Linux-Advocacy Digest #698, Volume #25 Sun, 19 Mar 00 17:13:14 EST
Contents:
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers ("David D.W. Downey")
Re: An Illuminating Anecdote (david parsons)
Re: Dirty deeds... (was Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of ("David D.W.
Downey")
Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K (Jerry McBride)
Re: Windows 2000 is pretty reliable (Jerry McBride)
Re: Iridium Tech Support (Jerry McBride)
Re: hot news: Corel Linux and Intel, Linux the next desktop OS!! (Jerry McBride)
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse (Jerry McBride)
Re: Kernel 2.4 (Tim Kelley)
Gnome/Gnu programmers Suck. -- Not a troll (Jeff Greer)
Re: An Illuminating Anecdote ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Dirty deeds... (was Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet
again) (Andrew)
Re: A pox on the penguin? (Linux Virus Epidemic) (Xcott Craver)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (George Marengo)
Re: Iridium Tech Support (ZnU)
Re: hot news: Corel Linux and Intel, Linux the next desktop OS!! (abraxas)
Re: Dirty deeds... (was Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet
again) ([EMAIL PROTECTED],net)
Re: Bsd and Linux (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Dirty deeds... (was Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet
again) ([EMAIL PROTECTED],net)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or Linux
("Jonathan Hendry")
Re: Gnome/Gnu programmers Suck. -- Not a troll (abraxas)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "David D.W. Downey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 20:07:01 GMT
>
> >I never claimed my
> >procedure was absolutely optimum but neither you nor anyone else has
> >shown (nor can show) how, for this particular machine (Gateway Solo
> >2300XL) and its Windows 95 software (version 4.00.950 B), as provided by
> >the manufacturer, the installation can be made significantly shorter
> >overall.
>
> Also wrong -- the use of SMARTDRV all by itself will do this.
>
haha hahah ahahahahah ahahahah HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
yeah, o.k.
--
David D.W. Downey - Red Hat Certified Engineer - Cert# 806100581800665
Assistant Site Manager - http://www.linuxnewbie.com - Come join
us!
Resume available at http://www.brainbench.com/transcript.jsp?pid=96113
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (david parsons)
Subject: Re: An Illuminating Anecdote
Date: 19 Mar 2000 11:40:43 -0800
In article <8auahk$ils$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Visual C++ has a command line compiler, which is called by the IDE. You
>> don't need to use the IDE or MFC to use this. You don't seem to know what
>> you're talking about.
>
>I think its very sweet that you use Visual C++. Just dont mistake yourself
>for an actual programmer.
So, just out of idle curiousity, just what makes using Visual C++ not
comparable with being an actual programmer?
____
david parsons \bi/ Inquiring minds want to know.
\/
------------------------------
From: "David D.W. Downey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dirty deeds... (was Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 20:05:10 GMT
"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>
> Would this be a good time to mention IBM's dirty deeds, and how they
> often "squished" the smaller companies and spread lies in the name of
> profit?
>
They had a good teacher in Microsoft.
--
David D.W. Downey - Red Hat Certified Engineer - Cert# 806100581800665
Assistant Site Manager - http://www.linuxnewbie.com - Come join
us!
Resume available at http://www.brainbench.com/transcript.jsp?pid=96113
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jerry McBride)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 13:28:29 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Wolfgang Weisselberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
>message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Wed, 8 Mar 2000 15:35:38 -0500,
>> Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Please show us when MS ever claimed NT was C2 when it wasn't? They
>announced
>> > the successful evaluation at C2 level the day it was done. Prove me
>wrong.
>>
>> Haven't we just been through that?
>>
>> Every time that MS claims _NT_ is C2-certified (instead of a
>> system X running NT Y with patches Z and setup in the way A is
>> C2-certified), they lie. An OS as such can not be certified, only
>> a complete system.
>>
>
>Look, they are claiming a NT4sp6a system was evaluated as complient. That's
>right, a system. Cause, that's how it's done. Same thing with these TPC
>benchmarks. MS says: look, W2K (or SQL Server depending on who's writing the
>ad) set world record benchmarks, two of them. Are they saying the OS itself
>with NOTHING else, not even hardware, did it? Of course not, you NEED the
>hardware to run the OS and you NEED the SQL Server to run the benchmark.
