Linux-Advocacy Digest #951, Volume #27 Tue, 25 Jul 00 14:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man! (Jeff Szarka)
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Not For Smoking!)
Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Not For Smoking!)
Re: windows annoyances (again) (Jeff Szarka)
Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux (Cihl)
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man! (Chris Wenham)
Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :( ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :( ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux (Cihl)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux (Cihl)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Bob Hauck)
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451736 (Tholen) (tholenbot)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("JS/PL")
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451736 (Tholen) (tholenbot)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:00:15 GMT
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 02:51:49 +1000, Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8lhs3c$tnc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <8l7tqi$575$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:8l79io$s8u$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> -- snip --
>>
>> > > Since when have managing e-mail and web browsing been "OS"
>> > > functions?!!?!
>> >
>> > Since around the same time a shell (of any description) became
>> > standard issue with an "Operating System" distribution. Indeed, since
>> > around the same time an "Operating System" contained anything except a
>> > bare kernel and some device drivers.
>>
>> So, then, it has yet to happen.
>
>You can name some commercial OSes shipping without shells (keeping within
>the market of OSes aimed at interactive syle use) ?
Shells consititute a minimum set required to either use the
OS through the employment of actually applications or for
maintenance of the system itself.
Although, a computer can be quite useful even with a 'shell'.
That merely requires the application to be the entire user
interface for the login session in question. This was common
with DOS, Ataris and Commodores as well as console systems.
[deletia]
This is a remarkably more meaningful than 'whatever the current
robber baron wants to include in order to eliminate the market
for certain 3rd party products'.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man!
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:10:50 -0400
On 23 Jul 2000 21:07:18 GMT, "Stephen S. Edwards II"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Please, give us a fscking break already.
As I said in another thread...
If in 3 years NET is a big deal and users find it very useful GNU NET
will suddenly pop up in Linux distributions.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Not For Smoking!)
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.flame.right-wing-conservatives,alt.politics.economics
Subject: Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:15:34 GMT
On Fri, 21 Jul 2000 19:39:57 GMT, "Marcus Turner"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"PWayner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>>
>> "Gilbert W. Pilz Jr." wrote:
>> >
>> > On 19 Jul 2000 07:39:57 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>> >
>> > >...in other words, Microsoft Windows did not get its market share by
>> > >being the best OS, it got there by way of business deals.
>> >
>>
>>
>> I've always thought that the experiences of BeOS explain just how MS
>succeeded.
>> Gasse'e and crowd wanted to practically _give_ away BeOS but they found
>that
>> the various contracts between MS and the retailers made it difficult, if
>not
>> impossible, to ship it with new PCs. The manufacturers were pretty much
>locked
>> into doing it MS's way.
>
>By mutual agreement.
You have a funny definition of "mutual."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Not For Smoking!)
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.flame.right-wing-conservatives,alt.politics.economics
Subject: Re: Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:15:35 GMT
On Thu, 20 Jul 2000 11:39:06 -0500, Gilbert W. Pilz Jr.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I worry that what Microsoft is *really* being punished for is not its
>offensive and illegal behavior in the software market, but its failure
>to play the game the way Washington likes it to be played. If
>Microsoft had been a little quiter about its disdain for the power of
>the feds, if it had gotten into the lobbying and campaign contribution
>game a little earlier I suspect things would have never reached this
>point.
Groundless speculation. Your suspicions have nothing to do with what
Microsoft did, or the volumes of evidence presented at the trial.
>The federal government (in the guise of Eric Cartman) to MS: "I am a
>cop, and you will respect my authority!!!!"
I think the government's case was more comprehensive than that.
------------------------------
From: Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: windows annoyances (again)
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:14:16 -0400
On Sat, 22 Jul 2000 18:49:35 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The
Ghost In The Machine) wrote:
>Does Windows support network installs? I have my doubts,
>although it's theoretically possible (at some point, the
>user would have to key in a license number, mind you).
Yes, It does and no the user does not need to enter a key.
Win2k AS can do network installs using floppy based boot disks or
network cards that have a boot ROM. Both methods work well.
You could also use disk images.
