Linux-Advocacy Digest #779, Volume #26 Wed, 31 May 00 03:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: There is only one innovation that matters... (was Re: Micros~1 innovations)
(Alan Baker)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. ("Christopher Smith")
Re: democracy? (Vilmos Soti)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. ("Christopher Smith")
Re: There is only one innovation that matters... (was Re: Micros~1 innovations)
("Christopher Smith")
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (Marty)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Alan Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy
Subject: Re: There is only one innovation that matters... (was Re: Micros~1
innovations)
Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 22:15:49 -0700
In article <8h0r7o$hv3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Christopher Smith"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Alan Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <8h0nhk$7ef$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Christopher Smith"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >"Alan Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> In article <8gvavr$8bc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Christopher Smith"
>> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >"Joe Ragosta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> >> In article <8gufnb$533$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Stephen S. Edwards
>> >> >> II"
>> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Microsoft's main innovation is quite obvious: putting lots of
>> >> >> > computing
>> >> >> > power into the hands of general consumers. Who else, besides,
>> >> >Commodore,
>> >> >> > Apple, IBM, or Atari has even attempted this? The beloved UNIX
>> >> >> > weenies
>> >> >> > at
>> >> >> > Sun? Silicon Graphics (officially renamed to "SGI")? Yeah...
>> >> >> > _right_.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Maybe IBM? HP? Compaq? Dell? Packard Hell?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Heck, Microsoft never put ANY computer power in the hands of
>> >> >> consumers.
>> >> >
>> >> >That's right, computers would be just as useful if you had to flip
>> >> >switches
>> >> >to use them.....
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> As if Microsoft were responsible for the current state of affairs.
>> >> Please.
>> >
>> >I'm sure some other company would be in the position Microsoft was in
>> >today
>> >if they "lucked out", but that's entirely irrelevant to who actually
>*is*.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> They lucked into a contract with IBM and bought someone else's work
>> >> to
>> >> fulfill it.
>> >
>> >And ?
>> >
>> >> Then they copied the Mac. Then, after they failed to create
>> >> their new technology OS (and after using IBM's money to pay for their
>> >> own research) they hired the guy who did VMS to do them a version of
>> >> it
>.
>> >
>> >And ?
>> >
>> >> Any positive effects that all this has had are purely accidental.
>> >
>> >By what definition of "accidental" ?
>>
>> By the definition that it took factors totally outside their influence
>> in order for it to have happened.
>
>Um, hardly. Outside their influence to get their foot in the door ?
>Certainly. Outside their influence to ram the door open thereafter ?
>Hardly.
They didn't get their foot in the door. IBM came to them. And when IBM
came the first time, Gates turned them down flat.
And if IBM had realized the ramifications of designing a system using
off-the-shelf components and a too-easy-to-reverse-engineer BIOS for the
eventual cloning of the PC, they would have refused to accept the clause
where MS got to keep the rights to distribute DOS separately and what
could MS have done about it? Bupkis. They didn't have the power to _ram_
open anything.
>
>> In particular, if Gary Kildall had signed IBM's non-disclosure
>> agreement, then Microsoft would never have been given a second chance to
>> produce MS-DOS (they'd already said no once) and if the largest and most
>> powerful computer company in the world hadn't made either one of _two_
>> crucial blunders in producing the PC, MS would never have been able to
>> sell their OS on clones.
>
>Then probably DR would be where Microsoft is today.
>
>The point is they're not, Microsoft is.
That's purely supposition. You don't know what kind of person Gary
Kildall is/was. There is no supposition to the circumstances under which
Microsoft lucked into the sweetheart deal of the century: it's
verifiable fact. And you were aware that IBM only came to Microsoft in
the first place because of family connections (Gates' mother on the same
board as the president of IBM, or some such) aren't you?
Face it: Bill Gates didn't make it happen... ...it happened _to him_.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that
wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the
bottom of that cupboard."
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 15:21:24 +1000
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On 30 May 2000 17:52:10 -0500, Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >Given sufficiently larger RAM for each new version, I'd agree. Run
> >each on the bare minimum for the previous version and you'll wish
> >you hadn't.
>
> Or if you run them with *only* 4 times what microsoft says is the minimum.
