Linux-Advocacy Digest #760, Volume #28 Wed, 30 Aug 00 22:13:04 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: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Joe R.")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Joe R.")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: American schools ARE being sabotaged from within. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Eric
Bennett)
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(Memory Comparison) ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Email spamming to the readers of these NG's (Steve Martin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 20:32:14 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" escribió:
[...]
>Where did you get the idea that I didn't look it up on several
>references? Don't jump to conclusions.
Then why did you bother posting one? It wasn't a conclusion, it was a
lack of evidence that was noted.
>> >Cool. Now, you said JS/PL is not a real person.
>> >
>> >I gave you already two interpretations: he is a non-real person,
>> >or he is a real non-person (so I obviously accepted the phrase
>> >as an amphibology).
>> >
>> >Now, what is your other interpretation?
>>
>> Did I suggest I have some other interpretation, or indicate that I agree
>> (or disagree) with either of yours?
>
>No, you just didn't answer the question. Are you practicing reticence?
>
>Just to refresdh your memory, here's the question again:
>
>> >> >Are you alleging that the posts signed JS/PL are actually written
>> >> >by bogie-men or ghosts or demons or something?
>
>Please answer.
Ha. Please stop asking. You're not going to get an answer that way.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== 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.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 20:33:16 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>>JS/PL is not a real person.
>
>Prognosis = Reality Dysfunction.
I didn't say that, but it might be true. I have no idea if you're
disfunctional, outside of Usenet. You're certainly disfunctional here,
though.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== 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: "Joe R." <[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, 31 Aug 2000 00:33:29 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> [...]
> >Because it's THEIR money to do with as they please.
>
> Not once they're dead, its not.
So it's ethical for the government to sieze everything I own and
completely disregard my wishes once I'm dead?
Or were you implying something else?
--
Regards,
Joe R.
------------------------------
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: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 20:36:33 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>You spend most of your time fighting off ankle biters because you attempt to
>personally degrade anyone who differs from your warped views of reality.
That's bullshit. I've never failed to consider any reasonable opinion,
and you're the one with a warped view of reality, whoever you are.
>You
>have a major problem and I'm sure you already know that. You can't even
>escape it in usenet. I'm quite sure the problems you have dealing with
>people here are mirrored in real life for you. Here's a hint - take a close
>look at yourself and attempt to improve it.
If you had a clue, you'd take your own hint and not bother me with it.
My problem is that real life is mirrored on Usenet: too many clueless
people.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== 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: "Joe R." <[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, 31 Aug 2000 00:44:02 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Said david raoul derbes in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> [...]
> >
> >My suspicion is that a bunch of these people will suddenly realize that
> >there is a tremendous shortage of high school teachers, and bail. At
> >that point, the market will force university bean-counters to recognize
> >that they can no longer get away with pretending to pay talent, and the
> >salaries paid to part-timers will skyrocket. As, of course, will
> >tuition.
>
> The problem is, there's not a "market" for high-school teachers.
> Arrogant so-and-so's say that the solution is to allow there to be one,
> but that's not going to solve the problem, I think.
There's no market for high school teachers?
Are you redefining words again?
Of course there's a market. A teacher can choose to apply to any school
he/she wishes. The school may or may not decide to make him/her an offer
for a certain salary. The teacher may or may not accept.
>
> The reason there isn't a market for high-school teachers is because
> primary education is not a profit-based venture, and shouldn't be.
1. You're only partially right about it not being a profit-based
venture. A number of private schools _do_ make a profit.
2. From a teacher's perspective, whether the school makes a profit is
100% irrelevant. There are a range of salaries, skills, and so on. The
teacher / school relationship is a very free market place -- regardless
of where the money ultimately comes from.
> There's no system on earth that is less inclined to do the work
> efficiently in a transaction-oriented environment. Schooling is an
> institution, not a business. The government has the responsibility of
That may or may not be true. But it doesn't mean that there's no
marketplace for teachers.
> ensuring that *every citizen* has a basic education. I hear a lot of
Nope. In your opinion, that's the government's responsibility. It's not
universally agreed upon.
> whining about high taxes and low standards of what's "basic". But if
> you turn it into a profit-oriented environment, all you're going to do
> is make what is considered 'basic' equal to "the minimum that we can get
> away with", and the problem is that the perspective judging the minimum
ROTFLMAO.
It's hard to imagine a for-pay educational system getting away with less
than the current system.
Just curious--why do you think competition is necessary in some aspects
of human relationships but not in others?
> is the vendor. To say that a parent can take their business elsewhere
> is to say that you can deprive a child of a missed opportunity to learn,
> and you can't. The perspective of what's "minimum" has got to come from
I see. So you're saying that the government should guarantee every
single student the _best_ education available? Anything less is a missed
opportunity to learn.
> the intellectuals, I'm afraid, those damned leftist professors of
> liberal arts. Or education, which is close.
