Linux-Advocacy Digest #750, Volume #27 Tue, 18 Jul 00 10:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Advocacy and Programmers... (Pan)
Re: I had a reality check today :( ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451743 (Tholen) (Marty)
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Growing dependence on Java (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Linux is just plain awful ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Can Linux Support PCMIA (Mikey)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? (Perry Pip)
BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious.... (Perry Pip)
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Drazen Kacar)
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it (Perry Pip)
Re: I just don't buy it ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Advocacy and Programmers...
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 06:28:54 -0700
David Brown wrote:
>
> That is true - VB will never have the appeal on Linux that it does on
> Windows.
Indeed. And why would it? There's a half dozen better scripting
languages on the platform already.
--
Pan
www.la-online.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I had a reality check today :(
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 09:37:23 -0400
Tim Palmer wrote:
>
> On 13 Jul 2000 05:55:26 GMT, Ray Chason
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>On 8 Jul 2000 07:20:33 GMT, Ray Chason
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>On 6 Jul 2000 03:40:57 GMT, Ray Chason
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>>Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>It won't healp LIE-nux anny. Nobuddy want's to reed HOWTO after HOWTO after
>HOWTO. You alreddy have
> >>>>>>users reeding TOO HOWTO's PLUS the ones they alreddy half toreed to get the
>rest of CommyLie-nux working.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Can't you set up your Windoze-based newsreader so it doesn't spew these
> >>>>>mile-long lines?
> >>>>
> >>>>Cant you make your Generly Not Usefall (GNU) CommyLie-nux crap to handall long
>lines propperly?
> >>>
> >>>1) My newsreader is of my own design and handles long lines just fine,
> >>> thank you very much...
> >>
> >>Proov my point again why do'nt you? In UNIX you half to rite your own programms,
>and your another exampel.
> >
> >1) Replace "half to" with "*can* without shelling out even more $$$$$".
> > Some people are happy with SLRN or TIN or Gnus (Emacs -- yeeccchh!).
>
> Some poepal are to cheap to pay for good software.
>
> >
> >2) Somebody had to write Lookout. (And ought to be shot for it.) Likewise
> > somebody had to write this newsreader I'm using. Why not me?
>
> Why work so hard when you can by a better one at the softweare store? I forgot,
>it's because thear's
> no software for Lixnu at the software store!
>
> >3) You're jealous that I *can* program, aren't you, Timmy-boy?
>
> You cant' programm as good as Microsoft.
Are you saying that causing system-crashes is "good programming" !?!?!?
just askin'
--
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: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451743 (Tholen)
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 13:40:46 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Eric Bennett writes:
>
> > Jacques Guy wrote:
>
> >> Soon, these newsgroups are going to consist of
> >> nothing but messages from bots and to bots. Raw
> >> bots, rough bots, tin bots, tholen bots
> >> (those with a speech impediment). I wish
> >> they'd post the source code
>
> > You can start with the source provided by Dave Wang, and work from there:
> >
> > main(){char *a[]={"Illogical.","Balderdash.","Non sequitur.",
> > "Incorrect.","See what I mean?","Irrelevant.","Poppycock."};
> > for(;;)puts(a[rand()%7]);}
>
> Insufficient, Eric, given that the code includes nothing to determine
> when it is appropriate to use each response.
Evidence of his C comprehension problems. The function "rand" is called.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 09:40:38 -0400
Tim Palmer wrote:
>
> On Tue, 11 Jul 2000 05:09:04 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >Tim Palmer wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 6 Jul 2000 14:54:08 GMT, Jim Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> >> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> >Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >>On Tue, 4 Jul 2000 11:10:02 GMT, Jim Cameron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> >> >>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> >>>Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>>>Windo's is weal made.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Good one Tim. You mean it makes you come out in a rash?
> >> >>>You must admit, this troll does have his moments.
> >> >>
> >> >>I mean its made good, not like LIE-nux that is maid by commy's and
> >> >>their all stoppid hippy's that cant' make a hole OS.
> >> >
> >> >Ah, a response from Tim Palmer. Does this mean I've arrived?
