Linux-Advocacy Digest #514, Volume #27 Fri, 7 Jul 00 07:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Updated List of Steve/Mike/... Pseudonyms -was- Linux is just plain awful (Mark S.
Bilk)
Re: Linux is just plain awful (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner? ("Alexey Zolotukhin")
Re: Linux, easy to use? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: ## HOT ## Microsoft software for Linux ("Wouter Verhelst")
Re: Linux faster than Windows? (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: ## HOT ## Microsoft software for Linux (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: VM Ware looks cool. (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Linux is just plain awful (Uwe =?ISO-8859-1?Q?B=F6hme?=)
Re: Linux is just plain awful (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: VM Ware looks cool. ("Ferdinand V. Mendoza")
Re: C# is a copy of java (Aaron Kulkis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Subject: Updated List of Steve/Mike/... Pseudonyms -was- Linux is just plain awful
Date: 7 Jul 2000 09:42:51 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
pac4854 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Search the Deja c.o.l.a. archives for "numero uno returns" and
>you find such distinguished anti-Linux posters as Wazzoo and
>Heather69. Matter of fact, Heather69 has the same ISP as the
>Wongs here, what a coincidence.
Thanks for the pointer; wazzoo was answering "BklynBoy" in
that post. That makes at least 27 fake names used by this
one creep for posting lying anti-Linux propaganda on behalf
of Microsoft:
Steve/Mike/Heather/Simon/teknite/keymaster/keys88/Sewer Rat/
"S"/Sponge/Sarek/piddy/McSwain/pickle_pete/Ishmeal_hafizi/
Syphon/Proculous/Tiberious/Amy/Jerry_Butler/Wobbles/wazzoo/
"Tim Palmer"/BklynBoy/susie_wong/"leg log"/bison/etc.
>The same lame recycled crap over and over again for nearly a year
>certainly speaks volumes about Microsoft's devotees.
Employee, I think. Nobody would do that much work --
so many thousands of posts -- without being paid somehow,
maybe through a third party -- a PR agency, or one of the
astroturf organizations that Microsoft has been paying to
publish propaganda for it in print:
Association for Competitive Technology
National Taxpayers Union
Americans for Tax Reform
Cato Institute
Americans for Technology Leadership
Independent Institute
Some of these are politically Conservative and would be
likely to have contact with homophobic Fundamentalists
like Steve/Mike.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Susan and Willy Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I manage a national software chain and as far as Linux is concerned, it
>is numero uno on the return list. The next nearest competitor isn't even
>close. And for those curious ones it is a kids game that sucks real bad
>although it is advertised on a national basis. It blue screens even in
>the setup program on many computers, especially those with Win 98 SE
>installed.
>
>Our policy typically is to not accept opened shrinkwrap for money back
>returns, but we have had such a backlash of dissatisfied Linux users that
>we had no other choice.
>
>Unfortunately our headquarters determines what we stock and Linux is high
>on their list for some reason. I suspect the markup is high, although I
>can't say for sure because I don't have access to the wholesale price the
>distributor pays. I know that my store makes 27 percent on each copy so
>the mark up must be tremendous.
>
>So why does Linux get returned so much?
>
>We wondered that also and in a crude attempt to gather some data we
>created a simple questionnaire that we require the customer to fill out
>before a full refund is granted.
>
>Most people returning Linux seem to be in very foul moods for some reason
>or another so the data may be skewed a little.
>
>Here are the results of 11 months of questioning people:
>
>72 percent said Linux sucks. Various reason given, hardware support and
>old style looking applications lead the list. Written by a bunch of nerds
>is a common comment.
>
>11 percent said they could not install it.
>
>7 percent said Windows has more applications.
>
>6 percent said they were going to sue us.
>
>4 percent said they didn't have the time to learn it.
>
>We currently have 2 techs devoted to Linux only support and I can only
>say that these people earn every dollar they make.
>
>They are screamed at, cursed at, threatened and so forth on a daily
>basis.
