Linux-Advocacy Digest #809, Volume #25 Sat, 25 Mar 00 19:13:07 EST
Contents:
Re: Producing Quality Code (Russell Wallace)
Re: joys of command-line image manipulation (Roberto Alsina)
Re: What should be the outcome of Microsoft antitrust suit. ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: From the Horse's Mouth ("doc rogers")
Re: UNIX recruiters and MS Word resumes (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Weak points (Roberto Alsina)
Re: VMWare vs. Bootmanagers ("gcaldwel")
Re: Weak points (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (Jason Bowen)
Re: Why did we even need NT in the first place? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: From the Horse's Mouth (Damien)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (Joseph)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (Joseph)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (Dave)
Re: VMWare vs. Bootmanagers (Bastian)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Russell Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Producing Quality Code
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 22:14:06 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Donal K. Fellows wrote:
> Quicksort is indeed O(NlogN) on unsorted data, and O(N^2) on sorted
> data,
Minor correction: naive implementations of quicksort are O(N^2) on
sorted data. Quality implementations are still O(N log N).
> however it also not a stable sort (doesn't necessarily preserve
> order of values that have the same sorting order)
Yah. Merge sort is what I'd use when that's required.
> and it is a really
> bad choice when you are building your dataset one item at a time and
> are mixing lookups and inserts...
Yes, in that situation you want to use something like a binary tree.
--
"To summarize the summary of the summary: people are a problem."
Russell Wallace
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: joys of command-line image manipulation
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 22:10:49 GMT
In article <8bgpg9$242$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich) wrote:
> For example, the KDE and Gnome desktops might
> be able to offer AppleScript-style features.
I suppose on GNOME that would be implemented accessing CORBA from a
scripting language that supports ORBIT bindings, such as python or perl.
On KDE2, applications can expose a DCOP interface. Once that's there,
you can script them from almost any language using the DCOP-XMLRPC
bridge. Your scripting language must support HTTP and XML. Even /bin/sh
supports that (spawn a telnet ;-)
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What should be the outcome of Microsoft antitrust suit.
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 16:29:31 -0600
Bill Gates has one of the smallest salaries in the industry (for a fortune
500 company). He's made the vast majority of his money from stock, not from
people that purchased Microsoft software.
Mark S. Bilk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8bibhv$a2p$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Bill Gates should have to give back all the money.
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >There should be a law that a customer must have a right to buy any PC
> >without any operating system installed.
> >This will give a customer choice of any OS, or if someone aleady have
> >Win on desktop, why he/she have to pay to M$ an additional fee for OS
> >on laptop?
> >
> >Zalek
>
>
------------------------------
From: "doc rogers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: From the Horse's Mouth
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 17:39:52 -0500
Norman D. Megill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8bii1o$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >The procedure looked close to what you were trying to describe, though,
> >minus the goofy stuff.
> >Their description is much clearer and doesn't have a lot of the wacky
stuff
> >in it that your's did.
> Thanks for the feedback. So now the problem is that my procedure is
> unclear.
And wacky. :-)
>You're entitled to your opinion,
I would say so.
> but me it seemed quite
> unambiguous, even tediously so, and more thorough than theirs.
Well, you wrote it. So that's understandable.
> As for
> "goofy" and "wacky" stuff, everything in it is factual,
Factual or not, some stuff was unnecessary for an OS install.
> and yes, I
> suppose the MS bugs I described in it could be viewed as goofy and wacky.
> They probably put them in on purpose so we can have a good laugh.
> >I've never encountered that bug. That's probably why they don't show it.
> >It must be rare enough that it's not part of an OS reinstall in almost
all
> >cases.
> It was common enough that the Gateway tech recognized it immediately and
> knew the workaround.
Given that combination of facts, it seems it again points to a hardware
peculiarity.
> >>and they do not show the
> >>details of the driver Wizard bug where it produces error messages
> >>because it "forgot" the driver location you specified earlier.
> >Ditto.
> Gateway techs also recognized this immediately. Not a serious bug, just
> "Yeah, I know it's annoying but...". It basically wastes your time by
> having to type the same long driver path name on the CD (or browse for
> it) multiple times during a driver installation, interrupting the flow
> of clicking OK over and over.
> You keep saying you haven't seen the same bugs I have. If a bug is
> common, MS tends to fix it. If it is rare they tend to ignore it. MS's
> goal isn't to make bug-free software but to eliminate just enough bugs
> to maximize profits with minimum investment.
That makes sense to me.
