Linux-Advocacy Digest #790, Volume #25 Fri, 24 Mar 00 08:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (Somebody)
Re: Weak points ("NNTP")
Re: Why Linux on the desktop? (Terry Porter)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Real, useful Linux Training (Richard Steiner)
Re: Predatory LINUX practices with NETSCAPE Navigator! (Donn Miller)
Re: To all Windows 2000/98/95 Fans ("none2")
Re: New research question, this time about Apache (Nick Kew)
Re: Weak points ("NNTP")
Re: Weak points ("NNTP")
Re: Weak points ("NNTP")
Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1] ("NNTP")
Re: Advocacy??? ("NNTP")
Re: Spoof interview ("NNTP")
Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1] ("NNTP")
Re: Weak points ("NNTP")
Re: Weak points ("NNTP")
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (Bob Germer)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Somebody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: 24 Mar 2000 10:14:09 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Steiner) writes:
> Also keep in mind that a *HUGE* percentage of the software writen today
> is custom software for internal use in big businesses, not the classic
> shrinkwrapped software market seen by consumers and referenced so often
> by magazines.
> That market is largely unaffected by open source because software that is
> closely tied to a specific company's business rules is often unique (and
> hence effectively unusable outside of the original company).
>
> The "software industry" is a lot larger than many people realize.
Definitely.
There's also something seriously depressing about this if you start
wondering *WHO* benefits from the vast amount of "software" with its bijou
"quality" production system - companies do not count as 'who'. The
satisfaction might hit an end user eventually, but they're *miles* away
from those who actually write the stuff.
~Tim
--
| Geek Code: GCS dpu s-:+ a-- C++++ UBLUAVHSC++++ P+++ L++ E--- W+++(--) N++
| w--- O- M-- V-- PS PGP++ t--- X+(-) b D+ G e++(*) h++(*) r--- y-
| The sun is melting over the hills, | http://piglet.is.dreaming.org/
| All our roads are waiting / To be revealed | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "NNTP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Weak points
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 10:22:07 GMT
First of all I appreciate your detailed and non-fanatic answer, plenty of
data
and commentaries. Relative to the winmodems, I have never used one, neither
would recommend it to anyone. I think this missunderstanding comes from my
error typing "sendmail" instead of "sendfax"; the modem support related to
faxing.
> Linux applications generate postscript output because you can
> use ghostscript to convert the postscript to nearly any other
> printer format. Granted, the floating point of Ghostscript
> calculations is a meat-grinders, but with a Pentium II/200
> generating about 200 megaflops, there isn't that much of a wait.
Just don't like people claming every hardware will run better
under Linux than under Windows (any flavor), because we both
know that it is not true nowadays.
> The Corel interface is really easy and really pretty. Assuming
> that I'm using supported hardware
I consider it in a very early state; the only so called
easy installation I accept as usable is Redhat 6.1 one,
and even that uses every swap partition without asking
you to do it, being able to overwrite your whole Solaris
system. Easy yes, but careful please. Nothing to say
related to Windows, 'cause I know it overwrites whatever
it wants, but one expect things to be different from Linux.
Related to Motif and the bloated applications, why the hell does not
Linux community forget about it and use GTK ? When changing the full
filtering system from ipfwadm to ipchains or now to netfilter people did not
think it twice, and what about libc5 to libc6 ? I know there was some
backwards compatibility, but ... I feel it a little stupid remaining tired
to
a such injured libraries.
> Each suite has it's advantages and it's weaknesses. But at least
> it's a competitive marketplace. Corporate IT departments are going
> to need to start to enforce generic standards that aren't
> vendor-centric.
I concede it.
> At least we know what's important to you. Simulations such as
> those written in VRML could easily be converted into new games.
> Just think, your Linux flight simulator could be identical
> to the one used to train real F-18 pilots.
> I'd think you'd have better things to do with your time.
I have better things to do although I do not mind playing
sometimes; anyway, I have never played Flight Simulator; but
I was talking about medium home user, not exactly me.
> 9 e-mail packages an you can't find one you like?
