Linux-Advocacy Digest #107, Volume #28 Sun, 30 Jul 00 02:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown ("Colin R. Day")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux can save you money on electricity! ("Colin R. Day")
Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Windoze is physically destroying my hand! (was Re: Linux [..] drive!) (Ian Pulsford)
Re: Poor stupid Aaron, pity his woman. ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
No Gnome for me :-( (OSguy)
Re: No Gnome for me :-( ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Serge J.Luca")
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary? (Jim Richardson)
Re: Are Linux people illiterate? (Jim Richardson)
Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown (Jim Richardson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:11:49 -0400
"Donal K. Fellows" wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But from what I have read, the Sherman was more rugged, which is
> > important when you're fighting on another continent.
>
> Cost to build is important; the German Tiger tank was a very good
> tank, but was so expensive to make that it couldn't be made in
> sufficient quantity. "Better is the enemy of Good, and Best is the
> enemy of them both." A *very* instructive phrase that! Thanks ACC!
The Tiger was also a gas-guzzler, but perhaps not as bad as
the Elefant. Of course, immobile tanks are vulnerable, and the
Germans didn't always have enough fuel.
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 23:17:44 -0500
On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 23:55:42 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 18:43:48 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 05:54:57 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 16:51:18 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:07:48 -0600, "John W. Stevens"
>>>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 12:35:42 -0600, "John W. Stevens"
>>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >Sorry, DC, but you just don't understand that the average consumer is no
>>>>>> >more going to seek out an patronize one of these little shops, than they
>>>>>> >are going to seek out an patronize a consumer electronics repair shop.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The issue, though, is that it's out there, local to customers, and
>>>>>> available to them.
>>>>>
>>>>>No, that's not the issue. Refer back to the snipped bit about consumer
>>>>>electronics repair shops . . .
>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, do you suggest this same JoeAverage customer
>>>>>> would ever buy Linux?
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes, they would, when it comes pre-installed and pre-configured, on
>>>>>hardware integrated by the seller to run Linux.
>>>>
>>>>This I have to disagree with. I have a hard time coming up with a
>>>>scenario for a home user that would purposely buy a Linux box over a
>>>>W98 box, even if the L box were $50 less. Can you build a scenario
>>>>for me?
>>>
>>> ...they don't know well enough to be aware of the distinction
>>> between operating systems and buy the first thing they come
>>> across.
>>
>>You mean an adult that doesn't know what Windows is? C'mon, jedi -
>>you're reaching, even for you. That's absurd.
>
> Not at all.
>
> Most end users are not saavy enough to tell the difference between
> a wiley window manager or efx or bare windows. Plus, they simply
> don't understand what an OS is to begin with.
I honestly believe you believe that.
I think that's flatly and absurdly wrong, but hey, more power to you.
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux can save you money on electricity!
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:23:25 -0400
Tim Palmer wrote:
>
> > On the Linux/unix server side, all the storage devices can be
> >located at one location with all environmental controls in that one
> >location. connected to the terminals in the offices of the people who
> >need them.
>
> ...and what programmms wuold they run? VI? HA-HA! You cant' run Ofice on VT-100
>terminnal, you know!
>
And this is a disadvantage of VT-100's?
>
> > While for a small home or business environment some would say
> >"Big Deal".
>
> Deffinnately. Big deal.
>
> >This can be a very big deal in a larger environment were
> >the system administration needs to not only maintain the hardware
> >including the Uninteruptable Power Supply (UPS) or the backup
> >generator(s)).
>
> So give all the work to the usors.
>
The users should not be doing system administration.
>
> > On my system here all I have are terminals. I was going to try
> >a lan, a 10base2 system (still have the card in the 486 for it). But
> >when I sat down and looked at the configuration of several clients
> >that would not be on 24x7 to save power or the tendency of users to
> >turn the machines OFF improperly I just said "screw this topoligy!"
>
> ...I doesant wan't too work! I;ll let the users due it!
>
> >Setting up NFS and NIS on both the server and clients and maintaining
> >backups across my planned 3 node network would have been an excersize
> >in frustration. (If thats bad for a 3 node, what about 40 node?)
>
> ...the problem migte be your using UNIX. UNIX is dum. You half to forst it too due
>everything.
>
As opposed to Windows, where even forcing doesn't always help.
> >such a compettive system vs a set of terminals plugged into a terminal
> >server. The same wire used for a 100/10baseT system can be used with
> >terminals. In the wiring closet one still plugs them into a central
> >box. Only its a terminal server instead of a hub or switch.
> >
> > Your comments on this piece are welcome.
>
> I'll replay to this: Your idea is dum. A terminnall is dum because it cant have GUI.
What if one doesn't need a GUI?
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:25:32 -0400
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 22:32:24 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
> >> Does he have a house in the countryside that he can go to for vacations?
> >
> >How many citizens in communist countries can have a vacation-house
> >in the countryside after even a lifetime of work?
>
> I don't suppose a communal shelter in one of Pol Pot's labor camps counts ?
