On 2008-01-06, Linonut claimed:
> * Paul Hovnanian P.E. fired off this tart reply:
>
>>> You can set up VMware so that a Ctrl-C (copy) of text in Windows can
>>> then be middle-click pasted into a document.
>>
>> Too many extra keystrokes. I can just feel my carpal tunnel flaring up
>> thinking about it
>
> Question: Is there a way in X-Windows to move the cursor and do
> mouse-clicks entirely from the keyboard? I can set up my window manager
> to move/resize windows with keystrokes, how about the generic mousy
> stuff?

Not sure about X itself. I think it's wm-dependent.

In KDE: Alt-F12, use cursor keys, and (I just
tried it, because I only had a very vague memory of it)

--
When you become dead, you join a very large organization.

* amicus_curious fired off this tart reply:

>> The very idea of /you/ dissing Paul for his "lack" of PC knowledge is
>> frickin' /laughable/.
>>
> Well, I'm laughing. I am sure it is some kind of joke, but his own site
> shows what he claims is his PC:
>
> http://www.hovnanian.com/images/8088.jpg
>
> which, if it were true, would account for much of his seeming backwardness.

Idiocy or slime? Let the reader decide.

> I don't see what code has to do with it at all. Windows systems are
> licensed for various levels of use, like it or not. If you don't want to
> pay, OK, use something else, but don't complain that it is not allowed if
> you are using Linux. If you want the benefits, you have to pay. If you
> don't see any benefit, then you don't need to use it, and you don't need to
> pay, but you can't then complain.

You can /always/ complain.

In fact, complaining is often the only way to obtain some kind of
improvement.

--
This sig has expired. Please reactivate your sig by paying $0.25
and entering the 30-character activation key that will be emailed to
your account.

"Linonut" wrote in message
news:PXfgj.47038$vt2.34886@bignews8.bellsouth.net. ..
>
> You can /always/ complain.
>
But not with any legitimacy. It seem to be in the nature of the OSS fan to
complain about the failings of commercial software, particularly where the
software is produced by Microsoft. They do not see the benefits derived
from using it, so they assert that there is no benefit and thus Microsoft is
perpetrating a theft or similar crime. They are, obviously, very
short-sighted and are fools to believe in themselves so rashly, but that is
the way with fools and they are no different.

They preach among themselves to bolster their mutual confidence and they
seem to reach extreme peaks of self-assurance, but it is a false security
and lacks any substance. They continually fail to gain any ground and so
seek an explanation that is served by the deus ex machina of "monopoly
power" that magically explains why their force is so ineffective. They
never ponder on just how such an evil force can continue in such an open
information environment, apparently fearing the true answer.

Linonut writes:

> * amicus_curious fired off this tart reply:
>
>>
>> "Linonut" wrote in message
>> news:PXfgj.47038$vt2.34886@bignews8.bellsouth.net. ..
>>>
>>> You can /always/ complain.
>>>
>> But not with any legitimacy.
>
> Of course it is legitimate.
>
> The customer is always right.

But not when they buy MS right?

* amicus_curious fired off this tart reply:

>
> "Linonut" wrote in message
> news:PXfgj.47038$vt2.34886@bignews8.bellsouth.net. ..
>>
>> You can /always/ complain.
>>
> But not with any legitimacy.

Of course it is legitimate.

The customer is always right.

> It seem to be in the nature of the OSS fan to
> complain about the failings of commercial software, particularly where the
> software is produced by Microsoft. They do not see the benefits derived
> from using it, so they assert that there is no benefit and thus Microsoft is
> perpetrating a theft or similar crime. They are, obviously, very
> short-sighted and are fools to believe in themselves so rashly, but that is
> the way with fools and they are no different.

Bull****. There are a few people who may believe Microsoft writes no
beneficial code, but I am not one of them, and most people are not,
either. Nonetheless (and this has been true for a couple of decades),
Microsoft has made many decisions that level-headed people agree are
wrong. And, in fact, the never-ending (or so it seems) string of
paradigm shifts at Microsoft illustrate the Microsoft itself knows that
it has made some mistakes, and needs to retrench.

> They preach among themselves to bolster their mutual confidence and they
> seem to reach extreme peaks of self-assurance, but it is a false security
> and lacks any substance. They continually fail to gain any ground and so
> seek an explanation that is served by the deus ex machina of "monopoly
> power" that magically explains why their force is so ineffective. They
> never ponder on just how such an evil force can continue in such an open
> information environment, apparently fearing the true answer.

