Docs/Word Processing in Console ?

[Luis Denera]

Please, is there any office suite available for linux console as it was
years ago WP-DOS v1.0-5.1, or older MultiMate ?

I know for "sc" or "slsc" spreadsheet application, but just a spreadsheet
isn't enough. Or, are there any standalone office application, documents
and word processing applications, faxing printing, piecharts, financial and
similar ?

It does not necessarily need to be freeware nor opensource. Thank you.

[none Rouben Rostamian]

In article <jfvtqu$547$1...@speranza.aioe.org>,

Luis Denera <luisd...@invalid.net> wrote:
>Please, is there any office suite available for linux console as it was
>years ago WP-DOS v1.0-5.1, or older MultiMate ?
>
>I know for "sc" or "slsc" spreadsheet application, but just a spreadsheet
>isn't enough. Or, are there any standalone office application, documents
>and word processing applications, faxing printing, piecharts, financial and
>similar ?

Have a look at LibreOffice: http://www.libreoffice.org/

You may not need to download it -- it is already included in
many Linux distributions.

--
Rouben Rostamian

[The Natural Philosopher]

Luis Denera wrote:
> Please, is there any office suite available for linux console as it was
> years ago WP-DOS v1.0-5.1, or older MultiMate ?
>

you mean a non gui ?

I think Emacs is the nearest.

[Robert Heller]

LaTeX + emacs work just fine in console mode. No GUI, no WYSIWYG, but
you can certainly create *beautiful* documents. Requires some actual
learning to use these tools.

>
>
>

--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software -- http://www.deepsoft.com/
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <6YSdnQslfNiEeL7S...@posted.localnet>,
Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com> wrote:
...

>LaTeX + emacs work just fine in console mode. No GUI, no WYSIWYG, but
>you can certainly create *beautiful* documents. Requires some actual
>learning to use these tools.

Which pretty much makes it a non-starter in today's market.

--
Religion is regarded by the common people as true,
by the wise as foolish,
and by the rulers as useful.

(Seneca the Younger, 65 AD)

[Norbert Möndjen]

Am 28.01.2012 11:38, schrieb The Natural Philosopher:
>> I know for "sc" or "slsc" spreadsheet application, but just a spreadsheet
>> isn't enough. Or, are there any standalone office application, documents
>> and word processing applications, faxing printing, piecharts,
>> financial and
>> similar ?
>> It does not necessarily need to be freeware nor opensource. Thank you.
>>
>>

The last time I see something like this was on a VAX with s2020 for
spreadsheet/diagramm and AllinOne as mail, fax, wordprozessor, calendar
and so on. Don´t know if there ist still something like this is out in
the wild. This combination was working very well on terminals.

Ciao Nobbe

[The Natural Philosopher]

Sco unix used to have something of this sort as well.

Office on 80x25 glass screens..

[Aragorn]

On Saturday 28 January 2012 13:17, Kenny McCormack conveyed the
following to comp.os.linux.misc...

> In article <6YSdnQslfNiEeL7S...@posted.localnet>,
> Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com> wrote:
> ...
>> LaTeX + emacs work just fine in console mode. No GUI, no WYSIWYG,
>> but you can certainly create *beautiful* documents. Requires some

>> actuallearning to use these tools.

>
> Which pretty much makes it a non-starter in today's market.

The OP doesn't appear to be looking for "a starter in today's market".
He appears to already be sufficiently experienced at using character
mode consoles and the DOS-equivalent software of what he's asking for
with regard to UNIX.

If the OP were a newbie, he'd go with Libre-/OpenOffice, Calligra, or
some other GUI-oriented suite.

--
= Aragorn =
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

[DenverD]

On 01/28/2012 05:33 AM, Luis Denera wrote:
> is there any office suite available for linux console as it was
> years ago WP-DOS v1.0-5.1

this is probably not the answer you wish:

-if there is a command line 'office suite' which runs in DOS like the
old days i am not aware of it (have you checked sourceforge?)

-i _loved_ WP5.1 in DOS and always thought WP5 and 6 running in Windows
3.1 was a GIANT step backwards....that said, if you still have the
program disk it _might_ worthwhile to load up DOSEMU
<http://www.dosemu.org/> and see if you can get a working install

-if you have the program disk for (say) Lotus 1-2-3, you could do the
same (try it) and it was a very nice spread sheet

-there was a rudimentary database program, but i do not remember the
name...hmmm, was it dBase...ah, and Clipper

-as far as i recall no one had yet invented a "presentation program"

-OH! i remember there was a suite of programs named "Enable" had a word
processor, spreadsheet and some other stuff....maybe a
calendar/appointment book....contact list etc

no, i don't know where you could get any of the program disks or if they
would actually work in DOSEMU..

--
DenverD

[Robert Heller]

At Sat, 28 Jan 2012 12:17:03 +0000 (UTC) gaz...@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) wrote:

>
> In article <6YSdnQslfNiEeL7S...@posted.localnet>,
> Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com> wrote:
> ...
> >LaTeX + emacs work just fine in console mode. No GUI, no WYSIWYG, but
> >you can certainly create *beautiful* documents. Requires some actual
> >learning to use these tools.
>
> Which pretty much makes it a non-starter in today's market.

Which pretty much makes a non-GUI workstation a non-starter in today's
market. If the OP wants to create documents from a console screen he is
out of luck, unless he is willing to take on the LaTeX + emacs learning
curve.

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <lcednXhR-YJGV7nS...@posted.localnet>,

Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com> wrote:
>At Sat, 28 Jan 2012 12:17:03 +0000 (UTC) gaz...@shell.xmission.com
>(Kenny McCormack) wrote:
>
>>
>> In article <6YSdnQslfNiEeL7S...@posted.localnet>,
>> Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com> wrote:
>> ...
>> >LaTeX + emacs work just fine in console mode. No GUI, no WYSIWYG, but
>> >you can certainly create *beautiful* documents. Requires some actual
>> >learning to use these tools.
>>
>> Which pretty much makes it a non-starter in today's market.
>
>Which pretty much makes a non-GUI workstation a non-starter in today's
>market. If the OP wants to create documents from a console screen he is
>out of luck, unless he is willing to take on the LaTeX + emacs learning
>curve.

Yep. You got it, bucko!

--
(This discussion group is about C, ...)

Wrong. It is only OCCASIONALLY a discussion group
about C; mostly, like most "discussion" groups, it is
off-topic Rorsharch [sic] revelations of the childhood
traumas of the participants...