>It's assumed the readers are smart enough to realize this. Same with the C2
>evaulation. Kinda hard to test JUST the OS - when the hardware itself plays
>a factor - HOWEVER, in C2 evaluation it's a VERY light accent on hardware.
>VERY light indeed. In fact, you COULD say NT has passed C2 evaluation
>without stretching the truth one iota. Cause, it's your obligation (and they
>have) to document exactly how it's done and how you too can do this. You can
>effortlessly reproduce the C2 evaluation platform yourself and use it on
>your network - MS gives you all the details.
>
Yeah... And I can stretch a condom over a torpeado... but does that make it
Safe?
--
*******************************************************************************
Let them that have eyes see
*******************************************************************************
* NetRexx - The onramp to the Internet - http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx *
*******************************************************************************
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jerry McBride)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 is pretty reliable
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 13:26:21 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-- snip --
>> ... If I had converted my system
>> partition to NTFS I guess I'd have been screwed and I'd have had to
>> reinstall and recover my user accounts, etc., from the latest backup.
>> It seems there was some kind of conflict between the PPTP driver and an
>> older version of RRAS.
>
>Funny - I've done this countless times but never had a problem. Hmmm...
>
>HOWEVER< even if you had gone to NTFS you could have simply fired up your
>emergency NTFS boot disk (you did visit system internals and create a DOS
>boot disk that can read/write NTFS partitions... right?)
>
Emergency NTFS boot disk... DOS?!?!?!? Hahaha The mighty NT saved by DOS...
--
*******************************************************************************
Let them that have eyes see
*******************************************************************************
* NetRexx - The onramp to the Internet - http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx *
*******************************************************************************
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jerry McBride)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Iridium Tech Support
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 13:32:34 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
evilsofa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chad
>Irby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Vermillion) wrote:
>>
>> > It looks like it might be turned off this week anyway.
>>
>> The amateur astronomers are just *waiting* for someone to de-orbit the
>> Iridium satellites...
>
>They won't be de-orbiting them over populated areas. That reminds me of
>SkyLab, by the way, which after a mind-boggling amount of hysterical
>hysteria, ended up squashing a jackrabbit somewhere in backwoods
>Australia.
>
They lucked out. That could have easily been a city...
--
*******************************************************************************
Let them that have eyes see
*******************************************************************************
* NetRexx - The onramp to the Internet - http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx *
*******************************************************************************
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jerry McBride)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: hot news: Corel Linux and Intel, Linux the next desktop OS!!
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 13:46:10 -0500
In article <8ame29$c8t$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On three separate occasions, I've asked store clerks in both CompUSA, and
>Best Buy how well Linux was selling... most of them stated that it wasn't
>selling in but meager numbers. In fact, most of the boxed Linux
>distributions at these retailers have a layer of dust on them. This
>does not bode well for Linux at all, IMHO.
>
The Staples near me begain their Linux sales with "a dummies guide" book that
included an old copy of RedHat on cd. A month later, I now see, COL, REDHAT, a
TURBO, etc and a number of utilities offerings... all the latest versions A
quick walk to the "book isle" and the number of linux books has gone from one
title to maybe 10 or more... In fact... the first thing yu see when walking
from the entrance is a shelf full of Linux matter. There are more Linux OS
books there than windows OS books...
Oh... and when I ask the manager about w2k sales... he claimed over 50%
returned... YIPES! How about Linux? He said less than 10%...
--
*******************************************************************************
Let them that have eyes see
*******************************************************************************
* NetRexx - The onramp to the Internet - http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx *
*******************************************************************************
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jerry McBride)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 14:43:06 -0500
In article <8au4a8$ils$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) wrote:
>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.
>
Yeah... I'll buy stock in that company... ;')
--
*******************************************************************************
I am Microsoftus of Borg. Prepare to be slowed down.
