Linux-Advocacy Digest #392, Volume #28 Mon, 14 Aug 00 07:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Windows stability: Alternate shells? (tom)
Re: OS advertising in the movies... (was Re: Microsoft MCSE) (2:1)
Re: Why Linux will crash and burn..... (2:1)
Re: Article: Why linux is here to stay ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Article: Why linux is here to stay ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: OS advertising in the movies... (was Re: Microsoft MCSE) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 04:52:29 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Christopher Smith in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Christopher Smith in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> Said Christopher Smith in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >> [...]
>> >> >There is no such thing as a dishonest mistake. You cannot tell
>> >> >a lie if you do not know the truth.
>> >>
>> >> I don't accept those two statements has being related by logic. The
>> >> second is correct, but has no bearing on the first, which is incorrect.
>> >
>> >The bearing it has on the first is in defining the word "dishonest".
>> >
>> >Again, you cannot make a dishonest mistake. Being dishonest requires the
>> >truth be known.
>>
>> Known by whom; the one making the mistake, or the one detecting the
>> mistake?
>
>The one making the mistake, of course. What relevance does the knowledge
>some person has to the knowledge some other person may or may not have.
That is the question. The relevance of information being provided is,
indeed, determined by whether the person is dishonest or honest in
either his information or his mistakes, and all other components or
portions of his communication.
[...]
>> It is true that one is not a liar if one is merely ignorant of
>> the truth.. This does not, however, entirely discombobulate the meaning
>> of the phrase "dishonest mistake". A dishonest mistake is an
>> intentional mistake, one motivated by dishonesty, and there is such a
>> thing.
>
>You mean a lie. I'm not surprised if you're going to call me a liar, Max,
>you have a habit of doing that to people whose arguments you cannot refute.
I have a habit of doing it to people that I believe are lying. The fact
that it rarely comes up except with people who deny that I've refuted
their arguments is more illustration of why these meta-discussions are
unending.
I meant a dishonest mistake. Whether that is the same as a lie would
depend on context.
>You may be surprised to know, however, that you calling someone a liar does
>not make them one.
I hadn't ever considered otherwise, honestly. Whether I think they're
lying has about as much ability to determine whether they are as whether
they say they're telling the truth.
>> And its worth observing that you seem to practice it routinely
>> in your insistence that observation and contemplation is not sufficient
>> to recognize Microsoft's behavior as both criminal and unethical.
>
>Working on whose definition of "ethical" ?
My own, of course. I haven't happened upon any others which I would
necessarily take as divine wisdom, though almost all I've examined have
had value in some regards, even the bad ones. Who's definition would
you like me to use in particular?
>> You
>> make the mistake of not considering much of the evidence, and your use
>> of obfuscation and misdirection and general flum-flummery in conjunction
>> with this pretense of naivete indicates it is a dishonest, which is to
>> say false, mistake.
>
>I have considered all available evidence. That I, someone who does not have
>an irrational hatred of Microsoft, should draw a conclusion different to
>yours, is not something you should consider strange or dishonest.
I have no irrational hatred of Microsoft, despite your accusations. I
do, I'll admit, have a rational hatred of Microsoft, if that isn't an
oxymoron to begin with. They epitomize so many despicable human
proclivities, when considered in the abstract, and have held the PC
industry back more than any other force I can think of. But that is
derived from my arguments, I do not derive my arguments from that
opinion.
I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with you. If you claim to have
considered all available evidence, and have drawn a different conclusion
than Joel Kline, Judge Jackson, or I have, then I must consider you
either strange or dishonest. Or simply mistaken.
>> You know the truth is that these are reasonable
>> considerations, whether the truth is that MS is wrong or not. You
>> simply want to avoid confronting your mistake in reasoning by resting on
>> tell-tale "we cannot know" and "that's not MS's problem" arguments, and
>> so many of your statements concerning Windows and Microsoft constitute
>> dishonest mistakes.
>
>If you want to point out any mistakes I've made, feel free.
That's rich, but rather boring in its evidence of your willingness to
deny the obvious. Goodbye.
[...Balance of the hundred lines where I did just that and
Christopher Smith pretended to respond snipped...]
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 05:05:14 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Chris Wenham in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> But the purpose was to compare and contrast OEM's activities and
>> interactions with Microsoft versus the OEM's customers, more than to
>> define the distinction between cater and pander. OEMs cater to
>> Microsoft (by force of threat) and pander to their customers (providing
>> them with illicit goods, namely Windows) for Microsoft (who is the
>> street-walking whore selling illusions in place of commitment in this
>> rather over-taxed metaphor).
