Subject: RE: [open-source] Sun to start charging for Star Office
To: 'Iggy Drougge' <optimus@canit.se>
From: Stephane St Hilaire <ssthilaire@hyperchip.com>
List: netbsd-users
Date: 04/03/2002 14:43:13
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
------_=_NextPart_001_01C1DB47.CB0E5680
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Iggy Drougge [mailto:optimus@canit.se]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 10:23 AM
> To: David Lawler Christiansen (NT)
> Cc: netbsd-users
> Subject: RE: [open-source] Sun to start charging for Star Office
>
> need/want to
> > communicate in a manner that plaintext format simply
> doesn't provide.
>
> I certainly don't. OTOH I don't post them on the internet. Instead, I
> print them out. Everyone can read printouts, only a selected
Reading fixed width fonts is also obviously better than proportionally
spaced ones containing italics and bolds where needed ?
> few can read
> the document format of the week.
HTML is hardly the format of the week. Sure it's not the format of 30 years
ago but heck technology evolves and sometimes software needs to be upgraded.
> Communication and papers are two different things. When I
> call someone on
> the phone, I don't want to hear the hisses of a modem, I just
> ewant plain
> speak. Likewise, when I read email, I expect plain text, not garbled
> markup.
Upgrade your e-mail client this way you can get the italics, bolds and all
those little thingies that have been available for decades on print but not
in e-mail and that most users with common sense would rather have than be
deprived of. This is probably why some e-mail clients default to using the
"richest" format, as odd as you may find it being I assume on a strict
feature/technological diet.
> If you don't want to communicate within the limitations of
> email, don't
Email limitations are disappearing with technical advance. Is that such a
bad thing ?
> use email. At least not on the internet. On an intranet, you
> may do as you
> wish, but not here. You have not a bloody idea about the receiver's
> ability to read anything but the common format, namely plain
> text. Is that
So you expect that the common ASCII (less and less common among e-mail
users) format will "still" be the norm in 10 years ? Should we really fight
to keep our ASCII pure ?
>
> > So, are you arguing against marking up email in general, or
> just against
> > the RFC2112/1872/2387 message-format in particular?
>
> I'm against being sent anything which I can't read anywhere I
> like to read
> mail.
Upgrade your e-mail client, or perhaps you are using something that is no
longer evolving and has no plans on supporting new RFCs ?
>
> > On the other issue...
> >
> > Do you REALLY think we're evil? If so, I don't think you
> know what evil
> > is. Evil is slaughtering those who believe differently from you, or
are going to do next, bring forth the Hitler argument?
>
> Indeed, I think that you're (if you'd like to stand up as an
> M$ spokesman)
> evil. You're polluting the internet.
Polluting a communication medium by making it richer, sounds like Devil
worship to me. Is IPV6 polluting IPV4 ? Is the color TV polluting the black
and white set ? By the way we all know that MS is making money and is
therefore intrinsically evil, we don't need the "satirical" dollar sign to
know that. Is it supposed to be an "attack" on MS to highlight the fact that
it is making money ?
> You, a single firm, behave as if
> common norms didn't at all exist. No other supplier would
> come up with as
> tasteless an idea as making HTML posting not only a
> capability, but the
> *default behaviour* of your application. What makes you think that the
> standards never apply to you?
Most users like to have the ability to choose font, emphasize and so fourth.
Why a technological company would stick to 30 year old "standards" is beyond
me unless they want to become dinosaurs and have few users and few
applications running on their systems (the obvious key to success).
> [snip boring sarcastic snips]
I have however one question for David:
I can personally understand that a Microsoft employee would get slightly
annoyed with the witless boring MS bashing that goes on in this list when
there's basically little justification for it (seeing how actively Ms is
involved in the NetBSD world), but what I don't get is why a MS employee
would spend anytime using NetBSD at all (except for historical research
perhaps). I'm rather curious about that...
