[ WARNING! This is unique thread to c.o.l.advocacy. I'm tired of reading about
comparisons to the other guys. So as an experiment I'd like to see this thread
be free of any direct reference to ANY non-Linux OS. Veiled references
(Big Blue, The Beast from Redmond WA., Red Fruit) will be barely tolerated.
Direct quoting is fine. Let's see how long we can keep this discussion focused
on Linux without having to resort to comparing to the other guys. Please
ignore (meaning don't follow up) any post whose intent is to degrade and
flame-bait this policy. unanswered threads die quickly.

I just want to see one thread about linux only in col.advocacy without
being baited (or baiting) the other guys.

Please keep this warning on any replies. Thanks. BAJ ]

In article <jameslDDD348....@netcom.com>,

Agreed. I'm distrubed by the number of postings that start with

"Don't flame me but..."

Its unnecessary and uncalled for most times. However how should one respond to:

-----
Dear Linux Lusers:

I'm trying to get so and so and such and such to work under Linux. I've
posted several times with no answer. I demand that someone send me E-mail
to solve my problem today. I don't have time to read the newsgroups.

Windows is so easy. Why does Linux suck so bad? It's too damn hard.

Later,

Suck Ass Newbie
-----

We've all seen these. It's difficult to refrain from flaming these types
of posts.

I usually gently remind newbies of the following:

1) No massive crossposting. All it does is piss people off. How many times have
you seen the same question posted over and over and over in all of the col
newsgroups? One enterprising fellow posted a Linux setup question about HP
printers into 20 newsgroups including all of the HP newsgroups (not just the
printer ones). I flamed him and he wasn't the least bit concerned. The bottom
line is that anyone who's going to answer the question reads all of the
newsgroups anyway.

2) Read

3) Read!

4) Read!!

5) Read!!! - get the picture ;-) Even if you don't know about the FAQs (which
of course you would find out if you read about typically every conceivable
question and answer about Linux is posted at least twice a week. Before asking
a question just browse through the current posts and usually there's a thread
about your problem. It saves time and bandwith on both ends.

6) Don't ask for E-mail. If folks are to follow 2-5 then the answers need to
be posted. Plsu it indicates that one isn't willing to take to time to find
the answer. BTW if you want E-mail replies without screaming "SEND ME E-MAIL!"
just put a poster in the Followup: field on your post. Many newsreaders will
tell any respondants that E-mail was requested and will automagically send
mail to the querant even if a response is posted.

Only some folks are calling for Linux for the masses. Personally I conceed
the fact that Linux will never ever have a mass market unless someone
nukes Redmond! ;-) Big Blue has been trying for over 5 years and its market
share is abysmal compared to the Beast from the West.

But I think it's unnecessary IMHO. Because Linux excellently serves a
small user population doesn't make it a bad thing. We should work to make
Linux the best Linux it can be without concern of outside forces.

"I'm OK. Linux is OK. I'm OK. Linux is OK...."

You can't have it both ways. I call for Linux to remain the do-it-yourself
hacker OS for the intelligent computer user and leave the rest screaming
for the inevitable wave coming on Aug. 24.

Moving to advocacy because of the blatant opinionating.

BAJ
--
Another random extraction from the mental bit stream of...
Byron A. Jeff - PhD student operating in parallel - And Using Linux!
Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332   Internet: by...@cc.gatech.edu

Did I? The one direct reference I had was in a quote I believe... ;-)

Absolutely. Like I said I gently point out some things. And I never go away
without answering the question or giving a pointer to an answer.

Probably what your mother told you is good advise here:
"If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all..."

Yes. Yes. and Yes. It does waste bandwith and time. Either answer the question
or don't post.

Some are useful and BTW Linux is commercial. I think that 40000+ CD's in
sales a month qualifies as commercial.

Well here's my problem with your suggestion: no matter how much you break the
groups up there will be lots of noise and lots of traffic. Mostly due to
the flaming, the questions asked over and over again, the lack of reading
of the material that's posted, and the crossposting. I used to be able to
scan col.help and it's 200+ messages a day in less than an 1/2 hour. Now I'm
reading quadruple that between misc,setup,advocacy,hardware,networking, and
X not to metion the development groups. And folks post questions into each and
every one of them. even if we had a newsgroup called:

comp.os.linux.don.not.post.any.questions.here.please

I gurantee that you'll get questions in it.

