Linux-Advocacy Digest #606, Volume #28 Thu, 24 Aug 00 01:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("JS/PL")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Courageous)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Courageous)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("JS/PL")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("JS/PL")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("JS/PL")
Re: Linux programmers dont live on this planet! (Glitch)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("JS/PL")
Linux, XML, and assalting Windows ("paul snow")
Re: Linux programmers dont live on this planet! (David M. Cook)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("JS/PL")
Re: Linux programmers dont live on this planet! (Tim Hanson)
Re: Just converted ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Microsoft Linux: what if? (Tim Hanson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: 24 Aug 2000 02:48:53 GMT
On Wed, 23 Aug 2000 17:27:53 -0400, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>Is it really so difficult to figure out what I'm trying to find out? Is
>there some part of NNTP I'm not aware of which prevents anyone from
>understanding a question in anything but the most literal (and
>unproductive) manner?
We are not psychics, and unless you express yourself coherently, it is
difficult to understand what you are asking.
>The reason the issue came up is because nobody seems to be able (or want
>to) explain where TT's customers for their fee-based software are going
>to derive profit.
Well there are a lot of ways. They could make profit in an activity
completely unreslated to the sale of software ( it could be used
in-house ), or they could sell proprietary software.
> The reason it is worth finding this out is because it
>does, whether TT, 'KDE', or Roberto want to recognize it or not,
>relevant in determining whether there is an ethical problem with Troll
>Tech's intent.
Why is this ? Are you suggesting that Troll Tech's customers are using
Qt to build sweatshops in third world countries ?
>by making it profitable. If I determine that TT's commercial customers
>are profiteers, then I will undoubtedly avoid using KDE software.
I am not clear on what your definition of a "profiteer" is. Suffice it to
say, that if you pay for the professional edition, it can be used or
misused in whatever way the customer sees fit.
However, it's worth mentioning that one could level the same criticisms
at GTK, which can be and is used by vendors of proprietary software.
In fact I am beginning to suspect that your thinking falls in line with
RMS's recent suggestion that the LGPL should not be used, and even library
code should be GPL'd. ( note: most free software developers seem to feel
that this position is a tad extreme, and they're keeping to the LGPL or
other licenses. )
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 23:19:09 -0400
"Chad Irby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> I think the comments you put in are hilarious, though...
>
> Among others, you quote two representatives from Microsoft's home state,
> like they're unbiased champions of free markets or something.
>
> > US Rep. Jennifer Dunn (-WA)
> >
> > US Sen. Slade Gorton (R-WA)
>
> Yeah, those millions of dollars Microsoft dumped into their election
> coffers had nothing to do with their public opinions or anything
Ok since you think they're so hilarious here's some more.
"Today may be a good day for the Clinton Administration's Legislation by
Litigation agenda, but it is a sad day for the American consumer. If the
Clinton Administration believes that there should be a federal Department of
Software Regulation, it should propose one so that the Congress can decide
whether we need federal bureaucrats and federal judges to write our computer
software and decide how we surf the Internet."
US Sen. Don Nickles (R-OK)
"This decision makes it clear that the Justice Department has no
understanding of American business or the marketplace, and that the Justice
Department has no respect for property rights - intellectual or otherwise. I
would be worried if Microsoft did not appeal this decision. Allowing the
government to take away the property rights of a company, simply because the
products it created have become popular sets up a very dangerous precedent.
Judging from its activities under the Clinton/Gore Administration, if
anything should be broken up, it's the Justice Department."
US Rep Richard Pombo (R-CA)
"I believe that the free enterprise system works particularly well in the
software industry. Free competiton has created lower prices and a better
product for consumers. In the software industry you may be the biggest and
the best one day, and the next day your product may be outdated and out of
style. I would caution against any government actions that moves too quickly
to break up Microsoft."
Assemblyman Dennis Cardoza (D-CA)
------------------------------
From: Courageous <[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: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 03:33:37 GMT
> paid tax via withholding throughout the year if they're getting a refund
> at the end. To me, that means they've been paying taxes. What does it
> mean to you?
Earned Income Tax Credit?
