Linux-Advocacy Digest #96, Volume #26 Wed, 12 Apr 00 19:13:09 EDT
Contents:
Corel Linux Office 2000 and Win32 Emulator Making Progress (Mark S. Bilk)
Re: I have a dream! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Penfield Jackson bitch-slaps Bill Gates (Seán Ó Donnchadha)
Re: Linux for a web developer ("Rich C")
Re: Rumors ... (Grant Fischer)
Re: Penfield Jackson bitch-slaps Bill Gates (nohow)
Re: Backdoors in Windows 2000? (CG)
Re: Backdoors in Windows 2000? (CG)
Re: Windows IS the dominant corporate OS (Ciaran)
Re: Bill Gates on T.V. (CG)
No Microsoft Certification = NO JOB! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: I have a dream! (Bastian)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Corel Linux Office 2000 and Win32 Emulator Making Progress
Date: 12 Apr 2000 22:08:00 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Petreley has got to be kidding in his latest Infoworld column.
>First he says "The superb new suite for Linux".
>Then he says " How much I like this suite and how You'll have to pry
>it out of my hands".
>Then, incredibly he goes on to state that one of the first things the
>suite did was crash, and of course he finds a way to blame it on
>Windows because apparently parts of Corel Linux Office 2000 runs under
>a customized version of Wine.
Corel is contributing to the development of Wine, the win32
emulator for Linux. This is a good thing, as it will allow
a lot of Windows software to run under Linux directly, without
needing any modification, nor a copy of Windows.
The columnist Petreley writes:
It is almost identical to its Windows counterpart because
much of the suite runs on Corel's version of Wine. (Wine is
an open source programming interface that brings most of
the Win32 API to Linux.)
The first thing that occurred to me is that WordPerfect may
have these problems because it still has too much Windows
code left in it. It doesn't matter whether or not I'm
right. A lot of folks are going to suspect the same thing.
It will be hard to trust WordPerfect until Corel produces a
version that is free of Windows contamination.
I suspect he's not a programmer, because "Windows code" and
"Windows contamination" as aspects of WordPerfect don't make
much sense.
WP, like other Windows programs, makes calls to the Win32 API
in Windows. Somewhere along the line, Windows is buggy, which
is why it has a habit of crashing.
Wine implements the win32 API under Linux. When it is per-
fected, any win32 application that runs under Windows should
also run well under Wine and Linux without modification (if
the app itself is bug-free). Wine will be, in effect, a
win32 subsystem for Linux.
That will be good for users, who can run win32 Windows soft-
ware (some of which they may already own) under Linux. It
will also be good for software companies, because they can
develop a single version of each product, and it will run
under both operating systems.
The "Windows code" and "Windows contamination" that needs to
be removed is not the code in WordPerfect that makes win32
calls to Windows or Wine, but the Windows operating system
that executes those calls.
>I have the Windows version and it runs fine.
>
>On top of that he can't get it to print on any other version of Linux
>except Corel (sound familiar?).
Of course Corel will fix this, because they want people to
buy WP no matter which Linux distro they're using.
>So much for "I can take any program and run it on any Linux".
This is true, since they all use the same kernel, although
it may require a little fiddling.
But Steve-Heather, who has written thousands of lying propa-
ganda articles against Linux on behalf of Microsoft, is
trying to imply that there's a serious problem, in order
to frighten people away from Linux, and make them stay with
Microsoft.
>Looks like the fragmentation of Linux has already started.
No worse than it has been for years. More propaganda.
>FWIW I
>couldn't get Worperfect included with Corel Linux Deluxe to even
>install on RH or SuSE or Caldera despite it being a *.deb file and my
>using the kde package manager which supports deb files.
>
>Wonder how many months he'll have to screw around with it to get it to
>print under other Linuxen.
Since Steve-Heather tries to make Linux look bad in every way
he can, it's certain that he didn't try very hard to make the
installation succeed, if he even attempted it at all.
>It just goes to show once again that "supported, working, runs etc"
>are words that have completely different meanings in the Linux
>community.
