Linux-Advocacy Digest #938, Volume #25 Tue, 4 Apr 00 13:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: 2000: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine! (Tim Kelley)
DID BILL GATES HAVE COSMETIC SURGERY?????? (CG)
Re: So where are the MS supporters. ("Mark Weaver")
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (John Hasler)
Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty (phil hunt)
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
("Boris")
Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty (Jay Maynard)
Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading ("David D. Huff Jr.")
Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows (Tim Kelley)
Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty ("Tim Haynes")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: 2000: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine!
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 11:12:58 -0500
"Leonard F. Agius" wrote:
> The only way I see that they will is if it an exact carbon copy of a Windows app. No
> differences AT ALL. Not just close. Close, but no cigar means NO SALE. Exact
>duplicate of
> all functions and file formats. Then and only then will the Bean Counters and MIS
>Managers
> even look, and I mean ONLY LOOK at another solution.
>
> Until that happens, even a "broken" MS would still own the majority of the market.
I doubt it. the main reason MS has infected every area of
computing to begin with is the attitude "well, MS makes it, so
that would be the best app of its kind to run on windows, because
MS makes windows!". Unfortunately, due to MS' practices, this
attitude is basically the correct one.
What makes you think anyone would switch to a competing linux
application that claimed 100% compatibility with some windows
app, when there are already *windows* applications (all failing
in the marketplace, I might add) that boast the same thing?
The reason to move to linux are mainly to save money in the long
run.
Get off the upgrade treadmill. This in itself is huge. the
upgrade treamill is an enormous lie that very few people even
question. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Take control of the product you paid for. Modify the apps you
like to perfectly suit your environment. Use it for whatever
purposes YOU deem fit.
I think the popularity gnu/linux will cause the industry to cool
somewhat. "Innnovation" won't stop, the the ridiculous sums of
money people spend on software will.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (CG)
Subject: DID BILL GATES HAVE COSMETIC SURGERY??????
Date: 04 Apr 2000 12:22:17 EDT
I saw him on tv this morning and he looks different. Any ideas on
this?
------------------------------
From: "Mark Weaver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: So where are the MS supporters.
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 16:23:29 GMT
> > 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.
>
> Actually, anything and everything you think Microsoft "has done" for the
> PC was really done by Apple for the Macintosh, first.
Except make the damn things cheap enough for "the rest of us" to afford. Do
you REMEMBER the ungodly sums Apple used to charge for Macs in the early
years? Can you IMAGINE what they would have charged and would still be
charging if there was no Microsoft and Apple was the dominant vendor of both
PC hardware AND operating systems? And are you forgetting that the current
Linux phenomenon is really only possible because of the low-cost,
standardized hardware that is a byproduct of the Wintel hegemony?
Mark
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 15:09:32 GMT
Tim writes:
> Sometimes I wonder what's so great about this capitalist thing after
> all. Or about communism. Or any other political Thing.
Capitalism and communism are about economics. Politics is about violence.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (phil hunt)
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 16:44:52 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 04 Apr 2000 10:32:39 +0100,
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. Personally, I favour The Chair, but I will admit there is much to
>> be said for a lethal injection.
>
>But how do you apply either to a company?
I was thinking of Bill Gates personally. Embrace and extend his
neck, with a noose!
>Is splitting them up into a lot of monopolies all specialists in several
>areas (particularly if they're all part of the "M$loth Group", or whatever)
>any good?
>
>Would the open-source community be interested in hacking Windoze code,
>should (for example) IE5 be open-sourced?
Probably not.
But if Windows + Office were open sourced, i would expect companies to
come forward to sell Windows+Office distributions, and perhaps add their
own enhancements. Like Red Hat with Linux.
In fact, RH might even come up with their own Windows distro -- obviously
if they did, it'd come with tools to make it work well with Linux; for
example it'd be able to read ext2 partitions.
--
***** Phil Hunt ***** send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] *****
Moore's Law: hardware speed doubles every 18 months
Gates' Law: software speed halves every 18 months
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 16:36:12 GMT
On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 14:51:03 GMT, "Leonard F. Agius"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>So what? Now we have multiple local and near zones, where it is now more
>expensive today to dial a number on the other side of town (at least in
>Detroit, Chicago, and other Ameritech locations). It's cheaper for me to
>call one of my siblings out of state than to call my parents fifteen miles
>a way. Degregulation did cause long distance rates to fall, but what you
>may not have realized is that in the bad ole' days of one Ma Bell, the long
>distance rates were subsidizing the local service. Now it doesn't. I'm not
>making that up, either. The Michigan Public Service Commission (which
>regulates local utilities) stated that fact two years ago.
That is exactly what happened here in NY, especially in the suburbs.
