Linux-Advocacy Digest #977, Volume #25 Wed, 5 Apr 00 22:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty ("Paul Smith")
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS (Bob Lyday)
Re: You anti-Microsoft types just don't get it, do you? ("Fred")
Re: Top 10 reasons why Linux sux ("Fred")
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS (Jim Dabell)
Re: Windows 2000 has "issues" (Marty)
Re: Linux mail/news application questions (Michael Powe)
Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows (Gary Hallock)
Re: Group Calendar (Timothy J. Lee)
Re: From the Horse's Mouth (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux mail/news application questions (Hal Burgiss)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (Richard Robinson)
Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows (Mark S. Bilk)
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
("fmc")
Re: You anti-Microsoft types just don't get it, do you? ("Leonard F. Agius")
Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451640 (Pascal Haakmat)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Paul Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 01:33:17 +0100
"Graham Murray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In gnu.misc.discuss, David Damerell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
>
> > Their increasing support for the MacOS (even though this directly
impacts
> > sales of Windows) says they disagree.
>
> Weren't some of the MS applications, eg excel, originally written for
> the Mac then later ported to Windows? Also, IIRC, MS have been a major
> supplier of MAC software right from the start.
Do you mean major in the sense that they were the _only_ other software
supplier on the Mac... ;-P
--
.oO Paul Smith Oo.
.o ICQ 67660294 o.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 17:36:39 -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
Darren Winsper wrote:
>
> On Wed, 5 Apr 2000 11:26:32 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > > The initial tests were rigged. The fact that subsequent
> > > non-rigged tests, while still showing NT outperforming linux on
> > > this test, also proved that the previous ones were indeed rigged.
> >
> > Where is all this nonsense coming from that Nt is fast, anyway????? Based on what
>I have seen, NT is one of the slowest OS's on Earth! Most of the Linux users say
>Linux is 50% faster than NT and the OS/2 folks say OS/2 is 2-3X as fast, and 7-8X
>faster on some stuff. Be and Amiga are obviously faster. Most people will tell you
>that Lose98 is faster than No Thanks. Lose 3x, 95, DOS: all are faster. I have even
>heard that Mac OS is faster sharing files over a network and sending docs to the
>printer on a network. When you start getting slower than thet Mac OS, it's time for
>the walking cane!
Then all these "studies" come out showing that NT is fast as
blazes. Considering that that goes against everyone's
experience, it makes you wonder...
--
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: "Fred" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: You anti-Microsoft types just don't get it, do you?
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 00:38:21 GMT
The goal should be to make the computer easy to use. People just want to
turn it on, and use it to get their work done. Most people don't care how
it works. They just want to check email, and cruise the web. They don't
want to dwell on how large to make the /var partition.
> You know about partitions. I know about partitions. The typical
> Windows user knows C:\windows and that's it.
>Example of people not knowing what they are doing. They're $.10/dozen
>anymore thanks to Windows.
>True, but it is the reality of the situation and a point the
>Linvocates fail to be able to grasp.
------------------------------
From: "Fred" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Top 10 reasons why Linux sux
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 00:40:31 GMT
> >
> >X can only use two colours in its cursors. Unless someone's eased
> >that restriction in a more recent version than I've got the docs for.
>
Other then you, who cares about the color of the cursor.
------------------------------
From: Jim Dabell <[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: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 01:43:51 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
[snip]
> >WinAmp -> XMMS - How is it any worse? Musicmatch, I have no idea what
> >it is, PSP -> GIMP and WinZip -> any number of tarball wrappers, same
> >goes. I don't see anything better about the Windows versions except for
> >the added bonus of having to pay for some of it. Well, I don't care for
> >the GIMP interface that much, but I prefer it to the nightmares in the
> >Windows world. Also, do you *really* think that WinZip has a nicer
> >interface than, say, KDE's handling of tarballs?
>
> Winzip handles tar.gz does kde handle .zip files?