------------------------------
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:22:05 GMT
Steve burped:
> [snip]
Open console
Enter: killall inetd
Or:
Open inetd:
Comment (#) before services to be excluded.
Enter: killall -HUP inetd
And that's even WITHOUT using any GUI-tools.
--
You have changed the signature included in your e-mail.
For these changes to take effect, you must restart your computer!
Do you wish to restart your computer now?
[YES] [NO]
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man!
From: Chris Wenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:22:14 GMT
Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If in 3 years NET is a big deal and users find it very useful GNU NET
> will suddenly pop up in Linux distributions.
By Magic!
I hope the source of inspiration for free software in the future will
not come from the Copy Microsoft (tm)* crowd.
Regards,
Chris Wenham
* - "Lets Copy Microsoft", "Copy Windows" and "Just Like Windows" are
registered trademarks of the Linux Movement (tm).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :(
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 26 Jul 2000 01:23:10 +1000
Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>The Linux solution is most likely just as powerful
>but lacks in the ease of use department.
No, it doesn't. In fact, it doesn't even require you to run around with
a floppy to a whole bunch of machines (which, at least in my case, would
be a real showstopper --- I have three or four machines without a working
floppy, and another one which has a floppy deeply buried behind all sorts
of stuff. I also have a machine that won't run x86 software at all.
In fact, I recently set my network up to do firewalling and IP masquerading.
I took that HOWTO, compiled a suitable kernel, adapted an example
configuration, and voila, the firewall/IPMasquerader was done.
Then came the user-friendly part: Sitting at my desk, using one monitor and
one keyboard, I configured a good half a dozen machines, in three different
rooms, to use it. Easy!
Bernie
--
One more such victory and we are lost
Pyrrhus
King of Epirus from 306 BC
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Some Miserable weekend with Windows :(
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 26 Jul 2000 01:26:31 +1000
Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Under Windows it's a matter of setup.exe and it
>works.
>No understanding of anything is needed.
Did I mention that I did all my firewall/IPMasq setup work without being
online? Without, in fact, a modem being connected to the firewall machine?
It seems that I had a much easier time setting up my masquerading than you
did. You didn't forget about the hair pulling you did because you didn't
quite understand how this works under Windows, did you?
Bernie
--
To understand the heart and mind of a person, look not at what he has
already achieved, but at what he aspires to.
Kahlil Gibran
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 26 Jul 2000 01:54:25 +1000
"Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >Yes, you are right. That was a mistake and easily fixed.
>>
>> Well, it kinda shows that your whole idea of figuring out the size of
>> the integer you are passed is doomed.
>I made a stupid assumption that worked within the limited knowledge I have
>of endian math. Again, I do not perform these functions. Ever. So I have no
>knowledge of the problem other than a single reference I found on the web in
>a perl newsgroup plus mention of a function called "Swap" in delphi 5.
Knowing about the different sizes of different data types, and knowing
that the conversion to hex of such types will lose the difference between
a 32 bit type with the top 16 bit being zero and a 16 bit type has
absolutely *nothing* to do with understanding the problem posed, and
has *everything* to do with programming experience.
>but you only have the lust in your eyes to put down and insult and
>can't for a moment look past the superficial and see it for what it is.
You are right --- I can't stand people who can bring themselves to use
strings to do any sort of bit-based maths calling themselves "programmers".
It drags down the image of people who actually deserve that name.
>Who the FUCK cares about a BASIC function, especially a visual basic
>function, to perform endian flips?
Nobody cares.
However, it all comes down to *how* you solved a useless problem. You see,
when I was still enrolled in EE rather than CS, I had to learn welding
(I was going to be an engineer, so I had to know how to weld ;-). One of
the things the teacher made us do was to weld two rectangles of steel, 1.5mm
thick, together at right angle. Afterwards, we were to proceed to hammer
the whole thing flat. Bad welds tend to break when you do that, at which
point you chucked the remains in the recycling bin and got two new rectangles.
The teacher knew just as well as I did that welding those two pieces
together was a thoroughly useless task, especially when followed by hammering
them flat. However, we both knew that if I couldn't do this weld properly,
neither of use would even think about trusting me with welding anything
important, and neither of us would ever agree to let me pass that internship.