I vehemently opposed the last split for these reasons. We don't need to change
the newsgroup structure again we need to change the posting practices of
its constituents.

During the last split I proposed the idea of having a set of moderated
newsgroups that would E-mail back any relavent sources of information to
any who posted there. An automatic moderator would examine posts for form
and content and any properly formatted post would be posted. But to get
the proper form and content you'd have to read some of the documentation.

This way the signal/noise goes way up. People posting to the group would
have to read first and because of the much better signal to noise it would
be more likely that actual posts are both relavent and would more likely
get answered.

It was shot down of course but I still think it's a viable idea.

BTW attacking people isn't cool at all.

I'm still trying to move this thread from misc to advocacy....

BAJ
--
Another random extraction from the mental bit stream of...
Byron A. Jeff - PhD student operating in parallel - And Using Linux!
Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332   Internet: by...@cc.gatech.edu

by...@cc.gatech.edu (Byron A Jeff) wrote:

I agree that Linux shouldn't be made for the masses.  It's the masses
which should be made for Linux.  I repeatedly point out that it is
the people who are willing to take the time to understand their
computer who will the long run winners -- and that many of these
winners will be Linux users.  I think we need to reach out to the
people who do not now have the required computer expertise, but who
are willing to expend the effort required in order to aquire that
expertise.  (I see no reason for being nice to the others, however.)

I'm not adverse to nuking Redmond either. :)  As I see it, the back
of the software behemouth must be broken.  Otherwise, OS like Linux
will eventually become illegal.

--
Jim Williams.

Find a Linux/GNU User Group near you:
http://www.tiac.net/users/williams/lugnuts/

      I can see your point.  I think the moderated thing is an even better
idea.   That would be ideal, - if people need help with CD-Roms they could just
type "HELP CD-ROM" and get the HOWTO or whatever.  I would support that.
As far as commercial, I actually meant being developed by a company, not
distributed by one.  The way things are right now we might as well get rid of
either .setup or .misc, as they both have the same post in em.

     I sent a copy to .advocacy as well (just to help it move :D)

-g

In article <40s2ar$...@solaria.cc.gatech.edu>,
Byron A Jeff <by...@cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
            ^^^^^^^^^
I propose that we release a new operating system based on the Linux
kernel with X, Internet software, GUI admin tools etc. And for a name?
I propose we call it Belle ;-)

Agreed. Linux is not an O/S for the masess and never will be. However,
the Linux kernel could very well be used to build a NEW O/S that is
intended for the masses. Lets just keep the distinction between the two
projects and the two goals and everyone will be happy.

--
Michael Dillon                                    Voice: +1-604-546-8022
Memra Software Inc.                                 Fax: +1-604-542-4130
http://www.memra.com                             E-mail: mich...@memra.com

Byron A Jeff (by...@cc.gatech.edu) wrote:
[Sorry, deleted Warning because of possiablity of Pissing off people. =-)]
BTW, I also believe that you have to gauge "US" to other guys as in..
Windows vs. Mac  vs. Linux...What would be the  point of an OS if it's
not keeping up. =-)

: In article <jameslDDD348....@netcom.com>,
: James Logajan <jam...@netcom.com> wrote:

: >: In message <40nevv$...@eccdb1.pms.ford.com>, cmalo...@sld024.cpd.ford.com
: >: (Craig Maloney) writes:
[Deleted talk about FAQs]
There have been times that I've read the FAQ and still can't get something
working...Normally it's something small...I tend to add to my messages "I've
read the FAQ...But I'm missing something small.."  Otherwise I get an
e-mail box full  of "READ the FAQ"  and one message that says,"Oh, you need
<insert correct answer here>"

[Delete Nice little "Linux sux compares to Winblows]

: We've all seen these. It's difficult to refrain from flaming these types
: of posts.
Oh..It's really  easy to refrain....I  think it's only HARD not to flame
if you are not willing to laugh at the people and your own OS.

: 6) Don't ask for E-mail. If folks are to follow 2-5 then the answers need to
: be posted. Plsu it indicates that one isn't willing to take to time to find
: the answer. BTW if you want E-mail replies without screaming "SEND ME E-MAIL!"
: just put a poster in the Followup: field on your post. Many newsreaders will
: tell any respondants that E-mail was requested and will automagically send
: mail to the querant even if a response is posted.
Sometimes it's better for the reply to be sent via E-mail...I know a few Linux
friends of mine that  get access to UseNET once a week or so..And they expire
every week...So they might  lose the repsoned...NOTE: Not everyone's problem
should be answered via  e-mail.

