[plug] [link] a lawyer Switches

[James Devenish]

In message <DHEILDCEDHJALGOKFJGLKEKMCJAA.PeterNicol at vrl.com.au>
on Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 04:04:30AM +0800, Peter J. Nicol wrote:
> typing 'route' produces nothing useful 'netstat -r' was the trick

Why do you regard a syntax summary not useful? The three other major
no-argument interfaces are: silently wait for input of stdin (not
helpful), start up an interactive shell-like interface (not something I
personally like), or do some default action (i.e. GNU style). While you
may be used to the GNU style, and may consider it superior, that doesn't
mean the Unix style is "nothing useful". On most Unix-like operating
systems that I'm aware of, 'route' is for "manipulating" your networking
whereas 'netstat' is for "showing" your networking.

In message <OFF7096C05.6226B4E5-ON48256CE2.00011D60 at au1.ibm.com>
on Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 08:22:27AM +0800, Richard Meyer wrote:
> If it wasn't for IBM's support, a number of Linux projects would not
> be as advanced as they are now. Particularly Linux on S/390 and
> AS/400, their

Mmm, within "Linux as a cultural phenomenon" there seems to be a
perception that "Linux is innovation" or "Linux is the solution". Linux
is spoken about as though it is a singular solution (whereas there is no
such thing -- different circumstances demand different solutions).
(Note: I'm not saying that this about anyone in particular nor about
anyone on this list.) And, most innovation has come from (and still
resides) outside the Linux community or at least in projects that are
not specific to Linux nor had their roots in Linux. Yet, because Linux
is a popular desktop platform and has a high profile, it is regarded as
a monolithic entity rather than a nebulous phenomenon. I'm not saying
there's nothing special about Linux nor that it is smoke and mirrors nor
that it's a fad, just that it seems not to be misrepresented a lot.

Linux (as in the phenomenon, not the kernel) exhibits the monocultural,
"plagiaristic", and bad design tendencies of the Microsoft software it
is supposed to be different from. I'm not accusing anyone on *this* list
of exhibiting these qualities, it is just an observation in general.

In message <OFF7096C05.6226B4E5-ON48256CE2.00011D60 at au1.ibm.com>
on Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 08:22:27AM +0800, Richard Meyer wrote:
> DISCALAIMER: (sic)
> 
> I am not a spokesman for IBM.

Likewise, I am only acting as a spokesman for myself :)