Big Lies on behalf of Microsoft from Steve-Heather.
>It's incredible the crap Linux users have to suffer with in regard to
>shrink wrap applications.
The StarOffice and Applix office suites, just to name two,
work perfectly well with Linux. Steve is lying again.
>He should send it back and run the Windows version which works
>properly, at least on my system.
The idea is to eliminate Windows. Bad enough if an app crashes;
there's no point in having the operating system go as well.
>Steve
>
>Here is the url:
>
>http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/00/04/10/000410oppetreley.xml
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I have a dream!
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 22:09:51 GMT
Haaaa,
This is so pitaful...
Try to demonstrate one little point and you end up starting an uprising in
Bavaria.
Well, let me explain my last message.
Back in the 60's, when I was a kid, Black people were turned away from
employment due to the color of their skin.
Well, same thing's happening today. If you don't have VB skills and/or a
MSCE you get turned away from employment.
And let' s review the list of morons who are doing it.
Let's see. There' s the district attorney's office, the State Capital, the
Federal government on many levels including the Federal Court system,
the U.S. District Attornies offices, in short just about everybody in
government with the exception of the Military.
So on one hand, the Justice department is breaking Microsoft up into little
peices because they are a BAD company.
ON the other hand, unless I'm a Microsoft DWEEBE MORON I don't get the
job....
KAPICHE!!!!
I feel like one of those folks from the 60's. My goverment doesn't
represent me anymore, further they don't even seem to be representing
themselves very well..
I'm a WIN api programmer form way back, now a Linux Hacker and I'd just
like to say I feel like a Black man due to the actions of
my Federal Government.
I really do.
And I think what King said back in the 60's still applies to us today.
We have no right's. It's because Microsoft is controlling the show. And
our own government is filled with idiots who are egging Bill on with
one hand and fixing to bust him into a billion peices on the other.
I've even got some freinds in a fairly large PC retailer who've been
TURNED OFF by local community city and county government offices
as well as several school boards because they don't have a single
MICROSOFT CERTIFIED ENGINEER working for them.
And because of this,, they are not allowed to sell these entities PC's
anymore!!!!
So they have been turned into black men also.
I know what King was thinking about when he was alive.
I'm oppressed every day and it's all because of one company known as
Microsoft.
Other people who are my freinds are oppressed every day and it's all due to
Microsoft.
And what REALLY, REALLY FRIES MY ASS is my government is actually
AIDING THE ENEMY!!!
That just blisters me to no end folks.
No for why I picked King. Very simple. Out of all the people in history
I could have choosed, I felt his experience was the closest to
mine.
Microsoft has a grip on our communities and government for which the Mafia
could only dream of.
How did we let this happen to us? What are we going to do about it?
And further, if you make jokes about this message and it doesn't scare you,
then you must be some kind of nut.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: Seán Ó Donnchadha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Penfield Jackson bitch-slaps Bill Gates
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 18:17:15 -0400
Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> POS or not, it's the reason why Windows kicked the living shit out of
>> <insert your favorite OS> in the market, and why that market will be
>> running on some form of Windows for a *LONG* time to come.
>
>Actually, windows owes is market dominance more to the fact that, until very
>recently, you couldn't even buy an assembled PC without windows/dos installed.
>
>That and that fact that they destroyed anyone that attempted to compete (DR-DOS
>being an example in the early win3.1 days) joined together to give them the
>monopoly position they've enjoyed (and abused) for years now.
>
I respectfully disagree.
Before Microsoft pushed Windows, they pushed OS/2 1.x, the product
they had taken years to develop with IBM. It was an excellent OS, with
preemptive multitasking, virtual memory, full memory protection, and a
very robust architecture. Yet those early versions of OS/2 bombed, and
for one reason only - bad DOS compatibility. OS/2 1.x's DOS support
was affectionately known as "the DOS penalty box".
That's when Microsoft realized that there would be no quick way to
move people off DOS and onto a real OS. They'd have to do it gradually
over many years, using a series of OS releases with increasing
functionality yet crippled by first-class DOS compatibility. That's
why they took a gigantic step back from the robust architecture of
OS/2 1.x and released the highly compromised Windows 3.0.