: >[ Agreement deleted ]
: >
: >With Linux, fixing problems is still very much do-it-yourself. What is
: >disturbing is that the "do-it-yourself" attitude is clashing with the
:>Linux advocates "Linux for the masses" attitude. You can't have it both ways.

: Only some folks are calling for Linux for the masses. Personally I conceed
: the fact that Linux will never ever have a mass market unless someone
: nukes Redmond! ;-) Big Blue has been trying for over 5 years and its market
: share is abysmal compared to the Beast from the West.

I've talked with  people...Mainly business men and women...The main reason
they don't move to UNIX (or Linux) is the bad name it orignally had. Keep
in mind that UNIX was not ALWAYS this advanced.=-)  Also, most people
want to use  Mircosoft Word/Excel...Why?  Hell..Even I have ONE favorate
product by Mircosoft...WORD!! It's nice and easy...Sorry fokes =-) TeX
is not the solution to the world's problems. =-)  

: But I think it's unnecessary IMHO. Because Linux excellently serves a
: small user population doesn't make it a bad thing. We should work to make
: Linux the best Linux it can be without concern of outside forces.

This seems like a typical Isolationist option...(No flame intended)
Without outside forces...The people on the Inside would get stale.  No
new ideas would occur after a period of time. Heck..Look at Microsoft and
Apple!!  Apple came out with Lisa/Mac and everyone started flocking...So
what did Mircosoft do?  Made a Mac look alike for MS-DOS (Even if  primitive).
If we don't stop to see what EVERYONE is doing...We will miss the boat..
Sorta  like what "Interactive by SunSoft" has done.  (Now that is a nasty
OS..I've been programming/managing them. =-)

: "I'm OK. Linux is OK. I'm OK. Linux is OK...."
<shug> If you want an  "OK" existence with an "OK" OS...Move back  to DOS. =-)
I personally want a better OS and an optimized OS. =-)

: You can't have it both ways. I call for Linux to remain the do-it-yourself
: hacker OS for the intelligent computer user and leave the rest screaming
: for the inevitable wave coming on Aug. 24.

That may be your personally thoughts..But There are a  large number of
companies changing Linux to make it more acceptable in the Mainstream.  
Personally I agree...If Linux can prove *ONE* thing to the world...Then
I'll be happy...."You can run Multiprosses STABLELY on a low end machine
with a pretty interface and has a good app base for a 'FREE' OS."   Then
I would be very happy...Personally  we have successed in MOST ofit.
We still need more Commerical Apps and we need a nicer interface then
Plain X....Mind you I've never tried some of  the other flavors of X
add-ons...But I've been working on NeXTStep...And If Linux was OpenStep
compatable and do it all with 8megs of memory (running nicely not  slow!)
and a 486dx-33 processor...That would MAKE Linux...=-) And  Break NeXT. =-)

: Moving to advocacy because of the blatant opinionating.
Yes, blatent...But no more then my opinions. =-) <grin>

by...@cc.gatech.edu (Byron A Jeff) wrote:

Well, some newbies are feeling pretty scorched, which is what prompts that sort
of disclaimer.

However how should one respond to:

No it's not.  Just don't answer.  

That's the biggest problem.  It was, IMO, made worse by the expansion of the
number of groups.  When some newbie needs help, he looks for `help' in the
newgroup.  When he doesn't find it, he shoots in the dark, especially if he
can't set up his hardware, his X, and misc. items.

--

David L. Johnson                        d...@lehigh.edu
Department of Mathematics               http://www.lehigh.edu/~dlj0/dlj0.html
Lehigh University
14 E. Packer Avenue                     (610) 758-3759
Bethlehem, PA 18015-3174                (610) 828-3708

Byron A Jeff (by...@cc.gatech.edu) wrote:
: In article <40spl0$...@news.unicomp.net>, Woody <gwo...@prysm.com> wrote:
: >In message <40s2ar$...@solaria.cc.gatech.edu>, by...@cc.gatech.edu (Byron A

: >    I hope Linux never goes commercial, but I wouldn't mind a few commercially
: >produced apps showing up (like we are seeing now), would you?  

