Linux-Advocacy Digest #381, Volume #27 Wed, 28 Jun 00 13:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why X is better than Terminal Server (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Why linux sucks and why linux is best (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Linux is junk (Mikey)
Re: Linux, easy to use? (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: VB suck and Java rules (was: Re: Is Java 'larger' than VB ?) (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Linux is junk (sylvain hutchison)
Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy?
(Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Why linux sucks and why linux is best (abraxas)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Phillip Lord)
Re: How fast is your text? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Darren Winsper)
Re: Linux faster than Windows? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: What UNIX is good for. (John Sanders)
Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451707 (Pascal Haakmat)
M$ Exposed (was Re: Oracle's Dirty Tricks Department) (Loren Petrich)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Why X is better than Terminal Server
Date: 28 Jun 2000 10:08:45 -0500
In article <8jc40m$l8d$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >I'm beginning to think I should switch from Mandrake - despite
>hearing
>> >good things about it. I have Red Hat 6.2, maybe I'll give that a
>spin.
>>
>> I don't think you'll see any difference in the default limits
>> between the two.
>
>From Redhat 6.2:
>
>[perrypip@x38 perrypip]$ ulimit -a
>core file size (blocks) 1000000
>data seg size (kbytes) unlimited
>file size (blocks) unlimited
>max memory size (kbytes) unlimited
>stack size (kbytes) 8192
>cpu time (seconds) unlimited
>max user processes 256
>pipe size (512 bytes) 8
>open files 1024
>virtual memory (kbytes) 2105343
Interesting - I don't think I have a 'stock' Redhat 6.2
but the VALinux variation has:
# ulimit -a
core file size (blocks) 1000000
data seg size (kbytes) unlimited
file size (blocks) unlimited
max memory size (kbytes) unlimited
stack size (kbytes) 8192
cpu time (seconds) unlimited
max user processes 2048
pipe size (512 bytes) 8
open files 1024
virtual memory (kbytes) 2105343
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why linux sucks and why linux is best
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 10:08:40 -0500
farraway wrote:
>
> Ordinary people, that doesn't use hours on learing operating
> systems, use windows and they are happy with it. Office is
> better than star office etc. I think windows98 and NT is better
> for 1) ordinary use with office, photoshop, games etc. I think
> Linux is better for companies that need more secure on their
> servers. Theese comanies only hire some geeks to setup and
> run their servers properly. I think many "Linux people" not
> only uses Linux as a operating system but also as a religion.
>
> It doesn't matter for ordinary people that the security isn't on top
> because without many windowsprogs many doesn't
> need a PC. OK Linux is good, i have tried it several times,
> but it's best for servers and it isn't good for personal useage.
>
> Why doesn't Linux support USB and plug and play?
Security is important in the Internet age. Do you want everyone to have
access to your files? I have used Linux on my desktops for at least
three years. I don't know why people keep saying it is useless on the
desktop, but to each his/her own.
Linux does support USB (in newer kernels, and most distributions include
preliminary support) and Plug and Play (again, in newer kernels, and
most distributions include it patched into thier default kernel). Some
devices aren't fully supported yet (example: I can 'see' my USB based CD
burner, but can only read from it, not write to it), but it does support
USB. Plug and Play consists of many layers (often confused by users as
one thing). ISA plug and play has been supported in user space for a
long time (the isapnp/pnpdump package) and is now in the kernel. PCI is
fully 'plug and play'. Of course, if you don't have the correct driver
for your kernel it won't be able to load it, but most distributions have
the correct drivers for supported hardware compiled as modules and will
load them when you boot up with new hardware.
As far as your comment of people using Linux not just as an operating
system but also as a religion, the same can be said of some Windows
users (Look at Simon/Steve/Mike/whatever his name is today for an
example). Also, if they do use it as a religion, you have just stepped
into thier church. Tell me, would you walk into a Catholic church and
say, "Being Catholic is OK if you only want a narrow minded view of one
God in the world. Tell me, why doesn't your god support the theory of
evolution?" If you would, then you may have bigger problems to conquer
than trying to disuade people from using an operating system that they
enjoy.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: Mikey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is junk
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2000 04:18:41 +0000
Mikey came up & bitch-slapped [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
> Linux is a stinkin', steamin' pile of shit as far as I am concerned.
>
> I wasted $40 on Corel Office and wish I could get my hard earned money
> back!