Remember, the reason Microsoft could get away with their pre-1995
exclusive OEM contracts was because most people *WANTED* DOS/Windows
on their machines. OEMs knew that they couldn't afford *NOT* to
provide Windows. Windows' popularity was the very reason Microsoft
enjoyed so much power over the OEMs - *NOT* the other way around.
In the end, the exclusive OEM deals were halted by the government, and
I agree that that was the right thing. But I still think Microsoft
deserves a lot of credit for providing products with exactly the mix
of features - and tradeoffs - that consumers demanded.
------------------------------
From: "Rich C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux for a web developer
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 17:18:26 -0400
Niall Wallace <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8d1rck$7nd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Yes but it's when the WYSIWYG designer you are using to make a complicated
> table and it looks different every time you load the thing up in Internet
> Exploder and Nutscrape Navigator and Opera can't find it's plugins
>
> That you have to start worrying.
That's why you have to test, test, test. Every browser renders pages
diferently,
and each browser renders pages differently at different resolutions and
color depths.
Different versions of the same browser display tags differently. AOL's
version of IE
will totally screw up things that look fine in every other version of IE.
>
> I used Frontpage express to write a page that was basically one massive
> table.
> It was a reall mess and it was to be for a CFM Secure Server Pagewhich
> doesn't like spaces in form names, I actually had to go through the code
in
> Notepad removing the tags that were basically not needed.
I don't know about FP Express; I use the full version myself. FPx may well
be a
piece of crap. I also don't do much with databases, but I would never trust
a
WYSIWYG tool to produce the strict code that would be required for such an
application. What I said was that WYSIWYG tools are fine for rapid
presentation
design. For basic "here's our mission statement, here's our prices, here's
our phone
number" sites they're perfectly adequate. I also said that you should also
check the
code they produce to make sure the tool is doing the right thing.
FrontPage, like any graphical tool, converts dialog settings into code. By
changing
settings, and checking the code they produce, you could probably get to
something
usable in your application. Whether or not this is worth it to you is your
call.
>
> It's obsessed with using <p align="left"> Where <br> is all you need.
> How many one line paragraphs have you seen?.
In a table, lots. However, in the Full FP98 version, I can create table
entries without
paragraph tags no problem.
> They also usually expect you to want to use word wrap and don't put in any
> <br> tags which is really annoying becasue I don't want a new paragraph
> after every line in my index.
In your case, the graphical tool was probably not appropriate. While being
an advocate
of graphical tools, I will never say that they will always do what you want.
I quite frequently
go in and tweak the code after FrontPage is done with it.
What I am NOT an advocate of, however, is those "idiot" tools that will
convert a Word
or Publisher document to HTML. Those are just worthless in my opinion. There
is NO
algorithm that I have seen that will take an intelligent paper design and
convert it to an
intelligent HTML design.
>
>
> Niall
>
-- Rich C.
"Great minds discuss ideas.
Average minds discuss events.
Small minds discuss people."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Fischer)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Rumors ...
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 22:18:01 GMT
On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 12:14:02 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Grant Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Tue, 11 Apr 2000 02:09:23 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> >Grant Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> That whole 1995 consent decree incident should have tipped them off
>> >> that the DOJ was thinking along those lines, even if it hadn't
>> >> occurred to them otherwise.
>> >
>> >The consent decree specifically allowed them to do what they are being
>> >accused of.
>>
>> Obviously, it isn't so clear-cut as you wish to portray it. Otherwise,
>> the DOJ wouldn't have had a case.
>>
>> Whatever the fine print, the fact that the DOJ was going after them
>> for anti-trust violations in 1995 likely served as a warning to
>> MS strategists. That's the point I was making.
>
>The point i'm trying to make is that the DOJ specifically told them they
>COULD do what they later prosecuted them for. Why would they think what
>they were doing was illegal of they had been specifically told they could do
>it?
Specifically? They mentioned IE by name? Or perhaps there is some
room for interpretation? It isn't as clear as you make it out.
