Linux-Advocacy Digest #781, Volume #27 Wed, 19 Jul 00 14:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: I had a reality check today :( (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Paul E. Larson)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Drazen Kacar)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Phillip Lord)
Re: I tried to install both W2K and Linux last night...
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Phillip Lord)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Chad Irby)
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots (Roberto Alsina)
Politeness and moiety (was Re: Linsux as a desktop platform) (The Ghost In The
Machine)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Paul E. Larson)
Re: Dresden's copyrights (Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?) (abraxas)
Re: [OT] intuitive (was Re: Hardware: ideal budget Linux box? (Re: I'm Ready!
I'm ready! I'm not ready.)) (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? (abraxas)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Joe Ragosta)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: I had a reality check today :(
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 16:44:09 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Tue, 18 Jul 2000 22:31:40 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
>Tim Palmer wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 18 Jul 2000 02:44:36 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
[snip]
>> >I can do the exact same thing on any modern flavor of unix, so, like
>> >do you have a point?
>> >
>>
>> "Moddern UNIX", now thear's an oxymorron.
>
>
> Unix Microsoft products
>
>First Multi-processing kernal 1970 1995
>
>tape backup utilities 1970 1998
>
>First GUI 1984 1990
>
>Cut and Past support in GUI 1984 1993
>
>Full networking support 1984 1995
>
>No differentiation between remote 1984 never implemented
> users and console users
>First Multi-user kernal 1970 never implemented
>
>Configuration changes w/o rebooting 1970 never implemented
1998 or 1999; NT 4 no longer requires a reboot for simple
TCP/IP configuration changes. For what it's worth.
>
>First non-fragmenting filesystem 1983 never implemented
Note that 'fsdext2' allows readonly access to an ext2 volume
from a Win95 box. If Microsoft really cared, they probably
could hook in a replacement to NTFS or FAT.
I don't know how much a bugaboo fragmentation is at this time
(it's clearly better for single files to be non-fragmented, but
how about file sets?) and I'd say a lot of the problem may be
related to usage patterns in some fashion.
It gets complicated if one throws "lying" disks and "lying" boards
into the mix -- the CPU thinks most modern disks have 255 heads.
(Uh huh. Pull the other one. :-) ) And most disks are
variable-geometry anyway; more sectors on the outer cylinder.
>
>RAID support (Redundant Array 1991 never implemented
> of Inexpensive Disks)
>full remote administration possible, 1970 never implemented
> including O/S install
Hm...how did Unix have remote administration prior to Woolongong?
Still, that only pushes it forward to the early 80's. (I have
an AT&T 7300 with Woolongong sockets, manufactured circa 1984 or
so, still operational AFAIK although I haven't fired it up lately,
with a whole 80 megs of disk space. Woohoo!)
>
>GUI's available 10 1
Shared library support ? since Win 3.1
Loadable driver modules ? unknown
Virtual memory <-> file association ? 1995?
(mmap(), CreateFileMapping()) [*]
SSH-type remote login capability ? ?
(i.e., zero-knowledge session
encryption coupled with some
sort of login program or widget)
Remote GUI 1984? 1998?
Remote login w/o password ? ?
from a trusted local site
(i.e., using Kerberos)
First multi-processOR kernel ? ?
(note that VMS had this ca 1986 or so;
presumably, Unix did, too)
First full journaling filesystem ? NTFS has meta only
(AIX claims its file system journals;
I don't know the details. Reiserfs
is available now for Linux.)
>
>Notice a pattern yet, spell-check boy?
>
*smirk*
Mind you, we have to be careful, as it is possible the Winvocates
will claim that "we did it better because we did it second".
(This is very debatable in its own right.)
[.sigsnip]
[*] this is a neat hack, but has to be applied with some care;
mmap() can put a region anywhere in the address space if
one is not careful, and that invalidates every pointer!
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul E. Larson)
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 16:45:23 GMT
In article <8l4e9j$n96$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>In article <8l4a58$96j$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>-- snip --
>
>> Given the only reason people are "forced" (and I use the term very
>> loosely) to buy MS software is because everyone else also uses it.
