Linux-Advocacy Digest #505, Volume #26 Sun, 14 May 00 22:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Dvorak calls Microsoft on 'innovation' (Gary Connors)
Re: You people are full of shit.... (abraxas)
Re: Never saw Linux die? Try this.... (abraxas)
Re: How to properly process e-mail
Re: You people are full of shit.... (Ray)
Re: How to properly process e-mail
Re: Dvorak calls Microsoft on 'innovation' (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Dvorak calls Microsoft on 'innovation' (Gary Connors)
Re: You people are full of shit.... (mlw)
Re: How to properly process e-mail
Re: Things Linux can't do! (Roger)
Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gary Connors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dvorak calls Microsoft on 'innovation'
Date: Sun, 14 May 2000 21:11:36 -0400
in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], JEDIDIAH at
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 5/14/00 8:12 PM:
> On Sun, 14 May 2000 16:53:58 -0400, Gary Connors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> MacOS's UI seems complete.
>
> Perhaps to you. To someone else, it's woefully inadequate or
> perhaps simply 'different' enough from Windows to be problematic.
>
Windows, screw Windows. Windows blows. The more I use Windows, I more I
think It was compiled in debug more, with all the screwy error codes, obsure
dialogs, control panels who primary functions are less usuable than the ones
that most people use at home. Why would I need to right click on a PPP
setup file to input my username and password? Why does the network control
panel have that many options? Windows is some ways less usuable than Linux.
Windows is why the tech support industry cost the US BILLIONS each year.
Windows is why people beleive that when a computer begins to misbehave it is
thier fault. Windows is not even worth using.
>> Why should I have to install several desktops in LInux to find one that
>> works. Good lord man, you realize how stupid that sounds. "Gnome blows,
>
> If you've used more than one GUI in your entire lifetime, it's
> not quite as stupid as it sounds. Plus, more than one desktop is
> usually installed on a Linux system to begin with.
>
Here lies the poblem. Give a desktop with a set of apps in the menubar that
are usuable. Give a defalt configuration that works and needs NO SETUP.
> In Bughat, all you have to do is choose another selection from a
> selection widget.
>
>> you think, well look for a different interface" Well, I dont have that sort
>> of time, I have work to do. The OS should work out of the box and there is
>> not a single Linux distrib out today that is as complete for home use as
>> MacOS or Windows. Stability be damned, I have work to get done.
>
> What is missing exactly? The widgets are there. The basic window
> management is there. Even GNOME is fairly stable these days. Plenty
> of apps and applets are bundled in, especially if you're installing
> the official Suse.
>
Okay. Why is Abiword's icon not on the desktop or in a menu? Why do I have
to go to a prompt and type which abirword to find out where it is located,
so i can use the file manager to create a shortcut on the desktop? Why did
Star Office outright break a fresh install of Mandrake 7.0 with default
configuration? Where are all those fancy apps for Gnome and KDE installed?
Why aren't they in the menu's or on the desktop? Once Linux is set up by
someone who has done it before, it can be used as a desktop? Personally, I
could care less about finding out what was installed, where it went, and how
to put it in a menu. To me buying an OS is not a political issue as it is
with many OSS advocates, its a pratical issue. Gnome, although feature
rich, default installs to give the impression it has very little features.
The same can be said about KDE.
>>>> Quite frankly I find IRIX to be FAR easier to use than Linux. Far easier.
>>>> Why, 1) limited UI options 2) finding my minimized apps doesnt require good
>>>> eyes (damn windows like taskbar in KDE and GNOME has got to go) 3)
>>>> Switching
>>>> apps is instant (just mouse over), raising and lowering windows is a
>>>> breeze.
>>>> Simple, Effective and doesnt get in the way.
>>>
>>> So pick an interface that works the way you like.
>>>
>>
>> I did and Linux doesnt have it.
>
> ...a good argument for having a wider selection of choices if
> there ever was one...
>
A good arguement for standarization on a suite of desktop apps and limited
and easy to use GUI controls with "power user" features NOT in the default
install, but as an option.
> [deletia]
>>> phisical enviornments, different customer priorities....