[Aaron W. Hsu]

On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 23:28:11 -0500, Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com>
wrote:

> Which pretty much makes a non-GUI workstation a non-starter in today's
> market. If the OP wants to create documents from a console screen he is
> out of luck, unless he is willing to take on the LaTeX + emacs learning
> curve.

Definitely time to change that!

--
Aaron W. Hsu | arc...@sacrideo.us | http://www.sacrideo.us
לֵ֤ב חֲכָמִים֙ בְּבֵ֣ית אֵ֔בֶל וְלֵ֥ב כְּסִילִ֖ים בְּבֵ֥ית שִׂמְחָֽה

[Robert Heller]

At Sun, 29 Jan 2012 07:06:37 -0500 "Aaron W. Hsu" <arc...@sacrideo.us> wrote:

>
> T24gU2F0LCAyOCBKYW4gMjAxMiAyMzoyODoxMSAtMDUwMCwgUm9iZXJ0IEhlbGxl
> ciA8aGVsbGVyQGRlZXBzb2Z0LmNvbT4gIA0Kd3JvdGU6DQoNCj4gV2hpY2ggcHJl
> dHR5IG11Y2ggbWFrZXMgYSBub24tR1VJIHdvcmtzdGF0aW9uIGEgbm9uLXN0YXJ0
> ZXIgaW4gdG9kYXkncw0KPiBtYXJrZXQuICBJZiB0aGUgT1Agd2FudHMgdG8gY3Jl
> YXRlIGRvY3VtZW50cyBmcm9tIGEgY29uc29sZSBzY3JlZW4gaGUgaXMNCj4gb3V0
> IG9mIGx1Y2ssIHVubGVzcyBoZSBpcyB3aWxsaW5nIHRvIHRha2Ugb24gdGhlIExh
> VGVYICsgZW1hY3MgbGVhcm5pbmcNCj4gY3VydmUuDQoNCkRlZmluaXRlbHkgdGlt
> ZSB0byBjaGFuZ2UgdGhhdCENCg0KLS0gDQpBYXJvbiBXLiBIc3UgfCBhcmNmaWRl
> QHNhY3JpZGVvLnVzIHwgaHR0cDovL3d3dy5zYWNyaWRlby51cw0K15zWtdak15Eg
> 15fWsteb1rjXnta015nXndaZINeR1rzWsNeR1rXWo9eZ16og15DWtdaU15HWttec
> INeV1rDXnNa11qXXkSDXm9a81rDXoda015nXnNa01pbXmdedINeR1rzWsNeR1rXW
> pdeZ16og16nXgta0157WsNeX1rjWvdeU
>

Huh? What is with the base64 encoding?

[Rui Maciel]

That really depends on what you actually want to do. Spreadsheets tend to
be abused by employing them in uses where they are less than adequate.

Regarding producing documents, nothing beats LaTeX. Still up to this day
and after decades of development, Microsoft Word and other word processing
software still lags behind good old LaTeX, with no sign of ever coming close
to it.


Rui Maciel

[Aaron W. Hsu]

On Sun, 29 Jan 2012 08:35:24 -0500, Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com>
wrote:

> Huh? What is with the base64 encoding?

Probably the Unicode. I have Unicode in my mails.

[Robert Heller]

Why? This is an *English* newsgroup.

[Richard Kettlewell]

Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com> writes:
> "Aaron W. Hsu" <arc...@sacrideo.us> wrote:
>> Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com> wrote:

>>> Huh? What is with the base64 encoding?
>> Probably the Unicode. I have Unicode in my mails.
> Why? This is an *English* newsgroup.

That doesn’t mean you have to stick to ASCII, nor that the contents of a
signature has to be in the English language (or indeed any language at
all).

A more pressing question is why he’s using base64 when 8bit or
quoted-printable would do just fine and be more widely readable.

--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[Aaron W. Hsu]

On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 13:32:03 -0500, Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com>
wrote:

> Why? This is an *English* newsgroup.

For special characters in my signature as well as for other things that
may appear in English as well. I also work on other newsgroups that use
Unicode extensively.

[Peter Köhlmann]

Robert Heller wrote:

> At Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:46:34 -0500 "Aaron W. Hsu" <arc...@sacrideo.us>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Sun, 29 Jan 2012 08:35:24 -0500, Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Huh? What is with the base64 encoding?
>>
>> Probably the Unicode. I have Unicode in my mails.
>
> Why? This is an *English* newsgroup.
>
>>

And for all practical purposes english is the same if using ASCII or UTF-8

They have the exact same characters for all chars up to 7Fh

[J G Miller]

On Monday, January 30th, 2012, at 12:32:03h -0600, Robert Heller wrote:

> This is an *English* newsgroup.

I guess that means all the Irish, Scottish, Welsh etc
will not be allowed to post then.

[Robert Heller]

Right. And the odd UTF-8 in the sig can be handled with
quoted-printable or something (and be ingored by people who can't/don't
deal with oriental languages). The rest of the posting would esentually
be in ASCII.

[Aaron W. Hsu]

On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:02:44 -0500, Richard Kettlewell
<r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:

> A more pressing question is why he’s using base64 when 8bit or
> quoted-printable would do just fine and be more widely readable.

My signature contains Hebrew/Yiddish, so normal 8-bit ASCII wouldn't work.
The other is a failure of my news client to encode things as
quoted-printable rather than as some other encoding.

[Robert Heller]

English language, which includes Americans, Candians, Austrailians, all
of the British Isles. *I* was just objecting to the use base64
encoding. It is *unfriendly*. I would have to add additional (and
really unnecesary) code to be newsreader. There isn't any really good
reason to use base64 encoding for *text*, unless you are making *heavy*
use of UTF-16 (eg the message is in Chinese using Chinese characters).
English (or really any language using the Roman alphabet) using either
ASCII (sufficent for English) or one of the 8-bit ASCII supersets either
needs no encoding or can use a lightweight encoding (quoted-printable,
etc.). Base64 is just plain overkill and is totally unreadably without
lots of extra processing.

[J G Miller]

On Monday, January 30th, 2012, 14:31:13 at -0600, Robert Heller wrote:

> English language, which includes Americans, Candians, Austrailians, all
> of the British Isles.

How about the term "Anglophone" then? ;)

noun
1. an English-speaking person, especially a native speaker of English.

adjective
2. of or pertaining to speakers of English.