>
>Until very recently, your statement was simply untrue. Unless you built
>your own machine from parts, or went to the most obscure
>hole-in-the-wall mom-n-pop computer shop in the county, there was no way
>to not buy Windows bundled with your computer. This is fine for
>hard-core geeks, but wrt Joe and Jane Average Consumer, this meant that
>there was no choice.
>
Hmmmm.... you are new to this whole computing thing aren't you!
Paul
--
"Mr. Rusk you not wearing your tie." -- Frenzy 1972
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 13:53:49 -0300
"T. Max Devlin" escribió:
>
> Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> [...]
> >You replied to that specific message, but deleted my question. That
> >looks
> >to me like a refusal to answer the quetion. Choosing not to answer is
> >the
> >same as refusing to answer, unless I'm missing some subtlety you surely
> >should be happy to explain.
>
> What was the question again? I'll answer it if its that important to
> you. I do hope it wasn't an off-target attempt to redirect the
> discussion, though.
Deleting something (twice) and then asking what that something was is,
let's
say, weird.
> >> >If I called you a orangutan that copulates with dead chimpanzees, the
> >> >fact of you not having red hair would not make it any less insulting.
> >>
> >> I suppose that is self-evident, though I clearly have no idea why you
> >> think it would be an issue.
> >
> >Because of the obvious parallelism?
>
> I meant beyond the obvious ad hominem intent.
Because of the parallelism, if this was ad hominem, then so was yours,
therefore making my ad hominem self defense.
[snip]
> >> I think maybe you need to consider that some statements are intended to
> >> be taken literally, and some are not, and often they occur in a
> >> staggering variety of combinations in human languages. If you took
> >> offense at my suggestion of suicide as an optimal service to society if
> >> you believe making money is an end in itself, you have obviously
> >> mis-classified it. The category in which it rightfully belongs,
> >> however, literal or rhetorical, I will leave for you to determine. So
> >> you tell me, "Am I talking about you?"
> >
> >I take offense at the suggestion of doing many bad things to people
> >who fit many descriptions I don't fit. That's not unusual.
>
> Is that a yes, or a no? For that matter, what is it to begin with?
It's a "it doesn't matter". I take offense at the suggestion that anyone
is worthless enough to be encouraged towards suicide. Take that
statement
and do what you want with it.
> >Throwing an insult under the thin disguise of an if, is, let's say,
> >disingenuous. In principle it assumes that it is correct to insult
> >those who fit the condition. It's just a cheap rethoric trick.
>
> Something about red hair and orangutans comes to mind. Is that what you
> meant?
Yup. Although that was meant as a parallel with your suicide suggestion,
which
you have strangely deleted again.
> >As for the final question, if you don't know who you are talking about,
> >that's your own problem.
>
> No, that's my question. Answering it seems to be your problem.
You have your problems, you have your questions, I have my answers, and
I only give them if I care. Yes, I am refusing to answer.
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
------------------------------
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: 19 Jul 2000 16:39:50 GMT
Rich Teer wrote:
> On 19 Jul 2000, Phillip Lord wrote:
>
> > I think that its unlikely that a standard scripting language
> > will ever happen. Look at how many people still use sh.
>
> Err, that's because sh *is* the standard UNIX scripting language!
The question is just which sh.
--
.-. .-. I don't work for my employer.
(_ \ / _)
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 17:00:07 GMT
On Wed, 19 Jul 2000 16:45:23 GMT, Paul E. Larson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <8l4e9j$n96$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>In article <8l4a58$96j$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>-- snip --
>>
>>> Given the only reason people are "forced" (and I use the term very
>>> loosely) to buy MS software is because everyone else also uses it.
>>
>>Until very recently, your statement was simply untrue. Unless you built
>>your own machine from parts, or went to the most obscure
>>hole-in-the-wall mom-n-pop computer shop in the county, there was no way
>>to not buy Windows bundled with your computer. This is fine for
>>hard-core geeks, but wrt Joe and Jane Average Consumer, this meant that
>>there was no choice.
>>
>
>Hmmmm.... you are new to this whole computing thing aren't you!
You've got to go back awhile before you start to see
multiple brands of computers/OS supported by more
than just the 'hole in the wall' types of stores again.
[deletia]
--
The LGPL does infact tend to be used instead of the GPL in instances
where merely reusing a component, while not actually altering that
component, would be unecessarily burdensome to people seeking to build
their own works.
