Linux-Advocacy Digest #194, Volume #28 Wed, 2 Aug 00 22:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man! (Marty)
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark (abraxas)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Mike Byrns")
Re: Linux & FreeBSD - security questions (Bob Tennent)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark (Courageous)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Leslie Mikesell)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Marty <[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: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 01:28:11 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:13:31 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 06:01:42 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 03:27:51 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >>> >> Otherwise your rant makes absolutely no sense at all.
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> >It tends to be difficult to follow when you delete the explanation
> >> >> >>> >and fill in the blanks with what you wanted to read.
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> >> [deletia]
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> >See what I mean?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Note: no response.
> >> >>
> >> >> The best you've come up with is ~ "it automates stuff".
> >> >
> >> >The best response you can come up with isn't even vaguely appropriate to the
> >> >question. Not surprising. Please reread the context again to glean what it
> >> >was I was commenting on. Do you read past a 5th grade level? I don't mean
> >> >that as an insult. You're honestly scaring me.
> >>
> >> You scare far too easily.
> >
> >Apparently not easily enough, as I'm still responding to your vapid tripe.
> >Meanwhile, you've still failed to account for how your response could have
> >been even esoterically related to my question and the context.
>
> No, you just wish it were so.
Do you ever stand behind anything you say? Not only are you arrogant (as you
have admitted), but you're a coward, making your arrogance far more pompous
and absurd.
------------------------------
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: 3 Aug 2000 01:33:26 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mike (and others) - understand something. I'm a nice guy, really.
I'm not sure that anyone actually cares what youre like in real life, dresden.
> I almost
> never lose my temper or rant or go on like I do here. This complete idiot
> kookus has been dogging me with his pet abracadabra
I resent that. Ive been dogging you solo all this time.
> for some time now.
> Exmine the trail of their posts and you'll find they follow me to every post
> I make.
Another lie. I only respond to posts that you make in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
and even then not nearly every single one. Not even half, actually.
> there is not a single post I've made that they do not insult and
> antagonize me every step of the way.
Another lie, once again---I do not respond to all of your posts (this is
very easily confirmable by anyone with a newsreader) and the ones to which
I do respond exist in comp.os.linux.advocacy only.
> I prove my points
No, you dont. You simply state them and appear to believe that that in itself
makes them true.
> and document my
> claims
Only very rarely; usually you simply state them and appear to beleive that that
in itsef makes them true.
> and they ignore it and continue to try to insult me and anything I
> mention.
I insult far less than half of the things you mention, actually.
> This aaraon is the newest in the group and he is the stupidest so
> far. his claims are so far from reality and his "fact" are so unbelievable
> and yet he spues
"spews"
> them further and faster than I can even dare expect. So, I
> do not have a personal beef but he has pushed me to the point where my
> replies to him are far far less professional or respectful as I have for
> anyone else I converse with.
Youre typing very quickly here, dresden...Has someone gotten your goat?
Dont forget: its only ascii. :)
Unless you're one of those assholes that posts in non-standard ISO. I
hate that.
> As I said, you have to see the history to know
> how long this has gone on for why I reply as I do. I have more respect for
> lice than I do those two. I'm sorry if this offends others.
>
If you were really sorry, youd stop lying.
=====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: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 20:41:16 -0500
On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:04:59 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>In article
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:31:15 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> >In article
>> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>-- snip --
>
>> >> No way. Not in such a way that anyone new to computers could
>> >> figure out.
>> >
>> >-- snip --
>> >
>> >> Face it - people have a huge comfort level with certain
>> >> applications, and by and large they don't run under Linux.
>> >
>> >So, people who are "new to computers" already have a "comfort level
>> >with certain applications" eh?
>> >
>> >When you make up your mind as to what your argument is, let us know.
>>
>> Face it - the vast majority have some computer experience, by and
>> large that's WinXX applications and OSs, and that's what they'll be
>> comfortable with. Twist words all you like;
>
>I'm not "twisting words" -- I'm simply observing *you* shift your
>argument from "people who are new to computers" to "people who already
>have a "comfort level with certain applications" as it suits you.
>
>That is known quite simply as inconsistency. You cannot argue from both
>positions as they contradict each other.
Not really. People who'd care about saving $50 and didn't have any
apps they cared about on the Wintel side (and, obviously, don't have a
PC already) probably still have a little Wintel experience, probably
have friends that have Wintel apps and at least a little Wintel
knowledge, and probably have an ISP that only supports Wintel, or
maybe Macs too. Linux just isn't "here" yet on the desktop, and won't
be for a while yet.
>> the facts speak for themselves - Linux isn't a commercial success
>
>The exact same thing was being said about Windows ten years ago . . .
