Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers (was: OT email response format)

From: Raymond Moyers <rmoyers_at_nop.org>
Date: Mon Apr 22 16:05:40 2002

On Monday 22 April 2002 11:58, you wrote:
> Raymond Moyers wrote:
> (unix plumbing)
> The problem with unix it never really found a clean way
> to go from a line oriented system to a video screen system.

 eh ?
 you mean those systems that eschew the command line by
 makeing the function it provided impossible ?

 Unix is superior *because* it retained the command line.
 the Unix GUI is also superior, because it is network transparent.

> Allmost 99% of unix is based on the main frame model of computing
> where you have 50 people all say text editing with the same editor
> and 3 people running a program in the background.

 Ok so you dont know anything about unix, thats what you are
 saying here.

 Its also apparent that everything you have been told about it came
 from those equally ignorant, they are all wrong.

> The windows model is based on personal computers with crappy hardware
> that you have 100% of the system to yourself.

 How does that differ from my unix boxes ? i certainly have them all
 to myself.

> I would like to see a 3rd system, one where the concept of information
> can be shared and that gives you a standard toolkit for both character
> and bitmaped displays

 That is an oxymoron, even tho what unix has now makes this look
 like what is happening.

 Gimp dont translate to a tty very well, but an xterm is certainly the
 bitmapped representation of the tty.

 and the bitmapped display is network transparent, making it superior
 to everything else, 2 CPUs or a farm of 4000 boxes, you only need one
 screen to run both tty and GUI software on all of them at once.

> that will permit plumbing from everybody.

 Unix already has this X11 is a standard you can run your sun apps
 your irix apps your freebsd apps all on the GUI of your linux box all
 at once. and last time i looked, all the other systems have adopted
 our plumbing, not the other way around.

> I use a
> 640x480 screen because I can read the text.I don't need ICON's that fill
> 80% of the screen or thousands of pop up windows.

 eh ? what would be wrong with a nice large 4096 x 3192 screen
 with whatever size fonts you desire ? and the ability to populate
 that screen with the workload of a whole stack of boxes.

> I want to use a computer not playwith it.

 "Well the end user experience" is system agnostic except
 for the winblows limitations that dumbs your system down
 to the microset winblows can provide. unix has point and
 click too, but it isnt implimented stupidly.

> > But what makes it really powerfull is that they plumb together
> > Its like attempting to explain the shuttle nosewhell servos
> > to a cave man, they have no frame of reference, and are
> > too ignorant to have any hint of how ignorant they are.

> Well maybe if they (the shuttle people) asked the
> Caveman in the first place you might have a better Space Program.

 You would make a good leftist, the asurdity seems high enough.

> Anyway for all the people that think Caveman had a big club, and
> hairy body and where chased by dinosaurs -- read "Clan of the Cavebear"
> by Jean M. Auel for what real cave life could have been like.

 So utopian brainwashed fiction writers are now your authority
 on such things ..

> PS. A few days ago somebody spoke about a construction company
> that uses VW bugs for transport and tanks for welding. When you think
> about it that is the model one needs for construction in space.
> reusable space transport (space plane) is offhand 10x the cost and 1/10
> the payload of air transport. Because a two stage vehical is needed
> the what you can put in BUG ( 500..2000 LB's) seems to the typical
> payload. Nobody asked me!!

 Are you a moonie of Noam Chomsky too ?
Received on Mon Apr 22 2002 - 16:05:40 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:34:33 BST