READ THIS B4

On Tuesday 13 September 2005 02:20, Heather stood up and spoke the following words to the mbuttes...:

You are also cross-posting this to...

-alt.os.linux.suse;-comp.os.linux.misc;and -alt.os.windows-xp

... which are not advocacy groups. At least, the first two in that list aren't. I don't know about the Windows XP group, but I don't see what that group has to do with Gnu-Linux.

The latter strongly suggests that it's a troll attempt, i.e. an attempt to keep people busy debating and arguing.

I disagree. It's quite biased in regards to the people using Gnu-Linux and the operating system itself. Cynicism is barely realism.

In where? I repeat that you've cross-posted this message to three other groups, regardless of the subject line mentioningcomp.os.linux.advocacy.

Don't mind if I spout a few comments on that...

False. Most of the desktop-oriented distributions are very good at detecting your hardware, unless you have "designed for Windows" hardware in your system.

False. This only applies to Windows-specific hardware for which there are no FOSS drivers available. I've never had any hardware compatibility problems in all of the years I've been using Gnu-Linux.

Once upon a time and on a blue Monday, long before I even had an internet connection at home, I had a machine with Windows NT 4.0 on it. And there, I did have difficulties in setting up my AWE64 soundcard, my ATI videocard and my Brother laser printer. Not quite exotic stuff...

It required Service Pack 3 to recognize the AGP slot and I needed to contact with the hardware vendors to obtain suitable drivers for Windows NT. The CD-ROM's I got with my computer only covered Windows95 and earlier.

I never had any problems setting up that hardware in Gnu-Linux.

False. Distributions such as Mandriva and SuSE have very good hardware support.

False. The distribution typically sets up everything with default settings, which you can tweak later but which will generally work for most set-ups.

Your buttumptions must be based on the Linux From Scratch distribution or else you haven't been looking at Gnu-Linux a lot lately.

Misleading. If the boot process stalls, there could be many causes. One of the more prevalent causes is that something went wrong while the user was creating his or her CD's or DVD from the downloaded.isofiles.

Most downloaders typically forget to check themd5sumson the downloaded image files against the ones in the accompanying text file on the mirror site.

Other possible causes could be that the install kernel needs a boot parameter because there are some (hardware) problems with either the (local) APIC or ACPI. This is therefore a BIOS-generated error scenario.

It is noteworthy that the Linux kernel does offer solutions for BIOS shortcomings in the form of boot parameters. Distributors of Gnu-Linux should however pay more attention to this in their configuration of the kernel and-or via their website.

Last time I checked, I had a pretty good chance to choose what I wanted installed and what not.

I also don't consider all that software as useless. At least you get some great and stable software for free with your operating system, while Microsoft requires you to spend extra money on the purchase of useful software, other than Minesweeper and Solitaire.

Most distributions allow you to select the packages and give you a description of what they are. If you don't understand the description, chances are that you don't need it.

For every binary installed in *-bin,* *-sbin* and the similar directories under the *-usr* and *-usr-local* trees, there aremanpages andinfopages. There is typically also a great collection ofHowTodocuments in HTML under *-usr-share-doc,* and more recent versions of these can always be read or download from the Linux Documentation Project.

... so that you can choose which one you like best. ;-)

... and hopefully less cynical...

I hardly consider plain text to be cryptic. Nobody complained about cryptic text files when Windows and OS-2 were still using.inifiles.

In my brief experience with Windows NT, I opened up the Register Editor a few times in an attempt to customize my system a bit more. I find the Windows Registry far more cryptic than the plain text files in Gnu-Linux.

Outdated. Most distributions allow you to download newer versions of their software, including their configuration utilities, in which the bugs are greatly cleaned out.

It is worth mentioning why many of the shell commands are so abbreviated. This dates back to the days of UNIX - of which Gnu-linux is a clone - and was a necessary evil because of the slow serial connections between the minicomputer and its terminals and the number of simultaneously logged in users on such - for todays standards - quite slow machines.

I have personally had the experience of trying to write a COBOL program on a dual 25 MHz Motorola 68k minicomputer with 12 MB of RAM using one of the 30 populated terminals connected to it.

