What if the reason...

What if the reason...

Post by ? - Infinity Rising - » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



...for Windows' continual * is this:

windows users have paid upwards of several thousand dollars in
applications (office suites, who cares who made it, professional 3d
development, etc...)

Maybe some of us want to switch platforms, but can't because we can't
afford new software (and pray that it's just as good)?  Maybe we can't
because what we have works?

If the OS/2, BeOS, Unix, and Linux zealots who keep saying "You should
use this..." and "This is for you..."  followed by a lot of drool want
us to change to their platform, then YOU can compensate the costs of the
applications we need.  If you're going to suggest or demand we use your
product, you can equally help in keeping our costs low.

Fair enough?  Cool!  Let's let the reign of Windows end.

--
http://www.veryComputer.com/~timanov  --> New and improved, with only 25
percent recycled material!

 
 
 

What if the reason...

Post by William H. Pridge » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



Quote:

> ...for Windows' continual * is this:

> windows users have paid upwards of several thousand dollars in
> applications (office suites, who cares who made it, professional 3d
> development, etc...)

> Maybe some of us want to switch platforms, but can't because we can't
> afford new software (and pray that it's just as good)?  Maybe we can't
> because what we have works?

> If the OS/2, BeOS, Unix, and Linux zealots who keep saying "You should
> use this..." and "This is for you..."  followed by a lot of drool want
> us to change to their platform, then YOU can compensate the costs of the
> applications we need.  If you're going to suggest or demand we use your
> product, you can equally help in keeping our costs low.

> Fair enough?  Cool!  Let's let the reign of Windows end.

> --
> http://www.veryComputer.com/~timanov  --> New and improved, with only 25
> percent recycled material!

Use whatever you feel like; I for one couldn't care less.

--
Bill Pridgen
--

"...once you don't understand something you're getting closer to
figuring it out."  -- Martin Ozolins

 
 
 

What if the reason...

Post by ? - Infinity Rising - » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


That wasn't my point...  hmm, I wonder why this thread missed the Linux
advocacy forum; it's the linux idiots who keep telling the rest of us to use
Linux because they say it's a good thing to do.

> Use whatever you feel like; I for one couldn't care less.

> --
> Bill Pridgen
> --

> "...once you don't understand something you're getting closer to
> figuring it out."  -- Martin Ozolins

 
 
 

What if the reason...

Post by jed » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



Quote:>....for Windows' continual * is this:

>windows users have paid upwards of several thousand dollars in
>applications (office suites, who cares who made it, professional 3d
>development, etc...)

>Maybe some of us want to switch platforms, but can't because we can't
>afford new software (and pray that it's just as good)?  Maybe we can't
>because what we have works?

        What are you going to do when MonopolySoft releases the
        next update? Or even Quicken. Some WinVocates whine when
        someone (like a LinVocate) even suggests using a 1 or 2
        year old version of such a simple thing.

Quote:

>If the OS/2, BeOS, Unix, and Linux zealots who keep saying "You should
>use this..." and "This is for you..."  followed by a lot of drool want
>us to change to their platform, then YOU can compensate the costs of the
>applications we need.  If you're going to suggest or demand we use your
>product, you can equally help in keeping our costs low.

>Fair enough?  Cool!  Let's let the reign of Windows end.

        It's rather more like: if you wan't simple, buy what's
        actually simple and has been engineered for simple from
        day one instead of the tripe that Dell and M$ pushes.

--

  "I was not elected to watch my people suffer and die     |||
   while you discuss this a invasion in committe."        / | \

        In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://www.veryComputer.com/

 
 
 

What if the reason...

Post by jed » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



Quote:>That wasn't my point...  hmm, I wonder why this thread missed the Linux
>advocacy forum; it's the linux idiots who keep telling the rest of us to use
>Linux because they say it's a good thing to do.

        It's more robust and it's potentially no more complex than any
        other PC OS on PC hardware.

        If complexity bothers you, Windows is the wrong thing. As a
        consumer, you should be encouraging those that deliver products
        that conform to your stated objectives.


>> Use whatever you feel like; I for one couldn't care less.