: Some are useful and BTW Linux is commercial. I think that 40000+ CD's in
: sales a month qualifies as commercial.

: >I was suggesting
: >that we break the groups up again to include problem areas such as
: >col.compiling.kernel  col.setup.cdrom  etc.  to REDUCE the same questions being
: >asked repeatedly in col.setup and col.misc.  That was the whole point, other
: >than people being attacked.  I strongly feel that the more Linux users there
: >are, the better the software will get.  Again, just my $.02.

YES YES YES !  The more users, the better for ALL ....

Even if it is Linux's cousin "___" .... we need to get the world away
from the current trend of single-user and stupid OS that are being
almost given away these days.

And the price we all must pay is being a newbie at first and later
helping newbies .... We all know the score .... don't cry about it.

We have support from many companies, and if people were to write or
convert docs in text-html and let a place like InfoMagic or other mirrors,
make it available.  

NEXT subject here ....  about moderated groups  ....

: This way the signal/noise goes way up. People posting to the group would
: have to read first and because of the much better signal to noise it would
: be more likely that actual posts are both relavent and would more likely
: get answered.

This is what lists are good for .... Pointing the newbee to a list is
best anyway, because a newbie often has no real net connections yet.
It is read-only .... and CAN be setup in a simple to use manner.

Even a host with fake usernames who are all on vacation .... send a report
to any email about it's topic .... User names like  'mail-faq' would
forward that faq as a 'vacation' message.   So Easy for the newbie  !
They won't have to know how to use a request list,  'ya know what I mean ?

A site like that could take a big load off the newsgroups !!!

<comment mode off - coffee mode on -  cyl.>
--

--
  how...@charm.net      Roger Howard     r...@howsys.com

David L. Johnson (d...@lehigh.edu) wrote:
: >I just want to see one thread about linux only in col.advocacy without
: >being baited (or baiting) the other guys.
: >Please keep this warning on any replies. Thanks. BAJ ]

: Well, some newbies are feeling pretty scorched, which is what prompts that sort
: of disclaimer.

: However how should one respond to:
: >
: >-----
: >Dear Linux Lusers:
: >
: >I'm trying to get so and so and such and such to work under Linux. I've
: >posted several times with no answer. I demand that someone send me E-mail
: >to solve my problem today. I don't have time to read the newsgroups.
: >
: >Windows is so easy. Why does Linux suck so bad? It's too damn hard.
: >
: >Later,
: >
: >Suck Ass Newbie
: >-----
: >I usually gently remind newbies of the following:
: >
: >1) No massive crossposting. All it does is piss people off. How many times have
: >you seen the same question posted over and over and over in all of the col
: >newsgroups? One enterprising fellow posted a Linux setup question about HP
: >printers into 20 newsgroups including all of the HP newsgroups (not just the
: >printer ones). I flamed him and he wasn't the least bit concerned. The bottom
: >line is that anyone who's going to answer the question reads all of the
: >newsgroups anyway.

: That's the biggest problem.  It was, IMO, made worse by the expansion of the
: number of groups.  When some newbie needs help, he looks for `help' in the
: newgroup.  When he doesn't find it, he shoots in the dark, especially if he
: can't set up his hardware, his X, and misc. items.

Another thing you can do is point them at us (Linux Journal).  While we
have a lot of "technical" articles we intend to also be a good resource
for the novice.  Also, for those looking for the "best CD distribution" or
whatever, the ads along with review articles in LJ are a good way for
people to shop for what is best for them.

--
Phil Hughes, SSC, Inc. P.O. Box 55549, Seattle, WA 98155  (206)PUBS-REF

    E-mail: p...@ssc.com  Phone: (206)782-7733  Fax: (206)782-7191
SSC/Linux Journal web site: http://www.ssc.com/

In article <40u0e9$...@felix.junction.net>,

I like your idea, but... well, I think you just described Caldera...

--
 Joe Sloan     j...@engr.ucr.edu   http://dostoevsky.ucr.edu
     Win95? No, none for me, thanks - I'm already running Linux...
 Microsoft is not the answer - Microsoft is the question; the answer is NO!