Okay, you're too stupid to ftp. Hey, Luserboy, there's more than just
Corel out there.
> First off the piece of shit destroyed my hard drive and erased 2 years
> worth
> of data I had saved. Lucky for me I have a backup on CD but it is
> a couple of days old.
Wahhhh, the poor little cry-baby troll/idiot. I bet you open email
attachments from unknown sources too. I'm glad it vaped your drive.
Stupid people like you should *never* be allowed to use computers and
firearms.
> The install kept failing over and over again dying on my SCSI controller
> but finally, and mysteriously it worked despite my not changing
> anything.
>
> Linux has been around longer than Win2k, so why the shitty hardware
> support?
Sorry, Luserboy, but Win2K doesn't have shit for HW drivers. Didn't you
hear about HP getting ticked off about how a lot of their drivers
doesn't work on win2K. Oh, and as far as ports for *real* servers,
Windows is in the stoneage. WinNT/2K servers are pretty useless unless
they're on an X86.
> Shitpile Linux didn't even recognize my USB ports.
>
> Is this Linux stuff some kind of a joke or something? I'd like to be let
> in on the joke please because I have lost data and wasted the better
> part
> of the weekend trying to make this smelly piece of trash work.
RTFM & post questions on comp.os.linux.setup. I think that would be
more helpful than trolling.
> I played around with the various applications included with Corel and
> quite frankly, it looks like Linux is some 1980's throw back. Reminds
> me of Pong and Visicalc.
Windoze *STILL* runs on top of DOS. If that's not a throw back, I dunno
what is. Do us all a favor and
C:\deltree c:\windows\command, and while you're at it, C:\format c: |
echo y
> Never even looked at a readme for windows.
And it shows. All you need to know is point, click, reboot. :P
> Windows has no equal...At least not yet....
True. I've never had to reboot an OS so often. I've never had an OS
take up to many resources either.
</flame>
Kinda shite day. Needed to take the piss out of some luser
--
Since-beer-leekz,
Mikey
Best comment /*Drunk...fix later*/
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 10:34:57 -0500
Roberto Alsina wrote:
>
> In article <8j9l2q$pvj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In article <8j9fq5$lg8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > I'm looking at it as
> > > > an alternative to Windows.
> > >
> > > That's nice but don't expect Linux to be like Windows. It isn't.
> >
> > Oh I can see that. I can see the inconsistancies, the holes and
> > mish-mash of ideas. This is the system that is trumpeted here as the
> > downfall of Windows. Yet I can't even do something as simple as an
> > Upgrade with one distro.
> >
> > Linux (+KDE or +Gnome) is nothing like Windows. Windows I can expect
> > things to work together. Linux doesn't even do that! I tried drag and
> > drop between KDE's Window Manager and KDE's Explorer - blimey! -
> doesn't
> > work! And that's just one of the holes I've found so far.
>
> I'm very curious about this.
> KDE's window manager doesn't show anything that can be dragged (unless
> you mean a window?), and there's nothing called explorer in KDE.
>
> Perhaps you could rephrase, or even describe like "I dragged the thing
> with a picture of a cow into the square watchamacallit which said
> "gizmo" in the titlebar".
>
> --
> Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
I think he's talking about 'kruiser'. It is a beta app included with
some distributions of KDE that is sometimes labeled KDE Explorer in the
menu. It is beta and the drag and drop is not implemented properly
yet. Also, I believe that development for the most part has stopped on
it as Konquerer will do everything that it was going to do at one point,
and then some. I used it a bit, but it really shows the "beta" that it
is labeled as. Most of the time I would say stay away from alpha and
beta quality software, but when you are out to prove the Linux sucks,
that is the best way to do it. Compare an alpha or beta quality app to
a completed? windows equivalent and you may actually have something to
complain about (maybe).
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: VB suck and Java rules (was: Re: Is Java 'larger' than VB ?)
Date: 28 Jun 2000 10:38:43 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Bob Hauck <hauck[at]codem{dot}com> wrote:
>>> > http://www.zdnet.com/products/stories/reviews/0,4161,2556513,00.html
>
>>> - They also say that Solaris can't "view server logs with base product,"
>>> Uh, what? I can sure log into a Solaris server and use any tool I want
>>> to view the logs. Solaris is part of the "base product."
>>
>>This may be a silly question, but aren't the server logs text files?
>>If so, couldn't one view them in any editor (or even less)?
