Linux-Advocacy Digest #366, Volume #26 Thu, 4 May 00 19:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 (Arclight)
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 (Arclight)
Re: which OS is best? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 ("Bob May")
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 ("Bob May")
Re: which OS is best? (Pascal Haakmat)
Re: Virus on the net? (David Goldstein)
Re: Virus on the net? (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Dinosaur Eat Blue Penguin? ("ax")
Re: Virus on the net? (Bastian)
Linus' comments go agains common knowledge ("Davorin Mestric")
Re: Is the PC era over? (dakota)
Re: What else is hidden in MS code??? (Rob S. Wolfram)
Re: Are we equal? (Rob S. Wolfram)
Re: UI Standards (was Re: KDE is better than Gnome) (David Steuber)
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 (Rico)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Arclight)
Crossposted-To: alt.lang.basic,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 21:10:41 GMT
On 04 May 2000 17:27:11 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damien) wrote:
>On Thu, 04 May 2000 16:32:03 GMT, in alt.destroy.microsoft,
>Arclight <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>| On 04 May 2000 09:38:30 -0600, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>| wrote:
>|
>| >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Arclight) writes:
>
>| >> anyway what's stopping you using office 2000 on some of the computers
>| >> and 97 on others?
>| >
>| >File incompatibilites.
>|
>| These can be avoided by using the right export/import filters.
>|
>| >Don't tell me they don't exist; we've already encountered several
>| >PowerPoint problems (and we don't even have Office 2000 anywhere in
>| >the building).
>| Try installing all the import/export filters that are on the office
>| 2000 CD, they should get rid of any problems.
>
>He doesn't have Office 2000.
but the source of the office 2000 document will.
>Another thing, the default on all these programs is to save into the
>new incompatible file format. Is there reason for this other than to
>turn the upgrade treadmill?
So that it saves all the new features in the file.
>Is there any way to change the system to
>make it save into the older formats by default?
Probably
>And why aren't these
>file formats backwards compatible?
Because they add new features to office with every release, and the
old file formats can't handle them.
>Any decent file format would have
>an extensible design making new versions automatically compatible with
>older versions.
They are partially compatible, as long as you don't use any of the new
features.
TTFN
Arclight
Web Site:
http://www.daniel-davies.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Arclight)
Crossposted-To: alt.lang.basic,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 21:10:42 GMT
On 04 May 2000 12:22:48 -0600, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Arclight) writes:
>
> [snip]
>
>> >File incompatibilites.
>>
>> These can be avoided by using the right export/import filters.
>
>No they can't.
Yes they can.
>> >Don't tell me they don't exist; we've already encountered several
>> >PowerPoint problems (and we don't even have Office 2000 anywhere in
>> >the building).
>>
>> Try installing all the import/export filters that are on the office
>> 2000 CD, they should get rid of any problems.
>
>Animated gifs in presentations?
That's a problem with using a new feature which doesn't exist in the
older versions. If you want to use new features you'll have to be
prepared for the older versions not to support it, its the same with
most software.
TTFN
Arclight
Web Site:
http://www.daniel-davies.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 16:18:36 -0500
On Thu, 04 May 2000 03:21:16 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
wrote:
>On Wed, 03 May 2000 22:03:24 -0500,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>
>>On 4 May 2000 01:36:38 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pascal Haakmat) wrote:
>>
>>>dc wrote:
>>>
>>>>Something's obviously wrong with that, though, because I now can't get
>>>>any of my modules to work. Since my PCMCIA controller is controlled
>>>>with a module, that laptop's dead in the water unless someone
>>>>(please!) can tell me what's wrong. It's done this time and time and
>>>>time again, and it's become very frustrating. I've renamed the
>>>>/var/modules dir to /var/mod2 and made a new, empty /var/modules
>>>>directory, to no avail (but after that, it only gets 3 or 4 dirs in
>>>>there when I do a make modules_install, although granted I've left out
>>>>most options that I don't need - sound, MMX, extra IDE support, SCSI,
>>>>etc., and my modules.dep is only 2k or so in size...) The modules
>>>>page in the kernel's menuconfig has 3 entries in it, and all are
>>>>selected; it _should_ load the modules just fine, no? I get all
>>>>kinds of errors when the modules try to load up from depmod, devfs
>>>>isn't found, and no entries for a PCMCIA controller are found in
>>>>/proc/pcmcia, so eth0 doesn't come up.
>>>
>>>try not building pcmcia as a module or check your /etc/conf.modules.