The "local calling area" has expanded to cover hundreds of miles so
that despite being called local, it is really a toll call. I can call
from NY to CA cheaper than I can from Montauk Long Island to
SouthHampton which is one town away.
>I can't speak for you, but I make a hell of a lot more local calls than I
>do long distance, so in the end, deregulation costs me more in the way of
>higher over all phone bills.
Same here...
Steve
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 16:39:26 GMT
On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 10:06:08 -0500, Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> How about using find under Linux and find under Windows and see what
>> happens.
>>
>> Linux churns away for an eternity and Windows has the result in a
>> couple of seconds.
>>
>> I'm not talking about FastFind either, just the normal find that comes
>> with Windows.
>>
>> Windows wins by a large margin, searching a similar number of files.
>
>I would wager that typically windows "find" is sifting through a
>LOT LESS than linux is. If you are just looking for a filname
>and specify something like "/" or even "/usr" linux find is
>probably looking through a GB of files, even more, perhaps >2GB
>if you installed one of the modern wiz bang distros and installed
>everything.
Nope. Windows is searching through even more files because of all my
*mp3 files. It is still so much faster it is not even close.
>That said, any comparison of GNU "find" and its pathetic
>counterpart in windows is, well, naive.
>GNU find is to windows find like the sun is to a little star.
But the little star finds soooooo much faster.
Steve
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 16:46:44 GMT
On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 15:33:56 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
wrote:
>On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 10:06:08 -0500, Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>
>>> How about using find under Linux and find under Windows and see what
>>> happens.
>>>
>>> Linux churns away for an eternity and Windows has the result in a
>>> couple of seconds.
>>>
>>> I'm not talking about FastFind either, just the normal find that comes
>>> with Windows.
>>>
>>> Windows wins by a large margin, searching a similar number of files.
>>
>>I would wager that typically windows "find" is sifting through a
>>LOT LESS than linux is. If you are just looking for a filname
>>and specify something like "/" or even "/usr" linux find is
>>probably looking through a GB of files, even more, perhaps >2GB
>>if you installed one of the modern wiz bang distros and installed
>>everything.
>>
>>That said, any comparison of GNU "find" and its pathetic
>>counterpart in windows is, well, naive.
>>GNU find is to windows find like the sun is to a little star.
>
> Nevermind, there is always locate. Unix and MacOS have the
> advantage of filesystem indexes that don't cripple the
> system necessitating their deactivation.
And there is also FastFind for Windows. Both use a Database concept I
believe.
I don't need to use FastFind at all. Regular find works rather well
for me and still is a hell of a lot faster than Linux find.
> Plus, Unix is actually ORGANIZED. Thus, you should never have
> to do a raw find against a mountpoint like /usr. Actual user
> files should be tucked away in a relatively small part of the
> disk.
Yet another complication. I'm looking for last years taxes, Click on
find, type stevetaxes98 and in 10 seconds or less I have it's location
despite Windows being on C: and my data on drive H: and also despite
there being a gazillion files in between.
Try finding /etc/ppp/options using find from the root directory and
see how long it takes.
I have my data before a newbie can even finish typing it in without
any syntax errors.
And right from the find pane I can copy, launch. and so forth.
Steve
> On Unix, you will have less files to search through. The end
> result (based on all relevant characteristics, rather than
> just the one that artificially makes M$ look good) will favor
> Unix.
Artificial?
How is it artificial when it is faster, by a large margin, every time?
Steve
------------------------------
From: "Boris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 09:34:33 -0700
Paranoid didn't take his pills again.
Boris
"Mark S. Bilk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8ccr85$mej$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jay Maynard)
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 16:47:38 GMT
On Tue, 4 Apr 2000 16:44:52 +0100, phil hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>But if Windows + Office were open sourced, i would expect companies to
>come forward to sell Windows+Office distributions, and perhaps add their
>own enhancements. Like Red Hat with Linux.
Been there, done that. IBM tried the "better Windows than Windows" bit with
OS/2, and fell flat on its corporate face. While a lot of the blame for that
has to be laid squarely at the feet of IBM's abysmal marketing, there's a
lesson there for anyone who would try to compete with Windows by trying to
out-Windows them: M$ was able to position Windows as the only way to run
Windows apps by making gratuitously incompatible changes and then trumpeting
their status as the only system what would run the changed programs. IBM was
perpetually plying catchup.
This is why I believe that open-sourcing Windows itself, and/or licensing
others to modify and sell it, will not curb M$'s monopoly abuses. That would
do nothing to prevent M$ from selling their version of Windows as the only
one, true, guaranteed-to-be-compatible-with-everything-past-future-and-
present Windows, and consumers would stick with theirs. It's a nice visible
patch that corrects nothing fundamental.
