Linux-Advocacy Digest #158, Volume #28 Tue, 1 Aug 00 18:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("David T. Johnson")
Is there any flash plugin for mozilla? (Thomas Pollak)
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Mike Byrns")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("John W. Stevens")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Chris Wenham)
There is no such thing as a free lunch! (Steve Wilbur)
Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel (The Magic Nose Goblin)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Isaac)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Chris Wenham)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("John W. Stevens")
Re: AARON KULKIS...USENET SPAMMER, LIAR, AND THUG ("MH")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark (abraxas)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("John W. Stevens")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Mike Byrns")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("John W. Stevens")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Mike Byrns")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "David T. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 14:16:40 -0400
Chris Wenham wrote:
>
> [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?
>
I recall back in 1992 or so when I was using Microsoft Word 2.0 to
convert Wordperfect 5.1 file formats and the conversion filter would not
work properly. I called up the Microsoft support telephone number and
they sent me a revised converter file on a floppy disk. What is notable
is that this is the last time that any application software company
provided any useful support to me on any platform for any product.
------------------------------
From: Thomas Pollak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Is there any flash plugin for mozilla?
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 23:15:50 +0200
Hallo there.
I'm searching for a flash-plugin for my mozilla.
The Netscape plugin doesen't work!
So, waht could I do?
------------------------------
From: "Mike Byrns" <[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: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 16:16:47 -0500
"abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8m770k$1rvd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I didnt think so dresden, because you NEVER can. You never back up your
> claims, you are a liar, you are an idiot, you are a shitty web designer,
you
> are a downright awful programmer (giving you a huge benefite of the doubt
> by calling you one at all), a horrid person, and a pathetic IT clown that
> everyone constantly laughs at. Go put some more ram in my workstation,
> bitch. And after, make me a fucking cup of coffee. You're almost
qualified
> to operate the machine all by yourself! For now just pour though.
You sound like you know this person very well. Where do you come by all
this information?
* He never backs up his claims? Well from what I've seen that's common
practice around here.
* He is a liar? Like pathological? Hmm. Are you a psychiatrist? Perhaps
he's just exposing the most conveniant truths.
* He is an idiot? Using the clinical definition, I doubt that he could use
language as well as he can, not to mention using a computer, designing web
pages and programming at all.
* He is a "bad" web page designer? Where can we see examples of his work so
we can decide for ourselves?
* He is an awful programmer? So you've run applications he's created?
* He is a horrid person? My grandmother told me that there's some good
everyone. I doubt that horrid is a fair term.
* He is a pathetic IT clown? You WORK with him? Wow.
> Thats not what he said. You are twisting words and lying in order to
appear
> to be correct; which you are not. You are an offensive retard for even
suggesting
> that anyone reading your filthy tripe would actually buy such a sophomoric
> manouver.
You know decaf can be every bit as satisfying :-) I believe that the nix
poster did say that "microsoft.com could not run without UNIX". He probably
meant hotmail.com but even that is changing. I'm not defending Mr. Black
but I do think you may be wrong here.
------------------------------
From: "John W. Stevens" <[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, 01 Aug 2000 15:25:10 -0600
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:13:50 -0600, John W. Stevens wrote:
>
> >Hmm? I wasn't refering to the Elian thing . . .
>
> Oh, I get your point now. You are kind of OT (-; We were talking about Elian.
Oops.
> IMO, the "criminals" vs "patriots" thing is more a moral issue than
> anything else. Someone rising up against a foreign power is on
> stronger moral ground than someone rising up against a democratically
> elected government enforcing laws that have a reasonable level of
> public support.
The problem is, of course, "Who defines what is and is not moral?"
> ( the usual disclaimers re allowances for "tyranny
> of the majority" type exceptions apply ... )
Hence my point.
--
If I spoke for HP --- there probably wouldn't BE an HP!
John Stevens
[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?
From: Chris Wenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:27:59 GMT
"David T. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > 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?
> >
> I recall back in 1992 or so when I was using Microsoft Word 2.0 to
> convert Wordperfect 5.1 file formats and the conversion filter would not
> work properly. I called up the Microsoft support telephone number and
> they sent me a revised converter file on a floppy disk. What is notable
> is that this is the last time that any application software company
> provided any useful support to me on any platform for any product.
