Linux-Advocacy Digest #666, Volume #27 Fri, 14 Jul 00 03:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Are Linux people illiterate? (Darren)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Where did all my windows go? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Mike Stump)
Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (void)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (void)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Aaron R. Kulkis' signature ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Java remains the best choice (was: Re: Oh Oh! 2) (fungus)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Darren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Are Linux people illiterate?
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 06:17:48 GMT
Considering in the short extracts of your postings, you are no better
than the 'illiterates' you are lambasting, you should really get a life
of your own. That comment about proofreading (notice it is ONE word -
not two) is especially apropos for you. I think I read in one of the
greatest lectures ever delivered - 'Why worry about the sliver in your
neighbor's eye when you have a plank in your own?'.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> That is no excuse. They could at least have someone proof read it.
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Ciaran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You may also consider that some of the documentation is written
> > by people for whom english is not their first language. Linux is
> > an international effort after all. You may want to cut them some
> > slack.
> >
> > You may also want to spend some time reading the Win32 platform
> > SDK documentation... hardy a paragon of literary excellence IMHO.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Ciaran
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
> > Up to 100 minutes free!
> > http://www.keen.com
> >
> >
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 02:19:17 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Austin Ziegler in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>On Thu, 13 Jul 2000, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>> And personally, I think that end-users should be writing their own
>> software. Certainly businesses should be developing their own stuff; it
>> ain't that hard. Take a wordprocessing object from over here, stick it
>> with an email client object over there. Simple, easy, affordable.
>> What, it isn't that easy?
>
>*snort* *guffaw* *laugh*
>
>Software development, you overblown asinine twit,
<G>
>is not putting
>together Lego blocks.
It should be. It will be when it has to be or you programmer's won't
make any money. Three cheers for RMS. Next?
>Business managers have been wanting that since
>computers first arrived -- and every time they have been given the
>ability to do so, the products have flopped or not been used by the
>original targets.
That's because business managers aren't the ones who are going to put
the Lego blocks together. Users are. Eventually.
>COBOL is a grand example. Yes, it's used everywhere. But it's used by
>programmers, *not* by business managers. It was originally created so
>that business managers could write their *own software*.
BASIC is a better one (real BASIC; Visual Basic doesn't have anything to
do with it.) All you asinine arrogant software "engineer" twits can
scoff, and go on ignoring the fact that you are only confusing the issue
when you insist that only a language fit for writing kernels and device
drivers can perform mundane and obvious tasks like open an object
written in one of those languages and automate its use with another
object so that the operator can have the computer doing whatever he
needs it to do right now.
>Novell came out a few years ago with a visual program building
>environment. It isn't sold anymore.
Lots of stuff along these lines aren't sold no more. Visual Basic cut
off their air supply. Notice.
Why is it that MS did that, do you think? Is it because empowered users
are not only possible, but the whole impetus behind the PC revolution,
and more than willing to tell profiteers to go suck eggs? Nah, must be
because "programming is hard", as Barbie would say.
>Software development is a very labour and capital intensive *art*.
Capital intensive? Are you on drugs? *LABOUR*??? You sit around and
fucking THINK for a living!!!!!
>Software development requires highly imaginative workers, not mere
>worker drones. These are *facts*. They're a hell of a lot more useful
>than the stupidity that you have so far exhibited.
Yea, well, you wouldn't know that from looking at software developers.
Maybe in some hidden rooms some where there's "imaginative workers", but
everyone I've ever met is either a code jockey or a project manager.
>Software is not, and likely never will be, the domain of blowhards like
>yourself.
Not even when I programmed an office production and work flow system in
1993? Sorry, you can snow me. I know just how "magical" programming
is. And I know that work flow system wasn't programming; it was a huge
set of macros I built. I also know the database reports we developed
weren't programming. Neither are the scripts we use to smooth over all
the gaping holes in "highly imaginative" developers products. The
enhancements to those products written in Perl aren't *really*
programming, either. But don't say that in front of the guys who do it,
they get pissed. And it does pretty much look like programming to the
uninitiated. Lost of weird conventions followed for forms sake with no
purpose or function, inline documentation that amounts to no more that
self-reminder sticky notes, terse functionality that obfuscates the
simplicity of the processing, all that stuff. But it ain't "real"
programming.