I think your position is rather shaky considering the current judgement.
It is fine to play Internet Lawyer, but the real courts aren't
agreeing with you.
--
Grant Fischer (gfischer at hub.org)
------------------------------
From: nohow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Penfield Jackson bitch-slaps Bill Gates
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 15:40:29 -0700
[snip]
>Remember, the reason Microsoft could get away with their pre-1995
>exclusive OEM contracts was because most people *WANTED* DOS/Windows
>on their machines. OEMs knew that they couldn't afford *NOT* to
>provide Windows. Windows' popularity was the very reason Microsoft
>enjoyed so much power over the OEMs - *NOT* the other way around.
>
How does the above jive with the fact that with the release of Windows
3.0 MS started charging OEMs substaintionally more for DOS alone then
the DOS/Windows combination?
>In the end, the exclusive OEM deals were halted by the government, and
>I agree that that was the right thing. But I still think Microsoft
>deserves a lot of credit for providing products with exactly the mix
>of features - and tradeoffs - that consumers demanded.
It wasn't untill recently that they met the mix of features that this
customer demanded but I guess you speak for all the other consumers.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (CG)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: Backdoors in Windows 2000?
Date: 12 Apr 2000 18:49:14 EDT
good point. I heard that Linus designed hooks into linux for the
Finnish government to browse user's systems for evidence of perverts
exchanging jpegs of children using Nokia phones.
On 10 Apr 2000 19:02:31 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason
Bowen) wrote:
>You obviously can't read because you have failed to prove anything.
>You've got conjecture and hearsay and circumstantial evidence but no
>facts. As a famous poster here would say, we are only interested in
>facts. By the way, I asked this in another post, do you know everything
>about the OS/2 security api? Do you just implicitly trust IBM, do you
>believe that the government wouldn't contact other operating systems and
>computer manufactures about placing backdoors for "national security".
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (CG)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: Backdoors in Windows 2000?
Date: 12 Apr 2000 18:49:38 EDT
On Mon, 10 Apr 2000 11:34:53 -0400, "S Car" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>actually, it has been reported just recently that _CIAKEY and _FBIKEY were
>found in the CryptoAPI of W2K, in addition to _NSAKEY that was found
>earlier.
>
>:)
>
I actually found an _ELVIS key.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Windows IS the dominant corporate OS
From: Ciaran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 15:53:10 -0700
In article <2wLI4.14076
$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Joseph Wong"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
>I've even heard rumors of efforts underway of porting the MFC
library and
>COM to other platforms. Linux may some day become Microsoft
friendly :)
>This shows the kind of clout these frameworks have.
COM has been ported. I believe there is even a linux port
floating around somewhere. Not too tricky to do. However the
suggestion that someone is even *thinking* about port MFC to
*anything* fills me with alarm, dread, skepticism, self-doubt,
nausea and horror.
MFC is an awful library. It should be taken out the back of
Redmond and buried and then we can go on with our lives and
never speak of it again.
[...]
Cheers,
Ciaran
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (CG)
Subject: Re: Bill Gates on T.V.
Date: 12 Apr 2000 18:55:44 EDT
On Mon, 10 Apr 2000 13:41:43 GMT, R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Microsoft is trying to convince the Supreme Court (through the mass
>media and popular opinion) that the consumer is better of with
>the Microsoft Monopoly that it would be in the competitive market.
>
>Of course, nearly every economist would say that the consumer
>ultimately suffers from Monopoly. Usually, the monopoly holder
>charges more, kills off competition, and gains control of the
>consumers themselves.
>
one way the consumer benefitted was with the winmodem. You buy a new
computer and pay for a modem that won't work with any other operating
system and if you stick with windows your systems slows to crawl speed
every time some program accesses the modem.
lucky consumers.
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: No Microsoft Certification = NO JOB!
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 23:01:44 GMT
I'm flamed that government offices and school boards are now
DEMANDING you have Microsoft certification before they
will consider purchasing products from you.