In article <41fsh2$2...@hopi.gate.net>,

I wonder if MS had any apps for Linux, or OS/2 for that matter, how many
if any would buy them?
--
ms_hostet...@kcgl1.eng.ohio-state.edu * phost...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
at...@cleveland.freenet.edu * hostetle...@osu.edu * CIS 70004.3540 [E--/F]

            WARNING: Do not look into laser with remaining eye

   I don't see why Linux can't be a workhorse for the masses and still be

   the cogniscenti's exoti-machine.  The __Linux__ philosophy of

   under-the-hood accessibility is irresistible to us technophiles

   who want to dink with the mixture, spark advance and manifold tuning.

   What bugs me is the _UNIX_ philosophy that measures Tech-hood by the

   number of obsolete, arcane human-factors disasters they regard as "power-

   ful" tools (groff, TeX, yadda).  Hey man, after I slam the hood down,

   I want to go do useful stuff like publish a magazine or help a friend

   set up a business ("Well, Fred, you got to learn all these languages here

   cause they're really powerful..."    Fred: "What the hell are you talking

   about-- my niece got all her work done in a few minutes on her Mac!  Go

   learn Bantu, Buddy."   And yes, we _do_ need the masses, cuz there are

   some really cool, mature products that _require_ a certain critical mass

   of market base.  And besides, every schmo we can stick in front of a

   Linux box is one less schmo sending alms to Microfilth.

                                         Russ McGinnis
                                         St. Pete, FL

    P.S. In the old days, engineers/physicists actually measured Tech-hood
    by the length of their sliderule scabbard.  I guess the compsci
    equivalent was the size of your instruction set. (Instruction-set envy?)

In article <40tfhk$...@daffy.anet.uwrf.edu>,
BENJAMIN A LINDSTROM <b...@uwrf.edu> wrote:
Word/Excel...Why?  Hell..Even I have ONE favorate

However, TeX does offer an alternative to dealing with Word's problems.
--
Finger c2a...@keats.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca for PGP public key. Or contact
one of the public key servers -- the key id is 0xD3C7995D.

In article <40tfhk$...@daffy.anet.uwrf.edu>,
BENJAMIN A LINDSTROM <b...@uwrf.edu> wrote:
-Byron A Jeff (by...@cc.gatech.edu) wrote:
-[Sorry, deleted Warning because of possiablity of Pissing off people. =-)]
-BTW, I also believe that you have to gauge "US" to other guys as in..
-Windows vs. Mac  vs. Linux...What would be the  point of an OS if it's
-not keeping up. =-)

Linux/FreeBSD isn't going to keep up with the other guys. They were
developed for a different audience with different goals. Going over
and over and over the same crap all the time gives me a headache. Honestly
I'd welcome the debate if they run the same apps, but they don't. So
the discussion degenerates in "We can do this." "Well we can do that too
using this tool which you can't run" ad nauseum.

I don't think it's unreasonable to have one or two threads in col.advocacy
that exclusively talks about Linux.

-
-: In article <jameslDDD348....@netcom.com>,
-: James Logajan <jam...@netcom.com> wrote:

-: >: In message <40nevv$...@eccdb1.pms.ford.com>, cmalo...@sld024.cpd.ford.com
-: >: (Craig Maloney) writes:
-[Deleted talk about FAQs]
-There have been times that I've read the FAQ and still can't get something
-working...Normally it's something small...I tend to add to my messages "I've
-read the FAQ...But I'm missing something small.."  Otherwise I get an
-e-mail box full  of "READ the FAQ"  and one message that says,"Oh, you need
-<insert correct answer here>"

You should state what you've read and done. And some folks don't really read
and you'll still get the "Read the FAQ". But I gurantee if you read the
docs and scan the newsgroups your question probably won't be foolish.

-
-[Delete Nice little "Linux sux compares to Winblows]
-
-: We've all seen these. It's difficult to refrain from flaming these types
-: of posts.
-Oh..It's really  easy to refrain....I  think it's only HARD not to flame
-if you are not willing to laugh at the people and your own OS.
-
-: 6) Don't ask for E-mail. If folks are to follow 2-5 then the answers need to
-: be posted. Plsu it indicates that one isn't willing to take to time to find
-: the answer. BTW if you want E-mail replies without screaming "SEND ME E-MAIL!"
-: just put a poster in the Followup: field on your post. Many newsreaders will
-: tell any respondants that E-mail was requested and will automagically send
-: mail to the querant even if a response is posted.
-Sometimes it's better for the reply to be sent via E-mail...I know a few Linux
-friends of mine that  get access to UseNET once a week or so..And they expire
-every week...So they might  lose the repsoned...NOTE: Not everyone's problem
-should be answered via  e-mail.

