Linux-Advocacy Digest #334, Volume #34 Tue, 8 May 01 17:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: IE ("Michael Pye")
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Ray Fischer)
Re: Shared library hell (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Ray Fischer)
Re: Linux disgusts me (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux disgusts me (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Windos is *unfriendly* (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Windos is *unfriendly* (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Windos is *unfriendly* (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Windos is *unfriendly* (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... (Pete Goodwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 21:38:19 +0100
> 'Can't get a shag' means you're actively seeking said shag. That's not
> being homosexual and not doing anything about it. Being homosexual and
> not doing anything (sexual) about it means liking (and loving) other men
> (or women, if applicable) without engaging in sexual activity.
Mabey I used a bad example, but you seemed to get what I meant.
-Ed
> Edward Rosten wrote:
>>
>> > Isn't being 'homosexual' without doing the act called being a
>> > homophile?
>>
>> No. If you're hetrosexual and can't get a shag, you're not a
>> hetrophile, you're still hetrosexual. The sme logic applies.
>>
>> -ed
>>
>>
>> > Edward Rosten wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > By the same token, merely having homosexual attractions does NOT
>> >> > make homosexuality...
>> >>
>> >> I'll quote Ritchard Ritchard (from `Bottom' here)
>> >>
>> >> I _AM_ hetrosexual. Well, I'm hetrosexual with intent.
>> >>
>> >> ie, you can be homosexual without doing anything about it.
>> >>
>> >> -Ed
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
>> >>
>> >> u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
>>
>> u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
>
>
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 21:47:39 +0100
> Of course it's a big difference. However, my argument was that birds
> are more closely related to reptiles that mammals, not that birds and
> reptiles are close reletives. What makes a mammal? Mammary glands.
> Neither birds not reptiles have them. Bigger difference, IMO.
When talking about these relationships, `reptile' is a useless word,
because the closest thing to the crocodile family is birds. Lizrds,
Tuatara's and especially turtles are further away from corcodiles, which
makes the name reptile useless for this purpose.
Some of the `reptiles' are very distandly related. I think it is still
disputed whether mammles are more closely related to lizards than
turtles, since turtles split off a very long time ago.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 21:48:43 +0100
>> > Being warm blooded is not the thing that makes a mammal, having
>> > mammae is what makes the mammal. Birds do not nurse their young,
>> > mammals do
>>
>> Yes they do. Hatchlings are fed by their parent(s).
>
> Not with breast milk.
So? the other guy said "birds do not nurse their young". This is false.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 21:59:53 +0100
>>How do you handle those printers in Linux? Output PS? I'm interested,
>>not attacking.
>
> FILE * fp = fopen("/dev/lpt1", "w");
>
> if everything's set up correctly.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!
{... printf()...} | lpr would be a better bet
> This also assumes the app developer has an intimate understanding of
> PostScript -- not guaranteed by any means. Windows makes it easy,
> unless something goes wrong.
You are missing 2 crucial points. First, an intimate understanding is not
required to do useful stuff. Secondly, windows makes it easier _ONLY_ if
you want to do wysiwyg printing from a GUI app. As soon as you want to
print from a command line app, it is much harder.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: 8 May 2001 20:04:49 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 08 May 2001 21:59:53 +0100, Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>How do you handle those printers in Linux? Output PS? I'm interested,
>>>not attacking.
>>
>> FILE * fp = fopen("/dev/lpt1", "w");
>>
>> if everything's set up correctly.
>
>NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!
>
>{... printf()...} | lpr would be a better bet
>
>
>
>> This also assumes the app developer has an intimate understanding of
>> PostScript -- not guaranteed by any means. Windows makes it easy,
>> unless something goes wrong.
>
>You are missing 2 crucial points. First, an intimate understanding is not
>required to do useful stuff. Secondly, windows makes it easier _ONLY_ if
>you want to do wysiwyg printing from a GUI app. As soon as you want to
>print from a command line app, it is much harder.
Rather, intimate understanding of postscript is not necessary at all, as
long as you are willing to get a library to do it for you.