Well, I know pine, mutt, xmail, kmail, xfmail and Netscape mail, these
are six, and I do not finally like any of them. Best of all for me is kmail,
but
I feel it is still a little beta.
> It would be nice if Microsoft could adopt/publish a standard
> for the schedular database (Linux has a standard and it's supported
> with Open Source Code) but that's not Microsoft's way of doing
> business. Instead Microsoft would rather use trade-secret code,
> trade-secret protocols, and trade-secret data formats to guarantee
> that no Linux user could ever share a schedule with an Outlook user.
Well, I do not see any hardware or industry company sharing their
projects, designs, ... why is it going software to be different ? I agree
to standars and clean game, but open ... well not clear at all, though
I recognize that the idea is very interesting.
> The results aren't pretty. Even if Win2K did run apache faster,
> Microsoft would want you to use IIS.
And me too, it is much more better OS integrated. Modularization
is good, but sometimes, OS dependency gives some advantages. Why
if not is now included a httpd at Linux kernel (if desired) ?
> Yep. After Linux advocates ranted for 8 years
2000 - 8 = 1992, if I am not wrong, Linus started kernel at 1991, are
you telling that by 1992 Linux was some what usable ? Come on, I tested
Linux at Slackware 1.0 and it was far behind the time Windows (I think 3.1)
for the home user.
> Notice that the key innovations of Win2K (MTS, MSMQ, and COM+) are
> all designed to keep application programmers from blowing up the OS
> or their servers. There is still so much overhead to DCOM that most
> applications are sticking with the COM (in-process) model for desktop
> applications.
I admit, but do not think it is neccessary bad. There was a terrible
overhead
in X11 design when it came out, and still here.
> These days, Windows 2000 suffers from to primary problems. It lacks
> support for any standards that provide access to other systems such
> as mainframes and UNIX systems. This is typical, but could become
> a problem as the market (under DOJ direction) becomes more
> competitive.
Microsoft is ready to add that support if they are forced by the market
to
whenever they want. It is logical that a company try to sell its product
above
all other products, is not it ?
> Microsoft's entire economic model is based on $200 operating systems,
> $400 Office Suites, $600 developer suites, and $60/user client access
> licenses. These are things you can get away with when your customers
> (the PC manufacturers) believe that the only way they can survive is
> to have your operating system, regardless of what other demands you
> make. With the exception of a few million "upgrade kits" sold at
> retail, Microsoft doesn't even care about the retail customer.
Microsoft HAS a good programmers team and I think it could adapt
to almost each possible future market. In fact, Microsoft has a lot of
good products, don't mind if bought, copied or created. After all, is
not Linux copying Unix ? (even when Gnu's Nt Unix and when GNU/Linux
is not GNU).
> In this forum, one person's opinion is another's FUD :-)
Sure :-) again thanks for your detailed answer.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Why Linux on the desktop?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 24 Mar 2000 18:31:37 +0800
On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 10:32:15 GMT,
George Richard Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 23 Mar 2000 11:24:54 +0800, Terry Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 21:15:26 GMT,
>> George Richard Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 19:39:59 GMT, JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 19:17:31 GMT, George Richard Russell
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> GUI configuration is available.
>>>
>>>for mutt and elm? Show me where.
>>Xterm ?
>
>That a GUI? I don't think so...
Sure it is, Slrn behaves just like a gui in a xterm.
>
>>>Comapre the docs with say, slrn to those of Agent. slrn's assume more
>>>knowledge and familiarity with Unix / USENET / etc.
>>>
>>>Its also not terribly task based - there is no documentation of howto
>>>change, for example, the colours used. It just says edit the rc file.
>>The rc file is self explanitory, because its TEXT. You're stuck in your world
>>of binary registeries George.
>
>Really, does it explain entries which can be added but aren't present?
Hahahah does the registry ?
>All the possible values? Valide ranges? Next you'll say the sendmail.cf is
>friendly since its text.
Um no I won't, and you picked one of the most obscure text config files
possible, and on purpose.
