Linux-Advocacy Digest #153, Volume #28 Tue, 1 Aug 00 15:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: C# is a copy of java
Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Re: Learn Unix on which Unix Flavour ?
Re: What are all you nix trolls doing in the WINDOWS advocacy list?
Re: Linux? You're kidding right? Some kind of a joke?
Re: Anti-Linux Spammer Steve/Mike Forges His 31st Fake Name -was- Linux? (Cihl)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Drestin Black")
Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive! ("Drestin Black")
Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive! ("Drestin Black")
Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive! ("Drestin Black")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark (Mats Olsson)
Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive! ("Drestin Black")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Drestin Black")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Drestin Black")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Drestin Black")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Drestin Black")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Drestin Black")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Chris Wenham)
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Drestin Black")
Re: AARON KULKIS...USENET SPAMMER, LIAR, AND THUG ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: 1 Aug 2000 12:41:11 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Quicken2000 could be bundled with the machine and running
>>>> via vmware or wine. Ardhi bundled a Mac version of Quicken
>>>> with Executor for awhile.
>>>
>>>/sarcasm
>>>Yeah, that would sell *really* well.
>>>/sarcasm off
>>
>> It all depends on how transparently it is done.
>>
>
>Maybe in a few years, but not today.
VMWare runs everything just about perfectly. If it were just a
bit cheaper I could see vendors bundling it, especially now that
most machines have plenty of disk space.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: C# is a copy of java
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:33:48 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Donal K. Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8m6gb4$hpq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <8m4p27$jk4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > To protect against dynamic memory leaks it would be nessary to
> > maintains some sort of reference count to the memory pointed to by
> > the pointer.
>
> Not necessarily. Like I said, there's been some really bright people
> working on the GC problem for many years. Some of the ideas they've
> come up with are only really obvious if you're working in chip design
> (I kid you not!)
Please, enlighten us. How can a reliable and efficient GC prevent memory
leaks without extra book keeping to determine when a piece of dynamic memory
is no longer in use and prevent fragmentation of memory without runtime
overhead?
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Am I the only one that finds this just a little scary?
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:19:22 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:PFzh5.352$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> More than likely, their going to use an embedded version of the
> OS either on special PC hardware with redundant systems, or
> a different platform and MS wrote a special HAL for them (which
> probably isn't that difficult for MS by now).
>
HAL is really a scary thought. "Close the missle launch ports, HAL", is too
close for comfort to "Open the pod bay doors, please, HAL". -- and next
year is 2001!
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,alt.solaris.x86,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Learn Unix on which Unix Flavour ?
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:36:44 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Grant Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:XpBh5.3022$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <8m5arc$t85$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> After they changed their name to Interix, I got a demo CD of
> their Open NT (or whatever the name was of their Posix/Gnu/NT)
> thing. I never got a chance to install it before it expired,
> so I don't know how well it worked. It looked like an
> impressive piece of work based on the literature.
Most products do look impressive, in the literature.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What are all you nix trolls doing in the WINDOWS advocacy list?
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 10:52:00 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8m6qju$v2s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <0Ttf5.80515$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> There are a couple of reasons why we cross post:
>
> a.) There are still people that think Windows is everything. When
> reading about other OS's, they shall see there are alternatives.
>
> b.) Sometimes we just return the compliment.
>
> c.) Some topics are worth cross posting in order to get the bigger
> picture.
>
> d.) It is not just about changing minds - it's also about broadening
> horizons.
>
> Did I miss anything?
e.) Many if not the most of the crossposted threads under consideration here
are started by Windows advocates.
f.) Non-crossposted threads are often converted into crossposted threads by
Windows advocates who address thier posts to additional newsgroups into
their followups.
Look at the thread "Linux can physically destroy you hard drive", started by
Drestin Black, a known advocate for Windows has recently started a thread
that he crossposted into comp.os.linux.advocacy and into
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy.
Look at the thread "A Case Study of Software RAID Systems" also started be
Drestin Black and he crossposted it to the same two groups.