Of course, the kernel guys will call the App developers lightweights,
and the embedded system programmers think even the device driver
programmers are a little weird. But nobody, not a one of them, unless
they're shielded by enough abstraction and ignorance to insist out of
the blue for no reason, none of them can draw a line and dare to insist
"on this side is programming, on that side is operation".
You remember fifty years ago, when "programmers" were the computer
operators, and the user population was divided between data entry
personnel and managers and accountants and clerks reading reports?
The person sitting in front of a PC is not a clerk or a data entry
person. They are the operator. They do not have an engineering degree.
Deal with it.
An application is just a 4th generation computer language. The operator
who uses and application is a computer programmer. They just can't save
their programs to disk, because somebody took their macros away. I
would have hoped that, instead, the BILLIONS of dollars of profit that
were used to buy other companies and line a very small number of
people's bank accounts through stock speculation were *supposed* to have
gone into developing some fifth and sixth and seventh generation
languages, so the world could work the way this particular blowhard
would like to see. Not for my benefit, but for the benefit of people
who honestly don't want to screw around with computers, but just get
their work done. Except they don't know the first thing about how to
get the computer to do what you want, because they were informed that
this was called "programming", and their job was to be stupid and click
buttons.
>> Sounds like we need to find someone who will sell us (and install and
>> maintain and develop...) some better end-user programming environments.
>>
>> There will always be the need for software. That is why the GPL is not
>> a stupid idea, but a good one. It is the only open source license that
>> recognizes that. An unlimited need, and unlimited supply; tell me again
>> why the profit needs to be there?
>
>I've never claimed profit needs to be there. There *does* need to be
>enough to reward those who work very hard at software development.
Sounds like profit needs to be there, then, as I don't know of any other
reward that buys dinner.
>Software developers are needed far more than twits like you -- without
>us, you don't get the software to get your job done. Open source, or
>not.
I already have the software to get my job done; I don't know why you
keep acting like I need more all the time. Apparently you didn't do
your job, though, because a lot of what I've already got doesn't seem to
be working the way its supposed to. Can I get a refund?
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[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: alt.sad-people.microsoft.lovers,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish.
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 02:21:35 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Nathaniel Jay Lee in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>Greg Yantz wrote:
>> You might have screwed up the wording elsewhere, but the part that I
>> quoted directly seems pretty much on target.
>>
>> -Greg
>
>Thanks for backing me up on my statement, but I truly believe that only
>a total admission of guilt will do for this individual. Until I admit
>that my entire reasoning/thought/wording/and everything to do with my
>statement is incorrect, this person is going to insist that I am backing
>up MS. That's OK though. I know what I said, I restated it a bit more
>clear, and still in his mind I'm wrong. So, life goes on. I don't have
>to impress everybody. As long as I can live with myself.
You ask someone to recognize one tiny, little, very specific, well
described, specifically defined conceptual glitch, and this is the
response you get.
Thanks anyway. Sorry I couldn't help.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[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: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Where did all my windows go?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 06:44:29 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) writes:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in <8k77g5$7lo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>Say what --- why don't you do me a favour, compile the following with
>>"gcc -O6", and time how long it takes to run (with "time bernies_prog")?
>I'll get back to you on this one.
It's been a while --- do you need help compiling?
Bernie
--
It is not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it is
because we do not dare that they are difficult.
Seneca
Ancient Roman poet and statesman
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Stump)
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 06:39:39 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> If so, why?
>
>A cite won't really help.
Actually, a cite would help.
>Other languages have a stronger sense of the differences involved
>that make the concept clearer. I'll try to explain it for you here.
Let me publicly say thanks for taking the time to inform and educate
me. I wasn't sure if you would in this case, but I was truely
interested in hearing what you had to say. Thank you.
> For example, one might say, "I ran the drill press." This is a
> non-living animate. In turn, one would NOT say, "I ran the hammer."
Indulge me again, of you will, I'll try and be very brief and I'm
trying to understand to a greater extent your first answer.
Can you run a hammer across a table?
Can you run a hammer in a local best tool contest?
Can you run a hammer up to your grandma's house?
Can you run bullets?
If I can run bullets, was there a time in which I could not run
bullets?
If so, do you agree that language can change to suit
someones usage?
How does that come to pass other than non-conventional usage by someone?
> Again, the vital classification of living is missing, which is
> one of the concepts generally required for slavery and
> enslavement.
I happen to think of software as living. See, this is part of the
problem. You don't I bet. Yet, my friends and I talk about genetic
bits of software all the time. It is reasonable to talk about their
offspring as well. Software can die. What quality of life does
software not possess? Carbon based? Is that the only thing?