You were asked to weld two pieces of steel together. You went for the
superglue. At the moment, you have cast significant doubt on whether you
have ever even touched a welder.
Bernie
--
If I had to choose between betraying my country and betraying my
friend, I hope I should have the guts to betray my country
E.M. Forster
English novelist
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 26 Jul 2000 02:06:04 +1000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) writes:
>Is the alpha big endian ? I take it you only write for *Wintel*, not
>Windows.
Actually, all instances of Windows, whatever processor they run on,
share the same endianness (and bugger if I can ever remember which one
is which ;-). The Alpha and x86 share a byte order, and are different
from the 68k.
Bernie
P.S.: That was one of the problems of MS's "portable" Windows version ---
it couldn't be ported to your machine if your machine didn't order
its bytes the right way ;-)
--
I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked
with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a
fad that won't last out the year
The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall
------------------------------
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:25:33 GMT
Mike Byrns wrote:
[snip]
Dude! You fell for it! This is a cross-post. The previous troll was
just responding to the original troll, ok?
--
You have changed the signature included in your e-mail.
For these changes to take effect, you must restart your computer!
Do you wish to restart your computer now?
[YES] [NO]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 26 Jul 2000 02:11:29 +1000
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>ASCII (0) is also known as "NULL"
>Are you alleging that Visual Basic uses some other ascii value as
>a string terminator?????????
[...]
>I can program in any of 15 different languages, whereas you are
>restricted to...gag...visual basic.
You'd think that someone who knows how to program in 15 programming
languages would be familiar with the way Pascal (and many others)
handle strings...
Bernie
--
Tyranny is always better organized than freedom
Charles Peguy
French poet and essayist
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 26 Jul 2000 02:31:45 +1000
"Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> Oh, great --- you *do* know what this *is*, don't you? It's a *summary*
>> of a *report* by D.H. Brown Associates, Inc.
>Gee then, I guess we an believe NOTHING written on the web ... We can print
>summaries of reports but that's meaningless cause, well, cause it's just
>some letters on a screen... means nothing according to bernie.
Drestin, you were saying that Stratus is selling NT solutions with 99.999%
availability. To support such a statement, you need to point to where
*Stratus* is actually mentioning anything like that --- not some uninvolved
third party that provides "summaries" for pointy haired bosses.
>I can only tell you that Stratus tells me that they sell server with
>99.999% uptime guarentees, including the OS.
Oh, of course they do. And the OS in question is HP/UX.
>That's what they claim and I repeated it.
On their web pages, they only "claim" it for HP/UX. They seem to be very
carefully avoiding making any quantitive statements about NT/W2k stability.
>what's the point of this - is it this hard for you to admit that Windows
>2000, something you obviously have very little exprience with, can be as
>stable and reliable as another OS.
Oh, I have zero experience with W2k, and I have no problem admitting that,
for all I know, it could be the most stable OS under the sun.
However, if you want me to believe that it *is* (or that it at least plays
in the same league as the established high availability OSs) --- which
clearly you do, as you wrote the part about W2k solutions with 99.999%
availability being offered now --- you'll have to provide more than
"I tell you so!" to convince me. And when asked to come up with supporting
evidence for your claim, you pointed at Stratus --- who, as far as I can
tell, are very careful to say nothing of any substance about W2k stability.
>So, unless you can prove that Stratus is lying - why should we not believe
>they and their customer testimonials are telling the truth?
Stratus is not saying what you think they are saying about W2k. Simple as
that.
And what testimonials?
Bernie
--
If I am a great man, then all great men are frauds
Andrew Bonar Law
British Prime Minister 1922-23
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 26 Jul 2000 02:44:26 +1000
Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>To me, it seems quite simplistic. If a user is
>open to attack this is bad, and it is particularly
>bad if it is under the guise of a default "medium
>security" setting.
OK, let me ask a simple question --- if you expect "medium security"
to lock down the machine, leaving only two ports open... then what
would "strong security" or "high security" be?
>Medium security under ZoneAlarm blocks so many
>incoming and outgoing traffic it actually gets
>annoying.
In other words, the setting "high security" is pointless?