Actually I've started the practice of doing both to make sure that the
person asking the question gets a copy and everyone else can also see the
discussion.

The point I was trying to make however is not to make it sound like:

"Lackey. I haven't the time to look for this answer. Find it and E-mail
it to me because I'm too lazy to do it myself."

All it does is piss people off so they won't answer the question.

-
-: >[ Agreement deleted ]
-: >
-: >With Linux, fixing problems is still very much do-it-yourself. What is
-: >disturbing is that the "do-it-yourself" attitude is clashing with the
-:>Linux advocates "Linux for the masses" attitude. You can't have it both ways.
-
-: Only some folks are calling for Linux for the masses. Personally I conceed
-: the fact that Linux will never ever have a mass market unless someone
-: nukes Redmond! ;-) Big Blue has been trying for over 5 years and its market
-: share is abysmal compared to the Beast from the West.
-
-I've talked with  people...Mainly business men and women...The main reason
-they don't move to UNIX (or Linux) is the bad name it orignally had. Keep
-in mind that UNIX was not ALWAYS this advanced.=-)  Also, most people
-want to use  Mircosoft Word/Excel...Why?  Hell..Even I have ONE favorate
-product by Mircosoft...WORD!! It's nice and easy...Sorry fokes =-) TeX
-is not the solution to the world's problems. =-)  

Agreed. But people discount the same types of tools that are available for
Unixes. They usually don't have everything including the kitchen sink like
the Word type apps, but they are functional. Like EZ, wordperfect for Unix,
Frame, XESS, FlagShip. However because they aren't WORD/EXCEL they don't
mean anything.

Like I said I find the tools for Linux extremely usable. To me it isn't worth
discussing because I don't use anything but Linux.

-
-: But I think it's unnecessary IMHO. Because Linux excellently serves a
-: small user population doesn't make it a bad thing. We should work to make
-: Linux the best Linux it can be without concern of outside forces.
-
-This seems like a typical Isolationist option...(No flame intended)
-Without outside forces...The people on the Inside would get stale.  No
-new ideas would occur after a period of time. Heck..Look at Microsoft and
-Apple!!  Apple came out with Lisa/Mac and everyone started flocking...So
-what did Mircosoft do?  Made a Mac look alike for MS-DOS (Even if  primitive).
-If we don't stop to see what EVERYONE is doing...We will miss the boat..
-Sorta  like what "Interactive by SunSoft" has done.  (Now that is a nasty
-OS..I've been programming/managing them. =-)

You've missed a fundamental point: all the players you named had to change
and compete because of profit motive or lack thereof. Linux can afford
to be isolationist because even if another copy is never sold it'll
still be here. Imagine if 0 copies of Win95 sold. So you think the
project would continue to exist? Two words: New Coke.

Like I said before Linux will never be the popular choice. For starters
it would have to run popular apps faster with half the RAM and half the
processor and half the disk. It would have to be easier to use, install
and maintain than the other guys. It would have to have not only a free
CD but a personal install boy/girl to drive up to each home to install
it. It would have to come with its own butler whose only job is to
explain each nuance to the user. In short it would have to be better,
faster, easier, more compatible, and more marketable than anything the
Redmond folks have to offer.
It would require the combined wealth of the top 10 list of
Forbes (including Mr. Redmond himself) and an act of Congress outlawing
the use of anything else. It won't happen. Game over man.

Given this why bother to kowtow to the populus' perception of what's
good when what you have is actually good. The Linux movement doesn't
have to think "Well how can we suck up to the computing public so
that more people use Linux..." because life and limb doesn't depend
of that happening. Linux wasn't a project designed to create a following
it was something that happened and those who saw what was good in it
followed.
-
-: "I'm OK. Linux is OK. I'm OK. Linux is OK...."
-<shug> If you want an  "OK" existence with an "OK" OS...Move back  to DOS. =-)
-I personally want a better OS and an optimized OS. =-)

No it sounds like a somewhat insecure type A personality that flinches
whenever someone asks "But can it run Word?" Linux is a better OS and a
highly optimized OS. It doesn't have the kitched sink bullshit that
everyone else has because every possible user might need it.