Why not the consumers?
>
> So the reason that the problem of the itinerate adjunct faculty is that
> there's no market for high-school teachers is because there's not much
> competition involved in the pay scale of high-school teachers. Because
That's absolute bullshit. A teacher is generally qualified to work at
any of thousands of schools. If they don't like the salary, they're
entitled to take their skills elsewhere and look for a job.
In fact, the uniformity of schools from one area to another is actually
increasing competition. Teachers' skills are far more portable than most
employees.
> whether there's a 'market' or not, there is money changing hands, and
> you're supposed to be able to get relatively wealthy if you're good at
> what you do. So the real reason the itinerate part-timers probably
That's absurd.
By your "logic" since money changes hands between a strawberry grower
and migrant labor, the laborer should be able to get relatively wealthy?
It's hard to believe that your grasp of even very simple principles is
so poor. Salaries are determined by a balance between what the employer
is willing to pay and what the worker wants to earn. If the skill is
scarce enough, salaries tend to be high and vice versa.
There's no "supposed to be able to get relatively wealthy" except in
your poor deluded mind.
> wouldn't go for whatever high-school positions they can find is that
> nobody's willing to pay what a good high-school teacher is worth. You
A good high school teacher is worth what the market determines they're
worth.
> can earn more money balancing a five course college load, most of the
> time, I'd bet. And let's not even mention what a primary school teacher
Then do so. No one's stopping you.
> should get paid if we want to ensure that all primary school teachers
> are pretty good at what they do.
So who's going to determine that? Some idiot left wing fanatic?
The market determines it. Any other way of setting salaries is insane.
--
Regards,
Joe R.
------------------------------
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: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 20:48:50 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Joe R. in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
>> Typical troll response. "Wrong". Christ.
>>
>> PEOPLE!: DON'T start Usenet messages with the word "wrong".
>
>Why not? You were wrong and refuse to admit it.
Because it proves you don't know what "wrong" means, or how to use it in
a coherent way.
>Of course, if I were like you, I'd start the post with 100 lines of
>drivel which have nothing to do with the subject, are full of lies, and
>do nothing but cloud the issue.
>
>No thanks.
If you were like me, you would indeed support your contentions with
reasoning and what information you might be able to provide. We're all
aware you don't do that. Most are also aware that you have no ability
to understand anything which doesn't echo your own opinions.
[...]
>> PEOPLE!: Don't waste time quibbling.
>
>IOW, you were lying.
In *my* re-wording, if you would like, I may have been mistaken; I was
neither wrong nor lying. Readers do not need any more examples of your
pathetic idiocy, and would appreciate, I'm sure, you not pretending that
one person making one mistake is some sort of support for your
never-quite-elaborated delusions. It could have been only $3050 that a
tax accountant could have save me. Oh, I am so dishonest and wrong.
Oh, gee. Somebody save me.
Christ, you're pathetic.
[...]
>> >IOW, you fabricated the entire things.
>>
>> I said something. Oops.
>>
>> You wish I was wrong. Oops.
>
>Then why do you refuse to substantiate your claims?
It wasn't a claim, it was a remark, and it needs no substantiation. If
you can refute it, fine. Otherwise, keep your stupidity to yourself and
stop making an embarrassing spectacle of it.
>And why do you keep ignoring JS/PL's point that the numbers you posted
>were impossible -- since your claimed "actual" deduction was far less
>than the standard deduction?
Because he was wrong. I didn't ignore him; I explained why (though the
little troll certainly didn't deserve it) in some of that "drivel" you
find it so difficult to comprehend.
[...]
>Nope. You made a claim which was central to the issue. You lied and
>completely fabricated the "facts".
Bullshit.
>Then, you refuse to admit it.
Also bullshit.
>> You're an idiot, Joe Ragosta. Go away.
>
>I suppose it's possible that I am. But what does it say about you that
>an "idiot" absolutely destroyed your arguments and caught you posting
>numerous blatant lies?
No, it isn't "possible" that you are. If you believe you "absolutely
destroyed" my argument, then you are, indeed, an idiot. For that
matter, if you think I post lies, you're an idiot. Just because you
cannot refute my opinions does not make me dishonest, whether you
quibble about everything I say or not.
[...]
>Ankle biters are those who refuse to let you post outright lies and
>fabrications, presumably.
Ankle-biters are people who make statements like that. If you have to
insist that those who support an alternative view are lying, then you
are probably the one doing the fabricating.
>> And as good an example of your idiocy as anyone in the world could
>> possibly need.
>
>I think anyone with an IQ greater than about 40 can understand what a
>fool you're making of yourself.
Probably because yours is not much higher, I would presume. Care to
compare test scores?
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: American schools ARE being sabotaged from within.
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 00:39:50 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine) wrote:
<deletia>
> Um...wait...Linux isn't being *used* in schools yet....???