> I guess it would be true for sufficiently small values of "vacation" and
> "house" ...
>
> However, if this is what he had in mind, I'd prefer my work to a "vacation".
>
Ditto. St. Petersburg, Russia is a wonderful place to *visit*, and I've
been there several times...and I don't know a single Russian there who
wants to stay in Russia.
> --
> Donovan
--
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"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
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.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 14:25:52 +1000
From: Ian Pulsford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Windoze is physically destroying my hand! (was Re: Linux [..] drive!)
Fscking mouse!
IanP
------------------------------
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: Poor stupid Aaron, pity his woman.
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:27:22 -0400
"Clell A. Harmon" wrote:
>
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 22:33:14 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> No wonder you can't get laid.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >my gf says otherwise.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >hehehehehehe
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Yeah, she says 'No'.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >To YOU...
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Is THAT what she told you? Tsk, tsk. Why do women lie like
> >> >> >> >> >> that? Didn't you wonder why she was so relaxed the next day? You
> >> >> >> >> >> haven't been doing the job boy.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >Question: What country are we in?
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> The one where...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Translation: he doesn't know
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Poor Aaron, getting all prissy when the truth about his oh so
> >> >> >> frustrated better 2/3rds (sorry Aaron, she let slip your 'size
> >> >> >> problem') gets out.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >If such were the case, then why is she still with me?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
> >> >>
> >> >> Masochist. Poster child for the 'Why Smart Women do Stupid
> >> >> things"books, Pity, who knows the minds of women? It doesn't stop her
> >> >> from trolling the bars Aaron, but hey if you can live with it...
> >> >
> >> >Wrong. I am the only one who makes her dreams come true.
> >>
> >> Not what she said Aaron, well maybe her very small dreams...
> >
> >still can't kick that crack habit, eh?
>
> Nah, never touch the stuff.
Strange..you write like a crackhead.
why is that?
> I can understand why you would
> think I did though, that woman of yours was sucking on the pipe like
> to pull the chrome off a trailer hitch. Just kept whining how it was
> the only thing that got her through the day, with the tiny little
> needle dick waiting for her at home.
Did this happen in Iowa?
--
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"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
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: OSguy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: No Gnome for me :-(
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 23:59:47 -0500
Sorry, but I can't help but to wonder if Gnome is a time bomb waiting to
explode....
I had Gnome 1.0 running on my laptop (Redhat 6.2, kernel-2.2.16) just
fine, but I thought I would try Gnome 1.2 since I've been reading how
nice it was. Well, after finally finding that the only easy way I had
was to upgrade it from helixcode over the T1 connection at work, I ran
the install. The result, Gnome is permanently crippled on my
laptop...the Gnome Panel segfaults. I sent the bug report to the Gnome
developers and it was very nice to get the response that the problem is
now "fixed in CVS". This doesn't help me however as it appears that I
either run anything but Gnome on my laptop, or reinstall Redhat 6.2 on
my laptop. Since I'm not ready to transfer all of my work off the
laptop harddisk, I'm running KDE right now.
This week, thinking I had learned my lesson, I was still running Gnome
1.0 on my home computer (Redhat 6.2, kernel-2.2.16smp) and it has done
very well....until last night when I discovered the Redhat security
fixes for gpm and pam. I installed those fixes to keep up with the
latest security fixes, and I expected them to be unrelated to Gnome.
Wrong. Now, Gnome 1.0's panel, while it doesn't segfault, is crippled
where pagers, control-panel, will not run (control-panel now says I have
no entries). The Footprint icon will no longer appear on the panel
either, It is now the word 'menu' in the box. It took some fancy
persuasion to get switch-desk to finally switch my desktop to KDE. What
a mess.
Now I could try to upgrade my Home system to Gnome 1.2 except that I
only have a 56K connection here at home requiring more than 12 hours to
upgrade, and, considering the results I had on my laptop, I'm leery
about trying it. It is also the reason I won't be buying the Gnome 1.2
CD from helixcode. In fact, I'm not sure that Helixcode and RedHat's
implementation of Gnome are/would be the same, but I don't know and
don't want to take the chance.
So, it is no Gnome for me. I guess I will try again when Gnome 2.1
comes out. Too bad because I really liked the sawfish/Gnome
combination.
Thanks for letting me rant.....
<Wintrolls need not make remarks to this post since this is probably
over their heads...no BSODs were involved.>
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: No Gnome for me :-(
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 01:30:54 -0400
OSguy wrote:
>
> Sorry, but I can't help but to wonder if Gnome is a time bomb waiting to
> explode....
>
> I had Gnome 1.0 running on my laptop (Redhat 6.2, kernel-2.2.16) just
> fine, but I thought I would try Gnome 1.2 since I've been reading how
> nice it was. Well, after finally finding that the only easy way I had
> was to upgrade it from helixcode over the T1 connection at work, I ran
> the install. The result, Gnome is permanently crippled on my
> laptop...the Gnome Panel segfaults. I sent the bug report to the Gnome
> developers and it was very nice to get the response that the problem is
> now "fixed in CVS". This doesn't help me however as it appears that I
> either run anything but Gnome on my laptop, or reinstall Redhat 6.2 on
> my laptop. Since I'm not ready to transfer all of my work off the
> laptop harddisk, I'm running KDE right now.