Look at the thread "A MacOpinion of Open Source that REALLY HIST THE MARK"
also started by Drestin Black, he crossposted it to comp.od.linux.advocacy,
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, and comp.sys.mac.advocacy.
I am sure you every one in all the Windows amd Linux advocacy groups are
familiar with the shapeshifting shinanigans of the Windows advocate/Windows
troll deadpenguin/Steve/Simon777/etc, who seems to hail from New York City.
He or she has recently started the thread "No wonder Hackers love Linux"
under the Steve identity, which he or she has crossposted to
comp.os.linux.advocacy and comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy.
I start a crossposted thread "Claims of Windows supporting old applications
are reflecting reality or fantasy?". I crossposted it to
comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy, and
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy, since I wanted to have the benefits of all
thoses view points to see how that claim could be stated honestly when we
all know that it is a myth. As it turned out there was no valid way to
justify that claim.
There are also plenty of "incursions" into Linux newsgroups by Winvocates
and Wintrolls that are not crossposted.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux? You're kidding right? Some kind of a joke?
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:52:30 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<%^$&&&&&&&&&&&&@!!!!!!!!!!!!!.com> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Try and find 10 people that are running Linux...Try it.............
Just count the persons listed in kernel sources and its included
documentation, you will find more than 10 there alone, disproving you claim
without having to look any further.
------------------------------
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anti-Linux Spammer Steve/Mike Forges His 31st Fake Name -was- Linux?
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 18:12:42 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
[read the original]
I think somebody on this NG said that every man once has an episode in
his life where he is attracted to other men.
Well, i think i'm having mine now!
[gasp]..[sucking in air].... OOOOOHOOOOO !!! LOVERBOY!!
Hi Honey!! Can i suck your dick? Then you can fuck my ass too! Let's
come off together, shall we?
--
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: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: 1 Aug 2000 13:17:01 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Spud wrote:
> >
> > > Remember...Dresting claims to use VB on a VERY frequent basis.
> >
> > and my program worked and yours is so full of errors it won't even
compile.
>
> I wasn't writing in a compiled dialect of BASIC, you moron.
you don't understand the dialect of what we're talking about at all do you?
>
>
>
> > Your basic program was completely completely wrong - I proved it and you
> > still try to ignore it. You can't even program in basic... lamer...
>
> Strange...the resident Computer Science prof down in Australia says
> just the opposite.
strange - I not only do not believe you but would tell him he were wrong too
if he did say so. Didn't know all of Australia had a single CS prof (AND, I
always knew more than my college prof's - always, they were way behind the
times).
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive!
Date: 1 Aug 2000 13:18:02 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Bob Hauck wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 29 Jul 2000 11:57:44 -0500, Drestin Black
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >Remember how we always laughed at people when they'd stay stupid
things
> > > >
> > > > I'm laughing now, at the advocate who does not think before posting.
> > > >
> > > > >well, it turns out that Linux onces again "innovates" - it's now
> > possible to
> > > > >actually, physically destroy your hard drive using some simple code
> > (link
> > > > >provided)...
> > > >
> > > > But not by accident, and not unless you are root, and not just on
> > > > Linux. This being a problem with the IDE _hardware_, it would
affect
> > > > all other systems that support IDE. Some of _them_ do not have any
> > > > security at all so any user can do this.
> > >
> > > And...of course...who keeps promoting IDE instead of the far
> > > superior SCSI....Microsoft, of course.
> >
> > No fuckhead - I promote SCSI, always have always will, don't even have
an
> > IDE drive. MS promotes SCSI, only a confused trolling fudster like
yourself
> > would think otherwise. How pathetic.
>
> Oh really, then why does MS always spearhead the drive to "update"
> IDE protocols every time they become obsolete.
>
and why shouldn't they? That has nothing to do with their prefered HD
interface....
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive!
Date: 1 Aug 2000 13:19:02 -0500
"Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
>
> > you missed the point - this doesn't just trash partion tables or make
data
> > inaccessible - it actually physically destroys the firmware - as in, IDE
> > drive => brick.
