Linux-Advocacy Digest #980, Volume #27 Wed, 26 Jul 00 07:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? (Arthur Frain)
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man!
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man!
Re: From a Grove of Birch Trees It Came... ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious.... ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? (WesTralia)
Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was: Microsoft
Ruling Too Harsh (Tim Palmer)
Re: LOREN PETRICH, CRYPTO-COMMIE (Tim Palmer)
Re: Linux ap't vs. Micorosoft (was: Re: If Microsoft starts renting apts (was: If
Micr (Tim Palmer)
Re: Just exactly what IS Linux, anyway? (Tim Palmer)
Re: I had a reality check today :( (Tim Palmer)
Re: Which Linux should I try? (Tim Palmer)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 02:08:06 -0700
From: Arthur Frain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> Arthur Frain wrote:
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > Besides, there's nothing keeping private interests from
> > > > exploiting the potential of hydro-electric power should
> > > > they foresee the value in such a thing and be willing
> > > > to invest in it.
> > > >
> > > > Given this 'no fuel cost benefit', one would think that
> > > > greedy interests would be clamouring to exploit this
> > > > sort of technology.
> > It turns out fuel only accounts for about 15% of
> > utility revenues, which is small compared to the
> > difference in rates.
> > > To build a hydro-electric dam, the first thing you have to do
> > > is get all of the people off of the land that will be flooded.
> > > Private companies have to purchase it.
> > > Government agencies just CONDEMN THE PROPERTY and tell the
> > > owner to beat it after paying them a paltry sum (usually
> > > far below market value).
> > You are clueless, aren't you? Private utilities use
> > eminent domain all the time for transmission line
> > right-of-ways and other purposes, and get the same
> Eminent Domain for a utility-pole right-of-way is SUBSTANTIALLY
> different than flooding the same property by creating an
> artificial lake.
Sure it is, but it isn't the only thing utility
companies use it for. Trying to change the
subject? You were asserting they couldn't do
it at all.
PS: Not poles - towers.
> > bargain prices on land. The fact is that one of the
> The property owner still gets to plant crops on the land, or
> put down sod, and let his kids play on the right of way.
Not where I grew up - there were chains
across the entrance and signs that said
"No Trespassing - WEPCO Property". You're
confusing sale under eminent domain with
an easement - different thing entirely.
However, with hydro, people still get
to boat, swim, fish, dive, drink and make
other use of the water that covers the
flooded land. Lake Mead? Lake Roosevelt?
Even the Columbia River.
And in fact people here get to plant crops
ONLY because some of the land has been
flooded by dams. Can't grow apples in
an area that gets only 10 inches of rain
a year (and most of that snow) without
irrigation. If the dam wasn't there,
most of the water wouldn't be either.
Water does tend to run downhill.
If it wasn't for those dams, you'd be
eating RED apples from China (may be
anyway, but that's a different story).
But this is getting pretty far away from
whether or not private utilities could
use hydro. The fact remains they could
and did at one time - just not as well
as the government does.
> This is far different from flooding the property by creating
> a lake.
Not really - see above.
> > dams my county now owns *was* owned by a private
> > company which couldn't successfully operate it, as
> > were literally hundreds of abandoned hydro sites
> > throughout the Midwest and East.
> > Reality seems to be getting in the way of your
> > political dogma again.
> > BTW - the cost of that land, even at bargain prices,
> > is a disadvantage to hydro compared to fossil fuel
> > or nuclear.
Arthur
Join the New Party - http://www.newparty.org
------------------------------
From: [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: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 09:09:01 GMT
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 03:16:38 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:46:02 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:11:26 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >Chris Wenham wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 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).
>> >> >
>> >> >Ya know, you're right on!
>> >> >
>> >> >I've really been getting nauseated with Linux ever since I first laid eyes on
>> >> >fvwm95. I ran Slackware a while back and I thought it was pretty keen. But
>> >>
>> >> Why? It's mostly slightly dressed up Motif interfaces from 5 or
>> >> more years before Microsoft finally decided to get desktop
>> >> religion.
>> >
>> >The whole concept of trying to immitate Win32 on a Unix platform was
>> >unappealing at best.
>>
>> What kind of crack are you on?
>
>Not the kind that makes one unnecessarily aggressive, like you are.
If you view that behavior as agressive then you need to get out
of daddy's house once and while and leave you excessively sheltered
existence for awhile.
>
>> It's Win32 that immitates X/Motif. (along with OS/2, Next and MacOS)
>
>Now who's on crack? Win32 and OS/2's windowing mechanisms are close to each
>other, but they are both extremely far removed from X. The entire
Howso? WIMP is pretty much WIMP all over. Even DnD and to some
extend object and applications imbedding aren't that different
from implementation to implementation.
