Linux-Advocacy Digest #974, Volume #26 Thu, 8 Jun 00 11:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux? The Kings New Clothes!!! (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: 10 Months of my time wasted on Linux. Back to Microsoft for me! (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day (jeff carroll)
Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ? (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers ("David Brown")
Re: 10 Months of my time wasted on Linux. Back to Microsoft for me! (Nathaniel Jay
Lee)
Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux ("Robert L.")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Illya Vaes)
Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451704.645^-.00000016 ("Joe Malloy")
Re: OSWars 2000 at www.tholen.com ("Joe Malloy")
Re: Bob's Law ("Joe Malloy")
Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451704.646^-.00000000017 ("Joe Malloy")
Re: Bob's Law ("Joe Malloy")
Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451704.647^-.000000000017 ("Joe Malloy")
Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Jack Troughton)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux? The Kings New Clothes!!!
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 08:48:37 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> But they are all naked your majesty, says the 8 year old girl.
>
> Linux is a fucking con job, it is a lame attempt at trying to push an
> operating system that most folks have no interest in.
Yeah, Windows is something that everyone should have to pay $350 for
just to think about looking at it. No con job there.
>
> Try Linux for yourself, $1.99 at Cheapbytes.com will get it to you
> pronto.
>
Or free download.
> Hint: It's overpriced!
Yeah, since it's actually free.
>
> When your system is lying legs up in the air like a dying cockroach,
> please let us know,
I have yet to see any Linux system go legs up other than one hard drive
failure (which was a hardware problem, new hardrive, back in business).
>
> After you have lost all your data, not to mention your friends, please
> let us know.
Jesus, if your friends all leave you just because you use Linux, you
have some pretty fucked up friends. I don't have any friends that give
a shit what kind of OS I use, and some of them are serious Windows
supporters (not shit heads like this guy, but real thoughtful types,
don't ask me how they got hooked on Windows, but they can actually give
thought out responses to things).
>
> When you spend countless hours trying to accomplish the simple task,
> please let us know.
Yeah, you're right, piping commands into eachother or writing a nice
shell script in bash is much easier in Windows.
>
> When your Y2k state of the art system is turned into a mid 1990's
> antique, please let us know.
Let's see, Unix vs. Windows. I think Unix has one hell of a lot more
technology to offer. But that's just my humble opinion. After all,
that pretty fluff on Win2000 that keeps it crashing is pretty advanced.
>
> When your clients data does not import correctly into Linux, please
> let us know.
I haven't had any problems converting data to something usuable under
Linux. Office documents ->Star Office/Corel Office. And most other
things are easily convertable between the two.
>
> When your video/sound half works please let us know.
Only my laptop has sound problems (damn fake sound card, some NeoMagic
MagicWave/256AV hybrid that seems to have some sort of SoundBlaster
fetish with Linux drivers) and that is the only problem I have had with
video or sound under Linux.
>
> You see, WE are Linux, and we want to help. And if you wait another 6
> years or so all of those things might work.
That's stretching it a bit. Usually if I see something new, it takes
about two months, or less for it to be supported. Maybe it will take a
little bit of time for the "stable" version of the kernel to come out
with that feature, but the "unstable/developer's kernel" hasn't ever
given me problems (I stay away from the first few generations of a
developers release though).
>
> Of course you could run Windows, like everyone else and they would
> work right now.
And you could totally avoid getting any work done as you play solitaire
and wait for Windows to reboot yet again when you actually try to launch
a program.
>
> Linux is Lame and no one can prove otherwise.
No one can prove that it is either. Lameness is a matter of opinion. I
think Porsches are lame, but that is just my opinion, no way to prove
that. And no one can prove that my opinion isn't right either. Now,
give us some facts so we can actually debate something troll.
Otherwise, go back to your happy shiny Windows system and drewl on your
screen some more.
>
> Shit, they can't even give it away..............................
Yeah, they can. Let's see, last estimate about 8 million people are
using it. Maybe that's not as many as Windows, but it is significant.
Nathaniel Jay Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
P.S. You make so many good points that I really don't think I am worthy
of using Windows. After all, with such a god-like person behind them
(you) I couldn't possibly be good enough to use it.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: 10 Months of my time wasted on Linux. Back to Microsoft for me!
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 13:54:16 GMT
On Thu, 08 Jun 2000 13:15:11 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 07 Jun 2000 22:45:42 GMT, Tiberious <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >I run a small hardware / software consulting firm and being a
>> >businessman educated in solid business principles (Wharton if you must
>> [deletia]
>> >First we tried Wordperfect but it kept crashing far too much to be
>> >useful. The demo's were getting embarrassing. Then we tried StarOffice
>> >but even on decent hardware (Pentium II 450mhz with 256 meg) it ran like
>>
>> This assertion seems suspect.