We disagree on what the best Linux can be. I never ran Windows. I never
needed Windows. I don't depend on Windows. I only have one machine that
has Windows on it and this month (out of the 18 months I've had the machine)
is the first time I've used it for anything (debugging a file transfer
problem for a client). So Linux need have nothing to do with Windows to
be the best Linux it can be. If you need windows, run windows. If you
need windows and a good OS run OS/2 or NT. Why does Linux need to be
bastardized by being drawn into Windows world? This is one aspect that
contradicts the "Build it and they will come" attitude that Linux
exhibits so far. The best Linux can hope to do is emulate what the
OS's from Redmond already do. If that's the case, why switch? Linux's
best bet is to do better what no one else does, something unique,
something special. That'll attract a smaller, different, smarter crowd
of interesting people and not the sheep who religiously follow whatever's
printed in PC Week.

Nobody can do Redmond better than Redmond. Many have tried.
All have failed. The only survivors are the ones that do something
different. We have been here long enough to know not to bother fighting
a Pyrric War whose only hope is to try to break even. And even that will
fail.

I really don't care if Linux ever deals with Redmond compatible software.
If it does fine. If it doesn't that fine too. But to make it the defining
and crowning achievement of the Linux movement is a sure call for the
movement's death.

-
-: You can't have it both ways. I call for Linux to remain the do-it-yourself
-: hacker OS for the intelligent computer user and leave the rest screaming
-: for the inevitable wave coming on Aug. 24.
-
-That may be your personally thoughts..But There are a  large number of
-companies changing Linux to make it more acceptable in the Mainstream.  

Like Caldera. That's fine. But Caldera is like a pilot fish in that
it'll pick up the scraps that Redmond leaves behind. It'll never be
the shark in the desktop computing world because most of the little
fishies out there respond to the shark while ignoring the pilot fish.

And nobody has changed Linux so that it can run all the other guys stuff
out the box faster and easier than the other guys. Now have they?

But honestly this is the exact debate I tire of listening to. I've been drawn
into it again. I'll try real hard not to comment on this aspect of
the thread again. All David has succeeded in doing is stubbing Goliath's
toe and attract a small cheering section in the process. But remember that
pore little David had much more than a lucky shot on ...

read more »

In article <41g3ufINN...@keats.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca>,

Please don't open this can of worms again! TeX and Word have two different
paradigms. One usually prefers one to the other. Discussing why one is
better than the other is about the same waste of time of the Personal
Free Unixes versus the Commercial App monster from Redmond.

I use Latex. I like latex. I do not try to convert people who use
word processors to Latex.

Other people like Word. Other people use word. Word works for them.

End of debate. next topic please.

BAJ
--
Another random extraction from the mental bit stream of...
Byron A. Jeff - PhD student operating in parallel - And Using Linux!
Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332   Internet: by...@cc.gatech.edu

In article <kevinbDDr5ow....@netcom.com>,

Yup. Note that the references are veiled though. ;-)

That's not what the Goliath killers are saying though. They believe that
every ounce of energy from every Linux developer on the planet needs to
be focused on designing and implementing the Linux-stone that will
wipe Redmond off the map. I'm going to break my own rule and ask straight
up: If anyone else released Windows '95 today (It's the 24th where I
am) would anyone buy it? Even if it were hyped as much as W95 is?

I think not.

Big Blue and the Fruit guys have spent millions (maybe billions) to get
people to buy their stuff. But the Pied-Piper of Redmond has already led all
the boys and girls away.

All I'm trying to do is shine some light into the somewhat foggy minds of
those who have delusion of grandure by thinking that the focus of the
personal computing industry can be removed from Washington State.

And that's fine. Even if Linux runs all the compatible apps in the world,
that's fine. But let's simply say "It would be nice if my Linux box
could run more apps without rebooting." than "Linus could be the #1
guy in Forbes if we could topple the Redmond Giants!"

Again no argument. What I keep asking is "of all the things that Linux
can become why does the ultimate goal seem to be make it like the
other environments on the market?" It's not going to get massive
market appeal, and it will make few heavier in the pockets. I just don't
see the win.

Let me tell you my experiences. I've set up computer systems for a few
novices. Since I was much more of a Linux zealot then (yeah, right ;-)
I attempted to convince these novices of the value of Linux. In each
case I failed. Why? Because the user didn't feel that their computer
was like the other computers around them. They felt alienated from
their friends.