Right, but I'm not the one suggesting that Linux is a commercial
success now or that it's viable that we offer Linux boxes at the local
BB or CUSA.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 20:44:21 -0500
On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:16:58 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>In article
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 17:10:49 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>
>> >On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:54:05 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 23:26:45 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>
>-- snip --
>
>> >>> Such a person would have equal trouble with WinDOS.
>> >>
>> >>Already installed and configured. Nothing to do but turn it on.
>> >
>> > The same would be true of the Linux box, or BeOS box, or MacOS
>> > box.
>>
>> Except that we're talking about a Linux box with Quicken on it
>
>No we're not. We're talking about a box with the OS and apps
>pre-installed and preconfigured, regardless of which OS and apps are
>chosen. The point is that the only real reason Windows is "easy to use"
>(and I use the phrase *very* loosely) is precisely because it *is*
>preinstalled. The minor differences between running GNUCash on
>Linux/GNOME and Quicken on Windows could be dealt with by any
>intelligent user. End users have had to change paradigms numerous times
>during the past couple of decades, from electric typewriters to
>dedicated word processors to character-based PC word processors to GUI
>ones. Compared to that, moving from Quicken to GNUCash is a walk in the
>park.
One day that will happen. It isn't ready yet.
>-- snip --
>
>> >>> WIMP under Linux is no different than WIMP under DOS or WIMP
>> >>> under MacOS or WIMP under GEM.
>> >>
>> >>Uh...no. The Macsters will strongly disagree with that one
>
>Irrelevant. The fact that mac users are, by and large, snobbish about
>the Mac GUI does not invalidate that a GUI is pretty much a GUI,
>regardless of platform. A Mac user might turn his nose up at the thought
>of using a Windows box (or a GNOME or KDE box), but he could certainly
>do so, and that's the point here.
Sure, but if it's not better, why bother?
------------------------------
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: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:45:57 -0500
"abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8mahjv$2g98$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> >
> > oh give me a break - this is from the gay poster child of
self-mutilation?
> >
>
> Another confirmable lie from dresden black; I am not gay.
And neither are we crack addicts. Perhaps you should just lay off the ad
hominem. Set an example for us :-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Tennent)
Subject: Re: Linux & FreeBSD - security questions
Date: 3 Aug 2000 01:36:44 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 03:46:48 GMT, Des Dougan wrote:
>I know little about FreeBSD, other than its background and that it is
>a closed development rather than the open environment Linux flourishes
>in. That said, I am working with a client who has been led to believe
>that FreeBSD is more secure (as a web hosting platform) than is Linux.
I'm not an expert, but I've seen opinions that OpenBSD is the most
secure OS because of the effort they've put into auditing the code for
insecurities. It's also open-source.
Bob T.
------------------------------
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: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 20:54:35 -0500
On Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:58:33 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 18:30:31 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:27:26 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:19:40 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 19:09:19 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 02 Aug 2000 13:53:57 -0500,
>>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 'support' is really an absurd feature when it comes to
>>>>>>>>> consumer computing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>How so?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Companies that don't want to waste the time or the money on you.
>>>>>>> TEch support people that are no more than people willing to read
>>>>>>> the manuals and are just paid to answer the phone for calls from
>>>>>>> people not willing ot read the manual. TEch support people that
>>>>>>> aren't even that bright and just drone off of a script.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I never bother with the first tier of support drones for exactly
>>>>>>> that reason. Niether do any of my colleagues in or out of MIS,
>>>>>>> regardless of the service level involved.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I know plenty of people who'd rather pay $.15 per minute to speak with
>>>>>>someone rather than read the manuals.
>>>>>
>>>>>$.15 per minute??
>>>>>
>>>>>$.15 per minute == $9.00 per hour. Who works for that wage?? You must
>>>>>be getting some pretty sharp tech's for $9.00 per hour...huh?? Hell,
>>>>>telco charges are more than that in most cases. If you are getting
>>>>>what you think is usefull tech support from someone who makes $9.00
>>>>>per hour then you must be worth even less.
>>>>
>>>>The customer generally pays only the long distance fee; the
>>>>Quicken/Microsoft/whoever pays the tech support person to answer the
>>>>phone and support you with any problems.
>>>>
>>>>That was pretty obvious....
>>>
>>> No it wasn't.
>>>
>>> http://www.intuit.com/support/quicken/options/live_phone.html
>>>
>>> For general 'tutorial' class tech support you will be
>>> paying $1.95 per minute actual human phone support.
>>
>>You left out just a -little- bit:
>>
>>Free stuff:
>>
>>Installation of Quicken 98, 99, and 2000 for Windows and Quicken 98
>>and 2000 for Macintosh (we help you install the program onto your PC
>>or Macintosh).
>
> Not relevant. This issue would be rendered moot by preinstallation.