> Actually I liked the kde archiver, and I did appreciate that the file
> associations worked out of the box, unlike Gnome's equivilant which
> couldn't open anything due to some config error.
Actually, I think Winzip's handling of tar.gz is awful, unless they
changed it while I wasn't looking. The KDE archiver can handle ZIP
files, but I was actually referring to the way you can click on a tar.gz
file and browse through it transparently, with every application being
able to use the files inside directly. Compare this to Windows, and you
will see what I mean about things being "bolted on" - where you get the
"transparent" style decompression, you usually have a separate explorer
clone window pop up, which differs in small, but crucial ways. In
Linux, it's been integrated well, wheras even in the latest version of
Windows, which has supposedly got it built in (what, did MS buy out the
company that did it?), it still has the look and feel of being a cheap
addon.
> Try:
> http://www.musicmatch.com/
>
> Great Mp3 player/Cd Ripper and so forth. Blows away WinAmp actually.
Hmm. Not sure about combining the two, myself. I'd rather have the two
separate programs that do one thing well, and a wrapper program if I
*really* need them to be integrated. But I do like things the UNIX way
:)
> > Linux doesn't
> >have that problem, because anything that makes sense gets integrated
> >properly, instead of being forced to become a separate application. For
> >instance, how about virtual desktops? How about putting stuff in the
> >system tray?
>
> Win98 does system tray I believe. I have never found a use for virtual
> desktops although there are applications that do it under Windows if
> someone else wants to.
It's rare to find any that do it *well* though, precisely because that
kind of functionality belongs in the system, not outside of it. When
you have two or more programs messing with things like that, then you
can get conflicts.
> >If you let yourself be put off by the crap out there, then it's not
> >worth arguing with you. There *are* quality apps out there, if you just
> >look for them. There are also plenty of crapps out there for Windows,
> >it doesn't mean that there are no good apps.
>
> I used to see all kinds of crap for Windows (500 numlock programs for
> instance) but not so anymore. The applications that are shareware are
> generally quite good.
I used to think the same about Linux software. Truth be told, the bad
apps don't go away, you learn to filter out the crap, or find the ones
you like. The only time bad apps *do* go away is when they are
integrated into the system, which happens more under Linux than Windows.
[snip]
> >Oh, so you are just talking about appearances? "Cheap *looking* and
> >half done *looking*"? How does this affect their usefulness?
>
> The UI sucks.
> Slrn for instance.
[snip]
Never used it, sorry.
> >How does freedom with software make it automatically cheap and half-done
> >looking?
>
> Take a good look at the typical Linux app. Most still look like 1970's
> Unix throw backs.
I don't think so. Maybe some of them, but take for example the average
GTK/GNOME/KDE/QT app. Themable, easy to use. You can change the
interface of a lot of them. Where is the option of putting the menu bar
at the top of the screen in Windows? How about getting rid of the menu
buttons you don't use?
> >> If you want to learn the interface that's fine.
> >
> >The only intuitive interface is the nipple. You have to learn Windows
> >as well, or had you forgotten?
>
> Windows is easy and hence let's me get my work done without reading a
> 100 page outdate How-To,
> Why do you suppose there are so many How-To's for Linux?
> Because it is intuititive?
> Doubtful............
I'm saying neither are intuitive. How do you stop using Windows?
That's right, you click on the "Start" button. Where is any given
command in Word/Outlook/any other MS app? Well it depends on the
version, doesn't it, because MS like to move things around for no good
reason. If you take a look at a lot of the Howtos, most of them are for
things the average user need know nothing about, such as setting up a
gateway, or wiring a coffee maker to your system.
> >> Show TeX to a secretary and she will scream.
> >
> >Of course she will. She isn't a typesetter. Show her Wordperfect or
> >StarOffice.
>
> StarOffice is the kind of bloat. Slowest app I have ever run....
All office apps I have ever used are bloated, Windows or Linux, it
doesn't matter. Do you think that the flight sims and Doom clones in
Excel are *reducing* the bloat? How about the magic eight ball in
Access? How about dozens of other "easter eggs", some of which are
actually in the shell?