>>
>>How would I not build it as a module? There's no option in menuconfig
>>for PCMCIA at all....it's just automatic, isn't it?
>>
>>What would I 'check' in /etc/conf.modules?
>>
>>More details, please.
>
>Until somewhere in the 2.3.x kernels, pcmcia is not in the kernel, it is
>available only as a seperate module. After compilation and installation of the
>pcmcia-cs pacakge, the modules for it will reside in
>/lib/modules/$KERNEL_VERSION/pcmcia
This is what I don't understand. I'm taking the kernel source that
was already there, and re-building the kernel. I shouldn't need to do
anything to get PCMCIA support working, right?
>check there for them, if they are there, then try verifying that
>pcmcia-core is loaded (lsmod will list the loaded modules)
If it isn't there, then what?
------------------------------
From: "Bob May" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.lang.basic,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 14:20:59 -0700
Sorry, but it is worse than that! If you create a file (just put a
character in a document) and you can't open that file with the older
version of the program. For reference, Works 3.0 creates a document
with just the letter "A" in it and you can't open it with the Works
2.0 version! That means that everybody in the company needs to
upgrade to 3.0 for compatibility reasons. All this because you can't
buy a license for Works 2.0 anymore. Microsoft is famous for this
kind of stuff. Look at the upgrading of RTF files for a very good
example. Every version of software that uses RTF for compiling
something seems to have it's own version of the extensions for doing
the same job. I have just put my foot down and am refusing to do any
upgrades unless the upgrade is backward compatible and with
Microsoft's propensity for not providing the standard being the same,
I am just not upgrading.
BTW, take a VB2.0 source code and try to run it in VB6.0 and you will
see what I mean. Even simple things (Hello World level stuff) won't
compile between the different versions!
--
Bob May
Don't subscribe to ACCESS1 for your webserver for the low prices. The
service has
been lousy and has been poor for the last year. Bob May
------------------------------
From: "Bob May" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.lang.basic,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 14:24:33 -0700
Ah, but that means a lot of work thrashing the code around and the
product is still the same because every time you make a change, you
need to go through the regulation process of the product all over
again. Do you want to spend $500,000 every year on a product that has
a gross sales of that much? I really wouldn't want to do that. I'd
rather maximize my engineering talent for making new products rather
than on just that one product.
--
Bob May
Don't subscribe to ACCESS1 for your webserver for the low prices. The
service has
been lousy and has been poor for the last year. Bob May
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pascal Haakmat)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Date: 4 May 2000 21:33:31 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>Something's obviously wrong with that, though, because I now can't get
>>>any of my modules to work. Since my PCMCIA controller is controlled
>>>with a module, that laptop's dead in the water unless someone
>>>(please!) can tell me what's wrong. It's done this time and time and
>>>time again, and it's become very frustrating. I've renamed the
>>>/var/modules dir to /var/mod2 and made a new, empty /var/modules
>>>directory, to no avail (but after that, it only gets 3 or 4 dirs in
>>>there when I do a make modules_install, although granted I've left out
>>>most options that I don't need - sound, MMX, extra IDE support, SCSI,
>>>etc., and my modules.dep is only 2k or so in size...) The modules
>>>page in the kernel's menuconfig has 3 entries in it, and all are
>>>selected; it _should_ load the modules just fine, no? I get all
>>>kinds of errors when the modules try to load up from depmod, devfs
>>>isn't found, and no entries for a PCMCIA controller are found in
>>>/proc/pcmcia, so eth0 doesn't come up.
>>
>>try not building pcmcia as a module or check your /etc/conf.modules.
>
>How would I not build it as a module? There's no option in menuconfig
>for PCMCIA at all....it's just automatic, isn't it?
>
>What would I 'check' in /etc/conf.modules?
>
>More details, please.
I'm afraid I'm way off base. I posted too soon and don't know how to
resolve your PCMCIA issue. Sorry for the confusion, good luck.
--
CSMA posting style test
http://awacs.dhs.org/csmatest
------------------------------
From: David Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Virus on the net?
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 23:24:01 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
<snipped>
> No microshit there, right? I think that even using Netscape as a mail-reader
> is semi-safe on Windows: it will infect the computer, but if you don't use
> Outlook, then it looks like it won't propagate any further.
This virus (macro) devestated Germany today. It propagated itself,
destroyed jpeg files, set IE to about:blank (big deal:)) and our company
is trying to discover if more damage was done. A lot of important
graphical data was destroyed and it will take a long time (very
expensive) to repair. The virus made the radio news just a couple of
hours after affecting our company. The SAP, a large bank, MediaMarkt,
and many other large companies were affected.
