Linux-Advocacy Digest #266, Volume #35 Fri, 15 Jun 01 14:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Redhat video problems. (drsquare)
Re: Getting used to Linux (drsquare)
Re: Getting used to Linux (drsquare)
Re: Getting used to Linux (drsquare)
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- He Created Unix, But Now Uses Microsoft Windows (drsquare)
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" (drsquare)
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" (drsquare)
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" (drsquare)
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" (drsquare)
Re: IBM Goes Gay (drsquare)
Re: What does XP stands for ??? (drsquare)
Re: More microsoft innovation (drsquare)
Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell" (drsquare)
Re: Will MS get away with this one? (Peter Hayes)
Re: Will MS get away with this one? (Peter Hayes)
Re: the world thinks there is only windows. yahoo sucks. (Nico Coetzee)
Re: Linux wins again.... (Richard Thrippleton)
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- He Created Unix, But Now Uses Microsoft Windows ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Redhat video problems.
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:26:38 +0100
On 15 Jun 2001 07:22:03 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marada C. Shradrakaii)) wrote:
>>However,
>>> it's a bit of an arse to have to press Ctrl+Alt+plus to increase the
>>> resolution from 640x480 every time it starts up.
>
>Edit /etc/XF86Config or /etc/X11/XF86Config (which one depends on version and
>distribution).
>
>You'll several sets of of lines like this:
>
>Depth 16
>Modes "640x480" "800x600" "1024x768"
>
>The "Depth 16" refers to the colour depth; you might see sections for 1, 4, 8,
>15, 16, 24, and/or 32. Just edit the ones for the colour depth you use.
>
>The order of the "names" after the word "Modes" determines the order you see
>the modes. The first one is the one you start in, the second is one Ctrl-Alt-+
>away, etc.
Ahah, I'll have to look into that.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Getting used to Linux
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:26:39 +0100
On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 00:40:37 -0700, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>drsquare wrote:
>> >> I have to use windows because of my winmodem. This would never have
>> >> happened if it wasn't for Microsoft.
>> >
>> >You can now get drivers for winmodems for linux. I have an external
>> >modem that doesn't rob the CPU of its clock cycles. One simple modem
>> >chip works better than any software and it won't get corrupted by any
>> >file system accidents either.
>> >Search the web for winmodem drivers for Linux.
>>
>> I have, but it's proving difficult to find anything.
>
>Try http://www.linmodems.org/
>
>They call 'em linmodems. Maybe you'll find what you're looking for
>here.
I had a look there, but it's a complete maze. Almost impossible to
find a modem listed.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Getting used to Linux
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:26:40 +0100
On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 10:39:04 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>>> um... the religous war is simple, much like the vi/emacs war.
>>>
>>> VI and proud of it.
>>>
>>> -Ed
>>>
>> I find I use vi or vim a lot. Vi loads up faster than xemacs. One of
>> these days I'll buy O'reilleys little book on vi.
>
>Its a good book. There are loads of things I didn't know about vi, never
>mind vim.
How much is it?
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Getting used to Linux
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:26:40 +0100
On 15 Jun 2001 03:02:25 -0700, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(mark34-@- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>says...
>
>>
>>Why did you buy a card with no Linux support, if as you say,
>>you wanted to use Linux? Seems a bit unlikely to me.
>
>May be because he liked that specific card?
So even if he liked it, he should buy it even though it wouldn't work?
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dennis Ritchie -- He Created Unix, But Now Uses Microsoft Windows
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:26:41 +0100
On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 12:04:58 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>drsquare wrote:
>> >Unless the installation program replaces some key Windows DLLs
>> >or mungs some Registry entry.
>>
>> Never happened with me. Every single program I've downloaded (and
>> that's a LOT) has installed flawlessly. With Linux, I'm lucky if it
>> installs at all, and that's AFTER downloading all the packages and
>> dealing with all the conflicts. And if you're compiling from source,
>> you may as well just not bother.
>
>Well, golly gee, I've had the opposite experience. Quite often
>an installed product (usually a Microsoft product) has fucked
>up my machine (or at least some of the apps that it runs).
>And at least two apps (Word 2000 and Visio 2000) run slow and
>act cranky on my box at work.