As the screen output is only an echo of the commands sent to the computer by the terminal, you can imagine that it took a long time before you got any keyboard response.

cpis only half as long ascopy,andrmonly one third ofremove,so...

People who are interested in computing, rather than in using a household appliance, maybe?

Same comment here as earlier...

Well, I've already read today that it was about 3%, in a post on another newsgroup, and from someone just as clueless as you are.

The number is much higher than what you're saying, and even higher than that 3%, since the latter only applies to the sales of commercial distributions.

The number of downloaded and self-toasted Gnu-Linux distribution CD's and DVD's alone is probably already twice as high.

Some do. Sun's StarOffice is an example. VMWare and Blender are commercial software as well. So is IBM'swysiwygwebdesign suite - I forgot its name.

bane flaw. Gnu-Linux software does not always try to mimic a Windows counterpart. You are buttuming - or intending to spread the belief - that Gnu-Linux was intended as an alternative to Windows.

Gnu-Linux is a UNIX clone. The GNU project was brought to life in 1984 by Richard M. Stallman as an alternative to proprietary and non-free UNIX systems.

GNU was intended to use a microkernel design, and while its Mach kernel was usable, the userspace serverset known as the Hurd which was supposed to run on top of that microkernel, was still under heavy development.

Linus B. Torvalds wrote the Linux kernel for use on his own machine as an exercise on programming for the Intel 80386 CPU. He thereby used the GNU tools, originally on Minix, later on the GNU operating system but with his own kernel. After having heard a lecture by Richard Stallman, Linus Torvalds decided to release his kernel under the GNU General Public License.

GNU didn't have a fully functional kernel before Linus's project, and Linus and friends only had a kernel but no operating system. The rest is history. Windows has no place in this history.

In addition to all of the above, I would hardly call The Gimp or OpenOffice substandard. More correctly would be that most of the Gnu-Linux distributions out there today come with loads of software that you would have to pay big dough for in the Windows world, only to end up with substandard software, compared to FOSS software.

I would also like to add that most of the more workstation-oriented FOSS software is also freely available for download to Windows users.

Slow? Buggy? Gnu-Linux gets updated regularly, but usually doesn't swell much unless a whole bunch of new features (or eye-candy) is introduced.

Compare the functionality of Windows NT 4.0 with that of Windows XP today and then look at their respective hardware requirements. You will find that the improvements in XP over NT 4.0 don't justify the hardware requirements.

If there is anything that's bloated, it's Windows. There is however a reason for this: it's an artificial bloat! The heavier the hardware requirements, the more the customer will invest in newer hardware.

It's only an excuse to keep the industrial treadmill on the roll.

Highly exaggerated. While it is true that there are better alternatives to the RPM standard - e.g. Mandriva'surmpior Debian'sapt-getfor instance, or even Gentoo'sportagesystem, which offers the dependency resolving for source-based packages - the libraries needed in Gnu-Linux are not really restricted to one version in specific.

There usually are requirements in the sense of "package X needs package Y in a version a.b.c. or better", but this problem also exists in Windows. And from what I've been told, Windows does not allow certain things - like DirectX, for instance - to be downgraded.

I hardly consider...

.configure make config make install

... to be cryptic. GNUmakeeven has amanpage. But of course, if you buttume that everyone using Gnu-Linux is a former Windows-addict who only knows how to click a mouse, then I suppose it would seem cryptic.

Is driving a car with a manual transmission cryptic?

Yeah, if you're lucky...

Your percentage is wrong, as I said above. There are commercial applications for Gnu-Linux, but they are usually not within the financial reach of the household PC user.

UNIX operating systems - and this includes Gnu-Linux - are typically the platform of choice for scientific computing. The Windows counterparts of those applications only came much later and are just as expensive.

Most of the normal desktop-style applications for Gnu-Linux are freely downloadable anyway.

Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt. Alias FUD (TM). UNIX was already way more advanced than Windows is today long before Windows even existed. In addition, it has continued to evolve. In most benchmarks, Gnu-Linux simply outruns Windows and even commercially vended UNIX systems such as Solaris or AIX.

More FUD. KDE and Gnome are quite mature, albeit one a bit more than the other. They are far from sluggish compared to Windows, they are visually far more appealing and they are customizable.