My point is that it had nothing to do with Linux. It had everything to
do with wanting to conform and be accepted and be part of a community.

So even if Linux could (and sometimes does) best the competition on
every conceivable technical point along with running all possible
apps compatibly, and giving a free meal in the process, most would
not switch.

So why bother making this a goal? It's doomed to failure. In fact
it's worse than that because Linux will lose its identity:

"Hey! I just heard about this Linux thing. It runs all my Win95 apps
faster than Win95 and it's free!"

"Why should I change? Win95 runs all my apps fast now."

"Because it can do this Unix stuff too."

"What's Unix?"

All Linux would become is a Win95 applications loader. A droll existance
at best.

Yup. I was just stating what I wanted.

BAJ
--
Another random extraction from the mental bit stream of...
Byron A. Jeff - PhD student operating in parallel - And Using Linux!
Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332   Internet: by...@cc.gatech.edu

Loosly coupled yes, totally independant no.  Improvements in the
kernel give hints on how the machine should talk to people.
Improvements in talking to people give hints on how the kernel
should talk to the hardware.  Tight coupling would be a bad idea,
but no coupling would be worse.

--
Sphere.

Find a Linux/GNU Group for you: http://www.tiac.net/users/williams/lugnuts/
Buy Free UNIX!
Microsoft is prohibited from examining any packet containing data
originating on any machine which I am using. (Not that I can stop them.)

by...@cc.gatech.edu (Byron A Jeff) wrote:

True.

And I'll keep trolling for that 1%.  I agree that Linux shouldn't chase the
illusion of Microsoft.  On the other hand, I consider attacking Microsoft good
policy.  I want to capture that 1% which wants to understand -- pointing out
the fallacy of following the current commercial OS paradigm is the most
effective method of reaching that 1%.

If Linux happened to run those "neat apps" I wouldn't complain.  It eases the
transition.  (I must admit that I'm not very excited about having the other
99% come along for the ride, but it's a cost I'm willing to accept.)

--
Jim Williams.

Find a Linux/GNU User Group near you: http://www.tiac.net/users/williams/lugnuts/

In article <41fttc$...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,

   If I could get Word for Linux, I'd probably buy it?  Why, 'cause it's
fairly popular, would (hopefully) be able to read and write files people
on other operating systems could get to, and would have a large expert-base
for when I got totally fed up with the silly thing and needed help NOW.

   Of course, this isn't likely to happen until Linux or xBSD gets over
about 5% of the installed base of computers.  Fortunately, Wordimperfect
is being ported, so I'll buy that instead.

                 ____
   david parsons \bi/ o...@pell.com
                  \/

: Paul Hostetler (phost...@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu) wrote:
: : In article <41fsh2$2...@hopi.gate.net>,
: : Russell McGinnis <ma...@news.gate.net> wrote:
: : >   I don't see why Linux can't be a workhorse for the masses and still be
: : >   the cogniscenti's exoti-machine.  The __Linux__ philosophy of
: : [chop]
: : >   some really cool, mature products that _require_ a certain critical mass
: : >   of market base.  And besides, every schmo we can stick in front of a
: : >   Linux box is one less schmo sending alms to Microfilth.

: : I wonder if MS had any apps for Linux, or OS/2 for that matter, how many
: : if any would buy them?

: There was a graph (In the latest LJ I think) which showed the apps that
: the polled users would like to see ported to Linux.
: At the top was MS Word.  As long as it doesn't run like Word for Mac. :)

: Even as a Linux advocate, I have to say that Word 2.0 is a very nice product.
: The jury is still out on 6.0, I find it kinda slow and bloated.

Same here ( as far as Linux prefernce and Word 2.0 use ).
I like and still use Word 2.0. I installed and then,
after some time, uninstalled Word 6.0. Not only is the app bloated
but files produced by 6.0 are significantly larger than files
produced by 2.0.  The extra baggage is for accomodating the new
OLE 2.0 stuff - structured storage etc.

I would like a good word processor on Linux.  I would however
prefer it to be even more lightweight than Word 2.0 and have say
Tcl as a scripting language.

Nitin Borwankar,
Principal, Borwankar R&D
ni...@borwankar.com

: --
: - Mark Komarinski - komar...@craft.camp.clarkson.edu

: "You can do anything you want until someone complains.  Then you're screwed."
: -Heard in reference to the FCC.