Well, I have had the complete opposite experience. Apart from Word
being infinitely inferior to LyX.
>On Linux, I've compiled from source, installed using RPMs, and
>copied software by hand. All has worked flawlessly, except for
>compiling nmap, and that's probably because of Red Hat's
>gcc-2.96 snafu.
>
Well, you must have an awful lot of dependencies and libraries already
there.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:26:42 +0100
On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 10:55:45 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>>>> PDF **is** a proprietary format. It's owned by Adobe. It's no less
>>>> proprietary than DOC or XLS.
>>>
>>>It si completely open , though.
>>
>> Then why are the viewers so bad?
>
>Pass.
>
>Adobe Acrobat is free and a very good viewer. You can also run it without
>an X display as a print filter.
I've used it, and it was terrible. It was the windows version though,
so maybe the linux version's different.
>There are perfectly good views that work with older PDF versions, such as
>xpdf.
I've never tried xpdf.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:26:42 +0100
On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 17:45:59 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Sandman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Macman
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There's another issue, though.
>>
>> Even if it's off by default and the user can turn it on, there's still
>> the potential for vast abuse by Microsoft -- since they are the ones who
>> set the default smart tags. To me, that's a much larger issue than
>> whether it's on or off.
>
>But then, wouldn't it be like Netscape's "What's related"? Netscape
>controls what does and doesn't show up in that popup. they keep it away
>from the webpage though, but the idea is similar...
And how many people actually use Netscape? 1%?
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:26:43 +0100
On 15 Jun 2001 08:27:09 -0500, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Charles Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > It's not hyper links, it has a distinctly different look.
>> > It's obvious that it's not the page author that put it there.
>> > You hover the mouse over a word with a wavy line underneath, and it pop a
>> > little graphic, that lets you do stuff about it.
>> > Frex, CompaQ, you get to go to the comapny's site, view stock information,
>> > read press releases, etc.
>>
>> Who put the wavy line in the page?
>> If you put wavy lines in my page you violate my copyright and may be
>> guilty of vandalism.
>
>No way. I'm free to change fonts, eliminate graphics, turn off
>cookies, etc.
Are you free to intercept pages that other people are viewing and
stick in links to rival sites?
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:26:44 +0100
On 15 Jun 2001 08:51:07 -0500, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>> It figures you would cchampoion micro$ofts changing the appearnce of
>> other people's pages. Micro$of has no right to change the prsentation of
>> someone else's page. NONE.
>
>Microsoft isn't changing anything.
Apart from inserting links into pages for its own commercial gain.
>*I* changed the appearance on *my*
>computer. I can also turn off graphics, sounds, videos, change fonts
>and sizes, background colors, etc.
>
>Why is this any different?
You're not adding links to pages before serving them to someone else.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IBM Goes Gay
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:26:46 +0100
On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 11:00:01 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <9gb4ag$isl$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>>>You fucking moron. I'll bet youre engilsh.
>>>>
>>>>I dont hate *caucasians*, you ignorant swine. I hate people from
>>>>england, no matter what fucking color they are, bitch.
>>
>>> Therefore you are a racist. Goodbye: *plonk*
>>
>> Took long enough.
>
>Ah! I get it now!
>
>You're a mate of Kookis and you're trying to see who can get the most
>killfile entries. figures, really.
>
>Or are you competing for the "biggest newsgroup twit"?
Well, they both seem very insecure, thus the desperate attempts to get
people's attention.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What does XP stands for ???
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:26:47 +0100
On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 16:52:25 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > You really are dense aren't you Matt? One guy complains because MS
>> > completes it's sockets implementation to make it standards compliant,
>and
>> > now it's a security hole? It's a security hole in most *nixes then as
>> > well.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> How many complete, and utter luser/morons do you see using UNIX?
>
>Well, Aaron says he uses *nix...
Exceptions don't make rules.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More microsoft innovation
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:26:48 +0100
On 15 Jun 2001 08:53:08 -0500, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>> Becasuse I want to control the links on my page MY PAGE. The page -I
>> wrote-. I dont want micro$oft deciding where peole should go from my
>> page.