>
>Of course, but if you have adopted the Windows Approach (tm) you must
>have a special tool for every purpose. Using a general-purpose thing
>like an editor is Just Not Done.
"tail -f" is the proper tool to view a growing logfile, perhaps
piped through grep if you only want to see certain items out
of the many-per-second stream. Analog is a good tool for
summarizing the logs. It isn't part of the base product in
the usual sense, but with free products - they are all included
for the same price.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: sylvain hutchison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is junk
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 11:48:56 -0700
> I wasted $40 on Corel Office and wish I could get my hard earned money
> back!
First of all the single (if you buy it alone) CD costs 5$, canadian
dollars!!!!!!
> I also wasted another $60 on Partition Magic, like Corel suggested.
>
> First off the piece of shit destroyed my hard drive and erased 2 years
> worth
> of data I had saved. Lucky for me I have a backup on CD but it is
> a couple of days old.
>
> The install kept failing over and over again dying on my SCSI controller
> but finally, and mysteriously it worked despite my not changing
> anything.
>
> My sound card didn't work.
>
> My video card ran slow as a snail.
>
> My network card didn't work.
>
> My printer didn't work
>
> My scanner didn't work.
>
>
Funny, I couldn't even run the X-windows, but I ask in newgroups like these,
printed info off the web, in a couple of mins, I was running Linux
perfectly, no crying here!!!!
Why Linux is better the Windows, simply because I'm sure loosers like you
use outlook express, only the worst software in the world in terms of
security!!!! This "Love" bug would've never of worked in Linux!!!!!!!!!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or
fantasy?
Date: 28 Jun 2000 10:58:13 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
John Wiltshire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>That's not a particularly valid question as they have no intentions to
>>>do either. If they wanted to do this then they would have paid twice
>>>as much and got a printer that could.
>>
>>So, if you can foretell the future, they are OK...
>
>If I could foretell the future, I'd be doing something other than
>buying hardware. As I can't I get the machine that best suits the
>current needs. Tomorrow's needs are hard to pick. Given that a
>serial modem now has a limited life (USB looks like it will replace
>serial ports in standard machines), and parallel ports are definitely
>on the way out.
Yes, the Wintel group does rather slavishly follow slowly behind
the MAC lead, don't they? But, no problem - my home printer has
both parallel and USB, and you can get a conversion cable if you need it.
>Linux doesn't support USB well yet so I guess that means you guys are
>stuck with dead end or high end hardware.
Like NT, I guess, only it won't cost anything to upgrade. Mandrake 7.1
has USB support backed into the 2.2 kernel and it will be in 2.4.
>You can say that for anything. What printer interface would YOU have
>recommended a year ago? If it is parallel or serial then I guess you
>would be stuck with hardware you can't even plug in to your machines
>let alone get a driver for in a year or so's time.
For office use I always get ethernet. For home use I got both
interfaces more than a year ago.
>As for Winprinters, if the price is right and the purpose is right
>then you should get it. Buying a printer to last 10 years these days
>means you are getting high end and not low end. Figure it out.
>People replace things. Often it is cheaper that way and more
>efficient. It depends on your setup, tax structure and other things.
>
>You'll never agree - your rel^H^H^Hphilosophy won't let you.
Just a matter of practicality. Printers should be sharable
on the network and my assortment of machines are never going
to be limited to a single OS. If I can't send it a print job
from any machine, then it isn't really a printer.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: Why linux sucks and why linux is best
Date: 28 Jun 2000 16:01:09 GMT
farraway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ordinary people, that doesn't use hours on learing operating
> systems, use windows and they are happy with it. Office is
> better than star office etc. I think windows98 and NT is better
> for 1) ordinary use with office, photoshop, games etc. I think
> Linux is better for companies that need more secure on their
> servers. Theese comanies only hire some geeks to setup and
> run their servers properly. I think many "Linux people" not
> only uses Linux as a operating system but also as a religion.
>
> It doesn't matter for ordinary people that the security isn't on top
> because without many windowsprogs many doesn't
> need a PC. OK Linux is good, i have tried it several times,
> but it's best for servers and it isn't good for personal useage.
>
> Why doesn't Linux support USB and plug and play?
It does, tard.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 28 Jun 2000 17:05:34 +0100
>>>>> "Jay" == Jay Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jay> On 28 Jun 2000 14:00:04 +0100, Phillip Lord
Jay> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> You are wrong on both counts. Business is universally of the side
>> of protectionism that benefits them.