What Fvwm95 does reflects interface elements present in X since 1990
and a little bit of dressup to make it look more superficially like
explorer.
>architecture is completely different.
>
>> If fvwm2 can manage to look 'too much like windows',
>
>fvwm95. The one with the freakin "Start" menu. Puke!
...rather like root menu's that have been in X forever.
Except for a few entirely cosmetic changes.
>
>> it's due to fvmw2's inherent flexbility and the truth regarding
>> who is stealing widgets from whom.
>
>I'm not knocking Feeble Virtual Window Manager's flexibility. I am knocking
>the alarming tendancy of Linux programs to want to look like Windows programs.
Just how do you propose to distinguish them without that
distinctiveness being entirely gratuitive? Besides, there
are plenty of applications and window managers that chose
to follow some other path.
So your whole premise is really just an excessively lame
troll, the rantings of someone unwilling to scratch the
surface or go beyond someone else's bad rumours.
>
>> >> >Redhat makes me want to vomit. Everything tries to magically
>> >> >configure itself and do everything for me, the stupid user.
>> >> >Unfortunately when something goes wrong (not if) there are now 12
>> >> >more layers of complexity in my way to work on solving the problem.
>> >> >In the old Slackware days, I used to find the exact
>> >>
>> >> At any time, the end user is quite capable of completely bypassing
>> >> and of this 'dreaded userfriendliness'. Infact, you will likely
>> >> end up using the exact same facilities to do so as you would have
>> >> under Slackware.
>> >
>> >On my current system, right now, I have a standard 3Com 10/100 Ethernet card,
>> >a 3c595, PCI, Plug-N-Play. In Redhat, I went to the pretty network
>> >configurator, entered all of my settings appropriately, told it to activate
>> >the settings and save the configuration. Fine. It loaded in the module and
>> >shazaam! I had network connectivity.
>> >
>> >Now I reboot my system. When I boot back into Linux, I do an lsmod and find
>> >that the Ethernet adapter's support module is not loaded. So, thinking I
>> >forgot to save, I pop into the pretty little configurator, add the settings
>> >*again*, save and activate them *again*, and everything is fine.
>> >
>> >Reboot again, and they're gone. This happened EVERY TIME I booted my system.
>>
>> Then just treat the system as if it were a Slackware intallation
>> for that particular task and stop being a whiney bitch.
>
>Talk about a whiny bitch. That's just the thing. I don't know what the hell
>to change anymore. The entire startup procedure is intimately intertwined
>with the pretty configuration programs. I don't even know where to begin
>grepping for 3c59x.o, or if it even made its way into any configuration
>scripts (which I strongly suspect it didn't).
>
>> [deletia]
>>
>> You don't need Slackware, you need an iOpener.
>
>What I need is a version of Linux that lets me be the boss, like it used to.
Any version of Linux allows for that. To claim otherwise
is pure bullshit.
>Did I mention already that I had the EXACT same hardware setup running
>Slackware a while ago with NO difficulties?
>
>And don't even get me started on the disturbingly Explorer-like file browser
>stuff.
If you can't take the initiative yourself, you don't need
Slackware, you need an iOpener or a Dreamcast.
--
Unless you've got the engineering process to match a DEC,
you won't produce a VMS.
You'll just end up with the likes of NT.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [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: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 09:13:59 GMT
On 26 Jul 2000 03:27:54 GMT, John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>: On 25 Jul 2000 23:37:14 GMT, John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>: >Doing "component-oriented software engineering" doesn't put you "even more
>: >at the mercy of the likes of Microsoft". There might be some specific
>
>: ...if Microsoft is in control or possession of all of the
>: components that is certainly a concern. Microsoft has gone
>: from the role of simple manufacturer to something more akin
>: to a banker with a similar increase in the ability to do you
>: damage.
>
>Would it make you feel better if I said that the earliest attempt to build
>a commercial component framework (that I know of) did not come from
>Microsoft, but from Apple? OpenDoc was burdened by a early-ninties
...except that's not at all what we're talking about here.
If you're going to insist on grossly equating one with the
other tha
>concept of framework "completeness", the same pitfall that swallowed
>Talagent, but it was an early 90's attempt at seperately deliverable but
>fully interoperable components. Academic work on the same subject (with
>the Modula and Oberon systems) were even earlier. More recently we've had
>technologies like JavaBeans. I'm sure others can add to the list.
>
>: >implementations of component-oriented software, created by Microsoft that
>: >would do that, but jeeze louise it isn't the whole domain of knowledge!
>: >
>: >Talk about blinded,
>
>: You're the one that is blinded.
>
>: There is more to the issue than "gee, this widget is nifty".