You can think of an equivalent OS this doesn't apply to ?
> Microsoft recomendations:
"Minimum" and "recommendation" are two very different things.
> windoze 3.1 in 1M
> windoze 95 in 4M
> windoze NT in 16M
I believe that's 12 (For WS, at least).
>
> Os/2 3.x in 4-8M could easily blow away windoze 98 in 64M w/ 4 times the
> processor.
Bwahahaha. Now that's funny. OS/2 is an absolute dog in less than 8 and
still slow in less than 16. Even OS/2 2.x was like that (worse, if
anything). The only reason it was better than NT is because it would
actually run (or rather, walk) in less than 12MB. NT and OS/2 at 16MB are
about the same, IME.
> Add 16-32M for your applications.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: democracy?
From: Vilmos Soti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 05:29:43 GMT
Praedor Tempus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>> If you want to see corruption at work go and work in Thailand.
>>>
>>> Heh, once I read in the newspaper (US) that the Thai Secretary of
>>> Education (or Culture, or something like this) said that corruption is
>>
>> If doing XYZ is actually the traditional and accepted way of doing things in
>> Thailand, who are we to say it's "corrupt" just because it's not the way we
>
> Err...I would wager that the common Thai would prefer no corruption,
> period.
Yes. Some Asian leaders like to talk about the so called "Asian Values."
All of these leaders were not famous for their love of democracy.
However, some Asian politicians like Martin Lee and Lee Teng Hui, the
latter one was the democratically elected president of Taiwan,
deny these so called Asian Values. They say this is simply a cover for
those politicians to cover up their acts.
According to this Asian Values the people accept that their rights should
be diminished for the common good. While this is a very nice thing, but
not the way China does. According to Martin Lee and Lee Teng Hui, nobody
likes that the government tell them how to live their own life and what
to give up. I trust these people way more than the leaders of Burma,
China, Vietnam, etc.
Same here. It is always understandable when the ruling class defends
corruption. They are corrupted, they are the beneficiary of this cancer.
I lived in three different continents (Asia, Europe, and North America),
and in all places the people were quite similar regarding these things.
The average people hate corruption and those Asian Values especially
when it is supported by a well hated government.
Vilmos
PS. I removed comp.os.linux.misc from this thread.
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 15:21:44 +1000
"Mig Mig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8h19q0$cnp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Mon, 29 May 2000 18:25:57 -0400, Drestin Black
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> No version of any microsoft software has ever been as fast as the
previous
> > >> version.
> > >
> > >
> > >What?! WHAT?!! are you on drugs??
> > >
> > >EVERY version of MS software I can think of is faster than the
previous. Can
> > >you name a specific issue of a new version slower than a previous
version? I
> > >can't think of a single one!
> > >
> >
> > windoze 3.1 vs. 95 vs. 98 vs. nt vs. W2K.
> >
> > All were slower than the prior version.
>
> 98 is faster and has less errors than 95... off course still several
> thousand procent more errors than Linux, MAC, CPM, AmigaOS, ZX81OS etc per
> thousand code lines.
Proof ?
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy
Subject: Re: There is only one innovation that matters... (was Re: Micros~1
innovations)
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 15:25:45 +1000
"Joe Ragosta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <8gvavr$8bc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Christopher Smith"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "Joe Ragosta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In article <8gufnb$533$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Stephen S. Edwards II"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Microsoft's main innovation is quite obvious: putting lots of
> > > > computing
> > > > power into the hands of general consumers. Who else, besides,
> > Commodore,
> > > > Apple, IBM, or Atari has even attempted this? The beloved UNIX
> > > > weenies
> > > > at
> > > > Sun? Silicon Graphics (officially renamed to "SGI")? Yeah...
> > > > _right_.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Maybe IBM? HP? Compaq? Dell? Packard Hell?
> > >
> > > Heck, Microsoft never put ANY computer power in the hands of
consumers.
> >
> > That's right, computers would be just as useful if you had to flip
> > switches
> > to use them.....
> >
> >
>
> Oh.
>
> So you're saying that if MS hadn't existed, that we'd still be flipping
> switches today?
Nope. But *someone* had to be there. It just happened to be Microsoft.