C//
------------------------------
From: Courageous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 03:35:55 GMT
> A fair number of pretty wealthy Americans pay *no tax whatsoever* in this
> country. There are all manner of tax shelters and dodges that wealthy
> people can avail themselves of, ...
You make it sound so easy.
If you truly understand this to be true, you can describe,
in simple English, the simple accounting to make this happen.
C//
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 23:34:06 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Joe Ragosta in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ZnU
> [...]
> >> Ahh. Another proponent of trickle-down economics. Of course, some
people
> >> see that for what it really is: a way for rich people to justify their
> >> exploitation of the system.
> >
> >That's possibly true.
> >
> >But, OTOH, perhaps you can explain why income disparity between the
> >"rich" and the "poor" is vastly worse today than it was under the Reagan
> >and Bush administrations?
>
> Continued profiteering by media conglomerates and other mega-corps,
> mostly. The political office-holders have nothing to do with it (other
> than that Republicans and Democrats have been fatally lax in anti-trust
> enforcement, for the most part).
God damn profiteering! Everybody gets to profiteer except you Max. Some day
you'll get even with all those god damn profiteers! You probably fall asleep
at night grumbling about all the god damn profiteers.
Sounds to me like a bitter old man without two nickles to rub together. If
you would have ever had the chance to actually "make" a profit in your life
you might have a different outlook on business life.
Fucking profiteers anyway!!! Huge profit should to be illegal huh?
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 23:45:14 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> Considering they're still getting richer, and the poor are still getting
> poorer, I fail to see why this would be so.
>
> >You have to make something like $20 to 30 K before you pay any taxes.
> >Meanwhile, I'm paying 50% of my income in taxes (all taxes combined).
> >
> >That's an absurd difference.
>
> Maybe from your perspective. Try living on $24,000 a year with a family
> of 3.
Who's fault is that? Oh yea I forgot....it's the profiteers fault. Anyway a
family of three can live on 24,000 a year and if they don't like
it...uhh...earn more money, become a profiteer, thats where the smart money
is at.
> >> 2) How can we avoid making the assistance to the poor assistance to
> >> poverty?
> >
> >Probably by getting rid of it, in general.
>
> Think harder. You're implying that eradicating welfare will eradicate
> poverty. Do you actually think that would work?
Try it out, we already tried throwing money at the problem and they thought
going to the mailbox once a month was they're new job. Maybe they now need
the burden of earning a living put on their own shoulders like everyone
else. You know (equality).
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 23:58:34 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> Have you compared the income disparity during the Reagan years to the
> administrations before that?
Yea EVERYONE had the privilege of being poor under Carter, I remember
well....you could finance a home loan for a mere 18% annual interst. And
inflation was at about the same level.
Income tax was ungodly, nobody could find a job, energy crisis, Iran was
making the US the laughing stock of the world, the Presidents alcoholic
brother was pissing on peoples lawns while the president was busy talking of
his own "lustfull urges".
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 00:11:56 -0400
From: Glitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux programmers dont live on this planet!
Is there an equivalent in the Windows world to an X server? Just so
that users coming from a background of Windows (like myself) can grasp
the idea little better.
Thanks
Brandon
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > Ryan Walberg (MCSD) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> > > message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > By "server" == "driver", he was probably talking about his X server.
> > > >
> > >
> > > That is what I was assuming that he meant, but as we know that is not a
> > > valid description.
> >
> > Actually it is a very valid description. Although it behaves like a
> > driver with regards to hardware and privileges, it is, none the less, a
> > TCP/IP server which provides a service via TCP/IP. Simply because
> > Windows does not have an adequate analogy, does not mean the words are
> > incorrect.
>
> Some X servers contains drivers but the servers are not drivers. In general
> X server use the system drivers. But even for those that contian driver, it
> provides much more than just a driver or drivers. An X server coordinates
> the various terminal input devices as well as well as many other non-driver
> functions. By the way an X server provides network access not only by
> internet domain networking but also unix domain netowrking--possibly many
> other networking domains.
>
> There are X servers that run on Windows and and of course they are not
> drivers, they use the various system drivers. There are also X servers for
> Dos and other OS's as well
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 00:17:53 -0400
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> How will AlGore "improve" education? That's the jobs of the
> school boards, principles, and teachers. *THEY* can improve
> education any time they want to, merely be re-instituting
> rational curricula and strong discipline within the school.