> >> >GCC compiles my (hopefully) beautiful programs, with an optimiser at no extra
> >> >cost. c.f VC++
> >>
> >> Just what the home user needs.
> >
> >Some do. Some don't. At least with Linux you have the choice.
>
> I can get compilers for Windows also if I wanted to, complete with
> IDE's.
Free ones? I know about mingwin, cygwin, and Borland. None of them
have IDEs. Linux has a number of IDEs, most of them free.
> Steve
Jim
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has "issues"
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 00:47:15 GMT
abraxas wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > *PL0NK*
>
> You may as well simply filter (if you know how) COLA at this point,
> since you seem to have killfiled everyone in it.
Do you honestly wish to associate COLA with the likes of Bob Germer? Well,
I'm glad it's a dishonor that COOA doesn't have to bear by itself.
--
The wit of Bob Osborn in action:
"Perhaps it something you should try to your kids don't end up as stupid as
you."
"There is an old saying fartface."
"Not only are you a filthy low-life lying bastard pig, you are too stupid to
know it."
------------------------------
From: Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Linux mail/news application questions
Date: 05 Apr 2000 16:58:12 -0700
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
Hash: SHA1
>>>>> "Hal" == Hal Burgiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hal> On Wed, 05 Apr 2000 04:16:43 GMT, Kaz Kylheku
Hal> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Mon, 03 Apr 2000 16:34:31 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> My mail filter analyzes headers, pings four or five anti-spam
>> databases and automatically junks spam.
Hal> OK, let's talk turkey. Please post or email me if you will
Hal> with details. What do you mean 'pings antispam dbs'? Like
Hal> ORBs?
Spam Bouncer has been working great for me for many moons. I might
see a junk mail a couple times a month, not more.
http://www.hrweb.org/spambouncer
mp
- --
BOYCOTT AMAZON http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/amazon.html BOYCOTT AMAZON
"For example, I've always liked PowerPoint, and I've always thought
that Visual Basic was a good product." -- Linus Torvalds
Michael Powe Portland, Oregon USA
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: GnuPG v0.9.8 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Mailcrypt 3.5.5/GnuPG v0.9.8 http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE469MO755rgEMD+T8RAmUeAKCPzNzfdd8/nfR1jR3PEeG2xQvaFgCfQCzI
LkfaZkilFGW/YQHxWfAkU68=
=RbTW
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 21:02:51 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> You can select it when you install.
>
> Hint though, nobody gives a flying fsk. But then again that is just
> the kind of thing that you LinoShills would focus on instead of easy
> to use programs that the average Joe would want, and is exactly the
> reason why Linux will take a nosedive shortly.
>
> Steve
>
I expected an response like this from you. You mean I have to re-install Windows
to change this? Now, if you know anything about Windows your response will be
"just enter the control panel and click on date/time". But of course that
doesn't do it either. the only choice I have there is to set the time zone to
GMT. But then all times are displayed in GMT time. Any decent OS will keep the
internal clock in GMT while for user friendliness. display times in local
format. Why GMT? Many programs are dependent on a monotonically increasing time
of day. The discontinuous jumps caused by daylight savings time can wreak
havoc. And it can be important when transferring information to other computers
in other time zones (shared file systems for example). Linux allows for
independent setting of the internal clock and the local time zone. So I can keep
file time/date stamps monotonically increasing while still seeing local time when
I display.
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Timothy J. Lee)
Subject: Re: Group Calendar
Date: 6 Apr 2000 01:14:35 GMT
Reply-To: see-signature-for-email-address---junk-not-welcome
Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|I dont think you will find anything with the functionallity of Exchange in
|Unix/Linux.
|Pro Exchange: a) It can be accessed with a Imap client (f.ex. tkRat and
|Netscape) b) It can be accessed with a Webbrowser
|Contra Excahnge: a) Crashes easily b) Dont expect one server to be able to
|handle more than 20000 mails/day if it even can handle that
|amount (Winvocates will clame wild numbers but forget them - this is not
|true)
More cons for Exchange: very expensive, very difficult to configure
email properly, can't really use it without email, can't back up the
configuration easily, email allows anonymous bounce relaying (bounce
messages do not include the original messages' Received: lines).