>
>Which widget? Apple's? Modula's? Oberon's? Lagoona's? Java's? Or do
>your blinkers only permit you to see Microsoft's work? God, you are Bill
At the moment, we happen to be talkign about the M$ widget in
particular which being like any MS widget is more about advancing
Microsoft's market domination goals than any sort of engineering
excellence.
Furthermore, criticisms about a particular implementation of an
idea or a class of implementation or a particular implementor
in no way implies that the notion in general is disputed.
>Gates dream lover .. you think everything is a Microsoft innovation!
No, you are just indulging in the construction of very weak
straw effigies to avoid actually addressing the issues
inherent abdicating control over your own applications and
data.
--
Unless you've got the engineering process to match a DEC,
you won't produce a VMS.
You'll just end up with the likes of NT.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.society.liberalism
Subject: Re: From a Grove of Birch Trees It Came...
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 05:09:47 -0400
"Mark S. Bilk" wrote:
>
> In article <8lg7a7$eks$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joseph T. Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In comp.os.linux.advocacy Bloody Viking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >: The Soviet oil max-out happened in 1988. The collapse was in 1989.
> >: Coincidence? Not hardly. Just keep swinging in the birch branches, fool. The
> >: same fate awaits us. We already see the writing on the wall. The non-OPEC oil
> >: production worldwide is about maxed out now. Why else does OPEC have to up
> >: production to keep petrol prices stable? Just wait for the fun and games when
> >: OPEC maxes out.
> >
> >The world's capacity to produce oil, or any other commodity, is not a
> >constant. It is determined by price. We can produce a great deal
> >more oil than we do, if buyers are willing to pay more for it than
> >they do now. However, it takes a lot of time and a lot of money to
> >bring new capacity online, or to restart previously idled exploration
> >and production efforts. It would take a much longer and/or bigger
> >jump in oil prices than anything we've seen (thus far) to justify this
> >cost.
>
> There's one thing that the laissez-faire Capitalists forget
> when they claim that the laws of the Holy Market control
> everything:
>
> The laws of physics.
>
> What happens when it takes more energy to explore, drill,
> and pump a barrel of oil out of the ground than the energy
> yielded when that barrel of oil is burned?
>
> A net energy *loss*, that's what. On every barrel pumped
> after that point, even if there are oceans of it down there.
Which describes most photo-voltaic "solar energy" systems.
The amount of energy consumed to produce the photo-voltaic
array in the first place is quite substantial.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: BASIC == Beginners language (Was: Just curious....
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 05:10:28 -0400
Nobody wrote:
>
> On 24 Jul 2000 15:50:47 -0500, "Drestin Black"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >"John Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:pZoe5.4332$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:8l49rh$2or$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >>
> >> > > But there are a great many tasks for
> >> > > which it is not really suitable.
> >> >
> >> > Outside of a few performance critical areas, these would be ?
> >>
> >> Anything reasonably large. VB lacks decent error handling and writing
> >larger
> >> projects which are robust in it is difficult IME.
> >
> >what's wrong with the error handling in VB?
> >
>
> It's not structured for one but that will change in the next version.
It's always "The next version" with Microsoft.
> ----
> Glenn Davies
--
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: WesTralia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:45:46 -0500
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >
> > So I guess you have never written a program that has to send data over a
> > network.
>
> Sigh... how on EARTH do you make that silly conclusion from what we're
> talking about. Gary, listen and I'll use small words: I just cranked out a
> quick solution for a silly problem someone threw out. That's it. Period.
> Done.
>
> THIS is the reason whenver someone says: "prove you can program, write a
> program" I never take the bait and shouldn't have here. NO MATTER WHAT I
> WOULD HAVE WRITTEN it would have resulted in the same type of crap.
>
> Yes, I have written network applications. In fact, the very last large
> application I wrote involved a medical transcription package which was fully
> network multiuser. So, you have guessed wrong.
"fully network multiuser"
I don't know, I just seem to giggle when ever I hear the term
"multiuser" in reference to anything Windows.
I think what Drestin was trying to say is that he wrote a
client/server solution.
Drestin, keep working on your buzz words.
-wt
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: 26 Jul 2000 06:30:03 -0500
Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tim Palmer wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 23 Jun 2000 22:57:23 GMT, Henry Blaskowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> >In talk.politics.libertarian Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> >The point is that the producer of a product should own it. Period.
>> >The alternative is to have the products politically owned, and
>> >the result of that form of ownership is well documented.
>
>That isn't capitalism ... capitalism is where the boss owns what
>you produce.
Why dont' you addmit that your a commy?
>> You can't tock to them. Their all commys.
>
>Right Tim, whatever.