>
>>>Not terribly novice welcoming. Nor is falling back to vi as editor.
>>Incorrect: Slrn does not "fall back to Vi"
>
>$EDITOR then - and on what Linux system is thise remotely likely to not be vi?
We were talking about SLRN, and its default editor is JED.
>
>>>Nor having to quit and restart to change configuration options.
>>We dont do this but once.
>
>Remarkably easily satisfied.
Well so then are you, with Windows well known requirement for reboots
after small changes.
Your "restart" was carefully worded tho, so lets be plain, we only require
a restart of SLRN, for some config changes, NEVER the Linux OS.
>
>>>Nor having slrnpull a sperately configured and run application.
>>Slrn does not need Slrnpull, and so what if its a seperate app ???
>
>It needs it to do offline reading - kind of the point of the comparison with
>Agent, Gravity etc.
Fair enuff. I still dont see any problem there ?
>
>>>
>>>>Ease of setup is
>>>> also pretty much a non-issue. Leafnode is quite nice in this respect.
>>>
>>>Yes, you like to edit things like /etc/inetd.conf? /etc/leafnode/leafnode.conf?
>>Sure, at least we *can* George, where are your tcp wrappers in Windows ?.
>
>Who needs them? I'm not running a server OS prone to remote shell exploits.
No your running a OS, prone to trojans, virii, and lockups.
>If I wanted a secure server, I'd use OpenBSD. Linux - err, no thanks.
Fair enuff, its personal choice.
>
>>>
>>>There are some web and GUI config tools, but incomplete and unstable.
>>Bull, The Dotfile generator is excellent if you need help, configuring
>>a simple well commented textfile.
>
>The dotfile generator understands few . files - it could do bashrc not tcshrc
>for a trivial example.
Yes atm, but its not stuck at that level indefinetly.
Whats your choice in free registry editors ??
How much detail does regedit add to what your editing ??
Answer *ZERO*!
Compared to regedit, TDG is light years ahead.
>
>There are more obscure rc formats than frontends.
Obscure rc formats are the exception I assure you.
>
>>Recently I tried to help a lady over the irc *configure* Free-Agent. Too hard.
>>She never got it going.
>
>You must have been really dumb then. What is it, four or five dialog boxes?
Perhaps, but its been over 3 years since I've seen Free-Agent, so please
forgive my "dumbness" ?
She was there, shes a long term Windows user, she couldnt do it. This
puts the gun to the head of your assertion that Windows GUI config is
*easy*.
>
>>It makes NO difference whether its GUI or text, if you dont know the
>>news server addy, you're screwed.
>
>Yes, but at least its obvious where to enter the server name is the GUI - none
>of the hunt the rc file game.
Bulltwang!
She spent age's searching thru the menues, and was totally lost.
It would have been easier in a text file.
>>>But they shouldn't force me to setup and run a local server, just to read news
>>>offline.
>>They dont, slrnpull is easy to set up.
>
>Just more difficult to add a group than in Agent or change your groups etc.
HUH ?
"L" (list groups)
*get.a.clue.about.linux.*
move cursur to desired group
"S" (subscribe)
How hard is this ????
>
>George Russell
>--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours 36 minutes
** homepage http://www.odyssey.apana.org.au/~tjporter **
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 10:37:44 GMT
George Marengo writes:
>>> The common perception that OS/2 needed PS/2 hardware wasn't because
>>> IBM was pushing OS/2 on their machines.
>> Was IBM actively countering the perception?
> Of course they were.
How?
>>> Gee... could it have been as simple as the common '/2' ending for both?
>> There was a connection between the two, but not a requirement to use
>> them together.
> I know -- I used OS/2 2.0 and 2.1 on a no-name 386 with 8 megs
> of ram. It was faster (after bootup) and much more stable than
> Windows on the same hardware.
Which is irrelevant to the issue of IBM's alleged unwillingness. Why
do you think IBM let Microsoft handle the OEM version of OS/2?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Steiner)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.security
Subject: Re: Real, useful Linux Training
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 05:05:34 -0600
Here in comp.os.linux.setup, reflection <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
spake unto us, saying:
>We're SGI, and we LOVE Linux!
