Linux-Advocacy Digest #844, Volume #27 Fri, 21 Jul 00 08:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux, easy to use? ("Slava Pestov")
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Phillip Lord)
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451736 (Tholen) (Jacques Guy)
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots ("Slava Pestov")
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Phillip Lord)
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots ("Slava Pestov")
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots ("Slava Pestov")
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots ("Slava Pestov")
Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown ("Adam Warner")
Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown ("Adam Warner")
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451736 (Tholen) ("Slava Pestov")
Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown ("Adam Warner")
Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown ("Adam Warner")
Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious.... (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451736 (Tholen) ("Slava Pestov")
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Phillip Lord)
Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451746.465^.00000000001 ("Slava Pestov")
Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown ("Adam Warner")
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451747 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows98
Some REAL fun before weekend ("Krondor")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Slava Pestov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 21:09:10 +1000
Repetition will get you nowhere, Tim.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Why should we blaim ourself's? Lienux is just junk, and thats' it.
>
> It was obsoleet when the 70s ended. And by the way, you mispelled
> "knowladgeibble" you fucking idiot!
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Why should we blaim ourself's? Lienux is just junk, and thats' it.
>
> It was obsoleet when the 70s ended. And by the way, you mispelled
> "knowladgeibble" you fucking idiot!
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Why should we blaim ourself's? Lienux is just junk, and thats' it.
>
> It was obsoleet when the 70s ended. And by the way, you mispelled
> "knowladgeibble" you fucking idiot!
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Why should we blaim ourself's? Lienux is just junk, and thats' it.
>
> It was obsoleet when the 70s ended. And by the way, you mispelled
> "knowladgeibble" you fucking idiot!
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Why should we blaim ourself's? Lienux is just junk, and thats' it.
>
> It was obsoleet when the 70s ended. And by the way, you mispelled
> "knowladgeibble" you fucking idiot!
------------------------------
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: 21 Jul 2000 12:10:58 +0100
>>>>> "KLH" == KLH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Yes, you could have a standard parser. And then on top of this,
>> you would have to have another parser for each DTD. Consider this
>> Python data structure: (6,"hello",-4.3)
>>
>> This could be coded in XML as:
>>
>> <array><int>6</int><string>hello</string><float>-4.3</float></array>
>>
>> or as:
>>
>> <list><value>6</value><value>"hello"</value><value>-4.3</value></list>
>>
>> or in many other ways.
>>
KLH> I don't know about anyone else but prefer the Python version to
KLH> the XML :)
The python version is fine. I'm a lisp-aholic so I like
parenthesis a lot. The problem is that it is not human readable, or
rather it is human readable, but not human comprehensible. My own lisp
experience shows that coding lists (and lists of lists) is a good way
to write brittle code. I tend to wrap this sort of thing up in
accessor functions whenever I can.
XML's main problem is that it is verbose. But I would argue
that especially when we are talking about a text based method of
interchange, that verbosity is not so much of an issue. Computers get
faster every year, but maintaining programs still seems to be as much
of a headache as ever.
Phil
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 11:16:07 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451736 (Tholen)
Slava Pestov wrote:
> Before calling me a "bot", I suggest you take a long hard look
> at your own posting history.
Your first name is a dead give-away, Slava, a reference to
your inventor and builder, Karel Capek. Likewise tinman.
I ought to know, since I do live in the land known here
as Oz. As for myself, I am just a product of my own
diseased imagination. Or perhaps someone else's. Possibly
even a T[o]uring Bo[a]t's.
------------------------------
From: "Slava Pestov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 21:12:49 +1000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Data processing is oftentimes best represented in the mind as
>> > 3+ dimensional processes. On the average, men's brains are MUCH
>> > more adept at this sort of thinking (in the same way as on the
>> > average, women's brain's are much more adept at acquiring and using
>> > linquistic skills)
Your original point was about setting up a Linux box, which has nothing
to do with "data processing" and certainly doesn't involve "3+ dimensional
processes".
> You're problem is that you cling tightly to your "equalist" philospophy
> even when nature contradicts it.
Do you equate "nature" with "fundamentalist christian 'family values'"?
> With women going into every field these days, please explain why men
> outnumber women by VAST ratios (like, 10:1) in computer science, etc.
> even though women are the MAJORITY on most college campuses.
The reason for the men -vs- women disparity is that people who share your
ignorant views are still around.
Slava
------------------------------
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: 21 Jul 2000 12:16:01 +0100
>>>>> "Colin" == Colin R Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Colin> Phillip Lord wrote:
Colin> Perhaps Tore Lund is saying that he is glad that Linus would
Colin> consider ideas from other operating systems, rather than
Colin> rejecting them because they were not first implemented in
Colin> Linux.