>
>Why? Do you want to control the fonts on YOUR PAGE? The colors? The
>graphics? The sounds? The videos? The regular hyperlinks?
>
>I can change/turn off all of these just as easily. Why aren't you
>complaining about these?
Because you're not intercepting pages, inserting your own links, then
sending them off to millions of users.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell"
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:26:49 +0100
On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 16:07:40 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>apt-cache showpkg gnucash
>...
>Dependencies:
>1.4.12-1 - gdk-imlib1 (2 1.9.10-3) libart2 (2 1.2.13-6) libaudiofile0 (0
>(null)) libc6 (2 2.2.3-1) libdb3 (2 3.2.9-1) libesd0 (18 0.2.20)
>libesd-alsa0 (2 0.2.20) libglib1.2 (2 1.2.0) libgnome32 (2 1.2.13-6)
>libgnomesupport0 (2 1.2.13-6) libgnomeui32 (2 1.2.13-6) libgtk1.2 (2
>1.2.10-1) libgtkxmhtml1 (2 1.2.13-6) libguile9 (2 1:1.4-11) libjpeg62 (0
>(null)) libpng2 (2 1.0.10) libxml1 (0 (null)) xlibs (4 4.0.3) zlib1g (2
>1:1.1.3) libwww-perl (0 (null)) slib (0 (null)) scm (0 (null)) guile1.4 (0
>(null)) guile1.4-slib (0 (null)) perl (0 (null)) eperl (0 (null))
>libgwrapguile0 (2 0.9.1) gnuplot (0 (null))
>
>Wow, that is a lot of dependencies. Good thing the
>package manager takes care of it all automatically.
You've still got to go and get all the packages yourself.
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Will MS get away with this one?
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:22:15 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 05:40:30 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Said Form@C in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 13 Jun 2001 20:09:58 GMT;
> >T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> >
> ><snip>
> >> That is impossible. Apple makes hardware; you can't be predatory in a
> >> software market if you are only making money selling hardware. Apple
> >> has always had a great balance between compatibility and proprietary
> >> value-add, I think.
> >>
> ><snip>
> >
> >Isn't it suprising how quickly Apple supporters (in particular) have
> >forgotten Apples past "dirty tricks"?
> >
> >Remember the hard-sector disks that Apple kept using for years after
> >everyone else (almost) had ditched them?
>
> No, I don't. When was that?
Instead of identifying sectors in software as happens when you format a
floppy, Apple's hard sectored disks had a series of holes, generally 16 of
them, to identify the sectors. Wozniak did it that way because he didn't
have the cash for disk controller hardware.
<...>
> Apple has always had a great balance between compatibility and
> proprietary value-add, I think.
Doesn't matter how many times you say it Max, it doesn't make it true.
Apple have shafted just as many people as Microsoft, the only difference
being that Apple's victims were the little guy and Microsoft took on the big
boys.
Peter
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Will MS get away with this one?
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:22:16 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 05:40:34 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Said Form@C in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 13 Jun 2001 20:59:51 GMT;
> >LShaping <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> >
> ><snip>
> >> Yup. Only an deranged zealot would deny that Microsoft has done some
> >> good. Fortunately, the court case is shedding much needed light on
> >> Microsoft's business practices.
> >>
> ><snip>
> >
> >I *have* to argue with this...
> >
> >Before the IBM/Intel/Microsoft triopoly there simply wasn't a standard.
>
> No, there weren't standard*s*. It is not that we lacked them, it is
> that the idea had not been invented yet.
Of course the idea had been invented, railways, radio communication, gold,
whatever. What you mean is that a standard hadn't emerged. It took the
marketing clout of the IBM/Intel/Microsoft triopoly to establish standards.
> All computers sold at the time
> were proprietary. IBM/Intel/Microsoft did not realize the PC was going
> to be anything different. But when the *market* created the PC
> architecture standard (Compaq and other clone and compatible OEMs used
> the PC design), Bill Gates lucked out. He had *thought* he was going to
> have to coerce and cajole each individual computer manufacturer to
> include his BASIC in their system. Things got easier when all he had to
> do was give away MS-DOS until he could start forcing people to buy it.
>
> >You couldn't write a text file on one machine and expect to read it on one
> >produced by a different manufacturer.
