Linux-Advocacy Digest #993, Volume #26 Fri, 9 Jun 00 13:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Jack Troughton)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Jack Troughton)
Re: Linux+Java, the best combination of techologies ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux is so stable... (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451705 (Pascal Haakmat)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Chris Wenham)
Re: 10 Months of my time wasted on Linux. Back to Microsoft for me! (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Dissecting Microsoft -- Where are all the astroturfers? ("Stephen S. Edwards II")
Re: Linux+Java, the best combination of techologies (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Mayor)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (nohow)
Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux (2:1)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (nohow)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (nohow)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jack Troughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 11:27:13 -0400
Bob Germer wrote:
>
> On 06/08/2000 at 06:36 PM,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric Leblanc) said:
>
> > When 70% of your clientele is French, if you had the choice betwen two
> > equally competent men and one of them only speak english and the other
> > speak both french and english. Which one would you hire?
>
> In a free country, I would choose the one who had the highest test score.
> If they were identical, I would choose the older. But in your province, I
> do not have that choice because your overbearing goverment requires
> bi-lingualism for employment.
Seeing as Bob has stated that I'm killfiled, I wonder how he'll take
this one...
When I arrived in Quebec in 1997, I spoke maybe a dozen words in
french, and couldn't put together any sentence more complicated than
"Une biere, s'il vous plait," in a bar. I had a job within three
months of arriving here.
Bob is completely full of shit, and has killfiled me because he's
having a hard time dealing with a unilingual anglophone who grew up
in Kingston, Ontario, who moved to Montreal speaking almost no
french, telling him that he has no clue on the subject of french and
english in Quebec.
Somehow I'm sure that Bob would be enraged by someone from Ghana
telling him that New Jersey was not free because tribal assembly is
both frowned upon by the dominant culture and banned in public
places without a permit for public assembly, but it seems he likes
to dish out that which he cannot take.
As a side note, I also will say that I have more respect for him
than some of the other posters on advocacy because I've seen him
help out others in the real newsgroups, like .apps, .misc,
.setup.system, and so on. But he's got a serious blind spot about
life in other places, and likes to make pronouncements on that life
based on a dilettante's knowledge of those places. It's very easy to
criticize other cultures from the comfortable armchair of the
dominant culture; I have very strong doubts that Bob has ever had
the experience of living in a minority community. He should try it;
it's very illuminating.
Bien sur, d'avoir habité ici pour plus de trois ans maintenant, je
comprende beaucoup plus de français que quand j'arrivaient en
Montréal. Mon français est loin de parfait, c'est sur, mais je peut
te dire qu'apprendre une nouveau langue est vraiment heureux.
Salut!
Jack
Montreal PQ
CANADA
------------------------------
From: Jack Troughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 11:06:39 -0400
Jim Richardson wrote:
>
> On Thu, 08 Jun 2000 09:03:04 GMT,
> John Wiltshire, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>
> >On Wed, 07 Jun 2000 15:57:41 GMT, Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >wrote:
> >
> >>On 06/06/2000 at 10:13 AM,
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) said:
> >>
> >>> On Tue, 06 Jun 2000 10:03:57 GMT, John Wiltshire wrote:
> >>
> >>> >How much does it cost to visit a GP in the US *without* health care?
> >>> >How much for the same in Canada?
> >>
> >>> Don't know about Canada. I live in the US now, and it was about $150- US
> >>> last I checked.
> >>
> >>Bullshit. Specialists don't charge that much, much less GP's.
> >
> >So how much to GPs charge?
> >
>
> I pay $75 for office visit. No insurance.
I asked a doctor here in Montreal what they would charge for an
office visit to someone who wasn't covered by ASQ. He told me
$40.00. His office is on Rue St-Joseph, a couple of doors east of
Roché.
BTW- we had a nice talk; he's a linux fan.
Jack
Montreal PQ
CANADA
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux+Java, the best combination of techologies
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 15:45:41 GMT
In article <8hlsar$bvb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> : Thank you. I have JRE installed and it works. Now I need to set a
> : CLASSPATH variable. I am not sure how to do this. Before, I set
it in
> : a BAT file with DOS but I don't know what kind of file or the
format of
> : the file for Linux.
