Linux-Advocacy Digest #952, Volume #25 Wed, 5 Apr 00 00:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS (Tim Kelley)
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS (Bob Lyday)
Re: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine! ("Otto")
Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS (Bob Lyday)
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS (Bob Lyday)
Re: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine! ("Otto")
Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters. ("Chad
Myers")
Re: remedy ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine! (Gary Hallock)
Re: So where are the MS supporters. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading ("Christian Gustafson")
Re: Microsoft Uses NDAs To Cripple Competitors (was: Guilty, 'til proven guilty
(Christopher Browne)
Re: 2000: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine! (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine! (Jim Richardson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 21:47:22 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Shell wrote:
> And since Apache is the market leader this makes them primarily responsible
> for putting Netscape into the ground.
>
> Unless of course you believe that Microsoft has been responsible because
> more important sites are run on IIS than Apache. But that creates an
> interesting conundruum for you since it would not support the argument I
> just quoted above. :)
Well, good, then.
Netscape is just getting a little taste of discipline before M$.
Netscape (the company) was horrible, just as all corporations are.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 19:57:24 -0700
From: Bob Lyday <[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
Shell wrote:
> >
> Unless of course you believe that Microsoft has been responsible because
> more important sites are run on IIS than Apache.
Yeah, IIS is so cool! Why are IIS sites always going down,
Stevie? Why does it take so long to access one? What's with
all the error messages, dude?
IIS fails under heavy loads = well-known fact. IIS is a
gigantic security hole = same. IIS is unstable = ditto.
> --
> Steve Sheldon
> BSCS/MCSE/Bill's bitch
> BEEFsh*t! - my posts
--
Bob
"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.
Remove ".diespammersdie" to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine!
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 02:57:39 GMT
"Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Otto wrote:
>
> > "Tim Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > >
> > > let's count 'em:
> > >
> > > 1. DOJ ruling
> >
> > Give it at least a year before something actually happens.
> >
> > > 2. Netscape 6
> >
> > It still blows, especially under Linux
>
> So, have you actually used Netscape 6?
I only use Netscape under Linux and don't care about version numbers.
>
> >
> >
> > > 3. KDE 2.0 (I haven't forgotten gnome just not paying attention)
> >
> > Isn't faster, or better than Windows interface.
>
> Again, have you used KDE 2.0?
You tell me, what version is on Caldera 2.4 e-desktop?
>
> >
> >
> > > 4. K Office
> >
> > Wanna be Office....
>
> So you say.
You have a problem with that?
>
> >
> >
> > > 5. Linux 2.4
> >
> > When, isn't it already late?
>
> It's in the final stage of beta testing now. 2.3.99-pre3 is available for
> download.
So, it is late after all....
>
> >
> >
> > > 6. Corel Office for linux
> >
> > Isn't free and just a cheap imitation of the real thing.
> >
>
> The real thing being MS???
As long as it's MS Office, yes.
>
> >
> > > 7. NDS for linux
> >
> > Who cares?
> >
> > > 8. W63K is a laughable DUD. their new OS reminds me of that fat
> > > bloated creature in the movie "Blade".
> >
> > I haven't seen "Blade"
> >
> > > 9. Big linux strategy from IBM
> >
> > Even bigger strategy for Windows 2000 from IBM
>
> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2000/0331ibmlinux.html?nf
>
> http://oss.software.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/
>
> http://oss.software.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/linux390/
>
> http://linux390.marist.edu/
>
> >
> >
> > > 10. Total, utter failure of Win98. the biggest piece of
> > > worthless shit ever sold to anyone.
> >
> > Question of opinion, millions disagree...
> >
>
> And millions agree.
Shall we count each of them :)?
Otto
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 02:50:37 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Tim Haynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Would the open-source community be interested in hacking Windoze code,
> should (for example) IE5 be open-sourced?
I think the open-source community would be V_E_R_Y interested in seeing
how much of their GPL code is in the MSWindows products. Could explain
why Mr. Gates promised to publish the Windows source last month followed
by the immeditate retraction by the MSFT marketing machine claiming he
said no such thing.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 20:01:59 -0700
From: Bob Lyday <[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
Shell wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (redrum) writes:
> >I already believe that Linux runs on Intel architecture chips. I'm not
> >sure if they have a good GUI or not, but it's really needed to succeed.
> >Computer makers have been bullied by M$ into putting only Windows on
> >their PCs. If they can get those agreements invalidated under the
> >antitrust ruling, then they'll be free to put whatever they want on
> >their PCs. Windows runs 95% of PCs now because people will buy what is
> >common. M$ snagged the market early so that when Joe Blow went out to
> >buy his first PC, he saw that they all were running Windows so he said
> >why not. But if a good number of Linux PCs come out with a good GUI and
> >Windows compatible apps, people will look into them.