>
> You couldn't when IBM/Intel/Microsoft systems were compared to any other
> proprietary design, either. Interoperability gets REAL easy once you
> start dealing with networking, though, and even before that, both Mac
> and PC systems had floppy compatibility.
>
> >CP/M helped a lot. It gave a common OS (of sorts) but there wasn't a
> >standard disk format when it first appeared. Some firms made cash simply by
> >copying files from one manufacturer's disk format to another (providing
> >that they were both CP/M files of course).
>
> Well, now you're getting in to senseless prattling, I'm afraid.
Sorry Max, it's you that's indulging in senseless prattling.
Advert in PC Plus, February 1992 page 432:-
=================================================================
"Disk and Tape Conversions."
"We can transfer your data across more than 1,000,000 permutations of
Micros, Minis, Mainframes, Typesetters and Wp's".
etc,etc
"A.L Downloading Services, London"
==================================================================
And that's just the first one I found.
Which is why, if nothing else Microsoft did was any good, at least they gave
us a standard.
Otherwise half your hard drive would be occupied by format converters. You'd
still have to convert irrespective of whether networks made the physical
exchange of bits and bytes easier or not.
> >Microsoft, no matter what their faults, did help to produce a common
> >software platform that worked on hardware from different manufacturers.
>
> Well, here's the truth of the matter:
>
> In the very early years of the 'PC revolution', from the perspective of
> the average consumer at that time, you didn't have a PC standard. What
> you had were other computer manufacturers copying IBM's design. These
> were the 'PC compatibles', and it is worth noting that, as products,
> they've all disappeared entirely. The products which still survive in
> the "IBM compatible" market are not compatibles, but clones.
Actually neither. The BIOS moved on from IBM's original, BIOSs created by
the likes of Ami and Award, and licenced by motherboard manufacturers. Then
the so-called "compatibles" and "clones" disappeared. Gates was still
working on his first billion at that time.
> Now, the thing that makes them clones, rather than compatibles, more
> than anything else in the world, is the BIOS. Compaq (or somebody)
> cloned the original BIOS, and IIRC, there was even a bit of suing going
> on. But in the end, IBM could not stop anyone anywhere from reverse
> engineering (wasn't tough; the first couple versions had the schematics
> and code!) the PC/XT/AT 'platform' and producing a clone computer.
More prattling, Max.
To clone the IBM PC BIOS those doing the reverse engineering had to have no
prior knowledge of the BIOS. They had to produce a BIOS that functioned 100%
as IBM's BIOS, but which was developed in isolation, otherwise IBM were
certain to sue for patent/copyright infringement, whichever.
It cost Compaq over $1M to do it.
So I guess "(wasn't tough; the first couple versions had the schematics and
code!)" is pure prattle. The code might have been there, and anyone can do a
disassembly of the BIOS anyway, but as far as the cloners are concerned it
might have been locked up as tight as Fort Knox.
And there weren't any "clones" anyway, except those made by IBM and someone
licencing the BIOS code from IBM, and I never saw any described as "clones",
maybe they were, but the vast majority were "compatibles" made by Compaq and
others who also reverse engineered the BIOS, until the BIOS moved on as I
explained above.
<megasnip>
> If Microsoft fan's retelling of history were true, there should be no
> confusion. Compatibility with MS-DOS should have been enough to define
> a PC compatible, just as the BIOS defined a PC clone. Except, it isn't,
> "just as the BIOS". Remember, the BIOS was cloned; it was not a
> proprietary product.
Of course the BIOS was a proprietary product, IBM's proprietary product. IBM
developed it as the unique item in their jumble of third-party bits and
pieces that went to make the first IBM PCs. They hoped that their hold over
the BIOS code would be sufficient for them to retain control of the IBM PC
market. When Compaq reverse engineered the BIOS the genie was out of the
bottle.
<snip massive rambling rant>
> The fact that Windows is monopoly crapware in no way indicates that
> millions of people have not successfully used it as an OS on their PC.
> It isn't the numbers, it is the proportions, that damn the product as
> monopoly crapware.
Eh? Are you saying that just because something is used by 95% of its target
market then it automatically becomes " monopoly crapware"? Monopoly, yes.