[Grant Edwards]

On 2012-01-30, Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com> wrote:
> At Mon, 30 Jan 2012 20:02:57 +0000 (UTC) J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Monday, January 30th, 2012, at 12:32:03h -0600, Robert Heller wrote:
>>
>> > This is an *English* newsgroup.
>>
>> I guess that means all the Irish, Scottish, Welsh etc
>> will not be allowed to post then.
>
> English language, which includes Americans, Candians, Austrailians, all
> of the British Isles.

Well, here we go an another ride on _that_ merry-go-round...

--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! I wonder if there's
at anything GOOD on tonight?
gmail.com

[Richard Kettlewell]

I'm not proposing you use ASCII, I'm proposing you continue to use UTF-8
but with a transfer encoding of 8bit. i.e.:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[Sam]

Robert Heller writes:

> English language, which includes Americans, Candians, Austrailians, all
> of the British Isles. *I* was just objecting to the use base64
> encoding. It is *unfriendly*. I would have to add additional (and
> really unnecesary) code to be newsreader.

In the year 2012, any non-prehistoric NNTP or mail client should not require
any additional coding, in order to understand base64.

[The Natural Philosopher]

great idea.

[Aragorn]

On Monday 30 January 2012 19:32, Robert Heller conveyed the following to
comp.os.linux.misc...

> At Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:46:34 -0500 "Aaron W. Hsu"
> <arc...@sacrideo.us> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 29 Jan 2012 08:35:24 -0500, Robert Heller
>> <hel...@deepsoft.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Huh? What is with the base64 encoding?
>>
>> Probably the Unicode. I have Unicode in my mails.
>
> Why? This is an *English* newsgroup.

Such a narrow-minded vision. Another US American who thinks that there
are no other people on planet earth in possession of computer technology
other than those who live in the United States of America.

Just for the record, it is not an "English" newsgroup. It is an
international newsgroup, although English does appear to be the de facto
standard language here.

And as a last FIY, virtually _everyone_ is using unicode these days - at
the very least the UTF-8 variant - unless they're on Microsoft Windows.
There is /no/ valid reason anymore /not/ to be using unicode.

[Rui Maciel]

Robert Heller wrote:

> English language, which includes Americans, Candians, Austrailians, all

> of the British Isles. I was just objecting to the use base64
> encoding. It is *unfriendly*.

Do you often take the time to rummage through post headers to find out if
unfriendly options were set?

> I would have to add additional (and
> really unnecesary) code to be newsreader.

Specifying which encoding scheme is used is not an unnecessary option. In
fact, your unreasonable complain demonstrates that it is in fact not only
reasonable but also required.

> There isn't any really good

> reason to use base64 encoding for *text*, unless you are making heavy

> use of UTF-16 (eg the message is in Chinese using Chinese characters).

UTF-8 is also Unicode, and the reason why it has been adopted globally to
replace ASCII or ISO 8859-1 is not due to "Chinese using Chinese
characters". You try to write anything in any language other than English
and you will quickly understand the shortcomings of ASCII/ISO 8859-1. In
fact, you don't even need to use languages other than English, as none of
those encodings support the euro sign.

> English (or really any language using the Roman alphabet) using either
> ASCII (sufficent for English) or one of the 8-bit ASCII supersets either
> needs no encoding or can use a lightweight encoding (quoted-printable,
> etc.). Base64 is just plain overkill and is totally unreadably without
> lots of extra processing.

Again, you are showing your ignorance. UTF-8 is Unicode, it a superset of
ASCII and you can use it to render any character you see fit. So, I don't
really see the point of your complains.


Rui Maciel

[Richard Kettlewell]

Rui Maciel <rui.m...@gmail.com> writes:
> Robert Heller wrote:

>> English language, which includes Americans, Candians, Austrailians, all
>> of the British Isles. I was just objecting to the use base64
>> encoding. It is *unfriendly*.
>
> Do you often take the time to rummage through post headers to find out if
> unfriendly options were set?

I suspect he just saw a pile of hex.

> Again, you are showing your ignorance. UTF-8 is Unicode, it a
> superset of ASCII and you can use it to render any character you see
> fit. So, I don't really see the point of your complains.

He's not complaining about the use of Unicode, he's complaining about
the use of base64.

--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[Aaron W. Hsu]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:53:09 -0500, Richard Kettlewell
<r...@greenend.org.uk> wrote:

> I suspect he just saw a pile of hex.

I believe you are right. The newsreaders which are a little old or have
not had reasonable patches will not unencode the encoded text, and thus,
some users will see nothing but a pile of hex. On the other hand, I know
of very few, if any newsreaders that have any active users that still have
this problem. I would be very interested to know what the newsreader is
that caused this problem.

[Paul Bartlett]

For reading some (not all) newsgroups, I use Alpine on a netBSD system
telnet'ed into from a terminal emulator. All I saw on the post under
discussion was a "bunch of hex." I did not at the time think to look at
the message headers. However, Alpine allows piping a message, so I
suppose that if I had an appropriate filter, I could have viewed the
message "plain."

--
Paul Bartlett

[Robert Heller]

It is my home-grown TkNewsII mail/news program that use the QWK protocol
to transport news and mail (with the use of uqwk) between by mail server
and my home machine (or laptop). (A reasonable current version of
TkNewsII is available for download from
ftp://ftp.deepsoft.com/pub/deepwoods/Other/) I never bothered to
implement base64 since I never visit binary newsgroups, which is where
base64 would be required.

[Chick Tower]

On 2012-01-31, Aragorn <str...@telenet.be.invalid> wrote:
> There is /no/ valid reason anymore /not/ to be using unicode.

I find unicode too pedestrian for my tastes. I use multicode.
--
Chick Tower

For e-mail: colm DOT sent DOT towerboy AT xoxy DOT net

[Robert Riches]

On 2012-02-01, Chick Tower <c.t...@deadspam.com> wrote:
> On 2012-01-31, Aragorn <str...@telenet.be.invalid> wrote:
>> There is /no/ valid reason anymore /not/ to be using unicode.
>
> I find unicode too pedestrian for my tastes. I use multicode.

Thumbs up. :-)

--
Robert Riches
spamt...@jacob21819.net
(Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)

[Laurent Claessens]

I got it with Thunderbird 3.1.16 on a Ubuntu Lucid Lynx. This is not
exactly "old" ;)

best
Laurent

[Rui Maciel]

Richard Kettlewell wrote:

> He's not complaining about the use of Unicode, he's complaining about
> the use of base64.

