C.O.L.A. Newcomer FAQ and Primer Edition: 23 - 10/24/07
High Plains Thumper
+
+ C.O.L.A. Newcomer FAQ and Primer
+ Edition: 23 - 10/24/07
+ Group: comp.os.linux.advocacy
+
+ Copyright (c) 2002-2006 Linux Reality Team
+
+ PLEASE VISIT OUR HALL OF LINUX IDIOTS:
+
+ http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
+
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Welcome to comp.os.linux.advocacy, otherwise known as cola.
This FAQ will try to address most of the issues regarding Linux and
this group. Unlike the other FAQs, this one will try to be as
realistic as possible. If you want the straight information from
real people, continue reading. If you would like to be told what
you want to hear, or read a bunch of misinformation that you will
regret later as you find things don't work as they should, feel free
to read one of the other "FAQS" in here.
OK, on to the info! ADDED NEW SECTION BELOW!
Here's a list of some frequently asked and answered question here
and elsewhere that you may find useful in your quest to try linux.
Read these carefully before you decide to invest time in Linux, you
may find that you have better things you can do instead.
SECTION ONE - INSTALLATION
--------------------------
1.1 Q: I heard linux was easy to install, is it?
A: That depends on what distro you try. Most of them will have
trouble detecting all your hardware. Most new hardware devices
are not supported. If your lucky you might be able to find
something that someone threw together on the net. But that's
after spending a couple hours searching and probably won't take
advantage of your hardware to it's fullest capability.
1.2 Q: Once I get it installed, then what?
A: Then you get the joy of making sure everything is configured
right. Plan on a minimum of two hours per device to get it to
work. That's if the device is even supported.
1.3 Q: What happens if I'm in the middle of an install and the
installation freezes or just stops?
A: You get to reboot and start all over again. This happens
every so often with Linux. It seems like it's buggy install
routines or something. Ain't Linux grand?
1.4 Q: What's the deal?! I installed Linux and it took up almost 2GB
hard drive space!
A: The Linux distros usually install a LOT of never-used programs
on the default install. You can pick and choose what you want,
but good luck figuring out what programs are needed and what is
useless, obscure tools. Linux usually installs stuff like 10
different editors, 12 different mail clients, and so on.
(more to come...)
SECTION TWO - CONFIGURATION
---------------------------
2.1 Q: What's with all these cryptic files?
A: All of Linux is configured with cryptic text files. Some of
the more user-friendly distros have configuration utilities
that claim to do it for you, but success with these works
sometimes and other times don't, so sometimes you have to
edit them by hand. With Linux's spotty reliability in UI
programming, you might as well get used to it.
2.2 Q: What is killall, HUP, ls, cat, rm, which, etc and why are
these programs telling me to do them? Arggg!!
A: These are command line programs that do things within the
system. It's what makes Linux a powerful OS for those that
are experienced with it. But it's also what makes it a pain
in the arse to use and inefficient as a desktop system. Who
wants to type all the time when they can just click?!
(more to come...)
SECTION THREE - APPLICATIONS
----------------------------
3.1 Q: Where can I get some programs to run on linux?
A: Good question. Because Linux doesn't have a large user base
on the desktop,(I think it's about 0.24%, less than 1%)
companies that make software won't write their programs for
Linux. There's a lot of community created programs out there,
and some are fairly good, but those are few and far between.
Most of the Linux software that tries to mimic it's windows
counterpart is substandard. It's usually slow and buggy and
early in development.
3.2 Q: I tried to install an RPM but I got 'failed dependencies', what
is that?
A: That's Linux's version of DLL hell. Different versions and
distros use different libraries. So unlike windows where
programs will run on many different versions, Linux programs
will fail if they're not made for your specific version.
3.3 Q: What is compiling and configure, make and make install? And
what is a makefile?
A: This is a way to build the programs from the source code
under Linux. When the question above fails, you can always
build it yourself. The advantage is that it works most of
the time. The disadvantage is that it takes forever to build
large programs, you need to know some cryptic commands and
you have to do all this on a command line. Unlike Windows
where you just double click and you are done.
3.4 Q: Can I go to my local store to buy any Linux applications?
A: Not really. You can buy Linux itself at various stores. But
not too many commercial companies make applications for Linux,
there's no profit in it with 0.24% of the desktop market.
(more to come...)
SECTION FOUR - SPEED ISSUES
---------------------------
4.1 Q: Why is Linux so slow?
A: Linux is built on the technology of the old UNIX OS's. Even
the graphical user interface of Linux is a separate program that
is the same type they used back in the older UNIX days. So
working with old technology will give you the old technology
responsiveness. Also, a lot of the GUI's, although nice to look
at, are still not mature. Using them is slow and sluggish
compared to, say, Windows.
(more to come...)
SECTION FIVE - CONSISTENCY
--------------------------
5.1 Q: Why are the windows different looking?
A: Since Linux isn't built by one company, group or have any
governing body, programs and interfaces can vary dramatically.
You can have everything from the nice look of KDE, to something
as ugly as TK and everything in between. You'll usually see some
varying UI stile in Linux.
5.2 Q: Should I buy Suse Linux?
A: No. They make it difficult to get it for free. All the other
distros provide free ISO's to download. Suse is the only one
that doesn't provide them but instead has a FTP install that's
hard to get to work. Why should they make it easy? The more
people that can't get the download to work have to spend $80
or more for the boxed set. And on top of all that although
it might have a few more user friendly tools, it's still the
same base Linux system that's in development and that all the
other distros are using. In other words, they're all on about
the same level of struggling to catch up to Windows, so you're
not going to find any earth-shattering features in one compared
to another.
(more to come...)
SECTION SIX - LINUX COMMUNITY
-----------------------------
6.1 Q: What is RTFM?!
A: This is an acronym for Read The Fuc*ing Manual. This is a common
answer you'll get when asking for help in the Linux community.
It's meant to make you feel inadequate while boating the Linux
persons ego at the same time. See, Linux enthusiasts consider
themselves to be guru like and above helping out the simple
newbie. You have to earn your respect by spending countless
hours becoming a kernel hacker before you're worthy of getting
any help.
6.2 Q: Why does everyone think they are better than you when
using Linux?
A: Same as above. When people use Linux they believe since it
takes a little more knowledge to use Linux, they are technically
superior, and see themselves as an elite group that doesn't have
time for the pathetic little Windows people.
(more to come...)
SECTION SEVEN - LINUX ADVOCACY, HELPING OR HURTING?
---------------------------------------------------
7.1 Q: Everyone in here says linux is perfect, why would they say that
if it isn't?