Maybe the main difference is that one is an add-on product that wants
to be noticed, while the other isn't?
Bernie
--
Giving money and power to government is like giving whisky and
car keys to teenage boys
P.J. O'Rourke
American journalist, 1947--
------------------------------
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: No wonder Hackers love Linux
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:26:31 GMT
Steve wrote:
>
> Just installed Mandrake 7.1 with medium security
> setting and install option of everything.
>
> Port 21 ftp WIDE OPEN.
>
> Port 23 telnet WIDE OPEN
>
> Port 110 pop3 WIDE OPEN
>
> Port 113 ident Wide open....
>
> Not to mention all of the other security holes due
> to inetd running every service known to mankind.
>
> Windows 98 se with ICS installed closes all of
> those ports and several are in stealth mode.
>
> No wonder the script kiddies seems to love
> Linsux.....
>
> Typical newbie will install it with defaults and
> be hacked within a couple of hours.
>
> BTW SuSE 6.4, Install Everything did somewhat
> better in that only ports 80 and 113 were open.
>
> I only checked via www.grc.com which does not
> check all ports.
>
> God only knows what else is wide open.....
>
> Steven
I'll install a box that way, and see if you can get in, ok?
--
You have changed the signature included in your e-mail.
For these changes to take effect, you must restart your computer!
Do you wish to restart your computer now?
[YES] [NO]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
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?
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:27:32 GMT
On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:28:12 -0400, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>$45 for an OS that retails for $200 isn't a bad offer. Hardly what one
>might call....how you say...strong-arm monopolistic pricing.
I would say that would depend on the context. What might be "just
business in one context" could well be seen as "strong arm tactics" in
another. If I sell you fire insurance, that's a business deal. If I
send thugs carrying a can of gasoline to sell you fire insurance,
that's strong-arming.
It also depends on the terms of the deal. If the $45 price was offered
in exchange for something else worth more than $200, then it isn't such
a great deal after all.
Would a deal of "$45 if you sell our products exclusively on all of
your computers, $200 if you want to offer anything else on even one of
them" be strong-arming? How about if the computer retails for only
$1000 to begin with? How about if the MS sales guy lets you know that
your competitor signed up for the $45 deal? How about if they offer
you the $45 price for the exclusive deal, or $200 and removal from
their logo and co-op advertising programs for the non-exclusive one?
See, things are not just about the price.
Nobody but MS could get away with this. I mean, if Be tried it they
would be laughed off. The trial testimony is that MS did do such
things. Which must mean their positon is maybe somewhat different than
that of Be.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451736 (Tholen)
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:31:55 -0400
In article <8Waf5.76$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Slava Pestov"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Illogical.
> >> >>
> >> >> Balderdash.
> >> >
> >> > Typical pontification.
> >>
> >> How ironic.
> >
> > See what I mean?
>
> Not unless you mean to dig yourself deeper into that hole, Eric.
Impossible.
> >> >> > I have not made one of your claims.
> >> >>
> >> >> Correct, but irrelevant, given that I never claimed you did.
> >> >
> >> > Incorrect, Slava.
> >>
> >> Prove it, if you think you can.
> >
> > You already proved it, by making the claim.
>
> What alleged "claim"?
Don't you know? It's your claim.
> > How ironic that you fail to
> > recognize this fact.
>
> I cannot recognize that which doesn't exist, Eric.
Irrelevant, since this fact does exist.
> >> Remember to use the scientific method.
> >
> > Of what relevance is this remark?
>
> Don't you know?
Why do you think I asked?
> >> >> > Still having reading comprehension problems, Slava?
> >> >>
> >> >> See what I mean?
> >> >
> >> > Illogical.
> >>
> >> On the contrary, you simply failed to recognize the logic.
> >
> > There was no logic to recognize, Slava.
>
> How typical, coming from someone who routinely fails to recognize
> logic.
Evidence, please.
> >> >> >> >> >> 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.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > See what I mean?
> >> >>
> >> >> Yes, but your meaning is incorrect, thus it is irrelevant.
> >> >
> >> > See what I mean?
> >>
> >> See above.
> >
> > Typical circular reasoning.