This dramatically alters the nature and usefulness of Free Software
in practice, contrary to the 'all viral all the time' fantasy the
anti-GPL cabal here would prefer one to believe.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: 19 Jul 2000 18:08:48 +0100
>>>>> "Rich" == Rich Teer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Rich> On 19 Jul 2000, Phillip Lord wrote:
>> I think that its unlikely that a standard scripting language will
>> ever happen. Look at how many people still use sh.
Rich> Err, that's because sh *is* the standard UNIX scripting
Rich> language!
Sorry that came out backwards.
The original post was about potential improvements to
unix in the future. The suggestion was to have python (or similar) as
the scripting language. It would be nice to replace sh scripts with
some better language. But this has never happened. There are many
better scripting languages around, but the none of the has replaced
sh, rather there are just lots of them around. Python appears to be
a nice one from what I know of it, but it will never become a
standard. Even sh which is no longer a standard, as it exists in many
different forms, with slight incompatibilities.
Now of course this is not in the slightest what I wrote, but
it was what I had in mind. Believe it or not.
Phil
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: I tried to install both W2K and Linux last night...
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 17:10:42 GMT
Jerry McBride? ([EMAIL PROTECTED]?) wrote (Sun, 16 Jul 2000 15:57:11 -0400):
>I've ever been exposed to. For crying out loud... OS/2 is easier to install
>than windows!
Except that, out of the box, it won't install on any machine made after
1997 or so: disk has to be < 8 GB, for one. No, OS2 is not an easy
install for anyone not already familiar with it. Besides, it's sort of
fragile, the install, especially if you install peer support -after-
the regular OS since the peer install GPFs dead when it sees any line
longer than 512 bytes in config.sys. Add to that that the out-of-box
OS2 experience is dated August 1996 (if you can find a copy that's what
you get) and you can imagine the driver situation.
'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`''`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`''`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`'`
Corne1 Huth 40th Floor - Software Win|CE|Linux|Warp|+ http://40th.com/
------------------------------
From: Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: 19 Jul 2000 18:10:48 +0100
>>>>> "Rich" == Rich Teer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Rich> On 19 Jul 2000, Phillip Lord wrote:
>> Well you have me there. What precisely does the National
>> Institute of Health have to do with this?
Rich> Just in case this isn't a troll, NIH == Not Invented Here.
I never troll.
Now I am confused, as I do not see how the acronym applies to
what I said. Am I being dense? Or is it just late in the day?
Phil
------------------------------
From: Chad Irby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 17:02:31 GMT
"JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It takes more than one judge. That's the beauty of the legal system.
> MS was on the path to being railroaded by this judge from day one
> which was his first mistake. The findings of fact are the culmination
> of his railroading activity. No Microsoft evidence was looked at
> during his "finding of fact"
You're ignoring, of course, Chairman Bill's pathetic appearance, where
he managed to show just how arrogant and silly Microsoft can be, along
with teh faked videotape "evidence" that Microsoft provided and got
caught out on.
> where he merely re-wrote the DOJ's
> opening statements.
Still haven't read it, have you?
> It will all be thrown out.
On what grounds? The Findings of Fact will stand, because the most
damaging parts came from Microsoft's own words and emails.
The only folks who think Microsoft can come out of this in one piece are
the desperate ones who don't know anything about business or law (or are
taking money from MS in other capacities).
--
Chad Irby \ My greatest fear: that future generations will,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \ for some reason, refer to me as an "optimist."
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 17:14:46 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > on their ability to do anything. I know some women software
engineers
> > > > that will put anyone to shame. (And yes, they can install Linux)
> > >
> > > the exception does not make the rule.
> >
> > But, the exception does invalidate the rule.
>
> No...an exception is an exception.
Tautologic, and it implies that all rules are valid. Interesting.
Exceptions do invalidate rules. If they didn't, the movement
of Mercury's perihelium wouldn't invalidate Newtonian physics.
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Politeness and moiety (was Re: Linsux as a desktop platform)
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 17:19:54 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
on Tue, 18 Jul 2000 11:46:19 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>>
>> Said ZnU in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [...]
>> >> Then other than buggy applications, there's no benefit to PMT, right?
>> >
>> >Wrong.