A: We really don't know. Maybe they've used Linux so long that
they've gotten used to it. Some of these people haven't used
Windows in years so they are comparing Linux to the
last windows they used, maybe Windows 3.1 or 95.
7.2 Q: Why does everyone call you a troll when you ask something that
questions linux?
A: Most of the people here in C.O.L.A. think of Linux more like a
religion than an OS. They mostly are MS haters and feel that
Linux is the greatest thing to ever hit computing. So when
someone questions Linux it's like questioning their belief
system. Instead of looking at it with some logic and
reasonable judgment, they will lash out at you can't claim your
are a troll or a paid MS supporter.
7.3 Q: Why does everyone <PLONK> you if you question Linux?
A: Fairly similar to above, Linux advocates can not argue their
point rationally. So to make it look like you are under them
or you are not worth it, and at the same time find an easy
way out of having to prove themselves, they will <PLONK> you.
(more to come...)
SECTION EIGHT - LINUX EVANGELISM, ZEALOTS
-----------------------------------------
8.1 Q: There are some people that call this FAQ lies and seem to treat
it like it's a conspiracy against them, and post all sorts of links
to anti-microsoft articles. Why are they reacting so strongly?
A: The people that are reacting so strongly are most likely the
Linux extremists that believe everything negitive that is said about
Linux comes from Microsoft. Like many cult-like groups, the people
that belong to them don't have the ability to see things rationally
or outside of their view. If someone replies to the FAQ, or
anything questioning a non-favorable view on Linux, that seems a
little "over the edge", do a google search on the person
(http://groups.google.com/) and look at his/her posting history
then decide for yourself if the person is credible or not.
(more to come...)
-----------------------------------------
PLEASE VISIT:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
--
HPT
Phil Da Lick!
<snip wintroll bullshit>
You have *way* too much free time. Do you get paid for that?
Hadron
Nice try.
High Plains Thumper
gepruild als meisje:
Path: [....] newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed2.news.xs4all.nl!
X-ME-UUID: 200807021340002...@mwinf6206.online.nl
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 15:39:37 +0200
Message-Id: <2008070213395...@mwinf6206.online.nl>
X-Abuse-Contact: ab...@bananasplit.info
> + PLEASE VISIT OUR HALL OF LINUX IDIOTS:^h^h^h^h^h^h^h[TROLLS]
http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/
http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/09/clogwog-troll.html
> OK, on to the info! ADDED NEW SECTION BELOW!
<SNIP>
> SECTION EIGHT - LINUX EVANGELISM, ZEALOTS
> -----------------------------------------
>
> 8.1 Q: There are some people that call this FAQ lies [SNIP]
simply because it is.
Following are excerpts from the official FAQ, entire text may be found at:
ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet-by-hierarchy/comp/os/linux/advocacy/%5Bcomp.os.linux.advocacy%5D_FAQ_and_Primer_for_COLA,_Edition_III
or http://tinyurl.com/4obfht
Alternates:
ftp://sipb.mit.edu/pub/usenet-by-hierarchy/comp/os/linux/advocacy/
http://gd.tuwien.ac.at/faqs/faqs-hierarchy/comp/comp.os.linux.advocacy/
http://faqs.cs.uu.nl/na-dir/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer.html
http://www.opennet.ru/docs/FAQ/OS/Linux/faq-and-primer.html
http://static.slated.org/cola-faq.html
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/
********************************************************
Frequently Asked Questions and Primer for comp.os.linux.advocacy
Edition III
April 19, 2002
+-------------------------------------------------+
| Beware of those who would call you a friend for |
| many will eat your bread while working against |
| you. They will take credit for your good works |
| and blame you for their own misdeeds. |
| - The Great Unknown |
+-------------------------------------------------+
1 Introduction
This is the FAQ for the comp.os.linux.advocacy newsgroup and a primer
for new readers of this newsgroup, providing information about this
newsgroup and the Linux community as a whole.
1.1 Availability
This document is posted on a weekly to the comp.os.linux.advocacy,
comp.answers, and news.answers newsgroups. In addition it is archived
at rtfm.mit.edu ftp archive and its mirrors and is also available on
the Internet FAQ Consortium's website at www.faqs.org.
1.2 Welcome to comp.os.linux.advocacy
If you are new to Linux and/or comp.os.linux.advocacy, welcome. It is
hoped that you will will enjoy your time in comp.os.linux.advocacy and
find it educational. We also hope that you will find Linux as useful
for you. and that in the ripeness of time that you will become a
contributing member of the Linux community.
COLA is like a meeting hall for Linux advocacy. A place where those
who advocate the use of Linux can meet and discuss all things Linux.
In addition it is a place were individuals interested in Linux can
come to gain an understanding of the Linux and the Linux community and
to learn about the capabilities of Linux from those who are
experienced with the use, administration, and development of Linux.
By using Linux as a user or sysadmin you are a member of the Linux
community of which this newsgroup is an asset. The Linux community is
world-wide and interconnected by the internet and other networks gated
to the internet.
The description that your news server delivers to you for
comp.os.linux.advocacy, or COLA for short, is "Benefits of Linux
compared to other operating systems". That description is derived from
the charter of COLA. Sometimes advocacy groups are viewed as a place
where the bickering undesirables of other newsgroups are directed, in
order to remove a disruption from another group on the same general
subject. That is incorrect for COLA.
1.3 Contributing to this FAQ and Primer
All those who advocate the use of Linux are invited to submit material
and suggestions to be considered for future versions of this document.
Submissions should be sent by email to mj...@mindspring.com. You may
also post your submissions in COLA; however, in that case you should
still email your submission as well, so that the submission will not
be missed as can happen if it were posted in COLA only.
Submissions offered by those who may deemed to be hostile to Linux,
including but not limited to anti-Linux propagandists, will not be
accepted.
1.4 The Charter of comp.os.linux.advocacy
The charter of comp.os.linux.advocacy is:
For discussion of the benefits of Linux compared to other operating
systems.
That single sentence is the one and only charter of the newsgroup
comp.os.linux.advocacy. The newsgroup's charter is for the newsgroup
as a place for supporters of Linux to gather to discuss Linux, for the
betterment of the Linux community and the promotion and development of
Linux. It supports this as a place for those who would like to learn
more about Linux to come to learn from those who know Linux. It does
not call for it to be a place where the anti-Linux propagandists to
gather in order to discredit Linux.
You may have heard of another charter sometimes called by some the
"original charter," that opens the newsgroup to the abuses that are
inflicted on Linux by those who oppose Linux. That other charter never
existed, it was a proposed charter for another newsgroup that never
was created that would also have been called comp.os.linux.advocacy.