He has complained about the use of Unicode in this thread, and this post is
a reply following subsequent replies to that complaint.

A couple of replies down this thread, Robert Heller stated the following:

<quote>

> Probably the Unicode. I have Unicode in my mails.

Why? This is an English newsgroup.
</quote>

Then, he proceeded to claim that "really any language using the roman
alphabet" "either needs no encoding or can use a lightweight encoding". On
another post in this thread, Robert Heller made the following claim:

<quote>

Right. And the odd UTF-8 in the sig can be handled with

quoted-printable or something (and be ignored by people who can't/don't
deal with oriental languages). The rest of the posting would essentially
be in ASCII.
</quote>

So, he isn't really complaining about the use of base64. He is complaining
about the use of any other encoding scheme beyond pure ASCII, and he is
basing his claims in premises which are silly and technically wrong.


Rui Maciel

[Richard Kettlewell]

Rui Maciel <rui.m...@gmail.com> writes:
> <quote>
> Right. And the odd UTF-8 in the sig can be handled with
> quoted-printable or something (and be ignored by people who can't/don't
> deal with oriental languages). The rest of the posting would essentially
> be in ASCII.
> </quote>
>
> So, he isn't really complaining about the use of base64. He is complaining
> about the use of any other encoding scheme beyond pure ASCII, and he is
> basing his claims in premises which are silly and technically wrong.

In the very text you quote he suggested using QP. In the message you
replied to he made it completely unambiguous that he was complaining
about base64, not about use of Unicode in general. You're staring the
facts in the face and denying them.

--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[Rui Maciel]

Richard Kettlewell wrote:

> In the very text you quote he suggested using QP. In the message you
> replied to he made it completely unambiguous that he was complaining
> about base64, not about use of Unicode in general. You're staring the
> facts in the face and denying them.

You claimed that "He's not complaining about the use of Unicode", which has
already been shown to be false. So, before you go on accusing others of
"staring the facts in the face and denying them", you should at least try to
make an effort not to make that mistake yourself.

And by the way, the only reason he suggested the use of quoted-printable
character is to «be ingored by people who can't/don't deal with oriental
languages». I don't know how anyone can agree with that nonsense.

In spite of these silly statements, and to avoid wasting time with this
nonsense, surely we can agree that base64 isn't suited for this stuff and
that nowadays there is no good reason to avoid Unicode.


Rui Maciel

[Rui Maciel]

Feranija wrote:

> I could read it in Thunderbird 3.1.17 without problems, even not
> noticing his encoding before someone questioned his post in base64.

I also could read it without no major problems, and I'm using KNode 4.7.3.
The only issue I've noticed was a couple of characters not being supported
by the font I use.


Rui Maciel

[Richard Kettlewell]

Rui Maciel <rui.m...@gmail.com> writes:
> Richard Kettlewell wrote:

>> In the very text you quote he suggested using QP. In the message you
>> replied to he made it completely unambiguous that he was complaining
>> about base64, not about use of Unicode in general. You're staring the
>> facts in the face and denying them.
>
> You claimed that "He's not complaining about the use of Unicode", which has
> already been shown to be false. So, before you go on accusing others of
> "staring the facts in the face and denying them", you should at least try to
> make an effort not to make that mistake yourself.

I prefer to trust his perfectly clear statement of what he's complaining
about over your theory.

--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[Rui Maciel]

Richard Kettlewell wrote:

> I prefer to trust his perfectly clear statement of what he's complaining
> about over your theory.

That's what you get by letting petty spite influence your judgement.


Rui Maciel

[pH]

On Jan 27, 8:33 pm, Luis Denera <luisden...@invalid.net> wrote:
> Please, is there any office suite available for linux console as it was
> years ago WP-DOS v1.0-5.1, or older MultiMate ?
>
> I know for "sc" or "slsc" spreadsheet application, but just a spreadsheet
> isn't enough. Or, are there any standalone office application, documents
> and word processing applications, faxing printing, piecharts, financial and
> similar ?
>
> It does not necessarily need to be freeware nor opensource. Thank you.

Well, I always liked WordStar over Word Perfect.

You could use the 'jstar' variant of the 'Joe' text editing package,
ispell for your spelling checker and then efax to send your faxes.
You already have the spreadsheet.

Printing by good old 'ps' or whatever.

Maybe there are ncurses based programs for the charts others can
suggest.

Pureheart
Aptos, CA

[danca]

Il 28/01/2012 05:33, Luis Denera ha scritto:
> Please, is there any office suite available for linux console as it was
> years ago WP-DOS v1.0-5.1, or older MultiMate ?
>
> I know for "sc" or "slsc" spreadsheet application, but just a spreadsheet
> isn't enough. Or, are there any standalone office application, documents
> and word processing applications, faxing printing, piecharts, financial and
> similar ?
>
> It does not necessarily need to be freeware nor opensource. Thank you.
>
>

You should probably try some old software under a DOS emulator. In
addition to WP-DOS and Multimate, I remember (and still should have
copies somewhere) of Framework II (it was a wonderful piece of software,
wp, db, spreadsheet and graph), the programs from Psion originally
created for the Sinclair QL (wp, spreadsheet, graph, db) and then ported
to DOS...and of course a lot of standalone apps.
Dan

[Michael Black]

Is Wordperfect for Linux so far in the past that it can't be used? For a
while at least, one could just install older libraries and get it going.
Of course, then there was a later version that used Wine or something,
that wasn't regarded well.

There was a time when Wordperfect for Linux was quite availalbe. There
was even a Dummies book about it, complete with Wordperfect on the CDROM,
though the clearance copy I got had a broken CDROM. There was also one of
those WOrdperfect for Linux Bible, complete with CDROM. If I remember
properly the author used to post in these newsgroups.

Michael

[Michael Black]

On Wed, 1 Feb 2012, pH wrote:

> On Jan 27, 8:33 pm, Luis Denera <luisden...@invalid.net> wrote:
>> Please, is there any office suite available for linux console as it was
>> years ago WP-DOS v1.0-5.1, or older MultiMate ?
>>
>> I know for "sc" or "slsc" spreadsheet application, but just a spreadsheet
>> isn't enough. Or, are there any standalone office application, documents
>> and word processing applications, faxing printing, piecharts, financial and
>> similar ?
>>
>> It does not necessarily need to be freeware nor opensource. Thank you.
>
> Well, I always liked WordStar over Word Perfect.
>
> You could use the 'jstar' variant of the 'Joe' text editing package,
> ispell for your spelling checker and then efax to send your faxes.
> You already have the spreadsheet.
>

I didn't think that was the real question, assumed he was asking about
Wordperfect because it allowed one to embed format tags that were
invisible the rest of the time, ie "what you see is what you get".

