Linux-Advocacy Digest #587, Volume #27 Tue, 11 Jul 00 05:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (ZnU)
Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: OT, Re: offering escape, Re: Three things not to say to spam (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: offering escape, Re: Three things not to say to spam victims... (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: offering escape, Re: Three things not to say to spam victims... (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Are there still markets? (C# Overview from Microsoft) ("Boris")
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 08:27:44 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] () from comp.os.linux.advocacy; 10 Jul 2000
> >Even Windows 95 has pre-emptive multitasking. Mac OS before
> >Mac OS X (in other words, the version of Mac OS that Mac
> >users are using today) does not.
>
> There is reason to believe that this is a good thing. The method used
> by the Mac puts whatever program is running in the foreground in charge
> of yielding to background programs if it wants to, while pre-emptive
> multitasking allows Windows to have background processes take control
> without waiting for the foreground process to yield. This does seem a
> bit in the Mac's favor in terms of being appropriate for a system which
> is intended to be used as a user desktop. Anyone who has been
> frustrated by a menu disappearing repeatedly because some dialog box
> wanted to pop up will recognize some of the trade-off. For a
> client-only system, the foreground *should* have to yield before any
> background processes can take control, by some reasoning.
It's a nice theory, but it doesn't work in practice. The fact is that
_any_ app in Mac OS can grab control of the processor; a background app
can cause the foreground app to lock up, for example. There's the flip
side as well. A foreground app will often hog the processor even when it
doesn't need it. Typing something in a news readers uses what? 2% of the
CPU? Yet if you're decompressing something in the background, it will
get dramatically slower. Huge amounts of processing power are simply
wasted. In the real world, PMT just works better on the desktop, and I
say this as one of biggest Mac fans you'll ever meet.
Issues like what you suggest with the dialog are really just the result
of badly designed UI. From what I've seen of Mac OS X DP4, it seems like
Apple has done an ingenious job of avoiding such problems while also
totally eliminating the extremely irritating modality problems with
current Mac OS dialogs.
--
The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected.
-- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:28:12 -0400
ostracus wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> >>
> >> Let me tell you, this guy Lewis has written a fantastic article that
> >> really really hits the mark. He tells it like it is and manages to say
> >> it concisely and without insulting anyone. He says all the things I
> >> wish I could say in a newsgroup posting without being interrupted by
> >> zealots and fanatics with their spue. I loved reading this and I hope
> >> you do too:
> >>
> >> http://www.macopinion.com/columns/macskeptic/00/07/07/index.html
> >
> >
> > The author is an idiot.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Well I wouldn't go so far as calling him an idiot, so far as someone who
> just has a POV that leaves 'blind spots'.
>
> For those who have experience on multiple OS'es and have been around long
> enough to witness the majority of computer history. As well as being
> 'human savvy' the 'holes' in some of the arguments will become quite evident.
The author talked about the complexity of the mount command,
but failed to mention that you can reference entries that are
already in the fstab. (which is documented on the same man pages)
Indicates that he has an ax to grind.
--
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.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:30:36 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Leslie Mikesell from comp.os.linux.advocacy; 10 Jul 2000
[...]
>X wouldn't exist at all if it had to be GPL'd. Nor would most
>of the things that use it.
It seems reasonable to assume that no software would exist if it *had*
to be GPL'd. Nevertheless, indications are strong that someday, almost
all software will be voluntarily GPL'd. Once a preponderance of
developers are using GPL code, then even if reference implementations do
get GPL'd, it won't make a difference. Because by that point, nobody
would consider taking the open source reference implementation and
trying to make profit on owning it to begin with.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
[A corporation which does not wish to be identified]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HITS THE MARK
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:30:56 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 19:07:32 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 23:34:44 +0200, Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> >> >> On Sun, 9 Jul 2000 23:16:28 +0200, Mig wrote:
> >> >> >Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> >> >> >heard. And both groups are technical oriented people.
> [deletia]
> >>
> >> IOW: one size does NOT fit all.
> >>
> >> The ideal situation is an end user that has become enlightened
> >> and knows what they want and is capable of expressing it in
> >> reasonable engineering terms.
> >
> >Don't hold your breath.
>
> ...this is typically how good applications rise from the mire.
>
> [deletia]
>
> Artist or Musician turned Geek is not such an extraordinary thing.
> (or vice versa)
>
But, then they no longer conform to the definition of a "technically
illiterate" user whom we should be going to for advice in software
design.
Remember, the GUI was invented by a bunch of total geeks at PARC
in the 1970's. They weren't ordinary mainframe timesharing geeks,
they were SUPER-COMPUTER geeks.
--
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: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:35:29 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Leslie Mikesell from comp.os.linux.advocacy; 10 Jul 2000
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
>>The GPL would only prevent it being used in one single circumstance:
>>profiteering.
>
>The GPL prevents code from being combined with any non-GPL'd code
>and has nothing to do with profiteering. That is, just
>about everywhere except for those who share the need to impose
>restrictions.