> And with their exclusive
> preload agreements, it means they often don't have to do much.
Well, except the major problems. If there were enough of those, there
wouldn't be the preload agreements--no one would buy a system with Windows.
> "There are no significant bugs in our released software that any
> significant number of users want fixed." -- Bill Gates, in an
> interview with Focus magazine, Oct 23, 1995.
> http://www.cantrip.org/nobugs.html
That makes sense to me, too. And it obviously works for them. If I was
selling code of that bulk and complexity, that would be my basic strategy,
too.
> (May I suggest you read the whole interview. Do you really want to
> deal with a company like that?)
Yeah. That doesn't bother me. I don't use any software, or systems, that
work exactly the way I want it to 100% of the time. That doesn't bother me,
really--the stuff is complicated enough that I don't expect it to never do
odd things. That's not how the universe works when it comes to complex
systems.
If the problems were common enough, and serious enough that it severly
hampered my productivity, then I'd care more.
I take the same approach to my work, though. I could obsess over it and
keep going over and over it until I thought it was perfect, or I could
realize that a few errors pop up here and there and not stress over that
fact.
Even when I go over and over something until I think it is perfect, more
often than not there seems to be some problem that creeps up eventually that
you didn't catch.
> It is possible that there are hundreds if not thousands of goofy and
> wacky rare bugs lurking in MS software,
That is a possibility, sure. I know it's a possibility with hardware, also,
which is where I happen to run across them more often.
> each of which affects an
> "insignificant" number of users.
I don't think he means "insignificant" there as a judgment on your humanity
that you should worry about. I think it means in terms of statistical
analysis.
> I'm currently being amused with a
> goofy bug with dial-up networking, on two different modems with two
> different drivers on two different W95 machines, that freezes the
> machines unpredictably every few days when you disconnect.
That certainly is another I haven't had yet. I'm having one myself on a
machine with Win98SE that can't recognize Linux partitions to enable Linux
booting through Boot Magic. I've never had that problem before, despite
lots and lots of machines that I've set up that way.
But PowerQuest hasn't been able to figure it out yet, either . . . it's been
over a week since I first contacted them about it.
As T-Max aptly noted, the more you work with computers, the more you realize
how indeterminate they are.
> And ftp,
> whether the built-in MS or third party, hangs maybe twice a week after I
> switch from ethernet to dial-up networking. And after using too many
> apps simultaneously for a few hours I sometimes start to see fragments
> of left-over app windows stay on the screen after I close them - a sure
> sign that I had better try to close out my work fast.
That one isn't very rare in my experience.
> I could go on and
> on. The worst part of the rare bugs is that they often occur rarely
> even for a single user, meaning it is virtually impossible to reproduce
> them. You add all these things together and I'm lucky to go more than a
> day or two without rebooting.
Yikes! Most of my machines can go weeks without rebooting. On the other
hand, we tend to reboot a lot because of software installs and uninstalls.
Anyway, I'm such a caffeine addict, rebooting always gives me a good excuse
for another cup of coffee :-)
> I loved Roger's response to the FDISK bugs:
> >And you misspelled "due to design decisions, FDISK does not gracefully
> >handle every possible situation, so there are rare instances where a
> >partition cannot be removed."
> That sums up MS's attitude quite nicely. FDISK is not a big program,
> they've had many years to fix it, and a competent programmer could
> probably fix it in a couple of weeks - so what is the big deal for them?
> They could even look at Linux fdisk to see how to do it right, if they
> are incapable of figuring it out on their own. The point is they just
> don't care because they don't have to.
It isn't cost effective to spend that money and time for them. I can
understand that. I have to make a lot of cost/time effective decisions in
my life, too.
> Now take the design attitude towards FDISK and extend it throughout the
> software. The philosophy seems to be that as long as it works most of
> the time, it's considered OK. Is it any surprise that there are goofy
> and wacky bugs that I've seen but you haven't?
No, I'm not surprised at that. I've experienced them enough myself.
--doc
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: UNIX recruiters and MS Word resumes
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 23:03:32 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, BSD Bob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on 23 Mar 2000 15:49:54 GMT <8bdef2$lur$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Timothy J. Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> |This one recruiter was really whiney: "But I don't _LIKE_ resumes in
>> |text format". I guess saying "You'll take it and like it" isn't an
>> |option.
>
>> It is, if you are in an employees' job market.
>
>Well, if we are supposed to be *nix types, send it to them in
>native troff. After all, if you don't know nroff/troff on *nix,
>you are still in training.....(:+\\.....
