Linux-Advocacy Digest #836, Volume #25 Mon, 27 Mar 00 10:13:07 EST
Contents:
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers ("doc rogers")
Re: What should be the outcome of Microsoft antitrust suit. ("ccghst")
Re: Peter Norton is one smart dude ("Chad Myers")
Re: VMWare vs. Bootmanagers ("Erna Odelfsan")
Rumors ... ("Erna Odelfsan")
Re: joys of command-line image manipulation ("Erna Odelfsan")
Re: Rumors ... (Donn Miller)
Re: Peter Norton is one smart dude (abraxas)
Re: Peter Norton is one smart dude (abraxas)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (Joe Ragosta)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (Nonnaho)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) ("Cary Bauman")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "doc rogers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 08:18:35 -0500
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >This particular discrepancy would best be understood by doing a little
> >experiment using a number of Gateway 2600's.
> >Since no one will probably agree to actually try to arrange such a thing,
I
> >at least emailed Gateway to see what they say about it.
> Well, that's one of the problems right there. Getting information from
> someone with a financial interest is a good way of getting incorrect
> information.
Here's a good example of the impetus for the "reading comprehension/follow
the thread criticism."
Part of what we're arguing about here is whether Norm's procedure is really
the procedure according to Gateway or not.
Also, a number of claims were made in this thread, mostly by you as you
swore that you had the _same model_, the Gateway 2600, that the procedure
given was _the_ procedure for all Gateway 2600's and that that was the
procedure per Gateway, too.
I suggested that the best way to resolve the contrary claims was to set up
an experiment. But lord knows that despite the amount of time that we spend
writing usenet posts, most of us aren't about to do something practical and
useful for discovering truth like conducting an experiment, so I did
something that was quick and easy--I told Gateway that I needed
clarification on certain problems I had heard about when installing Windows
on a Gateway "2600."
That you'll dismiss anyone who disagrees with you as having some sort of
vested interest or another or being a troll says more about your psychology
than it suggests about any facts we might be trying to obtain.
> We don't need "a number" of Gateway 2600s.
No. I hate to have to educate an educator, but the way you test a claim
that "this is the procedure for all Gateway '2600s' " is to do the procedure
on (preferably all, but practically) a large number of '2600s.'
> We need one. I have one.
You have a Gateway '2600?' Have you looked at the model number recently?
Can you take a picture of it, at least?
> If you
> wish to make a trip to Reading, PA, I'll show you the steps necessary to
> re-install the OS.
That's a possibility. It would be more likely that I'll contact you when
I'm going to be near there next. How do I get in touch with you?
> Based on that hard evidence, it makes no difference at all
> whether all 2600s exhibit such behavior or whether Gateway will provide
> information related to this.
The claim in question is that this is what is needed for _all_ 2600s. If
someone said "this is what I have to do on my '2600' " I wouldn't have much
problem with it, unless it was something that denied the principle of
non-contradiction or something.
I have computers that do bizarre things, too. I wouldn't think that the
bizarre thing they do is indicative of all computers of the same model. I'm
sure you've had enough experience at businesses with a number of the same
model computer to know this wouldn't be the case.
> I know for sure, for example, that the video hardware, mouse software, and
> Windows/usb/PCI/CardBus implementation had at least three revisions (one
> shortly before I got my 2600,
Can you take a picture of where it says "Gateway 2600," scan it and email it
to me?
> the nightmare configuration I had, and then at
> the very least one other which was released several months after mine).
They
> were all "Gateway 2600s", though I would never say for sure that they all
> required such a convoluted installation procedure.
--doc
------------------------------
From: "ccghst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What should be the outcome of Microsoft antitrust suit.
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 07:45:56 -0500
David Goldstein wrote in message <[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?
>
> We just had a discussion about this at work yesterday. My opinion was
>pretty much the same as yours--do not allow companies to sell computers
>with OS's preinstalled.
As an option, the right to buy without an OS is probably
a good one. There is a major practical problem with
-forbidding- machine vendors from preinstalling. It
could be a tech-support nightmare.
One reason vendors who do allow you the flexibility of
choosing your OS still refuse to sell the systems without
an OS is that it makes phone support much more difficult.