>
> That depends on your shell, which you can look up in /etc/passwd
> if need be. For tcsh/csh(?), use the "setenv" command, like:
>
> setenv CLASSPATH "foopath:barpath"
>
> but for bash/sh, I think you need:
>
> CLASSPATH="foopath:barpath"
>
> Hopefully that'll be enough to get you started.
>
>
Hi Brian or anyone else that can offer some assistance,
I have everything connected properly and I set my classpath variable
using the bash command above. Thank you. But, I tried to execute a
program and I am getting a segmentation fault and a core dump. One of
the pathes that I made was /tmp/Recorders/CLASSES I then entered this
at the command line:
java com.lllow.recorders.server.DocumentServer this is a path from
the CLASSES directory to the DocumentServer.class file. I tried it
with the dots separating the directories and forward slashes. Is this
the correct format?
Jeannie
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Linux is so stable...
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 16:00:51 GMT
On 9 Jun 2000 14:03:31 +0800, Terry Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 8 Jun 2000 08:17:30 GMT,
>Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote in
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>>> Not at all. I actually gave you the benefit of the doubt for
>>> awhile. It was only until you started making grossly false
>>> claims about very basic UI elements that I assumed the worse.
>>
>>You called me a liar on more than one occaison. Funny, as I keep saying,
>>I'm not lying now and I wasn't lying then.
>
>Me thinks Goodwin protesteth too much.
I looked back and I actually did call him a liar in the past.
It was in regards to confusing KDE with X and equating the
two such if you have a problem with K your only recource is to
use the console.
In retrospect, this recent time around I gave Goodwin more
respect than he had coming.
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pascal Haakmat)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,nl.scouting
Subject: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451705
Date: 9 Jun 2000 16:03:19 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Where are you going?
>
>Where were you coming from?
Are you going to answer my question?
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
From: Chris Wenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 16:07:14 GMT
Jack Troughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > One more thing: as
> > implemented in OS/2, it's the fastest interpretted language I've ever seen.
>
> A large chunk of the reason why that is is because the first time a
> script is run, the instructions get tokenized, and saved in the the
> EA of the file;
But only as long as the tokenized code comes out to 64K or
smaller. Most of the time it does because there aren't many cases
when you'd use Rexx to write a program that large.
Regards,
Chris Wenham
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: 10 Months of my time wasted on Linux. Back to Microsoft for me!
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 16:05:58 GMT
On Fri, 9 Jun 2000 00:45:23 +0200, Matthias Warkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It was the Thu, 8 Jun 2000 21:38:55 GMT...
>...and Bart Oldeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, 8 Jun 2000 2 wrote:
>>
>> > Also, why does everybody go on so much about fonts in X. Why not just
>> > download ttxfs and shut up about it.
>>
>> That helps a lot, but it's still not anti-aliasing. Compare it with
>> gv: in this application you can turn on/off anti-aliasing in the
>> "state" menu. This application (in combination with ghostscript) of course
>> does the rendering itself and hence can do it.
>>
>> Of course there is somebody working on it. So read
>> http://www.xfree86.org/~keithp/talks/render.html
>> and _then_ shut up about it.
>
>AFAIK, the biggest problem is that X considers fonts to have a colour
>depth of 1 bit. Full stop. Hard to bypass that...
It would most likely require some sort of extention that
is completely moot for any legacy apps. Considering the
speed of release cycles in both commercial and open source
software, that might not be as much of a problem as it would
initially seem.
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Dissecting Microsoft -- Where are all the astroturfers?
Date: 9 Jun 2000 16:10:41 GMT
Mark S. Bilk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
8< SNIP >8
: Microsoft is actually one enormous organism, like a huge
: jellyfish. The astroturfers are poisonous stinger organs
: on its surface, that try to kill anything in the environment
: that it regards as a threat. They obviously haven't any
: intelligence of their own; they just say what the brain
: tells them to.
You didn't describe Microsoft just now. What you described is Sun
Microsystems' ideal "enterprise computing model". One massive brain, and
thousands of mindless "stingers". Oh well... I guess there is something
to be said for retro-computing.