On 14 Feb 1994, Danny Gould dgo...@helix.nih.gov posted
comp.os.linux...@uunet.uu.net a Request for Discussion
entitled "Request for Discussion (RFD) on comp.os.linux.advocacy" to
the news.groups newsgroup. That RFD was cross posted to the
appropriate newsgroups and a number of other inappropriate newsgroups
as well. It included the following proposed charter:
The proposed group will provide a forum for the discussion of Linux.
In addition, it will allow comp.os.linux.misc to deal with
Linux-specific issues. Discussion will include (but not be limited
to) the discussion of the pros and cons of Linux and applications
for Linux, and the comparison of Linux with other operating systems
and environments such as Microsoft DOS and Windows, SCO UNIX,
Coherent, NeXTstep, Macintosh System, etc. It will be an unmoderated
forum.
The call for votes on the proposal was not posted, the issue died
without a vote.
On 4 Oct 1994, Dave Sill d...@ornl.gov posted 37mn57$d...@rodan.UU.NET a
Request for Discussion entitled "REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD)
comp.os.linux reorganization." Thus far comp.os.linux.advocacy was not
yet proposed. Note that unlike Danny, Dave posted the Request for
Discussions to appropriate newsgroups only, that is a hallmark of a
serious effort.
On 14 Oct 1994, Dave Sill d...@de5.ornl.gov posted
37mn57$d...@rodan.UU.NET a revised version of this Request for
Discussion, this revised posting called for the creation of
comp.os.linux.advocacy among other comp.os.linux.* groups. Dave
proposed this charter for comp.os.linux.advocacy:
For discussion of the benefits of Linux compared to other operating
systems.
The Call for Votes went out in the required form, and on 13 Dec 1994
posted the results ikl...@amdahl.com with greater than 8 to 1 in favor
of the creation of comp.os.linux.advocacy (our COLA) with Dave's
proposed charter. On that date, that charter became effective and that
other charter that was proposed for the other comp.os.linux.advocacy
that never was created, never became anything that affects this
comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Those who oppose Linux and have invaded comp.os.linux.advocacy in
order to try to subvert the purpose of this newsgroup will continue as
they have to insult the intelligence of the Linux advocates by citing
that other proposed charter of that other newsgroup that never came
into existence. They also have continued to quote from the
introductory paragraph of the Danny's Request for Discussion as though
that were a part of any actual or even a part of the failed, proposed
charter. Perhaps they feel that the introductory section provides them
with a greater impact.
When someone posts citations from that failed Request for Discussion
in order to make it appear that the anti-Linux propagandists are
sanctioned to be posting in COLA, as was done by an anti-Linux
propagandist on January 13, 2002 in article
pMr08.457$Wf1.3...@ruti.visi.com, then once again by another
anti-Linux propagandist on February 13, 2002 in article
d6761fb5.02021...@posting.google.com they are not only
using disinformation they are also insulting the intelligence of
everyone who is a reader COLA.
2 COLA
2.1 On Topic Subjects
On-topic is anything anything regarding Linux that is of interest to a
person who advocates the use of Linux, or requests for information
about Linux by a person who would like to learn about it. COLA is also
a great place to share your Linux success stories.
COLA is not a place to advocate the use of other operating systems,
there are other newsgroups for advocating them. COLA is not a place to
vent real or imagined complaints regarding Linux. There are other
newsgroups created for that purpose.
COLA is not a place to post advertisements or other promotions for
financial gain or for promoting anything other than the use of Linux
operating system and growth of the Linux community.
2.2 Kinds of People Who Read and Post to COLA
While reading articles in COLA you will often see references to
various types of people. To someone new to COLA, these classification
may be confusing.
2.2.1 Linux Advocates
A Linux advocate is a person who advocates the use of Linux. They are
those who enjoys sharing the experiences they have had with Linux.
These experiences range from an easy first-time install through
regular day-to-day experiences, all the way to solving thorny or
uncommon technical issues by using Linux.
Linux advocates may from time to time offer assistance to persons who
ask for technical support within COLA. Many of the Linux advocates of
COLA find offering such assistance difficult to resist and many the
those advocates are also the same persons who provide such support
through other channels. However, technical support is not part of the
official chartered purpose of COLA so someone requesting technical
support will more often than not be redirected to other Linux support
channels.
2.2.2 Ordinary User
A user of Linux that does not have superuser access. When you login
into Linux using your personal account, you are an ordinary user. When
a person who is a sysadmin logs into his personal account, he is an
ordinary user as well.
2.2.3 Sysadmin
The term "sysadmin" is a contraction of "system administrator." This
is the traditional title used for the person responsible for the
operations of a unix computer. In general, that is the person who
knows the superuser account password. That superuser account is used
for system maintenance. As the superuser a person is granted more
privileges than the other users, but only when using the superuser
account. For normal work the sysadmin should use his own personal
account and become the superuser only when needed. The most common
name for that account is "root", but it can be anything. The superuser
account is distinguished by its user identification number, which is
always 0.
2.2.4 Anti-Linux Propagandists
Anti-Linux Propagandists are those who regularly post argumentative,
insulting, distracting, untrue, and generally unpleasant articles to
COLA containing propaganda designed slow and even prevent to
acceptance of Linux by the general computing public. For more
information see Anti-Linux Propagandists and Trolls.
2.2.5 Wintroll and Winvocate
The term "wintroll" and "winvocate" have commonly used in COLA to to
refer to anti-Linux propagandists who champion Windows. Wintroll are
the ones who appear to behave at a lower level of sophistication than
the winvocate. Winvocate is someone who would be considered a true
Windows advocate, if they were to post in an appropriate Windows
advocacy newsgroup rather than posting off-topic in COLA.
3 Linux
Linux is an operating system based on the unix class of operating
systems. It can be argued that Linux is the kernel of the operating
system; however, in common usage the word Linux is used to refer to
entire operating system as a whole, an operating system comprised of
the kernel, systems utility software, user utility software and to a
lesser extent the applications software. This is the practice that
will be followed in this document. Specific instances of this from
given vendors are referred to as Linux Distributions.
Linux as stated above, is based on unix, but is not legally a clone of
the unix operating system. On the other hand it looks like unix,
behaves like unix, feels like unix enough to functionally be
considered a unix. Linux is more compatible with both major classes of
unix, BSD and AT&T, than they are with each other. Linux fully
operates with with the other unixes as an equal peer via networking.
Linux runs software compatible with those other unixes and in most
cases the very same software does run on each of those unixes and
Linux as well. Where the other unixes have deviated from each other
with various utilities or services, Linux typically supports both of
their styles of utilities. Often Linux is more compatible with the
various unixes, than they are with each other.
