Sorry that I'm too lazy to look it up just now, but I've posted it here a couple or few times over the last few years: There's an article yet at archive.org which is an interview of Bill Gates at an Indonesian (I believe) journalistic web site where he was asked whether he was concerned about competition from Linux. He answered that he didn't [at that time] consider Linux a competitor. He considered his biggest competitors to be his installed user base who were content with what they had.
I guess I can see his point of view on that, but it would sure make me reluctant to ever do business with a company who openly considered me a competitor as a result!
At any rate, it's concrete confirmation of the idea you'd expressed.
>... Windows, and its "let me do my work" mentality.
Ha!Ha!Ha!
I wish I had mod ability right now; that was a good one!
Linux should get rid of the bullet-proof plain-text run control files and switch to a fragile binary central registry. While we're at it, why don't we make it natively susceptible to a multitude of viruses, worms, and other mal-ware, and narrow the scope of file-systems to a couple of brain-dead ones. That way, we can get busy "doing our work" running virus scanners, mal-ware search-and-destroy tools, and defragging our hard drives. Yeah; sounds like a plan...
Wait! I almost forgot, we should also make it so that it really just won't work well unless the user has administrative authority.
I think you've fallen off the wagon and bumped your head a little.
While a short skirt does not validate rape of its wearer, the comparison between the acts of wearing one and using an operating system doesn't measure up. How many wearers of short skirts don't realize their skirt is short? (none?) How many users of the typical operating system don't realize it's the equivalent of a short skirt (and that they're not wearing any panties)? I'll bet the ratio between those two questions/answers is a large one.
True enough, the perpetrators cannot be absolved either in rape or in causing damage to an operating system simply because they saw something inviting. But while the short-skirt wearer should and likely does know that they're (hopefully) catching eyes, most Windows users really don't have an understanding that they're parading their goods around so. While the makers/suppliers of the former product are indeed blameless when use of the product results in wrongdoing, the makers/suppliers of the latter cannot claim innocence by hiding wholly behind the actions of the end user. In fact, aren't they additionally guilty of going out of their way in attempts to make knowledgeable use of their wares not only unnecessary, but discouraged?
Also, don't forget that the skirt-wearer would likely resist at least to some extent when the would-be rapist makes the attempt. Doesn't the typical operating system (not naming names, ha!ha!ha!) instead effectively hike up its skirt to make the event easier?
> but the one that took the cake was when we noticed that all the > hinges on each and every door to the room was on the outside... > anyone could show up at any time and steal the doors
Only if they were residential-grade doors/hinges. Commercial-grade stuff (most usually) has hinges with protrusions/sockets so that even if the pin is removed (if it's not locked in place!), the door will still not come out of the opening unless/until the latch is released.
> windows can take advantage of hardware such as that
It rather sounds to me like what you're saying is that it's such hardware that can take advantage of (or, overcome the limitations of, really) Windows; not the other way around.
I swear they weren't there when I submitted over my dialup connection! If I hadn't reloaded the page a few times just to see if it could possibly be true there were zero posts yet I would have made it... No doubt it was my chance of a lifetime.
I should have just released the beta instead of trying to debug a little before submitting. I guess MS wouldn't want me on the payroll, hahaha!
Hahaha! That perfectly describes what happened in Indiana last year. After dying several times (it almost became a daily occurrence) Daylight "Savings" Time was finally introduced to the state. It boggles the mind...
Many of those things appear on Bill's own list, but the number one competitor is, well, read it for yourself, searching in the document for "number one".
Hahaha! I was thinking the same thing. The post, aside from the lack of paragraphs, was extremely well-made. I didn't notice any glaring typos; and the sentence structures and word usage both seemed above-average.
That's why the use of "intensive purposes" was so alarming to me. At least we weren't treated to "should of"!
Now, for some of the content:
I cannot recall a single service under Linux which would require taking down the whole computer. I was tempted to say "init" but you can restart it in place whenever you want to implement changes to its configuration.
As far as not having to reboot Windows to have networking changes take effect, well, I've not discovered the way yet. Admittedly I don't "do" Windows very often (I'd guess it to be little more than a few dozen hours over the past decade). To the best of my recollection, some very mundane networking changes have prompted me for a reboot in Windows XP.
"When the general public isn't well educated and is using your software, you just do what's safest for them."
Well, I'd rather describe it as "When you cater to the continual fleecing of people (whom you'd evidently prefer to stay ignorant) and you don't want to field questions, you tell them to do what's easiest for you."
More likely it was an InfoMagic set. 6 CDs, with RH, Debian, Slack, and various archives.