*******************************************************************************
* NetRexx - The onramp to the Internet - http://www2.hursley.ibm.com/netrexx *
*******************************************************************************
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.4
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 14:51:02 -0600
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Net Walker wrote:
>
> Why to move into 2.4 serie ? Isn't it too many hurry to do it ? Is Linux
> falling into market tendences ? What the hell does it matter W2K is out ? I
> thought kernels where bullet proof, and by 2.3.51, kernel I tested had some
> bugs and a lot of EXPERIMENTAL code ... so why ?
one word: USB.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Jeff Greer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Gnome/Gnu programmers Suck. -- Not a troll
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 20:47:22 GMT
Gnu programmers don't suck, but they really piss me off. I believe they
are being really irresponsible towards the linux community by releasing
programs which are so hard to install. Has anyone tried installing
Gnucash? This bastard appears to require the installation of six other
packages: XmHTML-1.1.5.tar.gz, eperl-2.2.14.tar.gz, guile-1.3.tar.gz,
lesstif-0.88.1.tar.gz, nana-2.3.tar.gz, swig1.1p5.tar.gz. WTF! If a
program requires this much bullshit to install it should not have a
version number of 1.x. A version number this high is very misleading to
anyone who want to install this software. A program in not complete or
deserving of a 1.x version until there is a relatively easy way to
install it. It seems that the Gnome programmers are focusing too much
on technical coolness while leaving the user behind.
If I can't get this sucker installed there is a serious problem here.
I'm no linux guru, but I am not a newbie. I have set up ip
masquerading, cd burning, apache, php, mysql, my digital soundblaster
live, etc.
Can someone tell me what the problem is with the Gnome developers? I
would rather them use lower version numbers to indicate that their
programs are not ready for general use. Many users will be turned away
from linux by gnome programs which suck to install.
--
Jeff Greer
web developer/software engineer, Atipa Linux Solutions - www.atipa.com
B.S. computer science - Univ. MO - Rolla
- dedicated to the struggle against the fascist MS hegemony
(disclaimer: I do not speak for Atipa)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: An Illuminating Anecdote
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 20:51:16 GMT
In article <8b3afr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (david
parsons) wrote:
> In article <8auahk$ils$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Visual C++ has a command line compiler, which is called by the IDE. You
>>> don't need to use the IDE or MFC to use this. You don't seem to know what
>>> you're talking about.
>>
>>I think its very sweet that you use Visual C++. Just dont mistake yourself
>>for an actual programmer.
>
> So, just out of idle curiousity, just what makes using Visual C++ not
> comparable with being an actual programmer?
>
> ____
> david parsons \bi/ Inquiring minds want to know.
> \/
The ability to actually write C/C++ code without being babysat by an IDE,
for example. Of all the VC++ coders I know, only a couple actually know
how to write source code without using the IDE (and those couple are
folks who program on Linux as well). The others don't even know how to
properly use #INCLUDEs or #DEFINEs, or how to manually tweak
COM/DCOM IDL for unusual situations. Most of these people don't
even really know C/C++ at all -- they only understand the MS dialect,
and that only through the IDE.
------------------------------
From: Andrew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dirty deeds... (was Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of
knowledge yet again)
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 15:40:42 -0500
"David D.W. Downey" wrote:
>
> "Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
> >
> > Would this be a good time to mention IBM's dirty deeds, and how they
> > often "squished" the smaller companies and spread lies in the name of
> > profit?
> >
>
> They had a good teacher in Microsoft.
I think you've got that a little backwards...
Andrew
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Xcott Craver)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: A pox on the penguin? (Linux Virus Epidemic)
Date: 19 Mar 2000 20:54:24 GMT
John Sheehy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote :
>
>>Could you be more specific? After, one thing I can think of that AmigaDOS
>>has is a built-in GUI engine. Would this not be useful in an embedded
>>environment? Set-top boxes? Perhaps a control station for a
>>robotics-baed assmebly plant? Or are you just baiting with anti-Amiga
>>sentiment?
>
>No, I just think of an embedded environment as one that runs some
>firmware, and does not need much in the way of OS services. I thought
>embedded applications usually did not have a user-interface like
>intuition; just buttons and an LED or LCD readout.
This may be true for most "embedded" applications, but there
are a number of applications which need OS and GUI services.
Stephen's example of set-top boxes is one such. Small net
and information appliances are another example.
Indeed, the i-Opener internet appliance runs QNX, an OS aimed at
embedded systems. What do Tivo boxes use, come to think of it---
Linux?
Saying that embedded environments don't need much in the way of
OS services is, IMHO at least, reminiscent of early PC-era
sentiment that personal computers don't need much in the way
of color or graphics. JMHO.