Joe is fine as a text editor, there's also Pico that came with Pine, and
an identical in function editor that comes with Alpine, though the name
escapes me at the moment.

But none of them allow hidden embedded format tags, and of course require
an external formatter, if one wants to get fancy with text formatting.

Michael

[notbob]

On 2012-02-01, Michael Black <et...@ncf.ca> wrote:

> Joe is fine as a text editor, there's also Pico that came with Pine, and=20

Izzat what keeps dumping that annoying =20 at the end of almost every
line?

nb


--
Fight internet CENSORSHIP - Fight SOPA-PIPA
Contact your congressman and/or representative, now!
http://projects.propublica.org/sopa/
vi --the heart of evil!

[The Natural Philosopher]

I think it always WAS wine. I have it somewhere but never installed it.

[Feranija]

On 01/02/12 12:17, Michael Black wrote:

> Is Wordperfect for Linux so far in the past that it can't be used? For a
> while at least, one could just install older libraries and get it going.
> Of course, then there was a later version that used Wine or something,
> that wasn't regarded well.

Word Perfect CLI for linux console ? Oh boy, that will be the day!

[Aragorn]

On Wednesday 01 February 2012 21:58, The Natural Philosopher conveyed
the following to comp.os.linux.misc...

> Michael Black wrote:
>
>> Is Wordperfect for Linux so far in the past that it can't be used?
>> For a while at least, one could just install older libraries and get
>> it going. Of course, then there was a later version that used Wine or
>> something, that wasn't regarded well.
>>
>> There was a time when Wordperfect for Linux was quite availalbe.
>> There was even a Dummies book about it, complete with Wordperfect on
>> the CDROM, though the clearance copy I got had a broken CDROM. There
>> was also one of those WOrdperfect for Linux Bible, complete with
>> CDROM. If I remember properly the author used to post in these
>> newsgroups.
>>

> I think it always WAS wine. I have it somewhere but never installed
> it.

Nope. My first GNU/Linux distribution was Linux-Mandrake 6.0 PowerPack,
and it came with an X11 version of WordPerfect 8. Not wine, but an
actual UNIX variant.

Of course, WordPerfect had already long been acquired by Corel in those
days, and Corel in turn was bought by Microsoft, "because they were
interested in the code of Corel Draw". WP vanished shortly afterwards,
and the Corel Linux distribution - which was still quite new at the time
- was sold to Xandros.

[Aragorn]

On Wednesday 01 February 2012 22:18, Feranija conveyed the following to
comp.os.linux.misc...

Having been involved in teaching and creating WordPerfect 5.0 and 5.1
courses myself - on PC-DOS 3.30 on IBM XT and PS/2 machines back in
1990/1991 - I would certainly welcome back the non-graphical WordPerfect
variants for use in character mode login consoles on GNU/Linux (and
Free-/Net-/OpenBSD, Solaris, et al).

As I've stated elsewhere in this thread, Corel did, after it had
acquired WordPerfect, release an X11-based version of WordPerfect 8 for
GNU/Linux, which was supplied on the CDs of my Mandrake 6.0 distribution
in 1999. Shortly thereafter, Corel also released its own GNU/Linux
distro, but Corel was bought up by Microsoft and subsequently,
WordPerfect was killed off - as it was too big a competitor for MS-Word
- and the GNU/Linux division was sold to Xandros.

[Aaron W. Hsu]

On Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:35:20 -0500, notbob <not...@nothome.com> wrote:

> Izzat what keeps dumping that annoying =20 at the end of almost every
> line?

That's your newsreader's failure to properly handle the formatting of the
message. Those are used as line enders in mail messages that use MIME with
quoted-printable.

[notbob]

On 2012-02-01, Aaron W. Hsu <arc...@sacrideo.us> wrote:

> That's your newsreader's failure to properly handle the formatting of the
> message. Those are used as line enders in mail messages that use MIME with
> quoted-printable.

No doubt due to the fact usenet is not a mail protocol and MIME is an
unacceptable format for newsgroups. My newsreader client has failed
nothing and works precisely as intended for nntp.

[danca]

Correct. I still have Corel Linux's two CDs somewhere. I gave it a try,
too. IIRC it was based on a kernel 2.2 and Worperfect, at the time
freshly acquired by Corel, was a GUI app. I am not aware of any
Wordperfect for Linux in text mode.
Dan

[The Natural Philosopher]

you can still find the code somewhere if you want it

http://linuxmafia.com/wpfaq/downloadwp8.html#DOWNLOADURL

[Aaron W. Hsu]

On Wed, 01 Feb 2012 18:17:47 -0500, notbob <not...@nothome.com> wrote:

> No doubt due to the fact usenet is not a mail protocol and MIME is an
> unacceptable format for newsgroups. My newsreader client has failed
> nothing and works precisely as intended for nntp.

This has nothing to do with MIME, the quoted printable encoding is not
restricted to MIME, IIRC. How would you suggest the transmission of data
that uses more than 7-bit characters? Usenet is not and should not be
ASCII only.

First someone complains about base64, and suggests quoted printable
instead, and now someone says that quoted printable is unacceptable, what
should we use instead?

[Aragorn]

On Thursday 02 February 2012 00:58, danca conveyed the following to

Not for GNU/Linux specifically, no, but if I recall correctly then there
_was_ a generic UNIX version that ran only in character mode. ;-)

[Aragorn]

On Thursday 02 February 2012 02:08, The Natural Philosopher conveyed the

Still requires a libc version 5. :p

[Robert Riches]

On 2012-02-01, Aaron W. Hsu <arc...@sacrideo.us> wrote:

Try "man ascii". The "=20" means a space character, 0x20.
Micky$oft likes to put them at the end of lines because of the
bizarre way they deal with line wrap and formatting paragraphs of
text. The "=20" has nothing directly to do with line endings.

--
Robert Riches
spamt...@jacob21819.net
(Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)

[Krzysztof Mitko]

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.os.linux.misc.]

8-bit UTF-8 or ISO-8859-something, at least that's what some non-english
hierarchies require.

