Linux-Advocacy Digest #672, Volume #25 Fri, 17 Mar 00 17:13:08 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux Virus Info Enclosed ("Nik Simpson")
Re: A pox on the penguin? (Linux Virus Epidemic) ("Mr. Rupert")
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse (abraxas)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or Linux
(Jonathan W Hendry)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or Linux
(Jonathan W Hendry)
Debian Potato release? (mr_organic)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or Linux
(JEDIDIAH)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or Linux
(JEDIDIAH)
Re: Bsd and Linux (Lion)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or Linux
(JEDIDIAH)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or Linux
(Jonathan W Hendry)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: Darwin or Linux
(JEDIDIAH)
Re: 11 Days Wasted ON Linux (Wolfgang Weisselberg)
Re: Linux Virus Info Enclosed (Craig Kelley)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or Linux
(Jonathan W Hendry)
Re: Iridium Tech Support (Was Re: . . . Itanium . .. (Bill Vermillion)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Nik Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Virus Info Enclosed
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 15:13:05 -0500
"Mr. Rupert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> abraxas wrote:
>
> > According to Microsoft, Windows 2000 Professional may hang after you
> > install Microsoft IntelliPoint 2.2. Microsoft says that pressing
> > CTRL-ALT-DELETE will not help. To resolve this problem, Microsoft says
you
> > have to reinstall Windows 2000 Professional.
>
> This one is a real beaut and will forever keep Microsoft OSs in the Mickey
> Mouse league.
>
Intellipoint 2.2 is a very old version of the software, it's currently at
3.1, installing old device drivers on new releases of OS is often a problem,
and one not limited to MS. Of course the current version of IntelliPoint
works just fine.
--
Nik Simpson
------------------------------
From: "Mr. Rupert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A pox on the penguin? (Linux Virus Epidemic)
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 14:14:17 -0600
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > > So, Tim Kelley states that NO ONE has/uses root access in Linux -
> because
> > > that is a security risk. So, no one needs or get root. But they use SU
> all
> > > the time....
> > >
> > > laughs last that laughs best...
> > >
> >
> > I thought you finally understood su but I guess you are just too dense.
> > Where I work. no end users have root access to AIX on their RS/6000
> boxes.
> > We do have access to maint, which has authority for such things as
> defining
> > printers and mounting disks. How do I define a new printer queue?
> Guess
> > what - I use su - maint. So yes I do use su, but never to root.
> >
> > Gary
> >
>
> did I say su to root? no.
>
Your examples of virus spreading on a UNIX system used 'su' as root! This
entire 'su' thingy really has your head spinning doesn't it!??? Perhaps
it is the ease with which UNIX lends itself to the multi-user OS paradigm
that has you running around this newsgroup like a deer stuck in headlights.
> besides, did you even read the link at the bottom where it lists and
> describes and even provides working examples of linux virus?
Yes we read it and I am embarrassed for you. This is one thread that
you should just slowly walk away from.
--
Mr Rupert
.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Date: 17 Mar 2000 20:24:40 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Mr. Rupert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> Nothing worse than being stopped at a red light only to have a bum
>> attempt to wash your windshield and hand you a W2K CD.
> no, you're mistaken - W2K is not being given away free... the only OS I can
> think of that fits your description is Linux. The bum may have realized that
> no want accepts Linux CDs but would take a W2K copy in a heartbeat.
Not true. A popular PC magazine was recently given 120,000 w2k disks by
microsoft that they THOUGHT were the 120 day eval version. It turns out they
werent; they were the full version. Alot of people in Spain are very happy.
Microsoft gave away 120k copies of w2k for nothing.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: Jonathan W Hendry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or
Linux
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Date: 17 Mar 2000 14:30:13 -0600
In comp.sys.next.advocacy JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 19:42:45 GMT, Michael Paquette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>No, no. Nothing like that. I've never been good at multi-level
>>writing or subtle undertones. (Me? subtle? Hah!) I just get
>>tired of all the 'gimme, gimme, gimme' noise around the edges of the
>>Open Source community.
> That has nothing to do with this.
> It's more "treat me like a real customer, with a shelf
> full of completely licenced commercial applications"
> or quit clogging up a shared resource (the web) with
> your vendorlock crap.
What makes you think you're a customer?
> [deletia]
> If I were a BeOS user with no interest in sourcecode,
> the sentiment would essentially be the same.
> This is an Open Systems issue and has nothing to do with code.
It has everything to do with code. Write some.