>
> Incorrect.
On the contrary.
> > Ineffective.
>
> Yet another unsubstantiated claim. Trying to set a record for
> unsubstantiated claims in a single post, eh Eric?
How ironic.
> > Meanwhile, where is your
> > logical argument?
>
> "Meanwhile"? How rich!
Non sequitur.
> > Why, nowhere to be seen!
>
> On the contrary. Of course, anyone with open eyes would recognize that
> fact.
How ironic.
> >> > Gearing up to lose another argument, Slava?
> >>
> >> How ironic, coming from someone who has already lost the argument.
> >
> > Illogical.
>
> On the contrary, my logical argument is quite logical.
You presuppose that you have a logical argument.
> > Why do you continue to argue, Slava?
>
> Don't you know?
Why do you think I asked?
> >> > 0
> >>
> >> What alleged "0"?
> >
> > Ask your mentor, grasshopper.
>
> Illogical, as I have no mentor, and I am not a grasshopper.
Comprehend context, Slava.
> Gearing up
> to lose another argument, Eric?
Obviously not.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > 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.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On what basis do you make this claim?
> >> >>
> >> >> On the basis that the answer was self-evident, Eric.
> >> >
> >> > Incorrect.
> >>
> >> How ironic, coming from someone who claims I engage in "pontification".
> >
> > See what I mean?
>
> Not unless you mean to dig yourself deeper into that hole, Eric.
More evidence of your reading comprehension problems.
> >> >> >> > Gearing up to lose another argument, Slava?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Obviously not, Eric.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > See what I mean?
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Yes, but your meaning is incorrect, thus it is irrelevant.
> >> >
> >> > Argument by repetition, Slava?
> >>
> >> How ironic, coming from someone who has already employed argument by
> >> repetition several times in their post.
> >
> > "their" post?
>
> Correct.
Illogical.
> > Who are "they", Slava?
>
> I was referring to you, given that you have more than one identity
> I used the pural form.
tholenbot only has one identity, Slava.
> >> > Ineffective.
> >>
> >> Typical unsubstantiated claim.
> >
> > Incorrect.
>
> How ironic you view your claim as 'incorrect' now that you've realised
> you can't substantiate it.
Taking posting lessons from Joe Malloy again, eh Slava?
--
Prove that African swallows are non-migratory, if you think you can.
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:37:07 -0400
Reply-To: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:28:12 -0400, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >$45 for an OS that retails for $200 isn't a bad offer. Hardly what one
> >might call....how you say...strong-arm monopolistic pricing.
>
> I would say that would depend on the context. What might be "just
> business in one context" could well be seen as "strong arm tactics" in
> another. If I sell you fire insurance, that's a business deal. If I
> send thugs carrying a can of gasoline to sell you fire insurance,
> that's strong-arming.
>
> It also depends on the terms of the deal. If the $45 price was offered
> in exchange for something else worth more than $200, then it isn't such
> a great deal after all.
>
> Would a deal of "$45 if you sell our products exclusively on all of
> your computers, $200 if you want to offer anything else on even one of
> them" be strong-arming? How about if the computer retails for only
> $1000 to begin with? How about if the MS sales guy lets you know that
> your competitor signed up for the $45 deal? How about if they offer
> you the $45 price for the exclusive deal, or $200 and removal from
> their logo and co-op advertising programs for the non-exclusive one?
> See, things are not just about the price.
>
> Nobody but MS could get away with this. I mean, if Be tried it they
> would be laughed off. The trial testimony is that MS did do such
> things. Which must mean their positon is maybe somewhat different than
> that of Be.
Microsoft never did what you claim. Who's trial testimony are you referring
to? That's just one of the myths that pro courtroom competition crowds like
to keep inventing.
------------------------------
From: tholenbot <[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)
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:46:22 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jacques Guy
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> tholenbot wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Look, are they so hard-up at Cornell that they can't
> vote you a couple of bucks to improve your bot?
What alleged "bot"?
> You're
> about twenty years behind Eliza
Maybe your unsubstantiated and erroneous claims have something to do
with this.
--
Prove that African swallows are non-migratory, if you think you can.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