Imposing the restriction that you impose no restrictions on others that
you are not having imposed on you, is not a restriction. It is the
definition of freedom.
>>You certainly make the case for GPLing all reference code
>>for interoperability standards, but I doubt that wouldn't seem extreme
>>to the market at this point in time.
>
>Huh? I'm trying to make a case for reference code without
>restrictions that prevent it from being used. If the
>original BSD TCP/IP code had been so restricted I don't
>think the internet as we know it, with correctly interoperating
>components from many vendors, would exist.
Yes, I mischaracterized your argument. My apologies. I have just
posted some comments along the same lines; in the historical time period
when TCP/IP (or Kerberos) software was developed, it would have been
counter-productive to GPL the reference implementation, as it would be
today. GPLing reference implementations is not a good idea, I agree.
They should be public domain.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
[A corporation which does not wish to be identified]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: news.admin.net-abuse.email
Subject: Re: OT, Re: offering escape, Re: Three things not to say to spam
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:36:13 -0400
Jim Seymour wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cameron L. Spitzer) writes:
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ron Ritzman wrote:
> [snip]
> >>
> >>I was amazed as to the hoops that one had to jump through just to
> >>do simple things such as getting the sound card working. Windows
> >>plug n pray had spoiled me.
> >
> > It's awful, and Red Hat and Corel are not helping by claiming
> > otherwise.
> [snip]
>
> That may well be, but for my purposes: a reliable system that
> I can *depend* on is far more important than a sound card will
> ever be.
And in this case, an obsolete soundcard, that wasn't even
close to ubiquitous when it was standard, at a time when
the price of far more powerful successors (AWE64) is trivial,
and still falling.
>
> Regards,
> Jim
> --
> Jim Seymour | "Living in an email account with lots
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] | of spam is like living in a community
> http://home.msen.com/~jimsun | with trash in the streets,"
> | - Gartner analyst Joyce Graff
--
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: news.admin.net-abuse.email
Subject: Re: offering escape, Re: Three things not to say to spam victims...
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:37:20 -0400
Steve Sobol wrote:
>
> From 'Ron Ritzman':
>
> >I'm not completely unfamiliar with nix. I broke my net teeth on
> >shell accounts so I know my way around a command line. However, I
> >found out that running nix on your own PC is a completely
> >different thing from having a shell account on somebody elses
> >box. I played around with Winlinux which simplified a lot of the
> >setup issues that surround more traditional distros and even then
> >I was amazed as to the hoops that one had to jump through just to
> >do simple things such as getting the sound card working. Windows
> >plug n pray had spoiled me.
>
> PNP is available for Linux too, now. But there is still a learning curve.
>
> >Another thing I found out was that all of the newest and sexiest
> >services and applications are written for Windows first. (and
> >sometimes Windows only)
>
> Yup.
>
> >Why is it that Netscape can develop its browsers for Windows,
> >Mac, and nix concurrently but nobody else can?
>
> Microsoft has IE for Solaris and a couple other versions of Unix now :)
However, anybody who runs it as root should be taken out and flogged.
--
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: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:39:25 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Austin Ziegler from comp.os.linux.advocacy; Mon, 10 Jul 2000
14:43:36 -0400
>On 10 Jul 2000, Leslie Mikesell wrote:
>> T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> It is the "commercial" code which is "prohibited". Open source software
>>> is not prohibited at all, unless you're a profiteer.
>> No, the GPL prohibits combining with any non-GPL licence. It has
>> nothing to do with being commercial or making profit. It is just
>> a restriction that prevents many useful developments.
>
>That is better said "the GPL prohibits combining with any non-GPL or
>GPL-compatible licence" (which means that it can be overridden by the
>GPL's clauses).
That doesn't sound like it would be very GPL-compatible. What license
says 'this license can be over-ridden by any other license'? All
licenses over-ride licenses of additional sources of a derived work, if
they are compatible licenses. If they don't, they are non-compatible.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
[A corporation which does not wish to be identified]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: news.admin.net-abuse.email
Subject: Re: offering escape, Re: Three things not to say to spam victims...
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:40:56 -0400
Ron Ritzman wrote:
>
> On 7 Jul 2000 06:19:40 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cameron L.
> Spitzer) wrote:
>
> >Posed that way, it's not "Nyah, nyah, my OS is better than yours"
> >any more, it's "welcome to my community, enter when you're ready,
> >the door is open for you." It's pure empowerment, not a put down.
>
> Point taken.
>
> I'm not completely unfamiliar with nix. I broke my net teeth on
> shell accounts so I know my way around a command line. However, I
> found out that running nix on your own PC is a completely
> different thing from having a shell account on somebody elses
> box. I played around with Winlinux which simplified a lot of the
> setup issues that surround more traditional distros and even then
> I was amazed as to the hoops that one had to jump through just to
> do simple things such as getting the sound card working. Windows
> plug n pray had spoiled me.