>
> Max, I think you've just shown why dictionary defenitions /are/
> relevant to this issue.
>
> You just said that "OEMs...pander to their customers (providing them
> with illicit goods, namely Windows)"
>
> Here's the defenition of pander:
> One who ministers to the evil designs and passions of another.
> "Those wicked panders to avarice and ambition." --Burke.
>
> Max, what are the evil designs of a bunch of kids playing Reader
> Rabbit, a hoarde of teenagers playing Quake, or a incohate mass of IT
> managers and purchasing directors filling the desks of salesmen and
> secretaries?
Well, Merrium-Webster says
1 a : a go-between in love intrigues b : PIMP
2 : someone who caters to or exploits the weaknesses of others
So the user's are the Johns, get it? Have you let your ten year old be
a John to Microsoft's lies? Shame on you. So have I. We are all
guilty.
> But you said they "cater to Microsoft (by force of threat)"
>
> Here's the defenition of cater:
> To provide food; to buy, procure, or prepare provisions.
> "He providently caters for the sparrow." --Shak.
>
> So what provisions do Dell or Compaq provide to Microsoft?
Uh... computers to hold pre-load licenses for Windows? Sort of a
necessary substance when you're in the pre-load OS monopoly business.
Sort of the horn of plenty, though, wouldn't you say?
[...]
> Short of the fact that Microsoft need to equip their programmers and
> host their web sites with something, it's hardly equivalent to
> shipping every PC sold in America with a Windows license, is it?
>
> This is not a quixotic context, Max. If I say "Farmer Jones panders
> to the villagers by selling them poisoned bread and caters to the
> Devil in the process" I've got it the wrong way around. The villagers
> don't have evil designs, the devil does. Jones is not providing food
> to the Devil, he's providing them to the Villagers.
Look, you missed the allegory, that's all. Let it drop.
> And likewise, Dell and Compaq and all the others are providing
> computers to anyone and everyone who comes to them to buy
> them. That's the /CATER/ part. But Dell and Compaq and all the others
> have been shipping every them with Windows licenses included,
> therefore they are PANDERING to Microsoft.
So who's the quiff that Microsoft schtupps?
> Read the defenitions of the words, Max. You've got them both mixed
> up.
>
>Regards,
>
>Chris Wenham
Try to grasp the meanings of the words, Chris. You've got the point
backwards.
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows stability: Alternate shells?
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 09:49:36 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What it means is that:
> a) If a program happens to crash, the OS underneath will basically
> just "throw it in the trash;" the memory that _was_ consumed
> is returned to the system for use by other processes, and is
> returned _quite successfully._ In contrast, even with Windows
> NT, the "more reliable" member of the Windows family, once
> memory has been consumed by a process, the OS kernel appears
> somewhat reluctant to return it for use by other processes.
Unless you happen to have a running utility like Maxmem, which monitors
RAM usage and allows you to force Windows to free up memory. It comes
in very useful in multimedia work.
> b) If a program happens to crash, it _only_ had access to memory
> specifically assigned to it. This _DRAMATICALLY_ diminishes
> the ability of programs to adversely affect one another.
>
> c) Since programs _aren't_ stepping on one another, there are
> vastly fewer adverse interactions.
Now this is starting to ring a bell. I think I remember reading about
this in the past, about how NT segments programs into their own
separate memory space, perhaps similar to the way Windows does with DOS
boxes.
> Entertaining analogy:
>
> In effect, each program is given its own "homestead," complete with
its
> own virtual memory space. As a result, if the program pulls out a gun
> and starts shooting at things at random, while it may succeed at
killing
> _itself_, it is not likely to shoot anyone else by accident.
> (.......................)
> on the Uzi, bullets are likely to fly all the way through several
> apartments.
Interesting analogy. Dare I suggest that you may have played one too
many video games? :)
> I've tried LiteStep and found it a little _less_ stable for me atop
W95
> than Windows Explorer; I'm sure milage can vary.
Actually, I've found the same thing, despite what the LiteStep folks
claim; especially annoying is the virtual windows manager's tendency
to "lose" windows. (I once had to reinstall Free Agent to "find" the
window again. It also lost the Windows File Explorer.) Also, I find
that under alternate shells the display doesn't automatically refresh
when I make changes in Windows File Explorer; it's kind of a pain to
have to keep hitting F5 after every little action.