Wrong.
The government cannot improve the current government provided education,
only competition in a free market can "improve a product or service". Any
polititian that promises to improve education is lying through his/her
teeth. The only way the government can "improve education" is to get out of
the education business. Al Gore WILL NOT improve education, a school board
will not improve education, a principal will not improve education.A
business in a competitive market seeking customers WILL improve education.
A private school can teach twice as much in half the time. The way it stands
now the government needs 12 years to teach 60% of it's students basic math
and reading skills. That's not a good track record.
------------------------------
From: "paul snow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.text.xml,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Linux, XML, and assalting Windows
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 04:22:23 GMT
Here is a few observations:
Linux on the desktop (and as a server) requires it to beat Windows XXX hands
down for ease of configuration, security, and management.
Installing software is simply the act of constructing in storage a proper
representation of the software. In other words, our talking about
installing software on a computer is like a painter insisting she is
installing a picture of a duck onto her painting. It doesn't matter how she
does it, she is rendering the duck, not installing it.
We need to get rid of install programs, on all platforms. There isn't
another single thing we do on computers that causes more in dollars and time
(Solitaire *is* a close second, however ;-).
XML can be used to define a program in abstract. A single, separate
Software Rendering Facility can be used to take a program's abstract form in
XML and render it to the target computer system.
XML can be used to capture the options required for this rendering.
XML can be used to refer to a group of programs in abstract (XML), and their
options (XML), in order to define a single definition that can be expressed
in different ways on different computer systems to construct an operational,
distributed application. (Unlike today, where we have to install every web
server, every firewall, every Java JDK, every etc. all from scratch, with
one mistake preventing any of it from working!)
This discussion about how XML might be used along with Linux to create a new
concept in Operating Systems is beginning. We have the technology and the
know how. We just have to take our computer system, set it on its side and
view it a bit differently. This technology is going to completely change
the rules of software configuration, management, and security, and you can
make it happen.
http://www.egroups.com/group/xmlos/
http://www.egroups.com/subscribe/xmlos/
Paul Snow
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David M. Cook)
Subject: Re: Linux programmers dont live on this planet!
Date: 24 Aug 2000 04:24:41 GMT
On Wed, 23 Aug 2000 03:41:39 GMT, DES <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>did RTFM and you know what I found!!! A whole new bloody language!!! For
>those of you new to Linux; "Image" now means "copy",
I assume you're talking about a disk image. A disk image is a copy of all
the bits on the disk; it's not a copy of the disk. To use "copy" in this
context would be wrong as well as potentially very confusing.
>"Server" now means "driver" etc.
But a server (you mean X server) is not a driver. Quoting from
http://www.pconline.com/~erc/motif.htm
A very strange part about this is the terminology. In X, the server owns
the desktop. The server draws the dots on the screen, reads the mouse and
handles keyboard input. A client is simply a graphical application. The
client connects to the server to create windows and draw data to the
screen.
The client program can also *connect over the network*. The terminology is
a bit odd at first, but justified if you think about it. However, calling
the X server a driver would simply be wrong.
Dave Cook
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 00:57:16 -0400
"josco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> Some facts:
> The Anti-trust investigation against MS began in 1989.
snippage
Yea that's the time the government crawled up Microsofts ass and spent
18,000 man hours looking for ANY prosecutable offence and had to stand
before a judge and say, "We've found no prosecutable offences your honor". I
would venture to guess that 1 in 50 large corporations could be so pure.
------------------------------
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux programmers dont live on this planet!
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 05:07:41 GMT
Glitch wrote:
>
> Is there an equivalent in the Windows world to an X server? Just so
> that users coming from a background of Windows (like myself) can grasp
> the idea little better.
>
Sure, but not directly. X is the system which handles the most
primitive of graphic functions. It is responsible for drawing and
updating the screen in graphical mode, placing the mouse, updating its
location and providing programs with mouse events (clicks of the
buttons, etc.). It handles keyboard input while it operates. There is
a rudimentary (text only) cut and paste buffer no one really uses. It
is called by typing on the command line (or having your startup script
call for you) the script "startx."