Comp-sci classes should be expending their resources on more important
things, like '.sig' etiquette.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
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: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 20:59:58 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Joe R. in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <8ohj23$kf8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> "Joe R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > wrote:
>>
>> > > I find that understanding the principles is usually enough
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> > And this is classic Max.
>> >
>> > "I really don't understand what I'm talking about, but I've learned a
>> > few of the words involved in the discussion so I'll try to pass myself
>> > off as an expert."
>>
>> What part of "understanding" do you not comprehend?
>
>Of course, you snipped out the important part of the message.
Maybe in your opinion, but not his or mine.
>I wonder why you feel that you have to resort to trimming that
>completely removes the important information so you can attack people?
I wonder why you feel you have the right to accuse everyone who differs
with your opinion of dishonesty and attacking people. I wonder, even
more, why you are so blind to the fact that this is all you ever do,
yourself. (BTW, when you say "I wonder why...", you shouldn't put a
question mark on the end unless you're using quotation style.)
>For the record, the part that you trimmed is where Max claimed that he
>didn't need any facts or details.
How convenient that you can merely misrepresent it, instead of quoting
it yourself:
>From <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
=======================================================================
>Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> [...]
>>LOL This demonstrates that you have absolutely no clue Max.
>
>About taxes? I'll admit I don't know much of the details. As with most
>things, I find that understanding the principles is usually enough
>until, for some reason, I'm forced to deal with the details.
=======================================================================
>After all, facts and details are
>unimportant to him. He seems to think that he can understand everything
>at some esoteric level without having any facts or details to back it
>up. That's ridiculous and I was merely pointing that out.
Yet a fair reader will recognize that its rather trivial to make hash
out of your pathetic attempts at argument using the method. Perhaps
there's something to be said for "intelligence" over "learning", after
all. Not that you have either to support you to any great extent. Just
a lot of jumping up and down, it seems.
>Of course, later he admitted that some of his "understanding the
>principles" was complete lies and fabrications.
I don't think anyone's in doubt of just how inaccurate a quote that one
is, either. The pity is that you've been dissuading people from
engaging in actual discussion for years with your dishonest and pathetic
behavior. No wonder Usenet is "the bastard stepchild" of the Internet.
Idiots like you are all over the place.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== 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: Eric Bennett <[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: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 21:14:53 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Joe
R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So you're assuming that they're guilty?
>
> Besides, where do you draw the line? 115 lb? 110 lb?
I fail to see how this is very different from deciding when a company
has monopoly power.
--
Eric Bennett ( http://www.pobox.com/~ericb/ )
Cornell University / Chemistry & Chemical Biology
Anybody that wants the presidency so much that he'll spend two years organizing
and campaigning for it is not to be trusted with the office. -David Broder
------------------------------
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: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 21:22:40 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Seán Ó Donnchadha in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"Joe R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>>For the record, the part that you trimmed is where Max claimed that he
>>didn't need any facts or details. After all, facts and details are
>>unimportant to him. He seems to think that he can understand everything
>>at some esoteric level without having any facts or details to back it
>>up. That's ridiculous and I was merely pointing that out.
>>
>
>Yep, that would explain his comments about Windows and IE integration.
>What I find remarkable is Max's ability to muddle things up by
>spending paragraph after eloquent paragraph saying absolutely nothing.
>Debating with him is like trying to do the butterfly stroke in a pool
>of quick-dry cement.
>
>I stopped trying to reason with him when, after dozens of posts
>regarding antitrust law, he attempted to wiggle out of embarrassing
>defeat by proclaiming that he'd been using his own definition of
>"monopoly" that bears little resemblance to the common one.
Well, I certainly can't let such a personal attack go unnoticed, but I
must say that it practically fills my heart with glee to see you two
discussing how incomprehensible you find my statements. I have this
theory, see, that if I keep posting, despite the trolling, and try to be
as accurate, consistent, and practical as I can, then eventually, you'll
both realize that you just can't keep up a reasonable discussion even if
you tried, and go away. Go mutter in your soup about how little sense
I'm making, as long as you aren't bothering me or the people with some
integrity and intellectual ability who want to post here.
Then people who *aren't* mostly interested in ankle-biting will be able
to use Usenet without constantly having to deal with stupid assholes
like you guys. Of course, some of them will also turn into
ankle-biters; its a natural tendency, particularly when Usenet puts
intellectuals and those that couldn't get passed the sign-up sheet in
the same environment. But if there's enough people posting intelligent
discussion, maybe the trolls just won't feel as "at home" and continue
to consider it there privilege to repetitively intrude themselves in
conversations without any intention of contributing to the discussion,
but only a single-minded purpose to prove themselves "right". Maybe
some day Usenet will be useful for its intended purpose, even in the
advocacy groups, which is to promote discussion, not to win arguments.