> [The folks at work are going to be deploying W2K on a bunch of
desktops;
> it'll be interesting to see if the alternative shells help/hinder its
> stability...]
I've read in quite a few places that W2K is supposed to be better than
its predecessors in this regard.
> The _real_ problem is not in the shell; while if you can get a more
> stable "veneer" on top, that may help _a bit_, that only improves
> overall stability a bit, not a lot. You're still left with the
> problem that if a device driver is a little flakey, and you use
> an ODBC driver that has a memory leak, and you run Mozilla M17
> that has a few bugs, and continue the sequence, you're left with
> the overall degree of stability being based on the _product_
> of the levels of stability rather than on the _lowest stability_,
> as might be the case with a system like Linux that doesn't so
> tightly integrate the components.
Some of this goes over my head, but overall it seems to confirm what
I've suspected -- that the authors of the alternate shells are being
overly optimistic as to their work's contribution.
> The point of this is that when the components are a tad more
independent,
> the overall system improves in reliability.
Which is perhaps a bit surprising; it sounds more like a recipe for
chaos and anarchy. (kinda like the internet :) On second thought,
maybe the internet IS a good comparison, since its various arteries can
go down without affecting the whole network.
> In contrast, if the "flakey" Mozilla keeps crashing on Linux, that
should
> have virtually _no_ persistent ill effect. If it keeps crashing, that
> may signal some other persistent problem, but very probably _doesn't_
> signal that you should "reboot to clean things up."
In using both Win98 and Win95b, I don't think I've had that much of a
problem with system instability. However, other than downloads, I've
rarely done anything that required heavy, intensive use for long
periods.
> If you've been through _that_ stone age, then none of the options
> you see on the shelf should scare you too much. CompUSA has Caldera
> OpenLinux on for $9.95 right now, and it is certainly a credible
> system.
> Corel Linux seems to get billed as the "most heavily Barney-fied"
> of the bunch;
> SuSE comes with a _BOATLOAD_ of software, what with 6 CDs;
> Mandrake seems to get a lot of high marks around the local Linux
> Users Group;
> Red Hat has released 6.2, which gets them out of the "flakey x.0 and
> x.1 versions" that they tend to suffer from;
As I've mentioned elsewhere in this thread, I ended up getting Mandrake
7.1 (which claims to be somewhat RedHat compatible). Almost got SuSE
instead, since the price was the same, but since I'd already
partitioned c: and only gave Linux 2gigs, I didn't think I'd have room
for all the extra goodies anyway. Thought I might as well get a more
moderate distribution to learn on.
Incidentally, I got Caldera and Corel cd's from CheapBytes, but I
wasn't impressed. Documentation was slim and I couldn't even get the
Corel to install.
> You haven't really given any information that would help make
> a selection unambiguous; _all_ of them _ought_ to be _reasonable_
> selections for what purposes you've indicated (which is to say,
> you've not been terribly specific about your purposes).
Simply curiosity and exploration, with an eye towards seeing how Linux
works with an internet connection.
Thanks for the detailed reply.
Tom
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS advertising in the movies... (was Re: Microsoft MCSE)
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 09:50:30 GMT
> Ever buy a air conditioner or a heater in the USA? They are still
measured
> in BTUs. It was the year 1999 for them in the Matrix and a good guess
would
> be the USA. Whats is so strange about using the common measurement
for heat
> in the USA?
BTS's are obsolete (have been for over 100 years) and i ythought they
would have gon in a few (hundred / thousand/ whenever it's set) years
time.
Also I didn't realise the US still used British Thermal Units. Even
we've abandoned them...
IMHO, nice as they are, the time left for imperial units is limited.
They cause more hassle than it's worth, especially in engineering. SI
units are really much better.
-Ed
--
BBC Computer 32K
Acorn DFS
Basic
>*MAIL ku.ca.xo.gne@rje98u (backwards, if you want to talk to me)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux will crash and burn.....
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 10:05:55 GMT
> >If you think that folks will chuck their
> >already functioning hardware (Winmodems?)
>
> Calling a Winmodem 'functioning hardware' is an overstatement. You
get a
> half-working modem card, and a functioning driver programme.
>
I would have said that you get a fully functioning, but poor quality
sound card (with a *phone* jack :-) and a driver program which turns a
sound card in to a modem and your 300MHZ CPU in to a 100MHZ CPU.