--
Z pozdrowieniami,
Krzysztof Mitko

[Richard Kettlewell]

"Aaron W. Hsu" <arc...@sacrideo.us> writes:
> notbob <not...@nothome.com> wrote:

>> No doubt due to the fact usenet is not a mail protocol and MIME is an
>> unacceptable format for newsgroups. My newsreader client has failed
>> nothing and works precisely as intended for nntp.
>
> This has nothing to do with MIME, the quoted printable encoding is not
> restricted to MIME, IIRC.

QP is indeed part of MIME, although it’s wrong to say that MIME is not
suitable for news, since MIME headers are precisely how news articles
indicate their character and transfer encodings.

> How would you suggest the transmission of data that uses more than
> 7-bit characters? Usenet is not and should not be ASCII only.
>
> First someone complains about base64, and suggests quoted printable
> instead, and now someone says that quoted printable is unacceptable,
> what should we use instead?

You should use 8bit. As I think has been said several times now.

* The MIME readers will just work.
* The non-MIME readers that happen to be using the same charset will
just work too.
* The non-MIME readers that happen to be using some other charset
will have nonsense for non-ASCII characters but otherwise be fine.

base64 works for MIME readers but the non-MIME readers just see a pile
of impenetrable hex.

quoted-printable works for MIME readers but non-MIME readers tend to see
lots of extra =20 junk even for plain old ASCII characters.

--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[Feranija]

On 01/02/12 09:18, pH wrote:

> Well, I always liked WordStar over Word Perfect.
>
> You could use the 'jstar' variant of the 'Joe' text editing package,

Maybe people will find this interesting; two contemporary writers,
George R. Martin and Robert J. Sawyer still use WordStar for their
novellas. Also, jstar mentioned again in readers' comments.

Sawyer:
http://www.sfwriter.com/2009/06/rjs-on-wordstar-cited-in-paper-about.html
Martin: http://grrm.livejournal.com/197075.html

[Aaron W. Hsu]

Feranija <fera...@mouse-potato.com> writes:

>On 01/02/12 09:18, pH wrote:

>> Well, I always liked WordStar over Word Perfect.
>>
>> You could use the 'jstar' variant of the 'Joe' text editing package,

>Maybe people will find this interesting; two contemporary writers,
>George R. Martin and Robert J. Sawyer still use WordStar for their
>novellas. Also, jstar mentioned again in readers' comments.

I was just going around and I discovered this as well! I find it very
interesting. I was actually wondering whether there is a mode anywhere that
would allow one to print Wordstar documents composed in Joe (I think you
could actually put in the same codes that WordStar puts into documents using
Joe) in the same way? I would be quite interested to know if there were such
a thing!

Joe is a great editor, but I guess for some people, nothing beats an
original.


--
Aaron W. Hsu | arc...@sacrideo.us | http://www.sacrideo.us
Programming is just another word for the lost art of thinking.

[Anonymous Remailer (austria)]

Rui Maciel <rui.mac...@gmail.com> [RM]:
RM> On another post in this thread, Robert Heller [RH] made the
RM> following claim:
RM>
RM> RH> And the odd UTF-8 in the sig can be handled
RM> RH> with quoted-printable or something (and be ignored by people who
RM> RH> can't/don't deal with oriental languages). The rest of the posting
RM> RH> would essentially be in ASCII.

No. Non-ASCII characters (almost exclusively UTF-8 encoded unicode
characters these days) are also contained in some newsreader supplied
strings, like: "<poster> wrote on <date>:", according to the user's
locale settings. See older news replies in this group from e.g.
francophones.

[Robert Heller]

At Sun, 5 Feb 2012 16:52:05 +0000 (UTC) "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixm...@remailer.privacy.at> wrote:

>
>
> Rui Maciel <rui.mac...@gmail.com> [RM]:
> RM> On another post in this thread, Robert Heller [RH] made the
> RM> following claim:
> RM>
> RM> RH> And the odd UTF-8 in the sig can be handled
> RM> RH> with quoted-printable or something (and be ignored by people who

> RM> RH> can't/don't deal with oriental languages). The rest of the postin=

> g
> RM> RH> would essentially be in ASCII.
>
> No. Non-ASCII characters (almost exclusively UTF-8 encoded unicode
> characters these days) are also contained in some newsreader supplied
> strings, like: "<poster> wrote on <date>:", according to the user's
> locale settings. See older news replies in this group from e.g.
> francophones.

Even so, it is still a few odd characters. *I* can live with that.
Getting a blob of 'hex' (base64) is not readable. My newsreader can
'deal' with UTF-8 characters (well it displays hex codes, since I don't
happen to have all of the various fonts needed to display the exotic
characters). Since most of the message contents is in fact ASCII
compatible, it is displayed just fine -- most of the UTF-8 encodings
that handle Latin alphabets use ASCII codes, since these UTF-8 encodings
are supersets of ASCII.

>
>
>

--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software -- http://www.deepsoft.com/
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments

[Rui Maciel]

Robert Heller wrote:

> Even so, it is still a few odd characters. I can live with that.

> Getting a blob of 'hex' (base64) is not readable. My newsreader can
> 'deal' with UTF-8 characters (well it displays hex codes, since I don't
> happen to have all of the various fonts needed to display the exotic
> characters). Since most of the message contents is in fact ASCII
> compatible, it is displayed just fine -- most of the UTF-8 encodings
> that handle Latin alphabets use ASCII codes, since these UTF-8 encodings
> are supersets of ASCII.

It appears that the software you use doesn't comply with rfc2045,[¹] which
has been released about 16 years ago. Maybe it's time to look for an
upgrade.


Rui Maciel

[¹] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2045

[Robert Heller]

News != Mail.

>
>
> Rui Maciel
>
> [¹] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2045

[Rui Maciel]

Robert Heller wrote:

> News != Mail.

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5536

Rui Maciel

[Richard Kettlewell]

Rui Maciel <rui.m...@gmail.com> writes:
> Robert Heller wrote:

>> News != Mail.
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5536

That still doesn't make it any of necessary, sensible or polite to use
base64 in news.

--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[Rui Maciel]

Richard Kettlewell wrote:

> That still doesn't make it any of necessary, sensible or polite to use
> base64 in news.

It is only noticeable if you happen to use a usenet client that fails to
comply with the relevant RFCs.