It is extremely time consuming to determine, for example,
whether certain hardware isn't working because the
hardware is defective, or if the customer is in fact using
an unsupported version of their OS (didn't install the
patches, didn't compile the driver properly, etc.)
Plus a certain segment of the population is just too dim
to do an OS install, even with friendly menus, etc.
The politics would make that impossible.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Peter Norton is one smart dude
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 13:49:18 GMT
"W. Kiernan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Mark Hamstra wrote:
> >
> > "W. Kiernan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Was it really Chad Myers who wrote?:
> > > >
> > > > ...NTFS, which has journaling.
> > >
> > > It does? That's news to me.
> >
> > You shouldn't be so quick to broadcast your ignorance.
>
> I shouldn't ask questions, you mean. I should learn by telepathy,
> osmosis, however you do it, you bigdeal genius you.
Of course! <grin>
NTFS 5 (which is implemented in Windows2000 and read by NT 4.0 SP4 and higher)
has a change journal.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Erna Odelfsan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: VMWare vs. Bootmanagers
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 13:49:25 GMT
> Why not do both!!
I fully agree with this; 30GB hard disk is a lot of space; I have 16GB
and have Windows 98, Windows 2000, Linux, Solaris and FreeBSD. Emulation
never gives you the 100% experience (for good and bad things).
------------------------------
From: "Erna Odelfsan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Rumors ...
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 13:49:25 GMT
What truth is it there in Microsoft being forced to liberate Windows
98/Millenium source code and developing Office for Linux just to not have to
split among several companies ? I know this is a little off-topic, but know
too that many persons in here follow Microsoft issues from very close.
------------------------------
From: "Erna Odelfsan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: joys of command-line image manipulation
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 13:49:24 GMT
> Shell scripts are indeed a beautiful thing, aren't they?
They are, but, NT has scriptting languages too, including PERL;
scripts are not exclusive from Linux or Unix. Even DOS had a very
primitive scriptting language, that could be easily extended with
external commands very very easy to build. What's more, almost
every GNU utility (including often script used like find, awk, sed,
etc ...) has been compiled for Win32. So you are not really advocating
Linux or Unix in here, just advocating scriptting, in which I agree to
advocate too.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 09:08:06 -0500
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Rumors ...
Erna Odelfsan wrote:
> What truth is it there in Microsoft being forced to liberate Windows
> 98/Millenium source code and developing Office for Linux just to not have to
> split among several companies ? I know this is a little off-topic, but know
> too that many persons in here follow Microsoft issues from very close.
I think this rumor may have gotten a little distorted. Microsoft
proposed a number of things so they wouldn't be required to work under
the oversight of the government. One item was that they offered to
open up a small piece of the Windows source code. I think the idea is
to let other companies see some of the Windows source code to
eliminate the effect of its (apparent) monopoly. I seriously doubt
that MS is going to release the source code as open source - they will
just let a limited amount of companies see it, if they require it.
Certain companies that make Windows emulators, such as Bristol, which
makes Wind/U, may need to see the Windows source code. I seriously
doubt if they would consider make the source code available to the
Wine project, although it would be nice.
They would only open up a small portion of the Windows source, under
extenuating circumstances. Also, remember this is only a proposal for
settlement, so it doesn't necessarily mean they will do it anyways.
It looks like the DOJ isn't happy with Microsoft's settlement ideas
anyways...
- Donn
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Peter Norton is one smart dude
Date: 27 Mar 2000 14:12:52 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "W. Kiernan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Mark Hamstra wrote:
>> >
>> > "W. Kiernan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> > > Was it really Chad Myers who wrote?:
>> > > >
>> > > > ...NTFS, which has journaling.
>> > >
>> > > It does? That's news to me.
>> >
>> > You shouldn't be so quick to broadcast your ignorance.
>>
>> I shouldn't ask questions, you mean. I should learn by telepathy,
>> osmosis, however you do it, you bigdeal genius you.
> Of course! <grin>
> NTFS 5 (which is implemented in Windows2000 and read by NT 4.0 SP4 and higher)
> has a change journal.