>> Ah. Well that is fair enough I suppose, although I don't see how
>> it applies to what I was saying...
>>
Colin> Tore Lund may have thought that you were dissing the paper
Colin> clip simply because Microsoft invented it.
Ah. Okay now I understand.
Actually I was dissing the paper clip because its crap, and
it annoyed the hell out of me when I saw it. What I wanted from the
new version of windows, was greater stability, more flexibility, and
less bloat. What I got was a paper clip. I was not a happy man.
I was even less happy about how much effort it was to switch
the office assistant off....
Phil
------------------------------
From: "Slava Pestov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 21:16:16 +1000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Personally, I find the differences between the thinking of men and
>> woman similar to the differences between KDE and GNOME; not very
>> interesting and far too slight to really matter.
>
> Evidently, you are not well-read on the subject.
>
> Catch up, and get back to me.
And what exactly should he read? The bible? The burden of proof is yours
Aaron, and you still haven't provided any. Until you do, you are an
ignorant sexist and that's it.
>> > the exception does not make the rule.
>>
>> But, the exception does invalidate the rule.
>
> No...an exception is an exception.
>
Maybe you're the exception here, Aaron.
Slava
------------------------------
From: "Slava Pestov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 21:19:58 +1000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> KLH wrote:
>> My feeling is that the trend of women not taking up occupations in
>> computers is because of enviroment rather than any sort of inherent
>> capacity.
>>
>
>
> Keep believing the politically correct line, and you'll never learn the
> truth.
Are you afraid of women? Do you feel intimidated in their precence?
Are you afraid of losing your job to a woman? Your ignorant remarks
certainly suggest one of the above, The truth is that you are
wrong, Aaron.
------------------------------
From: "Slava Pestov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 21:24:45 +1000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Your egalitarion philosophy is equivalent to arguing that midgets can,
> with sufficient training, effectively compete in basketball with normal
> men around 6 feet tall, and even against NBA pros in the range of
> 7 to 7 1/2 feet tall.
What the hell is this supposed to mean?
> If anything, it makes COMPLETE evolutionary sense for women to have an
> INNATE predisposition to be better nurturers than men.
>
> Why? Because in "cave man days", infants were, by necessity, stuck
> with their mothers. Consequently, the survival of an infant was not
> nearly as dependant upon a father's "nurturing" capacity as it was upon
> the mother's.
It has been shown that women played an equal role to men in "hunter
gatherer" activities, Aaron. In any case, cave man activities are
irrelevant nowadays and centuries of more modern conditions would
have renderered the cave-man genes ineffective because they would
not offer any evolutionary advantage.
> Research with rats and many other mammals indicates that this is the
> reality. Pregnant females of various frequencies are injected with
> large doses of testosterone or estrogen. In the case of female
> offspring which developed in a high-testosterone environment, they tend
> to behave more like males than females THROUGHOUT THEIR ENTIRE LIVES.
Humans are not rats, Aaron.
> These experiments have been repeated numberous times, and the results
> are always the same.
You have been told otherwise several times, but your illogical statements
remain the same.
Slava
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 23:27:24 +1200
Hi Stuart,
> This I think is the most telling, and raises a few questions.
> 1. How does an app failure cause all LAN consoles to crash?
But we're possibly dealing with people that would interpret all LAN consoles
not working (because of a server crash) as a client crash, particularly if
the client applications froze while waiting for the server to restart.
> 2. Why not have the field set to NOT NULL so the administrators can't make
> the mistake?
I suspect they had to fix it up :-)
> 3. Why not have some error checking in the database - if the app is
mission
> critical, surely this is the least they can do?
Yes they certainly had to do that after the incident.
> But given that there was bad data in the database, rebooting would make no
> difference - yes?
But you might what to run a CHKDSK if you think some disk records have been
corrupted through the application dying unexpectedly?
> I wouldn't read that into it, especially since the reboot
> would only take a few minutes max. Unless they rebooted it a lot of
> times... :)
See above. But if the problem also lead to a huge memory leak rebooting
might also be needed to restore performance? After all, many NT problems are
"solved" by rebooting.
> I wouldn't have used NT to start with, and I like NT. I wouldn't have
used
> Linux either, but probably one of the commercial unices.
Agreed, although as Nico said, in-house development might be preferable.
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 23:28:28 +1200
I enjoyed the observations Nico,
And I agree about keeping up the skills of military personnel in
conventional/"old fashioned" methods.