>> --
>> Bill Pridgen
>> --

>> "...once you don't understand something you're getting closer to
>> figuring it out."  -- Martin Ozolins

--

  "I was not elected to watch my people suffer and die     |||
   while you discuss this a invasion in committe."        / | \

        In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com

 
 
 

What if the reason...

Post by jed » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00





>> ...for Windows' continual * is this:

>> windows users have paid upwards of several thousand dollars in
>> applications (office suites, who cares who made it, professional 3d
>> development, etc...)

>And other platform owners haven't ?  The only platform I can think this
>wouldn't apply to is the free Unices, and with them you waste a lot more
>time looking for, installing and learning your applications.

        What's to learn, a gui wordprocessor is a gui wordprocessor.
        If you need to learn something else for a new one, you would
        be better off with an old DOS box and WP 5.

Quote:

>> Maybe some of us want to switch platforms, but can't because we can't
>> afford new software (and pray that it's just as good)?  Maybe we can't
>> because what we have works?

>Maybe we don't because nothing else right now works *better* ?

--

  "I was not elected to watch my people suffer and die     |||
   while you discuss this a invasion in committe."        / | \

        In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://www.veryComputer.com/

 
 
 

What if the reason...

Post by Martin Ozolin » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



>On Sun, 28 Mar 1999 16:39:12 -0600, ? - Infinity Rising - ?

>>That wasn't my point...  hmm, I wonder why this thread missed the Linux
>>advocacy forum; it's the linux idiots who keep telling the rest of us to
use
>>Linux because they say it's a good thing to do.

> It's more robust and it's potentially no more complex than any
> other PC OS on PC hardware.

> If complexity bothers you, Windows is the wrong thing. As a
> consumer, you should be encouraging those that deliver products
> that conform to your stated objectives.

I guess some of us would rather let the computer do the work, rather than
endlessly editing silly little text files and constantly rewriting scripts
to perform day to day tasks.

That's my opinion, I could be wrong <SHOCK><GRIN>


>>> Use whatever you feel like; I for one couldn't care less.

>>> --
>>> Bill Pridgen
>>> --

>>> "...once you don't understand something you're getting closer to
>>> figuring it out."  -- Martin Ozolins

>--

>  "I was not elected to watch my people suffer and die     |||
>   while you discuss this a invasion in committe."        / | \

> In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com

 
 
 

What if the reason...

Post by jed » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00




>>On Sun, 28 Mar 1999 16:39:12 -0600, ? - Infinity Rising - ?

>>>That wasn't my point...  hmm, I wonder why this thread missed the Linux
>>>advocacy forum; it's the linux idiots who keep telling the rest of us to
>use
>>>Linux because they say it's a good thing to do.

>> It's more robust and it's potentially no more complex than any
>> other PC OS on PC hardware.

>> If complexity bothers you, Windows is the wrong thing. As a
>> consumer, you should be encouraging those that deliver products
>> that conform to your stated objectives.

>I guess some of us would rather let the computer do the work, rather than
>endlessly editing silly little text files and constantly rewriting scripts
>to perform day to day tasks.

        I did less adminstration on Linux even before the tools
        came to help banish the rcfiles than I did on Windows.

        That's a nice side effect of 'more robust'.

        You fix it that way, it STAYS that way.

        The notion that one is going to be constantly dibble dabbling
        with rcfiles is just a FUDsome lie.

- Show quoted text -

>That's my opinion, I could be wrong <SHOCK><GRIN>


>>>> Use whatever you feel like; I for one couldn't care less.

>>>> --
>>>> Bill Pridgen
>>>> --

>>>> "...once you don't understand something you're getting closer to
>>>> figuring it out."  -- Martin Ozolins

>>--

>>  "I was not elected to watch my people suffer and die     |||
>>   while you discuss this a invasion in committe."        / | \

>> In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com

--

  "I was not elected to watch my people suffer and die     |||
   while you discuss this a invasion in committe."        / | \

        In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com

 
 
 

What if the reason...