My local PC vendor has told me they have been REJECTED from bidding on
government contracts because their business
doesn't have one person who holds a Microsoft license of ANY KIND....
What will also excite you to death is the FACT that virtually
ALL government offices these days, Federal, State, County or City
ALL REQUIRE you to have Visual Basic skills before your even
CONSIDERED for a job as a programmer!
Imagine that! Visual Basic, the development platform which ONLY runs on
Microsoft products.
So, if I've been a C++ coder working with Borland or a COBOL coder
working on a mainframe or PC with Microfocus,
I'm not considered EMPLOYABLE by any LEVEL of government as they
REQUIRE skills on a very proprietary
development platform with a company the Federal court system has ruled
GUILTY of MIS-CONDUCT!
So on one hand, Microsoft is GUILTY of criminal conduct but on the
OTHER hand the actions of such government agencies
such as the FEDERAL COURT SYSTEM do not consider it CRIMINAL that they
REQUIRE you to have VISUAL
BASIC SKILLS before they will ACCEPT AN APPLICATION....
And let's talk further. In 6 years time, Microsoft might be in several
different companies after they are broken up.
The INVESTMENT? made in VISUAL BASIC DEVELOPMENT by all these
BRILLIANT GOVERNMENT DECISION MAKERS
will be at JEAPORDY which will cause WE the TAXPAYERS even more insult
to injury.
I'm not a free man. I can't be. I have to have Microsoft written all
over everything I own in order to get a job with the
Federal Government. My rights have been violated as a taxpayer because
my government allows the building of
major infrastructures on a proprietary development platform which will
ONLY RUN UNDER MICROSOFT OPERATING SYSTEMS.
YET it is MY GOVERNMENT who has found MICROSOFT GUILTY. And at the same
time are continuing to develop
their projects using ONLY VISUAL BASIC in EVERY job I've applied for
from the City, thru the County, thru the State, thru
the Federal Government itself!
I've got 17 years experience writing win api programs and as far as
MY GOVERNMENT is concerned, I'M UNEMPLOYABLE.
This is an absolute crime and I'm going to write my Senators and
Congressmen about it today.
And I encourage EVERYBODY to do the same.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bastian)
Subject: Re: I have a dream!
Date: 12 Apr 2000 23:03:43 GMT
On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 22:09:51 GMT, Charlie Ebert wrote:
>Haaaa,
>
>This is so pitaful...
Indeed, it is.
>Try to demonstrate one little point and you end up starting an uprising in
>Bavaria.
When I read this posting, your little point turned out to be a "I have to save
the world" thing.
>Well, let me explain my last message.
>
>Back in the 60's, when I was a kid, Black people were turned away from
>employment due to the color of their skin.
So what? This has been abolished as far as I can figure out.
>Well, same thing's happening today. If you don't have VB skills and/or a
>MSCE you get turned away from employment.
... and I get F's in maths because I don't have maths skills. This is called
"education". Blame the Lord or whomever for your level of intelligence, not
anyone else.
>And let' s review the list of morons who are doing it.
I'm looking forward to it...
>Let's see. There' s the district attorney's office, the State Capital, the
>Federal government on many levels including the Federal Court system,
>the U.S. District Attornies offices, in short just about everybody in
>government with the exception of the Military.
I don't want to know how many accounts in the district attorney's office are
MSCE's. Whom do you want to blame for your typing-skills in MS Office?
>So on one hand, the Justice department is breaking Microsoft up into little
>peices because they are a BAD company.
Yes, the policy of MS is kind of criminal, but...
>ON the other hand, unless I'm a Microsoft DWEEBE MORON I don't get the
>job....
... that's why they are sued. Microsofts tactics have nothing to do with the
functionality of the software itself.
>KAPICHE!!!!
You still wanna know this? Not really.
>I feel like one of those folks from the 60's. My goverment doesn't
>represent me anymore, further they don't even seem to be representing
>themselves very well..
In every democracy there have to be some people (they're commonly refered to as
"opposition" if they add constructive criticism, or as "anarchists" if their
contributions are not helpful) opposing government.