Linus Torvalds started developing Linux from scratch as a better unix
than than the Minix that was then available. Minix is a contraction of
Minimal Unix, and is the name of a very minimal unix that was licensed
for educational purposes. The name Linux is in turn a contraction of
Linus's Minix, although the actual results of Linus's early releases
had already so far out classed Minix so that Linus's Unix would have
been a better base to form the contraction Linux.
One of the major goals of creating Linux was to create a unix that was
free from the encumbrances of existing unixes and the licensing that
restricted the use of Minix. So it was necessary to write the Linux
kernel from scratch.
The Linux operating system provides all the features that users and
administrators should expect from any modern, high-performance
operating system. Many of these features have been a part of Linux and
stable for years. While the developers of various, so-called popular
operating systems claim to be innovating, they are only playing catch
up with Linux. As this document is being written, Linux is increasing
its lead with the development on the 2.5.x series
developmental/experimental kernels.
3.1 The Kernel
The Kernel is the core of the operating system. That is the part that
communicates with devices, handles memory management, schedules
processes, and provides other basic services to the systems utility
software, user utility software and applications software. Thanks to
the fact that the kernel handles the hardware and provides a uniform
view of it to higher level software, regardless of your hardware
platform, Linux will present the user with a uniform environment. That
means that once you as a user of Linux learn to run it on a PC, or a
Mac, or a minicomputer, or a mainframe computer you will be able to
sit down to use Linux on any other of the supported platforms, and
feel right at home. The hardware may look and feel different such as a
different key layout or a different pointing device, but Linux
knowledge is portable across hardware platforms. Members of the team
that produced this document can attest to this, through their first
hand experience on multiple hardware platforms running Linux.
Many versions of the Linux kernel have been released, in fact since
the release of the Linux kernel version 1.0.0 in there have been over
600 official main line kernels released, including the AC series of
Linux kernels there have been almost 900 releases in that time. The
reason for so many releases has to do with the development of the
kernel being an open process, this way you don't have to wait for
months or years for a needed patch to be provided or for a feature
that you really need to be made available.
3.3 The Linux way of software development
Some think that we must maximize our user base at all costs, to
include all potential users. This is a pitfall of the commercial
programming mind set, which leads to kitchen sink programming, where
you have a little something for everyone and a lot of nothing for
anyone, with a product that fails to fully serve anyone's needs. That
is not the the Linux way to develop software.
Software development with Linux is, as it should be, about creating a
program that suits its users' needs perfectly. If that program is a
text editor and your editor serves the needs of 100 people and it
pleases them completely, then you have achieved complete success.
Don't worry about somehow getting the rest of the Linux community to
use your editor, other editors serve their needs better. If they do
find that your editor serves them better, many will switch away from
their other editors in favor of yours. Then there is nothing wrong
with using multiple editors for different tasks. They could use your
editor for some tasks they they think it is suited for and other
editors for other tasks that they think those other editors are best
suited for. There is nothing wrong with that either, that is freedom
of choice in action and that is the Linux way.
You will have more satisfaction for your development efforts by having
a smaller user base comprised of users who are absolutely pleased with
the software that you have created, than with a user base of tens of
millions of users who can barely tolerate what you have developed,
with not one of them being truly pleased with it.
There is some software that runs on Linux that has fallen into the
kitchen sink programming trap. These programs are conspicuous because
they are the exceptions to the rule.
There is a developing commercial software market for Linux; Let us
hope that those developers learn the Linux way, and do not fall into
the trap of believing that they must each try to capture the
marketplace to the exclusion of all others. But if they do fall into
that trap, there will still be the programmers who do know the Linux
way, and users who appreciate that way. Those companies who fall into
the same old trap that has dominated a sizable portion of the computer
marketplace of the 1980's and the 1990's, will find their efforts
thwarted by the Linux way.
Due to the freedom of choice that is a keystone of Linux, let each
user choose the programs that suit their needs best.
3.8 Linux's Success is Not Prevented by Microsoft
3.8.2 Linux Does Not Have to be More Like Windows
A common question asked by some is, "Why is Linux so much like unix
and so different than Windows?". The answer is simply, Linux does not
have to be more like Windows. Linux only has to be like Linux (and
unix). Why is Linux so much like Unix? Because that is what it was
designed to be from the beginning of its development.
If you want a Windows (pick your favorite version of Windows) clone
operating system that is as free reliable, and stable as Linux, then
Linux may not be for you. Freedows or Freemen Windows would be better
operating systems for you.
Both the Freedows OS Project and Freemen Windows are a projects to
create free and stable operating systems that are clones of Windows.
It is true that neither of these projects have not yet produced a
single release nor have they released any files yet. You should look
into them at sourceforge.net/projects/freemenos and
sourceforge.net/projects/freedows, contact their development teams and
offer your services to help with their development. That way everyone
will be much more happy.
3.8.6 Longevity
Free software has a characteristic that proprietary software
lacks-longevity.
In the early 1990's PC class computers were sold with the MS-DOS
operating system and often with Microsoft Works. Both have since
either died, or changed into programs unrecognizable from their
origins. DOS exists only as a command prompt in Windows and
OS/2-except for the open source FreeDOS. Works exists only as a
Windows product that uses Microsoft Word for word processing. Its file
formats are completely foreign to Works' original file formats. The
way users interact with these programs has also changed-the feature
sets have changed dramatically (which can be seen as both good and
bad). There are hundreds, maybe thousands, of programs that are no
longer available. Some of those programs were once the kings of the
desktop. WordStar is one example.
In the free software world useful programs tend to last a very long
time. Emacs, has been around for at least 20 years. Unix, whether in
free or proprietary incarnations, has been around since 1969. The C
language has been around for nearly as long-it was created
specifically to enable porting Unix to different hardware platforms
(not that these are revelations for the COLA readership-I mention them
only as contrasting examples). The TEXtypesetting system has been
around since the 1970's.
These differences in longevity of software have implications for
user's expectations about it-in the effort they are willing to invest
in learning it, and in their trust that the software will be around in
five or ten years.
If many in the Linux community thought Linux and other free software
was a fly-by-night phenomenon, they probably would not invest much
time or energy learning it or advocating its use. But the more that
one realizes that it and its applications are here to stay, the more
they are willing to invest time and energy learning specific pieces of
software. Knowing that what they learn today will continue to be
useful to them for years and decades to come.