I, too, started with one. I'd installed all three distros and very quickly settled on the "simple" one. Trying to figure out how it was things were getting done (not historically being a fan of graphical "wizards") in RH and Debian was a bit painful because of the necessity to wade through all their cruft.
Indeed, I'd read through about 2/3 of the cache of her (first?) page. She's a loose cannon. Though I see nothing wrong with approaching the on-site superintendent when one notes things that aren't right, she goes around to various construction sites, during and after hours, and noses about for infractions. The biddy ought to get a life. Makes me wonder does she cart her kids along or leave them at home, and if the latter, who's minding them? But that's not one whit of my business, is it?
If nothing else she's admitted to trespass, so I'm surprised the developer isn't the only one after her.
I'll suppose for the sake of argument that the "plan" espoused there has not changed markedly from the time I originally became aware of it a few years ago.
The "income" tax scheme, at least on the Federal level, is not really the "revenue generating" mechanism most people are led to believe it is. It's really about control over and intrusion into people's lives as much as it is a mechanism to siphon the fiat "cash" (we haven't had true money since the mid-sixties) back out of circulation. The "fair" tax scheme as was outlined at that site, at least historically, does absolutely nothing to alleviate the intrusive control over citizen's lives and should therefore be left totally unconsidered.
If the gov't really needed to generate revenue off the backs, blood, and sweat of the citizenry, then an across-the-board no ifs, ands, buts, or exceptions 10% Federal sales tax would more than suffice. Once the door is opened for folks to beg for credits/refunds and/or other deductions, the mechanism will become lopsided to say the least.
Trouble is, even if it were necessary and sanely implemented, it would make every enterprising individual into a Federal tax collector. What would be "just" compensation for that, I wonder?
Always pronounced ``"lin-nucks" ("lin" rhymes with "chin")''?
Maybe always only very recently.
I'd never heard it pronounced "lin-nucks" for the first 5 or 6 years I was using it. One evening after hearing Captain Picard say "privacy" with the first syllable sounding exactly like the first syllable in "privilege" I asked a Brit acquaintance how they pronounced the name "Linus". Result: "lin-nus". Coupling that with Linus himself in the two sound files I was perhaps a bit too vague in referencing earlier ( http://www.mx.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/SillySou nds/ ), and with experience with people who natively speak various European languages, the whole thing gets rigidly cemented into place.
I may sound like a displaced Kentuckian here in Hoosierland when I say "line-ucks", but I'm consistent; as are arguably most other-language-speakers from around the globe, with saying Linux and Linus using the same vowel sounds.
I'd say Linus as "lin-nus" just to be able to conform with the rest of you would-be Brits (when saying "Linux"), but I feel utterly stupid saying it that way. I'd bet you would/do too.
In terms of vowel sounds, if you had a buddy named Linus, however you'd pronounce his name (wherever in the world you lived) would be the same way you should pronounce Linux.
Here's a thought. Do an informal "man on the street" series of interviews right there in Tennessee. One where you show folks the written word "Linux" and ask them to pronounce it. And I'm not talking about your IT friends; just your run-of-the-mill folk on the street. See how many you'd have to "correct", step back, and re-evaluate your position for consistency.
There is no "one way" to pronounce it. Propriety keys on the local pronunciation of "Linus". Note the pattern in the two versions of the historic sound bites of Linus introducing himself and stating how he pronounces "Linux"
"lee-nooks" would be appropriate wherever "lee-noose" is.
"lin-nucks" would be appropriate wherever "lin-nus" is.
Here in the U.S.A. (most parts anyway) "line-us" is the man's name, so "line-ucks" is correct.
Maybe I'm silly because I read this site with a +3 filter and this has already been stated, but here goes nonetheless...
(yes I still don't know how to uninstall a generic packages..like when I download something, untar; make; make install : where can I find out where it put all it's stuff?)
make install 2>&1 | tee Log.make.install
or better:
make install DESTDIR=`pwd`/.made 2>&1 | tee Log.make.install
then
change to.made, add the/usr/doc/whatever directory and populate it with the appropriate files
change back to.made and use makepkg
use either upgradepkg or installpkg, as meet
Of course, there are the occasional silly sources which want to install directly to the main file tree, in which case use the first suggestion above.
Slackware is hands-down the best distro for a newbie who wants to learn GNU/Linux. When trying to discover how everything actually works it's not necessary in Slackware to first learn and then dig below all the convoluted cruft most every other distro lays on top.
"With the new design, will the poor saps who compose in HTML (i.e. in IE) be able to reply within the quoted portion and have the results be like email is supposed to be instead of the crap it makes of it now?"