> Can one "enslave that dog?" PETA would say that you could,
Right, they are trying to gives rights to things that never had them
before. To do this, it must be possible to enslave a dog. If they
are successful, we as a society will modify how we view dogs. I am as
corrupt as they are by trying to give freedom, to software. This is
the crusade, to change people's ideas about it, to change the
language, to get it into a dictionary, so people like you don't do
what you do. I define language, you merely use it.
> but dogs are not generally held to be sentient beings, which is
> another classification used with slavery. It's therefore fair to
> say that unless one is referring to a person -- a living sentient
> -- slavery cannot apply.
So, can slave only apply to humans?
Why does the m-c reference give `to make directly responsible to another
mechanism' instead of `to make directly responsible to another
human' for slave(v)?
Why does m-c give `a device [...]' for slave(n) instead of `a person'?
>English *is* a tool that can be reshaped to the needs and desires of
>the speakers, but there are both grammatical and semantic rules
>*inherent in the language itself* which prevent either grammtical or
>semantic meaning in certain combinations.
Ok, since there are rules, certainly they are documented, I mean,
certainly I have violated some of them, please cite me a reference to
the rules so that I may better play the game.
>I'm saying that it's semantically void
I disagree. It is as semantically void as saying run bullets after
the usage of the term but before it was put into the dictionary, in
other words, not very.
>to say "software can be enslaved" -- until you can point out that
>software has the characteristics that are generally associated with
>slavery and enslavement.
[ snicker ] I have, I will continue to do so.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.sad-people.microsoft.lovers,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish.
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 02:37:00 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in alt.destroy.microsoft;
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> >I know Windows crashes are random. [...]
[...]
>> What you said above was incorrect. You don't quite seem to understand
>> what it means to be "random". I realize that you only want to consider
>> practical cases, and will believe that I'm just being pedantic and
>> rhetorical and trying to talk about theoretical cases, but I'm not.
>> This is the crux of the issue, and why we've gone back and forth so
>> long, and why what you're saying seems to make sense, and why what I'm
>> saying does not. This is not theory; this is, essentially, the result
>> of careful (though undocumented, because it is not empirical)
>> observation.
>
>In electronics we have a term for failures that happen that cannot be
>predicted when it would be likly to happen so that so that it is very
>difficult to quantify for analysis of its cause that terms is "intermittent
>failures". Equipment that is prone to Intermittent failures is often
>referred to as being flaky and as having flaky behaviour. Poor design, poor
>quality control in manufacture, poor maintenance, user abuse are some
>factors that are know to contribute to the increase of the probability
>intermittent failures. Since intermittent failues often seem to happen at
>random times. They are also know as random failures.
I have never known of anyone to call an intermittent gripe a random
failure. I have heard of 'phase of the moon' failures, I've heard of
'dark-sucker failures' (the ones that only happened when you weren't
looking; that is, when the lights [dark-suckers] were turned off), and
many others. Nobody I know calls and intermittent grip a random
failure, nor would I accept it if they did. I believe I could even
remark that I've regularly heard people avoid using the term "random",
since anyone dealing with technical issues has at least enough brains to
know what "random" means and that things don't happen 'randomly' in a
physical system, except on purpose and only in special cases.
>Since the computer field grew out of mathematics and the electronics fields,
>the pioneers and many of those in the field of computers today have a solid
>background in electronics and/or mathematics. As a result of this, it has
>inherited many terms from both of those fields.
Perhaps in your corner of the field. In my background as an aviation
electronics repair person, and then a computer trainer/technician, I can
unequivocally say that such practices should be scoffed at loudly.
>A major failue in computers is know as a crash, because early disk and drum
>storage devices had a tendancy to have their head crash against the media
>when the system had a major system failue, causing the destruction of the
>storage media, and ofther the heads as well.
And here I thought it as because everyone envisioned a car swerving off
the road into your PC...
>Taking the electronics term "random failures" which is a common subsitute
>for the elsctronics term "intermittent failures" and replacing the word
>"failures" with the word "crashes" derived from the history of computer, we
>come up with the term "random crashes".
Yea, there you go. You've said it. Random crashes. That's what this
is all about. Nathan tried to get away with using it, and now you are
too.
Well, I don't care if you though it was OK because you heard some
deficient technician call an intermittent gripe a "random failure".