------------------------------
From: "David D. Huff Jr." <[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 16:49:56 GMT
==============F85F7E644B08C6C13621B22C
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
This spew was written by another kind of nut.
Christian Gustafson wrote:
> "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
==============F85F7E644B08C6C13621B22C
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
This spew was written by another kind of nut.
<p>Christian Gustafson wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>"Multi_OS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
<br><a href="news:8cbulq$t7e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:8cbulq$t7e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]</a>...
<br>> Shares of Linux distributors Corel (CORL), Red Hat (RHAT), and Caldera
<br>> (CALD) soared in after hours trading in the wake of m$ being found
<br>> _guilty_ of violating the Sherman Antitrust Act,
<br>>
<br>> Corel stock was up by almost 18%, Red Hat 12% and Caldera 1%. Micro$not
<br>> stock fell 15% after news of the guilty verdict during the day and
<br>> gained 2% in alter hours for a net loss of 13%.
<p>Look at these stocks over a longer period of time, and you'll see that
<br>they are all dogs:
<p>Caldera (1/3 below its IPO!):
<br><a
href="http://quotes.nasdaq-amex.com/quote.dll?chart=1&page=charting&mode=basics&sy">http://quotes.nasdaq-amex.com/quote.dll?chart=1&page=charting&mode=basics&sy</a>
<br>mbol=CALD%60&selected=CALD%60
<p>Red Hat:
<br><a
href="http://quotes.nasdaq-amex.com/quote.dll?chart=3&page=charting&mode=basics&sy">http://quotes.nasdaq-amex.com/quote.dll?chart=3&page=charting&mode=basics&sy</a>
<br>mbol=RHAT%60&selected=RHAT%60
<p>Corel:
<br><a
href="http://quotes.nasdaq-amex.com/quote.dll?chart=3&page=charting&mode=basics&sy">http://quotes.nasdaq-amex.com/quote.dll?chart=3&page=charting&mode=basics&sy</a>
<br>mbol=CORL%60&selected=CORL%60
<p>Microsoft will regroup and refocus again, as it has before, and recover
from
<br>yesterday's decision. Windows 2000 will be a great success (I
love it), the
<br>improved
<br>PocketPC devices will be very popular, Microsoft will continue to innovate
<br>and produce
<br>excellent products: SQL Server, Internet Explorer, Win2K, Office, etc.
I
<br>can't wait to
<br>get a PocketPC later this month.
<p>The main purpose of yesterday's decision was to establish a starting
point
<br>for the hordes
<br>of parasitic trial lawyers who want to get a piece of something they
do not
<br>deserve.
<p>Microsoft will win on appeal. Either way, we'll see a new administration
in
<br>the Fall that
<br>will end this ugly spectacle as soon as possible.
<p>You OS/2 crazies are welcome to keep speculating as to which "remedies"
you
<br>think
<br>are just and proper: a breakup of MS, open-source of all software,
<br>"regulation",
<br>show trials and executions of all executives and employees, whatever
whim
<br>appeals
<br>to your bitter selves these days.
<p><sheesh> you guys are *still* using OS/2?!
<p>cg
<br>Marina City,
<br> Chicago, Illinois</blockquote>
</html>
==============F85F7E644B08C6C13621B22C==
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 12:04:41 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >I would wager that typically windows "find" is sifting through a
> >LOT LESS than linux is. If you are just looking for a filname
> >and specify something like "/" or even "/usr" linux find is
> >probably looking through a GB of files, even more, perhaps >2GB
> >if you installed one of the modern wiz bang distros and installed
> >everything.
>
> Nope. Windows is searching through even more files because of all my
> *mp3 files. It is still so much faster it is not even close.
>
> >That said, any comparison of GNU "find" and its pathetic
> >counterpart in windows is, well, naive.
> >GNU find is to windows find like the sun is to a little star.
>
> But the little star finds soooooo much faster.
Heather,
Do yourself a favor and use the locate command. That uses the
updatedb and is, well, way faster than windows "find" for the
simple task of finding files.
My previous example is more relevant, since it involves the speed
with which windows is deleted. Not much else matters when
windows is still nesting on the drive somewhere.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Tim Haynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty
Date: 04 Apr 2000 18:06:39 +0100
Reply-To: "Tim Haynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Merrill Lynch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes upside-down:
> An intersting wrangle is I *believe* the VAST majority of MS profit is
> NOT from the OS.
>
> Also there is a school of thought that believes MS will give away
> personal (not server) versions of Windoze when Linux and/or something
> else really hits the mainstream (i.e. average Joe on the street)
Sounds like a bad strategy to me. Trying to give something away for zero
money but also with no source won't win more converts (everyone who wants
'doze already has it courtesy of the M$loth tax) and will just make
revealing its instabilities all the easier :)
~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]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