>
>I must agree. Soffice 5.1 is reasonably responsive on my ageing P133.
>Quite how it could be slow on a PII 450 is beyond me.
...actually, after I saw that I quickly looked for some SO
reviews in the Shill press. At least the Win32 version seems
to be getting reasonable reviews. It's performance isn't
being criticized and reviewers are needing to stretch things
a bit to find nasty things to say about it (like making comparisons
against typically mutually exclusive products like wp+excel).
I suspect this is just people repeating the criticism leveled by
users such as myself that SO is too much like msoffice in terms
of bloat. That doesn't necessarily imply that SO is WORSE than
msoffice, but rather that some of us view the whole bloatsuite/
vendorlock paradigm as fundementally faulty.
Novice users shouldn't have to put up with the like of WP (or Word).
>
>
>
>
>> >Several clients use video and audio embedded applications which depend
>> >on the Creative Sound Blaster Live Card. The support for this device
>> >under Linux seems to be dismal.
>>
>> SB Lives in Office machines?
>good popint...
...not that there aren't "suitable candidates" mind you...
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jeff carroll)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 13:56:11 GMT
On 7 Jun 2000 23:00:10 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am not just saying that I prefer command lines, in order to be mean or
>contrary. I really do prefer them. A GUI advocate who sets out to prove
>that I don't *really* prefer command lines must necessarily end up looking
>very silly. I know my own mind; you don't. Even if there were rational
No, I think you're missing the crux of Freedle's Argument (ObPhilipRothTitle)
here.
<homily>
Freedle is the Eye in the Sky; looking at you, or reading your prose, he can
read your mind. He knows if you've been sleeping; he knows when you're awake;
he knows if you've been bad or good. Even though I doubt he has a master's
degree in Science, he knows more than you do.
Therefore your arguments are worthless because malinformed, because you do not
have the benefit of Freedle's All-Seeing Eye.
Who knows the innocent user interface preferences that lurk in the heart of
man? Freedle knows.
Freedle loves you. He loves you so much that he gave three minutes of his
prime Seinfeld-watching time to impart to you the benefit of his omniscience;
although it may appear to be misspelled and mispunctuated, the faithful and
wise will persist in their belief that Freedle has chosen this earthly
manifestation for higher reasons, in order to impart a larger, transcendent
message.
Why, O hard-hearted Canadian, do you resist the ultimately irresistible power
of Freedle's love? Why do you flail away at your miserable shell prompt, when
Freedle has been waiting all these years for you to accept the bountiful
grace of his graphical user interface? It is Freedle's free gift to mankind;
to know it is joy and health and peace.
Turn back, I pray thee, O craven shell-programmer, and accept the GUI while
it is yet not too late.
</homily>
Yeah, it's a stupid argument. But I just wanted to make sure you understood.
jkc
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ?
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 14:00:17 GMT
On Thu, 08 Jun 2000 03:14:31 GMT, Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>
>> Same thing here, Print causes a virtual shutdown.
>>
>
>Usually, when you screw up a configuration item, you get
>problems. For example, if I unplug my network cable, Linux
>takes a lot longer to boot while three different network daemons
>each time out in turn.
That begs the question: what sort of gross misconfiguration
could cause a situation such as this?
>
>But you're not really interested in getting Linux to work, are you?
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 16:12:50 +0200
JEDIDIAH wrote in message ...
>On 5 Jun 2000 17:04:07 -0500, Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>I can see why typing commands might be a problem for you. You
>>>>have my sympathy, but fortunately it is not a problem for
>>>>most people.
>>>
>>> ...that's more of a DOS thing actually...
>>>
>>> Dealing with bad typing isn't quite as much of a problem with
>>> a Unix commandline. Editing out errors and conveniently
>>> repeating commands is not as much of a hassle in bash or tcsh
>>> as it is with command.com.
>>
>>DOSKEY makes this moderately painless, although I miss the
>
> DOSKEY breaks things. In general, trying to extend or
> replace command.com tends to break things.
>
I find doskey works quite well (under NT), especially with the /insert flag.
Add to that the registry entry that allows command line completion (it does
exist in NT, it is just hidden) and you have a reasonably workable shell.
It is somewhat limited (for example, file name completion does not work for
the command name, but only for file name parameters, and it always expands
the full path), and the command box dies occasionally but otherwise it's OK.