That's certainly interesting, but this isn't the appropriate newsgroup
for your advertisements. Please investigate comp.os.linux.announce.
--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>---> Bloomington, MN
OS/2 + BeOS + Linux + Solaris + Win95 + WinNT4 + FreeBSD + DOS
+ VMWare + Fusion + vMac + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven! :-)
IMPIETY: Your irreverence toward my deity.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 06:25:59 -0500
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Predatory LINUX practices with NETSCAPE Navigator!
I didn't see the original posting, so I'm just going to address a couple
of posters at once here. (That's why I didn't include the original
message. Pine is a great newsreader... not!)
Actually, this is a very bad example. First of all, MSFT doesn't make IE
for unix systems. Second of all, what other major browsers besides
Mozilla (which is Netscape 5.00 anyways), and kfm are there for unix
anyways? So, right off the bat the analogy falls flat. Second of all,
the INTENT of Microsoft integrating with Windows 98 was to force people to
be stuck with IE. IE is a part of Windows 98, and so you're forced to use
it even when you're not browsing with it.
The purpose of putting Netscape on a 'nix desktop is just for
convenience. Who is Netscape trying to lock out of the market? Netscape
was the only major browser for unix for a long time, and web browsers are
a crucial component of our modern day-to-day living. Microsoft's putting
IE on the desktop in Windows 98 was to reduce Netscape usage among Windows
usage. Therefore, bundling IE with Windows is predatory. Bundling
Netscape with unix isn't predatory ISN'T predatory, because Netscape is
the only major browser out there.
Who made the original poster of this? Must be lacking in brains, insight,
or both.
- Donn
------------------------------
From: "none2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To all Windows 2000/98/95 Fans
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 23:55:43 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ciaran
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> PS Only Australians are allowed to make fun of New Zealanders.
one, two, three, four,five,sex
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Kew)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: New research question, this time about Apache
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 18:58:38 +0000
In article <8bdj26$88p$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Tom Steinberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Woah, OK. Looks like I've managed to instigate a bit of a battle here.
A battle?? Try gnu.misc.discuss, where the real diehards live.
> 1) Can anyone tell me about the history of Apache and Sendmail?
Very different. Sendmail has been a de facto standard for 20 years,
in the first 15 of which there was no general-purpose alternative.
I _suspect_ sendmail's market share may be significantly lower in the
Linux world than in the Internet as a whole. Apache is a recent
development. Look at sendmail.org and apache.org.
Oh - and don't forget, all the other main Web and Mail servers are
opensource. As with software for every other important Internet
protocol - including the ones you don't see.
> 3) Geographic/demographic info on the opensource community. I know it must
> be pretty scarce, but it'd be interesting. After all, not many world beating
> trends start in Finland.
1. Erm .. can you say Mobile Phones?
2. Opensource didn't start there. Linus's work was was in an established
tradition - albeit one that was less mature than it is today.
3. Now that you've broadened your scope, you might want to consider
the recent BSDI/Walnut Creek merger, that could lead to Linux's
leading competitor (in technical terms) achieving the critical mass
(in terms of public awareness) that Linux has reached.
Hint - look at freebsd.org and cdrom.com.
> thanks again. All comments, criticisms and vicious personal attacks
> welcomed.
Oh all right. B****y Suits should EOADH and ... never mind.
--
Nick Kew
We're so advanced here ... our nearest main road is A 386
------------------------------
From: "NNTP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Weak points
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 12:12:33 GMT
> ...a little care or a lot of care...
> There really isn't any difference, hypocrite.
It is difference for me, as it is that I've never injured you
and you several times me. There are other in this group that
have disagreed with me and did not have to injury me, learn.
------------------------------
From: "NNTP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Weak points
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 12:12:36 GMT
> I spent a week trying to get a win95 machine setup for PPP mail. I had to
> delete everything and reinstall it.