Why invest time in an "easy to learn" text editor that might die in a
couple of years or a seemingly more difficult editor that has proved
through longevity and developer support that it will be around for a
long time to come? The first impulse upon starting to use Linux is to
pick the easy editor (such as nedit). They do not want to invest the
energy or time to learn Emacs or Vim. assuming that they would be
supplanted by graphical editors. But then they started longing for
better features in their editors. They could ask the developers to add
features, pay someone to add them, or add those features themselves.
But why, when editors with all the wanted features, and more, are a
mouse click away?
And what's the hurry? The software isn't going anywhere. It won't be
outdated next year or the year after. It has proved its utility and
longevity. Even more important in the long run is that this software
has a stable user interface. New features have been and continue to be
added over the years and the pre-existing features are still there.
They won't have to learn a new way to use their computer just because
developers might decide that break dancing provides a better way to
interact with computers or that animated paper clips or some dweeb
named Bob make life easier for new users.
In Linux, some things remain constant-BASH, Emacs, Vim, the core
utilities, and languages for programming and typesetting. New features
get added, graphical interfaces are developed, new programs are born.
But the latest whiz bang hypeware doesn't kill the tried and true work
horses that made the system useful. Marketing doesn't determine a
Linus program's lifetime, feature set, or implementation. Utility and
need are the sole arbiters of a program's life cycle.
There are many who would chomp at the bit to point out that most
people just want to use their computers without having to invest time
and energy learning 20-year-old software. The good news is-they
can-even with Linux. The breadth of command-line, text, and graphical
software for doing everything gives users choices in how to interact
with the system. New users coming from other systems can adapt Linux
to their style. There is no need to learn new ways to do anything.
Complete novices can be productive very quickly thanks to KDE, GNOME,
and BASH.
Fortunately, there are many ways to get most things done and Linux
provides an environment that allows gradual accumulation of knowledge
and skill and adapts easily to any working style. And the knowledge
and skill gained over time is not made obsolete by sweeping changes in
software availability, feature sets, or user interfaces.
3.9 Linux's Compatibility With Other Operating System
Linux is compatible at different levels with many other operating
systems, ranging from the networking level all the way to running the
same software.
3.9.1 Compatible With Windows
Linux can run Windows software by running that software under the
actual Windows operating system (requiring a properly licensed copy of
Windows) that is in turn running as a guest operating system in a PC
emulator such as VMware. Linux can also run Windows software on Linux
itself with an implementation of the Windows Application Programming
Interface (API) via Wine. It is also possible to compile the source
code for Windows based software on Linux and link it against the Wine
libraries to produce a Linux executable of that Windows software. One
note about Wine, Wine can only run on PC style hardware, since it is
not a PC emulator hardware, and runs the Windows software directly on
the underlying processor.
Linux can provide network printers and act as a fileserver for Windows
computers by running Samba using TCP/IP networking. You can also use
MarsNWE to provide printers and network volumes using IPX/SPX
networking. Linux can also access shares and printers provided by
computers running Windows by the use of Samba and the Samba
filesystem. Linux can also be a file, and print server to Windows
clients by using Samba. Linux machines can access Windows machines
that are emulating NetWare file servers by using the NetWare core
protocol filesystem.
Linux can read and write to Windows hard drive partitions that use the
filesystems of MS-DOS and Windows 9x. The NTFS filesystem are a bit
problematic because of their nature and they way their specifications
change from version to version. Linux can read Windows NT, Windows
2000, and Windows XP NTFS partitions well; however, writing directly
to such partitions is possible but not recommended.
There is an indirect method for Linux to read and write to NTFS
partitions. Running Windows under a PC emulator such as VMware, give
that copy of Windows access to the NTFS partition or partitions and
have that copy of Windows running as a fileserver. Then let Linux
access the fileserver through a virtual or actual network connection.
Linux understands the Windows extensions to the CD-ROM standards.
Linux can both read them and generate them. Linux can also access
Windows diskettes and other disk media, either by mounting them as any
other Linux partition can be mounted, or by the use of the mtools.
3.9.2 Compatible With *DOS
Linux can run DOS (Pick your favorite DOS) software by running that
software under actual DOS (requiring a properly licensed copy of DOS)
that is in turn running as a guest operating system in a PC emulator
such as VMware. An older and popular option for Linux on PC style
hardware is to run DOS software with DOSEmu. DOSEmu is a PC emulator
that uses the underlying Intel style processor to execute programs.
With it you will need a properly licensed copy of actual DOS, such a
copy is easy to come by since contrary to popular belief DOS is not
dead. There are commercial versions of DOS being sold and there is
FreeDOS. DOSEmu can also run other real mode PC software that boot and
run independently of any operating system and depends on PC hardware.
Linux can provide network printers and act as a fileserver for Windows
computers by running Samba using TCP/IP networking. You can also use
MarsNWE to provide printers and network volumes using IPX/SPX
networking. You can also use Linux's as a NFS fileserver and lpr
printserver for DOS. In each case DOS will require the applicable
networking client software.
Linux can read and write to DOS hard drive partitions, diskettes and
other disk media, either by mounting them as any other Linux partition
can be mounted, or by the use of the mtools.
3.9.3 Compatible With MacOS
Linux can provide network printers and act as a fileserver for
Macintosh computers. Linux can access Macintosh based print servers
and fileserver.
Linux can read and write Macintosh floppies, hard drives, and other
disk media.
3.9.4 Compatible With NetWare
Linux can work in a NetWare based network as a fileserver, a print
queue server or a IPX/SPX router with the use of MarsNWE and the
IPX/SPX networking protocols. With NCP utilities Linux can communicate
with other printer queues as a print server. Linux can also print
through a Novell-style printserver. Linux can be a client in such a
network, using the existing NetWare file and print queue servers.
Linux supports the DOS, Windows, OS/2, and NFS names spaces of
NetWare. Linux can access NetWare's hard drive partitions.
3.9.5 Compatible With Other Unixes
Linux software is Unix software. Some source code many need to be
ported to Linux, but that is no different than moving such a program
from one Unix to another. If the software in question is too low level
then it might require a complete rewrite to run on Linux, but that is
the same as it is between any other two Unixes already. Most other
Unixes can also run programs written for Linux, some of the other
Unixes have even started to support running Linux binaries. Yes, Linux
and other Unixes are very compatible with each other's software.
In all ways that matter, Linux is a Unix, so if the other Unix
computers in the networks are running a version of Unix that is
compatible with normal Unix networking services, Linux will fit right
in.
Linux can access the filesystems of a variety of other Unixes, that
means that Linux can read their drives. Linux can access even a
variety of those that do not use the native partitioning scheme that
Linux uses on the given hardware platform that it is running on.