Jay> It is that qualifiction that shoots the hole in the
Jay> argument. The original argument was that business is
Jay> universally on the side of protectionism. Your statement is
Jay> true, and unremarkable: aren't businesses allowed to act in
Jay> accordance with their own interests, just as people are?
Your original statement was that "big labour" was
universally on the side of protectionism, which is not true. My second
point is that big business is happy to be madly protectionist when it
will benefit from it.
>> For someone who is so cognisant of the problems with the use of
>> the word "free" as espoused by the FSF, I am surprised that you
>> have not realised that the "free" market is a total sham.
Jay> No, I simply recognize that the free market must, like all
Jay> other freedoms, necessarily include the freedom to do things
Jay> that piss you off.
The free market provides freedom to almost no one.
Phil
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: How fast is your text?
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 16:09:21 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ray Chason
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on 28 Jun 2000 03:57:23 GMT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine) wrote:
>
>>This makes NT look sick -- an over 50x speedup. To be fair, of
>>course, I should run NT in text mode for this benchmark. That is,
>>if there is one.
>
>Open a DOS window, and then press Alt-Enter. Press Alt-Enter again to
>return it to windowed mode.
Good suggestion. Still pretty slow, though.
NT Full Console: 2203
Linux terminal: 10820
Hmm...maybe it's not a scrolling problem....
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Winsper)
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.economics
Subject: Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: 28 Jun 2000 16:12:13 GMT
On 27 Jun 2000 17:52:29 GMT, Henry Blaskowski
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In talk.politics.libertarian Darren Winsper
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Do you even understand how business works? Microsoft said, if you
> >> want our product at a discount, you have to agree to sell a copy
> >> with every machine you sell. You are free to buy it at full price,
> >> or you can get it at a discount with conditions. My grocery store
> >> does a similar thing to me all the time, but you don't hear anyone
> >> running around crying "monopoly".
>
> > Does your grocery store have 90% of the grocery market?
>
> Yes, they have 90% of the "large grocery stores within 4 miles of
> my house" market. Any other questions, or would you like to
> address the point?
How about you answer my question rather than try and bullshit your way
around it.
--
Darren Winsper (El Capitano) - ICQ #8899775
Stellar Legacy project member - http://www.stellarlegacy.tsx.org
DVD boycotts. Are you doing your bit?
This message was typed before a live studio audience.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Linux faster than Windows?
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 16:18:58 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Mike Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on 28 Jun 2000 09:34:16 +0200 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine) writes:
>
>> >> Pedant point: Quicksort has N^2 performance on already-sorted lists,
>> >> and might overflow the stack to boot.
>> >>
>> >
>> >You wont get the stack overflow if your quicksort implementation
>> >isn't recursive (although I assume libc qsort is).
>>
>> I'd have to look through the source code; thankfully, on Linux at
>> least, I have that option. Lessee....
>>
>> According to the source code comments, the algorithm is
>> a non-recursive modified quicksort/insertion sort pair.
>That's pretty cool.
>> This should -- I don't know for sure without actually
>> trying it, or digging through the source code in grotesque
>> detail -- remove most of my objections.
>>
>> >
>> >> (This is assuming qsort() actually uses quicksort, as opposed to
>> >> some other sorting algorithm, like hashsort or AVL treesort.)
>> >>
>> >> Of course, a bubble sort *always* has N^2 performance.
>> >>
>> >
>> >Think about bubble sort on an already sorted list (best case).
>>
>> It's still N^2 performance. The compares are always done.
>>
>
>I think generally the termination criteria is an iteration without
>exchanges, so bubble sort on an already sorted list will require
>exactly N-1 compares, i.e. a single list iteration. This is as I
>learnt it at college, and as given in (for example) Sedgewick, or my
>ancient copy of Tenenbaum (DS using Pascal).
>
>I suppose bubble sort could carry on regardless (ie ignoring the fact
>that it is done), and then it wouldn't be bounded by N, but would be
>by N^2. I guess this is what you meant.
Yep.
It hadn't occurred to me to terminate the bubblesort run early if no
interchanges are made during a pass.
Mind you, I'm still not sure if I'd want to use it... :-)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: John Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: What UNIX is good for.
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 11:18:55 -0500
> > On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 00:08:55 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >Linux IS trying to compete with Windows and is doing quite a poor job
> > >of it. The rash of poorly thought out and inconsistent Windows
> > >imitation gui's proves that point.