One could do that, admittedly! However, AFAIK nroff/troff/groff
only lives on in manpages.
A more general option would probably to use one of the TeX family.
Probably LaTeX.
Or SGML, since Linux sports a fine suite of SGML-conversion tools.
One can convert SGML to HTML, TeX, or raw text.
If MSOffice can't read HTML format, well, it really sucks! :-)
Note also that I use MSOffice 2000 at work, and it can in fact read
from and write to HTML format, although I can't say how well it writes;
I use Netscape Composer for editing HTML and occasionally even just
edit the text directory (NC has an option for just such a contingency!).
Too much glop in the MS-generated HTML to be of much use (it loves to
use "style=" in the tags, instead of pre-formatted style sheets).
>
>Bob
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Windows. When you really want it to look proprietary.
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Weak points
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 22:55:53 GMT
In article <SJ1D4.81$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Give me a choice" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Someone else whote the >> part, but Mrs. Gimme deleted the attribution.
It seems he wants anonymity to extend to others, too.
> > I, for one, don't ever want to own a combination
> > coffee-maker/toilet.
>
> > > > 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.
>
> > > > I think Micros~1 Office is a bloated piece of crap -- lucky
> > > > me, I am forced to use it at work
>
> > I routinely reply to email formatted in Word97 with email
> > formatted in KLyX. For documents on diskettes, I ask that
> > they format the documents in some platform-independent
> > system. Most don't, but they soon learn. (I work in a
> > central office at a university, and there's no way anyone at
> > the university can get past me without my OK.)
>
> > I have no desire, let alone reason, to read Word documents.
>
> > > > I have less than no interest in computer games.
>
> > I have less than no interest in computer games.
>
> > I haven't felt a need to test either system, mostly because
> > it would have cost me beaucoup de bucks.
>
> > And there's really
> > no reason for me to switch to Microsoft products.
>
> > I'm
> > functioning at least as quickly on 3 year old hardware as
> > Winders 2000 users function on brand-new, state-of-the-art
> > hardware.
>
> > My download times at home via a 56K modem are as
> > fast, if not faster, than my downloads from work where I'm
> > ethernetted into a backbone site (usc.edu).
>
> > > > used Internet Explorer or Outlook Express, mostly because
> > > > I've never felt the need to do so.
>
> > My new boss uses IE and Outlook Express. The main
> > difference in my productivity and output from hers, so far
> > as I can tell, is that her print-outs are formatted
> > differently.
>
> > I've never used krn, but tin strikes me as more than
> > acceptable.
>
> > Give me a break. I've been using computers at work since at
> > least late 1985/early 1986. Shall I really list them out?
>
> > Buy me the hardware that even Microsoft claims is the
> > minimum and I'll try Windows 2000 out.
>
> > I'll hush up, Missy "SetMeUp", if you will.
>
> Yeah, it may seem incredible, but the above is a discussion
> about Windows v.s. Linux as desktop, although it could seem
> like he/she was telling about his/her life.
I believe the underlying idea is "I can do it, why can't you?".
> I won't post in here any more reasons and facts, because it seems like
> if some people don't understand what are all about; besides I am not
> giving my name and email (I think that my genetic code identifies me
> enough),
Then post a blood sample ;-)
> and that's very very important, what's more, if Newton of Leibnitz
> hadn't give their names, perhaps the theories they developed weren't
> as demonstrable by each person around the universe. You know what
> I want to say, don't you Mr GIVEMEYOURNAME ? Don't bother me
> with relativistic issues and things like that ...
Believe it or not, if Newton had not given his name, his theories would
probably not have been published, noone would have known them, and yes,
noone would have verified them. Just try submitting anonymous papers
to the AMS, and see for yourself.
PS: Newton's theories are not demonstrable by every person in the
universe. Some people are too ignorant to do it, and some know too much
to agree.
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "gcaldwel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: VMWare vs. Bootmanagers
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 18:08:16 -0800
> Why is this necessary ? You don't need partition magic to install multiple
> operating systems. The standard Linux install allows this. The main
advantage
> of this approach is that you don't have to pay for the VMware license.
>
My reasoning behind partition magic was that I would need to resize the
partition to make room for the new one to install Linux on. At this point
Partition magic was the only product that I know of that allows a user to
resize partitions without loosing the data that is currently on that
partition..
under the second scenario, I would resize the 30 gig partition running
windows 98 to 3 and install NT on a 6 gig and BeOS on a 2 gig and Linux on
the rest, Ah heck I might even stick OS/2 in there somewhere. :-)
Gerald
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Weak points
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 23:19:22 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Darren Winsper
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on 25 Mar 2000 15:34:56 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 08:35:17 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> An Os is an OS is an OS is an OS is an OS is........
