Linux-Advocacy Digest #935, Volume #25 Tue, 4 Apr 00 10:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Microsoft Uses NDAs To Cripple Competitors (was: Guilty, 'til proven guilty (Mark S.
Bilk)
Re: Windows 2000 has "issues" ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary ("Tim Haynes")
Re: So where are the MS supporters. ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Cd-burning ulility... (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: So where are the MS supporters. (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: So where are the MS supporters. (Mark S. Bilk)
Re: Linux mail/news application questions (Jan Panteltje)
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading ("Chad Myers")
Re: Cd-burning ulility... (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading ("Christian Gustafson")
Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading (Esther Schindler)
Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading (Bob Tennent)
The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters. (Mark S.
Bilk)
Re: So where are the MS supporters. (Tim Kelley)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Crossposted-To:
uk.comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Microsoft Uses NDAs To Cripple Competitors (was: Guilty, 'til proven guilty
Date: 4 Apr 2000 11:09:58 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Tim Haynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (phil hunt) writes:
>
>> Microsoft is guilty, Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!!!!!!!
>>
>> The only think that remains to be decided is what sentence the judge will
>> pass.
>Would the open-source community be interested in hacking Windoze code,
>should (for example) IE5 be open-sourced?
Rex Ballard has described how Microsoft uses non-disclosure
agreements to prevent competitors like Linux from obtaining
the details of various essential hardware and software
interfaces. MS should be required to stop this practice,
and the current NDAs should be rescinded.
Search DejaNews ("power search") with:
author = ballard
keyword = microsoft & (non-disclosure | nda*)
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has "issues"
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 06:17:31 -0500
Bob Hauck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Most Unixen impose a limit (usually admin-adjustable) on per-process
file
> >> handles.
>
> >You usually have to recompile the kernel to adjust these limits though.
> >Therefore they are hard coded (such as the number of processes)
>
> Linux 2.2 allows you to adjust most of those at runtime. Some older
> Unixen required a relink (not a recompile) to change certain things, but
> that seems to be going away in modern versions.
I was under the impression that the process table was a compile-time fixed
array. I know it was in FreeBSD, and I thought it was in Linux.
> >> That's a pretty lame defense. Sure, maybe that's an unusual
> >> configuration, but this "issue" is still a bug that should be fixed.
> >
> >I didn't say it shouldn't be fixed. I'm simply saying that it's not the
> >major problem that effects all ISP's that the press made it out to be.
>
> MS would do themselves a lot of good if they would just give the real
> explanation (it is a bug that affects a few customers only and will be
> fixed by such-and-such a date) rather than dissembling and covering up.
> Saying "it is't a bug, just an issue" makes them look foolish. Saying "no
> customers have reported it" makes them look even more foolish when the
> press is saying they have talked with customers who say they've reported
> it.
>
> The press jumps all over that kind of thing as it looks like MS are hiding
> something. And, well, they are actually.
Considering that the press got the issue wrong in the first place (saying
that it devasting to ISP's and not mentioning anything about it being on
domain controller only systems) don't you think it's possible that they
misinterpreted MS's response as well? Or perhaps they didn't ask the right
person (say, asking a PR guy instead of a technical spokesperson?)
> >No, I said DirectDraw was not the problem. The problem was one
particular
> >implementation of DirectDraw. mlw indicated that DirectDraw itself had
some
> >kind of hard coded limit.
>
> Uh, right. So it isn't DirectDraw, but the implementation of
> DirectDraw. I'm afraid I still hear the sound of hairs being split.
No, the implementation of ONE VERSION of DirectDraw ON ONE PLATFORM that was
fixed by a later service pack.
Again, you seem to be indicating that all versions of DirectDraw suffer from
this limitaiton with your response.
> >> Wow, that's a lot better. Instead of running out at a fixed number, it
> >> ran out depending on 500 things you couldn't predict. Cool.
>
> >Well, that was because of the 16 bit architecture.
>
> You mean Win95 _wasn't_ "all 32 bit"? Of course, we both know that, but
> it seems a lot of your fellow Winvocates are still in denial on that
> particular point.
Nobody with any kind of clue would deny that it doesn't have 16 bit code.
Microsoft doesn't either and never has. Therefore, your statement is quite
irrelevant.
> >> BTW, there _was_ a limit on *system* handles in Win3 and they were not
> >> garbage-collected. The system brushes for example.
> >
> >Actually, it was Display Contexts, not system handles.
>
> Yes, I was mistaken on that one, thanks for correcting it. Either way,
> contrary to what you said, there were "hard coded" limits in Win3.