>>>
>>>
>>
>> "different administrative practices" I dont have time to "administrate" my
>> home computer. Linux needs to be pampered properly to get desired
>
> Then what are you doing owning one?
>
I picked up a P2/266 for $200 with montior. Who could pass that up? I
tried to install Mandrake and Redhat on it. Mandrake was the easier to
install of the two (by far). While trying to install those fancy desktop
apps, I kept breaking the installer. Tried this for days, before wiping the
HD with a final blow, and spending my spare time turning the computer into a
mp3 stereo (using linux of course, as a embedded OS that requires limited
uses, linux is fine) that is controlled via http on a LAN with my Macs.
That took some time (2 months, maybe less), but was well worth it, now as I
add computers to my house, regardless of OS on them, I have full access to
my mp3s from all of them.
>> funcality. It defalts to a unsetup OS out of the box. It has basic
>> functionality obsured (how do you set up that printer again? How do you set
>
> You've pretty much demonstrated your complete inexperience with
> Linux whatsoever with this little bit of FUD.
>
FUD, FUD. "You just keep using that word over and over, but i dont think
you what you think it means is what I think it means". FUD. Priceless.
Why FUD linux? What is there to gain? Im not advacting MS shit. Im
certainly not gonna tell a Linux user that MacOS is for them, cause it's
not. Hell, I LOVE the idea of OSS and hope that it might actually break the
MS monolopy, but it hasnt. I'm just saying that if you are going to use a
Open Source OS, you should NOT use Linux. Especially as a workstation and
server, there better solutions out there. No self respecting high end
server has Linux on it, they use FreeBSD or OpenBSD.
> [deletia]
>
> There have been shiny happy gui tools, in and outside of the
> installation process, for most aspects of Linux for quite
> some time now. This includes init, modems (as if a real modem
> needs any twiddling with actually), printers and networking.
Existing and easy to find and locate are two different things.
BTW, init is usually somthing that doesnt not need to be set up, being the
mother of all processes and all. For home use, runlevel 3 should suffice,
which is the default, iirc.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: You people are full of shit....
Date: 15 May 2000 01:23:14 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I use Windows 98se everyday running a graphics workshop business and I
> never get BSOD's nor do I seem to have all of the troubles you Linux
> nuts seem to have.
Neat. A graphics 'workshop' that relies on windows98. Tell me,
exactly what sorts of graphics do you do?
> I have friends in the jingle business that I work closely with and
> they also run Windows for their studios and they do not seem to have
> all of the troubles you speak of....
The "jingle business"? Oh thats very impressive.
> I suspect that some of the Linux folks are soured on Windows because
> of the bad experiences they had with earlier versions, and rightfully
> so. We have all had to endure some pretty shitty Windows releases.
I just had an experience so terrible with W2K that I dumped it entirely.
> However, the current crop is quite good and is used by millions every
> day to make money.
Ah. The old 'everyone uses it so it MUST be good' argument. Kind of
like cigarettes in the fifties.
> We are not anti-Linux at all, in fact we are looking forward to the
> day that we can stop paying ridiculous prices for software. However we
> have all tried various forms of Linux and quite frankly it is a
> complete joke.
Sounds like the problem is with your intelligence, not the OS in
question.
> One guy spent nearly a week trying to get a Samba
> server going.
Then hes a complete idiot. A collegue's 9 year old son set up samba
at his home a couple of months ago. On his very own linux box.
Yes, what im saying is this: Your 'one guy' is dumber than a 9 year
old.
> This is completely idiotic since it is so simple to do
> under Windows. Don't even try to compare Gimp to Adobe or Rosegarden
> to SoundForge.
Gimp to "adobe"? You must mean "photoshop". Ive been playing with
the latest betas, and they absolutely do every last thing that
photoshop does, except take up 200 megs of ram on my machine.
> Linux is a fucking joke. Really it is.
I think that rather, the case is that you're an idiot and you dont
understand it. You're mad because you feel stupid. Id be mad if
I couldnt get a simple operating system to work too. I understand
where this is coming from.
> Networking? Simple under Windows. A nightmare under Linux.
Oh really? Tell me, how do I set up multiple IP-ed network interfaces
and hosts under win98?