--
========================================================================
Timothy J. Lee timlee@
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome. netcom.com
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: From the Horse's Mouth
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 21:14:56 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Roger from alt.destroy.microsoft; Sat, 25 Mar 2000 17:53:37 GMT
>On 23 Mar 2000 14:28:16 -0500, someone claiming to be Norman D. Megill
>wrote:
>
>>I did discover that Gateway now has a web page describing the 2300XL
>>installation procedure:
>>
>> http://www.gateway.com/support/techdocs/portable/2300/30718.shtml
>>
>>You will see that it follows my procedure quite closely, including 10
>>reboots during the whole process.
>
>9 -- 5 of which can be eliminated by rearranging the steps, or typing
>a command rather than rebooting.
This is incorrect information which I have addressed before. You are speaking
from ignorance, I believe. Regardless of model number, I have had experience
with these issues, and you self-professedly do not. Dumb luck or act of
denial, why don't you excuse yourself from this "discussion".
Oh, I see, because there wouldn't BE a discussion if you didn't keep trolling
the same [mostly invalid] points! What is your point? You honestly think
we've all mis-thought this, and just HAPPEN to be in agreement with an
ostensibly large number of other customers, judges, and governments? Well
GIVE US SOME REASON TO THINK SO. So far, all you and your buddy doc have
simply repeated "you may be wrong" a million times. PLEASE don't make me use
an exclamation point twice in one paragraph. Just tell us who the hell you
are and why the hell we should care.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hal Burgiss)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Linux mail/news application questions
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 01:16:45 GMT
On 05 Apr 2000 16:58:12 -0700, Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>>>>> "Hal" == Hal Burgiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Hal> On Wed, 05 Apr 2000 04:16:43 GMT, Kaz Kylheku
> Hal> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 03 Apr 2000 16:34:31 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> >> My mail filter analyzes headers, pings four or five anti-spam
> >> databases and automatically junks spam.
>
> Hal> OK, let's talk turkey. Please post or email me if you will
> Hal> with details. What do you mean 'pings antispam dbs'? Like
> Hal> ORBs?
>
>Spam Bouncer has been working great for me for many moons. I might
>see a junk mail a couple times a month, not more.
>
>http://www.hrweb.org/spambouncer
Thanks. Looks promising!
--
Hal B
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Robinson)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 01:36:58 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nick Kew wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Tim Haynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> Sometimes I wonder what's so great about this capitalist thing after
>> all. Or about communism. Or any other political Thing.
>
>Oi!!
>
>The Thing has an honourable tradition. The old icelandic Thing has a
>democratic tradition going back over 1000 years.
>
>The Thing gave every citizen the right to speak *and be heard*. Can you
>imagine that in our modern so-called democracy?
Okay, so capitalist/communist Things can't match that, and what's so great
about them ? ;-)
--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Subject: Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows
Date: 6 Apr 2000 01:40:33 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Pick a file jedi. Any file jedi. It can be on drive C: or it can be on
>drive p:
>It can be an existing file, or one that does not exist. The results
>are always the same.
>
>Linux painfully churns away the ONE drive it has to search and Windows
>finds the file, any file much much faster.
>
>Steve
Probably because all the directories are already cached
in memory on Steve's machine.
If he's even telling the truth at all.
>On Wed, 05 Apr 2000 03:41:44 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
>wrote:
>
>>On 5 Apr 2000 00:04:15 GMT, David Steinberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>: >>Try finding /etc/ppp/options using find from the root directory and
>>>: >>see how long it takes.
>>>
>>>: > It takes less than a second on my box, even using find.
>>>
>>>: I find that extremely difficult to believe.
>>>
>>>That's because you're an idiot, Steve.