> >> >I'd say that Windows was more of a "hole OS" than Linux. Linux
> >> >holes tend to get plugged very quickly.
> >>
> >> ...but LIE-nux has more hoals to plug.
> >
> >damn, you're dense.
>
> But its' troo! You LIE-nux LIARS clame that LIE-nux gets its' bug's fix'd faster
>because thear are
> so meny people working on it, but LIE-nux gets new bug's put into it even faster
>than they get fix'd,
> because thear is no orginnizatian.
Linux, like Unix, is written in a modular fashion.
It's the LoseDOS spaghetti code which suffers from two NEW bugs
surfacing as a result
of every bug that is fixed (just like that other monstrosity, OS/360)
--
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: "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: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 09:42:30 -0400
Spud wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >
> > 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.
>
> Actually, VB is only available, as far as I'm aware, on Windows
> systems. "LoseDOS"? Never heard of it. As to "M$ droids", I've
> never heard of "M$" either, so I wouldn't know about that. I do know
The boy isn't to perceptive, is he.
--
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] (Donal K. Fellows)
Subject: Re: Growing dependence on Java
Date: 18 Jul 2000 13:38:28 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aravind Sadagopan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Offlate I have seen a number of application written in Java and that
> seems the companys trump card for boasting multiplatform support. I
> downloaded XML Pro for Linux and its so damn slow, JBuilder 3.5 is a
> snail and Forte for Java is the slowest application I have seen..
> Starwriter takes time to load that I have switched to Corel
> WordPerfect. And many applications are using java runtime.I think
> applications should not compromise speed for platform indepence.
> There can be some tradeoff but Java is just too damn slow. What do
> you guys feel?
In my experience, Java's speed is quite acceptable and the demands it
makes for resources can be tolerated. Not having to futz around
building binaries for loads of different platforms is a *big* win IME
(autoconf is nice, but not needing to do it at all is *waaay* nicer!)
However, my experience is not necessarily yours. I was developing a
non-GUI application that did mostly structure shuffling; running on
Solaris 7, I found that the speed of Java 1.1.7 was within about a
factor of two of gcc -O3 on this platform with my code (no, I do not
remember which version of gcc...) I imagine it would go even faster
now on the same hardware now that the compilers are better, but I've
not got around to checking.
Remember, YMMV. But some of us have had good experiences with it.
And other features of the language (notably javadoc and a lack of
horrible crashes) make programming in Java much easier than in C.
Also, many people don't seem to know how to use the language
efficiently. (People using String to do a StringBuffer's job, etc.)
But I suppose bad programmers will be bad programmers, whatever
language you hit them over the head with. :^)
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is just plain awful
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 09:51:46 -0400
Jim Broughton wrote:
>
> Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>
> (big huge snip)
> > 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
> (signature sniped)
>
> The first problem is to keep the OS from trashing itself then you move
> onto controlling the other problems. M$ programmers seem to break good
> OS programming rules at every release.
>
A friend of mine showed me a kernal-code sample sent to a friend of
his (by a microsoft programmer) when he had a questions about how to
use an API call.
Freaking GOTO statements all over the place.... in C CODE!!!!!
> Jim Broughton
> (The Amiga OS! Now there was an OS)
> --
> If Sense where common everyone would have it!
--
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: Mikey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Can Linux Support PCMIA
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 23:02:06 -0400
Christopher Fardell wrote:
>
> Can Corel Linux support the PCMIA ports on a Pioneer Notebook?
> If if can would it support an ethernet card inserted in that port?
I'm running Mandrake 7.0 on my CTX 700e EzBook laptop, and it supports
my Intel 10/100 Ethernet/Modem PCMCIA card just fine. I haven't played
too much with Corel, so I couldn't tell you on that one.
--
Since-beer-leekz,
Mikey
Best comment in source code: /*Drunk...fix later*/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: 18 Jul 2000 13:57:19 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 17 Jul 2000 20:02:33 -0500,
Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>excepting machine and OS UI specifics, most VB code ports rather easily.