------------------------------
From: Jonathan W Hendry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or
Linux
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Date: 17 Mar 2000 14:31:59 -0600
In comp.sys.next.advocacy JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 19:42:52 GMT, Michael Paquette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>> >The point you're missing is that it may not be Apple's to provide. (I'm
>>>
>>> Actually they do infact 'own' control of the codec.
>>>
>>
>>You don't know what you are talking about. It's OK, though.
>>'Ignorance is Strength' and all that.
>>
>>The Cinepak and Sorensen codecs are owned by other companies. The
> Sorenson is owned by Sorenson, but it's exclusively licenced
> to Apple. Thus, apple does infact 'own' control of it. This
> came up when Podlipec tried to get a licence from Sorenson.
Wrong. Apple doesn't control it. They are only able to use
it in accordance with the license from Sorenson. It's a sure
bet that releasing the codec (even under NDA) would
be outside the scope of their license.
> [deletia]
> I'll take his word on the matter over some wanker like you.
<Snrk> You have no idea who you're responding to, do you?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mr_organic)
Subject: Debian Potato release?
Date: 17 Mar 2000 19:49:08 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just wondering when Debian Potato is due for formal release.
Anybody know for sure? I didn't see anything definite on
Debian's website.
mr_organic
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or
Linux
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 20:59:21 GMT
On 17 Mar 2000 13:55:06 -0600, Jonathan W Hendry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.sys.next.advocacy JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> This is why we chuckle at Apple when they claim to give away
>> BSD and not their hypocrisy when they do so the day after the
>> first TPM trailer was snugly vendorlocked away from anyone
>> who contributed to the BSD codebase.
>
>How tragic that people were kept from viewing the trailer for
>a bad movie. Tragic.
That's just one instance of a larger problem. Just because
you feel that you can indulge in weak handwaving doesn't
alter the issue.
I'm glad my previous generation didn't have such cavalier
attitudes when it came to free access to information.
>
>However, as has been explained, the codec is the issue, and
>that isn't Apple's to give away.
Apple's the one with the exclusive licence. They could
certainly give it away in binary form. They do that
already. Sorenson can't because of the exclusive licence
they have with Apple.
That was a deal worthy of Microsoft.
--
So long as Apple uses Quicktime to effectively |||
make web based video 'Windows only' Club, / | \
Apple is no less monopolistic than Microsoft.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or
Linux
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 21:02:49 GMT
On 17 Mar 2000 14:30:13 -0600, Jonathan W Hendry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.sys.next.advocacy JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 19:42:45 GMT, Michael Paquette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>No, no. Nothing like that. I've never been good at multi-level
>>>writing or subtle undertones. (Me? subtle? Hah!) I just get
>>>tired of all the 'gimme, gimme, gimme' noise around the edges of the
>>>Open Source community.
>
>> That has nothing to do with this.
>
>> It's more "treat me like a real customer, with a shelf
>> full of completely licenced commercial applications"
>> or quit clogging up a shared resource (the web) with
>> your vendorlock crap.
>
>What makes you think you're a customer?
I OWN a quicktime licence. Do you?
Plus there's the 2 editions of Applixware, WP8, WABI, Bfris,
Hopkins FBI, CivCTP, Myth II, EUS, Unreal Tournament, HMM 3
and Quake III. VMware 2.0 will soon be added to the pile.
I'm probably more likely to add to Apple's coffers than you are.
I'm actually a professional and consumer rather than just some
snot nosed brat going to college on daddy's dime.
>
>> [deletia]
>
>> If I were a BeOS user with no interest in sourcecode,
>> the sentiment would essentially be the same.
>
>> This is an Open Systems issue and has nothing to do with code.
>
>It has everything to do with code. Write some.
You have absolutely no clue.
--
So long as Apple uses Quicktime to effectively |||
make web based video 'Windows only' Club, / | \
Apple is no less monopolistic than Microsoft.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: Lion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Bsd and Linux
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 20:17:06 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Donn Miller
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Now that Linux is pretty popular, and
>maybe BSD will also, it will be interesting to see if Borland will
>want to develop products for these OS's.
They already are. I know at least their Java development kit is due for
release (or already available) on Linux
--
Lion
BreadHead - Back By Popular Demand
Sex, Metal & Revolution
http://www.bigfoot.com/~breadhead
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or
Linux
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 21:12:39 GMT
On 17 Mar 2000 14:31:59 -0600, Jonathan W Hendry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.sys.next.advocacy JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 19:42:52 GMT, Michael Paquette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>>> >The point you're missing is that it may not be Apple's to provide. (I'm
>>>>
>>>> Actually they do infact 'own' control of the codec.