EnlightenmentandWindowMakerare also a great window managers and they are extremely fast compared to anything from Microsoft.

True, but some may find this a charming aspect of the system. I use KDE and I personally prefer its consistency (and appearance) over Gnome and GTK applications, but I am just as happy *using* a GTK application every once in a while if it gets the job done in a better way than its KDE counterpart.

I believe downloading SuSE is now a little easier again, since Novell took over the company. I could be wrong though, as I don't use SuSE myself. It is however a very good distribution.

In addition, please note that the word "free" in Free Software refers tofreedom,not to "gratis". The latter may be welcome for many less fortunate computer owners who wish to use Gnu-Linux, but for those who don't value the true spirit of FOSS, it would be pure opportunism to opt for Gnu-Linux over any other operating system only because of its freely downloadability.

Lastly - in regards to the price of boxed distributions - I don't think one has the right to complain. First of all, the money will be well spent as it goes to the community that tries very hard to maintain the system and all of its software and not to a monopolizing mogul, and secondly you typically get all the application software in the same box as the operating system, and installed at the same time as the operating system, completely integrated with it, but without breaking things as the Windows Registry tends to do - which is about the only integration taking place on a Windows platform.

Some commercial distribution vendors do attempt to compete with Windows, because they are businesses. However, that was never the idea behind Gnu-Linux.

Yeah, in the Slackware groups, probably. The community that I'm part of typically provides for quality help.

The reply one gets to a Usenet post with a question regarding Gnu-Linux typically depends upon the question itself and how it was asked. If you post a question in a snotty and trolling way, then the replies you get will be accordingly.

UNIX is not user-unfriendly. It just requires the user to be a little more computer-friendly. This requires using ones brain. You can't expect to drive an F1 racecar the same way you drive a stationwagon without doing some research and buttuming some responsibility.

If you can't bring yourself to doing at least a bit of your own research, then Gnu-Linux is not for you, period.

Hogwash!

I suppose you don't get out often? Try looking a little further than your nose is long. I participate in four different newsgroups on Gnu-Linux, and I see a lot of useful help being given.

I also seem to be getting some nice comments on the advice I myself am giving. I don't consider myself to be a guru - although I'm hardly a newbie - as everyone has his or her own field of expertise and we all learn from eachother. That is what community spirit is all about.

By the way, have you ever had to contact the Microsoft Helpdesk? Well, I have, and only to post-order the various service packs for my NT back at the time, as I didn't have any internet connection at home yet.

You call their number. You hear a recorded message, urging you to press a certain key for your language. You press the key, and then you hear another recorded message, inquiring about the reason behind your call, which you have to answer by another keypress in the multiple-choice offer of possible answers.

It takes a few more of these auditive menus to wade through, every once in a while guessing on what it is you really need to pick, since most of the questions relate to business deals or public relations. You get slapped around the ears with $2000 breastles and flashy commercial terms which are as hollow as your wallet will be by the time you finally get to talk to an operator.

And then, the moment of revelation: you get to talk to an operator. Oh wait, he doesn't speak your language very well. Oh, but he'll connect you with someone who does. Some muzak and again several minutes later, you get to talk to an operator who does speak your language. And then you have to explicitly and repeatedly tell him what you want, because he is likely to misunderstand you. So you order the latest Service Pack CD.

Order taken... You have to first transfer the money or send a check to an obscure PO box before they send you the CD, of course. You agree, and you say "Allright, will do. Thank you, Sir. Have a pleasant day" and you hang up the phone.

Three months later, your Service Pack hasn't arrived yet, and then you suddenly get a call from Microsoft. The guy tells you that the check you sent them is for a far too low amount for Office 97. Office 97? Duh! You ordered Service Pack 4 for Windows NT 4.0 Workstation. You already have Office 97.

Yup... Quality help...

More cynical hogwash...

We don't think of ourselves as better than the people who use Windows. We do however prefer not to hear about the idiosyncratic comparison between Windows and Gnu-Linux and "how Linux (sic) sucks" because "Windows is so great when this or that".

If there is a loose nut between the keyboard and the chair, then problems arise, especially if the loose nut starts spreading FUD.