To where?? Other versions of Windows??
>Escaping the UI portions, which even C suffers identically from, moving the
NOT!! Motif and Gtk/Gnome (C) port between Linux, Solaris and IRIX
near perfectly, as well as does Qt/KDE (C++). Qt and gtk run on
windows to varying degrees as well. If we ever see a decent POSIX
interface for windows we'd probably see KDE and Gnome available for
Windows.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: 18 Jul 2000 13:57:44 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>From http://www.fys.ruu.nl/~bergmann/history.html
"BASIC (standing for Beginner's All Purpose Symbolic Instruction
Code)...the designers wished it to be a stepping-stone for students to
learn on of the more powerful languages..."
'nuff said.
On 18 Jul 2000 01:36:50 GMT,
abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> "abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:8knvdb$1tst$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>> > oh, grow up and get a life child. You couldn't possibly know how much
>> code
>>> > I've done and copyrighted in my life. Yep, as in registered at the
>> copyright
>>> > office, not just a little (C) in some remarks somewhere.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Yeah? Lets see some examples, dresden.
>>>
>>> Not some examples of VB (which anyone with a mouse can write, literally),
>>> I want to see c, c++, fortran, etc. And ill know if you used 'visual *'
>>> to write it, as will approx. half of this newsgroup.
>>>
>>
>> oh give me a break... sigh... you know that no matter what I would write
>> you'd just pick it apart and either call it shit or say it was copied. It's
>> a no win scenario. I haven't used Fortran since college (or RPG and Cobol).
>> C++ , it takes half a page to write hello world, fuck that. So... piss
>> off...
>>
>>
>
>In a word: you cant back up your claims.
>
>Ok, six words.
>
>
>
>
>-----yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Drazen Kacar)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: 18 Jul 2000 13:46:52 GMT
Christopher Browne wrote:
> Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Drazen Kacar would say:
> >Christopher Browne wrote:
> >
> >> The "X hater" amongst them, Don Hopkins, has recently had things to say
> >> about Gnome that I found remarkably conciliatory.
> >
> >I missed that. Any pointers?
> <a href=
> "http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=00/06/21/0046236&cid=208">
> Pie Menus and Conciliatory Comments</a>
>
> --> The Pie Menus discussion is the "conciliatory" one...
Slashdot, of all places... Well, I suppose the only thing which could
improve his opinion about X is the addition of pie menus somewhere.
OTOH, maybe Java extension in X servers would bring us closer to the
lost world of NeWS. :-)
--
.-. .-. I don't work for my employer.
(_ \ / _)
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: 18 Jul 2000 14:00:47 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 17 Jul 2000 19:38:08 -0500,
Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>unreliability and poor cost/performance? You couldn't be more wrong and if
>you'd quit living in 3.51 days you'd know this. When is the last time anyone
>not a linux zealot ever saw a blue screen? I can't remember. It's been over
>a year I think. Crashes? That's what W98 is for, and even the beta of
>Windows ME is as stable as most would want.
Really?? According to this Microsoft promoted study:
http://www.nstl.com/html/windows_2000_reliability.html Win2K is only
13 times more reliable that win98, with an average of 2893 hours of
use per crash. And this is in a strictly controlled environment, i.e.,
common desktop apps, with regular reboots. A more intersting test
would be continous use in a multiuser software development
environment, where the behavior of undebugged apps can't be predicted.
>W2K is as stable as any *nix you
>could name.
Well 2893 hours =~ 4 months. I couldn't imagine IRIX, Solaris, and
even Linux crashing every four months. Even a properly configured
Linux machine will crash far less than once per year, in my
experience. And that inlcudes extensive application software
development use as well. Face it Dristan, W2K is still not as stable
as UNIX.