>[deletia]
>
>--
>
> |||
> / | \
>
> Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 10 Months of my time wasted on Linux. Back to Microsoft for me!
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 09:11:14 -0500
Tiberious wrote:
>
> I run a small hardware / software consulting firm and being a
> businessman educated in solid business principles (Wharton if you must
> know), I thought I saw an opportunity to get my foot in the door and
> promote Linux as an alternative to Windows and less so Apple. Let's face
> it there are millions of folks out there "consulting" at various levels
> of competency and in truth, just looking at my own area it is
> frightening the level of MSCE that is out there. Some of these people
> can barely format a diskette via a command line.
> So anyway, I started investigating the various Linux distributions and
> hired 2 Linux Systems Engineers who knew the product so well it was
> scary.
> I am not exactly a Unix newbie either having dealt with IBM/AIX in the
> past, but my function was mainly to garner support and try and sell
> Linux.
>
> Our business plan called for the money to be made in pricing Linux much
> lower than similar Windows configurations (not hard at all) and making
> our money on hardware and the system software set up as well as
> maintenance of the above items.
>
> What seemed like a good idea at first quickly blossomed into the worst
> nightmare a person in my field could ever imagine.
>
> The basic problem was that NOBODY WANTED LINUX!!!!
>
> We couldn't GIVE IT AWAY!
>
> They were so entrenched in Windows that to even consider switching was
> out of the question.
>
> The first problem was providing Microsoft compatible applications. I
> tried most of the applications we were going to pitch to the end users
> and quite frankly thought that although they needed a little polish here
> and there, for the most part they were Microsoft compatible.
>
> Boy was I wrong, BIG TIME!!!
>
> First we tried Wordperfect but it kept crashing far too much to be
> useful. The demo's were getting embarrassing. Then we tried StarOffice
> but even on decent hardware (Pentium II 450mhz with 256 meg) it ran like
> molasses and took over the entire desktop. As a last resort we tried
> Applix, which seemed to work ok until one client asked us to try and
> import his payroll/tax spreadsheets.
> Applix died on the launch pad like Apollo 0ne.
>
> Other problems were the general dislike of Netscape. People, for some
> reason or another, seem to hate that program. They keep bringing up
> features and the general look and feel of Explorer as being far nicer.
>
> Look is another area where Linux let us down. We kept getting complaints
> about the screen layouts. Essentially the end users could not adjust the
> screen so that the text looked smooth and clear. My Linux gurus
> explained the lack of anti-aliased fonts to me and that was the end of
> that. A person who has to look at a screen for 8 hours a day with jagged
> fonts is an OSHA lawsuit in the making.
>
> More problems surfaced.
>
> Several clients use video and audio embedded applications which depend
> on the Creative Sound Blaster Live Card. The support for this device
> under Linux seems to be dismal.
>
> What we discovered about Linux is that while it may look like a great
> and superior system on paper, the truth of the matter is that the end
> users ARE NOT INTERESTED IN LINUX.
>
> They are interested in solutions to their problems and Windows 2000
> provides them in a polished, ready to go package that is the current
> standard and is supported by THEIR clients. We had other consultants
> blowing us out of the water with their offerings and although our
> clients were trying to be loyal to us because of our integrity and long
> term relationships with most of them, the honest truth was Linux was NOT
> and option if we intended to remain their consultants.
>
> Linux is lagging terribly in polished world class applications. Even the
> SoundBlaster Live card has Liveware! available for Win2k, despite Win2k
> just being released. Linux has been spouting support "coming real soon
> now" for a long time. Still no full support for this popular card.
>
> Linux drivers are bare bones and no Livewire is even in sight.
>
> In conclusion, we have dumped Linux because Windows is really the
> future.
> Linux shows it age with every command line instruction.
>
> We tried to support and sell Linux but the truth of the matter is that
> the end users have spoken and Linux is NOT in their vocabulary.
>
> Tiberious
End users tend to be the last to pick up on new technology. Now, I will
agree that there are some areas where Linux needs improvement (I would
love to see X be fully anti-aliases sometime soon) but it is usuable in
a Work environment. If you were starting from scratch, you probably
would have a better shot at it. The problem is, if you go at an
existing business with it, they are not going to see the benifit in
changing over from what they have. But, if you target new businesses,
many of them will see the advantage (especially early in thier business
plan) of using a free system that they can have customized any way that
they want. I know, I've done it myself with the business I currently
work in (an all Linux network for a woodworking company) and as a
consultant for a couple of other businesses (smaller, home based
businesses for other people). Now, I wouldn't automatically consider
Linux for every new business starting up, but if the requirements could
be met by Linux, then by all means it should be brought up. You can't
force it in. But in a few more years, Linux will be much more ready for
the big time.