8< snipped adolescent sci-fi blithering >8
--
.-----.
|[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | NetBSD: Free of hype and license.
| = :| "Artificial Intelligence -- The engineering of systems that
| | yield results such as, 'The answer is 6.7E23... I think.'"
|_..._| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux+Java, the best combination of techologies
Date: 9 Jun 2000 16:25:25 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
<snip!>
: Hi Brian or anyone else that can offer some assistance,
: I have everything connected properly and I set my classpath variable
: using the bash command above. Thank you. But, I tried to execute a
: program and I am getting a segmentation fault and a core dump.
Hmm, that's not a good sign. Is this IBM's Java or Blackdown's?
My guess is that if this is IBM's, there might be some compatibility
problems between it and the Sun standard that Blackdown uses, so you
might want to try that one instead.
Even when Java executes bad code, the JVM should insolate your system
from segmentation faults and generate Java errors instead before
exiting semi-gracefully. So the fact that it's doing this is a
sign of a JVM problem. Try switching Javas and see if you have
better luck.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
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: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 16:25:56 GMT
On Fri, 09 Jun 2000 04:26:46 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 09 Jun 2000 01:53:00 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >JEDIDIAH wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, 08 Jun 2000 23:36:56 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >JEDIDIAH wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Thu, 08 Jun 2000 13:32:28 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >> >Leslie Mikesell wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> [deletia]
[deletia]
>> >for me? We're discussing the tradeoffs between app interoperability and
>> >system interoperability, remember?
>>
>> "interoperability" as you define it is somewhat meaningless.
>> Passing off some imbedded binary data to another application
>> and making it look like it's all integrated is slight of hand
>> not "interoperability".
>
>You just don't get it, do you? There are no streams of data flying around
>under the hood to make this happen. Not a single part of the app is even
Well there has to be. How else is the Monpolysoft component going
do your "interoperability". Data has to come from somewhere and
data has to go to somewhere. It doesn't matter if it's DDE, the
GEM message queue, an IP socket or a file.
>aware that anything is happening. I guess you're just not going to understand
>it clearly until you've used the workplace shell of OS/2. There's no slight
>of hand involved. It's an extremely elegant and OO solution, which guarantees
>future interoperability. You just can't find solutions like that on Unix
>based platforms.
You really have to be a bit more detailed then this bit of rhetoric
and marketing. It really doesn't tell anyone why we should believe you
or think that OS/2 is anything special.
>
>> This is doubly so given the WinDOS cultural bias against
>> the individual choice when it comes to such tools.
>
>You seem to think I'm in favor of Windows and monopolies. I'm absolutely
>not. I'll say it again: given the choice between interoperability between
>systems and interoperability between applications on a given system, it is far
>more beneficial for a home user to have the latter. Would I like to have both
...except the sort of "interoperabilty" you seem to be advocating
is the interoperability that only comes from running the predominant
vendor's product in a crafty way. The line you draw between one
physical machine and another is quite an artificial one. There's
contraining processes to one machine. Quite often the same
communications methods can be used both locally and remotely.
>kinds of interoperability? Sure! Does such a solution exist today? Not that
>I know of. OS/2 is about as close as I've found to a useful balance between
>the two.
>
>> [deletia]
>> >> >> There are already versions to handle the 3 most widely used
>> >> >> toolkits. So, in the worst case you would need a deamon for
>> >> >> each toolkit you're running.
>> >> >
>> >> >Yuck. How does the user know which toolkit is deployed for which app? And
>> >>
>> >> Just check what it's linked against. This is also handy for
>> >> automagically distinguishing between console and X apps.
>> >
>> >That's just what a home user wants to be bothered doing.
>>
>> ...and just what makes you think the end user would have to be
>> bothered with the mechanics of this? The tools are there, the
>> automation facilities are there, the programers are there.
>>
>> However, these facilities are stil available to "those that
>> don't want them" should they prove useful to them or someone
>> else who may be providing "free tech support" for them.
>
>So I suppose this software will just install itself on all the boxes that need
>it, and fire off the daemons where needed, and modify the startup scripts
>where needed? I highly doubt it. That also assumes the user performing the
That's nothing more than the same problem that comes about with
the arrival of any new application or interface. The only way
you're going to avoid that sort of situation is to have a stagnant
system. It can be stagnant for a few months, or for years.