Neat. Now its just like MacOS 7.5.1.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Peter Norton is one smart dude
Date: 27 Mar 2000 14:16:40 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> "W. Kiernan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> Mark Hamstra wrote:
>>> >
>>> > "W. Kiernan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> >
>>> > > Was it really Chad Myers who wrote?:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > ...NTFS, which has journaling.
>>> > >
>>> > > It does? That's news to me.
>>> >
>>> > You shouldn't be so quick to broadcast your ignorance.
>>>
>>> I shouldn't ask questions, you mean. I should learn by telepathy,
>>> osmosis, however you do it, you bigdeal genius you.
>> Of course! <grin>
>> NTFS 5 (which is implemented in Windows2000 and read by NT 4.0 SP4 and higher)
>> has a change journal.
> Neat. Now its just like MacOS 7.5.1.
Oh, and BeOS DR3.0, IRIX and Purgatory/Inferno.
Catch up microsoft! Catch up! Tell us you invented it! We'll believe you!
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: Joe Ragosta <[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: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 14:45:02 GMT
In article <8bjpph$p1e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen) wrote:
>
> So if we have a conversation about I have to bring up the item being
> talked about each time? It is never implicity referenced? The 92
> million was added to IBM's bottom line from OS/2. The 92 million that we
> were talking about was part of IBM's revenue. OS/2 contributed 92
> million
> as I said in my previous statements, and I was wondering what you think
> that means for OS/2. Would you like to talk about the 92 million IBM
> says
> OS/2 generated for it? That is an awkward way of communicating that you
> need, the inability to reference what is being talked about from previous
> statements.
>
I think you might want to start by taking some basic economics courses.
Start by learning the difference between "revenue" and "bottome line".
Now, which was it? Did OS/2 add $92 M in revenue or $92 M to the bottom
line. If the former, how much did it really add to the bottom line?
Now, assuming you can answer those questions (and cite your sources),
let's go to some advanced topics:
How much would IBM have made if they had put all the OS/2 resources into
some other project--ie., what was the opportunity cost of investing in
OS/2?
--
Regards,
Joe Ragosta
Get $10 free:
https://secure.paypal.com/auction/pal=jragosta%40earthlink.net
Or get paid to browse the web (Mac or PC):
http://www.alladvantage.com/home.asp?refid=KJS595
------------------------------
From: Nonnaho <[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: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 06:46:19 -0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Jeff Glatt writes:
>
> >>> He is here for the express purpose of attempting to harass people
> >>> whose opinions he doesn't happen to like.
>
> >> Yet another lie.
>
> > Yet another pontification.
>
> Namely yours, given that you cannot read my mind.
>
> >>> It is precisely this which got him in trouble with the University
> >>> of Hawaii for abusing their facilities
>
> >> What alleged trouble, Glatt? What alleged abuse, Glatt?
>
> > The abuse that caused the university to reprimand you not to post your
> > nonsense to COOA from the university's facilities,
>
> What alleged abuse, Glatt? What alleged reprimand, Glatt? Classic
> circular reasoning.
Why don't you just answer the question so this thread could end, did
the U of H stop you from posting to COOA from their computers?
> > which is why you now have to use RoadRunner.
>
> Liar. I do not have to use RoadRunner.
That's right, you can use any other ISP. But can you post from
the University of Hawaii?
> >> Yet another example of your pontification.
>
> > Yet another example of your lies.
>
> What alleged lies, Glatt?
If you guys would directly answer questions, we wouldn't be seeing
these childish word games.
Nonnaho
------------------------------
From: "Cary Bauman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 15:05:43 GMT
Some local businesses, NorthWestern Public Service (gas, elec company),
NorWest Bank, Local TV Station
got together and put up their own Doppler Radar system here in SouthEastern
South Dakota.
<When in LA> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sun, 26 Mar 3900 01:01:40, Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
>
> |On 03/26/2000 at 02:14 AM,
> | When in LA said:
> |
> |> If you tune into TV forecasters you will find a big falling off of
> |> forecast accuracy from the real meteorologists who actually man the
> |> weather stations, run the forecast models, etc. I dislike listening
to
> |> TV meteorologists except to see the latest pictures. Tuning in my
> |> internet connection to the Oxnard weather service station though, I
get
> |> the good forecasts that hold up quite well when probabilities are
> |> figured in.