The only reason I have a winmodem is because I didn't buy the
computer...
-Ed
--
BBC Computer 32K
Acorn DFS
Basic
>*MAIL ku.ca.xo.gne@rje98u (backwards, if you want to talk to me)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Article: Why linux is here to stay
Date: 14 Aug 2000 02:45:03 -0700
In article <8n8b79$1n0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "by" says...
>5> * Collegiate computing. If you want to know what will be mainstream
>in corporate computing in five years, just visit your local college
>campus. Most of the people majoring in technology these days are very
>familiar with Linux...
>
>This is totally wrong. When I was in university most
>engineering/computer science students were familiar with DOS and Unix.
DOS is dead (you must have left school 20 years ago).
Linux is Unix. So you agree with the point then. When I was at school,
we used Sun everywhere, but that was becuase Linux did not exist then.
>Collegiate computing is always different than, well, non-collegiate
>computing. I don't think it's a good predictor of future computing.
When millions of engineering and computer science students leave universities
to go to work in the industry, and they know unix/Linux more
than windowz, you do not think this will have an effect on what systems
they decide to use at work? Why do you think MS tries to give away
windows machines to universites anytime they can?
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Article: Why linux is here to stay
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 06:18:38 -0400
by wrote:
>
> Hmm, I don't quite agree with all 5 points.
>
> 1> Vendor rivalry.
>
> OK, I'll buy this. It makes sense that "it is in the strategic interest
> of Oracle, IBM, and even SAP to push to open free platform alternatives
> that could ultimately cripple Microsoft's economic engine."
>
> 2> * Component chaos... Once you establish this model, Windows itself
> becomes little more than a base platform for hosting component software.
> The funny thing is that this is how many people already view Linux. So
> as Microsoft moves in this direction, they continue to validate the
> Linux development model.
>
> Everything sounds OK until the last 3 sentences. Why is this "component
> chaos" better for Linux than Windows ? Or why does it inherently favor
> any traditional OS ?
>
> 3> * Appliance computing.
> OK, this I agree with.
>
> 4> * International appeal.
> I don't know enough about this to have an opinion.
>
> 5> * Collegiate computing. If you want to know what will be mainstream
> in corporate computing in five years, just visit your local college
> campus. Most of the people majoring in technology these days are very
> familiar with Linux...
>
> This is totally wrong. When I was in university most
> engineering/computer science students were familiar with DOS and Unix.
> Collegiate computing is always different than, well, non-collegiate
> computing. I don't think it's a good predictor of future computing.
Collegiate computing is the forerunner of next decade's CORPORATE
computing.
--
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 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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS advertising in the movies... (was Re: Microsoft MCSE)
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2000 06:26:01 -0400
2:1 wrote:
>
> > Ever buy a air conditioner or a heater in the USA? They are still
> measured
> > in BTUs. It was the year 1999 for them in the Matrix and a good guess
> would
> > be the USA. Whats is so strange about using the common measurement
> for heat
> > in the USA?
>
> BTS's are obsolete (have been for over 100 years) and i ythought they
> would have gon in a few (hundred / thousand/ whenever it's set) years
> time.
> Also I didn't realise the US still used British Thermal Units. Even
> we've abandoned them...
The entire British measurement system is still in place in the US
for consumer and agricultural products.
President Carter TRIED to get us to switch over to metric in the
1970's, but the only place it really has been carried out is in
science and engineering. Our automobiles are metric now, but that's
really about the only consumer-good in the US that's manufactured
to metric specs.
>
> IMHO, nice as they are, the time left for imperial units is limited.
> They cause more hassle than it's worth, especially in engineering.
For engineering, yes. For cooking...we have 100 Million dumb-ass
women over here who can't figure out that the only CRUCIAL aspect
of a recipe is the PROPORTION of the ingredients. They get all
freaking hyper when they find out that 1 cup isn't EXACTLY 250ml,
and...oh god, it's just such a TERRIBLE thing... you have to do
all this freaking math...oh horrors!
The idea of just realizing that a Tablespoon is 1/24th of a cup,
which is close enough to 1/25th of a cup, and proportioning everything
off of that is beyond them.
> SI units are really much better.
>
> -Ed
>
> --
> BBC Computer 32K
> Acorn DFS
> Basic
> >*MAIL ku.ca.xo.gne@rje98u (backwards, if you want to talk to me)
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
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 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
******************************