And upgrades never happen? I'd *LOVE* to have a 1-XXX number to call
for support for the latest GTK+ installations! I sincerely hope
GnuCash doesn't have those horrible installation problems and
dependency issues. Quicken doesn't, and perhaps one day Linux won't
either.
>
> Plus, it's not the sort of thing that consitutes the sort of end
> user tutoring you seem to be implying that Quicken would provide
> for free.
How much support does GnuCash provide again? None? With no support
numbers? Right. And Intuit gives far more support - many the types
of things people read the manual for (or don't, as the case may be.)
>>Data conversion from prior versions of Quicken to current versions of
>>Quicken on the same platform (ex. Windows to Windows, DOS to Windows,
>>or Macintosh to Macintosh).
>
> Another install issue rather than, "phone based tutorial".
Another thing people frequently have questions on - and another thing
GnuCash has zero support on.
>>Product defects that are known to Intuit.
>>Autopatch downloads.
>>Registration of Quicken.
>>View and Pay Bills.
>>Quicken Quotes server issues.
>>
>>Does GnuCash offer any of that? Does GnuCash offer even $1.95/minute
>>tech support?
>
> Perhaps, perhaps not.
>
> However, the bulk of the gratis support for Microsoft and Intuit
> remains web or irc based (strangely similar to Linux) and anything
> beyond that will cost you.
As we've shown already, that's not true.
>>
>>> For Microsoft, the terms of what does and doesn't constitute
>>> 'warranty' support is a bit vague (certainly moreso than for
>>> Quicken) with non-warranty support being $35 per incident.
>>
>>It's pretty obvious to me - if it's NT or Win2k or BackOffice or
>>similar productline (ie a business product) it's $35 per incident. If
>>not, it's free - you only pay toll charges. I've used MS help a time
>>or two with Outlook 98 and with MS Word 97. Free.
>
> No, it is not that obvious.
Actually it is...
> Whereas Intuit spells things out rather clearly.
And MS has more support options and more offerings.
> Figuring out how to do your monthly accounts with Quicken would
> NOT be covered by Intuit's policy whereas the scope of Microsoft's
> policy for Money is vague.
Money?
http://support.microsoft.com/directory/phone.asp
The phrase "blatently obvious" comes to mind...
> Knowning Microsoft it is intentionally vague so that it can mean
> whatever they want it to mean at the time.
Well, someone's got a problem with MS. :)
>>
>>> IOW, Microsoft and Intuit don't want to have your lazy ass leeching
>>> free training off of their unpaid support lines.
>>
>>IOW MS has willingly helped me a time or two without any charge, and I
>>was impressed with their service.
------------------------------
From: Courageous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 01:56:52 GMT
> > from Compaq, unisys and others perform again these *nix boxes...
>
> I guarantee, hands down, no contest, that a sun enterprise 10000 running
> solaris would absolutely kick their ass.
I'm sure you're right. But this won't be true for long.
Go to http://www.compaq.com, go to search, and type in
"21364". An incredible architecture. The Alpha team is
looking at building SMP systems with ridiculously high
bandwidth and dedicated transputer-like 4-way point-to-
point meshes. Memory controllers will be integrated into
the chips, resolving some latency issues. Most intriguing.
C//
------------------------------
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: 2 Aug 2000 20:53:47 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Every entry level windows user I've seen learned how to reboot
>>>right away. I think most could handle making one extra choice
>>>there.
>>
>> No, there would merely be a default configuration so that the
>> end user wouldn't have to strain their brain.
>>
>> Unix has been automating these sorts of things before DOS existed,
>> nevermind Windows.
>
>Seems like an amazing amount of trouble when simply buying a Win98
>machine in the first place is really what the customer wants....
Customers hardly ever want an OS. They want apps that are
good enough and don't cost much. Windows gained it's popularity
by being cheaper that the competition. Now it isn't, and
with StarOffice the Linux apps are good enough.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
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: 2 Aug 2000 20:58:39 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> http://www.intuit.com/support/quicken/options/live_phone.html
>>
>> For general 'tutorial' class tech support you will be
>> paying $1.95 per minute actual human phone support.
>
>You left out just a -little- bit:
>
>Free stuff:
>
>Installation of Quicken 98, 99, and 2000 for Windows and Quicken 98
>and 2000 for Macintosh (we help you install the program onto your PC
>or Macintosh).
>Data conversion from prior versions of Quicken to current versions of
>Quicken on the same platform (ex. Windows to Windows, DOS to Windows,
>or Macintosh to Macintosh).
>Product defects that are known to Intuit.
>Autopatch downloads.
>Registration of Quicken.
>View and Pay Bills.
>Quicken Quotes server issues.
>
>Does GnuCash offer any of that? Does GnuCash offer even $1.95/minute
>tech support?
Maybe not quite all of that, but how is Quicken in the free-upgrades
forever department?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