> |
> |For the most part, I agree with you regarding talking heads at local TV
> |outlets in many cities I have visited. However, here in the Philadelphia
> |metropolitan area, we have a staff of very highly trained and qualified
> |meteorogists with the very latest doppler radars at the NBC outlet. One
of
> |the team, Glenn Schwartz is known as Hurricane Schwartz because of the
> |years he spent in the NOAA hurricane research center. The station
sponsors
> |more than 50 on-line remote reporting stations in Pennsylvania, New
> |Jersey, and Delaware in conjunction with AMX in Maryland. They have, and
> |use, at least a half dozen or more computer models and create their own
> |forecasts which prove more accurate over a 6 or 12 hour period than the
> |NOAA forecasts.
> |
> |Also, the ABC affiliate is tied in with Accuweather which is usually a
bit
> |more accurate than NOAA. Until recently the CBS outlet had as its chief
> |met guy a former Navy pilot who was a trained meteorologist and also did
> |extremely well day to day.
> |
> |Now, in the Washington and Baltimore markets, the locals are not so good.
> |Ditto for New York with the exception of WNBC.
>
> Very interesting Bob, have you actually done a rigorous test of your
> hypothesis though? Advertising is a great way to tell the public all
> you are doing, but often it is just fluff with no real substance.
>
> For instance, a guy who used to be with NOAA, is in fact a guy that
> used to be with NOAA. He now has a new job, and it is almost
> certainly not a job to pour over the various weather products and come
> up with a forecast. He is doing his joke rehearsals, he is in the
> make-up room, he is getting his suit pressed, and when not at the
> station he is out doing public appearances, sponsoring charities,
> attending events, doing other reporting duties to promote the station.
> I have never heard of a TV company actually giving the guy a full
> lab.
>
> Here I am certain the Doppler Radar images being used by the local
> stations are government run. They have the radars on ridge tops
> spaced so there is pretty good overlap around the region. Once you
> have such an installation and you provide public access to it, why
> bother building your own Doppler Radar net? Even Accuweather seems to
> utilize NOAA inputs to create their forecasts. All Accuweather seems
> to do is put it in a more user friendly format eliminating the weather
> jargon, and making pretty pictures without all the details and
> artifacts that you get from an unretouched satellite photo.
>
> Additionally, NOAA sponsors hundreds of independent observation
> stations around the area. My father operated one for years before his
> death. NOAA even has a little newsletter from the Oxnard service
> they distribute to their stations. These stations post their data
> online and anybody can go look at the individual station reports.
> Additionally, here in Socal most of the weather comes from the north
> Pacific ocean, not many observation stations out there. NOAA
> collects ship weather reports, has a weather station on the outer
> island at a remote point on the heel of California (its remote mostly
> because it is covered by military reservations), and has a bouy system
> in place.
>
> Some of the local stations also sponsor call ups by local observers.
> However, such an observer can have maximum impact by hooking into the
> local NOAA weather observation system and do the call ups too. For
> the TV station that way they can get a little color commentary to go
> with the weather data.
>
>
> BobO
>
> Marty Amodeo says: "If Glatt, Sutherland, yourself, or myself tried
> to get someone fired for using a particular word it is a despicable
> act."
>
> David Sutherland made the following quotes in posts residing on
> Dejanews:
>
> If I posted anything remotely like Tholen's "queer" [Editor: Note
> particular word in quotes] comments with my employers name
> anywhere within that message, I would be escorted to the door,
> and rightly so.[Editor: Note euphemism for firing]
>
> If Tholen doesn't apologise in full, publicly and at great length, I
> *will* advise his university, as this kind of bullshit *should* and
> *will* be challenged.[Editor: Note threat]
>
> I've asked Kenneth P. Mortimer, President, University of
> Hawaii ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) for his opinion on how
> certain members of the faculty are spending their time.[Editor: Note
> admission to personal notification of employer]
>
> Tholen used "queer" [Editor: Note particular word in quotes] as an
> insult and a means to attack someone. This is discriminatory. He did
> so from his employers account. His employer has a policy against
> discrimination. Tholen acted against the policies of his employer.
> Tholens employer is now aware of this. [Editor: Note reason for
> contacting employer]
>
> Pretty despicable, I have to agree Marty.
>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