> >
>
> No, he didn't miss the point. You just chose not to read all of his post.
> And you missed the point that you can destroy the firmware on Windows
also.
you are making a poor asumption. I read the entire post (and the posts to
the list as well as other articles about this) and am fully aware that it's
possible to write a program like this that runs under Windows. Duh...
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive!
Date: 1 Aug 2000 13:20:15 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > you missed the point - this doesn't just trash partion tables or make
data
> > inaccessible - it actually physically destroys the firmware - as in, IDE
> > drive => brick.
>
> And you are alleging that IDE controls codes are available only in
> Linux and Unix?
Nope.
>
> Are you insane?
>
Nope.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mats Olsson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: 1 Aug 2000 18:20:08 GMT
In article <u_Ch5.5822$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8m6f7f$hf3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jun Nolasco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> > Then you'd be surprised to hear that the top 5 of the latest TPC-C
>> > Performance results use Windows 2000. Plus the top 10 TPC-C
>> > Price/Performance results are either WinNT or Win2000.
>>
>> Partitionable or non-partitionable data?
>
>Doesn't matter to the TPC. Both are explicate allowed.
Yep. Of course, to anyone trying to decide what the TPC/C numbers
_mean_ and how useful the number is, it is crucial to know whether it
used partitioning or not.
For example, if you are doing read-only database work, then the
partitioned numbers can be pretty interresting.
OTH, if you need to do handle ecommerce and want all those writes in
one database, then you want to look at the non-partitioned versions.
So, while it is legal to use tpm/C for both partitioned and
non-partitioned runs, it is extremly important to know whether or not
it was partitioned runs.
On the other hand, if all you want to do is benchmarketing, the
difference is of course neglible.
/Mats
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive!
Date: 1 Aug 2000 13:21:02 -0500
nope - not true.
I didn't write the article...
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8m508m$ln5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> What a twerp you are drestin.... You know damn well that you posted that
> to bash linux, then when every one made you look like the fool that you
> are, you back away! The fact is, It was a Linux user that pointed it out
> and a laim windows user (you) that tried to bash linux with it.
>
>
>
> In article <GXmh5.713$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > This information was quoted from linux weekly news - I didn't make it
> up nor
> > do I say anything other than what is here. Use your own brains to
> figure the
> > rest out. I never said it couldn't run under Windows (but I don't
> often run
> > as administrator under W2K anyway). Take your anger to lwn.com if you
> don't
> > like what you read here, I didn't create it.
> >
> > "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:39830c8b$0$2247$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Remember how we always laughed at people when they'd stay stupid
> things
> > > like: "I installed this game and it physically destroyed my hard
> drive"
> > and
> > > we'd patiently point out that that's impossible and it's probably a
> fried
> > > partition and/or FAT table and so on...
> > >
> > > well, it turns out that Linux onces again "innovates" - it's now
> possible
> > to
> > > actually, physically destroy your hard drive using some simple code
> (link
> > > provided)...
> > >
> > > Turning disks to bricks with Linux. Andre Hedrick is the maintainer
> of the
> > > Linux IDE/ATA subsystem; as such, he works with a piece of code that
> is
> > > critical to the vast majority of Linux users. He also sits on the
> ATA
> > > standards committee, and understands well the ups and downs of how
> the
> > > protocol works.
> > > He recently discovered a significant "down." It seems that there are
> > certain
> > > ATA commands that can be sent to a drive which will cause it to
> destroy
> > > itself. Andre posted a thing he called disk-destroyer.c (see below)
> which
> > > will use an IDE command to trash the partition table on a disk, thus
> > > rendering all data inaccessible. Apparently, however, there are
> other
> > > variants possible which will cause the drive to wipe out its
> firmware,
> > thus
> > > turning it into a true brick.