>>>>
>>>
>>>You don't know what you are talking about. It's OK, though.
>>>'Ignorance is Strength' and all that.
>>>
>>>The Cinepak and Sorensen codecs are owned by other companies. The
>
>> Sorenson is owned by Sorenson, but it's exclusively licenced
>> to Apple. Thus, apple does infact 'own' control of it. This
>> came up when Podlipec tried to get a licence from Sorenson.
>
>Wrong. Apple doesn't control it. They are only able to use
>it in accordance with the license from Sorenson. It's a sure
>bet that releasing the codec (even under NDA) would
>be outside the scope of their license.
Learn to read. Podlipec tried to gain NDA access to the codec
from Sorenson, the owner. They were prevented from accomodating
by a M$-style contractual arrangement.
>
>
>
>> [deletia]
>
>> I'll take his word on the matter over some wanker like you.
>
><Snrk> You have no idea who you're responding to, do you?
Some moron that thinks that if I wish happy thoughts I
will magically have access to the information needed to
write a Sorenson codec?
--
So long as Apple uses Quicktime to effectively |||
make web based video 'Windows only' Club, / | \
Apple is no less monopolistic than Microsoft.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: Jonathan W Hendry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or
Linux
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Date: 17 Mar 2000 15:13:37 -0600
In comp.sys.next.advocacy JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 17 Mar 2000 13:55:06 -0600, Jonathan W Hendry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm glad my previous generation didn't have such cavalier
> attitudes when it came to free access to information.
Oh really? So when Star Wars came out, you called up Lucasfilm,
asked for an 8mm print (because you didn't have a 35mm projector
at home), and they sent you one gratis?
Or did you wail and bitch and moan that Lucas was infringing on
your rights because they won't pander to you?
>>
>>However, as has been explained, the codec is the issue, and
>>that isn't Apple's to give away.
> Apple's the one with the exclusive licence. They could
> certainly give it away in binary form. They do that
> already. Sorenson can't because of the exclusive licence
> they have with Apple.
Nonsense. Sorenson sets the terms of the license, not Apple.
> That was a deal worthy of Microsoft.
Yeah, right. I suppose you think it's okay to violate the GPL?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: Darwin or
Linux
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 21:16:31 GMT
On 17 Mar 2000 14:02:27 -0600, Jonathan W Hendry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.sys.next.advocacy JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> ...and Sorenson has exclusively licenced them to apple.
>> As far as cinepak goes, cinepak is quite available and
>> has been for some time.
>
>
>So quit whining, quit bitching, quit suggesting that your
>rights are somehow being trampled because you're unable to
>access a *luxury* item, and write some damn code!
What is this assinine fixation you have with code. This isn't
a 'code' issue. It's a PATENT and TRADE SECRET issue. That's
why you can't point out an example of someone else that has
produced a sorenson codec implementation and why some 3rd party
willing to take my money hasn't obliged my interest.
>
>Again, if open-source development is as powerful as some claim,
>why hasn't a clean-room version of the Sorenson codec been written?
Add one assinine assertion to another...
Do you have any idea what it would take to reverse engineer
a video encoding scheme. Unless you do, you have no business
whining that such a feat should have been achieved already.
>
>In the meantime, go watch Willy Wonka and see which of the
>characters you most resemble.
Go fuck yourself, corporate bootlicker.
Go somewhere else to live out your vision of
a corporate serf's paradise.
--
So long as Apple uses Quicktime to effectively |||
make web based video 'Windows only' Club, / | \
Apple is no less monopolistic than Microsoft.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wolfgang Weisselberg)
Subject: Re: 11 Days Wasted ON Linux
Date: 17 Mar 2000 21:18:36 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 03:53:55 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED],net <[EMAIL PROTECTED],net> wrote:
> On 16 Mar 2000 23:47:12 GMT, Steve Mading
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem with Linux is that the only advantage I can see for a
^^^^^^^^^
> small business owner is the much lower cost and that really only
> applies to larger business's which have multiple systems and thus
> higher licensing costs.
Which is a valid comment, but not a proof. Unless you want to
prove limited imagination.
> You're going to sit this guy who owns a clothing store for example
> down in front of Linux and tell him how great it is and how he is
> going to save tons of money
Wrong argumentation. Being able to avoid the vendor lock-in you
describe further down is a much better argument ... and then you
start when he has a system which seems to work for him! If you
start earlier (when he chooses his system) almost all of the
problems disappear.