>installation has sufficient priviledge to accomplish said tasks. And this
>solution still fails to work with all applications. It will not work with
>statically linked apps which were linked with older versions of the widget
True. OTOH, you could put the facility that you are talking about
in the library itself or at least modify the toolkit in question
to be aware of it. Commonly defined protocols are useful in this
regard.
Thus, Netscape can interact with GNOME Desktop as another gnome
application would. Fully open standards make this possible.
>library without the needed hooks, and it will not work with apps the use
>unsupported widget libraries. That's very poor interoperability.
>
>> >> >when a new whiz-bang widget library comes along, you no longer have voice
>> >> >control support with the apps that use it.
>> >>
>> >> What makes you think that would be the most relevant compatibility
>> >> issue? Although, as long as there are common protocols that can be
>> >> conformed to it should never be a problem.
>> >
>> >It breaks and needs to be fixed with each update. That's not interoperability
>>
>> That sounds more like a damnation of MS Office style applications
>> and OLE rather than anything Linux/Unix related.
>
>That's a gaping hole in your proposed solution.
That's a version control problem in general. It's not merely
limited to Linux. It's a side effect of not being so arrogant
that you think you don't need to push your infastructure
further anymore.
>
>> >in my book. VoiceType works with any OS/2 PM application. Period.
>> >
>> >On a side issue, where are these magical daemons going to be run? If they're
>> >run on your box, they can affect your X session. But in order to affect the X
>>
>> That's rather the point now isn't it? (much like something such
>> as Plugin or efx).
>
>Your aim was to point out how this could be used to show system
>interoperability, was it not? I stated that a solution such as VoiceType
>could only be implemented effectively on one box, showing the value of
>application interoperability, and you challenged that statement.
Network desktops can already be effectively implemented across
machines. I do that on a daily basis with X as do others here.
>
>> >sessions of remote machines, it'd have to be running there as well (because
>> >the application itself is executing remotely and it's pulling from the widget
>> >libraries on the remote box). Not only that, but the two daemons would have
>> >to know about each other and be able to communicate so that your remote
>> >sessions can be controlled by you and you only. And both your box and these
>> >remote servers would have to have one of these magical daemons for every
>>
>> True. However X clients have been doing this sort of thing for
>> nearly 20 years and Unix is quite capable of handling many small
>> process communicating with each other. The challeges aren't quite
>> as impressive as they might sound from a less client-server oriented
>> perspective.
>>
>> >widget library used by the apps you're running (each of which communicate with
>> >one another). As is often the case, you may not even have administrative
>> >privileges on one of the boxes in question, and hence could not install or
>> >start such a daemon yourself as a lowly user.
>> >
>> >Application interoperability is much more important than system
>> >interoperability for such an application, as is the case for nearly any task
>> >that a home user will want to do. That's my point.
>>
>> That's what OEMs, VARs and Distributions are for.
>
>But you were attempting to tell me about the wonder of system interoperability
>for home users. How can you claim any reasonable amount of interoperability
>if you have to rely on a specific installation of an OS? Are you going to
OEMs make sure all the right pieces are there for a particular
machine or end user. That doesn't mean that Solaris machines
can't seamlessly interact with NT machines or Irixes or anything
else with the necessary tools installed.
>convince Sun to install these daemons? How about HP? IBM for their AIX
>platforms? They all support the X protocol, so you should have
>interoperability with all of these systems, right? I'll stick to VoiceType,
>DDE, and my proprietary but cozy Workplace Shell, thanks just the same.
...and because of it I have a nice network desktop using various
protocols in the mix (SQL Net,HTTP,X).
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
From: Mayor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 09:24:17 -0700
In article <8hr1sr$1buf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> On 06/08/2000 at 05:02 PM,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
>
>>> I didn't offer any commentary other than to include the
quote. Your
>>> comment on Lousisana is noted.
>>> (from www.senate.gov/learning/stat_13.html)
>
>>> " 12th Congress (1811-1813)
>>> " Majority Party: Republican (30 seats)
>>> " Minority Party: Federalist (6 seats)
>>> " Other Parties: 0
>>> " Total Seats: 36
>
>> That was the final tally. The 35th and 36th Senators were not
seated until
>> after July 4, 1812, after the vote to which you referred.
