From truebluecajun@yahoo.com Mon Aug 13 17:09:39 2001
Return-Path: <M.E.Landry@student.tcu.edu>
X-Sender: M.E.Landry@student.tcu.edu
X-Apparently-To: lojban@onelist.com
Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_1); 14 Aug 2001 00:09:39 -0000
Received: (qmail 95313 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2001 00:09:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.26)
  by l7.egroups.com with QMQP; 14 Aug 2001 00:09:36 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO smail1.is.tcu.edu) (138.237.135.165)
  by mta1 with SMTP; 14 Aug 2001 00:09:36 -0000
Received: from tcu.edu (MEL8984-A.STUDENT.TCU.EDU [138.237.162.46]) by smail1.is.tcu.edu with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2653.13)
  id Q12D7APY; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:12:29 -0500
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
To: lojban@yahoogroups.com
Subject: *nix stuff
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 19:09:40 -0500
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <01081319094000.00820@tcu.edu>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: truebluecajun <truebluecajun@yahoo.com>


On Monday 13 August 2001 05:22 pm, you wrote:
> until Cowan's announcement a few minutes ago, the
> nixists have said that it couldn't be done even to nix, let alone to a
> multiplatform. Maybe tomorrow, now.

No, Robin said HE couln't make Logflash work on *nix. There's a difference 
between "I can't do it" and "It can't be done."

> <First, DOS isn't even used on the newest versions of Windows.
> Second, there is no shame in making a program multiplatform.
> Third, stereotyping *nix users as "cultists" (you said it, see below)
> is not only morally wrong, but extremely inaccurate, as stereotypes
> usually are.>
>
> but people keep insisting on making things
> only for this paltform or that. I have been arguing they should support
> all the platforms that are likely to be used -- and especially MS, since it
> is actually the most used. 


OK, if I remember correctly, Robin said he uses Win98 as well as LInux. 
CMIIW, but I think he wanted a version of Logflash for *nix _as_well_as_ 
Windows. I don't think he's asking for a monopoly here.

>Yes, I called them cultists and will defend it
> on literal grounds -- and, to an extent, on figurative ones as well (read
> some of the things that they say about other platforms, for example -- and
> compare with Koresh on ordinary Christians).