I don't think that Windows is the future, I think it is the past and the
present. But if you watch, you will see the momentum building in Linux
for the future. The future will be Linux. Maybe not as soon as some
people think, but it will come. Just don't expect everything to happen
right now, it will happen.
Nathaniel Jay Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Robert L." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 14:14:51 GMT
It's an advocacy NG, people that need help don't go here. People here
should ) talk about things that are good and bad about Linux.
"David E. Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le
message news: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Arthur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> >2. Having made a very good living for the past 13+
> >years in sales and marketing related jobs including
> >my own business, I will throw in the secret that
> >every salesperson knows, but many non-salespersons
> >fail to recognize: customers are people who buy
> >your product or may buy it in the future. (I don't
> >think this whole "customer" thing really applies here
> >anyway, but I'll play along for now). Since the
> >post being responded to quite clearly indicates the
> >poster will *NOT* be using Linux (ignoring the fact
> >that the post is entirely fiction to begin with), he
> >is clearly not a customer. He is at most a waste of
> >time. Therefore there is no reason to be "solicitous,
> >concerned, caring, emphathetic, interested, and
> >committed to helping out no matter how irritating",
> >unless you would prefer wasting time to "making
> >sales". Converting heathens is the work performed
> >by missionaries, who make a lot less money than
> >salespeople, and sell a lot less product. Don't
> >confuse the two professions, especially if you
> >ever plan on selling anything.
> >
>
> Allow me to point out something that should be pretty obvious to
> someone with a background in marketing: Your responses are being
> read by many more people (potential customers) than the original
> poster.
>
> The constant barrage of flame, skepticism and personal attacks
> against anyone with the gall to post something less glowing
> than "Linux is the best thing since the abacus" makes the entire
> Linux community look extremely bad.
>
> David E. Thomas
>
>
> * 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: Illya Vaes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 16:21:36 +0200
Daniel Johnson wrote:
>"Leslie Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>>>Flip a coin between the 'kill Netscape' and the Halloween
>>>>document strategy of mutating the protocol again.
>>>Right. Lower prices or improved product.
>>Dumping product until the competition is dead or breaking
>>well-considered protocols is not an improvement.
>The Halloween document specifies *improved* products.
That's MS-speak for "products that force 'customers' to use only our products
better than previous ones".
>And "dumping" *is* an improvement for the customers; it's
>rather inconvinient for competitors, but they can cope.
Only in the short term. Once those competitors are down, the company can do
anything it wants with its dependent users (note I don't use the word
'customer' here).
Where were you when all those Walmarts drove local shops out of existence?
This is standard Monopoly 101 that even a child can understand.
--
Illya Vaes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) "Do...or do not, there is no 'try'" - Yoda
Holland Railconsult BV, Integral Management of Railprocess Systems
Postbus 2855, 3500 GW Utrecht
Tel +31.30.2653273, Fax 2653385 Not speaking for anyone but myself
------------------------------
From: "Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451704.645^-.00000016
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 10:20:02 -0400
Just when you thought it was safe to go outside, Tholen's back. Oh well.
Here's a Tholen digest of everything of value he has to say:
[oops, nothing!]
Thanks for reading!
--
"USB, idiot, stands for Universal Serial Bus. There is no power on the
output socket of any USB port I have ever seen" - Bob Germer
------------------------------
From: "Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.be.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: OSWars 2000 at www.tholen.com
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 10:20:10 -0400
Tholen tholes:
> > ....Anyway, as you can see from RJ's post (an OS/2 user) to Marty (a
fellow
> > OS/2 user), one of the sure signs an OS with few users is that the few
users
> > left begin attacking one another.
>
> Another example of classic illogic from Brad Wardell.
Ah, Tholen jumps to conclusions. It figures. How absolutely ironic.
--
"USB, idiot, stands for Universal Serial Bus. There is no power on the
output socket of any USB port I have ever seen" - Bob Germer
------------------------------
From: "Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Bob's Law
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 10:20:16 -0400
Tholen tholes:
> >>>> Bob Lyday writes:
>
> >>>>> Bob's Law invoked. Tholen mentioned. Thread is now
> >>>>> officially dead.
>
> >>>> Illogical.
>
> >>> Since when has logic had anything to do with Usenet?
>
> >> Since I started posting. Perhaps even before that.
>
> > Typical pontification.
>
> Since when does "perhaps" represent a pontification?
Typical Tholen, tholening along as usual, blind to what was actually said.