>SP1 is coming out in the next week and it addresses a handful of
>issues, most esoteric and minor and just add to the 5 9's of reliability W2K
>is already able to deliver. 64,000 bugs? even 19,000 bugs? ha! not even 4
>digits... and this from a 40 million line OS version .0 --
Yeah but their not fixing this bug:
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q195/8/57.ASP
As you can see in the above URL, an error in application programming
is causing the OS to crash, and Microsoft is saying the solution is to
fix the application. No news at all about designing the OS to protect
itself from the application. Now sure, no decent commercial software
is going to forget to close handles. But in a software development
envoronment mistakes just like that are going to happen....and W2K is
gonna crash. So while Linux developers are typing 'gdb -c core'
windows developers are hitting the reset button, hoping their work
wasn't lost. No wonder MS programmers stick with crutch languages like
VB.
>can you even find
>a single comprehensive list of all the bugs and "issues" in the linux
>kernel?
Bugs in the Linux kernel are fixed as they are found, with as many
patchlevel releases as needed, so it never builds up such a huge
list. And you can find out the current state of Linux development at
any time by reading the kernel mailing list:
http://kernelnotes.org/lnxlists/linux-kernel/
You can also get the entire kernel source code if you want. You can
also get involved and send in patches if you want. Can you do any of
this with W2K?
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I just don't buy it
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 10:03:03 -0400
Ian Pulsford wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> There has been some discussion about M$ .NET. I just don't see the
> advantages of it from a home user perspective or a business perspective.
>
> 1. Is a home user really going to want to store private documents on
> some remote server?
Bill Gates, well-known megalomaniac, assures them that they do.
What's more...why would BUSINESS users want to? Yeah, *I* want
company documents on Microsoft's servers....NOT!
> 2. Why would I want to log onto the internet everytime I want to write a
> short letter or note?
To keep from being interrupted by important phone calls.
> 3. Why clog up internet bandwidth more with stuff that really belongs on
> the home PC/business file server?
Bill Gates must be investing in fiber-optic to the house...
> 4. What company would trust strorage of information to a server on the
> internet?
Bill Gates has already prepared a Non-Disclosure agreeement, wherein
M$ prohibits the company from disclosing the content of any document
stored on .NET.
uh....nevermind.
> 5. Hard drive capacity gets bigger every year, no need for
> 'internetwork' disk space.
From: Bill Gates
To: All M$ Programmers
You are not writing enough nonsense code! From now on, EVERY .exe and
.dll file MUST contain at least one embedded 24-bits/pixel bitmap image!
It is crucial for our .NET stragety.
> 6. Intel, AMD, etc want to sell faster expensive processors, not cheap
> thin client gear.
heh heh heh
> 7. Everyone already has an office suite of some sort
> 8. What can .NET do that an intranet + an internet gateway cannot do?
Allow Bill's minions to snoop through people's personal documents.
>
> Plus probably loads of other reasons.
>
> Of course, in the future internet bandwidth will increase with
> technology, and everyone in a modern country may have a permanent
> connection via cable just like a phone service or TV aerial, but where
> is the advantage of keeping information/applications remotely as opposed
> to retaining them locally?
>
> The only 'advantage' I can see is tricking the PHB tools of microsoft
> into buying M$ .NET and making extra cash for M$. Of course SUN et al.
> have to push their equivalent technologies. So everyone rushes towards
> an idea that seems to have little real merit.
>
> IanP
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 09:19:01 -0400
JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Well we could start a large circular argument in which we both eventually
>waste 8 hours of our lives comparing and quoting "documents" I really don't
>wish to do this.
>I will tell you one thing. Government made a huge mistake when they decided
>to try and help Netscape compete and get on the evening news all at the same
>time. I'll just go on record by saying the appeal will result in the whole
>judgment being thrown out.
>But if it were upheld....
>Splitting up Microsoft will not punish the principal shareholders at all, in
>fact it will most likely increase their wealth beyond belief! It will not
>benefit the consumer in the slightest because the price of the consumer
>operating system will surely go up. The software market will still be
>incredibly competitive, so it will not help anyone at all. You'll just have
>Uncle Sam with his bureaucratic grasp on something he has no business being
>involved in.
>All you Anti-MS people who are embracing uncle Sam as your savior are insane!
Are you paid by M$ to come here with this nonsense, or do you just go
trollling to escape a little tiny desperate life?
===========================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