> > >
> > > And here is the code:
> > >
> > > /*
> > > * gcc -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2 -s -o disk-destroyer
> disk-destroyer.c
> > > */
> > >
> > > #include <unistd.h>
> > > #include <linux/string.h>
> > > #include <string.h>
> > > #include <stdlib.h>
> > > #include <stdio.h>
> > > #include <fcntl.h>
> > > #include <errno.h>
> > > #include <ctype.h>
> > > #include <sys/ioctl.h>
> > > #include <sys/shm.h>
> > > #include <sys/stat.h>
> > > #include <sys/sysmacros.h>
> > > #include <sys/time.h>
> > > #include <sys/times.h>
> > > #include <sys/types.h>
> > > #include <linux/hdreg.h>
> > > #include <linux/fs.h>
> > > #include <linux/major.h>
> > >
> > > int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> > > {
> > > unsigned char args[4+512] = {WIN_WRITE,0,0,1,};
> > >
> > > int fd;
> > >
> > > if (argc != 2) {
> > > printf("usage: %s device\n", argv[0]);
> > > return 0;
> > > }
> > > if ((fd = open(argv[1], O_RDWR|O_NONBLOCK)) == -1) {
> > > perror("couldn't open device");
> > > return 0;
> > > }
> > >
> > > if (ioctl(fd, HDIO_DRIVE_CMD, &args))
> > > perror(" DISK_DESTROYER falied");
> > >
> > > close(fd);
> > > return 0;
> > > }
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: 1 Aug 2000 13:21:16 -0500
"fungus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> > Win2K can take the heat too. www.tpc.org
> >
>
> http://www.objectwatch.com/issue_27.htm
>
so what?
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: 1 Aug 2000 13:23:14 -0500
"Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8m411b$i2a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <uveh5.11098$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Many corporations use WinNT and now Win2000 for their largest, most
> > heaviest tasks.
>
> The PC bus architecture has the I/O throughput for that sort of stuff?
> The usual tactic is to get a proper mainframe or Sun Enterprise or
> what-have-you[*], and I've never heard of a port of NT to that size of
> iron...
>
Yes, actually, it does. This is proven all the time. Benchmarks head to head
against the biggest iron Sun can muster is defeated by Compaq and Dell boxes
using Wintel.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: 1 Aug 2000 13:25:05 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > If Microsoft has such a good platform, then why are the servers
> > > that come under the heaviest usage Unix machines?
> > >
> > > How come no Lose2000 machines?
> > >
> > >
> > > Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
> >
> > Now that's a compelling argument! Also completely false.
> >
> > Many corporations use WinNT and now Win2000 for their largest, most
> > heaviest tasks.
>
> EVERY Fortune 500 company I have worked at keeps their most
> important databases on AS/400's and Unix machines.
which demonstrates exactly what we've been saying all along. You are full of
it! And, besides, so what if 1 or 2 F500 companies keep "most" of their
"important" databases on AS/400s and Unix machines according to ex-employee
kookis. All the rest run on less expensive, easier to maintain/operate and
more productive Windows/Intel boxes.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: 1 Aug 2000 13:27:02 -0500
"fungus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Mike Byrns wrote:
> >
> > Everything is redundant.
> >
>
> No it *isn't*, that's the entire point. How many times must
> it be pointed out to you?
but, you are wrong and we're trying to educate yo.
>
>
> The Microsoft TPC database is split into equal chunks, if
> any chunk/machine is lost then all processing stops for that
> part of the database.
prove that statement and maybe we'll listen.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: 1 Aug 2000 13:30:02 -0500
"petilon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> The underlying assumption of clustering is to improve
> >> "availablility", this means both speed *and* reliability.
> >>
> >> 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.
> >
> > how do you claim that more machines in a cluster lower
> > reliability? what is your basis for this?
> >
>
> The answer has already been provided on this thread:
>
> http://x70.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=652807064
you are wrong.
------------------------------
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?
From: Chris Wenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 18:31:23 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Quicken2000 could be bundled with the machine and running
> >>>> via vmware or wine. Ardhi bundled a Mac version of Quicken
> >>>> with Executor for awhile.
> >>>
> >>>/sarcasm
> >>>Yeah, that would sell *really* well.