This is more than you think. Drivers which configure various mice as
well as various graphics card drivers interact with X to provide screen
resolution. By itself it is useless; it needs a window manager running
on top to color the screen, allow wallpapers, interact, etc.
The Windows environment is roughly equivalent to a proprietary form of
X, plus the single proprietary window manager. The advantage to having
them split *nix style is the diversity of multiple window managers, from
the simplest, which bring up a graphical version of a command line for
running programs, to the most complex, which these days is probably
KDE. Another advantage is that different versions of X exist for all
Unices, allowing the same window manager to run on multiple OSs. The
disadvantage is that it is a little slower than, say, the Mac
interface.
The current version for Linux is XFree86, v.4.0.1. You can check it out
at http://xfree86.org/.
Hope this helps!
--
The giraffe you thought you offended last week is willing to be nuzzled
today.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Just converted
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 00:24:30 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Stephen Patterson wrote:
> >
> > I've been using Linux for about 2 years now, on and off (mainly off). I
> > recently completed a college project which got me using and adjusting
Linux
> > a lot. Just after finishing this, I looked at my computer usage and
found
> > a) Linux is more reliable than windows
> > b) Everything I had previously done in windows could be done in Linux
with
> > an appropriate set of applications
> > c) Linux internet access was regularly twice as fast as windows.
>
> True...on the SAME internet connection...
>
> My windows machine rarely surpasses 200 kbits/sec.
>
> The Linux machine gets over 1000 kbits/sec hitting the same sites
> at the same time.
While the Windows 9x TCP/IP stack is a poor performer, it has no problems
with 1Mb/s. My old cable modem under 98 routinely pushed 1.5-3Mb's without
blinking an eye. Internally, I've gotten as much as 50Mb/s on a 100bT
network. (I'm not bragging about anything here, these are poor numbers, but
nowhere near as poor as you claim).
There must be some other issue here if this is true.
> These two machines are nearly identical:
>
> same Motherboard
> same CPU
> same Ethernet card
> plugged into the same hub
>
> The only real difference is that the memory
>
> Linux: 128 MB
> Windows: 192 MB
The only reason why this might be true is if you are using some kind of
firewall that is sensitive to Windows generated packets.
------------------------------
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Linux: what if?
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 05:08:52 GMT
Dan Jacobson wrote:
>
> I was just reading in
> http://www.gnulinux.com/interviews/stallman_part1.shtml where it says
>
> Stallman: Well, I have concerns in that certain things could happen, which
> we must avoid. Having companies interested is, not in itself, a bad thing.
> There's a potential for them to contribute. There's also a potential for
> them to exploit the community and lead it in the wrong direction. Which
> one will happen will be determined ultimately by the values of the users.
>
> This got me thinking what if (Psst, nobody tell BillG) Microsoft were to
> release and promote their
> own distribution of Linux, in an effort to do the usual
> drag-it-down-the-path-of-locking-you-in-to-the-Microsoft-world thing...
> Anyways, it seems they could easily come up with Microsoft Linux,
> Microsoft Linux Extensions, Microsoft Linux Plus, Microsoft Linux Plus,
> Microsoft Linux II,
> Microsoft Linux 2002, Microsoft Linux Applications Kit, Microsoft Linux
> Explorer, MS Linux Express, etc. etc., indeed they could just take the
> guts [for free], paste some glitz on it, box it, sell and be the new
> "trendsetter"... Anyway, have some more names:
> Microsoft Linux Home, Microsoft Linux Office, Microsoft Linux Pro,
> Microsoft Linux Junior, Microsot Linux Family...
> Indeed, they could just paste a windows directory explorer front end on
> it, not worry about maintaining the guts... let their proprietary
> 'extensions' creep in and see if they can lock in some users...
> --
> www.geocities.com/jidanni ... fix e-mail address to reply; ¿n¤¦¥§
> Tel:+886-4-5854780; starting in year 2001: +886-4-25854780
"Microsoft Linux Technologies" <sigh>
--
The giraffe you thought you offended last week is willing to be nuzzled
today.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