>
> The Amiga and Macintosh had a chance to do this back in the 1980's when the
> PC was relatively uncommon in the home market. It didn't happen, despite
> Commodore actually having the largest share of the home market in the early
> 80's.
Oh, and M$ pre-loading agreements had nothing to do with it!
Too bad we aren't running Amiga and Mac now, it'd be a better
world...
>
> There are forces at work here far more powerful that Microsoft, far more
> powerful than the Computer makers unwillingness to waste their time putting
> other software on the machines.
If they can sell the box, why is it a waste of time? And they
can...
That force is the consumer, woe be it to
> him who defies the will of the consumer.
Gee, M$ has made a career of it, Stevie, how come they don't get
their due?
> --
<snip ad for Steve>
--
Bob
"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.
Remove ".diespammersdie" to reply.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 20:03:59 -0700
From: Bob Lyday <[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
Alan wrote:
>
> Mark S. Bilk wrote in message <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.
You a stand-up comic?
They have truly brought the geek world of
> >>computing to the desktop of the typical soccer mom.
Leah now she can crash all day too! previously only geeks had
that illustrious privilege!
> >
--
Bob
"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.
Remove ".diespammersdie" to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine!
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 03:05:29 GMT
"Tim Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Otto wrote:
> >
> > "Tim Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > > let's count 'em:
> > >
> > > 1. DOJ ruling
> >
> > Give it at least a year before something actually happens.
>
> stock's already plummetting.
It's been bouncing back and forth for the last 3-4 month, so what?
>
> > > 2. Netscape 6
> >
> > It still blows, especially under Linux
>
> a minor irritation to put up with considering the alternative. Yu're
speaking of
> netscape 4x.
>
> > > 3. KDE 2.0 (I haven't forgotten gnome just not paying attention)
> >
> > Isn't faster, or better than Windows interface.
>
> Oh, so you've used it have you?
Yes I have...
> > > 4. K Office
> >
> > Wanna be Office....
>
> Nope. Uses open file formats. that's the REAL difference.
Not for the REAL world....
>
> > > 5. Linux 2.4
> >
> > When, isn't it already late?
>
> ?
Was it suppose to be out by now?
>
> > > 6. Corel Office for linux
> >
> > Isn't free and just a cheap imitation of the real thing.
>
> ? It works.
So do hand mixers, your point?
>
> > > 7. NDS for linux
> >
> > Who cares?
>
> folks who want a secure directory service that works on many plaforms.
That shouldn't be many people.... :)
>
>
> > > 9. Big linux strategy from IBM
> >
> > Even bigger strategy for Windows 2000 from IBM
>
> haven't heard a peep. Making lotsa noise over linux.
Noise is good....
>
> > > 10. Total, utter failure of Win98. the biggest piece of
> > > worthless shit ever sold to anyone.
> >
> > Question of opinion, millions disagree...
>
> haven't met a single person who likes win98. Inclues all windows zealots
and
> linux haters.
Meet Bob......
>
> > > Fat assed Windows is coasting, sputtering and dying, Linux is
> > > behind but accelerating.
> >
> > Yeah, last year Linux was at the edge of the cliff. Speed off Linux....
>
> wishful thinking.
Care less either way....
>
> > > 2000 will be more exciting for linux than 1999 was.
> >
> > And someone said the same thing in year 1998....
>
> it was true then, it's true now.
The chances are that someone will be right in year 20xx...
>
> > > Can they survive this? Let's hope not!
>
> > Not only they can, they will. It'll be decided by the market and not
DoJ.
>
> the "market" decides nothing. People do. When will you market freaks get
over
> this ridiculous crap? Idiots talk of the "market" today the way people
talked
> about "god" a few centuries ago. Disturbing.
And people drive the market in case you haven't noticed it. Be careful about
using God as reason, there are a few religious people around. Never mind....
:)
Otto
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows
Date: 4 Apr 2000 22:09:21 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The question is why is Linux Find so damm slow?
>
> Is it the disk i/o subsystem?
>
>The OS itself?
>
>
>
> What is the reason?
>
>Why is Windows so much faster at a brute force find a file name
>search?
There may be some difference from the physical layout of the directory
structure - allowing the directory names to be anywhere could make
a filenames-only search slower but it this have the opposite effect
on normal access of a few files at a time.