>>
>> I bet it was just a bad example and Steve was just talking
>> out his ass again. In his ignorance, he chose an example
>> that would be returned relatively quickly.
>>
>>[deletia]
>
------------------------------
From: "fmc" <[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: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 01:56:55 GMT
"CG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Wed, 05 Apr 2000 00:23:52 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >On 04 Apr 2000 23:51:37 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damien) wrote:
> >
> >>On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 21:57:04 GMT, in alt.destroy.microsoft,
> >>Leonard F. Agius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>| > Most people have some requirements that go beyond the standard
> >>| > WP/Spreadsheet/Browser. I need a financial app like Quicken or MS
Money, a
> >>| > tax preparation program like TurboTax, TaxCut, or TaxSaver, and
project
> >>| > management software like MS Project or CA-SuperProject. These don't
exist
> >>| > for Linux. I also can't manage my bank accounts online. That
requires
> >>| > either Windows or Mac.
> >>
> >>Finace management and tax preparation
> >>http://freshmeat.net/appindex/x11/financial.html
> >>
> >>My bank allows me to use any browser capable of SSL.
> >
> >You're joking right?
> >
> >You are comparing a collection of checkbook balancing programs to
> >QuickBooks ?
> >
> >Oh, I really like PTax98. "Computes MOST of the 1998 Federal 1040EZ?
> >
> >I'll bet the IRS is real interested in the part it doesn't compute.
> >
> >I'll be sure to watch for the 2000 update so I can switch from
> >TaxCut...
> >
> >What a joke....
> >
> >Steve
> >
>
> I don't get it. What does tax software have to do with linux? The
> fact that intuit (turbo tax) doesn't develop its program for linux is
> only a marketing decision by intuit, it has nothing to do with windows
> or linux as operating systems. they just want to sell the most
> programs possible.
What you say is absolutely correct.
>
> if the tables were reversed, and linux were on 95 percent of the
> desktops, do you think intuit would still be developing turbo tax for
> windows?
No they'd be developing for Linux.
>
> I certainly understand why you use windows based products to do your
> taxes, I do too, but I still think linux is a better o/s.
Fine. However. I wasn't talking about the merits of the operating systems,
but the applications available to run on them. The Linux community will
work on what interests them, and ignore what they don't care about. Intuit
will develop programs for the mass market in order to make a profit. Since
you realize that Intuit made a marketing decision not to produce TurboTax
for Linux, maybe you can come up with a better explanation as to why Linux
developers don't take on some of these challenges themselves, in order to
put Linux on a whole lot more desktops.
fmc
------------------------------
From: "Leonard F. Agius" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: You anti-Microsoft types just don't get it, do you?
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2000 02:05:14 GMT
Fred wrote:
> The goal should be to make the computer easy to use. People just want to
> turn it on, and use it to get their work done. Most people don't care how
> it works. They just want to check email, and cruise the web. They don't
> want to dwell on how large to make the /var partition.
>
> > You know about partitions. I know about partitions. The typical
> > Windows user knows C:\windows and that's it.
> >Example of people not knowing what they are doing. They're $.10/dozen
> >anymore thanks to Windows.
>
> >True, but it is the reality of the situation and a point the
> >Linvocates fail to be able to grasp.
You said it Fred.
--
Fight SPAM!!! Remove the _nospam from the above address to send e-mail.
The opinions expressed are my own.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pascal Haakmat)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451640
Date: 6 Apr 2000 02:08:11 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Today's Haakmat digest:
I'm so happy to see you're digesting me again. I was beginning to think you
had become oblivious to all that is wonderful about our relationship.
>> There's something irresistible about you.
>
>Then explain why so many people claim to kill-file me (and I emphasize
>the word "claim").
Perhaps they love to hate you.
>> fl. 10 or fl. 15 if you star in it.
>
>And how many others would be willing to pay the same?
Just you and me, Dave.
--
CSMA posting style test
http://awacs.dhs.org/csmatest
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