> Proprietary format? Sure but that's not his fault.
Of course it's not his programming. But I hold people responsible
for the tools they use. Guns and bullets can kill, you know, even
if you bought them ready-to-use. And if you use Outlook and post
in HTML, I am not going any softer on you because you cannot use
your tools or are unable to understand them.
> The program works for him and he is happy.
Then there's no reason at all to change. If he were unhappy,
well ... that would be different.
However your claim proves you are building up a straw man
argument. Well, come here, troll, let me feed you some cyanide.
> Then he gets to see Netscape in all of it's ugly looking font'ness,
> not to mention Wordperfect 8 in which the fonts are so jagged you
> dizzy looking at them and by now the guy is gone out the back door.
You can integrate good fonts with Linux, too. After all, your
business owner did set up Windows all by hims... wait ... no, he
got someone to do that, right? So tell your consultant (of
whatever OS he might be: "Do that!"). Which problem? After all,
you saved enough with the OS that you *can* pay someone to
configure it well ...
> Later he finds out that half the Win hardware he foolishly bought
> wouldn't have worked and his ISP is Linux hostile and he would be on
> his own for dialing up.
The first part is cheapish hardware designed to reduce a CPU to a
These evil hardware only exists to reduce your CPU 386 in speed in
exchange of $10 and should not even be used under Windows. (And
not only because it's a vendor lock-in again.)
Replacing the printer with some inexpensive real thing won't cost
more that $100 or $150 (see other threads). Replacing the modem?
Well, how much is a modem these days? Replacing the sound card?
I thought we talked 'small business', not game machine! You save
more than that on not having to buy the licenses. (Also see the
URL below.)
The second part can easily be solved: Switch to a clueful ISP.
> So what is the reward for switching to Linux?
Try your example for someone who is in a similar situation, but
uses OS/2, Linux, AIX, SCO, or any other system. You'll find
that there are quite some similarities. The differences seem to
be that the vendor lock-in is not so hard. As has been said:
You need a good reason to switch. "Just to run Linux" isn't.
> You have given him no reason to switch and in fact have given him
> every reason to stay with MS. He wants to run a business, not
> re-invent the wheel and have it turn out square.
So he stays with MS, (after all, by your definition, he is happy
with it!) but I am perfectly allowed to snicker evilly everytime
his OS crashes. I think that's a fair deal.
> For a non-programmer, applications based
> person for whom a PC is a tool to run a business I can't think of one
> single reason to switch to Linux. Not even one.
Gross oversimplification on the base of a constructed and
weighted example is not really convincing. However, I think
that you might have a limited imagination. Let's take a
business owner who uses the PC as a tool, and nothing more.
What's important to him?
- It must RUN. No matter what.
- The apps and the environment must be good enough.
- There must be a specialist somewhere in case of trouble.
- It must be payable.
Let's examine these things one by one.
1. Windows 9x and even NT are not really that crashproof.
(Neither is a misconfigured Linux.) For one example where
they failed in that area, see the URL:
http://citv.unl.edu/linux/LinuxPresentation.html
(The Cats Pajamas)
You see, sometimes your imagination fails. :-)
2. This is the question with every OS. While Windows has many
more applications, Linux is catching up. (and then there are
programs you can only run under DOS or OS/2 or whatever)
3. RH is but one example. Linux-Hotlines and support contracts
are aviable everywhere by now. Even with 0900-numbers if you
don't want a contract.
4. Linux wins hands down here, especially if you are bigger than
1-PC-Mom'n'Pop shop.
> Open Source way, it will steam roll Windows over time. Currently it is
> not even close, and looking at the cryptic applications that folks
> seem to be writing for Linux these days I doubt it ever will.
Nobody forces you to use them. Actually, you could write a
noncryptic (aka simple) wrapper GUI round them. This is of course
the preferred way: Less code duplication, reuse of well tested
code, choose-your-GUI.
> Meminfo? Don't we have enough of those already?
Obviously not, else it would not have been written. Are you
trying to tell people what to write? Hmmm ....
> GPM? I thought you guys had figured out how to use mice by now?
Yes, you use GPM. It also does nice stuff like handle quite a
range of touch screens and controls nearly every aspect of your
mouse-needs. You can even have a 'magic' mouse-key combination to
e.g. reboot your machine or other nice stuff ... if you need/want
that. You'd not need that, but sometimes driver/kernel
develloping can kill your KB and TCP-stack. Not all Linux users
are drooling mouse pushers, you know? Some do program the kernel
...