>
>> Under our system, were Puerto Rico to seek statehood, it
>> would require an act of Congress signed by the President.
>> Then Puerto Rico would be admitted. However, they have to
>> hold elections for those Senators AFTER
>> admission. Official admission is July 4 following enactment
>> of the Act of Admission.
>
>Puerto Rico is a commonwealth of the United States, just like
>pennsylvania.
No it isn't. Pennsylvania (and Kentucky, Massechusetts and
Virginia) have the word 'commonwealth' in their official names
as arcahiac holdovers from colonial times. They are in fact all
full-fledged states. Puerto Rico is an actual commonwealth of
the United States.
>How many senators does pennsylvania have again?
Two, just like every other state.
* 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: nohow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 09:44:29 -0700
On Fri, 09 Jun 2000 12:36:01 GMT, Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On 06/08/2000 at 12:05 PM,
> Jack Troughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>> Sure you did. I'd refer you to another post in this thread from Alan
>> Baker, a Vancouverite. You are talking bullshit about which you know
>> nothing again, Bob.
>
>No need to reply to the various nonsense you posted. This one alone proves
>what you are.
>
>Three other Canadians have refuted what you post. The signs along the
>Trans-Canada Highway are indeed bi-lingual from Vancouver all the way to
>Calgary.
I wrote that I remember seeing seen some on the Trans-Canada (for sure
as far west as Northern Ontario but it's been 5 years since I've
driven accross the country) but that doesn't mean the Trans-Canada is
littered in bi-lingual signs especially between Calgary and Vancouver.
Anyway your original point was that Vancouver had French signs - it
doesn't, french is non-existent out here.
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 17:40:01 +0100
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> "David E. Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >That is the difference between free and commercial software.
> > >
> >
> > This is a far too simplistic analysis of the situation.
>
> Would you expect any less from a froth-mouthed Linvocate with no
> real grasp on reality?
>
> -Chad
He's back!
Hi Chad, good to hear from you again!
-Ed
--
The day of judgement cometh. Join us O sinful one...
http://fuji.stcatz.ox.ac.uk/cult/index.html
------------------------------
From: nohow <[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: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 09:50:22 -0700
On Fri, 09 Jun 2000 00:14:40 -0700, Alan Baker
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, nohow
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 08 Jun 2000 10:28:32 -0400, Jack Troughton
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>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.
>>>> > > >
>>[snip]
>>>> 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:)
>>>
>>
>>It's the classic case of building an great product without knowing
>>what the market wants. In this case there was little or no demand for
>>high altitude, long range interceptors
>
>Bullshit. The McDonnell-Douglas Phantom II was first flown in the same
>year as the Arrow. It had a range of 1,750 miles and a service ceiling
>of nearly 60,000 feet. Only it didn't have near the thrust to weight
>ratio, which for the Arrow was around unity and among the first aircraft
>to achieve it.
What's bullshit? That the arrow wasn't designed as a high altitude,
long range interceptor or besides us and the Yanks no one (at that
time) wanted them? Who and where were the customers?
------------------------------
From: nohow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 10:13:38 -0700
On Fri, 09 Jun 2000 10:36:34 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Jack Troughton) wrote:
>On Thu, 8 Jun 2000 20:15:29, nohow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>On Thu, 08 Jun 2000 10:28:32 -0400, Jack Troughton
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>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:)
>>>
>>
>>It's the classic case of building an great product without knowing
>>what the market wants. In this case there was little or no demand for
>>high altitude, long range interceptors.
>
>Just out of curiousity, what makes you think that?
I do admit that it's been close to 15 years since I've studied the
history of the politics around the arrow in university so my memory
could be a little fuzzy. At that time outside of the Yanks and
ourselves who needed a high altitude, long range interceptor? The
Americans were only interested in rolling their own and made that
position well known so who did that leave as the potential customer
base? If it had of been designed as a general purpose fighter or as a
fighter/bomber than maybe some of our European allies, and 2nd and 3rd
world countries might have been interested. As it was it was hard to
justify the costs just to equip a couple of Canadian squadrons.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