For example, Qt's QPainter generates postscript. X's Xprt generates
postscript. there are dozen other ways to create postscript output
without knowing anything about postscript.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 22:05:37 +0100
>> You can access the device independent printer layer in Linux using
>> (f)printfs. In windows, you have to use the GDI to get to the device
>> independent printer layer.
>
> Okay, haven't thought about that one. You can do the same on Windows, I
> believe, can't you?
I don't think so. I thought you needed GDI calls.
>> The probelm being here that windows does not allow arbitraty print
>> filters to be put in to the printing sysetm. With UNIX, you dump a file
>> to lpr and forget. The printer subsystem can then activate a filter
>> based on the file type. Windows lacking this step requires you to print
>> to a file, then run a program on that file (such as GS) in order to
>> print it. This is a real pain for batch work.
>
> Okay, I'll do some research in this direction, I can think of several
> workarounds already, but none of them require zero user intervention at
> the moment. A possible solution would be to set up a filter on PS2PRN
> file, located on
> %SYSTEM%, that *should* work.
> And would require zero user intervention.
I'm not familiar with this object. Could you provide some pointers (I'm
genuinely curious).
>> >> I was not referring to text printing. I went to the effort to learn
>> >> basic PostScript and not I can do graphics printing from all my
>> >> command line apps that I need to print from, with graphics. I have
>> >> used this ability quite a lot.
>> >
>> > Point taken, personally, I learned ASCII art :)
>>
>> It only goes so far... :-)
>
> Far enough. I once saw Linux's penguin as ASCII art, very amusing, (and
> bloody *huge* in size).
LOL!
>> I think WMF would be an entirely suitable format (based on my limited
>> knowledge of WMF), but most programs won't output WMFs and even if they
>> did, you can't dump one straight to a printer via the GDI.
>
> What is WMF?
Windows Meta-File. It maps pretty directly to GDI calls. I believe VB
supports them natively.
>> > I think that you are wrong, because it's just as easy to print from
>> > the CLI on windows as it's on Linux, if you are going to output PS.#
>>
>> The difference is that under Linux, you can dump PS to the printer and
>> get out graphics. In windows, you have to dump it to a file, then run
>> the interpreter on the file, as a seperate step.
>
> See my suggestion about PS2PRN, you dump PS to file, and it iterupt it
> for you, and print.
How would you do this, and does it only work under NT/2K?
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 22:09:05 +0100
>> How can you print device independent graphics in Windows without doing
>> the whole GDI thing to a command line program?
>
> You seem to be asking us how you would use the Windows device
> independant printing software without using the Windows device
> independant printing software.
>
> This seems like a silly question.
>
> How do you do device independant graphics printing on Linunx, if you
> aren't allowed to install GhostScript?
No, not really. Under the UNIX method, you can generate your files on a
CRAY, and then ftp them over to a computer with a printer to print them.
You can't do this under the windows system.
> BTW, are you under the impression that GDI is as painful to use as, say,
> raw XLib? I'd suggest that printing using GDI for a console application
> really isn't particularly *hard*.
No, but it allows for no off-line stuff. Also, raw XLIB isn't that hard.
>> > BTW, you have to go to *great* lengths to find a portable C/C++
>> > program that is portable once you start using graphics, so it doesn't
>> > count.
>>
>> Not true. If all the graphics are off-line (ie printed only) then you
>> ca write programs in standard C and standard PS and they will anywhere
>> that has a PS interpreter and a standards conformant C compiler.
>
> I'd say that calling that "portable" is a stretch, though.
It is as portable as you can get with graphics.
> It's become something of a de-facto printing system for Unix, but that's
> it. Other OSes do not use GhostScript that way. You can't just print
> postscript and expect it to get rendered.
>
> [snip]
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Michael Pye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: IE
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 21:00:09 +0100
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> I think it has been agreed that there *SHOULD* be two different webs. I
> did not mean to suggest that there was some easy dichotomy which can or
> should be applied.