>
>This rarely happens with Windows or Macintosh users. What is it about
>Linux that seems to bring out the hostility in people?
>
>In conclusion, our new policy is to warn people before they purchase
>Linux to understand what Linux is about, and that it is not a Windows
>replacement. We had a lawyer try and convert his entire office of 14
>computers to Linux with the hopes of using Wine to run the odd Windows
>application that didn't have a Linux clone.
>
>He almost went out of business and lost a lot of data. We had to provide
>onsite tech help for this customer so that he didn't sue the pants off of
>us.
>
>We have informed the head office of all the troubles we are having with
>Linux and in a memo to us, they have acknowledged that the other stores
>are having similar problems.
>
>My feeling is that Linux will be removed from the shelves pretty soon
>because it is just not worth the hassle.
>
>Susie and Willy Wong
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is just plain awful
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 06:10:02 -0400
Woofbert wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > Woofbert wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Joel Barnett"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > <snipped the unimportant parts>
> > > >
> > > > Schools out for the Summer, eh ? Pretty unimaginative as trolls go,
> > > > i.e., obviously bogus storyline, stock Linux complaints,
> > >
> > > Oh, yes, there can't be anything to the story at all, especially
> > > considering that it only rehashes the same complaints you're already
> > > familiar with...
> > >
> > > Now is it just me or does that make no sense? Doesn't it seem as though
> > > someone ought to actually look into these complaints and try to fix the
> > > problem?
> > >
> > > From my own experience with Linux, Windows, and Macintosh, I can see how
> > > the complaints would make sense. The herd is stampeding to follow a new
> > > leader ... only Linux isn't as polished as Windows.
> >
> >
> > The problems mentioned were fixed YEARS AGO.
> >
> > Hope that helps, dork.
>
> Oh, ow. That really hurts. Hey, just because you called me a dork, I'm
> gonna go right out and buy a copy of Linux. Isn't that amazing? This
> must be the first time it ever worked.
>
> No, just fooling. I already did that a while back.
Yes. that's why the problems you are complaining about are ones
that were solved around 1995-96.
>
> > > For development machines, servers, embedded apps, and tinker-toys, Linux
> > > is great. But is it really ready for commercial software?
> >
> > Linux is more home-user friendly than Unix, and Unix systems have been
> > more workable as a desktop OS than LoseDOS ever was.
> >
> > Unix had SEVERAL fully functional GUIs ***BEFORE*** LoseDOS 1.0
> >
> >
> > hope that also helps, dork.
>
> I just installed Red Dog on my G3 and NetBSD on my Quadra. It's fun
> playing with the hodgepodge of UI styles.
>
> Just having a UI, and having had it longer than Windoze, is not the
> answer to the problem. You're making the same mistake the Windows folks
> did, which is to not understand the problem.
>
LoseDOS doesn't understand the the FIRST problem is to keep a rogue
program from trashing the system.
You know.... kind of like you make sure that the fuel system doesn't
catch on fire before worrying about air conditioning and a sunroof.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Alexey Zolotukhin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Alexey Zolotukhin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner?
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 12:15:41 +0200
Jerry McBride <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <net85.6917$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Alexey Zolotukhin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> >> >Downloading files with my Linux box
> >> >is about 66% faster.
> >>
> >> PPFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFT. What a nice, rownd number. How long it took
> >you to make it up?
> >>
> >
> >that's actually not far from the truth.. I get an average of 2-3 kbps
with
> >my ISDN
> >card when I work in windows98, and in linux I get an average of 6-7 kbps
> >with the same ISDN card... (in both cases I only use one isdn line)
> >
>
> What? ISDN? 2-3kbps or 6-7kbps??? I get that over a crappy dial-up at 33k!
>
well, lucky you :)
- alex
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 11:11:56 +0100
On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 13:56:31 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Mr Goodwin: you are a moron. At least, that is the impression of you
>> that I gain from reading your posts. Hell, _Scientologists_ do less
>> squirming and evading the issue than you do...