3.9.6 Compatible With Other Operating Systems
Linux can access the floppy drives and hard drives of a variety of
other operating systems. Any operating system that can use TCP/IP,
IPX/SPX, DECnet networking can communicate with or through a Linux
host.
3.10 Linux Leaves Users Wanting Less
From them 1950's through the 1970's users would expect their computers
to operate as specified in the manuals and the specification sheets.
The POP manuals (Principal of Operations manuals) and the rest of the
documentation of those computers were considered to be faithful
representations of the operations of those computers.
There was one computer that was installed in 1964, the organization
that owned it decommisioned it in 1984, and wanted to donate it to a
college computer science department but they had lost the installation
media of the machine's operating system. The computer was running
twenty-four hours a day and seven days a week for those twenty years
without a single reboot or any down time. There were components that
had failed: individual tape drives and card readers/punches had worn
out and were replaced, CRT terminals were added and the most of the
card readers, the old model 26 keypunch stations and most of the model
29 keypunch stations were retired. Disk drives were added to that
computer years after the initial installation, None of that needed any
downtime or reboots.
In the 1970's there was the development of microprocessors and
microcomputers, most of them matched their operating systems in what
ever form they came in and were as reliable as the computers of the
prior decade. Some of the hardware was problematic but the operating
systems would generally operate as specified.
In the early 1980's something started to change. Today many users have
come to accept and even expect their computers and operating system to
fail frequently, many shops now use regular reboot cycles as an
attempt to use pre-emptive reboots to avoid crashes at unexpected
times. They have come to expect their operating systems and systems
software and applications software to not work as documented. What is
even worse, they often see nothing wrong with that madness. In prior
decades, if such undependability and unreliability were experienced,
it would not have not been acceptable and the vendor would have to
replace those useless systems and often had to pay for the customer's
losses as well.
Now flash forward to present day, users have come to expect very
little from their computers. Such poor performance has led them to
expect less and less while wanting more and more with little prospect
of getting it. But in addition to such unreliable operating systems,
there is Linux, leaving its users wanting less and less because it
provides more and more all the time.
* A stable operating system
Linux users no longer want for a stable operating system because
Linux is as stable operating system. Twenty four hours, seven days
a week non-stop operation for years at a time with off the shelf
PC hardware is not anything unusual for Linux. As members of the
FAQ and Primer team can attest to from personal experience.
* An operating system that doesn't require me to spend a fortune on
new
hardware.
Linux can run on hardware with just the computing power needed or
that is available. Linux sysadmins upgrade to more powerful
hardware to have more power available for their users, not to
regain yesterday's performance from today's operating system.
* An operating system with a decent graphical user interface.
Or rather one that can be configured to work the way you want it
too. With the look and feel you seek. Linux does not actually have
any graphical user interfaces, but the X Windowing System is
commonly run on Linux and other unixes. There are also other
graphical user interface besides the X Window System that can run
on Linux, including some next generation test bed systems. If a
Linux user wishes he can run today a user interface that won't be
available elsewhere for years or even decades, that is if he likes
to live on the bleeding edge.
* An operating system with lots of useful stuff built in.
Much of what a person needs to purchase to get some other
operating systems to be useful comes with the common Linux
distributions. Sometimes in surprising ways, such as the little
program named "cat" that concatenates files and is the more
powerful original that the DOS command "type" was copied from. The
program "cat" also provides by itself much of the functionality of
Norton Ghost.
* An operating system that doesn't try to prevent me from using my
computer.
Linux does not second guess or interfere with the human decision
making process. It respects the wisdom of the human sysadmin and
the user. There are utilities available to automate that, but in
the end humans are the bosses. There has been a call for more
"Windows like" automation to take over from human authority, one
distribution that used that philosophy was Corel Linux. It is now
a hated distribution by its own users as a result.
* An OS not prone to viral infections
While in theory no operating system can be 100all worms and
viruses, Linux by is nature is immune enough that the
possibilities that such little beasties exist have become like
urban legends in the Linux community. Even if such infections
could target Linux, the multifaceted code base would in itself
limit the spread, if a sysadmin selects the software to run
without regard to distributions and does not use precompiled
binaries, he has just increased the level of immunity of his
systems. The worst an attacking worm could do is crash a server
program, but the worm creator could not actually control anything
with the worm because he could not predict the memory layout of
the program he is attacking on systems so independent from
distributions. That same would generally be true with binaries
supplied from a different distribution or different version than
the one he is targeting.
* An operating system which I can program and hack easily
Anyone can have access to the source code of the Linux kernel and
most if not all the programs they run on Linux. If one is a
programmer, Linux provides all the tools and the source code to
add or alter any feature he pleases. If he wants to write a new
program and has questions, about the operation of the library
functions, or the kernel, he can refer to the documentation, ask
for help on-line, or just read the applicable source code. If he
has a device for which he want to create a driver for, he can
write it. If he wants to see how similar drivers work, there is
the Linux kernel source code and the code of the other drivers
available.
* An operating system which doesn't decay over time.
Since the late days of DOS programs and the coming of Window NT
and Windows 95, there has been a pheonoma known as software rot,
also known as bit rot. With late DOS programs it could take an
individual program on a production system out of commission
needing to be reinstalled. Windows 95 and Windows NT elevated the
software rot phenomenon from causing the decay of individual
programs to the decay of the entire operating system. This is not
a factor with Linux.
All these items are things that Linux users are not wanting for any
longer, because Linux has given to them what they have been wanting
for up to a decade. So yes, Linux leaves its users wanting less,
because it provides so much more of what they have been hoping for
from their prior operating system.
[Abridged, see official version for full text.]
High Plains Thumper
> Nymthief poseuring as High Plains Thumper wrote:
>
> <snip wintroll bullshit>
>
> You have *way* too much free time. Do you get paid for that?
Path: [....] newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed2.news.xs4all.nl!
X-ME-UUID: 200807021340002...@mwinf6206.online.nl
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2008 15:39:37 +0200
Message-Id: <2008070213395...@mwinf6206.online.nl>
X-Abuse-Contact: ab...@bananasplit.info
It's the Australian Netherland fraudster, clogwog, posting his
anti-Linux advocacy tripe. And yes, he including several other
vagrants have *way* too much free time.
--
HPT
Phil Da Lick!
You wish. Your actions here speak louder than your words.
High Plains Thumper
> "Phil Da Lick!" writes:
>
>> <snip wintroll bullshit> You have *way* too much free time.
>> Do you get paid for that?
>
> Nice try.
You have *way* too much free time. Do you get paid for that?