Or maybe I'll just get sick of the whole thing in a couple more weeks,
and finally stop wasting my time trying to make sense to people who have
trouble grasping abstractions to begin with, and resign myself to the
fact that the small handful of posters and correspondence which make
sense in their responses might occasionally see my point, but don't
think it worth the bother to engage in debate. Perhaps the only reason
I rarely get any response but trolls is because there's rarely anyone
but trolls reading my long, rambling, shamefully undisciplined
discourse.
On that note, to address Sean's blatant fabrication; the definition of
"monopoly" I was using was, indeed, not the common one, but the correct
one; I didn't bother waiting even one post before pointing out the
discrepancy, though Sean never did really get it. It shouldn't have
been news to him, since the entire point of the discussion was the fact
that the common one is not correct. Those dozens of posts were my
explanation of how and why this is so. He was never able to understand
the argument, so its no surprise he still doesn't realize just who
suffered an "embarrassing defeat", or chose to lie about it, if that is
the case.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== 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.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 21:27:13 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Chris Wenham in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>>>>> "T" == T Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Said Chris Wenham in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >> T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >>> Mr. Wenham. You may have thought you were posting a humorous response,
> >>> here. But what you've actually done is certainly libelous, and
> >>> potentially criminal. This is a dishonest post, and I'd prefer if you
> >>> never repeated this type of behavior. I'd prefer it so much, in fact,
> >>> that if you do it again, I will report you to your ISP, and we'll see if
> >>> they agree with my sentiments.
> >>
> >> Sure!
> >>
> >> They can be reached by sending mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] They
> >> can also be called directly by dialing (516) 221-6664.
> >>
> >> The address of my ISP is:
> >>
> >> 2471 Merrick Road
> >> Bellmore, NY 11710
>
> > I was already aware of this information, of course. I will presume that
> > your posting of it rather than a repeat of what I was complaining about
> > indicates that you do not intend to continue your offense, though I must
> > also point out that the fact you posted it with no other comments
> > indicates you will likely continue to deny that you are acting
> > dishonestly.
>
> I believe your newsfeed is undergoing flux. I have not re-posted that
> message. It is now over a month old.
It was an old post, yes. It wasn't my newsfeed, it was my attention; I
just read the message, and this was my first response. I consider it
still valid and contemporary.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== 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: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows stability(Memory Comparison)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 20:49:09 -0500
"Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8ojf9r$q75$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <QuSq5.8087$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm sorry. I simply do not believe you that A system with X, KDE,
> and
> > > > several other major services only takes 35MB. X with KDE alone
> will
> > take up
> > > > at least that much (KDE buffers consume huge amounts of memory in
> fact).
> > >
> > > Believe what you want, but I run X, KDE, and man other things on my
> > Thinkpad
> > > with 32MB of memory.
> >
> > You've never heard of virtual memory?
>
> System with KDE 1.93 (approx) and netscape running:
> total used free shared buffers cached
> Mem: 57636 56136 1500 34572 1332 20776
> -/+ buffers/cache: 34028
> 23608
> Swap: 72256 1188 71068
Exactly as I said. A system with X, KDE and Netscape is using 57MB's.
There is simply no way a system running this plus Apache and several other
programs can only be using 32MB.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 20:54:59 -0500
"2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8ok0jo$g31$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > It makes no sense to drop things on buttons, and task bar buttons are
> just
> > that, buttons.
>
> The buttons are the icons of running programs, therefore it makes sense
> to drop things on them. it certainly makes sense to drop something on to
> an icon of a running program, and the buttons are the _only_
> representation avaliable.
> Besised how does half-dropping something on to a button make any sense
> at all?
No, they're buttons with pictures on them. They are not icons. Icons
launch applications, buttons do all sorts of different things. Are you
suggesting that any button with a picture on it should launch an
application?
> > You can right click on buttons. You can even double right click
> buttons.
> > Buttons have no facility to recieve drop messages and never have.
>
> No buttons have the ability to have anything dragged on to them, except
> the ones in the start bar. How else could the app be raised if nothing
> had any idea that there was an object being dragged floating above a
> task bar button?
That's not a drop request, that's a mouseover request.
------------------------------
From: Steve Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Email spamming to the readers of these NG's
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 01:39:34 GMT
"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
> "N, C, C, one, seven, oh, one... no bloody A, B, C, or D."
>
> A thick cuban cigar goes to the man who can name this quote!...
Simple. Former Enterprise chief engineer Montgomery Scott, morose
and working through a haze of some "green" concoction fed to him
by Data in 10-Forward, feeling his years and missing his old
comrades in arms, asks the computer to reproduce the bridge of
the Enterprise on the Holodeck. The computer asks for clarification
as to which "Enterprise" bridge he means, and asks him for the
serial number of the ship.
BTW, I don't smoke.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