No. Again, I was merely hypothesising as I am wont to do, about the problem
which faces the web and one possible solution. I don't suggest that it would
be the only, the best, the worst or the proper way to do things. It was an
idea. For discussion. Unfortunately we don't seem to be discussing the ideas
anymore, but brushing them aside in favour of arguing each other's
credibility.
> The key to this "real web" is organization and hyperlinks.
>
> Your "eye candy surfer" is a myth, Michael. Sure, people may be looking
> for amusement when they're bored, but THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BUY ANYTHING.
> They do not want to "look for bargains", as I've said; they want the
> bargains to come looking for them! Web shoppers are not idle, they are
> not windows shopping; they are either doing serious research or making a
> purchase.
I was only putting forward the evidence of what I have observed.
> Your 'trendy web' doesn't stand up to the light of day. It is a mirage
> created by vendors expecting to be able to 'capture markets'. It is the
> antithesis of the convenience of the real web. There may be value in
> having some form of "store front" protocol, for presenting a highly
> graphic remote console "site" interface; it might even look very much
> like the web. But navigation, not organization, is the key, and
> interaction, not information, is the goal. There's nothing wrong with
> this web; the hostility you may notice I have is caused only by the fact
> that it has rather thoroughly messed up the real web.
I do hate to be picky, but "The key to this "real web" is organization and
hyperlinks." -> "But navigation, not organization, is the key". Are we
talking about the same web?
> But that function is not what you or the vendors believe it is, so it
> doesn't serve it very well, that's all.
Let's move away from what I believe as you seem to have thins somewhat
confused and it is bogging down the debate.
> If you didn't try so hard to show your bias, you might have a shadow of
> a point. Are you REALLY suggesting that the only information that can
> exist is scientific information? What is wrong with you?
No. I am suggestion nothing of the sort. But it is true that the web
originally grew out of an academic base.
> Usenet, BTW, has nothing whatsoever to do with the web.
No. But it does have something to do with the internet.
> Your contempt
> for science and the implied transcendence of crass commercialism,
> unfortunately, tends to undermine your position.
I cannot see where exactly I have shown any contempt for science. I find
science not only interesting but compelling (yup, strange isn't it). I study
it with a ridiculous level of interest for a 17 year old and I go home and
ponder ideas about physics and maths until I can pull them apart and
understand exactly what stops the world from working that way. Most of the
principals in my GCSE (the general school leavers qualification inthe UK)
science course were taught to me by my father when I was between seven and
ten and pestered him for teach me electronics. At that age I understood the
motor pinicipal and it's application in the propultion of a new type of
water craft. I even build a little model to see if water would really move.
Seems simple, but I was really little. Among the things I am contemptuous
of, science cannot be numbered.
I would also like to take this oppertunity to point out that I am not a
geek. I also ponder sex, go out with my mates and get drunk like any other
17 year old. Just thought people might think I studies science 24/7 then. ;)
> They aren't interested in paying for any of that, though, so why are you
> so convinced this "commercial web" is even viable?
OK, playing devil's advocate is fun. Except when you are losing.
> There you go making mandates again. Your speculation becomes idle as
> soon as you do that, I'm afraid. There is no "should" in a protocol
> implementation; only "can" and "does".
Yes. It is idle I suppose. But does it matter. It was speculation because
there if not a fuckincat's chance in hell that I am going to go out and
redesign the web. I am only putting forward my ideas, so if you don't want
to evaluate the actual ideas, please stop, because the idea behind it is far
more important than the use of the word could or should.
> There is no "venture", and your "commercial web" isn't even a "web";
> just a bunch of servers, each working independently.
Why is it MY commercial web? I have never written a commercial web page. I
have never sold anything through the web. I am a hobby designer.
> You were making excusing, not providing an explanation.
Maybe. If what they are doing is really that bad in your eyes then they will
be excuses. To the people who run the stores, right or wrong, they are
reasons.
> What about proving that people just want to find what they're looking
> for (not wander around until it 'catches their eye') do you think
> opposes my understanding of people's on-line habits? I'm afraid I have
> to point out that, regardless of whether the studies you look at are
> valid, your interpretation of them is not.