Well, you did not have to, you just did it. I know people that reinstall
Linux once
and again thinking it will solve things. PPP Linux configuration until a
recent time
was one of the principiants more difficult thing to do.
> I still use my old version of lotus and wordperfect they run just fine
> under DOSEMU.
Well, you should recognize you are missing some of the new software
features.
Excellent if that works for you.
> I switched to linux because my install of NT won't play midi sound files.
> It's been 2 years now and Dell and Microsoft have no solutions.
A personal case can't be a reason to use one or another OS, hardware
support is not the best thing under Linux, you're just a lucky man.
> Also I can have separate user setups under linux, under NT if a user
> changes the screen resolution every other user gets changed.
Home users does not normally have too many users, let's say
administrator, and two
or three users. Anyway, do you honestly consider that is a reason to use
Linux ?
------------------------------
From: "NNTP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Weak points
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 12:12:34 GMT
> Do Micros~1 employees get monthly bonuses for this kind of
> stuff?
I do not belong to Microsoft, what's more, I DO colaborate often
with the open source movement. That doesn't have to keep me from
having my own opinions at certain moments in this group.
> machines are for. Or are you one of those people who think
> that what the world needs RIGHT NOW is a combination
> television-hair dryer-telephone-toaster oven?
Anything wrong in it ?
> replaced Window~1 95 on my home machine with Red Hat 5.0 in
> August 1998.
Well, strange change, Redhat 5.0 had more bugs than Windows 95
itself, anyway, what was you using Windows 95 for that could be
substituted by Redhat 5.0 ? Did not you think about upgrading to NT ?
> I haven't any idea what you're babbling about here. In 18
> months I've never had a single window manager problem on Red
> Hat 5.0, Red Hat 5.1, Red Hat 5.2, Linux-Mandrake 5.2,
> Linux-Mandrake 6.0, or Linux-Mandrake 6.1.
Neither have I, but that, does not answer any about my questions.
> I think Micros~1 Office is a bloated piece of crap -- lucky
> me, I am forced to use it at work -- but I'm not going to
> stick up for StarOffice either. I really don't need an
> office suite at work or at home, and I'm more than pleased
> -- I'm thrilled in fact -- with the WordPerfect 8 port to
> Linux.
Ever tried to read .DOC documents ? Don't ever try to tell
me that it always read them correcly. Yes, I need Word compatibility,
is it a sin ? No, I do not like false claimings, and till now, you are
answering
nothing more than "Signor", "Madame" and so stupidities. Tell me something
real, and by the way, me is a system administrator under Linux, Solaris and
NT ... now 2000.
> I have less than no interest in computer games.
Well, you are not the world, most people that is encouraged to change
to the DOITALL OS called Linux like gaming, and thus, I can not recommend
them to use only Linux as their desktop OS.
> Netscape under Windows 95 crashes for me at
> work on average a dozen times a day (no exaggeration);
Yeah, under Linux it goes fine, don't tell me more uh ! By the
way, have you tested NT or 2000 ?
> used Internet Explorer or Outlook Express, mostly because
> I've never felt the need to do so.
That's the difference, I used everything I'm talking about. It is
difficult to have an opinion about something one does not know.
> And I'm at a loss as to
> your characterization of tin and krn as "sucky".
Well ... I won't explain it to you ...
> It offers me, for one, an
> incredibly stable and fast OS, and that counts.
What other OS have you tested to think Linux is the best ?
> unbelievable stability and speed on a Pentium II than spend
> thousands of bucks for Window~1 2000 software and the
> hardware it requires to run it, in return for which
> applications freeze up constantly, there are system crashes,
> and the memory leaks are so humongous that you have to
> reboot at least once a week. Unless you change any
> configurations or install software or stuff like that, in
> which case you have to reboot.
Again, are you talking about your own experience, be serious. None
of the Linux advocates that have tested Windows 2000 dare to say it
freezes constantly, and if we compare system requirements to run equivalent
environments under Windows 2000 or Linux (aka KDE or GNOME), we find
it very similar; what's more, now I am running a PII-233 with no PC100 64MB
RAM,
and it goes much more better than NT went. Again, if you have no tested it,
do not
talk about it.