>
> Another thing I found out was that all of the newest and sexiest
> services and applications are written for Windows first. (and
> sometimes Windows only) Want to make a call using dialpad.com?
> Sorry, Windows only. Want to listen to a stream encoded with the
> most recent release of Real Audio? You have to wait a year for
> the Linux version to get to that release.
>
> Why is it that Netscape can develop its browsers for Windows,
> Mac, and nix concurrently but nobody else can?
They choose not to.
The unix commmunity should start bashing these people over
the head with clue-sticks.
>
> --
> Ron Ritzman
> http://www.supertroll.com
--
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: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:46:57 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Roberto Alsina from comp.os.linux.advocacy; Mon, 10 Jul 2000
>"T. Max Devlin" escribió:
[...]
>> The GPL would only prevent it being used in one single circumstance:
>> profiteering.[...]
>Uh.... suppose the BSD TCP stack was GPL.
>
>Now, suppose MS ported it to windows 3.11 and called it, say,
>winsock.dll.
>
>Believe it or not, they would not be able to include winsock.dll as part
>of windows 3.11[1].
Yes they could. They'd just have to release Win3.11 as GPL open source.
What's the problem?
>No non-GPL application could EVER link to
>winsock.dll.
>No BSD application would be able to link to winsock.dll.
I think this might lie on the library issue, and that gets too contrary
when dealing with commercial software. No BSD application, AFAIK, ever
has linked with winsock.dll, and I wouldn't expect it would come up very
often. It would force Microsoft to GPL windows or not use TCP/IP, fine.
Again, I don't see the problem; Microsoft's decisions about how to write
their software are their concern, not anybody else's.
>What would the internet be, then?
Ummm. Useful for more than debating points of logic on Usenet and
downloading porn?
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
[A corporation which does not wish to be identified]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:49:09 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Roberto Alsina from comp.os.linux.advocacy; Mon, 10 Jul 2000
[...]
>> As I've stated myself on numerous occasions: if it's truely
>> portable "percieved market demand" is a piss poor excuse.
>
>If porting to MIPS costs a cent more than what porting to MIPS earns,
>it's a perfectly good excuse. Just keep it portable, and do the actual
>port whenever making a port actually will earn you money.
The only way to keep it portable is to port it.
>You know, MS is not in it for the computer theory implications.
They ain't in it for the benefit to the consumer, either.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
[A corporation which does not wish to be identified]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:54:22 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Mike Stump from comp.os.linux.advocacy; Mon, 10 Jul 2000
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Jay Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Sat, 08 Jul 2000 05:32:06 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>The "free = unlimited action without bounds" thing you have in mind is
>>>simply an abstract concept. There's nothing that is that "free",
>>>including free speech. So why do you think it should magically apply to
>>>GPL software? That isn't very consistent.
>>
>>Because "free speech" and other freedoms do universally obey the "free ==
>>unlimited action as long as you do not harm others without their consent".
>
>Is that the only limitation on them? Are you sure?
Yes.
>What about a judge that tells you to sit down and shut up.
He is conducting a trial; impeding justice does harm to a potentially
very large number of people. You will have your turn in the legal
proceedings, so shutting up and sitting down is *preserving* your free
speech, not preventing it.
> Do you
>think you can just talk if you want?
Damn right.
>Do you think it really harms
>him?
No, but it will "harm" you if you don't like spending time or money on a
contempt penalty.
>Speech isn't as unlimited as you seem to think it is.
Yes it is. :-)
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
[A corporation which does not wish to be identified]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: "Boris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.lang.java.gui,alt.news.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Are there still markets? (C# Overview from Microsoft)
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 01:54:52 -0700
Details will be announced at MSD conference around July 15. I'm not at liberty of
discussing them now. But briefly, you didn't get it. Just wait for official
announcement.
Boris
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:55:45 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Mike Stump from comp.os.linux.advocacy; Mon, 10 Jul 2000
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>John Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>And the inconsistancy of the GPL, is that some people call the
>>GPL 'free', and then apply constraints, rules and regulations to
>>the redistributions... This makes GPL inconsistant with free
>>software.
>
>Are you a free man? Do you have any constraints placed upon you? Are
>there any rules and regulations that you must obey?
You know, its a little embarrassing that this discussion has gone on so
long before anyone was bright enough to present such a cogent and
complete argument, Mike. Thanks.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
[A corporation which does not wish to be identified]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 04:56:12 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Austin Ziegler from comp.os.linux.advocacy; Mon, 10 Jul 2000
>On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Mike Stump wrote:
>> John Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> And the inconsistancy of the GPL, is that some people call the
>>> GPL 'free', and then apply constraints, rules and regulations to
>>> the redistributions... This makes GPL inconsistant with free
>>> software.
>> Are you a free man? Do you have any constraints placed upon you? Are
>> there any rules and regulations that you must obey?
>
>Is software now a legal person?
>
>It's amazing that you can't tell the difference between a tool and a
>person.
Its amazing you can't tell the difference between a definition and a
metaphor.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
[A corporation which does not wish to be identified]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