Yes, there was. I don't know the exact reason for this, probably memory
related. A Display context takes up a fairly large amount of memory, my
guess would be that 7 is the maximum number that can fit in a single 64K
heap segment.
------------------------------
From: "Tim Haynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: 04 Apr 2000 12:16:30 +0100
Reply-To: "Tim Haynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Communist country" is an oxymoron. I compared the Soviet Union to
> Microsoft: I said nothing about communism.
Interesting idea! :)
> Jim Richardson writes:
> > It claimed it was, it also claimed that communism was a good thing.
>
> The politicians who ran it made those claims. They lied, of course: they
> were politicians, after all.
Sometimes I wonder what's so great about this capitalist thing after
all. Or about communism. Or any other political Thing.
After all, when Jack Straw is trying to kill e-commerce in the UK stone
dead in order to put a few 'Net-using criminals behind bars... maybe they
should allow the sensibly devolved countries to have their own views on the
"RIP" bill.
~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: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: So where are the MS supporters.
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 06:27:39 -0500
Truckasaurus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8cc3hn$23k$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > The verdict isn't really the final factor. Microsoft will most likely
> be
> > appealing, and whatever the results of that appeal will be the real
> > judgement. Jackson has been overruled repeatedly in the past in
> regards to
> > Microsoft, and it would appear to me that they have a good case for
> appeal
> > considering the one sided nature that Jackson took in his findings of
> fact
> > (it's nearly word for word from the governments documents).
>
> Hmmm. Maybe the government just were well-prepared, and 'had a case'?!?
There are things in the Findings of Fact and the Findings of Law that are
proveably wrong.
As an example, the Findings of Law state "Neither Microsoft nor its OEM
customers believe that the latter have - or will have anytime soon - even a
single, commercially viable alternative to licensing Windows for
pre-installation on their PCs". Yet many big name OEM's are selling Linux
systems in both server and desktop configurations, and have been doing so
for over a year in some instances. Clearly this "Finding" is wrong and
proveably so.
I think Microsoft will have a damn good case on their hands for appeal with
all the errors in both documents that are easily proven.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Cd-burning ulility...
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 11:30:10 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, JoeX1029 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on 03 Apr 2000 23:44:16 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Is there a cd burning program for Linux thats lets you burn the image of a cd
>right to the disk?? Thanks.
There should be several. The one I know about is xcdroast.
Yahoo suggests among other locations
http://rufus.w3.org/linux/RPM/dld/5.4/i386/RPMS/i386/xcdroast-0.96d-4.i386.html
but I don't know if that's the latest version or not.
You'll also need mkisofs, if you don't already have the image.
http://rufus.w3.org/linux/RPM/contrib/libc5/i386/mkisofs-1.11.2-1.i386.html
(Disclaimer: I've used mkisofs in the past, but all it does is
create the image; it won't burn it. I use a 4020i and haven't
tried to get xcdroast to work, but the DOS burning software that I
have worked with the image, the one time I tried it. :-) )
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: So where are the MS supporters.
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 11:36:09 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Tue, 04 Apr 2000 06:43:58 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Ok I'll bite..........
>>
>> Can't stand Gates, although I admire a self made millionaire, unlike
>> some liberal Kennedy slime that inherited it all.
>
>Well, Gates is not a self-made millionaire, that is propaganda from the
>MS machine. Bill's father was a very wealthy man, with lots of contacts,
>to begin with. Bill is by no means "self made" at all.
Pedant point: Billion with a 'B'. :-)
At least in America; the Brits would say "100 thousand million".
[rest snipped]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- I'll admit, though, $100,000 million would look
awful nice in my bank account :-) $100,000 wouldn't
be too bad either... :-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Subject: Re: So where are the MS supporters.
Date: 4 Apr 2000 12:21:23 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I just check on at, 10:25 PM EST to see what the MS supporters had to
>say about the court ruling, and low and behold, nothing.
>
>Hmmm, I am left to wonder.
Gates is so angry about the guilty verdict, and the failure
of his astroturf operations to prevent it, that he's stopped
the payments (laundered through various PR agencies*) to his
gang of spammers.
The rumors that Myers, Funkenbusch, et al, have gone into
hiding, in case the wrath of the world's richest man takes
a more personal and dangerous form, remain unconfirmed at
this time. 8^)
* http://www.deja.com/=dnc/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=342778662
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jan Panteltje)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Linux mail/news application questions
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 12:23:14 GMT
>Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> You could give NewsFleX a try:
>> http://www.panteltje.demon.nl/newsflex/
>>
>> My attempt to write an agent for linux.