--
HPT
William Poaster
Couldn't have been HPT either.
"References: @mwinf6206.online.nl" so more likely the Toilet-Clog troll.
--
The little scamps! It's the oldest trick in the book: capture your ship,
turn it into a planet, then explore a macro universe in a laundry basket.
How could you fall for an old scam like that?
--Holly, Nanarchy - Red Dwarf--
High Plains Thumper
> Phil Da Lick! wrote:
>> High Plains Thumper wrote:
>>
>> <snip wintroll bullshit>
>>
>> You have *way* too much free time. Do you get paid for that?
>
> Couldn't have been HPT either. "References:
> @mwinf6206.online.nl" so more likely the Toilet-Clog troll.
I see it like a cat out of gratitude, leaving a dead bird on the
doorstep as a gift to its owner,
It is like an enemy in defeat, taking its last moments in vain to
gain lost ground by nymthieving, libeling, posting advocate
privacy information violations, etc.
Even stupider is the trolls thinking I am Phil Da Lick!
Their tongues are now stuck, licking the frozen railway tracks as
the Linux train approaches.
--
HPT
William Poaster
> William Poaster wrote:
>> Phil Da Lick! wrote:
>>> High Plains Thumper wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip wintroll bullshit>
>>>
>>> You have *way* too much free time. Do you get paid for that?
>>
>> Couldn't have been HPT either. "References: @mwinf6206.online.nl" so
>> more likely the Toilet-Clog troll.
>
> I see it like a cat out of gratitude, leaving a dead bird on the doorstep
> as a gift to its owner,
>
> It is like an enemy in defeat, taking its last moments in vain to gain
> lost ground by nymthieving, libeling, posting advocate privacy information
> violations, etc.
>
> Even stupider is the trolls thinking I am Phil Da Lick!
Well we already know Quack can't read headers, & is illiterate.
> Their tongues are now stuck, licking the frozen railway tracks as the
> Linux train approaches.
--
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper wrote:
>
>> Even stupider is the trolls thinking I am Phil Da Lick!
>
> Well we already know Quack can't read headers, & is
> illiterate.
And he is the only one I know of that can screw up a perfectly
easy to install and use Debian Stable distro.
--
HPT
Phil Da Lick!
But your results are skewed. You see the rest of the people you know
WANT it to install without problem... It's not really a fair comparison.
Bob Hauck
<highplai...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> 1.4 Q: What's the deal?! I installed Linux and it took up almost 2GB
> hard drive space!
This one probably should be updated given the needs of Vista. 2 GB is
looking pretty svelte these days. If you're going to take the trouble
lie to make something look bad, you actually need to make it look bad.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| http://www.haucks.org/
Moshe Goldfarb.
It's nice to see the accurate FAQ posted here instead of the usual tripe
you post, High Plains Thumper.
You really need to update it though to include the hypocrisy that exists in
COLA.
IOW use Windows by day and slam it by night.
You can start with a new section on Mark Kent.
--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/
High Plains Thumper
Umh, er, no. I was referring to:
http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/01/hadron-quark-troll.html
[quote]
Debian Stable is one of the most widely used distros for mission
critical applications and where one wants minimal impact to
production work. Very few require bleeding edge software to be
productive.
Yet Hadron insists that Debian Stable is full of bugs and too
backward for usage:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/3364e9f972538fd9?
Subject: Re: [News] Sister OS to Linux, OS-X Has Better TCO than
Microsoft Windows
Date: Sun, 09 Mar 2008 09:50:07 +0100
Message-ID: fr08c1$9e1$2...@registered.motzarella.org
[quote]
> Hadron has an apparent inability to recognise how more
> consistent usage of Debian Stable will only help his usage of
> the product, preferring unstable versions of Debian; if not for
> the only reason as an opportunity to attack Linux/OSS.
Once more for the hard of brain power : I use testing. Not
unstable. And I use it for a reason - Debian Stable is simply too
buggy and backward and I cant be arsed to manage pinning or
selectively monitoring backports.
[/quote]
"Linux expert" Hadron has problems with stable versions.
--
HPT
The Ghost In The Machine
<phil_the_lickRE...@hotmail.com>
wrote
on Wed, 02 Jul 2008 14:44:06 +0100
<ZY-dnQYQDJi7G_bV...@posted.plusnet>:
> High Plains Thumper wrote:
>
>
> <snip wintroll bullshit>
>
> You have *way* too much free time. Do you get paid for that?
Actually, this fake "FAQ" has been kicking around for years.
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
/dev/signature: Resource temporarily unavailable
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
Sinister Midget
Yeah. Fisted requires more than that just for memory to boot up and
show a desktop. The disk space required is quite a bit more.
--
Microsoft is to operating systems and security as McDonalds is to
gourmet cooking.
---- Posted via Pronews.com - Premium Corporate Usenet News Provider ----
http://www.pronews.com offers corporate packages that have access to 100,000+ newsgroups
High Plains Thumper
> Phil Da Lick! wrote:
>
>> <snip wintroll bullshit> You have *way* too much free time.
>> Do you get paid for that?
>
> Actually, this fake "FAQ" has been kicking around for years.
Except that every time the trolls try and improve it, it gets worse.
--
HPT
Tim Smith
The Ghost In The Machine <ew...@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote:
>
> Actually, this fake "FAQ" has been kicking around for years.
As has the other fake "FAQ". There's no such thing as a "real" FAQ for
a group like this. Only groups that have significantly more consensus
than this group (or moderated groups) can produce a real FAQ.
--
--Tim Smith
High Plains Thumper
> As has the other fake "FAQ". There's no such thing as a
> "real" FAQ for a group like this. Only groups that have
> significantly more consensus than this group (or moderated
> groups) can produce a real FAQ.
We have been through this before. Timmy has had problems with
agreeing on the purpose of the newsgroup as originally
established by vote following Dave Sill's RFQ's of Fall 1994.
Nothing to see, move along ....
--
HPT
Tim Smith
Looks like HPT doesn't know the difference between a FAQ and a charter.
--
--Tim Smith
Moshe Goldfarb.
If you read both *FAQS * with an open mind, the so called *fake FAQ*
describes COLA a lot more accurately than the other one.....
High Plains Thumper
> Looks like HPT doesn't know the difference between a FAQ and a
> charter.