That's an interesting annecdote. Did you have a point, though?
Regards,
Chris Wenham
------------------------------
From: Steve Wilbur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: There is no such thing as a free lunch!
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 13:29:56 -0800
The laws of physics (entropy) dictate there is no such thing as a free
lunch. For there to be one, the perpetual motion machine would have to
be a reality, and it is not.
Even if the people using the software get it for free, get tech support
for free, and even get people to use it on their behalf for free -
there is still a cost - borne by SOMEONE. it's not free.
There is no such thing as a free lunch
------------------------------
From: The Magic Nose Goblin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:17:44 GMT
> Go change the toner on my fucking printer, IT bitch.
ouch.
In article <8m7d0n$1rvd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Chad Myers wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >
> >> > > it's "web search" is handled either by inktomi or Fast
> >> >
> >> > How do you know this?
> >> >
> >> > -Chad
> >>
> >> Because I worked at FAST and was a technical contact for Lycos.
> >
> > Do you work there now? I'm certain the answer is no because you
would know
> > that that relationship was dissolved over dissatisfaction with the
> > reliability and performance of that "solution."
> >
> > Lycos switch to Wintel to improve performance and reliability.
Think what
> > that says about what they were using before...
>
> That actually has nothing to do with why they switched to wintel,
despite
> what your lying-ass has to say about it.
>
> You are an idiot, dresden.
>
> Go change the toner on my fucking printer, IT bitch.
>
> -----yttrx
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:30:18 GMT
On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 14:38:32 -0600, John W. Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Lars Träger wrote:
>>
>> John W. Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Lars Träger wrote:
>> >
>> > > Apart from the PMT systems that never pretended to have protected
>> > > memory, there always is Win9x
>> >
>> > Which is less likely to crash than Windows 3.1 . . . a CMT system.
>> >
>> > > (and the increased stability of theMacOS
>> > > against crashing apps despite *not* having prot.mem.
>> >
>> > Sorry, but you are incorrect. In actual fact, the increased ability of
>> > the MacOS to protect against crashing apps is almost entirely due to the
>> > implementation of a limited amount of protected memory.
>> >
>> > It is, in fact, the legacy of CMT that keeps the MacOS from implementing
>> > much more PM than it currently does.
>>
>> So what's the excuse for Win9x?
>
>Windows 3.1 . . . Windows 9x attempts to maintain backwards
>compatibility.
I can run Win 3.1 apps under Solaris just fine.
Binary compatibility doesn't require compromising the host OS.
It never has really. Some people just prefer to cut corners.
>
>> I had Photoshop crash the machine on
>> Win98SE while zooming or cropping. Never happened to me on a Mac.
>
>I've seen that happen on the Mac. What's your point?
You expect it to happen on the Mac.
OTOH, genuine PMT should prevent it happening on WinDOS.
>
>> You also ignored PMT systems without PM.
>
>No I didn't. I just didn't discuss them.
>
>What's your point?
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Isaac)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:31:46 GMT
On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:47:27 GMT, Reini Urban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>>Plugins are usually implemented as dynamically loaded libraries.
>>So, in most cases plugins ARE libraries, therefore plugins are
>>like libraries to applications in a trivial way.
>
>Libraries ARE needed to build and run an application.
Some applications need libraries but others are loaded dynamically at
run time just like plug-ins. MS uses the 'LoadLibrary' function.
On linux, dlopen can be used similarly. In either case if the target
library is not present, the program simply cannot use that functionality
but runs okay otherwise.
Isaac
------------------------------
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: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:32:36 GMT
On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 18:31:23 GMT, Chris Wenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[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?
Would Intuit provide meaningful support otherwise?
[deletia]
'support' is really an absurd feature when it comes to
consumer computing.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
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 21:34:27 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] () writes:
> > Would Intuit provide support to a customer running Quicken in VMWare?
>
> Would Intuit provide meaningful support otherwise?
Have you had the opportunity to judge it?
Regards,
Chris Wenham
------------------------------
From: "John W. Stevens" <[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, 01 Aug 2000 15:31:41 -0600
[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?
Yes, I can. Cable Modems/DSL.
Question: What has stopped the "home user" from installing and using a
"server class" machine running a "server class" OS up 'til now?
Answer: A lack of bandwidth and connectivity.