>> And it works very well.
>> The search functions in the group lists are great (MS copied it from me I think).
>> It may not do all you need, but already people are having a go at it, so feel free
>:-)
>> Jan
>
>Sounds great. I tryed to find a rpm without succes (slow machine= slow
>compile).. could you point me to a direction where one might be found?
>
>Greetings
>
>
What do you need a rpm for?
Installing is clearly described in the distr.
unpack with tar -zxvf .....tgz
I will not make an rpm, but maybe some redhat fan will...
Jan
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 08:29:18 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Greg Patton from alt.destroy.microsoft; Sun, 2 Apr 2000 18:22:55 +0100
>I hate Linux I use BeOS
Good for you.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 12:46:30 GMT
"Multi_OS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8cbulq$t7e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Shares of Linux distributors Corel (CORL), Red Hat (RHAT), and Caldera
> (CALD) soared in after hours trading in the wake of m$ being found
> _guilty_ of violating the Sherman Antitrust Act,
>
> Corel stock was up by almost 18%, Red Hat 12% and Caldera 1%. Micro$not
> stock fell 15% after news of the guilty verdict during the day and
> gained 2% in alter hours for a net loss of 13%.
Micro$not, that's a good one. Did you come up with that all by yourself,
or did Mommy help you?
> It is widely believed that Bill Gates has been buying up m$ stock in an
> attempt to shore up the price in spite of his financial advisors
> recommending that he dump it.
That's a pile of bullshit. Do you have any proof?
You know, because any major investment or sell-off like that by any
major principle of the company must be reported a few days in advance
through the SEC.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Cd-burning ulility...
Date: 4 Apr 2000 13:12:00 GMT
JoeX1029 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Is there a cd burning program for Linux thats lets you burn the image of a cd
: right to the disk?? Thanks.
I think cdrecord is the standard CD burner. Info about it is at:
http://www.freshmeat.net/appindex/1998/03/13/889803174.html
(it's homepage URL is too long to post on one line) It's
extremely cross platform and I've had great luck with it.
------------------------------
From: "Christian Gustafson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 08:20:12 -0500
"Multi_OS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8cbulq$t7e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Shares of Linux distributors Corel (CORL), Red Hat (RHAT), and Caldera
> (CALD) soared in after hours trading in the wake of m$ being found
> _guilty_ of violating the Sherman Antitrust Act,
>
> Corel stock was up by almost 18%, Red Hat 12% and Caldera 1%. Micro$not
> stock fell 15% after news of the guilty verdict during the day and
> gained 2% in alter hours for a net loss of 13%.
Look at these stocks over a longer period of time, and you'll see that
they are all dogs:
Caldera (1/3 below its IPO!):
http://quotes.nasdaq-amex.com/quote.dll?chart=1&page=charting&mode=basics&sy
mbol=CALD%60&selected=CALD%60
Red Hat:
http://quotes.nasdaq-amex.com/quote.dll?chart=3&page=charting&mode=basics&sy
mbol=RHAT%60&selected=RHAT%60
Corel:
http://quotes.nasdaq-amex.com/quote.dll?chart=3&page=charting&mode=basics&sy
mbol=CORL%60&selected=CORL%60
Microsoft will regroup and refocus again, as it has before, and recover from
yesterday's decision. Windows 2000 will be a great success (I love it), the
improved
PocketPC devices will be very popular, Microsoft will continue to innovate
and produce
excellent products: SQL Server, Internet Explorer, Win2K, Office, etc. I
can't wait to
get a PocketPC later this month.
The main purpose of yesterday's decision was to establish a starting point
for the hordes
of parasitic trial lawyers who want to get a piece of something they do not
deserve.
Microsoft will win on appeal. Either way, we'll see a new administration in
the Fall that
will end this ugly spectacle as soon as possible.
You OS/2 crazies are welcome to keep speculating as to which "remedies" you
think
are just and proper: a breakup of MS, open-source of all software,
"regulation",
show trials and executions of all executives and employees, whatever whim
appeals
to your bitter selves these days.
<sheesh> you guys are *still* using OS/2?!
cg
Marina City,
Chicago, Illinois
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Esther Schindler)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 13:15:05 GMT
On Tue, 4 Apr 2000 06:00:43, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Karen Mansbridge-Wood) wrote:
| Given his personality type, I find it difficult to believe that Bill Gates would
|actually keep any advisors who told him the truth, if he didn't like the truth they
|were telling him.
Actually, of all his many failings... that one isn't among them.