>>
>
>WOAH! That's seriously cold dude. I mean, I know he gets a bit obtuse,
>but did you really have to hit him with the scientology jab?
Yup :-) And *they* tend to do it with more personality and style, and
I'm well aware of the implications of what I'm saying there.
--
Warning: end of message imminent. Stop reading now.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Wouter Verhelst" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.best,alt.linux.sucks,be.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: ## HOT ## Microsoft software for Linux
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 10:22:27 GMT
"Gert Vandelaer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in bericht
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > This is not the only Microsoft program for Linux.
> > For a long time exists Microsoft Netshow (like realplayer) for Linux -
check
> > the microsoft site.
>
> I WILL MOST CERTAINLY DO NO SUCH THING !!!!
> :-)
Neither will I ;-)
Still, there is even other software from M$ for Linux: Frontpage extensions
to the Apache Webserver (Not really Linux, but more for Unix)
However, as could be expected, there are several security issues in using
this program...
:-)))
--
Groetjes,
Wouter
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux faster than Windows?
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 06:39:11 -0400
"Tod D. Ihde" wrote:
>
> Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Tod D. Ihde" wrote:
> >>
> >> Will you all quit your whining? Who cares? People use what they use.
> >> Besides, ever since we moved away from 8-bit machines, nobody has
> >> given a darn about good code. Everyone got lazy when memory &
> >> CPU cycles got cheap.
>
> > You've never run systems that house corporate databases for a Fortune
> > 50 company, have you....
>
> No, but... You don't seem to read what you're replying to, do you? What does
> that have to do with code bloat & lazy programming practices?
> Oh, that's right - Fortune 50 companies all hire only the best programmers,
> known for their ability to save 4 bytes & 18 clock cycles by using RORs.
> Sorry, I forgot. How menial of me. I'm not worthy.
I saw a 15-million dollar project almost go down the tubes due to
ppoor programming.
When I was at Kmart, a 15-year old inventory control program written
in COBOL, running inside a kind of VM/CMS emulator on HP-UX was
upgraded to a new program, called Warehouse Management System
running on an Informix database.
Stupidly, the vendor's programmers did something to the effect of
in the batch-processing session.
exclusive_lock_region (low row, hirow, blah, foo, bar, ... )
for row=low to hi
process_row (row);
next
During the batch processing mode, several large blocks of exclusive
locks practically ruined the entire project, [increasing the number
of CPUs from 3 to 6, and even upgrading the CPU speed to the fastest
available had only a 5% speed up in batch processing] because of
starvation caused by contention for exclusively locked rows.
When they rewrote the code to:
from row=low to high
exclusive_lock_row(row, blah, foo, bar, ...);
process_row (row);
next
system performance increased dramatically.
Before those changes were made, the warehouse running the pilot
installation was running at aproximately 50% throughput of the old
code. Deliveries to stores were lagging, trucks were backed up on
the docks. Stores were running so low on inventory, that despite
assistance from neighboring warehouses (Kansas, Michigan, Tennessee,
and Minnesota) many stores served by this warehouse (in Illinois)
were in danger of having to close within 48 hours....which would have
forced a roll-back the the old system [and thus, shutting down the
warehouse, doing a complete inventory, and forcing the closure
of of a few hundred stores].
Fortunately, the problem was found and corrections made, and the new
system significantly reduced turnaround time for both loading
and unloading operations, but it had been a very close call.
The reason this happened is because the warehous in question was
approximately 10 times larger than the largest facility where the
vendor's product was already installed. Thus, with the smaller
database, and significantly smaller number of transactions/hour
at the loading docks, their sloppily written code was able to
muddle through.... but the same routines, running inside one
of Kmart's warehouses was inadequate without a SIGNIFICANT
improvements in processing efficiency.
>
> Sorry, couldn't resist. It bugs me when people just spew "oh yeah"'s w/o
> even touching on the subject at hand.
>
> Oh, btw: as a "Unix Systems Engineer", and fellow UseNet reader, you should
> know that your .signature should be limited to ~4 lines of text, out of
> courtasy to both your fellow readers & NNTP servers worldwide. But then, you
> knew that, right?