All we ask is that if you want to drive a car, you'd at least try to familiarize yourself with a steering wheel and a gearshift instead of whining that there isn't a driver on the bench at the top of the coach and that there are no horses.

Gnu-Linux is not perfect. We never said it was. We do however feel that it is a very good operating system architecture, created by a strongly driven and idealistic community with a great philosophy behind them.

And once again, not everyone using Gnu-Linux has ever been a Windows addict. I myself have used NT for about three years. Before that, I was using 32-bit OS-2 - while mainstream Windows was still based on MS-DOS but misleadingly sold as an operating system, i.e. Win95-98-ME.

Ever since I was using OS-2, I had a soft spot for UNIX. Commercial UNIX systems were expensive, that is why I chose to try NT for a short amount of time. Then I switched to Gnu-Linux, and I've been using it for longer now - and much more intensely - than I've ever used OS-2.

I was not looking for an alternative to Windows. I was interested in UNIX and I liked operating system technology in general. Installing Gnu-Linux without any Usenet buttistance was a breeze - and this was many years ago; today's distributions are far easier to install - and when I read about the GPL and the OSI, I was hooked for life.

Gnu-Linux never gave me any of the problems I had when I was using Windows (or OS-2, for that matter). I specifically started posting on Usenet to share my knowledge with other Gnu-Linux users, because I like giving something back to the community, and because I like helping people.

The GPL does cover a certain philosophy. It is therefore only natural that this philosophy gets defended. I believe that this is why the group's name ends in the wordadvocacy.

I wouldn't speak out on what was exactly the greatest thing to ever hit computing, but Gnu-Linux and everything it stands for may just be that, yes.

There are such paid MS supporters, and this has already been proven more than once. Microsoft considers it one of their priorities to spread FUD about just about every other kind of operating system out there, and infesting Usenet scouting for newsgroups dealing with such operating systems is part of their strategy.

Some users may be more vigilant or more paranoid than others in regards to trolls. People are people, and everyone has his or her limits. Some have a longer fuse than others.

However, trolls do exist. Whether they are paid by Microsoft or whether they do it just to get off on the number of people they manage to rub against the hairs, they are real nevertheless.

Hogwash! I usually don'tplonkanyone unless they really become offensive, and by this I mean "on a personal level".

I am always open to a debate, but the debate must be fair. Typically, anti-Gnu-Linux posters are prejudiced and misconditioned from years of using Windows and not having to use their brain anymore.

I always try to reason with people of whom I believe that their outlook on things is incorrect. If such people are not interested in reasoning but only wish to post some crap in order to stir up trouble, then there is no point in a debate.

I usually give everyone the benefit of the doubt, but if they really are trolls, then this will surface sooner or later. And usually quite soon...

Hogwash, once again.

A: Because they may be right, perhaps? It is quite obvious that you've had one or two attempts at installing a Gnu-Linux distribution - or at least, someone in your social circle has - but you are quite clearly biased and cynical.

Cynicism is worse than sarcasm. Sarcasm has reason, while cynicism doesn't. Everything said in cynicism therefore has no value. That leaves about0.24%- to use one of your favorite statistics - of this post as being accurate.

Most of it does. I wouldn't know who else would start dissing on Gnu-Linux. Apart from SCO, maybe. But then again, they are funded by Microsoft shares, for just the right amount of capital to keep the trial against IBM going.

SCO is a sinking ship, and Microsoft is the only company in the world that doesn't know that.

Being afflicted with Asperger's Syndrome, I can butture you that I am a *very* rationally thinking person.

Everyone is welcome and encouraged to do a Google search on my nick. I'm quite confident about my credibility.

How about yourself? Posting from a Hotmail account is not quite guaranteed to earn you credibility as a Gnu-Linux user, and neither is cross-posting to three other groups than C.O.L.A., especially not with one of those groups being a Windows XP group.

I'm strongly beginning to suspect that you are the creature known asflatfish.

Either way, I stand by everything I've written here in reply to all your prejudiced FUD. At least this way, the newbies will have a chance of reading the truth.

-- With kind regards,

*Aragorn* (Registered Gnu-Linux user #223157)