> > >
> > >Linux should have stayed a CLI operating system IMHO because it is
> > >extremely powerful in that application and quite frankly Linux is
> > >embarrassing itself by trying to graft a slow and obviously inferior
> > >GUI on top of a stable system.
> >
Why don't you try to display some indication that you are in some way
connected to reality?
1) Linux is not competing with windows. Linux is NOT
marketed. DISTRIBUTIONS are marketed. Linux remains the
same no matter what the distribution. If someone
replaces Windows with Linux, that's just someone's
personal decision. If you want to call that a '1' for Linux
and '0' for windows, that's up to you. Have fun. No one
cares.
2) A GUI running under Linux is only that: a GUI running under
Linux. Linux stays the same. I run Linux. I run no GUI.
3) "Linux should have stayed a CLI operating system." You have
brain damage. What does this mean? I have an embedded
system that boots Linux from an FDDI connection and has no
keyboard or monitor. What kind of system is this? GUI or
CLI? What are you talking about?
4) Linux is grafting a GUI on top of a stable system? How does it
do that? graft 'stable system' < GUI. Or is it a daemon
maybe? Again, what exactly are you talking about?
You obviously have no concept of what an operating system is. Just
because windows is crippled with an 'enforced' GUI, it does not serve as
the model for all OSs. Try to separate applications from OSs. I know
it's tough for a windows weeny, but you won't come off as some kind of
idiot.
--
John W. Sanders
===============
"there" in or at a place.
"their" of or relating to them.
"they're" contraction of 'they are'.
------------------------------
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 2451707
Date: 28 Jun 2000 16:23:20 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Why do you think I asked?
>
>Entertainment purposes?
Do you still think that?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.economics
Subject: M$ Exposed (was Re: Oracle's Dirty Tricks Department)
Date: 28 Jun 2000 16:41:05 GMT
In article <Cul65.11$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Marcus Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>NEW YORK (AP) -- The Oracle Corp. has confirmed it hired a detective agency
>to investigate allies of rival Microsoft Corp., and said the work showed
>that Microsoft paid the trade and policy groups to ``influence'' public
>opinion during its federal antitrust trial.
What would you consider a more credible source, Mr. Turner? If
this case was only based on Oracle's assertions, then one can certainly
question its credibility. But if Oracle's investigations revealed
assertion-independent evidence of such payments, then the case was
clearly made.
One can certainly ask how much M$'s opponents have been paying
opinion leaders to criticize M$, but M$ has not come up with any real
evidence of similar payments.
But such payments by M$ are all in character for it; there was the
famous "Steve Barkto" (or Bartko) incident of some years back, in which a
supposed administrator of IBM systems would effusively praise M$ and blast
OS/2. It turned out that the account SB posted from had been financed by
some M$ executive.
>The groups ``were misrepresenting themselves as independent advocacy groups,
>when in fact their work was funded by Microsoft for the express purpose of
>influencing public opinion in favor of Microsoft during its antitrust
>trial,'' Oracle said Tuesday.
>``This is a sad day,'' Mark Murray, a Microsoft spokesman, told The
>Associated Press. ``(Oracle is) basically trying to justify these
>inappropriate actions and it's unfortunate that Oracle won't admit that it's
>wrong.''
Such as exposing M$ shenanigans? Does M$ have any comparable dirt
on Oracle?
>Oracle said it retained the detective agency a year ago to investigate the
>Oakland free-market policy institute after it placed full-page ads defending
>Microsoft in national newspapers. The Times has reported that the ad was
>paid for by Microsoft.
Some "objectivity"!
>The taxpayers' union at one point issued a study blaming the antitrust
>case -- which Microsoft lost and has appealed -- for a loss in value of
>state pension funds. The Journal later reported that the group had received
>funding from Microsoft.
>The Journal also reported Wednesday that Oracle hired a Washington public
>relations firm, Chlopak, Leonard, Schechter & Associates, to disseminate
>potentially damaging information about Microsoft to the media. That work
>included suggestions that a company headed by political consultant Ralph
>Reed -- a top campaign strategist for George W. Bush -- was trying to
>persuade the presidential candidate to support Microsoft.
>The company, Century Strategies, later apologized for encouraging ``a small
>number of individuals'' to lobby Bush. The company said Reed never asked
>Bush to take a position on the court case.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