>
> > I'm talking about... warehouse inventories
> > automotive CAD drawings,
> > Customer accounts at stock brokers, etc., etc..
>
> ...Which had nothing to do with what I was talking about (see above).
>
> My point was that nobody cares about _good_ code anymore - about saving
See above. A vice president's neck was on the line with respect to
good code vs. bad code.
> that byte, about saving that clock cycle. Everyone's answer is to just throw
> more CPU, more memory, more HD space at a problem until it becomes bearable,
> not to actually go through their code & try to make it leaner, meaner, more
> refined & elegant.
Kmart would disagree, as would many other places with extremely large
databases. There are certain types of problems where throwing more
CPU cycles at the problem DOESN'T solve it, because that is not where
the program lies. If your code aggrevates the disk I/O bottle neck
that exists on most systems, then your code will NOT scale up very well.
>
> And then, I ended up by saying the following:
>
> >> If you don't like a platform, don't work with it... But please, don't whine
> >> about it either.
>
> Which, I think, says it all.
>
> >> *sigh*
>
> Ok, so _this_ says it all.
>
> Again, I just have to say... This .sig is _way_ too long. Put it in your
> .finger and change your .sig to read "For my personal crusade against 2
1) That's .plan, not .finger.
2) It would not serve it's purpose when stashed away in a file
which is printed ONLY when an obscure command is run with
my account as the argument.
> people, and you if you don't agree with what I think is right, finger
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]" - It's going to save bandwidth & make anyone who tries
> to read your posts/followups much happier. (Besides, now people can't see
> that I'm the Lorax & speak for the trees, unless they scroll down two
> pages. What a bummer!)
>
> Tod.
>
Your method will NOT prevent a dormant flamewar from
1) reigniting, and
2) spreading into this group.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.best,alt.linux.sucks,be.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: ## HOT ## Microsoft software for Linux
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 06:43:04 -0400
Atanas Kolev wrote:
>
> This is not the only Microsoft program for Linux.
> For a long time exists Microsoft Netshow (like realplayer) for Linux - check
> the microsoft site.
This is just an attempt to get Microsoft-written code installed onto
Linux platforms under the root uid..... something which only an IDIOT
would do. [Microsoft applications do enough damage to M$ platforms,
why would they provide better service for a non-M$ platform?]
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: VM Ware looks cool.
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 06:50:45 -0400
Ian Pulsford wrote:
>
> What are you talking about, OS/2 is not dead, just laying low. Rumours are
> that '4.5' or 5.0 may be released in the near future.
Unfortunately for IBM (but fortunately for everyone else), OS/2 is
suffering from blood-loss amounting to about 2-3 quarts.
>
> "Ferdinand V. Mendoza" wrote:
>
> > Don't equate Laura with your poor mentality. She doesn't want
> > to do reboots just to use Winblows. Period.
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > If Linux keeps trying to be Windows it is going to die just like OS/2.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Ferdinand
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Uwe =?ISO-8859-1?Q?B=F6hme?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is just plain awful
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 12:34:46 +0200
Susan and Willy Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (or maybe someone else) wrote:
> [lots of snips]
> Here are the results of 11 months of questioning people:
>
> 72 percent said Linux sucks. Various reason given, hardware support and
> old style looking applications lead the list. Written by a bunch of nerds
> is a common comment.
So the newuser advice is so bad in your "27 shops", that you're not able
to give them a hardware compatibility list?? Ouch!
> 11 percent said they could not install it.
Being stupid is no good reason for returning a software
X: I gave back my mercedes.
Y: Why
X: Neither I had a license, nor I knew hot to drive.
Ouch!
> 7 percent said Windows has more applications.
And of course all of them have a lot of applications comming along with
their bare Windows!
Ouch!
> 6 percent said they were going to sue us.
The facts you mentioned above make me hope they will succeed.
> 4 percent said they didn't have the time to learn it.
So they better start cleaning the floor.
Ouch, sorry... they would have to learn!