--Esther
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Tennent)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading
Date: 4 Apr 2000 13:29:12 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 12:46:30 GMT, Chad Myers wrote:
>
>You know, because any major investment or sell-off like that by any
>major principle of the company must be reported a few days in advance
>through the SEC.
>
It's long been evident that Microsoft is a company without any principles
except maintaining and profiting from its monopoly.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
Date: 4 Apr 2000 13:38:13 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Believe that MS has done more for the home computing market than any
>corporation to date. They have truely brought the geek world of
>computing to the desktop of the typical soccer mom.
Microsoft has stolen practically every idea that it has
implemented (badly) for the public, often using coercive and
illegal methods which have destroyed the originators of those
ideas, and prevented them from bringing out a much better
product.
http://www.deja.com/=dnc/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=550266479
>Believe that whatever the government does, MS will come out on top of
>it all. Checked your phone bill lately? Deregulation did wonders for
>us all in that market :(
Long distance rates within the U.S. used to be about 30 cents
a minute, and now they are 5 cents. It's amazing how this
guy just pours the lies out so glibly and hopes that we will
believe them.
>As far as the Linux vs Windows contest is concerned, I believe that MS
>has set the trap and is simply waiting to spring it.
Right. Gates has the Linux folks right where they want him.
>MS has done very little to counter the press that Linux has been
>receiving in the last year. This is especially true for the desktop
>and less so for the server market but still there has been no direct
>attack on Linux.
Meaning what, that Microsoft hasn't bombed the headquarters
of Red Hat? MS has spewed out huge amounts of propaganda
against Linux and other competitors, some secretly financed
in astroturf operations, has paid for rigged benchmarks, used
non-disclosure agreements to prevent companies from publishing
benchmarks where Linux comes out ahead, put up a whole website
full of lies about the competition, etc.
http://www.deja.com/=dnc/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=342778662
But it still hasn't prevented the truth from coming out, in
large part by means of the Internet, and specifically Usenet
(in spite of the efforts of spammers like "Steve" here to
bury the truth under a flood of Microsoft crap).
>My theory is that MS is simply allowing people to choose and try Linux
>to see what it is all about.
>Once they try it and find out how much it sucks, all by themselves,
>they will come running back to the MS fold in mass.
If that were true, there wouldn't be so many Microsoft propa-
gandists lying about (mostly non-existent) shortcomings in
Linux, and trying in every other way to discourage people
from using it.
>Linux truely speaks for itself. For every geek that loves the control
>there are 500 normal users that need to accomplish tasks that require
>software that simply is not available under Linux. Or if it is
>available, it is so crude and ugly looking it is not worth mentioning.
>Or it's simply not compatible with what the rest of the free world is
>running.
The true situation is that applications fulfilling the
requirements (with the exception of games) of most Windows
users are *now* available under Linux, almost all of them
at no cost.
>To date I have given out somewhere near 50 Linux CD's and not one,
>not even one, person has stuck with Linux that I am aware of.
There is no reason whatsoever to believe this claim.
The public posting record of Steve/Mike/teknite/etc. shows
all the credibility and integrity of a rabid weasel on crack,
and the truth values of his statements are well approximated
by a random sequence of zeroes and ones. If he wrote that
the Sun rises in the East, one would have a sudden urge to
check that it still does.
>Linux in and of itself sends a powerful message....
It certainly does, one which all these guys have worked very
hard to keep people from listening to, but they have failed.
Here's a list of the pro-Microsoft/anti-Linux propaganda
spammers operating in comp.os.linux.advocacy, present and
past (including multiple fake names used by the same person).
Some of them post at a rate of nearly 500 articles per month,
each:
"Drestin Black", Chad Myers, Erik Funkenbusch, Stephen Edwards,
Steve/"teknite"/keymaster/keys88/"Sewer Rat"/heather/mcswain/
"S"/"Sponge"/"Sarek", etc., "Chad Mulligan"/"boobaabaa",
Jeff Szarka, Robert Moir, Steve Sheldon, "piddy", Brent Davies,
Boris, "ubercat"/"Odin", "Xerophyte"/Kelly_Robinson, "bob/bill/
[EMAIL PROTECTED](newsguy.com)", "Cuor di Mela", etc.
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: So where are the MS supporters.
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 09:08:29 -0500
mlw wrote:
>
> I just check on at, 10:25 PM EST to see what the MS supporters had to
> say about the court ruling, and low and behold, nothing.
>
> Hmmm, I am left to wonder.
They all signed an NDA not to give their opinions on the case,
because as paid employees of Microsoft (TM), they aren't supposed
to represent the company in this manner.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