> One person tried to set up a Linux server and gave up.
A linux "server". You dont even know what youre talking about, do you?
Be honest.
> Reading 3 weeks
> of How TOs was a complete waste of time.
Because hes an idiot. Reading is generally a waste of time for idiots.
> Call him stupid if you will but ya'll are listening to his latest
> creation every day on the radio.
> In closing I wish Linux good luck because God knows it will need it.
> Linux is a hostile, user unfriendly system that no one but a true geek
> could love.
Or someone with two braincells to rub together.
> In my industry,
Oh, the "graphics workshop" industry? What exactly do you do, anyway?
Logo design? Webpages? Something equally "impressive"?
> Linux is the center of many a lunch time
> joke and it will be many years before this is changed.....
Id just as soon very, very stupid people not try it at all.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: Never saw Linux die? Try this....
Date: 15 May 2000 01:24:16 GMT
. wrote:
> Canoscan scanner parallel port attached.
> Try running the scanner identification program that Sane uses.
> Kills Linux completely...No other terminals to log into. Can't kill X
> server. Completely dead.......Red Switch Time....
Hmmm...
Alright, theres one (1) way to kill a linux machine.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: How to properly process e-mail
Date: 14 May 2000 21:30:57 -0400
CAguy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
>On Thu, 11 May 2000 17:31:37 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>(Bit Twister) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 11 May 2000 02:49:59 GMT, CAguy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On Wed, 10 May 2000 22:30:52 +0200, Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>This is no more dangerous then going to a web page the does the
>>>same thing. I get those also..and it's annoying as hell.
>>Dangerous, you might want to look here
>> http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2000-02.html
>
>It's not dangerous in that the Javascript embedded in the
>html of a web site or email cannot insert a virus onto my system.
It can if that Javascript is actually an ActiveX control.
--
Guns don't kill people, cops do!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray)
Subject: Re: You people are full of shit....
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 01:37:03 GMT
On Mon, 15 May 2000 00:47:43 GMT, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I use Windows 98se everyday running a graphics workshop business and I
>never get BSOD's nor do I seem to have all of the troubles you Linux
>nuts seem to have.
If you're happy with Windows than by all means use it.
>
>We are not anti-Linux at all, in fact we are looking forward to the
>day that we can stop paying ridiculous prices for software.
If Windows actually works well for you then it's really not overpriced, your
just cheap.
>
>Linux is a fucking joke. Really it is.
>
>Networking? Simple under Windows. A nightmare under Linux.
>One person tried to set up a Linux server and gave up. Reading 3 weeks
>of How TOs was a complete waste of time.
>
>Call him stupid if you will but ya'll are listening to his latest
>creation every day on the radio.
Jingles suck. I took music classes for years and still can't carry a tune.
Don't call me stupid, I work with computers for a living.
>
>In closing I wish Linux good luck because God knows it will need it.
>Linux is a hostile, user unfriendly system that no one but a true geek
>could love. In my industry, Linux is the center of many a lunch time
>joke and it will be many years before this is changed.....
In most industries, computers are set up by people with computer skills and
jingles are written by people who can carry a tune. Just because I can't
draw doesn't mean that graphics are worthless and just because you can't set
up a Linux machine doesn't make Linux worthless either.
If you really want to use Linux in your business then hire someone who know
what the're doing and get back to doing something you are good at.
--
Ray
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How to properly process e-mail
Date: 14 May 2000 21:38:26 -0400
Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
>
>"Leslie Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8fd8so$23rj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <8fd6v2$sbo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> I didn't, which is why I am still asking questions. Is the difference
>> >> between an image and a script obvious in preview mode or not? That
>> >> is, can you tell if 'open' is dangereous?
>> >
>> >Yes. Different icon, different file extension.
>>
>> So how does that tell you what is going to happen?
>
>If you "open" something that can execute code, it's very dangerous.
Normal users don't know what can execute code and what can't. They think
that "Open It" always means "Display its contents" (which it does, in any
mail client except Outlook). That's why e-mail viruses spread so efficiently
between Windows systems. If a different icon and extension was enough, we
wouldn't have even heard of ILOVEYOU.