>>
>> Couldn't you just say "you're mistaken"? Or maybe skip it entirely and
>> merely address the point, as you do below?
>
>Why sugar coat it?
After rereading Robert A. Heinlein's _Citizen of the Galaxy_, I
believe I have an answer to that question. Part of the book
revolves around Situ's shipboard life and the People, who are
essentially one big happy (hopefully!) family, within said ship.
In essence, politeness is the lubricant of internal communication
(external communication as well, although that gets *really*
complicated when dealing with different species);
if one is friendly with, say, one's cousin, one can have informal
communications, but if one absolutely detests one's brother,
one can be highly formal and still get the job done. In fact,
they differentiate between family and shipboard matters, each
member of the People has both family rank and shipboard rank
(one can be highly placed within the Family, but be a lowly
watch officer or something). There is also the concept of moiety;
marriages must cross, in order to facilitate gene mixing, I guess.
Unmarried girls born within the Family are traded at Gatherings,
which happen once every 10 years or so. They don't stay single long.
Note that the head of the ship is male, but the head of the Family
is female; presumably, the two are usually married.
The only real problem with the Family is that they barely
tolerate fraki (essentially, non-persons, or perhaps non-Family),
although they do deal with them. :-)
This is of course a work of fiction, but I somehow get the
feeling that Mr. Heinlein did some legwork here, and based this
on various characteristics of so-called "primitive" cultures
and various other data sources such as aristocracy. I can't
say for sure.
And yes, this is wildly off-topic...so what else is new? :-) :-)
But it does make sense -- and there's also the old saying that
one can get a lot more flies with a teaspoonful of honey than
a gallon of vinegar. :-) And then there's the classic Marry
Poppin's line, "just a spoonful of sugar". :-)
[rest snipped]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Wacky answers to simple questions While-U-Wait :-)
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul E. Larson)
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 17:19:36 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Wed, 19 Jul 2000 16:45:23 GMT, Paul E. Larson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In article <8l4e9j$n96$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>In article <8l4a58$96j$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>> "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>-- snip --
>>>
>>>> Given the only reason people are "forced" (and I use the term very
>>>> loosely) to buy MS software is because everyone else also uses it.
>>>
>>>Until very recently, your statement was simply untrue. Unless you built
>>>your own machine from parts, or went to the most obscure
>>>hole-in-the-wall mom-n-pop computer shop in the county, there was no way
>>>to not buy Windows bundled with your computer. This is fine for
>>>hard-core geeks, but wrt Joe and Jane Average Consumer, this meant that
>>>there was no choice.
>>>
>>
>>Hmmmm.... you are new to this whole computing thing aren't you!
>
> You've got to go back awhile before you start to see
> multiple brands of computers/OS supported by more
> than just the 'hole in the wall' types of stores again.
>
For Linux, at least, as early as 1994(when I started looking at it) it was
possible to buy computers from nationally advertising companies, all you had
to do was buy a magazine(Linux Journal)!
Paul
--
"Mr. Rusk you not wearing your tie." -- Frenzy 1972
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dresden's copyrights (Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?)
Date: 19 Jul 2000 17:21:36 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>>
>> Jacques Guy wrote:
>> >
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> > >
>> > > "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> > > >because smarty, the copyright isn't under the name "Drestin" -
> sheesh...
>> >
>> > Of course, "Drestin Black" == "Dressed in black". Now let me guess
>> > under what name those famous copyrights might be.... Brown?
>>
>> Nope....under "cross-dresser"
>>
>
> reduced to personal insults - your desperation has been showing for some
> time now... when you fail to have any facts to counter my arguments you
> resort to name calling?
>
The fact is, you cannot back up your claim at all. You cannot program,
you dont know what youre talking about, and you're an idiot.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
Subject: Re: [OT] intuitive (was Re: Hardware: ideal budget Linux box? (Re: I'm
Ready! I'm ready! I'm not ready.))
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 12:21:04 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Wed, 19 Jul 2000 03:39:56 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Said Jonadab the Unsightly One in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> Yes, that is the focus of my argument, though it applies equally well to
> >>> the Macintosh. Neither is intuitive; the Mac is just a lot easier. (It
> >>> also relies on the mouse far too much for my convenience,
> >>
> >>Heck, *Windows* relies too much on the mouse for my convenience.