Now, why AmigaDOS isn't used as an embedded system, I don't know.
How portable is/was it? Also, systems like QNX are such that
one can leave out the components of the OS which aren't needed.
Other OSs are more suitable for net appliances, because of the
need to run things like real-media files and Macromedia flash.
But it's a good question.
> John P Sheehy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-S
------------------------------
From: George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 21:01:40 GMT
On Sun, 19 Mar 2000 17:18:18 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>>Nope -- my only point was that anyone who is actively trying to kill
>>off OS/2 is a nut... IBM did that themselves.
>
>I agree, but I also think -- in light of what has come out at the M$ antitrust
>trial, that there are many, many dirty deeds committed by M$, as well as
>mis-information and lies spread by Ziff-Davis and others -- that had just
>a large an impact on OS2, as anything that IBM did or didn't do.
Maybe... but's it was very hard to tell anyone that they should get
OS/2 when IBM itself loaded Windows as the default with the option
of loading OS/2 when it should have been the other way.
------------------------------
From: ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Iridium Tech Support
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 21:12:21 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jerry
McBride) wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> evilsofa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chad
> >Irby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Vermillion) wrote:
> >>
> >> > It looks like it might be turned off this week anyway.
> >>
> >> The amateur astronomers are just *waiting* for someone to de-orbit the
> >> Iridium satellites...
> >
> >They won't be de-orbiting them over populated areas. That reminds me of
> >SkyLab, by the way, which after a mind-boggling amount of hysterical
> >hysteria, ended up squashing a jackrabbit somewhere in backwoods
> >Australia.
> >
>
>
> They lucked out. That could have easily been a city...
Not likely. Cities don't occupy a very large fraction of the Earth's
surface. The chances are probably worse than one in a million.
--
The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected.
-- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: hot news: Corel Linux and Intel, Linux the next desktop OS!!
Date: 19 Mar 2000 21:20:46 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Jerry McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <8ame29$c8t$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On three separate occasions, I've asked store clerks in both CompUSA, and
>>Best Buy how well Linux was selling... most of them stated that it wasn't
>>selling in but meager numbers. In fact, most of the boxed Linux
>>distributions at these retailers have a layer of dust on them. This
>>does not bode well for Linux at all, IMHO.
>>
> The Staples near me begain their Linux sales with "a dummies guide" book that
> included an old copy of RedHat on cd. A month later, I now see, COL, REDHAT, a
> TURBO, etc and a number of utilities offerings... all the latest versions A
> quick walk to the "book isle" and the number of linux books has gone from one
> title to maybe 10 or more... In fact... the first thing yu see when walking
> from the entrance is a shelf full of Linux matter. There are more Linux OS
> books there than windows OS books...
Indeed. What Mr. Edwards fails to understand is a simple fact of retail:
Stores do not carry what does not sell, period.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED],net
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dirty deeds... (was Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge
yet again)
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 21:22:36 GMT
You show your age as well as your ignorance. IBM was "doing the dirty
deed" from the 360 days on. Ever hear of the anti-trust settlements
that IBM went through, long before Microsoft was a thorn in Redhat's
side.
If anything, IBM taught Microsoft, not the other way around. Of course
Microsoft turned this around and used it against IBM, but we shall
save that story for another StoryTime.
steve
On Sun, 19 Mar 2000 20:05:10 GMT, "David D.W. Downey"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>>
>> Would this be a good time to mention IBM's dirty deeds, and how they
>> often "squished" the smaller companies and spread lies in the name of
>> profit?
>>
>
>They had a good teacher in Microsoft.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Bsd and Linux
Date: 19 Mar 2000 21:23:04 GMT
On 19 Mar 2000 16:35:18 GMT, Chris Lee wrote:
>Don't be too sure about claiming this. Remember RedHat will be including
>tripwire with it's dist pretty soon
Security is about fixing bugs more than it is about adding features. Until
Linux sees the same level of rigor in code-auditing as OpenBSD, it will never
be as secure. Of course, there are advantages to the Linux approach ( for
example, it supports much more hardware than OpenBSD ) but security isn't
one of them.
Even if you wanted to compare the security features, you'd probably find
OpenBSD to be a clear winner, as it ships with a lot of security features
( strong crypto, kerberos, and now ssh ). No Linux distribution based
inside the US can hope to achieve this.