> >>>/sarcasm off
> >>
> >> It all depends on how transparently it is done.
> >>
> >
> >Maybe in a few years, but not today.
>
> VMWare runs everything just about perfectly. If it were just a
> bit cheaper I could see vendors bundling it, especially now that
> most machines have plenty of disk space.
Would Intuit provide support to a customer running Quicken in VMWare?
Regards,
Chris Wenham
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[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: 1 Aug 2000 13:33:02 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > John Hughes wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "fungus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > John Hughes wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Add to this the known fact that Microsoft itself doesn't run
> > > > > > > any of their internal databases (hotmail, msn, etc) on Windows
> > > > > > > and we're left with what? Hot air about some new definition
> > > > > > > of "scalability"....
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This isnt a known fact. Can you provide references to your
'facts'.?
> > Or
> > > > are
> > > > > > you a liar.......?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > John,
> > > > >
> > > > > It's been what, a whole week since the last thread about Microsoft
> > > > > not using Windows for any of their stuff? Have you forgotton
already
> > > > > or are you doing this deliberately?
> > > > >
> > > > > Whatever...I certainly don't mind posting some more proof to the
> > > > > Windows advocacy newsgroups, so here we go (again):
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Try again.
> > > >
> > > > Fungus :
> > > >
> > > > 'Add to this the known fact that Microsoft itself doesn't run any of
> > their
> > > > internal databases (hotmail, msn, etc) on Windows and we're left
with
> > what?
> > > > Hot air about some new definition of "scalability"....'
> > > >
> > > > YOU state that Microsoft doesnt run ANY (please proove this) of
their
> > > > INTERNAL DATABASES (and this). You know the difference between a
> > database
> > > > and a web site? Right?
> > > >
> > > > Or you just trying to change the subject?
> > >
> > > If Microsoft has such a good platform, then why are the servers
> > > that come under the heaviest usage Unix machines?
> > >
> > > How come no Lose2000 machines?
> >
> > Which unix machines? Which heaviest loads? The 2nd busiest site in the
world
> > is microsoft.com - not a single unix deseased box anywhere...
>
> Correct, the Unix boxes are not deceased, because the Unix boxes are
> essential to running microsoft.com.
I made a spelling error but YOU have made the biggest lie in the world.
I meant to say "not a single unix deseased box" not "deceased" (or as I
mispelled it "deseased").
You dare to claim "unix boxes are essential to running microsoft.com?"
Aaron Kooklis - you are the single most amazingly thick headed person I've
ever had the displeasure of proving wrong at every turn (well, except how
much I love proving 5x3/po0k/abrabrastrap wrong).
Unix... running ms.com? ... hahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahaaaaa
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbough,soc.singles
Subject: Re: AARON KULKIS...USENET SPAMMER, LIAR, AND THUG
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 14:34:47 -0400
"Mark S. Bilk" wrote:
>
> Kulkis dodged every point. Big surprise. The Right-wing
> political propaganda machine exists to delude voters about
> exactly these matters, so that the wealthy people who finance
> it can continue to rob 90% of the wealth for the richest 10%,
> leaving 10% for the remaining 90% of us. Kulkis is one of
> their typical robotic dupes, who probably isn't wealthy
> himself, but spreads the propaganda for them, thanks to their
> bogus ideology he's swallowed because it matches his bullying
> personality.
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >What part of "I oppose ALL wealth redistribution programs"
> >do you not understand?
>
> The part where you don't oppose Capitalism, which redistri-
> butes much of the wealth produced by workers into the pockets
> of their employers.
>
> And, just to short-circuit the usual Right-wing Libertarian/
Oxy-Moron.
Right-wing is FASCISM which is a form of SOCIALISM
Libertarianism is opposed to ALL forms of FASCISM
Since your argument is based on a false premise (the existance
of something which cannot exist: namely fascist-libertarianism),
your entire argument is without merit
[faulty argument deleted]
GAME
SET
MATCH
YOU FUCKING LOSE!
--
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.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