Rui Maciel

[The Natural Philosopher]

Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> Rui Maciel <rui.m...@gmail.com> writes:
>> Robert Heller wrote:
>
>>> News != Mail.
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5536
>
> That still doesn't make it any of necessary, sensible or polite to use
> base64 in news.
>

Ah, the old RFC argument. "It's not a specification".

Nevertheless if all parties conform, things play nice together.

[Richard Kettlewell]

The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> writes:
> Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>> Rui Maciel <rui.m...@gmail.com> writes:
>>> Robert Heller wrote:

>>>> News != Mail.
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5536
>>
>> That still doesn't make it any of necessary, sensible or polite to use
>> base64 in news.
>>
> Ah, the old RFC argument. "It's not a specification".

Not really; more that it's a fact of life that existing implementations
continue to be used when specifications are revised, combined with the
fact that there is simply no good reason for using base64 in text
newsgroups.

--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[Anonymous Remailer (austria)]

Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com> [RH]:
RH> Even so, it is still a few odd characters. *I* can live with that.
RH> Getting a blob of 'hex' (base64) is not readable. My newsreader can
RH> 'deal' with UTF-8 characters (well it displays hex codes, since I
RH> don't happen to have all of the various fonts needed to display
RH> the exotic characters).

You might be able to live with that, but others, regularly posting
8-bit messages to other newsgroups, _need_ to encode those messages, if
they want them to survive across different systems and devices.

To make matters worse some people use the same application for e-mail
and usenet and that application might not differentiate between e-mail
and usenet messages as far as content encoding is concerned. Oops.

I guess it's a problem with newsreader settings (or lack thereof). One
should be able to define *per newsgroup* whether she wants her
messages to be encoded and according to which protocol.

Until such a configuration option arrives and the majority of posters
configure their newsreader accordingly, please do yourself a favour
and let your newsreader know about base64 encoding. Denial will
not make the problem go away...

[Richard Kettlewell]

"Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixm...@remailer.privacy.at> writes:
> Robert Heller <hel...@deepsoft.com> [RH]:
> RH> Even so, it is still a few odd characters. *I* can live with that.
> RH> Getting a blob of 'hex' (base64) is not readable. My newsreader can
> RH> 'deal' with UTF-8 characters (well it displays hex codes, since I
> RH> don't happen to have all of the various fonts needed to display
> RH> the exotic characters).
>
> You might be able to live with that, but others, regularly posting
> 8-bit messages to other newsgroups, _need_ to encode those messages, if
> they want them to survive across different systems and devices.

They do not need to use base64. 8bit works fine in news. Even if it
didn't, QP would be fine.

--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[Rui Maciel]

Richard Kettlewell wrote:

> Not really; more that it's a fact of life that existing implementations
> continue to be used when specifications are revised,

The relevant RFC is 16 years old, and base64 encoding precedes that. There
is a difference between existing implementations continuing to be used and
not letting go of a piece of software whose development is either poorly
managed or ceased over a decade ago.

> combined with the
> fact that there is simply no good reason for using base64 in text
> newsgroups.

Complaining about the use of standard protocols is considerably more silly
than complaining about the use of specific standard encoding schemes, which
were standardized for over a decade.

And Robert Heller complained about the use of any encoding other than ASCII,
not the use of base64 in particular. You already knew that.


Rui Maciel

[Anonymous Remailer (austria)]

Richard Kettlewell <...@greenend.org.uk> [RK]:
RK> They do not need to use base64. 8bit works fine in news. Even if
RK> it didn't, QP would be fine.

Some UUCP implementations (still used around the developing world)
as well as some newsgroup gateway and archiving systems are not 8-bit
clean. Even regular 7-bit ASCII characters such as tabs and trailing
spaces seem to vanish (or appear out of the blue) as a news posting
moves from system to system. Feel free to test it for yourself.

QP encoding is fine if most of the content can be written using the
printable ASCII characters. Otherwise it is very inefficient compared
to base64 encoding. Besides, in some people's head QP encoding carries
a certain western world bias, which makes it a less attractive option
in some circles/cultures.

I don't claim that either is better or desirable in news postings.
They are just a necessary evil.

[Rui Maciel]

Richard Kettlewell wrote:

> They do not need to use base64. 8bit works fine in news. Even if it
> didn't, QP would be fine.

If a newsclient complies with standards passed over a decade ago, base64
will work just fine, as will any Unicode encoding. This has been the case
for over a decade.

I don't believe it is reasonable to complain that everyone should be forced
to live in the past just because a single user insists in using software
whose development ceased over a decade ago or is rather poor.


Rui Maciel

[Anonymous Remailer (austria)]

Richard Kettlewell <...@greenend.org.uk> [RK]:
RK> combined with the fact that there is simply no good reason for
RK> using base64 in text newsgroups.

This is _not_ a fact. Please don't confuse one's opinion (obviously
stemming from ignorance) with facts.

As I wrote earlier, others, regularly posting 8-bit messages to other

newsgroups, _need_ to encode those messages, if they want them to

survive across different 7-bit only systems and devices. And there is
no way telling their newsreader to use base64 for one newsgroup and
not using it for another. So there is some good reason for using
base64 in text newsgroups. Perhaps not in your part of the world, but
there still is.

I hate it/find it obtrusive as much as you do, but it's
sometimes a necessary evil. We no longer live in a 7-bit/ASCII
internet world. Expect more of the same with applications not
supporting international domain names (xn--XXXXXXX)...

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <jgogqu$mvq$1...@speranza.aioe.org>,

Rui Maciel <rui.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>
>> Not really; more that it's a fact of life that existing implementations
>> continue to be used when specifications are revised,
>
>The relevant RFC is 16 years old, and base64 encoding precedes that. There
>is a difference between existing implementations continuing to be used and
>not letting go of a piece of software whose development is either poorly
>managed or ceased over a decade ago.

You guys just crack me up!

I've got a couple suggestions for ya:

1) Can't you just take this feud out of the public eye? The rest of us
really don't care. For one thing, it has nothing to do with the original
topic and for another, it (this thread) someone has popped into my "select"
filter. I'm thinking maybe I did in fact respond on this thread once long
ago - back when things were actually on-topic.

Anyway, I suggest you guys get a ruler and go find a bathhouse somewhere.

2) At least learn how to change the Subject: header, since, as noted above,
it has nothing to do with the original thread.

--
"We should always be disposed to believe that which appears to us to be
white is really black, if the hierarchy of the church so decides."