It probably explains how our New Zealand defence forces are (sometimes) able
to beat other countries, including the US, in training exercises even though
our forces have no other choice but to use antiquated equipment.
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------
From: "Slava Pestov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451736 (Tholen)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 21:28:15 +1000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <lWvd5.50$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Slava Pestov"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (tinman) wrote:
>> >> Another unsubstantiated claim.
>> >
>> > Check the archive, Slava.
>> >
>>
>> The burden of archive checking is yours, tinman. You made the
>> unsubstantiated claim.
>
> How ironic, coming from someone who makes unsubstantiated claims without
> checking archives.
How ironic you allege that my claims are 'unsubstantiated' when you have
just made one yourself.
>
>> >> What alleged "Tholen emissions"?
>> >
>> > The ones that result from digestion,
>>
>> I see no evidence of "digestion" here.
>
> More evidence of your reading comprehension problems.
Incorrect, given that neither I nor tinman are currently being digested.
>
>> >> >> > now that Tholen's back on CSMA.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I wonder how Dave Tholen would react to your claims that he's
>> >> >> "back on CSMA".
>> >> >
>> >> > Ask him, I'm sure he'll answer to your satisfaction.
>> >>
>> >> I'm not here for "satisfaction", tinman.
>> >
>> > Then why are you here?
>> >
>>
>> Don't you know?
>
> I see you didn't answer the question.
The answer was self-evident, Eric.
> Gearing up to lose another
> argument, Slava?
Obviously not, Eric.
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 22:37:55 +1200
Hi Stuart,
> This I think is the most telling, and raises a few questions.
> 1. How does an app failure cause all LAN consoles to crash?
But we're possibly dealing with people that would interpret all LAN consoles
not working (because of a server crash) as a client crash, particularly if
the client applications froze while waiting for the server to restart.
> 2. Why not have the field set to NOT NULL so the administrators can't make
> the mistake?
I suspect they had to fix it up :-)
> 3. Why not have some error checking in the database - if the app is
mission
> critical, surely this is the least they can do?
Yes they certainly had to do that after the incident.
> But given that there was bad data in the database, rebooting would make no
> difference - yes?
But you might what to run a CHKDSK if you think some disk records have been
corrupted through the application dying unexpectedly?
> I wouldn't read that into it, especially since the reboot
> would only take a few minutes max. Unless they rebooted it a lot of
> times... :)
See above. But if the problem also lead to a huge memory leak rebooting
might also be needed to restore performance? After all, many NT problems are
"solved" by rebooting.
> I wouldn't have used NT to start with, and I like NT. I wouldn't have
used
> Linux either, but probably one of the commercial unices.
Agreed, although as Nico said, in-house development might be preferable.
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 22:38:06 +1200
I enjoyed the observations Nico,
And I agree about keeping up the skills of military personnel in
conventional/"old fashioned" methods.
It probably explains how our New Zealand defence forces are (sometimes) able
to beat other countries, including the US, in training exercises even though
our forces have no other choice but to use antiquated equipment.
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: 21 Jul 2000 11:18:07 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
MH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Better yet, can someon write a freaking browser for Linux IN ANY
> LANGUAGE THAT ISN'T A POS!!!!
It'd be interesting to see one for *any* platform that isn't a POS.
Frankly, every one I've seen (and yes, that includes IE5, recentish
Netscrapes and recent Lynx browsers) has been filled with annoying
misfeatures (font legibility and formatting being major factors here.)
Though the sheel quantity of bad HTML out there doesn't help either...
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: "Slava Pestov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451736 (Tholen)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 21:29:24 +1000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jacques Guy
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> tholenbot wrote, quoting Timan and Slava Pestov time and again:
>>
>>
>> [never mind what he wrote, shouldn't we pass the
>> hat around to buy him a long-sleeved pajama top, though?]
>>
>> Leave those two young people to their budding tryst, you miserable bot
>> with a thpeech impediment!
>
> Typical invective.
I see no invective here.
> How predictable, coming from one of the antagonists.
I see no antagonist here. Gearing up to lose another argument, eh Eric?
How predictable.
------------------------------
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: 21 Jul 2000 12:30:42 +0100
>>>>> "Stefaan" == Stefaan A Eeckels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Stefaan> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Phillip
Stefaan> Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> "Phil" == phil hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
Phil> And more complicated.
>> No I disagree. If lots of commands used XML, then you could make
>> a nice standard API for handling it. One shared library is all it
>> would need.
Stefaan> You've taken the XML bait, hook, line and sinker. XML is
Stefaan> not a format, but a language that allows you to define
Stefaan> formats. This is why companies like MS are so fond of XML:
Stefaan> it allows them to claim standards compliance, and remain
Stefaan> incompatible.