Companies such as those that sell "Internet-wide accessible file
storage" services would go out of business in a year, if everybody had a
Linux box attached to an always-on network.
Other network services are, of course, also candidates for this. Note:
always-on, plus Linux, means that ISP's, to a greater or lesser extent,
are unneccesary.
Web Server? It's on your home box. Mail Transfer Agent? It's on your
home box.
Etc.
> >Sure he can. *YOU* are assuming that pre-installed and pre-configured
> >Linux boxen will never be made available on BB shelves. . .
>
> I think it's a pretty safe assumption for the time being.
I disagree . . . considering a well known, very large company is already
selling such boxen. ;-)
> >And there is nothing to stop Linux from being the OS installed on the
> >above system.
>
> Except a total lack of demand.
Not true.
> And consumer-level software.
Also not true.
> And
> infrastructure support, aka handholders.
And again, not true.
--
If I spoke for HP --- there probably wouldn't BE an HP!
John Stevens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: AARON KULKIS...USENET SPAMMER, LIAR, AND THUG
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 17:36:39 -0400
> >The richest 10% of Americans own 90% of the wealth, and thus
> >are 81 times wealthier on the average than the poorest 90%,
> >which collectively owns 10% of the wealth. That's the
>
> You are mixing and matching income with "wealth" or "assets". All
> the assertion above proves is that the richest people tend not to
> spend all of their money.
That may be for the simple fact that they have a disproportionate amount to
spend?
Sliding ratio \ proportion. Beyond a point the rich have no reason to spend
more money. Unless they just enjoy throwing it away. But they still have it
to spend. At a much lesser point, the average income household in this
country can't spend anymore because they simply don't have it.
> Now the upper tax brackets are at a marginal tax rate of I'd say at least
> 40%. So if the top 10% make up 90% of the nations income, then 36% of the
> nations income is shared by everyone ( in fact the people on the bottom
> would get a better share of that 36% ).
>
> >Yes, but a 30:1 pay ratio is enough, not 1,000 or 1,000,000:1.
>
> Here, you seem to be outright confusing pay ratios with ownership of
> assets. Don't forget, that the guy who is paid the higher amount gives
> more than 40% of it back to the country in income taxes.
Please, please, please. Show me someone in the top 10% and I'll show you
someone who NEVER
pays close to the 40% rate. The tax laws are written for the rich. The more
they have, the more they can write off. Of course it takes money to make
money. Tax accountants, lawyers, so on and so on.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
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 21:40:59 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8m770k$1rvd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> I didnt think so dresden, because you NEVER can. You never back up your
>> claims, you are a liar, you are an idiot, you are a shitty web designer,
> you
>> are a downright awful programmer (giving you a huge benefite of the doubt
>> by calling you one at all), a horrid person, and a pathetic IT clown that
>> everyone constantly laughs at. Go put some more ram in my workstation,
>> bitch. And after, make me a fucking cup of coffee. You're almost
> qualified
>> to operate the machine all by yourself! For now just pour though.
>
> You sound like you know this person very well. Where do you come by all
> this information?
> * He never backs up his claims? Well from what I've seen that's common
> practice around here.
You havent seen as much as quite a few of us have.
> * He is a liar? Like pathological?
Did I *say* pathological?
> Hmm. Are you a psychiatrist?
Nope.
> Perhaps
> he's just exposing the most conveniant truths.
When youve been around a little while longer, you will realize that there is
no need for speculation.
> * He is an idiot? Using the clinical definition, I doubt that he could use
> language as well as he can, not to mention using a computer, designing web
> pages and programming at all.
You are an idiot.
> * He is a "bad" web page designer? Where can we see examples of his work so
> we can decide for ourselves?
By "we" I shall assume you mean "YOU", as most of the rest of the class has
no trouble searching dejanews for such information.
> * He is an awful programmer? So you've run applications he's created?
Again, dejanews, before you make any greater a fool of yourself.
> * He is a horrid person? My grandmother told me that there's some good
> everyone.
Your grandmother was wrong.
> I doubt that horrid is a fair term.
And now you are wrong.
> * He is a pathetic IT clown?
Is there any other kind of IT clown?
> You WORK with him? Wow.
>
It is self-evident.
> You know decaf can be every bit as satisfying :-) I believe that the nix
> poster did say that "microsoft.com could not run without UNIX". He probably
> meant hotmail.com but even that is changing. I'm not defending Mr. Black
> but I do think you may be wrong here.