All I will say if that you seem to be taking a light-hearted discussion far
to seriously and aggressively that it was meant to be. I don't think my
arguments are watertight, and neither are my suggestions, I am only forming
them now, I don't even assert that they are necessarily correct. THEY ARE
JUST IDEAS. At one point we were discussing, but now we are just fighting.
MP
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:14:59 -0400
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> >> > Being warm blooded is not the thing that makes a mammal, having
> >> > mammae is what makes the mammal. Birds do not nurse their young,
> >> > mammals do
> >>
> >> Yes they do. Hatchlings are fed by their parent(s).
> >
> > Not with breast milk.
>
> So? the other guy said "birds do not nurse their young". This is false.
MAMMALS NURSE THEIR YOUNG WITH BREAST MILK
>
> -Ed
>
> --
> You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
>
> u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray Fischer)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 20:15:56 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> >> >> >> >Homosexuality obviously is a defect.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "Obviously being a Jew is a defect".
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Racist pig.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Being a homophobic pig is no different from being a racist or sexist pig.
>> >> > ^^^^^^^^^^
>> >> >"-phobic" to be in fear of
>> >> >
>> >> >Since I don't *fear* gays, the accusation doesn't fly.
>> >>
>> >> Uh huh. That's why you're so hostile towards them.
>> >
>> >disgust != fear.
>>
>> You go out of your way to be hostile towards gays.
>
>Prove it.
"Homosexuality obviously is a defect"
>> You practically
>> obsess over what they might be doing in private. You spend far too
>> much time thinking about what gays do for fun.
>
>I have ZERO interest in what they do in private. It's what the
>gay community does in PUBLIC that disgusts me.
Are you also offended at what the black community does in public?
Or the Jewish community?
--
Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] into you -- Nietzsche
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Shared library hell
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 20:16:41 GMT
Perry Pip wrote:
> But with Linux, you can completely avoid these problems by first
> configuring your symbolic links correctly and then as needed using the
> features described above. Learn how to do both.
libqt.so.2 -> libqt.so.2.3.0
One app needs libqt.so.2.3.0, one needs libqt.so.2.3.4. Both use libqt.so.2
How do you solve that one, if libqt.so.2.3.4 and libqt.so.2.3.0 are built
with different versions of gcc?
The answer is easy - provided you have the sources. It's not so pleasant if
you don't.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray Fischer)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 20:17:27 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>robert bronsing wrote:
>>
>> The majority of AIDS patients and HIV positive people in the world are
>> heterosexuals.
>
>Then how come, if someone asks "what the hell did you do to get this
>deadly, but very UN-contagious disease", they are accused of being
>anti-homosexual?
Because stupid bigots like to rationalize their hatred of gays by
blaming them for AIDS.
--
Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] into you -- Nietzsche
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux disgusts me
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 20:18:06 GMT
T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>Curious. If it is so trivial, why is not the default on various distros?
>
> Because they are various distros. Distros are not produced for specific
> hardware systems, so the distro producer does not deal with this kind of
> thing. But OEMs are not distro producers; they do not currently perform
> extensive configuration unless they are a premium VAR of some kind.
> (And even then you would be shocked at the lack of effort made towards
> producing 'clean' systems.) This is a result, you guessed it, of
> Microsoft's illegal anti-competitive practices (it isn't necessarily
> *Microsoft's* competitors that get screwed by this stuff, you know; it's
> just 'competitors') which have allowed only OEMs with razor-thin margins
> to maintain a presence in the marketplace. Sure, Linux OEMs could do
> this kind of configuration, and put out the prettiest fucking systems
> you've ever seen a computer buy for Christmas. But that ain't so easy
> when you have to compete with Windows OEMs, you see.
>
> The Linux OEMs can't become distro producers for similar reasons; that
> would make them as direct a target for Microsoft as Sun or IBM or Apple
> are.
What has 'font deuglification' and that no distro actually does it yet have
to do with Microsoft's monopoly?
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux disgusts me
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 20:20:05 GMT
Terry Porter wrote:
> Looks like pete is right, and Abiword isnt ready yet?