I am fully aware of what XML is, and what it is not. I have
used SGML in the past, and am currently using XML in some code that I
am writing.
Stefaan> XML without a DTD (implicit, explicit, embedded or
Stefaan> referenced) is largely without added value.
My suggestion involved a standard repository for command
DTD's.
Stefaan> When people give "XML" examples, they'll say something
Stefaan> like:
Stefaan> <price>1234</price>
Stefaan> and conveniently forget that they never defined a DTD.
Actually your example does show a case in point. Even without
a DTD the tags "price" is human readable and comprehensible. So
<stockitem>
<stockno>13213</stockno>
<price>43243</price>
<stockitem>
is a lot more comprehensible than
(13213,43234).
Stefaan> So your sentence should actually read "If lots of commands
Stefaan> used XML *and* the same DTD, then you could make a nice
Stefaan> standard API for handling it."
Stefaan> The rub is that it's as difficult (if not more difficult)
Stefaan> to agree on a common DTD as it is to agree on a common
Stefaan> plain text output format.
I did not require this. The point is that having a DTD
provides a specification for the output. It is of course possible that
people will write bare and incomprehensible DTD's in which case things
have not been advanced that much. It is also possible that people will
write sensible, well documented DTD's, in which case things have
advanced a lot.
Stefaan> <aside> XML and XSL give you 1/100th of the features of
Stefaan> ASCII and regular expressions for 100 times the size, while
Stefaan> requiring 100 times more computing power. </aside>
I work in a field (biology) where there are enormous of
inscrutable and inconsistent flat file formats. Often there are
several different formats representing the same piece of data. Most of
them are not formally specified, most of them are not context free,
and require hand written parsers, which have to be updated every time
the format changes. I would say its the second biggest problem we
face. The first biggest problem is that the data sets are growing
exponentially and are massively heterogeneous. However the first
biggest problem is caused by the fundamental nature of the domain we
are working in, whilst we have no one to blame for the second problem
but ourselves.
XML is not a universal panacea for all ills. Like Java
before it, it is over hyped, and similarly is being used in the
Machiavellian schemes of large companies. I do think that it may help
us to sort out the mess we are in, and god knows we need all the help
that we can get. Perhaps if you look through the hype you may see
within something that actually may be useful.
Phil
------------------------------
From: "Slava Pestov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451746.465^.00000000001
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 21:30:39 +1000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> [Nothing of value added at all]
How ironic, coming from someone who routinely fails to add anything
of value.
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 23:35:07 +1200
Sorry about the double posts. You can see I waited almost an hour before
resending (my ISP's news server is experiencing problems).
Adam
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451747
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 11:49:05 GMT
Here's today's Tinman digest:
1> Reading comprehension problems, Dave?
Obviously not, Tinman.
1> On the contrary.
Typical pontification.
1> On the contrary.
Even more pontification.
1> Reading comprehension problems, Dave?
Obviously not, Tinman.
1> (;
Reading comprehension problems, Tinman? How ironic.
1> But not mine.
Incorrect, Tinman.
1> Illogical. You waste more by engaging in tholenating.
Prove it, if you think you can, Tinman.
1> Not at all. His jump started a different conversation.
There you are, admitting that he jumped into the conversation.
1> That doesn't negate the fact that you jumped into that different
1> conversation.
On what basis do you call it different, Tinman?
1> On the contrary.
Even more pontification.
1> Nope, I'm noting that you do fail to place responses appropriately
On the contrary, you're merely pontificating again, Tinman.
1> Incorrect.
Even more pontification.
1> You disprove that assertion with every post, Dave.
On what basis do you make that claim, Tinman?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Windows98
Date: 21 Jul 2000 07:56:06 -0400
On Wed, 12 Jul 2000 11:04:26 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>One: never install to C: if you have ANY other partitions available.
>When windows dies (and IT WILL), you aren't stuck with having to do
>ALL of your re-installs all at once .... some of the apps will work
>if you, say, make a habit of always installing to E:\apps\whatever.
Don't these apps still need to be reinstalled if something happens
to the Registry?
--
If a man commits sedition in the middle of the
woods, and there are no cops around to arrest
him, is he still a criminal?
------------------------------
From: "Krondor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Some REAL fun before weekend
Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 14:07:01 +0200
from the "whitepaper"
http://www.microsoft.com/net/whitepaper.asp
About .NET
"Ten years ago Microsoft set out a vision of a world with Information at
Your Fingertips. "
I REALLY love this site.
Enjoy,
k.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