1. Ground /is/ being gained. Inexorably, if very slowly.

2. Microsoft has been doing all it can to prevent the ground from
being gained, by taking advantage of its monopoly situation.

3. Microsoft is trying to extend the reach of its monopoly (with
varying degrees of success) into IPTV, media, search, the business
stack, and probably some stuff I don't even know about. Their
acquisitions tell the tale.

--
This sig has expired. Please reactivate your sig by paying $0.25
and entering the 30-character activation key that will be emailed to
your account.

Hadron wrote:

> Linonut writes:
>
>> * amicus_curious fired off this tart reply:
>>
>>>
>>> "Linonut" wrote in message
>>> news:PXfgj.47038$vt2.34886@bignews8.bellsouth.net. ..
>>>>
>>>> You can /always/ complain.
>>>>
>>> But not with any legitimacy.
>>
>> Of course it is legitimate.
>>
>> The customer is always right.
>
> But not when they buy MS right?

I am certain you can point to those posts also, Hadron Quark, where it was
said that people are "wrong" when they buy a windows machine.

Come on, don't be shy
--
Microsoft: The company that made email dangerous
And web browsing. And viewing pictures. And...

"Linonut" wrote in message
news:2nsgj.47768$N67.965@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>* amicus_curious fired off this tart reply:
>
>>
>> "Linonut" wrote in message
>> news:PXfgj.47038$vt2.34886@bignews8.bellsouth.net. ..
>>>
>>> You can /always/ complain.
>>>
>> But not with any legitimacy.
>
> Of course it is legitimate.
>
> The customer is always right.
>
A customer, sure, but the complaints here are coming from non-customers who
are, at least in their own minds, competitors.

>> It seem to be in the nature of the OSS fan to
>> complain about the failings of commercial software, particularly where
>> the
>> software is produced by Microsoft. They do not see the benefits derived
>> from using it, so they assert that there is no benefit and thus Microsoft
>> is
>> perpetrating a theft or similar crime. They are, obviously, very
>> short-sighted and are fools to believe in themselves so rashly, but that
>> is
>> the way with fools and they are no different.
>
> Bull****. There are a few people who may believe Microsoft writes no
> beneficial code, but I am not one of them, and most people are not,
> either. Nonetheless (and this has been true for a couple of decades),
> Microsoft has made many decisions that level-headed people agree are
> wrong. And, in fact, the never-ending (or so it seems) string of
> paradigm shifts at Microsoft illustrate the Microsoft itself knows that
> it has made some mistakes, and needs to retrench.
>
I would rather attribute that to a constant search for product improvement
and, as newer and better ways are discovered, Microsoft is ever ready to
incorporate them into their Windows, office automation, and other products.
And they are not so arrogant as to continue down a fruitless path once it
has been shown to lead nowhere. That is a commendable trait and much of the
key to their overwhelming successes.

>> They preach among themselves to bolster their mutual confidence and they
>> seem to reach extreme peaks of self-assurance, but it is a false security
>> and lacks any substance. They continually fail to gain any ground and so
>> seek an explanation that is served by the deus ex machina of "monopoly
>> power" that magically explains why their force is so ineffective. They
>> never ponder on just how such an evil force can continue in such an open
>> information environment, apparently fearing the true answer.
>
> 1. Ground /is/ being gained. Inexorably, if very slowly.
>
Hard to measure and equally hard to attribute to any particular thing.
Statistically I think Linux adoption on the desktop is still within the
noise.

> 2. Microsoft has been doing all it can to prevent the ground from
> being gained, by taking advantage of its monopoly situation.
>
They continually fail to gain any ground and so seek an explanation that is
served by the deus ex machina of "monopoly power" that magically explains
why their force is so ineffective. They never ponder on just how such an
evil force can continue in such an open information environment, apparently
fearing the true answer.


> 3. Microsoft is trying to extend the reach of its monopoly (with
> varying degrees of success) into IPTV, media, search, the business
> stack, and probably some stuff I don't even know about. Their
> acquisitions tell the tale.
>
They are constantly seeking to enter new markets that may, some day, prove
to be as rich as the operating system platform software and office
automation software markets have been. Certainly that is something that you
would want them to do rather than just stick their head in the sand. Look
at Apple. They finally decided that they were not a big computer maker and
went after the personal entertainment market and re-invented themselves for
the better.