Steph
------_=_NextPart_001_01C1DB47.CB0E5680
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =
5.5.2653.12">
<TITLE>RE: [open-source] Sun to start charging for Star Office</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BR>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> -----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> From: Iggy Drougge [<A =
HREF=3D"mailto:optimus@canit.se">mailto:optimus@canit.se</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 10:23 AM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> To: David Lawler Christiansen (NT)</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Cc: netbsd-users</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Subject: RE: [open-source] Sun to start =
charging for Star Office</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> need/want to</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > communicate in a manner that plaintext =
format simply </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> doesn't provide. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> I certainly don't. OTOH I don't post them on =
the internet. Instead, I</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> print them out. Everyone can read printouts, =
only a selected </FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Reading fixed width fonts is also obviously better =
than proportionally spaced ones containing italics and bolds where =
needed ?</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> few can read</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> the document format of the week.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>HTML is hardly the format of the week. Sure it's not =
the format of 30 years ago but heck technology evolves and sometimes =
software needs to be upgraded.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Communication and papers are two different =
things. When I </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> call someone on</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> the phone, I don't want to hear the hisses of a =
modem, I just </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> ewant plain</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> speak. Likewise, when I read email, I expect =
plain text, not garbled</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> markup.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Upgrade your e-mail client this way you can get the =
italics, bolds and all those little thingies that have been available =
for decades on print but not in e-mail and that most users with common =
sense would rather have than be deprived of. This is probably why some =
e-mail clients default to using the "richest" format, as odd =
as you may find it being I assume on a strict feature/technological =
diet.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> If you don't want to communicate within the =
limitations of </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> email, don't</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Email limitations are disappearing with technical =
advance. Is that such a bad thing ?</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> use email. At least not on the internet. On an =
intranet, you </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> may do as you</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> wish, but not here. You have not a bloody idea =
about the receiver's</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> ability to read anything but the common format, =
namely plain </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> text. Is that</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>So you expect that the common ASCII (less and less =
common among e-mail users) format will "still" be the norm in =
10 years ? Should we really fight to keep our ASCII pure ?</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > So, are you arguing against marking up =
email in general, or </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> just against</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > the RFC2112/1872/2387 message-format in =
particular? </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> I'm against being sent anything which I can't =
read anywhere I </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> like to read</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> mail.</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Upgrade your e-mail client, or perhaps you are using =
something that is no longer evolving and has no plans on supporting new =
RFCs ?</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > On the other issue...</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > Do you REALLY think we're evil? If =
so, I don't think you </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> know what evil</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> > is. Evil is slaughtering those who =
believe differently from you, or</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>are going to do next, bring forth the Hitler =
argument?</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> Indeed, I think that you're (if you'd like to =
stand up as an </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> M$ spokesman)</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> evil. You're polluting the internet. </FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Polluting a communication medium by making it richer, =
sounds like Devil worship to me. Is IPV6 polluting IPV4 ? Is the color =
TV polluting the black and white set ? By the way we all know that MS =
is making money and is therefore intrinsically evil, we don't need the =
"satirical" dollar sign to know that. Is it supposed to be an =
"attack" on MS to highlight the fact that it is making money =
?</FONT></P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> You, a single firm, behave as if</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> common norms didn't at all exist. No other =
supplier would </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> come up with as</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> tasteless an idea as making HTML posting not =
only a </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> capability, but the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> *default behaviour* of your application. What =
makes you think that the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>> standards never apply to you?</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Most users like to have the ability to choose font, =
emphasize and so fourth. Why a technological company would stick to 30 =
year old "standards" is beyond me unless they want to become =
dinosaurs and have few users and few applications running on their =
systems (the obvious key to success).</FONT></P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>> [snip boring sarcastic snips]</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>I have however one question for David:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=3D2>I can personally understand that a Microsoft =
employee would get slightly annoyed with the witless boring MS bashing =
that goes on in this list when there's basically little justification =
for it (seeing how actively Ms is involved in the NetBSD world), but =
what I don't get is why a MS employee would spend anytime using NetBSD =
at all (except for historical research perhaps). I'm rather curious =
about that...</FONT></P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=3D2>Steph</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>
------_=_NextPart_001_01C1DB47.CB0E5680--