However, you might also have a drastically different number of
filenames. Under Linux you can tell easily by piping the
output of find with no search to 'wc -l'. Under windows, how
to you pipe the output list to some arbitrary program to
process it?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[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: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 03:13:19 GMT
"Jeremy Crabtree" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Boris allegedly wrote:
>
> I see you changed your "From:' field again (to foil killfiles?), anyway,
> back in you go.
It's funny, because Boris was the one actually contributing something (humor)
and Mark was just blowing out his usually moronic banter again.
Mark has earned a place on the block-train quite a few times, himself.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: remedy
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 03:12:58 GMT
The crime that MSFT has been found guilty of is far worse than what your
remedy would apply to. MSFT could have been found guilty of violating
racketeering and organized crime statutes based on their conduct in the
marketplace; the DOJ is being "nice" in only prosecuting for
monopolistic practices....
"You wanna sell beer in my town? I own all of the breweries. You wanna
sell another brand? I own all the trucking companies, and they only
deliver my beer. You wanna have music in your bar? I own the jukebox
company. There were other jukebox companies, but I convinced 'em they
could do better elsewhere."
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 11:23:17 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine!
Otto wrote:
>
>
> I only use Netscape under Linux and don't care about version numbers.
>
So, in other words, you lied. If you are using Caldera then you using
Netscape 4.72. I''ll give you a hint. Click on that button in the upper
right corner called "Help" and then click on "About Communicator" .
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > 3. KDE 2.0 (I haven't forgotten gnome just not paying attention)
> > >
> > > Isn't faster, or better than Windows interface.
> >
> > Again, have you used KDE 2.0?
>
> You tell me, what version is on Caldera 2.4 e-desktop?
So, in other words, you lied again (hint: KDE 2.0 is still in alpha/beta).
Another hint - bring up the KDE control center. That will tell you the KDE
version. Most likely it is KDE 1.1.2 - the latest stable release. KDE 2.0 is
something else and will blow KDE 1.1.2 away. Now I can say that because,
unlike you, I have tried KDE 2.0.
>
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > 4. K Office
> > >
> > > Wanna be Office....
> >
> > So you say.
>
> You have a problem with that?
You don't even know what Koffice is and have certainly never tried it.
>
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > 5. Linux 2.4
> > >
> > > When, isn't it already late?
> >
> > It's in the final stage of beta testing now. 2.3.99-pre3 is available for
> > download.
>
> So, it is late after all....
No. Since you think it is late, then perhaps you could tell me by how much.
When was it due to be released?
>
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > 6. Corel Office for linux
> > >
> > > Isn't free and just a cheap imitation of the real thing.
> > >
> >
> > The real thing being MS???
>
> As long as it's MS Office, yes.
Your opinion.
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > > 7. NDS for linux
> > >
> > > Who cares?
> > >
> > > > 8. W63K is a laughable DUD. their new OS reminds me of that fat
> > > > bloated creature in the movie "Blade".
> > >
> > > I haven't seen "Blade"
> > >
> > > > 9. Big linux strategy from IBM
> > >
> > > Even bigger strategy for Windows 2000 from IBM
> >
> > http://www.networkworld.com/news/2000/0331ibmlinux.html?nf
> >
> > http://oss.software.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/
> >
> > http://oss.software.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/linux390/
> >
> > http://linux390.marist.edu/
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > 10. Total, utter failure of Win98. the biggest piece of
> > > > worthless shit ever sold to anyone.
> > >
> > > Question of opinion, millions disagree...
> > >
> >
> > And millions agree.
>
> Shall we count each of them :)?
>
> Otto
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: So where are the MS supporters.
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 03:20:36 GMT
In article <8txG4.313$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8cddjl$gv6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> First of all, the purpose of the trial is not to punish Microsoft, but
to
> stop anti-competitive behavior, should it exist. Therefore, any
evidence,
> even after the beginning of the trial that shows that the supposition
of
> continued dominance is false should be relevant.
.
.
BUZZZ, wrong again! Franky-boy!
.
Evidently, you are not from the US. the trial was to determine if MS
BROKE THE LAW. It did. Now the comes the sentencing part of the trial.
The relevance is that while MS was breaking the law, many companies and
people suffered harm because of the Law breaking of the MS corporation.
The fact that MS did so much harm by breaking these laws IS what is
relevant. Since a great deal of harm was done to free market
competition, the judge MUST now impose a sentence on MS that will allow
for free market competition to develop again.
.
Or could you be saying that criminal behavior should go unpunished???
.
By the way, here are the laws that MS broke (from the Judges verdict)...
.
.
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECLARED, that Microsoft has violated §§ 1 and 2
of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1, 2, as well as the following state
law provisions: Cal Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 16720, 16726, 17200; Conn. Gen.