Nonetheless, I am not.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
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: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:43:36 GMT
On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:27:59 GMT, Chris Wenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"David T. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> > > 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?
>> >
>> I recall back in 1992 or so when I was using Microsoft Word 2.0 to
>> convert Wordperfect 5.1 file formats and the conversion filter would not
>> work properly. I called up the Microsoft support telephone number and
>> they sent me a revised converter file on a floppy disk. What is notable
>> is that this is the last time that any application software company
>> provided any useful support to me on any platform for any product.
>
> That's an interesting annecdote. Did you have a point, though?
End user support for consumer grade product is typically a joke.
It incurs a cost that most companies typically want to minimize,
especially since they already have your money and don't have to
give it back.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
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: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:44:53 GMT
On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:34:27 GMT, Chris Wenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] () writes:
>
>> > Would Intuit provide support to a customer running Quicken in VMWare?
>>
>> Would Intuit provide meaningful support otherwise?
>
> Have you had the opportunity to judge it?
Being that you are advocating a deviation from a widely
observed norm, I'm not the one with the burden of proof.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: "John W. Stevens" <[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, 01 Aug 2000 15:36:42 -0600
JS/PL wrote:
>
> There's nothing holding them back, software has about the lowest barriers to
> entry of any market on earth, at least it does now.
That turns out not to be the case.
Interoperability is an important factor in the market place, and the use
of secret, proprietary interfaces makes the barrier to entry very, very
high.
--
If I spoke for HP --- there probably wouldn't BE an HP!
John Stevens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 16:42:50 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<snip>
> > I made a spelling error but YOU have made the biggest lie in the world.
> > I meant to say "not a single unix deseased box" not "deceased" (or as I
> > mispelled it "deseased").
> > You dare to claim "unix boxes are essential to running microsoft.com?"
> >
>
> Yes. And based on the existance of Unix boxes at microsoft.com,
> Microsoft believes this, too.
Provide proof that "microsoft.com", meaning Microsoft's internet presence on
that domain specifically, consisting of web servers, application servers and
database servers directly involved with displaying web data, sending files
or acquiring information from forms, uses nix. You must ignore whay any
partners may be using because that's not "microsoft.com". You must ignore
any possible internal business uses of nix as well because that is Microsoft
Corporation IT *NOT* "microsoft.com". Hey you chose the words you used to
make that assertion. Now BACK IT UP.
<snip>
------------------------------
From: "John W. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 15:38:55 -0600
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said John W. Stevens in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> [...more or less...]
> >> So anyone is free to wander off and make an exact copy of AIX ?
> [...]
> >> > This is the 'pseudo-capitalists' cop out.
> >>
> >> No, it's the blatant truth.
> >
> >No, it's not. It fails the most basic test: consistency with reality.
> >
> >Several attempts to create an interface compatible version of Windows
> >have been sabotaged by MS.
> >
> >> If you can make a compelling alternative to
> >> Windows then nothing stops you from selling it.
> >
> >Nothing but Federal Law, that is.
> [...]
> >Yes, it is. Secret and proprietary interfaces, combined with a great
> >deal of pressure on Congress to get them to enact certain pieces of
> >legislation designed to protect their monopoly, is indeed the fault of
> >MS.
>
> Which certain pieces of Federal Law were you thinking of, John?
The FCC and the FTC both have the requisite powers without passing new
legislation, but some new legislation would certainly help.
--
If I spoke for HP --- there probably wouldn't BE an HP!
John Stevens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Mike Byrns" <[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: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 16:46:13 -0500
"petilon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "John Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> You are not load balancing SQL.
> >>
> >> i.e., you are lying again.
> >>
> >
> > Can you prove this? Im currently working on a system like
> > this so if its all in my imagination I would love to know.
>
> Yes, I can prove it. But first you are going to have to explain
> what you understand by the term "load balancing", with respect
> to a DBMS. If we don't start with a definition then I cannot
> prove anything because you are simply going to redefine "load
> balancing" to mean something else.
You provide the definition then. We'll assess it's validity by citing
impartial industry sources. It will then be amended and agreed on. Then
the arguments will begin. Or is that too rational and proper for an
advocacy newsgroup?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