> and the other dists will follow, and
>the RedHat 6.2 beta defaults with a lot of things turned off that used to be
I'm not just talking about sensible defaults ( this isn't really a problem
for a competent admin anyway -- it's mostly a problem with dialup users
and untrained admins )
The problem is that there are simply a lot of reported exploits in Linux.
Sure, it's no worse than say NT, or even some commercial UNIX breeds.
However, it's not in the same class as OpenBSD. ( see the list of OpenBSD
advisories on http://www.openbsd.org/security.html )
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED],net
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dirty deeds... (was Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge
yet again)
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 21:24:53 GMT
Was that question on the RedHat Certification Test?
If it was, you got it wrong, unless of cause they used a Linux
Spreadsheet to import the tables from Excel and then the chances are
you might have gotten credit for a correct answer despite a wrong
answer.
Steve
On Sun, 19 Mar 2000 20:05:10 GMT, "David D.W. Downey"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>>
>> Would this be a good time to mention IBM's dirty deeds, and how they
>> often "squished" the smaller companies and spread lies in the name of
>> profit?
>>
>
>They had a good teacher in Microsoft.
------------------------------
From: "Jonathan Hendry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 15:25:40 -0600
Sal Denaro wrote in message ...
>On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 16:06:32 GMT, JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> So, where do I get this published copy of the sorenson Codec?
>> Please provide a specific url rather than sleazy indirection.
>
>From sorenson. As other's have pointed out, there are products that
>use the sorenson codec other than Apple's QuickTime.
And it would probably help to offer some money, rather than
expecting access to the codec for free.
Hell, someone should ask RedHat to cough up some money. (Since
Linux companies have money (if only funny money) to spend, the
'give it to us free' argument doesn't work very well anymore.)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: Gnome/Gnu programmers Suck. -- Not a troll
Date: 19 Mar 2000 21:27:01 GMT
Jeff Greer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gnu programmers don't suck, but they really piss me off. I believe they
> are being really irresponsible towards the linux community by releasing
> programs which are so hard to install.
You do realize that Gnu programmers are not writing software for LINUX
in particular, dont you?
> Has anyone tried installing
> Gnucash?
Yeah. I typed "make install" in the Gnucash directory in my ports
tree under Freebsd and it did everything all by itself while I drank
my coffee.
> This bastard appears to require the installation of six other
> packages: XmHTML-1.1.5.tar.gz, eperl-2.2.14.tar.gz, guile-1.3.tar.gz,
> lesstif-0.88.1.tar.gz, nana-2.3.tar.gz, swig1.1p5.tar.gz. WTF!
You mean to tell me you didnt already have that stuff installed?
> If a
> program requires this much bullshit to install it should not have a
> version number of 1.x.
Gnucash is very stable at this point, and its version numbering scheme
is valid. Your inability to comprehend Gnu programming does not
make Gnucash unstable.
> A version number this high is very misleading to
> anyone who want to install this software. A program in not complete or
> deserving of a 1.x version until there is a relatively easy way to
> install it.
Oh, THATS the rule? I'm glad you said something.
> It seems that the Gnome programmers
Stop right there. Theres an enormous difference between GNU apps and
GNOME apps. It appears to me that you are not understanding most of
this stuff from the very beginning. No wonder youre frustrated.
> are focusing too much
> on technical coolness while leaving the user behind.
All my stuff works. Though I am getting a little sick of gnapster
dumping core.
> If I can't get this sucker installed there is a serious problem here.
> I'm no linux guru, but I am not a newbie. I have set up ip
> masquerading, cd burning, apache, php, mysql, my digital soundblaster
> live, etc.
And you still dont know the difference between GNOME and GNU.
> Can someone tell me what the problem is with the Gnome developers? I
> would rather them use lower version numbers to indicate that their
> programs are not ready for general use. Many users will be turned away
> from linux by gnome programs which suck to install.
Have you even SEEN www.gnome.org? Why not count the number of apps that
have made it up past 1.0...
> --
> Jeff Greer
> web developer/software engineer, Atipa Linux Solutions - www.atipa.com
> B.S. computer science -
Then your ignorance has exactly zero exuse. Fix it at once.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