It figures. How incredibly ironic!
--
"USB, idiot, stands for Universal Serial Bus. There is no power on the
output socket of any USB port I have ever seen" - Bob Germer
------------------------------
From: "Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451704.646^-.00000000017
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 10:20:22 -0400
Today's Tholen tholening digest:
[nothing worthwhile here, either!]
So long!
--
"USB, idiot, stands for Universal Serial Bus. There is no power on the
output socket of any USB port I have ever seen" - Bob Germer
------------------------------
From: "Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Bob's Law
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 10:20:26 -0400
Tholen tholes and boasts:
> > Since when has logic had anything to do with Usenet?
>
> Since I started posting.
How ironic! How doubly ironic! I'm sure all the participants of uselessnet
or its forerunners would be interested to read that piece of poppycock.
--
"USB, idiot, stands for Universal Serial Bus. There is no power on the
output socket of any USB port I have ever seen" - Bob Germer
------------------------------
From: "Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,nl.scouting
Subject: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451704.647^-.000000000017
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 10:20:32 -0400
Tholen tholes:
> 1> Hello.
>
> Goodbye.
Goodbye, Tholen and good riddance!
--
"USB, idiot, stands for Universal Serial Bus. There is no power on the
output socket of any USB port I have ever seen" - Bob Germer
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 14:24:54 GMT
On Thu, 08 Jun 2000 01:22:16 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>I'm baffled at the intensity of the response that this post drew. Most
>of the replies were simply nasty. Many of the replies didn't even
His 'anecdote' simply didn't stand up to any scrutiny.
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: Jack Troughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2000 10:28:32 -0400
Mike Stephen wrote:
>
> On Sun, 7 Jun 3900 15:57:32, Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > On 06/05/2000 at 07:58 PM,
> > Monkeyboy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >
> > > > > Most historians agree that in the end, the Canadians were the victors.
> > > >
> > > > Victors of what? Again, please quit saying Canadians. The BRITISH were
> > > > fighting to maintain their land in their BRITISH state of Canada.
> > > >
> > > > -Chad
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> > > Don't let technicalities get in your way. It would not surprise me to
> > > have Mr. Barclay proclaim other Canadian "victories" such as Dieppe or
> > > Monte Cassino (in WWII).
> >
> > Hell, it wouldn't be a shock to see him claim that Canada won the war
> > against Japan and beat the Russians into Berlin, put the first human into
> > orbit, and invented the wheel.
>
> Now that is interesting. Dieppe was a Canadian invasion that was
> poorly planned, but it did include a large number of Canadians.
> Canada had little overall to do with the Pacific war. (other than
> the fall of Singapore and Hong kong, very early on). Canadians
> were not involved with Russia in any significant manner. However
> many Canadian troops were halted on their way to Rome so as to
> allow the US troops to march into the city as victors. Meanwhile
> the Canadians who got their first were told to wait until the
> Yanks passed.
One note about Dieppe; the command of the raid was British, not
Canadian. The Brits viewed Dieppe as a test of beach landings under
fire, and used Canadian troops as guinea pigs. Unfortunately for the
Canadians, the troop ships were spotted while still some 35 miles
from shore by a German patrol aircraft; at that point the raid
should have been called off, but wasn't. The Germans basically knew
exactly where the Dieppe raid was going to land, and had nearly two
hours to prepare for it. Also, the stone beach at Dieppe completely
immobilized the tanks as the large stones stuck in the treads of the
tanks; after Dieppe, the design of tank treads was modified so that
that problem wouldn't occur again.
> As for the orbit of the first man, no... Canadians were not
> involved.... That was entirely a Russian endeavour. However if
> you care to look up who ran the Mercury, Gemini and Apollo
> projects, you will find it was run by many Canadians. If you
> ever get to talk to an actual NASA employee of those years, they
> will fondly refer to the "Canucks" that ran the show.
Dunno about that... probably refugees from the Avro Arrow program.
Dief was an idiot; I personally know three people of that generation
that dumped the conservative party because of Diefenbaker's decision
to scrap the Arrow program.
http://www.totavia.com/arrow/
The Avro Arrow was well and truly ahead of its time... like warp,
you could say:)
> I still think we Canadians should never have given you Yanks the
> Atomic secrets required to make the bomb.
>
> Read the following URL before you rant on about high tech in the
> USA. Canadians are rightfully peeved at the majority of
> unschooled Americans that are unaware of the Canadian
> contribution to high tech.
> http://ccnr.org/index.html#dir
I'll go take a look...
Jack
Montreal PQ
CANADA
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