--
Guns don't kill people, cops do!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dvorak calls Microsoft on 'innovation'
Date: 14 May 2000 20:30:02 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Gary Connors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>THis is like saying "Both Porsche and Ford are as fast as thier engines
>allow" Its double talk and means nothing. Take a look at www.openbsd.org.
>Look at thier front page and the nice notice on how long it's shipped
>wihtout a security hole in the defalt install. Then try again.
But openbsd defaults to having everything turned off. What
good is being secure when you don't have any network services
running? If you actually want the box to do something you
have to turn them on. Didn't they ship the same named as
everyone else when it had security problems?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Gary Connors <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dvorak calls Microsoft on 'innovation'
Date: Sun, 14 May 2000 21:31:00 -0400
in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Ray at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote on 5/14/00 9:04 PM:
>>
>> Solaris, VMS, IRIX, Ultrix...Just to name a few.
>
> So the only difference between the average mainframe and the average PC is
> the OS that they run? Are you sure about that?
>
Well, in terms of stability, generally speaking, yes. A fault tolerant OS
doesn't crash. End of story. It may end up being slow as mollasis, but it
won crash.
> What default? You pick the front end(s) you want installed when you install
> the system or at any time thereafter. I'm using fvwm2 on this laptop but if
See Installer Install, See Installer Break. Break Installer Break.
>>
>> MacOS's UI seems complete.
>
> You were comparing OSs not just UIs. If MacOS is "complete" then why isn't
> it used on every PC, Mainframe, and Laptop by everyone for every purpose?
>
>>
Same reason Linux isn't capturing the world by storm, MS has a monolopy and
if someone buys a PC for work use that doesn't have Windows on it, they get
fired.
<snip stuff addressed in another post>
>> you think, well look for a different interface" Well, I dont have that sort
>> of time, I have work to do. The OS should work out of the box and there is
>> not a single Linux distrib out today that is as complete for home use as
>> MacOS or Windows.
>
> Maybe you'd best define complete.
>
> MacOS and Windows may be more polished but most Linux Distros come with far
> more Apps. and documentation. Most PC hardware comes with Windows drivers
> (and install instructions) but if you're just talking about what comes in
> the OS box Linux often has better hardware support than Windows.
>
Big deal. Even if Linux supported every device know to man and worked with
it the first time, if you cant find the printer set up utiltity, its
pointless.
Personally, Windows isn't even an option. It's faults in some ways are
bigger than Linux's.
>
>> Stability be damned, I have work to get done.
>
> What can you really do with Windows "out of the box"? Almost every task I
> can think of requires some add on or another. You might be able to limp out
> onto the net but without a virus scanner even that's asking for trouble.
>
Well, lets see, that Winmodem is gonna work. Ummm... MacOS is gonna see, by
default every printer on the network and during the install will ask you
which ones you want to add to your desktop. Let's see, both of which can
look at Quicktime movies. Both of which work with AOL (for me thats
completely irrelevent, for my mother its primary). Both of which have
access to MS Office (again to me its irrelevent, to a large network with
crossplatform OS's, its primary). Simpler set up programs, post installer
(at least on MacOS, Windows didnt seem to have very good post installer
setup). Easy acess to apps that ship in the defalt install. (AbiWord
anyone).
>>
>> I did and Linux doesnt have it.
>
> Obviously not since all of the features you list above ARE available in most
> Linux distros. out of the box.
>
No they aren't. Dont lie.
>>
>> "different administrative practices" I dont have time to "administrate" my
>> home computer.
>
> And you're not running VMS at home either are you?
>
If i could pick up an old VAX, I would. How cool would that be.
> You were comparing the stability of Linux running on a home machine and
> being administrated by an end user with VMS running on a mainframe with at
> least one full time system admin. The hardware is different, the skills of
> the admin. are different and you'd therefore expect the reliability to be
> different even if they had the exact same OS installed.
>
Most of my comparisions were to OpenBSD, FreeBSD, and MacOS (and some
Windows). Which are fair comparisions.