Ohmigod, he agree's with me!
I feel faint! Quick! Show me the registry editor! Quick! Quick!
Ack!!!
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: 8 May 2001 20:19:37 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 08 May 2001 16:14:59 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Edward Rosten wrote:
>>
>> >> > Being warm blooded is not the thing that makes a mammal, having
>> >> > mammae is what makes the mammal. Birds do not nurse their young,
>> >> > mammals do
>> >>
>> >> Yes they do. Hatchlings are fed by their parent(s).
>> >
>> > Not with breast milk.
>>
>> So? the other guy said "birds do not nurse their young". This is false.
>
>MAMMALS NURSE THEIR YOUNG WITH BREAST MILK
Yes that is true. However, that doesn't make "Birds do not nurse their young"
true.
I must add that *some* birds don't nurse their young, but they are rare (
the only example I can think of is the cuckoo).
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windos is *unfriendly*
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 20:23:49 GMT
Terry Porter wrote:
> I did networking for about 3 years and had nothing but trouble with
> Windows, so I did find Windows difficult to network.
I worked for a networking group producing routers for a couple of years.
Never had too many problems configuring Windows. Lots of fun configuring
routers.
> I think that the complexity is less of an issue than the way that
> Windows forces one to impliment it.
It has IP address, mask, gateway, DNS etc. What else do you need?
> Its further influenced byt the fine control over all aspects
> of networking that Linux gives me, unlike Windows where if
> the GUI doesnt have the fine control, I'm stuck.
... what else do you need?
> About 3 months ago, I put my Wifes Windows98 pc on our network
> and found the whole install a pain in the butt.
I put together a simple network at home with Windows with apparent ease.
Enter Linux and things got complex.
> Numerous reboots, it failed to detect the NE2000 isa card, and
> I had to enter the parameters by hand. At least Windows95 found
> them in the past.
I've had no problems with the two PCI cards with Windows but lots of fun
with Linux.
> It may just be me, I think I've become spoilt by Linux ?
There are two ways I could take that... 8*}
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windos is *unfriendly*
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 20:26:14 GMT
Terry Porter wrote:
> If you have problems with the same hardware on Linux, then I'd expect
> you to feel as I do about Windows ?
I'd feel Linux just makes a simple thing harder.
> Yet you have 2 degrees, and I have none.
I have a degree in Electronics and another in Computer Science. I'm no
expert in networks, yet Windows is dead easy, Linux is harder.
> What conclusion can you draw from this ?
That Windows is easy and Linux is hard. What other conclusion could I
possibly come to?
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windos is *unfriendly*
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 20:27:20 GMT
Chad Everett wrote:
> I suspect he's really stubborn and pigheaded. I have two degrees too,
> and work with PHD mathematicians and engineers. Many highly educated
> people are very myopic and some have trouble thinking outside "their
> box".
>
> You're right though. Something is not right. Either Goodwin is
> a degreed programmer who can't tie his own shoes, or he's
> purposely being stubborn for some unknown reason.
There is a third possibility, one you appear not to want to consider.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windos is *unfriendly*
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 20:28:14 GMT
Edward Rosten wrote:
> Well, since you ignored everything correct I said about printers under
> linux, it's safe to assume you did the same with initialsation.
And you likewise ignored everything correct I said...
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 20:31:59 GMT
T. Max Devlin wrote:
> If I knew that, I'd have to be working for Microsoft and have a brain
> the size of a planet. All I know is it sucks. The real question isn't
> how it sucks, but why it sucks. If I knew that, I'd be working for Id
> and driving a Ferrari.
So you have absolutely no reason to say "DirectX sucks". Is that it? It's
something someone else fed you is it?
I, on the other hand, use DirectX, and I have some idea whether it sucks or
not.
I also use Linux and have some idea wether or not it sucks or not.
You would appear to be expressing hearsay, rather than an opinion based on
experience.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 20:32:22 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> So in other words you don't know what you are talking about and have
> no facts to back up your foolish statement?
That appears to be the size of it.
--
Pete
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