>
>Yeah right. I suppose Linux isn't an OS because it doesn't have a
>browser which cannot be removed.
Smirk.
Maybe I'm getting old, but I still remember the Unix/PDP 11/xx days,
where an OS was merely a piece of software that handled EMT traps
(the method back then to switch from user mode to supervisor mode;
INT would be a rough analogue in x86 hardware, if the supporting
structures were set up correctly; I'd have to dig through my 486
programming manual to recollect the details now).
Browser? What browser?? (This was admittedly back in the 80's,
when I attended college.)
Oh, and the thing ran beautifully in 120 megs or so of RAM, too.
For multiple people, yet.
(Side point: I also remember when 300 megabytes in removable disk packs
were lifted out of washing-machine-sized devices, as well. Nowadays,
I can hold 2 gigs in the palm of my hand. Tomorrow I probably can
probably blow away terabytes because one can store 1T of information
on something the size of a dust speck.... :-) )
>
>> I like things simple.
>
>Then Windows isn't for you.
Pointy pointy clicky clicky typey typey "Your application has bombed.
Hit Abort to kill it, Retry to debug it, Ignore to ... um ... well,
how does one ignore it?" [Abort] [Retry] [Ignore]
(And yes, I've seen this requester! Not quite with this phrasing,
admittedly, but I'm posting from memory. I think I already know
what Information Architects will think of *this* one
(http://www.iarchitect.com/mshame.html), as they already have
a similar one somewhere. Presumably, an app or OS developer should use
the buttons [Kill] [Debug], instead of [Abort] [Retry] [Ignore]. DUH!)
Or
Pointy Pointy Clicky Clicky Blue Screen Of Death. (And the BSOD
can't be scrolled or otherwise interacted with. It's time to hit
The Button or the Three-Fingered Salute.)
>
>> I run applications.
>
>Amazingly enough, so do I
If one can call what Windows does "running". It's more like
crawling if one doesn't have enough memory, or chewing on one's
disk drive... :-)
>
>> The OS that has the quality applications wins.
>
>That's your choice. However, your high and mighty attitude tends to
>make you think particular apps you like are the be all and end all.
And of course Microsoft's Mega Monolithic Mighty Marketing Machine
will have one think that there's only one solution (namely, theirs)
and that all other solutions are inherently inferior.
(Trouble is, that statement implicitly recognizes that there are
other solutions. Whoopsie. :-) )
[rest snipped]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- "Thou shalt have no other gods before me!"
-- early advocate of Microsoft :-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen)
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: 25 Mar 2000 23:16:11 GMT
In article <tj9D4.13327$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Jason Bowen writes:
>
>>>> O.K., lets change the subject then. What do you think these numbers mean
>>>> for OS/2?
>
>>> Which numbers, Jason? You didn't retain any numbers in your follow-up.
>
>> I'm sorry that you can't remember them
>
>I can remember lots of numbers, Jason. Why do you think I asked about
>which ones?
The ones that followed from our thread. Do you have trouble following
that?
>
>> since you provided a source.
>
>You didn't specify any source when you asked your question, Jason.
You can't follow a thread?
>
>> According to the source that YOU provided OS/2 brought in $92 million
>> towards IBM's bottom line.
>
>Which directly answered George's question about where the numbers came
>from. If only you could be as direct.
If only you could follow a thread.
>
>> This is OS/2 advocacy isn't it.
>
>Incorrect; it's answering a question directly.
>
>> Wouldn't you like to talk about that?
>
>I already accomplished what I set out to do, Jason, which was to
>answer George's question. Was there something inadequate about
>my answer that needs further discussion?
>
So you don't want to talk about OS/2 in the OS/2 newsgroup?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why did we even need NT in the first place?
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 23:22:22 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Daniel O'Nolan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Sat, 25 Mar 2000 06:41:24 +0100 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>"Mr. Rupert" wrote:
>
></SNIP>
>
>> <*sigh*> Dare I ask what this new 'whistler technology' is all about? Is
>> it a technology, or an MS mop and bucket?
>>
>> --
>>
>> Mr Rupert
>If I'm not mistaken (though I'm waiting for someone to tell me that I
>am), it's what should have been "Windows 2000" (NT for consumers).