>
>--
>Tim Kelley
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: LOREN PETRICH, CRYPTO-COMMIE
Date: 26 Jul 2000 06:30:12 -0500
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>Loren Petrich wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >Petrich is the classic crypto-commie.
>>
>> To a resident of certain groves of birch trees, maybe.
>>
>> And yes, I mean John Birch trees :-)
>
>You write like a paranoid conspiracy nut.
>
>By the way, you STILL haven't answered the question about how your
>ideology differs from the communists.
>
>We're waiting! [tapping foot].
Its' like i sedd. Lienux zellates are commy's.
>
>--
>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: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux ap't vs. Micorosoft (was: Re: If Microsoft starts renting apts
(was: If Micr
Date: 26 Jul 2000 06:30:22 -0500
Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tim "Rosie" Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>SUPER RESIDENT
>>
>>Certain tasks can only be peformed by the Super Resident. The Super Resident
>>can move into and out of
>>any appartmant he want's.
>
>1) This is *my apartment*. I *AM* the @$%# Super Resident.
>
>2) Windoze NT also has this feature.
>
>3) Any clueful Linux (or NT) user will do most stuff from an unprivileged
> account, the better to avoid such situations as....
>
>>TRASH
>>
>>Every Resident get's an R-M wand. Whattever the end of the wand touches is instantly
>>vaperized. It is
>>not the responsibbillaty of Red Hat Apt's if you vaperize your dog, your girlfrend,
>>or your Netscape TV.
>
>BTW, this differs from the D-E-L wand in Windoze...just how?
Windows has the Recycal Bin.
>
>
>>NEWSPAPER
>>
>>Ressidant's get the LIE-nux Inquieror. Because our printing pres doesnt' work,
>>the articall's are all
>>starecas'ed. There are no picchors in the Lie-nux Inquieror, and the text is
>>reely raggid-looking.
>
>Yeah, just like Lookout breaking your lines as it did. That's better than
>mile-long lines but it's not quite there.
>
>Now go back and RTFM for Lookout again.
>
>
>--
> --------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
> PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
> Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Just exactly what IS Linux, anyway?
Date: 26 Jul 2000 06:30:42 -0500
Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 21 Jul 2000 03:51:35 -0500,
> Tim Palmer, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>
>>
>>Thats' only because your a FERAK that actually LIKES typing commands. all the
>normall poepal out thear
>>hate Lixnu and will never give up Windo's just to use it.
>
>I know I have said this before Tim, but it's blindingly obvious why you
>would have difficulty with any command line system, sheesh.
Its' binldly ovious that you like computer's that are kaotic like anarchy.
>--
>Jim Richardson
> Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
>WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
> Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
>
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I had a reality check today :(
Date: 26 Jul 2000 06:30:32 -0500
The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Tim Palmer
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
>on 21 Jul 2000 03:52:06 -0500
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>On Thu, 20 Jul 2000 12:44:32 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> wrote
>>>> on Tue, 18 Jul 2000 22:31:40 -0400
>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>[snip our stuff for brevity]
>
>> Full perphireal support for No Yes
>> adcanced periphealls like
>> scanners, printers, etc...
>>
>> Automatic hardware dittection
>> that work's the first time,
>> flawlissly No Yes
>
>That's *IT*???
EAZY TO USE GUI No Yes
INTIGRATED printting from FAX mashine No Yes
>Timmy, you need to do your homework. Surely you can find a
>dozen things that Windows does right (*AND* prior to Unix).
>
>Can't you?
>
>Obviously, we (Aaron and I) have done ours. :-)
>
>(Besides, Unix was doing printers since before you were
>born, probably. :-) Ever hear of a Printronix?
>And that's a relatively recent one.)
Nothing beet's Window's printing you stopid Lie-nux commy.
>
>[rest snipped]
>
>--
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Which Linux should I try?
Date: 26 Jul 2000 06:30:52 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 21 Jul 2000 03:51:14 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Tue, 04 Jul 2000 09:15:23 GMT, cpliu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>With all the hype about Linux, I'd like to give it a try.
>>
>>You'll find that hipe is just about all thear is to LIE-nux.
>>
>>>There are so
>>>many vendors on Linux, red hat, mandrake, caldera, TurboLinux, etc. Which
>>>one should I try? Are there any major differences? interface? How about
>>>compatibility between different venders?
>>
>>Nonexistant. You cant' run a programmm from one distrobutian on another one.
>
> You are just so ignorant.
>
> Binary package excepted, there aren't any significant
> differences between distributions. What differences
> there are are more like the variances between individual
> Windows machines.
>
So what your saying is that it's comtatibball if you compial everything.
>[deletia]
>
>
>--
> Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
>
> That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
> |||
> / | \
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
