Yes that's great. Teddy, orasnita at home.ro ----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Heil" <eheil@xxxxxxx> To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 4:24 AM Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms' Actually, Gnome 2.0 will have accessibility built in, as in support for braille displays and software synths I think. I also believe that its safe to say that they might use Festival which is the best open-source software synth available out there. I know for a fact that I'll be really excited to see what Gnome is like and also KDE 3.x or whatever version will have such accessibility build in. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita@xxxxxxx> To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 8:30 PM Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms' > Right again, but until a GUI will be accessible for the blind in the same > conditions like in Windows (without requiring a hardware sinthesizer which > is very expensive comparing it with a software one, Linux OS will stay > behind, for the blind community, of course. > > It will be a good idea to start developing that graphical interface with > accessibility in mind, something like the Microsoft active accessibility. > > Teddy, > orasnita at home.ro > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow at gmx.net> > To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> > Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 1:32 PM > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms' > > > I think linux would be widely used if a windowslike gui was developed for > it, so the average person could use it. Also getting the message out that > linux isn't just for developers or server admins would help. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Octavian Rasnita" <orasnita at home.ro> > To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 9:35 PM > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms' > > > > You're absolutely right. > > I don't like Windows or Microsoft or Bill Gates, but Linux definitely has > > problems. > > It is a lot much harder to use than Windows. > > > > If it would be such a great OS, more people would use Linux not Windows. > > And in addition, it is free. > > > > Teddy, > > orasnita at home.ro > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Ameer Armaly" <Ameer_Armaly at hotmail.com> > > To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> > > Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 3:15 AM > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms' > > > > > > Hi all. > > What would you rather do. Check checkboxes, or arrow through config files > > (which make no sense att all!). Everybody knows it, windows rules in the > > sense that the non-programer can use it. It also isn't dependant on > > confusing drivers that are almost impossible to configure because of there > > confusingness. now, if linux were a little less unix-style in the sense > > that it requires the time and patience of a programer, I would take a > second > > look. My friend at ms agrees. He used linux for 4 years, and says that > > you're not very far in most areas than you were three years ago. Also, > why > > should you have to use cat to print files. There should be a simple > "print" > > command, like in dos (which is a lot more user-friendly than linux), and > > these extreemely long and borring paths shouldn't be so cumbersome. I > > should know, zI like command-lines, but I'd rather type "print > > /etc/httpd/conf/http.conf" rather than use cat. Also, why not have html > in > > email. It only makes it easier to go directly to a link rather than have > to > > copy it and past it into lynx. Also, why should we have to use lynx > anyway. > > It at this stage is only an out-of-date piece of crap. It can't interpret > > java, activeX, vbs, and who knows how many other things that ie can. > Also, > > you shouldn't have to wast your time working so hard on configuring the > > right alsa drivers for your soundcard. In windows, you just tell it you > > have a sound card, and it just does the rest. Also, home networking is > > another issue that linux needs to improve on. You need to compile support > > into the colonel, and then do so many things to keep yourself from beeing > > hacked. But in windows xp, I just answered a few questions, and voila! my > > network was setup! Now why can't linux be so easy? Because there's no > > profit for the people who are working on it. They have no financial goal, > > so most of them make really crappy software. On the other hand, ms, who > is > > working for a profit, has a purpose and goal, so therefore they make good > > software. > > That's just my 2 cents. > > Feel free to ask me to support it with a full-blown > > windows-to-linux-back-to-windows convert, namely, A good friend of mine, > who > > will be glad to support my point. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Alex Snow" <alex_snow at gmx.net> > > To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:55 PM > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms' > > > > > > > If only winblows used simple config files... instead of having to find > the > > > right tab in those huge properties forms. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths at attbi.com> > > > To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 7:24 PM > > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms' > > > > > > > > > Hi Alex. Check the security tab in internet destroyer. This is what I > hate > > > about integration! One thing affects another. I like the separation. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Alex Snow <alex_snow at gmx.net> > > > To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:46 PM > > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms' > > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > I use outlook depress to read email, since my linux box is still in > > > pieces. > > > > How can I stop active x controls and other code from launching the > > files? > > > > Norton catches them only after the file is opened. Is there any way > to > > > stop > > > > this? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Igor Gueths" <igueths at attbi.com> > > > > To: <speakup at braille.uwo.ca> > > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:12 PM > > > > Subject: Re: Consensus opinion required - was 'more worms' > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Kerry. Well said, no doubt on your statements. I remember the > days > > > back > > > > > when plain text was perhaps the only method for sending e-mail (late > > > 80's > > > > > early 90's). Those were the good days! > > > > > > > > > > Gates go to hell, your OS is waiting for you there! > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Charles Hallenbeck wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Kerry, > > > > > > > > > > > > No question about it, things would be a whole lot better if > > > > > > nobody sent html emails - I only wanted to point out that many > > > > > > html emails can readily be handled by pine (and perhaps other > > > > > > mail readers) and also that html email comes with and without > > > > > > viruses as do plain text emails - banning html is no protection > > > > > > against viruses. > > > > > > > > > > > > Chuck > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Kerry Hoath wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chuck I should point out that certain versions > > > > > > > of pine have contained buffer overflows in the html processing > > > > elements > > > > > > > and so did older versions of mutt and lynx. > > > > > > > I am not taking a stand one way or the other regarding html > > messages > > > > > > > except to say that there are dangers in html; > > > > > > > more so for Windows users than Linux ones but the Linux dangers > > > > > > > exist as well. > > > > > > > I don't mind html if there is an equivalent plain text section, > > > > > > > but replying to html only messages causes me grief. > > > > > > > I for my own reasons choose to send to mailing lists in plain > text > > > > > > > to minimize bandwidth usage and also message bloat. > > > > > > > I encourage people to set their look out distress > > > > > > > settings to send in plain text where possible but let it reply > to > > a > > > > message > > > > > > > in the format it was received in. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, Kerry. > > > > > > > On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 09:16:13AM -0400, Charles Hallenbeck > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am still a pine user, and on my system pine reads html > > messages > > > > > > > > transparently, no problem. HTML has nothing to do with most > > > > > > > > viruses. Executable attachments that launch themselves are the > > > > > > > > real problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 15 May 2002, Steve Holmes wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since I've been using mutt to read my mail, I really haven't > > > been > > > > > > > > > affected either way with HTML mail. When I used pine, it > was > > an > > > > > > > > > annoyance but no more than that. But I think I would favor > a > > > > blockage > > > > > > > > > of HTML mail since the reasons sighted below and some people > > > still > > > > use > > > > > > > > > windows mailers on the list; so go for it! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 14, 2002 at 07:48:26PM +0100, 'Georgina' wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi All > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Because of the use of html messages being used to transmit > > > > Windows > > > > > > > > > > viruses, I wondered if folks would agree to having list > > > messages > > > > > > > > > > restricted to plain text only? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The list owner will act upon whatever the consensus is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gena > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Have your say: > > > > > > > > > > Blindness Advocacy and Self Help Online www.bashonline.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please don't send me MS Word documents, see > > > > > > > > > > http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Personal Contact Details: > > > > > > > > > > E-mail: gena at gena-j.net WWW: http://www.gena-j.net ICQ: > > > > 144169465 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list > > > > > > > > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > > > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list > > > > > > > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck > > > > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > > > Speakup mailing list > > > > > > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > > > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Visit me at http://www.valstar.net/~hallenbeck > > > > > > The Moon is Waxing Crescent (10% of Full) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > > Speakup mailing list > > > > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Speakup mailing list > > > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Speakup mailing list > > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Speakup mailing list > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Speakup mailing list > > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Speakup mailing list > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Speakup mailing list > > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > > > > _______________________________________________ > Speakup mailing list > Speakup at braille.uwo.ca > http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup > _______________________________________________ Speakup mailing list Speakup at braille.uwo.ca http://speech.braille.uwo.ca/mailman/listinfo/speakup
