Linux-Advocacy Digest #728, Volume #34 Wed, 23 May 01 12:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("David Brown")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Single sign-on authentication for Novell, Windows and Linux? (Stan McCann)
Re: Using Army and Marines to enforce gun-confiscation... (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! (Craig
Kelley)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (Craig Kelley)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (Craig Kelley)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (Dan Pidcock)
Re: Linux on the desktop potential, suggestions needed (Dan Pidcock)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (Craig Kelley)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (Craig Kelley)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (Dan Pidcock)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 17:05:37 +0200
Chad Myers wrote in message
<3b0aed60$0$2606$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
>"Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <3b0ad984$0$2599$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad Myers"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > It does for people who do serious word processing. You're a developer,
>> > so you probably don't need most of the features, but for people
creating
>> > real documents with flash and pizzaz, those features save lots of time.
>> >
>> > -c
>> >
>> >
>> Chad,
>>
>> Wouldn't you classify academic dissertations of 200 pages as serious word
>> processing? C't did a test on word processors beginning this year and
Word
>> 2000 (SP1) consistently barfed on that.
>
>C't is a biased MS-bashing rag just like The Register. I have yet to
>see either posted a favorable article of Microsoft.
>
C't and the Register are fairly unbiased - both commend MS on the few
occasions when it is appropriate. Since you read neither of them, the fact
that *you* haven't seen favorable articles is hardly an indication that such
articles don't exist. It is just that unlike many publications which get a
substatial advertising income from MS, or are concerned about MS taking
legal action (justified or not), they are not inclined to be biased
*towards* MS.
>Somehow, millions of people use Word very efficiently and demand
>even more features from, yet you, all-knowing, all-wise deem it
>crap because you can't seem to figure it out?
>
Millions of people use Word, yes. But efficiently? Have you ever seen the
average Word user in action? And what sort of fraction of the features do
you think they actually use? Word has gone far beyond the usual 80/20 rule,
and is nearer 95/5 rule.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 15:12:38 GMT
Said Gary Hallock in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 22 May 2001 23:26:20
[...]
>No theory that predicts the speed of radio waves in a vacuum to be 0.88c
>is valid because it contradicts experimental evidence.
You've generally confabulated the original argument to the point it is
incomprehensible entirely. Nobody claimed that radio waves travel at
.88c in a vacuum. You are mistaking a claim that seems to contradict
your explanation for one that actually contradicts the mathematics those
explanations are based on.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: Stan McCann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.netware.connectivity,comp.os.netware.security
Subject: Re: Single sign-on authentication for Novell, Windows and Linux?
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 08:49:10 -0600
Dean Thompson wrote:
>
> Hi!,
>
> You can link passwords on Linux and NT/Win2K systems together with the help of
> PAM SMB modules. There are also some PAM modules in existence for validating
> logins into Linux through various versions of Netware but normally the Netware
> server has to be operating in a bindery mode. I am not sure of too many
> authentication modules which actually work with a NDS tree directly.
>
BorderManager Authentication might be able to do the job. I don't know
for sure but it is something you can look into. I use it here to
authenticate dial up users dialing into our Cisco router.
--
Stan McCann
Computer Services Manager
New Mexico State University at Alamogordo
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.law-enforcement
Subject: Re: Using Army and Marines to enforce gun-confiscation...
Date: 23 May 2001 15:16:59 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 22 May 2001 18:46:45 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 22 May 2001 15:34:49 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, 22 May 2001 15:15:03 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >"You've got MALE.. sex organs!" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Aw, suck my dick, you little right wing turd. I'll insult little
>> >> >> phoney fuckheads like you all I want. I've earned my rights to
>> >> >> criticize little bastards like you.
>> >> >
>> >> >I hope you get your wish for nationwide gun ban. Then me and all my
>> >> >rightwing gunnut friends can legally invade your home and totally
>> >> >trash it out looking for yours.