Crapware? That's down to the individual product.
Whatever Microsoft's faults, they've established a product that has resulted
in dirt cheap hardware. Do you think for one minute that there would be a
games market on any "personal computer" if Windows 9.x hadn't happened? No,
Sega and Nintendo would have 99% of the market and personal computer
hardware would cost the earth even if there was such a thing as the personal
computer market remotely like what we have today. To buy a graphics card
with 32 meg of ram and a GPU capable of billions of t&l calculations/second
would set you back tens of thousands of dollars instead of about 100. To buy
even a card capable of up to 24 bit colour at 1024x768 would be hundreds,
instead of which that is now a sub entry level specification.
So thank Microsoft that, as a (necessary) by-product of their quest for
world domination, they've established the conditions that made today's
hardware affordable. You don't need to thank them for anything else.
Peter
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 19:30:58 +0200
From: Nico Coetzee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the world thinks there is only windows. yahoo sucks.
"x@x" wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Zsolt says...
> >
> >top@pp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 14 Jun 2001 00:12:49 -0700 presented us with
> >the wisdom:
>
> >Nope.
> >I just clicked on the link, running Mandrake 7.2, reading this with KNode,
> >so it brings up Konqueror as a browser and that has no problem whatsoever.
> >I see all the adds, forms etc. the links work also - didn't get any error
> >message...
> >
> >What browser did you try to use ?
>
>
> using netscape on linux you get the error.
>
> Ok, tried konq. Yes I do not see the error. But no movies are played.
> I click to play the movies, but nothing plays. I boot windows and
> try the same, and the movie plays.
>
> lets face it, browing the net on linux is a pain. I boot windows now
> just to browse the net. when done browing, I boot linux.
Depends what you want. For most of us Linux is the perfect Internet
workstation.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Thrippleton)
Subject: Re: Linux wins again....
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 18:26:22 +0000
In article <9gddm6$h2s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Todd wrote:
<snip>
>Hell, I still can't even get my standard 3com card working with Linux.
Then you have dodgy hardware or you're doing something wrong. Use
the modconf tools, it'll be right there in front of you. 3Com is very well
supported.0
>
>W2k just wins because it has so much more built in functionality, more
>ease-of-use, tons of built in support for hardware, and just far easier to
>use overall.
Windows is very easy to use for somebody who has been using windows
for years. Unix is very easy to use for somebody who has been using it for
years. Put a newby in front of Windows without help and they will just
drool..... hell, some newbies need help installing AOL.
Market dominance seems to be giving the illusion of ease of use.
>Linux is a *fine* server OS. But *nothing* more.
It probably is a fine server OS, but I wouldn't know anything about
that. Linux has always been a desktop OS for me, and by desktop I don't
just mean something with icons and a wastebasket....
That was a really stupid generalisation, bearing in mind the
numbers of people increasingly taking up Linux as a desktop OS.
I concede the point on gaming ATM, but companies are coming round.
Now they just have to learn to write portable code and realise that x86 isn't
the only CPU.
Richard
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dennis Ritchie -- He Created Unix, But Now Uses Microsoft Windows
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 13:32:00 -0400
drsquare wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 22:49:44 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> (Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >drsquare wrote:
> >
> >>> I've just downloaded that, and I'll install it when I can get all the
> >> dependencies and conflicts worked out. That's the good thing about
> >> Windows, you just download the installation programs and install it,
> >> you don't have to bother about all the dependencies and package
> >> conflicts etc.
> >
> >Unless the installation program replaces some key Windows DLLs
> >or mungs some Registry entry.
>
> Never happened with me. Every single program I've downloaded (and
> that's a LOT) has installed flawlessly.
You must be the ONLY one in the entire world.
Most corporations have large numbers of people who do NOTHING
except test for bad interactions between the dll's of various
Windows-based apps.
However, no such groups exist for Unix machines. Nor has their
ever been even a need for them.
Why is that?
> With Linux, I'm lucky if it
> installs at all, and that's AFTER downloading all the packages and
> dealing with all the conflicts. And if you're compiling from source,
> you may as well just not bother.
So, like, what are you doing wrong that you hose things up so badly?
--
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.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