>
> That's an even stupider statement than the one before.
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 31 May 2000 05:45:15 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: In article <8h1ip5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <bb@bb> wrote:
:>In article <8h0lk5$b9b$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:>I guess then it is true what they say about linux. it is free for those
:>whose time is worthless.
:>Time is money. Are you so worthless that your time is worth nothing?
: What does that mean? Linux is faster than most of the alternatives.
: Are you offering to come over and re-install my Windows printer driver
: for free the next time it decides to destroy itself? It is easy enough
The guy appears to be a kind of Eliza. If you check his posts you find
that he (?) simply responds to anything with a insult plus chacterization
of the previous post as stupid. He makes to attempt at a
semantically meaningful reply.
He's either at a psychiatric institution or is an auto-reply program.
Peter
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 06:05:47 GMT
Not familiar with the comic stylings of Dave Tholen, eh? No matter.
Steve White wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
That article never appeared on my news server, Steve.
> > Which Kong? Robert was referring to the "One True Kong", which
> > is ambiguous given the existence of several Kongs, such as Donkey
> > Kong and King Kong. I don't believe you'll find either of these
> > Kongs in Singapore.
>
> We of course refer to the one and only Ho You Kong,
Prove that there is only one, if you think you can.
> whom you haven't met.
On what basis do you make this claim?
> Robert and I haven't either,
Irrelevant.
> though we feel, in a deep and nonsensical way, that we've met him.
How you feel, whether in a "deep nonsensical way" or otherwise, is
irrelevant. What you can prove is relevant.
> You could be his doppelganger,
On what basis do you make this ridiculous claim?
> but that would require you to make sense,
That would not be adequate proof that I was his "doppelganger" (sic).
> and you don't.
Incorrect.
> Given your writing style, however, you might be the doppelganger of King
> Kong,
Do you claim familiarity with the writing style of King Kong? Impossible.
> since he was a big, burly ape, and you're merely a chimp.
Typical invective, the usual resort of one who lacks a logical argument.
> Can't do a better insult than that unless you give me more material.
You are erroneously presupposing that I desire a "better" insult.
> Fovell works wonders with single words at times,
How often is "at times"?
> but I lack his panache.
Unfortunately, that's not all you lack, given your lack of a logical argument.
> > Illogical, as there are many other possibilities to achieve the same result.
>
> Asking that Kong, either Ho You or King, to be logical demonstrates that
> you are sorely missing the point,
On the contrary, it demonstrates your reading comprehension problems, as I
have not asked Ho You Kong or King Kong to be logical.
> as neither have been known for their logic.
Irrelevant. One need not be known for their logic in order to be logical.
> Nor frankly have you,
Yet another example of your pontification.
> but I digress.
Why?
> While HYK could stow away on a container ship filled with styrofoam
> peanuts,
What "HYK" could do is irrelevant. What you can prove is relevant.
> he'd have more fun in the container ship filled with laptop monitors,
> even if they're not yet assembled.
What he'd have more fun doing is also irrelevant. What is this, Irrelevancy
Theater?
> The Kong-ness of such a venture is evident to any regular here,
Incorrect, as "here" consists of CSMA, COOA, COLA, and COMS-WNA.
> and you aren't.
Incorrect again, as I am a regular to COOA.
> > What you don't think is irrelevant. What you can prove is relevant.
>
> Marty, clearly you're in the running for the ROOA
What I'm clearly in the running for is irrelevant.
> (ask Edwin the peeg),
Unnecessary.
> though you need to work on the obtuse-ness of your writing (as in, increase
> it).
Liar. The degree of my obtuse-ness is more than adequate.
> What each of us thinks on this forum is precisely the point of the
> Usenet,
On what basis do you make this claim?
> let alone csma.
CSMA is irrelevant.
> Indeed, proof is irrelevant
Evidence, please.
> -- little said here (particularly by you and the Wingulls) can be
> subjected to rigorous analysis,
On the contrary, you simply lack the ambition or skill to subject it to said
rigorous analysis.
> and I certainly don't have time to carry your water for you.
Non sequitur, as I have made no such request.
> You're on your own!
Incorrect.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