>> It has basic
>> functionality obsured (how do you set up that printer again? How do you set
>> up that modem? How do you set up a basic LAN? How do I turn off all those
>> stupid daemons?) I know how to do it, but it could never be described as
>> easy.
>
> Agreed those things should get easier but I've seen people screw those tasks
> up in Windows as well.
>
Windows is irrelevent.
> What??? You just said " Linux doesnt even compare to other GNU OS's". What
> other GNU OS's are there besides Hurd and (maybe Linux)?
>
Hmm. Hold on. Pulling foot out of mouth. Forgot, OpenBSD and FreeBSD
aren't GNU. Technicalities, I'm sure.
>>
>> Did you study double talk in college? Try making sense next time.
>
> Well that was rude.
>
>> We are
>> talking about the out of the box experience.
>
> And yet you keep comparing Linux with VMS & IRIX and I'll bet you've never
> seen "the boxes" for those much less installed one from scratch.
>
No, I compare Linux to MacOS, OpenBSD, and FreeBSD for home use and Linux
vs. VMS, IRIX, Solaris, and Ultirix for high end use. Both of which are
fair comparisions.
>> OpenBSD's out of the box
>> experience is way better tha Linux (as server and workstation). Linux's out
>> of the box experience for a home use machine out right blows.
>
> Most home users are way over their head installing any OS including both
> Linux and OpenBSD. I've even seen users screw up a Win95 -> Win98 upgrade
> and I've seen many screw up NT installs. Home users should either stick to
> the OS that came with their hardware or shell out a few bucks and some time
> for a decent book on their new favorite OS or pay someone else to do it for
> them.
And the OS that should come with x86 PC's should be one of the BSD's not
Linux or Windows.
>
>> I've
>> installed Redhat 6.x, Mandrage 7.1, and OpenLinux. I've broken all three
>> installers by choosing incompatible rpm's. I can say with conifidence, I
>> never has broken the installer to MacOS (system 7.1-9.0) or Windows
>> (3.1-98).
>
> How much software comes with Redhat etc. How much comes with Windows/Mac?
> Try installing a similar quantity of software on both and then we'll talk.
>
Everything I've every need to use for MacOS came with my machine or is a
free download, with the exception of Dreamweaver and Fireworks, both of
which has quality that exceed anything available on Linux.
>>
>> No. Linux is not like BMW, it more like calling it a E-Machines. Cheap,
>> everywhere, but still not worth buying because its competitors win hands
>> down in everything.
>
>
> Even a Yugo handles better than a Uhaul, is faster than a moped and gets
> better gas milage than a pickup truck etc.
>
> Lets see. You are comparing Linux's stability with VMS, "completeness" with
> Win/Mac, and security with OpenBSD.
>
>
Taken in context, that is in several markets, all of which are completely
viable comparisions.
>>
>> THis is like saying "Both Porsche and Ford are as fast as thier engines
>> allow"
>
>
> No, it's like saying that "Both Porsche and Ford are as fast and safe as the
> skills of their drivers allow."
>
>
You obviously didnt go to OpenBSD's web site. Try reading the front page
and tell me if Linux can claim:
Three years without a remote hole in the default install!
Two years without a localhost hole in the default install!
Without being laughed out of the market.
>> Its double talk and means nothing.
>
> It means that the administrator of a computer system is almost always the
> weak link when it comes to security and reliability.
Not if they install OpenBSD.
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You people are full of shit....
Date: Sun, 14 May 2000 21:41:46 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps you are proud of what you have written, and you may not, in
fact, like what I write. However... I read what you write and just shake
my head. Obviously this is a hostile post. Being such, one has to
question the perspective of the presenter.
>
> I use Windows 98se everyday running a graphics workshop business and I
> never get BSOD's nor do I seem to have all of the troubles you Linux
> nuts seem to have.
>
One can not debate the experiences of another, but, I find this hard to
believe.
> I have friends in the jingle business that I work closely with and
> they also run Windows for their studios and they do not seem to have
> all of the troubles you speak of....
> I suspect that some of the Linux folks are soured on Windows because
> of the bad experiences they had with earlier versions, and rightfully
> so. We have all had to endure some pretty shitty Windows releases.