>> >>
>> >> Apparently you are unaware that doing such a thing is illegal,
>> >> and a ban on guns would not change that situation. In fact, even without
>> >> a gun, according to what I have read lately, he would be legally
>> >> entitled to anally electrocute you.
>> >
>> >Evidently, you haven't noticed that the POLICE and the (all volounteer) ARMY
>> >and MARINES are all, according to the anti-gun people, "right wing gun nuts"
>>
>> You are not a policeman, and you are not a soldier. You are a reservist.
>> You are, though, a right wing nut, and if you did the above, it would be
>> illegal.
>
>Absolutely not.
>
>Read the Posse Commitatus Act. It **CLEARLY** states that the Army can be used
>to do law enforcement with the permission of the governor of the state(s) in
>question.
With permission.
> Remember all the times the Army was used in the 1950's and 60's.
Sure.
>The MARINES can be sent into any state WITHOUT the permission of the Governor.
And they will still not be a law enforcement agency.
>> >Who the fuck is going to enforce this gun ban, other than the POLICE,
>> >the ARMY and the MARINES?
>>
>> The police, yes. The army and the marines, no, because they are not
>> law enforcement agencies. It is illegal for a soldier to enter
>> your house without permission, is it not?
>
>See above.
Above, you said the governor can give permission for them to become
a law enforcement force. Not that they can enter your house without
permission.
>Also, if the gun-phobes' wet-dream of CONFISCATION is to implemented,
>how would it be done without entering citizens' homes?
Right now, possession of certain kinds of pronography is forbidden,
and if found it is to be confiscated. Guns are not any different.
>> And even a policeman will need a search warrant.
>
>The gun-phobes' wet-dream is a law that requires no search warrant.
Stop arguing with the voices in your head. You said that if a
gun banning law is passed, you would invade another person`s
house. That would be illegal, unless certain OTHER laws are
passed. You could just as well say that you will blow his
brains with a bazooka, because in your mind a law will be
passed allowing you to shoot people with one.
>> >> >> Oh, you're a SOLDIER! So fucking what? Plenty of us have been soldiers,
>> >> >> and I doubt that many have been as much of a sad sack as you. Soldiers
>> >> >> are like any other population - there are some great ones, and there are
>> >> >> some losers - like YOU.
>> >> >
>> >> >I was decorated 9 times in my first 3 years of service.
>> >> >what does that tell you
>> >>
>> >> You own some little ribbons you like to flaunt when you're among
>> >> other slaves of the system? I find that ritualistic behaviour
>> >> akin to baboon's exposure of erect penises as sign of authority.
>> >
>> >Commendation for work well done.
>>
>> No, the baboons don't work.
>
>You sound exceedingly jealous.
Of you? Man, if I were jealous of you, I would go to Chicago with
the intent to jump off the Sears tower.
>Why is that, coward...
Coward? I say that blind retaliation is the chicken's path.
Dare live peacefully, if you have the balls to do it.
>> >Work which I *CHOSE* to get into.
>>
>> Well, I am sure you are even happy about it.
>
>Yep
>
>> And that you even think
>> that says something good about you.
>
>Damn straight.
Self delusion as an artform.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
Date: 23 May 2001 09:18:27 -0600
"JS \\ PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Tue, 22 May 2001 17:49:25
> > >"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> "JS \\ PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >>
> > >> > Internet connection stays when switching users!
> > >>
> > >> Wow. Welcome to Slackware 1.0.
> > >
> > >And NT 3.51.
> >
> > Yea; *now* you know that. <*Smirk*>
> >
> > >> > And get this - Applications even stay open and are there (still
> > >> > open) when returning to that user.
> > >>
> > >> And to GNOME 1.0.
> > >
> > >Really? How do you exit GNOME as one use, log on as another,
> > >then log back in as the first and have all apps still running?
> >
> > What do you mean "still"? Why would you want to exit GNOME just to log
> > on as another user?
>
> I find myself going back and forth to root quite often. It's nice to
> know there is a way to keep open programs up without having to
> re-open them. Except with XP there isn't a need to save the
> session. It just does it. BTW the other users remain logged on
> until they officially log off, so switching back to another user is
> almost instant once he is logged on.