Even when the phrase is used, that's not what it means at all. I don't
care if you have built up a tolerance for the fact that you don't know
what causes your computer to crash most of the time.
But, no, you can't say "random crash" and expect to be taken seriously
by people who are planning on making things work, not just giving up and
throwing more money towards Redmond. There are no random crashes. And
software *can't* really even have intermittent crashes. Just the
inability to figure out what, why, or how it crashed. And no care and
feeding of the system is going to give you the ability to know that
considering how far gone Windows is that even people who are paid to
troubleshoot it are willing to accept the impossible notion of "random
crashes".
I'm done with my pontificating for now (this time ;-}). Let's talk
about something else.
--
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 R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 02:40:45 -0400
abraxas wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > "abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8kefaj$3p2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >> > Rob:
> >> >
> >> > I didn't read the code because I have a few questions before I even
> > begin to
> >> > think about how to do this in windows.
> >> >
> >>
> >> You didnt read the code because you CANT read the code, dresden.
> >
> > and again, you provide nothing but an attempt at insult. go mutilate
> > yourself some more...
> >
> >
>
> You dont know how to read code, because you are an IT professional. You
> know how to hook up printers, and thats about it. Now stop trying to
> fool everyone and go back to changing toner.
>
No..he also replaces big, ORACLE databases servers on Unix with
Microsoft
Exchange running on LoseNT....
NOT!
> -----yttrx
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (void)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: 14 Jul 2000 06:32:13 GMT
On Thu, 13 Jul 2000 22:29:33 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>And that's the problem with CMT. What if you put a rendering job in
>the bg? It dies, basically. It's a PITA on a modern computer - you
>can run one thing, and everything else is suspended. Oh, it isn't
>nearly that bad, and modern CPUs have smoothed over some of the
>problems, but still, it's a horrid method of MT'ing.
When SETI@home runs on my roommate's Mac, the responsiveness of my
foreground apps (a web browser and an ssh client) goes to hell. So
while my experience was exactly the opposite of yours, I agree that Mac
scheduling sucks.
--
Ben
220 go.ahead.make.my.day ESMTP Postfix
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (void)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: 14 Jul 2000 06:38:39 GMT
On Thu, 13 Jul 2000 21:50:51 GMT, Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>That's absurd. Foreground means you're working on it at that time.
>Background means you're not.
>
>No matter how the computer deals with it, it's a useful concept.
Your conception of time and a computer's are vastly different. Most of
the time that you think you're using an application, your computer
thinks you're doing nothing.
--
Ben
220 go.ahead.make.my.day ESMTP Postfix
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 02:39:24 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8kefaj$3p2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > Rob:
> > >
> > > I didn't read the code because I have a few questions before I even
> begin to
> > > think about how to do this in windows.
> > >
> >
> > You didnt read the code because you CANT read the code, dresden.
>
> and again, you provide nothing but an attempt at insult. go mutilate
> yourself some more...
It's only an insult because it's TRUE!
--
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 R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 02:45:25 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
>
> I am not a big fan of C++, Java or PERL - that leaves quite a bit... I tend
> to favor VB (in it's variations) becuase it's easy, fast and universally
> understood and available.
VB is ONLY available on LoseDOS systems and is ONLY understoond my M$
droids.
Pretty strange definition of "universal" you have there.
Java and Perl are MUCH closer to being available and understood.
--
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 R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Aaron R. Kulkis' signature
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 02:47:36 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> What does it take to get this guy to stop attaching his rediculous
> signature to his posts? Most times the content of his replies are 1 or
> 2 lines and yet, after many people pointing out that his signature is
> far too long, he does nothing!
>
> It's a shame as his comments are normally reasonable and well put.
And my .sig is written they way it is for equally valid reasons, even
if they are not immediately clear to you.
--
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"
------------------------------
From: fungus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Java remains the best choice (was: Re: Oh Oh! 2)
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 06:54:52 GMT
JennyMe wrote:
>
> Which is precisely why Javapologists and Sun should be worried about
> .NET. M$ is (finally) architecting with the ultimate demise of
> Windows in mind.
Yep. They'll escape the DOJ by making Windows obsolete all by
themselves. Windows' last act will be leverage in the .NET
platform, then it'll be split off by the DOJ and killed by
Microsoft. The monopoly will continue.
--
<\___/>
/ O O \
\_____/ FTB.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