David Goldstein
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Virus on the net?
Date: 4 May 2000 21:41:52 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:8esgeo$46$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>
:> <snip!>
:>
:> :> 1) Most Linux e-mail clients aren't dumb enough to run code sent in
:> :> e-mail, and there's no "give me all your friend's e-mail addresss"
:> :> API either.
:>
:> : No, but there's a mail aliases list in the users home directory that
: could
:> : easily be read.
:>
:> There is? Where? Surely you don't mean .aliases
: Oh, of course, you keep all your email aliases in your head.
I'll pretend you're not trying to assert that mail addresses
are kept in .aliases. Where should a would-be attacker look
for stored addresses? Should it try .addresses that pine
uses? Maybe parse out the .muttrc and find the arbitrarily
named address files within? .elmrc perhaps? Grepping the
home directory for the @ symbol could take a very long
time before anything is found and even then is no guarantee
of finding anything. And hunting through the mail spool
for addresses or finding stored messages in the user's account
can take even longer.
That's an awful lot of work for a shell script.
:> :> 2) Linux doesn't run VBS. :)
:>
:> : No, instead it has sh.
:>
:> Not having VBS protects Linux against these sorts of email viruses
:> that Outlook runs automatically. I know of no email programs that
:> execute shell scripts short of actually saving them to disk and
:> explicitly running them. It's not VB in particular, but the
:> auto-executing of content that's such a killer in this case.
: Sorry, but this virus is *NOT* run automatically. It's only run by
: executing the script attachment. The user must physicall execute the file.
Early reports stated viewing the message in the preview panel is
enough to launch the script. This has since been proven false.
Yet the problem persists. Why is this? Are people really this
stupid? I don't think so. The problem is still one of
auto-executing content. People click on something in their
email expecting data and an program executes in its place.
Not only does it hide and overwrite files, but it has the
ability to mangle the entire system!
In this case, a little bit a consious thought (like actually
having to save the file to disk first) could've saved a lot
of grief. Another safeguard would be some actual system
security beyond the "any app can do anything" approach
of consumer-grade Windows.
But until people on the street start getting more proactive
towards security (like demanding a standard installer program
that can check digital signatures prior to installation - ala RPM,
for example) these sorts of attacks will continue to occur.
So far, people still aren't sick enough of Melissa and ILOVEYOU
to change their attitude. I wonder how much more it'll take.
------------------------------
From: "ax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Dinosaur Eat Blue Penguin?
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 21:44:02 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8enu65$eip$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <27FO4.777$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "ax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > People are chatting about what the two new Microsoft Dinosaur will do.
> One
> > speculation I heard is that Windows' Dinosaur will buy out Corel to
> pick
> > fight with its twin Office Dinosaur. Is this just a speculation? Any
> > rationale behind it?
> >
> > If Dinosaur likes to eat Penguin, why it choose PERFECTly DRAWn blue
> one
> > instead of the Red?
>
> No, no, no. What would be _really_ interesting is if Corel or Red Hat
> bought one of the baby Bills. Now that _would_ be something to get all
> worked up about.
>
Corel is running out of cash and Red Hat is in "Red" in its name.
They don't have deep pockets to buy any one of the baby Bills.
If anyone wants to collect more Penguins, Corel is cheap now.
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bastian)
Subject: Re: Virus on the net?
Date: 4 May 2000 21:53:14 GMT
On Thu, 4 May 2000 16:01:56 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> What alias list do you mean?
>
>depends on what mail program they're using. But common mail programs such
>as Elm or Pine have well known and common names for their mail aliases.
That's the strength of Linux: there isn't one commonly used mail
client that's part of the OS. I use mutt and/or balsa, other people
might use NS, elm, pine and many others. The alias list is defined
for each mail client in its own config file. That's why a Linux
Loveletter worm wouldn't be spread very fast and effectively.
Bastian
------------------------------
From: "Davorin Mestric" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linus' comments go agains common knowledge
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 00:50:54 +0200
but i thought open sourced programs are easy to debug with thousand eyes
working on it... now linus says they need help from professional programmers
for debugging?
doesn't make sense...
from: (watch for line splits)
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-1808165.html?tag=st.ne.1003.thed.1003-2
00-1808165
In February, Torvalds exhorted programmers to spend time on the
comparatively mundane bug-fixing instead of the more exciting work of adding
new features. He predicted the arrival of programming help from businesses
would help with the bug-fixing.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Is the PC era over?
From: dakota <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 15:22:30 -0700
>And finally apparently even PC Week believes the PC era is over.