You do know that you needn't log out in order to run applications as
the root user, right? You can run programs as any user on the system
from the same desktop (regardless who started it). I thought
Microsoft figured this one out already with Windows 2000.
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: 23 May 2001 09:22:13 -0600
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > > I've been running 100% Linux for so long that I can't even figure out
> > > > how to do many things inside Windows 2000. It literally took me an
> > > > hour to figure out how to change the video driver (I couldn't
> > > > right-click on the desktop to do it anymore).
> > >
> > > Um... sure you can. There isn't a Windows since Windows95 that you
> > > can't do that.
> >
> > Please explain.
>
> It's only slightly different between the various Windows (win98, ME,
> and 2K are pretty much the same, though).
>
> You right-click on the desktop, properties, settings, advanced, adapter,
> click on "Properties". In there you can change or update the driver.
You cannot change it. It won't let me. You must use the silly new
hardware control panel which tries to autodetect a bunch of crap that
it failed to autodetect already.
I can 'update' the current driver (VGA), but I cannot change it to
something else; either that or Windows is lying to me.
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: 23 May 2001 15:22:34 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
David L. Moffitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Tue, 22 May 2001 15:34:49 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, 22 May 2001 15:15:03 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >"You've got MALE.. sex organs!" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Aw, suck my dick, you little right wing turd. I'll insult little
>> >> >> phoney fuckheads like you all I want. I've earned my rights to
>> >> >> criticize little bastards like you.
>> >> >
>> >> >I hope you get your wish for nationwide gun ban. Then me and all my
>> >> >rightwing gunnut friends can legally invade your home and totally
>> >> >trash it out looking for yours.
>> >>
>> >> Apparently you are unaware that doing such a thing is illegal,
>> >> and a ban on guns would not change that situation. In fact, even without
>> >> a gun, according to what I have read lately, he would be legally
>> >> entitled to anally electrocute you.
>> >
>> >Evidently, you haven't noticed that the POLICE and the (all volounteer) ARMY
>> >and MARINES are all, according to the anti-gun people, "right wing gun nuts"
>>
>> You are not a policeman, and you are not a soldier. You are a reservist.
>> You are, though, a right wing nut, and if you did the above, it would be
>> illegal.
>>
>> >Who the fuck is going to enforce this gun ban, other than the POLICE,
>> >the ARMY and the MARINES?
>>
>> The police, yes. The army and the marines, no, because they are not
>> law enforcement agencies. It is illegal for a soldier to enter
>> your house without permission, is it not?
>
>%%%% They did at Waco.
Those were not soldiers, they were federal law enforcement agencies.
And they did have permission, in the form of a search warrant.
>> And even a policeman will need a search warrant.
>
>%%%% They didn't at Waco.
>
And having guns did them a whole lot of good, to those Davidians,
didn't it?
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: 23 May 2001 15:25:42 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 22 May 2001 18:47:38 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>
>> Robert W Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> > "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > <> Also, using myself as an
>> > <>example: I'm heterosexual and have *no* choice in the matter.
>> >
>> > But you do have a choice in your behavior.
>> >
>> > 1Peter 5:7
>>
>> I assume you say this from a religious perspective. In that case,
>> if you are a literalist, his behaviour doesn't matter all that
>> much, since already the desire is a sin.
>>
>
>I desire to have $1,000,000,000
Actually, that is pretty much a sin. It is called greed, Aaron.
>Nonetheless, that wouldn't justify me robbing banks now, would it.
Of course not. Who said something about justifying?
The voices in your head are really working overtime these days.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 17:26:16 +0100
> About the only thing similar to the Mac in Win95 is the recycle bin, but
> similar technologies had existing on the PC for quite some time, it just
> wasn't built into the OS.
Technology?!
Are you trying to claim that the recycle bin (and its many synonims on
other platforms) is a _technology_?
The mind boggles. That's almost as bas as Vauxhall claiming that a new
seating system is a `technology'.