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry that I'm too lazy to look it up just now, but I've posted it here a couple or few times over the last few years: There's an article yet at archive.org which is an interview of Bill Gates at an Indonesian (I believe) journalistic web site where he was asked whether he was concerned about competition from Linux. He answered that he didn't [at that time] consider Linux a competitor. He considered his biggest competitors to be his installed user base who were content with what they had.
I guess I can see his point of view on that, but it would sure make me reluctant to ever do business with a company who openly considered me a competitor as a result!
At any rate, it's concrete confirmation of the idea you'd expressed.
75% of the 85% of peecee users will never avail themselves of the option and you know that, don't you?
> ... Windows, and its "let me do my work" mentality.
Ha!Ha!Ha!
I wish I had mod ability right now; that was a good one!
Linux should get rid of the bullet-proof plain-text run control files and switch to a fragile binary central registry. While we're at it, why don't we make it natively susceptible to a multitude of viruses, worms, and other mal-ware, and narrow the scope of file-systems to a couple of brain-dead ones. That way, we can get busy "doing our work" running virus scanners, mal-ware search-and-destroy tools, and defragging our hard drives. Yeah; sounds like a plan...
Wait! I almost forgot, we should also make it so that it really just won't work well unless the user has administrative authority.
Make that 26!
I think you've fallen off the wagon and bumped your head a little.
While a short skirt does not validate rape of its wearer, the comparison between the acts of wearing one and using an operating system doesn't measure up. How many wearers of short skirts don't realize their skirt is short? (none?) How many users of the typical operating system don't realize it's the equivalent of a short skirt (and that they're not wearing any panties)? I'll bet the ratio between those two questions/answers is a large one.
True enough, the perpetrators cannot be absolved either in rape or in causing damage to an operating system simply because they saw something inviting. But while the short-skirt wearer should and likely does know that they're (hopefully) catching eyes, most Windows users really don't have an understanding that they're parading their goods around so. While the makers/suppliers of the former product are indeed blameless when use of the product results in wrongdoing, the makers/suppliers of the latter cannot claim innocence by hiding wholly behind the actions of the end user. In fact, aren't they additionally guilty of going out of their way in attempts to make knowledgeable use of their wares not only unnecessary, but discouraged?
Also, don't forget that the skirt-wearer would likely resist at least to some extent when the would-be rapist makes the attempt. Doesn't the typical operating system (not naming names, ha!ha!ha!) instead effectively hike up its skirt to make the event easier?
> but the one that took the cake was when we noticed that all the ...
> hinges on each and every door to the room was on the outside
> anyone could show up at any time and steal the doors
Only if they were residential-grade doors/hinges. Commercial-grade stuff (most usually) has hinges with protrusions/sockets so that even if the pin is removed (if it's not locked in place!), the door will still not come out of the opening unless/until the latch is released.
> windows can take advantage of hardware such as that
It rather sounds to me like what you're saying is that it's such hardware that can take advantage of (or, overcome the limitations of, really) Windows; not the other way around.
I swear they weren't there when I submitted over my dialup connection! If I hadn't reloaded the page a few times just to see if it could possibly be true there were zero posts yet I would have made it... No doubt it was my chance of a lifetime.
I should have just released the beta instead of trying to debug a little before submitting. I guess MS wouldn't want me on the payroll, hahaha!
How'd I get a first post?
Hahaha! That perfectly describes what happened in Indiana last year. After dying several times (it almost became a daily occurrence) Daylight "Savings" Time was finally introduced to the state. It boggles the mind...
Many of those things appear on Bill's own list, but the number one competitor is, well, read it for yourself, searching in the document for "number one".
It was already gone sometime around 4:00 PM Eastern time.
Maybe the UN does need control over the root nameservers, huh?
That's why the use of "intensive purposes" was so alarming to me. At least we weren't treated to "should of"!
Now, for some of the content:
I cannot recall a single service under Linux which would require taking down the whole computer. I was tempted to say "init" but you can restart it in place whenever you want to implement changes to its configuration.
As far as not having to reboot Windows to have networking changes take effect, well, I've not discovered the way yet. Admittedly I don't "do" Windows very often (I'd guess it to be little more than a few dozen hours over the past decade). To the best of my recollection, some very mundane networking changes have prompted me for a reboot in Windows XP.
Well, I'd rather describe it as "When you cater to the continual fleecing of people (whom you'd evidently prefer to stay ignorant) and you don't want to field questions, you tell them to do what's easiest for you."
More likely it was an InfoMagic set. 6 CDs, with RH, Debian, Slack, and various archives.
I, too, started with one. I'd installed all three distros and very quickly settled on the "simple" one. Trying to figure out how it was things were getting done (not historically being a fan of graphical "wizards") in RH and Debian was a bit painful because of the necessity to wade through all their cruft.