> RTP? So now I can turn my $450 Sony display into an etch-a-sketch.
Why not? Imagine, someone might want or need that ability!
Even with their $30000 extra-big flatscreens or their 3rd hand
13" monitors. (But then, trolls lack imagination ...)
> QextMDI? Yet another library that I am certain is needed somewhere and
> for something.
Are you frightened that people create stuff you don't understand?
And which you probably never will use?
> This stuff is scary..It reminds me of stuff I used back in the mid
> 1980's to tweak my IBMPC, like NumLockOff.
> Absolute FlintStone period.
Ah. I see. You also wrote at least one useful aplication. What
was it called, what did it do? (After all, you did not invent a
kernel for your "IBMPC", right ...?)
> BTW this was taken off the http://www.freshmeat.net page today.
> >: If someone tells a business owner that he has to buy
> >: new computers in order to get Linux up and running,
> >: the business owner will give up on Linux since preserving
> >: current technology investment is business owners' high priority.
> Absolute truth and the main reason why for small business owners Linux
> is not an option.
I agree that having to upgrade to switch is something you'd not
like to do. But having to upgrade for Windows (which is much more
likely since Linux needs comparatively little resources) is OK? I
bet not! But locked in, you won't be able to help yourself ...
-Wolfgang
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Virus Info Enclosed
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 17 Mar 2000 14:19:08 -0700
Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Mr. Rupert" wrote:
>
> > > According to Microsoft, Windows 2000 Professional may hang after you
> > > install Microsoft IntelliPoint 2.2. Microsoft says that pressing
> > > CTRL-ALT-DELETE will not help. To resolve this problem, Microsoft says you
> > > have to reinstall Windows 2000 Professional.
> >
> > This one is a real beaut and will forever keep Microsoft OSs in the Mickey
> > Mouse league.
>
> Misleading and totally untrue. You don't have to reinstall at
> all, what you have to do is pick through the registry for 70+
> hours looking for the right things to delete.
LOL
And then apply 'Add' access to all users who would ever want to use it
to the System32 directory.
It's simple, really.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Jonathan W Hendry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or
Linux
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Date: 17 Mar 2000 15:19:30 -0600
In comp.sys.next.advocacy JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 17 Mar 2000 14:30:13 -0600, Jonathan W Hendry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In comp.sys.next.advocacy JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 19:42:45 GMT, Michael Paquette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>>No, no. Nothing like that. I've never been good at multi-level
>>>>writing or subtle undertones. (Me? subtle? Hah!) I just get
>>>>tired of all the 'gimme, gimme, gimme' noise around the edges of the
>>>>Open Source community.
>>
>>> That has nothing to do with this.
>>
>>> It's more "treat me like a real customer, with a shelf
>>> full of completely licenced commercial applications"
>>> or quit clogging up a shared resource (the web) with
>>> your vendorlock crap.
>>
>>What makes you think you're a customer?
> I OWN a quicktime licence. Do you?
To what platforms?
> Plus there's the 2 editions of Applixware, WP8, WABI, Bfris,
> Hopkins FBI, CivCTP, Myth II, EUS, Unreal Tournament, HMM 3
> and Quake III. VMware 2.0 will soon be added to the pile.
> I'm probably more likely to add to Apple's coffers than you are.
Not likely, since I'm a professional OpenStep developer, and have
been for years. I'll probably be moving to WebObjects at some point.
> I'm actually a professional and consumer rather than just some
> snot nosed brat going to college on daddy's dime.
Email addresses don't carry much context. I have this account
because I took a night class at DePaul two years ago.
And I paid my own way through college, thanks.
And I'm 28.
>>
>>> [deletia]
>>
>>> If I were a BeOS user with no interest in sourcecode,
>>> the sentiment would essentially be the same.
>>
>>> This is an Open Systems issue and has nothing to do with code.
>>
>>It has everything to do with code. Write some.
> You have absolutely no clue.
So write a codec that's better than Sorenson, so that Apple
will be stupid to use Sorenson, and open source it.
What's keeping you?
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: Iridium Tech Support (Was Re: . . . Itanium . ..
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 20:52:16 GMT
In article <8atoor$65d$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 2 + 2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Dear Tech Support,
>My computer somehow got sent up through your big cell phone up to one of
>your sattelites.
>Please send a technician up there to reboot it ASAP.
>Please do not de-orbitize your system before fixing it.
It looks like it might be turned off this week anyway.
--
Bill Vermillion bv @ wjv.com
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