Windows 2K is specifically targeted for the business market;
Windows Millennium (also known as Windows Me, which I for one
find slightly humorous in light of Austin Powers' work :-) ) is
the one slated for the hoi polloi, and will presumably be released
sometime this summer.
This after Microsoft has been promising for some years to
eliminate the DOS/Winshell hybrid, and even claimed, during early
marketing of Win95, to have successfully done it.
Smirk.
>
>Dan O'Nolan
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damien)
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: From the Horse's Mouth
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 25 Mar 2000 23:27:27 GMT
On Sat, 25 Mar 2000 17:39:52 -0500, in alt.destroy.microsoft,
doc rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Norman D. Megill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
| news:8bii1o$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
| > "There are no significant bugs in our released software that any
| > significant number of users want fixed." -- Bill Gates, in an
| > interview with Focus magazine, Oct 23, 1995.
| > http://www.cantrip.org/nobugs.html
|
| That makes sense to me, too. And it obviously works for them. If I was
| selling code of that bulk and complexity, that would be my basic strategy,
| too.
Of course if you were writing it because you enjoy coding, and you
want to show off your coding skills to you colleagues, and you want to
create the best operating system that can be created, then you might
spend the extra time it takes to solve a few more problems, eliminate
a few more bugs and limitations. And you might end up with Linux.
------------------------------
From: Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 15:44:52 GMT
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 3-25-00, 5:26:14 PM, George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote=20
regarding Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet=20
again):
> On Sat, 25 Mar 2000 16:07:08 GMT, "Mike Ruskai"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 21:57:05 GMT, George Marengo wrote:
> <snip>
> >>OS/2 simply didn't have the software selection that I was looking=20=
for,
> >>and I knowingly traded off stability for application availability.
> >
> >Going by the few messages I saw from you, I thought you may have lost=
=20
your
> >sensibility, because you seemed to be suggesting that you were a=20
die-hard
> >OS/2 supporter, who left due to IBM's lack of support.
> >
> >Obviously that's not the case, but you should be aware of the=20
impression
> >you're leaving.
> Thanks for the feedback. No, I'm not a die-hard supporter of any OS.
> The OS is simply a means to an end for me -- using software that I
> want or need to use.
Why suggest that IBM should have totally boycott windows to show=20
consumers that IBM is behind OS/2? =20
You can describe yourself as reasonable but your opinion is=20
unreasonable.
------------------------------
From: Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 15:51:44 GMT
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 3-25-00, 3:47:16 PM, George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote=20
regarding Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet=20
again):
> On Sat, 25 Mar 2000 07:32:21 -0500, Bob Germer
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >It is quite obvious that you are totally unable to comprehend the=20=
Findings
> >of Fact. They clearly, absolutely, unequivocally, without question,=20=
beyond
> >a shadow of a doubt contradict what you state above. That makes what =
you
> >said a lie. That makes you a liar.
> You were right the first time. I was unable to comprehend the
> Findings of Fact because I found them to uninteresting. I suppose
> that to anyone who hates MS or has a particular love of an OS,
> it would be fascinating reading.
The ideal man: He has strong IBM-OS/2 opinions and when shown facts=20
contradicting his understanding of the past, the information is called=20=
"uninteresting." Those who read the Finding of Fact more are MS=20
haters.=20
------------------------------
From: Dave <[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: 25 Mar 2000 17:56:02 -0600
On Sat, 25 Mar 2000 20:19:28 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Any thoughts/ideas/opinions are "irrelevant" to the the tholenbot if
>> you disagree with it.
>
>What alleged "tholenbot"?
>
>> Watch it chime in here babbling about "typical invective" or "what
>> alleged tholenbot" or something equally useless and obtuse.
Right on cue!
Dave
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bastian)
Subject: Re: VMWare vs. Bootmanagers
Date: 26 Mar 2000 00:05:55 GMT
On Fri, 24 Mar 2000 23:45:31 -0800, gcaldwel wrote:
>I'm going to install multiple OSs on my computer, so I nailed it down to
>uses Partition Magic and Boot magic or VMware.
> Are any of you using VMware for Linux? How does the virtual platforms
>perform. Is there any problems with performance do to running in a virtual
>window. Can files be shared between the installed platforms.
>
I'd make some compromise: running the unstable OS's (Win9x) in a VM, because
you won't have to care if they crash. NT/w2k are quite stable, so they won't
make much trouble. But if you're sick of win9x giving you a blue screen...
Bastian
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