A low UID at /. is indicative of what, exactly?
Indeed, I'd read through about 2/3 of the cache of her (first?) page. She's a loose cannon. Though I see nothing wrong with approaching the on-site superintendent when one notes things that aren't right, she goes around to various construction sites, during and after hours, and noses about for infractions. The biddy ought to get a life. Makes me wonder does she cart her kids along or leave them at home, and if the latter, who's minding them? But that's not one whit of my business, is it?
If nothing else she's admitted to trespass, so I'm surprised the developer isn't the only one after her.
Thanks for posting the link. Her site is currently offline for exceeding its bandwidth allocation.
I'm glad that malcontent and nosy gal lives in Canada and not in my neighborhood south of the border.
Not to necessarily defend the developer in this case, but she's definitely a loose cannon.
The patent is obviously to prevent Microsoft Windows from trying to overtake the computer, especially when it's being re-installed again.
hahaha!
"Don't even bring up the Apocrypha"
which was included in the early editions of the King James...
I'll suppose for the sake of argument that the "plan" espoused there has not changed markedly from the time I originally became aware of it a few years ago.
The "income" tax scheme, at least on the Federal level, is not really the "revenue generating" mechanism most people are led to believe it is. It's really about control over and intrusion into people's lives as much as it is a mechanism to siphon the fiat "cash" (we haven't had true money since the mid-sixties) back out of circulation. The "fair" tax scheme as was outlined at that site, at least historically, does absolutely nothing to alleviate the intrusive control over citizen's lives and should therefore be left totally unconsidered.
If the gov't really needed to generate revenue off the backs, blood, and sweat of the citizenry, then an across-the-board no ifs, ands, buts, or exceptions 10% Federal sales tax would more than suffice. Once the door is opened for folks to beg for credits/refunds and/or other deductions, the mechanism will become lopsided to say the least.
Trouble is, even if it were necessary and sanely implemented, it would make every enterprising individual into a Federal tax collector. What would be "just" compensation for that, I wonder?
Always pronounced ``"lin-nucks" ("lin" rhymes with "chin")''?
u nds/ ), and with experience with people who natively speak various European languages, the whole thing gets rigidly cemented into place.
Maybe always only very recently.
I'd never heard it pronounced "lin-nucks" for the first 5 or 6 years I was using it. One evening after hearing Captain Picard say "privacy" with the first syllable sounding exactly like the first syllable in "privilege" I asked a Brit acquaintance how they pronounced the name "Linus". Result: "lin-nus". Coupling that with Linus himself in the two sound files I was perhaps a bit too vague in referencing earlier ( http://www.mx.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/SillySo
I may sound like a displaced Kentuckian here in Hoosierland when I say "line-ucks", but I'm consistent; as are arguably most other-language-speakers from around the globe, with saying Linux and Linus using the same vowel sounds.
I'd say Linus as "lin-nus" just to be able to conform with the rest of you would-be Brits (when saying "Linux"), but I feel utterly stupid saying it that way. I'd bet you would/do too.
In terms of vowel sounds, if you had a buddy named Linus, however you'd pronounce his name (wherever in the world you lived) would be the same way you should pronounce Linux.
Here's a thought. Do an informal "man on the street" series of interviews right there in Tennessee. One where you show folks the written word "Linux" and ask them to pronounce it. And I'm not talking about your IT friends; just your run-of-the-mill folk on the street. See how many you'd have to "correct", step back, and re-evaluate your position for consistency.
There is no "one way" to pronounce it. Propriety keys on the local pronunciation of "Linus". Note the pattern in the two versions of the historic sound bites of Linus introducing himself and stating how he pronounces "Linux"
"lee-nooks" would be appropriate wherever "lee-noose" is.
"lin-nucks" would be appropriate wherever "lin-nus" is.
Here in the U.S.A. (most parts anyway) "line-us" is the man's name, so "line-ucks" is correct.
(yes I still don't know how to uninstall a generic packages..like when I download something, untar; make; make install : where can I find out where it put all it's stuff?) or better:then
- change to
.made, add the /usr/doc/whatever directory and populate it with the appropriate files - change back to
.made and use makepkg - use either upgradepkg or installpkg, as meet
Of course, there are the occasional silly sources which want to install directly to the main file tree, in which case use the first suggestion above.Slackware is hands-down the best distro for a newbie who wants to learn GNU/Linux. When trying to discover how everything actually works it's not necessary in Slackware to first learn and then dig below all the convoluted cruft most every other distro lays on top.
Not for me. It went unavailable at the time they made the change a few years ago, and is unavailable as of 1 minute ago.