> We had a lawyer try and convert his entire office of 14
> computers to Linux with the hopes of using Wine to run the odd Windows
> application that didn't have a Linux clone.
> He almost went out of business and lost a lot of data. We had to provide
> onsite tech help for this customer so that he didn't sue the pants off of
> us.
So maybe your "shops" lack the qualification of doing professional support.
> We have informed the head office of all the troubles we are having with
> Linux and in a memo to us, they have acknowledged that the other stores
> are having similar problems.
Minor note here: I wonder how you are "managing a national software chain"
without sitting in the headoffice?
> My feeling is that Linux will be removed from the shelves pretty soon
> because it is just not worth the hassle.
It's better to the linux community if you remove linux.
Providing such poor services would demage it's reputation.
> Susie and Willy Wong
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I know this is a troll, but some questions here might be really
discussed, like how it's possible to avoid reputation demage
by incompetent support.
Also certifications from private
companies like RH or SuSE can not be the final solution.
--
Uwe Böhme
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.bnhof.de/~uwe/
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is just plain awful
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 06:52:03 -0400
jbarntt wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Joel Barnett"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > <snipped the unimportant parts>
> > >
> > > Schools out for the Summer, eh ? Pretty unimaginative as trolls go,
> > > i.e., obviously bogus storyline, stock Linux complaints,
> >
> > Oh, yes, there can't be anything to the story at all, especially
> > considering that it only rehashes the same complaints you're already
> > familiar with...
> >
> > Now is it just me or does that make no sense? Doesn't it seem as
> though
> > someone ought to actually look into these complaints and try to fix
> the
> > problem?
>
> Think about it, a law firm with 14 pc's - why would one of these
> lawyers attempt to upgrade them to Linux, w/o backing up the data ?
> First, the law firm would probably have a consultant who would not be
> so stupid as to forget to do backup's before installing a new OS. Also,
> let's assume that of the 14 pc's 2 are servers, say one for file/print
> service and one as a proxy server. You might wish to upgrade the
> servers to Linux, but probably not the workstations.
Any law firm too cheap to purchase an additional machine for the
pilot project is one that won't be in business any longer anyway.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Ferdinand V. Mendoza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: VM Ware looks cool.
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 15:00:25 +0400
You're barking at the wrong tree.
You should shout loud at Simon 777.
Ferdinand
Ian Pulsford wrote:
> What are you talking about, OS/2 is not dead, just laying low. Rumours are
> that '4.5' or 5.0 may be released in the near future.
>
> "Ferdinand V. Mendoza" wrote:
>
> > Don't equate Laura with your poor mentality. She doesn't want
> > to do reboots just to use Winblows. Period.
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > If Linux keeps trying to be Windows it is going to die just like OS/2.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Ferdinand
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: C# is a copy of java
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2000 06:58:52 -0400
Leslie Mikesell wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On 4 Jul 2000 13:03:22 -0500, Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>You mean you don't like:
> >>
> >> char *foo="abcd"; foo[2];
> >>and
> >> "abcd"[2];
> >>and
> >> 2["abcd"];
> >>
> >>to all mean the same thing?
> >
> >They don't all mean the same thing. Two of them mean 'c', while
> >the other means "Crash, burn, and dump core, *right* *now*".
>
> A long time ago, back in the K&R days, I fuzzily recall someone
> who should have known explaining why a C compiler had to
> treat them all the same. I can't do the argument justice
> myself, but it involved the steps of turning the string
> into a pointer, then turning the subscript operation into
> an addition, and it doesn't matter which direction
> you add - you end up adding an integer to a pointer either
> way and the result is the same.
Um... doesn't work on 2["abcd"]
because that translates into 2 + 0x41424344 = *(0x41424346.)
which ONLY works if "abcd" is stored at 0x41424345 (thats rigth,
last two digits are 45, not 44)
maybe you're thinking:
char *foo=abcd
x=foo[2]
y=abcd[2]
z= *(1 + foo) /* off-by-one syndrom */
???
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