> >>I would prefer if *everything* that could be done with the
> >>mouse also had a keyboard equivalent. It ain't so.
> >
> >I would actually disagree with you there. Much of it is not as easy to
> >do as it should be, and there are obvious exceptions for "how do you
> >drag something without a pointer" preclude certain things which frankly
> >aren't possible with a keyboard. But in the vast majority of cases, you
>
> Simply control the graphics cursor without the mouse.
>
> The Atari ST did this quite nicely. Either Windows or X
> should be able to do the same even with a small addon...
>
Much as I hate to admit knowing this:
Early versions of Microsoft's Intellitype software (the drivers and
software that came with the original Natural Keyboards) could be set up
to allow you to move the cursor and even klick using nothing but the
arrow keys (or number pad with numlock off) and the "windows" or "alt"
and "cntrl" keys (depending on how you set it up). I'm not sure if they
still have that functionality enabled in the newer versions.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: 19 Jul 2000 17:25:13 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm sorry but this is a decision based on more than a few factors. I have
> often wished I could stand up and say, "HEY! You know who I am?!" and let
> loose with my company's name so I could proudly stand with it's/my/our
> achievements and (few) moments in the press.
If you recall, a few of us did find out who you are and where you work months
ago, and it really wasnt all that impressive.
You lie too much.
> But, I am writing here my own
> personal opinions, not always necessarily those I'd share with every client.
> And it's unfair to my company for any mistakes I may make here to taint it.
> It's with a bad taste that I assume this triple layered aninimity and I'm
> both thankful and sorry to my friend who lets me borrow his pseudonym and
> news account to post, via Terminal Services :) You would not believe the
> e-mail he's got and forwarded to me. That and the two people who went so far
> as to find his personal home address and post it with phone number.
>
Lie.
You arent a programmer, you do not know how to code, you are a lowly
'IT' professional who WISHES he was intelligent enough to understand
what he claims.
Pathetic.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 17:30:15 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "JS/PL"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Joe Ragosta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <8l4a6f$qgh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Christopher Smith"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:39752aad$1$yrgbherq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > > >
> > > > >"Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > >news:8l35h4$a6m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> : The statement above has absolutely no facts to debate. Instead
> > > > >> : of
> > > > >reciting
> > > > >> : the anti-MS "evil Microsoft" line try laying down some proven
> > > incidents
> > > > >of
> > > > >> : wrongdoing on Microsoft's part.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Why bother repeating the effort of the court case? Go read
> > > > >> Judge Jackson's findings of fact. This task has already been
> > > > >> done.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >Very few facts can be found there.
> > > >
> > > > Are you for real? Its "factual" enough that now M$ is hanging on
> > > > thread
> > > > praying and paying that US Supreme Court will not make them into
> > > ieces. ---
> > > > Its over and you need to get a life.
> > >
> > > Pfft. It's a long document containing largely a *single* judge's
> > > _opinions_, and very few facts.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Enough facts for Microsoft to be convicted of breaking numerous laws.
> >
> >
> > It only takes one judge, btw.
>
> It takes more than one judge. That's the beauty of the legal system.
Wrong (as usual).
It only takes one judget to convict them. Period.
Granted, they have the option to appeal it and another judge or panel
can overrule the first judge. But it only takes one judge to convict.
And, as of today, the conviction stands.
> MS was on the path to being railroaded by this judge from day one which
> was
> his first mistake. The findings of fact are the culmination of his
> railroading activity. No Microsoft evidence was looked at during his
> "finding of fact" where he merely re-wrote the DOJ's opening statements.
> It
> will all be thrown out.
>
He railroaded them in to sending damning e-mails? And he railroaded them
into putting a doctored video into the public record? And he railroaded
them into lying under oath?
Your fantasy theories are getting more interesting all the time.
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 12:31:28 -0500
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Nathaniel Jay Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> <snip> >
> > > 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...
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > #include<iostream>
> >
> > main()
> > {
> > cout << "Hello World!" << endl;
> > return 0;
> > }
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> > Um, half a page?!?!
>
> I'm sorry, I exagerated a little :)
>
> of couse, in BASIC this would be
>
> --------------------
> PRINT "Hello World!"
> --------------------
Well, joke to joke...
To each his own and all that....
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