- Saint Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556) Founder of the Jesuit Order -

[Richard Kettlewell]

"Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixm...@remailer.privacy.at> writes:

> Richard Kettlewell <...@greenend.org.uk> [RK]:

>> They do not need to use base64. 8bit works fine in news. Even if

>> it didn't, QP would be fine.
>
> Some UUCP implementations (still used around the developing world)
> as well as some newsgroup gateway and archiving systems are not 8-bit
> clean. Even regular 7-bit ASCII characters such as tabs and trailing
> spaces seem to vanish (or appear out of the blue) as a news posting
> moves from system to system. Feel free to test it for yourself.

That would be an argument for avoiding CTE: 8bit. It’s an argument that
was lost years ago, however; Usenet is full of 8-bit data (and the
current specification recognizes this).

> QP encoding is fine if most of the content can be written using the
> printable ASCII characters. Otherwise it is very inefficient compared
> to base64 encoding. Besides, in some people's head QP encoding carries
> a certain western world bias, which makes it a less attractive option
> in some circles/cultures.

That’s not an argument that base64 is _required_, just that some people
don’t like the alternatives.

--
http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[Rui Maciel]

Kenny McCormack wrote:

> 1) Can't you just take this feud out of the public eye?

Select the thread, hit "ignore", and stop whining.


Rui Maciel

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <jgortq$jag$1...@speranza.aioe.org>,

I'm trying to help *you* - help *you* become a better net citizen.

Isn't that what these newsgoups are all about? Helping each other.

I'm trying to help you be not so clearly identifies as a an idiot.

--
"The anti-regulation business ethos is based on the charmingly naive notion
that people will not do unspeakable things for money." - Dana Carpender

Quoted by Paul Ciszek (pciszek at panix dot com). But what I want to know
is why is this diet/low-carb food author doing making pithy political/economic
statements?

Nevertheless, the above quote is dead-on, because, the thing is - business
in one breath tells us they don't need to be regulated (which is to say:
that they can morally self-regulate), then in the next breath tells us that
corporations are amoral entities which have no obligations to anyone except
their officers and shareholders, then in the next breath they tell us they
don't need to be regulated (that they can morally self-regulate) ...

[J G Miller]

On Monday, February 6th, 2012, at 16:30:07h +0000, Kenny McCormack declared:

> I'm trying to help *you* - help *you* become a better net citizen.

And in the spirit of that, may I respectfully suggest that you trim
your signature from 13 lines to the recommended maximum of 4?

[Kenny McCormack]

My sigs are randomly generated. Some are long, some are short.

C'est la vie.

--

Some of the more common characteristics of Asperger syndrome include:

* Inability to think in abstract ways (eg: puns, jokes, sarcasm, etc)
* Difficulties in empathising with others
* Problems with understanding another person's point of view
* Hampered conversational ability
* Problems with controlling feelings such as anger, depression
and anxiety
* Adherence to routines and schedules, and stress if expected routine
is disrupted
* Inability to manage appropriate social conduct
* Delayed understanding of sexual codes of conduct
* A narrow field of interests. For example a person with Asperger
syndrome may focus on learning all there is to know about
baseball statistics, politics or television shows.
* Anger and aggression when things do not happen as they want
* Sensitivity to criticism
* Eccentricity
* Behaviour varies from mildly unusual to quite aggressive
and difficult

[The Natural Philosopher]

Kenny McCormack wrote:
> In article <jgp0c8$qka$1...@dont-email.me>, J G Miller <mil...@yoyo.ORG> wrote:
>> On Monday, February 6th, 2012, at 16:30:07h +0000, Kenny McCormack declared:
>>
>>> I'm trying to help *you* - help *you* become a better net citizen.
>> And in the spirit of that, may I respectfully suggest that you trim
>> your signature from 13 lines to the recommended maximum of 4?
>
> My sigs are randomly generated. Some are long, some are short.
>

and all suck.

> C'est la vie.
>

yes, it is

[Rui Maciel]

Kenny McCormack wrote:

> I'm trying to help you - help you become a better net citizen.

>
> Isn't that what these newsgoups are all about? Helping each other.
>
> I'm trying to help you be not so clearly identifies as a an idiot.

It seems that you missed the ignore button and mistakenly pressed the reply
button instead. And it appears you then hit the "sanctimonious bullshit"
template button and kept on whining.


Rui Maciel

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <jgp688$fep$1...@speranza.aioe.org>,

You're not making my job any easier, are you?

[Aragorn]

On Monday 06 February 2012 23:49, Kenny McCormack conveyed the following
to comp.os.linux.misc...

> In article <jgp688$fep$1...@speranza.aioe.org>,
> Rui Maciel <rui.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Kenny McCormack wrote:
>>
>>> I'm trying to help you - help you become a better net citizen.
>>>
>>> Isn't that what these newsgoups are all about? Helping each other.
>>>
>>> I'm trying to help you be not so clearly identifies as a an idiot.
>>
>> It seems that you missed the ignore button and mistakenly pressed the
>> reply button instead. And it appears you then hit the "sanctimonious
>> bullshit" template button and kept on whining.
>
> You're not making my job any easier, are you?

You're not making ours any easier either, and you criticize others for
what you yourself are doing on a more than regular basis. That's
hypocrisy.

Oh, and by the way, half of what your (current) signature contains on
the nature of Asperger Syndrome is plain wrong and based upon prejudices
and a lack of understanding of neurology.

--
= Aragorn =
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)

[Rui Maciel]

Kenny McCormack wrote:

> You're not making my job any easier, are you?

Your job appears to be displaying a hypocritical concern with virtue. If it
is then I believe you are doing it with the greatest of ease.


Rui Maciel

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <jgr1d9$g0c$1...@speranza.aioe.org>,

My job is to help you become a better person. It is a tough job, but
somebody has to do it!

What's funny about "net people" is the ease and sanctimoniousness they
display while fiercely biting the hand(s) that feed them.

However, like any other truly dedicated do-gooder, I shall not be deterred.

--
Windows 95 n. (Win-doze): A 32 bit extension to a 16 bit user interface for
an 8 bit operating system based on a 4 bit architecture from a 2 bit company
that can't stand 1 bit of competition.

Modern day upgrade --> Windows XP Professional x64: Windows is now a 64 bit
tweak of a 32 bit extension to a 16 bit user interface for an 8 bit
operating system based on a 4 bit architecture from a 2 bit company that
can't stand 1 bit of competition.