>I'm a WIN api programmer form way back, now a Linux Hacker and I'd just
>like to say I feel like a Black man due to the actions of
>my Federal Government.
What's that supposed to be: "I'm feeling like a Black man." Do you consider
this a decrease in your importance/value as a human being? Or is it just a
catchphrase?
>I really do.
I start to believe this...
>And I think what King said back in the 60's still applies to us today.
>
>We have no right's. It's because Microsoft is controlling the show. And
>our own government is filled with idiots who are egging Bill on with
>one hand and fixing to bust him into a billion peices on the other.
It really limits your rights if the government uses M$ software. I'm pretty
sure you're affected by this in everyday life. But the fact that the
government fights M$ in some way shows that they want to change the situation.
I really don't get your point: you speak of "morons" and "idiots" because they
use Microsoftware, and on the other hand you don't appreciate those "idiots"
regulating M$.
>I've even got some freinds in a fairly large PC retailer who've been
>TURNED OFF by local community city and county government offices
>as well as several school boards because they don't have a single
>MICROSOFT CERTIFIED ENGINEER working for them.
>And because of this,, they are not allowed to sell these entities PC's
>anymore!!!!
Well, I'm not running a business... but my brain needed like 2.3 milliseconds
to find both a solution and an explanation for your friend's problem. He
should probably employ an MSCE. And the explanation: what's wrong with
requiring a certain proven standard of education from the people your
government spends money for? Not much, because if they let every wannabe-hacker
install their computer equipment, they'd end up spending more money on
repairing their stuff than an army of MSCE's would cost.
>So they have been turned into black men also.
Now what? You wanna open a black-only club? BTW if your textwriting urge forces
you to use metaphors, chose better ones next time please. The black man one is
really bad.
>I know what King was thinking about when he was alive.
Virtually everyone knows this.
>I'm oppressed every day and it's all because of one company known as
>Microsoft.
>Other people who are my freinds are oppressed every day and it's all due to
>Microsoft.
I'm glad you're not blaming all your problems on Microsoft. But it must be
a torture for you to burn the food in the oven. Oh sorry, of course it was the
one who supplies the current to run it. If your "blame everything on the
other ones" theory weren't so stupid, I'd be tempted to use it myself: why
hit the brakes when somebody crosses the street? It's his problem...
>And what REALLY, REALLY FRIES MY ASS is my government is actually
>AIDING THE ENEMY!!!
YOu HaVE a PROBLEM wItH yOuR CapS lOck KEY.
oF CourSe youR gOVERrnmEnt juSt SUeS thEm to MAKe tHEm stROngEr.
>That just blisters me to no end folks.
>
>No for why I picked King. Very simple. Out of all the people in history
>I could have choosed, I felt his experience was the closest to
>mine.
Of course, because you've been sent to jail too for your encouraging words to
the public. And because you also blamed yourself, like King did when he spoke
against the hatred Malcolm X spread. MLK was well aware of the fact that the
Blacks are not just the victims. You're not. You definitely shouldn't write
about persons you don't know anything about.
BTW would you die for your opinion on who ought to use which OS?
>Microsoft has a grip on our communities and government for which the Mafia
>could only dream of.
>How did we let this happen to us? What are we going to do about it?
Great grip they have there. If M$ *could* control government or whomever, they
had done it long ago: they never had been sued or sentensed. And Mr.
Multimillionaire Gates can't even bribe a simple judge. What bad kind of world
is it we're living in? At least in parts it seems to work quite well.
>And further, if you make jokes about this message and it doesn't scare you,
>then you must be some kind of nut.
>
>Charlie
Your message is a joke, no one needs to add one! And it doesn't scare me at
all, because I usually don't give a shit about the panicmakers.
If you haven't understood my metaphors, here's a short summary and little
explanation: I'm not a supporter of MS, I use Linux as the only OS. That would
be a good point to start "saving the world" (using an expression that's
dramatic enough to get thru your skull): use Linux, support it. The government
will recognise sooner or later which is the best choice for them. I'm pretty
sure they won't let themselves be forced to do something they don't want to
do.
Bastian
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