Blech.
-ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: 23 May 2001 09:26:59 -0600
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > > Oh puh-leeze. Perhaps if Windows came with any useful software I
> > > > would consider using it; as it comes now it's simply a glorified
> > > > typewriter until you spend hours updating and installing by hand.
> > >
> > > So which is it? If it comes with apps, then MS is an evil monopoly
> > > trying to squish out all app vendors and competitors, if they
> > > don't then they're just a glorified typewriter.
> > >
> > > Which is it?
> >
> > I didn't realize that Microsoft had been sued for including
> > development tools, perl, an ssh daemon, low-latency remote access, a
> > good shell, wget, a real editor (take your pick), etc. etc.
>
> Well, WindowsNT has always had a good shell (better than Bash in
> most cases). The simple fact is, 99% of the users don't use half the
> things you mentioned, and Win2K has two forms of low-latency remote
> access as well.
Telnet doesn't count (sorry, I like security). Terminal services is
not low-latency; it's barely livable across our WAN, much less over a
phone line.
> Who uses wget besides a bunch of Unix geeks (less than one percent
> of one percent I'm sure).
People who want to download a Quicktime or ASF movie and not "watch"
it live. People who want to download a bunch of pictures from my
family web album ("right-click, check save to disk; right-click, check
save to disk; right-click, check save to disk" isn't very fun on 500
images).
That's the problem. Microsoft decides who needs what instead of the
user. *They* decide that nobody wants wget, so nobody gets it or sees
it. It's hardly brain surgery to use:
wget URL
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Pidcock)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 15:27:33 GMT
On Wed, 23 May 2001 13:50:01 GMT, "Chad Myers"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9ef90p$iti$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> How many *original* ideas has Microsoft given to the computer world?
>
>Quite a few. Many more than you and I could count, I'm sure. Just in IE
>alone there are several dozens.
>
>COM was a big contribution. Enterprise-level transaction processing
>for a dirt-cheap price (MTS and COM+).
Hmm. Not so sure that COM was a contribution really.
>A top-notch unmatched unified development IDE and rapid-development
>aids.
Unified? I assume you're talking about visual studio but can't really
see how. VB & VC: different keyboard shortcuts (e.g. debugging),
completely different layouts. No decent visual 'form' editor in VC -
the one in VB is buggy and crashes: try selecting a bunch of UI
elements and doing stuff.
>A leading Office suite with many more features than any other office
>suite out there...
Can't disagree with you there. Office has plenty of 'features'. But
are they all beatifully organised in the program so it's intuitive to
find them? And let's see - my document just seems to be growing and
growing in size...
remove .hatespam to reply
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Pidcock)
Subject: Re: Linux on the desktop potential, suggestions needed
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 15:27:34 GMT
On 23 May 2001 14:19:08 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (quux111) wrote:
>The general office computer user is not, as a rule, a guru. They tend to
>use one or two apps all day long -- usually word-processors and
>spreadsheets (and increasingly web-browsers). To claim that Windows
>performs these functions so much easier or more intutively than anything
>else is just false: load up StarOffice and the average user would be happy
>as a clam after a couple of days adjustment. I know because I migrated
>fifty users to Applix Office from Microsoft Office not long ago. The first
>couple of days were filled with complaints and questions, but by the end of
>the week everything was humming along smoothly again. The people adapted
>and made use of what they had. When the rationale for the move was
>explained to them, and when we involved them in their own retraining, their
>buy-in helped the move to succeed.
Surprising. My experience of users is that they have difficulty doing
anything outside the standard (e.g. linking an inserted picture in
word rather than embedding it). They also have difficulty
understanding what goes on in the machine. Confusion as to what
memory is: RAM/HD is a big one. I just used the desktop/filing
cabinet metaphor recently and that seemed understood, unless they were
pretending just to humour me :-)
None of this is any easier/more difficult with Linux tho.
What was your rationale for moving that convinced users? I can't
imagine "saving the company money" is good enough: most people would
say "tightfisted company..."