Stat. §§ 35-26, 35-27, 35-29; D.C. Code §§ 28-4502, 28-4503; Fla. Stat.
chs. 501.204(1), 542.18, 542.19; 740 Ill. Comp. Stat. ch. 10/3; Iowa
Code §§ 553.4, 553.5; Kan. Stat. §§ 50-101 et seq.; Ky. Rev. Stat. §§
367.170, 367.175; La. Rev. Stat. §§ 51:122, 51:123, 51:1405; Md. Com.
Law II Code Ann. § 11-204; Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, § 2; Mich. Comp.
Laws §§ 445.772, 445.773; Minn. Stat. § 325D.52; N.M. Stat. §§ 57-1-1,
57-1-2; N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 340; N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 75-1.1, 75-2.1;
Ohio Rev. Code §§ 1331.01, 1331.02; Utah Code § 76-10-914; W.Va. Code §§
47-18-3, 47-18-4; Wis. Stat. § 133.03(1)-(2); and it is
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
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 22:38:04 -0500
"Bob Lyday" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Christian Gustafson wrote:
> > >
> > Microsoft will regroup and refocus again, as it has before, and recover
from
> > yesterday's decision.
>
> We'll see.
>
> Windows 2000 will be a great success (I love it)
>
> Keep on fooling the idiots. Whoops, I guess you are one!
> Sorry! I didn't make you angry, did I?
>
> the> improved> PocketPC devices will be very popular,
>
> Yeah, like I want Loseblows 98 on my damn handheld...why, so it
> can poop all over my pocket? Ewwww, gross, dude!
I haven't kept up with COOA in a long time -- too busy with work these
days -- so I don't recognize your name.
Are you a child? You really should be ashamed to post such drivel.
Short term: investors spooked by the lawsuit. A quarter or two of solid
profits, continued success in several of its hot areas, industry acceptance
of Windows 2000, and the stock will recover these losses. Don't cry for
Microsoft; they're still pushing ahead aggressively on all fronts. The cost
of defense lawyers is only a little sand in the gears.
cg
Chicago, Illinois
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Microsoft Uses NDAs To Cripple Competitors (was: Guilty, 'til proven
guilty
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 03:32:13 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Shell would say:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk) writes:
>>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.
>
> Oh good god! Why do people keep listening to Rex Ballard?
>
>Even if I was a Linux advocate, I'd have to discount the guy. He has *NO*
>clue what he's talking, understands zilch about the computer market. And to
>make it worse, he fabricates evidence to support his claims.
>
> I'm just at a complete loss as to why anybody would consider him a reliable
>source.
If he says enough things, *some* of them are *bound* to be right.
I used to gripe about some of the more aggregious fallacies, and he used
to effectively "thank" me for something along the lines of "helping keep
his facts straight."
But I don't see any point to bothering with correcting all the
blatherings, particularly with the sheer *volume* of it.
>Rex Ballard has been going around for at least 5 years spreading tales
>about Microsoft signing agreements with SCO to prevent them from getting
>into the Unix market. And because everybody *WANTS* to believe it's true,
>they just accept it as fact without verification.
Vernor Vinge's characterization of a Usenet-like medium via the moniker
"Net of Million Lies" in _A Fire Upon The Deep_ was entirely marvelous
and insightful; Usenet is essentially an open "party line," and you need
to have considerable skepticism about what is said in order to extract
any useful information.
*.advocacy groups are the ultimate cases in point; they collect "liars"
of all sorts...
>I guess it's the fascinating thing about the Internet, how some old crack
>pot can buy a $500 computer and then proclaim himself as an expert by
>writing a lot of random words.
...In keeping with Vinge's work, this cuts in all sorts of directions.
There are probably some "old crackpots" that want to be thought to be
pundits (after all, if Al Gore could convince some people he invented
the Internet, many others of us should be able to get a piece of that...)
There are some "angry old men" (that may not be all that old) that
assortedly want to bash:
- Unix
- Bill Gates
- Richard Stallman
- IBM
- Apple
- Digital
- Windows
- [Pick favorite bashee]
With the incidences of Microsoft using questionable publicity tactics such
as offering to pay academics for positive mention of their software,
and having people ghostwrite letters to US newspapers "saying nice
things about MSFT," it would not be beyond belief for there to be some
"astroturfers" that are somehow recompensed for putting forth more subtle
"attacks" against Linux and other free software.
On the other hand, someone like Rex Ballard probably *intends* to say
things that will accrue merit to Linux. Unfortunately, when he claims
howlingly invalid things, this is *not* good, and when people aren't
skeptical enough, this can fool the unwary into believing foolish things,
and when naive people take such seriously, they make themselves look
like fools.