FAQ is found at:
ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet-by-hierarchy/comp/os/linux/advocacy/%5Bcomp.os.linux.advocacy%5D_FAQ_and_Primer_for_COLA,_Edition_III
or http://tinyurl.com/4obfht
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/
ftp://sipb.mit.edu/pub/usenet-by-hierarchy/comp/os/linux/advocacy/
http://gd.tuwien.ac.at/faqs/faqs-hierarchy/comp/comp.os.linux.advocacy/
http://faqs.cs.uu.nl/na-dir/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer.html
http://www.opennet.ru/docs/FAQ/OS/Linux/faq-and-primer.html
http://static.slated.org/cola-faq.html
to name a few. I like this FAQ, because IT FEELS OFFICIAL.
--
HPT
Moshe Goldfarb.
>
> to name a few. I like this FAQ, because IT FEELS OFFICIAL.
That's Marti you feel, not the COLA *FAQ*....
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper wrote:
>
>> to name a few. I like this FAQ, because IT FEELS OFFICIAL.
>
> That's Marti you feel, not the COLA *FAQ*....
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/8187683e7f46e030?
[quote]
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 22:19:15 GMT
Subject: More "Flatfish" Forgery: "Felching, Linux and the FAQ"
This forged post, another in a series, provides further proof
that their author is the person who uses the name "flatfish"
(among some 60 other fake identities). Evidence has been posted
identifying this individual as one Gary M. Stewart.
He has previously posted articles expressing his hatred of
homosexual people, and his belief that I'm gay (because I've
written in support of civil rights for homosexuals). The forged
post contains a derogatory sexual reference that he thinks
relates to gay men.
[/quote]
http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/01/moshe-goldfarb-troll.html
[quote]
http://tinyurl.com/5hwppw
From: Moshe Goldfarb [brick....@gmail.com]
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: I never liked the ReiserFS for one simple reason...
Date: Sat, 3 May 2008 09:59:50 -0400
Message-ID: 1r8x6y6djvmx.9...@40tude.net
High Plains Thumper (the name) sounds like some kind of a
deranged effeminate cowboy that stepped right off Brokeback Mountain.
[/quote]
--
HPT
Hadron
> Looks like HPT doesn't know the difference between a FAQ and a
> charter.
Maybe we could call is the FAQe?
--
"Unfortunately, once again, the user-unfriendly dirtware sucks so bad it's
hard to prove how bad it sucks."
-- "DFS" <nospam@dfs_.com> in comp.os.linux.advocacy
Mark Kent
The FAQ is valid, registered appropriately was agreed by the on-topic,
pro-charter occupants of this group. It must be observed.
--
| mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper espoused:
>> Tim Smith wrote:
>>
>>> As has the other fake "FAQ". There's no such thing as a
>>> "real" FAQ for a group like this. Only groups that have
>>> significantly more consensus than this group (or moderated
>>> groups) can produce a real FAQ.
>>
>> We have been through this before. Timmy has had problems
>> with agreeing on the purpose of the newsgroup as originally
>> established by vote following Dave Sill's RFQ's of Fall
>> 1994.
>>
>> Nothing to see, move along ....
>
> The FAQ is valid, registered appropriately was agreed by the
> on-topic, pro-charter occupants of this group. It must be
> observed.
Oh, Timmy and rest of the astroturfing anti-Linux brigade brings
up the COLA Charter and FAQ issue yearly for the past umpteen years.
They are unwelcomed off-topic guests, who have no respect for the
charter nor things regarding Linux.
Bottom line is he has no respect for the charter, which the FAQ
is based on. Hence then, no respect for the FAQ.
They could simply go off and do their own thing in a newsgroup
formed for the purpose, but instead prefer to spread their
poisonous words in this forum.
--
HPT
Snit
486d52c3$0$25953$6e1e...@read.cnntp.org on 7/3/08 3:29 PM:
Frankly the culture is more important than the charter for most groups. It
is the nature of Usenet.
--
"Uh... ask me after we ship the next version of Windows [laughs] then I'll
be more open to give you a blunt answer." - Bill Gates
<http://tmp.gallopinginsanity.com/gates/>
Mark Kent
I've said this before here, but it's worth mentioning again. There's
soemthing sociopathic about people who knowingly break rules deliberately
and with regularity. It's not as if the rules are particularly onerous
here, in fact, usenet is such that there is already a group suitable for
pretty much anything you might imagine somewhere, and even if there
weren't, you could create one.
Timmy and the turfers (sounds like a cross between a 1960s teen-pop band
and the Wurzels :-) need to deny the FAQ and Charter in order to try to
get some kind of justification for their anti-charter activities. It's
rather like burglars justifying their burglaries by claiming that people
have insurance, so it's okay.
Snit
b7v0k5-...@ellandroad.demon.co.uk on 7/4/08 12:14 AM:
> I've said this before here, but it's worth mentioning again. There's
> soemthing sociopathic about people who knowingly break rules deliberately
> and with regularity. It's not as if the rules are particularly onerous
> here, in fact, usenet is such that there is already a group suitable for
> pretty much anything you might imagine somewhere, and even if there
> weren't, you could create one.
>
> Timmy and the turfers (sounds like a cross between a 1960s teen-pop band
> and the Wurzels :-) need to deny the FAQ and Charter in order to try to
> get some kind of justification for their anti-charter activities. It's
> rather like burglars justifying their burglaries by claiming that people
> have insurance, so it's okay.
The post you made directly before this one was an example of you going
against the charter - you merely posted a "me too" post in response to
trolling by others in COLA. I was talking about OSS (OO.o)... and you and
two other "advocates" were not willing to talk about it... fair enough, you
have no obligation... but your reaction was to denigrate someone who noted a
fact you did not like.
The post of yours I am responding to is clearly not a post about Linux or
OSS in any way either.
You live in a glass house. Stop throwing stones.
--
Dear Aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1123221217782777472
High Plains Thumper
> Timmy and the turfers (sounds like a cross between a 1960s teen-pop band
> and the Wurzels :-)
Heh! Just as well, the tripe they push is ages old.
> need to deny the FAQ and Charter in order to try to get some kind of
> justification for their anti-charter activities. It's rather like
> burglars justifying their burglaries by claiming that people have
> insurance, so it's okay.
... or requiring a customer to purchase another license because he
exceeded the hardware upgrade change quota.
... or requiring a customer to purchase another license because system
failed, needs restoring and it came with no media.
Like father, like son.
--
HPT
Moshe Goldfarb.
> The FAQ is valid, registered appropriately was agreed by the on-topic,
> pro-charter occupants of this group. It must be observed.
Better inform Roy Schestowitz of this because he violates it about 100
times per day.
Moshe Goldfarb.
You mean like Roy Schestowitz who violates your 'FAW/Charter" somewhere
around 100 times per day.
Interesting you never seem to mention that fact.
He, Roy Schestowitz, is without a doubt the most flagrant violator of the
charter.