They
>are changing their name from PC Week to eWeek:
>
>
The PC era is nowhere near over. The only thing coming to an end
is Microsoft's reign of stupidity.
Thank you DOJ/Judge Jackson....
* 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] (Rob S. Wolfram)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What else is hidden in MS code???
Date: 4 May 2000 16:53:15 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Hard disk serial numbers are not guaranteed to be unique. Two hard disks
>can exist with the same ID. It's unlikely, but it can happen. And since
>components that use them can be shipped all over the world, the odds of a
>clash are even higher. Random numbers are not guaranteed to be unique
>either. It's possible for two systems to generate the exact same random
>number. Again, not likely, but possible. MAC addresses are guaranteed by
>the IEEE to be unique.
I'll bet you a year's salary that I can come up with two distinct
ethernet cards with the same MAC address. Wanna play?
Cheers,
Rob
--
Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP 0x07606049 GPG 0xD61A655D
Adult: A person who stopped growing at both ends and starts
growing in the middle
-- stolen on Usenet
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob S. Wolfram)
Subject: Re: Are we equal?
Date: 4 May 2000 22:38:06 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TNT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, 02 May 2000 22:27:59 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mlw) wrote in
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>When you think about how the woman kidnapped the son, and left the
>>country, should she have been american, she would be considered a
>>criminal.
>
>It's actually a good deed to kidnap (it's really a rescue) a child and bring
>him away from an oppressive country like Cuba which's often been condemned
>for human right records and carrying a US embargo. Should she have been
>american, there's no such reason she would have fleed from the country
>politically. Even those who are communists often want to become American.
Let's turn the tables. When a Saudi-Arabian man kidnaps (or do you
perhaps prefer the term "rescues") a child he has with an American
woman and brings the child to Arabia, where she can be "properly" raised
in an environment away from the "atheists" in the US, would you agree
with that too?
How about when the father dies in a carcrash during the process and the
child is raised by distant relatives who refuse to give her to the US
mother because she will not be veiled in the US?
>Your reasoning is the exact reason why Elian's mother wanted to take him away
>from Cuba where people have no right to take care of their own business. The
>Communists take care of everything for you - from your body to your soul.
How long have you lived in a communist country to have had this
experience?
I personally don't care about the political aspects of the Elian
dispute, other that that I really pity the fact that the boy is being
abused politically by *BOTH* camps. All I know, is that if my kid was
kept away from me by distant relatives, I would not show the patience
that Elian's father has.
Cheers,
Rob
--
Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP 0x07606049 GPG 0xD61A655D
NT and security should not be mentioned in the same
sentence without negation.
-- Joe Zeff in a.s.r.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.kde,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: Re: UI Standards (was Re: KDE is better than Gnome)
From: David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 22:59:59 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows) writes:
' Have you read _About Face_ yet? If not, do so as it is a most
' informative book that is highly relevant to your questions. It
' is also rather more than I care to summarize here...
Do you mean this book?
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1568843224/o/qid=957478886/sr=2-1/104-5209136-9446822
I'll see if it is in my budget.
--
David Steuber | Hi! My name is David Steuber, and I am
NRA Member | a hoploholic.
http://www.packetphone.org/
All bits are significant. Some bits are more significant than others.
-- Charles Babbage Orwell
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.lang.basic,alt.destroy.microsoft
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rico)
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: Thu, 04 May 2000 23:05:16 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
mentioned:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Arclight) writes:
>
>> >And in 2001, or 2002?
>>
>> well you can still buy office 95 from some places, so I think it'd be
>> pretty safe to say that you will probably be able to buy office 97 in
>> 2002,
>>
>> >That doesn't solve the problem.
>>
>> But why should you force microsoft to sell outdated products just to
>> support the few people who might want them?
>
>It's commonly called the "upgrade treadmill" by us "few people".
>
>We hate it.
>
>> anyway what's stopping you using office 2000 on some of the computers
>> and 97 on others?
>
>File incompatibilites.
>
>Don't tell me they don't exist; we've already encountered several
>PowerPoint problems (and we don't even have Office 2000 anywhere in
>the building).
>
I'm missing your problem here, if you want to stick to a particular
version of a product, buy an open license. Then if MS stops selling, so
what, buy a new computer in what ever year you pick, install from the same
old CD you installed every other copy in the office from. Better still
stick the CD in the CD server and log the 'new' PC into the lan and run
the install script. Let 3Com and cat5 wiring do the work.
For an individual, as you upgrade computers, just install your original
license on the new machine.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