Post by Christopher Smit » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00




Quote:> ...for Windows' continual * is this:

> windows users have paid upwards of several thousand dollars in
> applications (office suites, who cares who made it, professional 3d
> development, etc...)

And other platform owners haven't ?  The only platform I can think this
wouldn't apply to is the free Unices, and with them you waste a lot more
time looking for, installing and learning your applications.

Quote:

> Maybe some of us want to switch platforms, but can't because we can't
> afford new software (and pray that it's just as good)?  Maybe we can't
> because what we have works?

Maybe we don't because nothing else right now works *better* ?
 
 
 

What if the reason...

Post by n.. » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00





> > ...for Windows' continual * is this:

> > windows users have paid upwards of several thousand dollars in
> > applications (office suites, who cares who made it, professional 3d
> > development, etc...)

> And other platform owners haven't ?  The only platform I can think this
> wouldn't apply to is the free Unices, and with them you waste a lot more
> time looking for, installing and learning your applications.

KDE is just like windows, nothign to learn. As for finding applications,
freshmeat and gnorpm simplify the task to enter what you need and I'll find
it. Linux and other Free unix's have come a long way in the past year, give
Linux another spin.
Quote:

> > Maybe some of us want to switch platforms, but can't because we can't
> > afford new software (and pray that it's just as good)?  Maybe we can't
> > because what we have works?

> Maybe we don't because nothing else right now works *better* ?

 
 
 

What if the reason...

Post by Jack Trought » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



?On Sun, 28 Mar 1999 10:40:47 -0600, - Infinity Rising - ?
?
?>Maybe some of us want to switch platforms, but can't because we can't
?>afford new software (and pray that it's just as good)?  Maybe we can't
?>because what we have works?
?
?That's why things like KOffice and Gnumeric are being written.  If you have
?a PII and lots of RAM, StarOffice is not too bad.

Actually, I'm using SO5 on a p200 w/64MB ram under warp... it works
just fine here.  The startup time is long, but after that it
performance is certainly acceptable.  I typically have a tasklist with
~20 apps in it.  Hell, three of them are REXX scripts, but they don't
hack my resources much at all.

SO5 is just fine.  It can even interoperate reasonably well with
office97.  And it's free:)

I have to admit though that I do use Describe for a lot of my
wordprocessing; it's much faster on it's feet and it seems to handle
font kerning and page layout much better than any other word processor
I've seen; in fact, it blows Word out of the water in this respect.  
OTOH, if I need an integrated document (wp w/ spreadsheet w/
presentation... you get the idea) then I turn to SO.

It's a real shame that Describe couldn't make a go of it; in some
respects, it is still peerless, despite its advancing age.

Jack Troughton   ICQ:7494149
http://207.253.224.232:8000/
jack.troughton at videotron.ca
jaft at adan.kingston.net
Montr?al PQ Canada

 
 
 

What if the reason...

Post by Bob Hau » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00




Quote:> windows users have paid upwards of several thousand dollars in
> applications (office suites, who cares who made it, professional 3d
> development, etc...)

If you want to keep throwing good money after bad, who am I to
say you should stop?  Have at it.

--
 Bob Hauck, Software Engineer - Will program for food.

 
 
 

What if the reason...

Post by Matt Templeto » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00





> > ...for Windows' continual * is this:

> > windows users have paid upwards of several thousand dollars in
> > applications (office suites, who cares who made it, professional 3d
> > development, etc...)

> And other platform owners haven't ?  The only platform I can think this
> wouldn't apply to is the free Unices, and with them you waste a lot more
> time looking for, installing and learning your applications.

???? With windows, I have to run to the store, Look at a box that tells me
NOTHING about how the product looks, feels and performs. Pay BIG bucks
(remember to count the time I had to work to afford the windows POS
software). Drag it home. Load it on my PC. Find out it does not do what I
want. Repeat until all options are exhausted or on rare occasion until
satisfied. While I'm running to and from the store I'm not getting anything
else done! When I count the time I had to work in order to afford buggy
software or on hold to a tech support flunky, I can spend 20 hours and not
get what I want. Usually I do not spend much time learning software written
for windows because it does not do anything that needs learning.