This is an interesting paragraph, one which is repeated frequently.
Every time a new version of Windows is released, we hear how bad the old
one was and how stable the new one is. Until, of course, the next
version.
>
> However, the current crop is quite good and is used by millions every
> day to make money.
Yes, this is true, but measurable TCO is a very difficult metric.
Windows is reliable because the average worker reboots every day, saves
every five minutes, and knows how to operate scandisk. I can't tell you
how many times I hear "Just reboot, that will fix it." I would like to
state for the record, rebooting does not "fix" anything. Rebooting
corrects the current symptoms of the problem, which, of course, goes
unfixed.
>
> We are not anti-Linux at all, in fact we are looking forward to the
> day that we can stop paying ridiculous prices for software. However we
> have all tried various forms of Linux and quite frankly it is a
> complete joke. One guy spent nearly a week trying to get a Samba
> server going. This is completely idiotic since it is so simple to do
> under Windows. Don't even try to compare Gimp to Adobe or Rosegarden
> to SoundForge.
I have no idea how anyone could take so much time. There are books about
samba in the store, there are numerous web sites that detail everything
from the most basic to the most esoteric. A week? I can't see this
actually happening.
>
> Linux is a fucking joke. Really it is.
So, this is your agenda, be honest, we can take it.
>
> Networking? Simple under Windows. A nightmare under Linux.
> One person tried to set up a Linux server and gave up. Reading 3 weeks
> of How TOs was a complete waste of time.
3 weeks? Again, I can't imagine this.
>
> Call him stupid if you will but ya'll are listening to his latest
> creation every day on the radio.
I wouldn't call anyone stupid, however, often times people are resistant
to change and refuse to learn something which is different. Different is
a quality independent of better or worse. Linux is different and many
people have problems with that.
>
> In closing I wish Linux good luck because God knows it will need it.
> Linux is a hostile, user unfriendly system that no one but a true geek
> could love. In my industry, Linux is the center of many a lunch time
> joke and it will be many years before this is changed.....
I work, make money, earn a good living, saving to put the kid in a good
school, and I use Linux. I could not get the work I do done with
Windows, so for me it is not a joke.
--
Mohawk Software
Windows 9x, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com
"We've got a blind date with destiny, and it looks like she ordered the
lobster"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How to properly process e-mail
Date: 14 May 2000 21:45:12 -0400
Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
>Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>"Rob S. Wolfram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> If I hit enter on a shell script or ELF binary in Mutt or click on it in
>>> Netscape, it will not execute. If I hit enter on a jpg image in Mutt it
>>> will use Imagemagick to display it. If I hit enter on an AVI file in
>>> Mutt it will use xanim to display the move. If I hit enter on an mp3
>>> file in Mutt it will play it via mpg123. Do you finally see the
>>> difference between open and execute?
>>I already know the difference.
>Then tell me, what /should/ happen when I "open" an email attachment
>that contains a Visual Basic Script?
What _should_ happen? A text editor should be spawned, showing the
contents of the VirusBasic Script.
--
Guns don't kill people, cops do!
------------------------------
From: Roger <roger@.>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 01:52:27 GMT
On Sun, 14 May 2000 16:53:14 GMT, someone claiming to be Perry Pip
wrote:
>It is a well known fact the MS has subsidized people to use NT so that
>they could publish an NT success story.
Then you should have no problem documenting a dozen cases where this
has happened?
Half a dozen?
One?
Didn't think so...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 01:52:36 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc Christopher Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now, now, don't say such things.
> You probably don't actually have proof of this.
> And if you _did_, saying such things in public certainly wouldn't reflect
> well on "the church," and could thus get you, um, killed...
Financially, maybe. The seem to be more lawsuit happy than the American
public.
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
| Andrew Halliwell BSc | |
| in | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
| Computer Science | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
==============================================================================
|GCv3.12 GCS>$ d-(dpu) s+/- a C++ US++ P L/L+ E-- W+ N++ o+ K PS+ w-- M+/++ |
|PS+++ PE- Y t+ 5++ X+/X++ R+ tv+ b+ DI+ D+ G e++ h/h+ !r!| Space for hire |
==============================================================================
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