If you know how to answer with no sarcarsm and know any real data, answer
me
and if not, just shut up.
------------------------------
From: "NNTP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1]
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 12:12:40 GMT
> Nope. You got it backwards.
> Windows sets up fine (usually) but then crashes a lot when you try to run
> it.
What version ? Windows 2000 does not, and NT very little and in
a few cases.
> Linux is (still) tough to set up properly, but once it is, it NEVER
> crashes.
False, start playing with /dev entries or play some SVGALIB game
as root (I has to be so). It crashes as little as 2000 or less, but no
never.
Anyway, have you tested petalo.c 15 lines code to bring down (crash till
2.3.x) every Linux kernel as non root user ? Just allocating memory
in a threaded way. Interesting. In 2.3.x now you can use magic keys to
umount, sync and reboot, but reboot is neccessary. Besides, to keep on
using new version of programs (as they are almost in beta state) you need
to keep on upgrading kernel, GTK, GLIB and QT libraries ... not every week
if you do no want to do so, but I'd predict an important upgrade at least
every
month.
> Which would you prefer? Personally, if everything I wanted to run had a
> Linux version, I doubt that I would EVER boot Windows again.
Sincerely I'd prefer a kind of mix among several existent OS's
------------------------------
From: "NNTP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Advocacy???
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 12:12:37 GMT
It depends a lot of the people you found. I've always helped whoever
I could do; I even telnetted to person's machines to solver their problems.
Anyway, in the net (and by my experience in techs channels or supposed
guru channels like Linux, FreeBSD, BitchX - this is terrible, ...) people
tend to be vey very rude; even in the news, injuries and very offensive
sarcarsm are often used in a way no one would do face to face. Well, net
has advantages and disadvantages, but I do not like at all kicks, bans,
stupid (supposed interesting) comments and arrogancy. Many people think
that just 'ause they can manage their Linux or their todowhatever tool they
are the kings ... human condition, hard to fix, I think it was a bug of God
when
developing humanity :)
------------------------------
From: "NNTP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: rec.humor
Subject: Re: Spoof interview
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 12:12:38 GMT
Nowadays, every person I know that knows a little about Linux want to
make money with it be it teaching be it installing networks ... do not say
Linux is to help the world; even when I recognize the beautiness (does it
spell so ?) of the open source movement.
------------------------------
From: "NNTP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1]
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 12:12:41 GMT
> Really? Who has w2k and "several software packages" for free?
> Why would anyone want it, even for free, anyway unless they simply didn't
> know any better?
When you loose the testing capability, you loose the learning capability.
------------------------------
From: "NNTP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Weak points
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 12:12:04 GMT
> 12 first tier games versus much of the crap that sits
> on store shelves these days. 12 may be enough for you.
> That's what's really important, not some assinine notion
> of 'having everything'.
I am not talking about having everything, just being able to choose among
a lot of them.
> You're a hypocrite. You drone on about game demos and then
> have to gaul to cry vaporware.
Explain this one to me. Demos use to give to you a first taste about a
game that already is in the market.
------------------------------
From: "NNTP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Weak points
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 12:12:06 GMT
> They're trying to accomodate fools like you that think
> Windows is the benchmark for anything and that extra
> options are a bad thing.
Tired of the discussion myself started, I'd just like to say
to you that don't make assumptions about my skills, and that
exposing arguments about a user type doesn't mean belonging
to it. I'd like to say too that you tend to be rather offensive and
hide your arguments (when any) under screams and cries.
Greetings.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2000 07:13:50 -0500
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
On 03/23/2000 at 05:53 PM,
George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> BM could have decided to preload OS/2 on their machines
> -- Better Windows than Windows, right?
> BTW, I don't work for Microsoft or make any money due to
> any connection with Microsoft.
Then you are the dumbest damned liar here.
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.08 Registration Number 67
As the court closes in on M$, Lemmings are morphing to Ostrats!
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