With the "free Unices" I log into the net spend 10 or 15 minutes searching
the software sites and start the download. While the software is
downloading I do my Email, put in a load of laundry, start dinner... no
time wasted.... Start the compile - while compiling I make the salad for
dinner, pester my partner <grin>... no time wasted here and I feel
MUCH BETTER thank you. So far I have spent maybe 30 minutes working on
getting the software. Even if I have to track down some libraries, I'm
still way ahead of the time I spent on windows software. Your are right, I
do spend more time learning the software I download for Linux... because it
does more than the Windows Pay For Junk (TM) software.

 
 
 

What if the reason...

Post by Craig Kelle » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



Quote:> That wasn't my point...  hmm, I wonder why this thread missed the Linux
> advocacy forum; it's the linux idiots who keep telling the rest of us to use
> Linux because they say it's a good thing to do.

Umm, look in your headers.

As opposed to Windows idiots who say the same thing?

What a clever approach, using phrases like "the rest of us" to denote
that you are everyone's advocate against those evil, "idiotic" linux
users.  What a joke.

--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.


 
 
 

What if the reason...

Post by Craig Kelle » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



Quote:> windows users have paid upwards of several thousand dollars in
> applications (office suites, who cares who made it, professional 3d
> development, etc...)

> Maybe some of us want to switch platforms, but can't because we can't
> afford new software (and pray that it's just as good)?  Maybe we can't
> because what we have works?

With proprietary-ware you must upgrade every year anyway...

How many times have YOU purchased Word?

How many times have you caused OTHERS to purchase Word (either at work
or by e-mailing .doc files)?

How many of the NEW features in Word have you used since 4.0 came out?

This is a fallacy.  Linux has many weaknesses, but making people "buy
their software again" is not one of them.

If "what [you] have works", then why are you going to upgrade to
Windows NT 2000 and Office 2000?  Why do you continually flush money
down the toilet for fluff?

--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.


 
 
 

1. Passing a String with an IFS without truncating

Could somobody help me ?!!!!
I have big troubles with IFS, and I can't get it.
IFS are the Internal Fields Separators, that are <space>, <tab.>, and <CR>
for the POSIX-tively correct Unix shells.
But my probems do not come from command-lines shell, but from the buffers
that I'm trying to manipulate through the different stream classes under
DEC/C++.
For example :
-I've created my QueueInterfaceClass which allows me to make different
processes communicate. But when I send a message ( which is in char *
buffer ) which contains an IFS, all the characters behind the IFS one are
blasted.

        i.e.:
        - If I send : "The cat is in the maze";
        - I will receive :"The"

        - If I send "bloubloum  cat"
        - I will receive :"bloumbloum"

-I've created an Serial_Line_InterfaceClass to communicate with a P.C. with
a RS232 chip. From the P.C. to my AlphaStation, the messages are not
truncated, even if they contain an IFS character. But if there is one in a
message from the station to the P.C., it is skipped with all the afterward
characters.

        i.e:
        - Same examples that with the QueueInterfaceClass.

        And this, even if I send characters one by one on the serial_line
!!!
        And yet, I use only asynchronous buffers in my stream classes !!!

Well, this is in fact a problem on which I've spent hours and hours, trying
many iostreams class configurations, without resolving just once the
problem.

And as the just-passed week-end has tired me a lot ( seems that me and my
friends are the alive prooves that Paris is not a undeads-museum !!!), it's
very hard to purchase the problem with a dbx debugger.
So, if you have any suggestion, it will be welcomed.

thanks a lot for finding time to answer me,
sorry for my english ( but still try'ing to improve it.)

2. lpr problem, interrupt driver

3. Linux ext2fs IFS for OS/2 : ext2-os2 0.3 available for testing

4. Xwindow on serial terminal

5. New version of IFS uploaded to Sunsite and tsx-11

6. need process that tells me when screen is locked

7. tcpdump + IFS = no sense?

8. Recommend PCI video card?

9. What happened to IFS?

10. Set IFS to non-printable character

11. IP spinning on IFS 1.0.0

12. ksh/sh difference w/IFS or read??

13. IFS setting