Just specify UPGRADE.
all of your "work files" should be in your home directory, and thus,
untouched.
--
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"
J: Loren's Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
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: "Serge J.Luca" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 07:32:55 +0200
>
> Microsoft compromised reliability to gain speed. The more machines
> you add to a Microsoft "cluster", the less reliable it gets. This
> is exactly the opposite of what people actually want from clustering.
>
>
Please, prove it ....
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 21:05:07 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 12:57:37 -0700,
Arthur Frain, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Jim Richardson wrote:
>
>> You are correct that the first intercon RR was basically a govt project, but
>> there was at least one that did it without fed funds, Burlington Northern, I
>> think it is mentioned in "Myth of the Robber Barons"
>
>The Burlington Northern (which may have changed names
>again recently?) was originally the Great Northern
>Railroad and was built by James J. Hill. It was built
>later, and went to Seattle and not California. There
>wasn't any gold in Seattle, and it hadn't just been
>"liberated" from Mexican control, which seem like
>good reasons (among lots of others) for the govt to
>back a RR to CA.
So that Burlington Northern ran to Seattle and not Calif somehow makes it
a non-contender in the transcontinental dept?
>
>> Govt runs poorly at best, sometimes (like the micro electronics industry) it
>> hits a goldmine as it were, most of the time, the funds are spent on massive
>> boondoggles, vastky outweighing the positive results. If the funds were
>> collected without theft, then that would be fine, But they aren't.
>
>The idea that "govt runs poorly at best" is nonsense,
>as I've pointed out in other threads. A simple example
>(and not as trivial as it seems at first look): the
>University of Wisconsin Badgers (a government backed
>football team) became the first Big Ten team to win
>back-to-back Rose Bowl titles by defeating Stanford
>(a private university team, from a school funded by
>the profits Leland Stanford made in part from building
>the first transcontinental RR). It seems government
>runs football teams very well at best, which is
>sufficient to refute your claim. Government does lots
>of other things well, and lots of other things horribly.
>Just like private enterprise.
So you pick two different ends of a bell curve, compare them, and
consider that a valid comparison?
How do govt run teams do overall? How about something a little more
serious than a sport team? like postal service? Ever hear of the American
Letter company?
>"Taxation is theft" is a philosophical claim,
>not a legal one, and it represents a philosophy I
>don't adhere to or even admire.
Fortunately, whether you "adhere to or admire" it is of no relevence to
me. Theft is theft, it doesn't matter what the mugger does with the money.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: Are Linux people illiterate?
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 21:16:07 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:13:20 -0400,
Colin R. Day, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Jim Richardson wrote:
>
>
>> like the Huns further east on the steppes. They brought their germanic
>> languages, and gave us place names like Wessex (west Saxons) Essex (east
>> Saxons), Norfolk (north folk), and the village I grew up in in East Anglia,
>> called hockWold, which meant High wood. Germanic structure underlies modern
>> english due to the spread of the germanic tribes. Little of either strain of
>> Gaelic remains although there are remenents. The Danes brought with them many
>> word constructs and words, especially when they conquered what became known as
>> the "DaneGeld".
>
>I thought that the region was the Danelaw, and that the Denegeld was tribute
>paid to the Danes.
>
>Colin Day
>
doh! you're right of course, I plead beer deprivation
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 22:42:35 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:48:15 -0400,
Colin R. Day, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Jim Richardson wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 22:12:57 -0400,
>> Colin R. Day, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> brought forth the following words...:
>>
>> >Woofbert wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> The Germans didn't agree with the US analysis of the effectiveness of
>> >> tanks, and developed a couple of different Panzers ... which are the
>> >> basis of the current Israeli design. The Sherman, with its flat front
>> >> end, was years behind German design.
>> >>
>> >
>> >But from what I have read, the Sherman was more rugged, which is
>> >important when you're fighting on another continent.
>> >
>> >Colin Day
>> >
>>
>> The Sherman was cheap, but that's about it, (oh, and the hydraulically
>> stabilized turret was better, it could shoot reasonably accurately whilst
>> moving.) But it had a myriad of flaws. It used radial aircraft engines, they
>> used gasoline,
>
>The US was the world's largest oil producer at the time, so why is this
>a problem?
>
Gasoline burns way too easily, diesel is a lot harder to ignite, this means
that taking a hit in say, a Panther with the Maybach diesel, or a T34 with
it's diesel, was a lot less likely to result in a conflagration.
>
>Did the Sheramn break down much?
>
>Colin Day
>
Some, tanks are inherently high maintanance, the tracks are the weak point
there. But the M4 (Sherman) was no worse than it's contemporaries there.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