This doesn't establish that *everything* that is said is wrong, just
that being too trusting on the "Net of a Million Lies" is downright
*stupid.*
--
If a person with multiple personalities threatens suicide, is that
considered a hostage situation?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: 2000: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine!
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 03:36:01 GMT
On Wed, 05 Apr 2000 01:57:06 GMT, Otto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"JEDIDIAH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
>> It's not the "investment" in the software, it's the inability
>> of their people to adjust to different but equivalent interfaces.
>
>You don't suppose that the DoJ will hand out ability to handle different
>interfaces, together with the verdict. Do you?
>
>> In terms of $$$, they'll likely save money with a Linux migration.
>> They just might get themselves off the upgrade treadmill.
>>
>
>Although they could save $$$$ with the Linux migration, the saving could be
>erroding rather quickly. There is such a factors, like productivity, which
>would suffer.
You have no way to really judge that actually. Plus, most of
the relevant interfaces are equivalent anyways. You would be
lying to imply anything else.
>
>> [deletia]
>>
>> This whole "must switch to word" problem is just one of the
>> many reasons severe penalties need to be levied against M$.
>
>Based upon what?
The need for real free choice in a capitalist marketplace.
That choice is what drives (or at least should) the checks
and balances that keeps a market healthy and diverse
rahter than inbred.
>
>> If law firms can't be free to choose what they view to be
>> the best product, who can...
>
>Who is stopping a law firm from choosing the best product? Once the choice
>is made, be that MS, Unix, or even Linux, they are stuck. The platform makes
>no difference.
The law firm likely is not the same sort of monopoly that can
dictate terms to a captive customer base. They have to deal
with the barrier to compatibility and perfect replaceability
that MS puts up.
--
It is not the advocates of free love and software
that are the communists here , but rather those that |||
advocate or perpetuate the necessity of only using / | \
one option among many, like in some regime where
product choice is a thing only seen in museums.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 03:38:16 GMT
On Wed, 05 Apr 2000 02:04:16 GMT,
Otto, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>
>"Tim Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>>
>> let's count 'em:
>>
>> 1. DOJ ruling
>
>Give it at least a year before something actually happens.
>
>> 2. Netscape 6
>
>It still blows, especially under Linux
Um, you have a copy allready?
>
>> 3. KDE 2.0 (I haven't forgotten gnome just not paying attention)
>
>Isn't faster, or better than Windows interface.
Gee, where did you get this! It's not out yet.
>> 4. K Office
>
>Wanna be Office....
Is that a bad thing in your opinion?
>> 5. Linux 2.4
>
>When, isn't it already late?
it's better to do it right, than do it right now...
>> 6. Corel Office for linux
>
>Isn't free and just a cheap imitation of the real thing.
It competes with non-free office, and runs on Linux
>> 7. NDS for linux
>
>Who cares?
Everyone running NDS maybe? and all the people who took one look at ADS
and said "no way! Too buggy, poor security."
>> 8. W63K is a laughable DUD. their new OS reminds me of that fat
>> bloated creature in the movie "Blade".
>
>I haven't seen "Blade"
>
>> 9. Big linux strategy from IBM
>
>Even bigger strategy for Windows 2000 from IBM
Wow, you mean W2K is running on S/390?
>> 10. Total, utter failure of Win98. the biggest piece of
>> worthless shit ever sold to anyone.
>
>Question of opinion, millions disagree...
that's million$$ I think you mean.... :)
>> 11. BeOS making slow progress (wrt its popularity)
>
>Very, very slow...
>
>>
>> Fat assed Windows is coasting, sputtering and dying, Linux is
>> behind but accelerating.
>
>Yeah, last year Linux was at the edge of the cliff. Speed off Linux....
IYHO, this year will be an interesting one for sure.
>>
>> 2000 will be more exciting for linux than 1999 was.
>
>And someone said the same thing in year 1998....
And they were right! each year, more support, more vendors, more apps,
more games, more features... More market share.
Tell me, where is windows market share on the desktop going? up or down?
how about the server side? they are loosing share on the web servers.
>>
>> Can they survive this? Let's hope not!
>>
>
>Not only they can, they will. It'll be decided by the market and not DoJ.
>
Have to agree here, if M$ is a staggaring buffalo, with all the grace and
agility of a pregnant Yak, then the FedGov makes 'em look svelte and gazelle
like...
In a conflict between Jackboot Janet Reno, and Bill Gates, it's tough to
call up any support for either side... Here's to hoping that they do
damage to each other...
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