I still think Linux has to look as much like windows as possible when
you first do the switch though, to keep retraining costs down.
Dan
remove .hatespam to reply
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 17:33:46 +0100
> With Linux on 4 different virtual desktops,
Just 4? I've got 8. My SO seems happy with about 20.
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: 23 May 2001 09:37:24 -0600
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > >
> > > Solaris and HP-UX are hardly "obscure", though, regardles of which
> > > world you're living in.
> >
> > So Chad, why doesn't Microsoft make IE for Linux? What are they
> > afraid of?
>
> They're not afraid of anything. No one would use IE on Linux
As opposed to the endless masses using it on Solaris and HP-UX? Linux/BSD
easily have 100 times the number of desktop users.
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: 23 May 2001 09:34:42 -0600
"Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > > Oh puh-leeze. Perhaps if Windows came with any useful software I
> > > > would consider using it; as it comes now it's simply a glorified
> > > > typewriter until you spend hours updating and installing by hand.
> > >
> > > So which is it? If it comes with apps, then MS is an evil monopoly
> > > trying to squish out all app vendors and competitors, if they
> > > don't then they're just a glorified typewriter.
> > >
> > > Which is it?
> >
> > [sorry for the double follow-up]
> >
> > Show me *one* good, free image viewer that is as capable as any of the
> > standard Linux viewers. *That* is why I dislike Windows; every
> > niggling little thing costs $20 (shareware) to $500 in order to fill
> > in the same thing Linux does for free.
>
> InfraView.
Cool; now why isn't it at download.com?
> Recent Windows versions has Image Viewer, too.
Not Windows 2000.
> > Sure, the Windows software may have a few more features, but more
> > often than not the Linux equivalents have other features not present
> > in the Windows versions (is there an equal to cdparanoia for Windows
> > yet?? It's only been 4 years now).
>
> CDEX.
Also cool; but it still doesn't do acoustic sampling. It's nice to
see GPL software out there for Windows.
> > Some software packages simply
> > aren't available for Linux in any form (Quark, Access) -- but that's
> > only important if you *require* those packages.
>
> Indeed.
> What you should've mentioned is CD-Burner, which (at least to my knowledge)
> you can't get for free for windows.
Yes, but the CDROM drive you bought comes "bundled" with the Windows
software anyway.
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 17:41:50 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "JamesW"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <hFwO6.3261$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>> even the blackest object will still reflect a tiny amount of light.
>>
> A black hole?
They absorb enything that hist them, however, they do radiate as well.
Black holes have to radiate to obey the 2nd law of thermodynamics. It's
calles Hawking radiation.
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Pidcock)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 15:48:53 GMT
On 23 May 2001 09:22:13 -0600, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> > > "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > >
>> > > > I've been running 100% Linux for so long that I can't even figure out
>> > > > how to do many things inside Windows 2000. It literally took me an
>> > > > hour to figure out how to change the video driver (I couldn't
>> > > > right-click on the desktop to do it anymore).
>> > >
>> > > Um... sure you can. There isn't a Windows since Windows95 that you
>> > > can't do that.
>> >
>> > Please explain.
>>
>> It's only slightly different between the various Windows (win98, ME,
>> and 2K are pretty much the same, though).
>>
>> You right-click on the desktop, properties, settings, advanced, adapter,
>> click on "Properties". In there you can change or update the driver.
>
>You cannot change it. It won't let me. You must use the silly new
>hardware control panel which tries to autodetect a bunch of crap that
>it failed to autodetect already.
>
>I can 'update' the current driver (VGA), but I cannot change it to
>something else; either that or Windows is lying to me.
>From the adapter tab click properties, go to driver tab, click update
driver, update driver wizard appears, choose Display a list of known
drivers so I can choose, wizard goes and looks for drivers for ages,
click all hardware of this device class.
You know if MS didn't change the interface with each release it
couldn't charge so much as people would say "what have I paid for" -
or at least that is what MS must think.
Dan
remove .hatespam to reply
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
