Linux-Advocacy Digest #761, Volume #28 Wed, 30 Aug 00 23:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: How low can they go...? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: How low can they go...? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Bob Hauck)
Re: The dusty Linux shelves at CompUSA (Steve Martin)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (T. Max
Devlin)
Re: Windows stability(Memory Comparison) (Craig Kelley)
Re: It's official, Microsoft porting applications to Linux (Steve Martin)
Re: Why doesnt SuSE and RedHat wait until later this autum? (R.E.Ballard ( Rex
Ballard ))
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Donovan
Rebbechi)
Re: Why doesnt SuSE and RedHat wait until later this autum? (David M. Cook)
Re: Microsoft Linux: what if? (Steve Martin)
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers (MrTroll)
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers (MrTroll)
Re: How low can they go...? (Tim Hanson)
Re: How low can they go...? (Tim Hanson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 20:55:56 -0500
"Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:n%5r5.346$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Simon Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
> 8oh0tu$rb9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > If you can install MacOS9 on a bare machine then it is indeed
> > > the equivalent of a full licence of any Microsoft OS.
> >
> > Please show me where I can buy a bare machine that will run MacOS9, and
> > which does not come pre-bundled with a copy of MacOS.
>
> Format the HD, can you reinstall MacOS9 * WITHOUT* first installing MacOS
8
> or whatever? Yes you can, there, point proven
No, you can install an upgrade version of Windows without installing the
previous version as well.
Apple liscenses the MacOS based on the ROMS. MacOS will not install to a
machine without ROMS.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 20:57:30 -0500
"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > If you can install MacOS9 on a bare machine then it is indeed
> > > the equivalent of a full licence of any Microsoft OS.
> >
> > Please show me where I can buy a bare machine that will run MacOS9, and
> > which does not come pre-bundled with a copy of MacOS.
>
> Pick an emulator of your choice.
And guess what? The apple liscense forbids you to run the MacOS on
emulators.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 01:44:09 GMT
On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 22:18:19 -0400, Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
>wrote:
>> I believe that was a state government, not the feds. And doctors did
>> say there was a health threat.
>
>New Mexico. And the parents say they know it is a health threat, but
>the doctors they've talked to don't have any idea how to cure whatever
>disorder this is. So, should children with incurable health problems
>always be confiscated from their parents, simply because the parents
>can't cure an incurable problem?
I don't know the particulars of what is wrong with the kid. I don't
know what doctors the parents have talked to, how qualified they were,
or much of anything. So I'm not prepared to talk about this specific
case.
I was merely pointing out the error in Joe's reasoning, that the
federal government, which dealt with the Elian case and is supposedly
out of control, is not the government that did this taking. The
western states in particular seem to take pride in doing what the feds
*don't* want them to do, so it seems unlikely that the feds are behind
this in any way.
To answer your question, no I don't believe in taking away all children
that have incurable diseases.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: Steve Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The dusty Linux shelves at CompUSA
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 01:49:22 GMT
Glitch wrote:
> The first year of the first millenium was 1, not 0. There never was a 0
> year. This means the first decade was *over* *after* the 10th year, not
> the 9th. Therefore the 2nd millenium will be over at the end of the
> 2000th year, not the 1999th. So based on this MS has indeed 4 months to
> cough up whatever they are currently choking on.
...which brings up an interesting point. Remember Y2K? Remember how all
the
computers were going to choke because "stupid" programmers and "stupid"
computers all used a two-digit year? Any of this sound familiar?
Well, here we are, all breathing a sigh of relief. Civilization didn't
end,
the bombs didn't drop, our cars still run, the can-openers still work,
aliens didn't land, and all's right with the world, right? So how many
of
you are now using four-digit dates, eh??? Dropped right back into our
old
habits, didn't we? We didn't learn a damned thing from all that hooraw.
Take a look; even Microsoft is calling their newest little attempt
"Windows 98ME" instead of "Windows 1998ME". Well, I put a four-digit
year
on everything I write, software as well as things like the date on a
check.
Guess it doesn't matter now, right?
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 21:57:23 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>Gary Hallock wrote:
>> Mike Marion wrote:
>> > Gary Hallock wrote:
[...]
>Our K-12 classes are being taught be "teachers" who they themselves
>can't pass simple tests of basic knowledge, and you're thinking that
>their (former) pupils need a script to look stupid???
Well, that's what happens when you're not willing to pay teachers what
they're worth. You want to pay teachers crapola, you're going to get
crappy teachers.
>> the people know what the segment is about and know that they are expected to
>> give a dumb answer. They also know that dumb anwsers will likely give them
>> their 15 minutes (or in this case, a few seconds) or fame.
>
>Try this: Go out to a coffee shop some time, strike up conversations
>with people, and ask some simple questions like "who was president
>during the Civil War?" and see what kind of answers you get.
Better yet, ask them "what is a molecule?" The reason Aaron's views are
so ludicrous is because it is the widespread acceptance of moronic views
like his which causes the problem in the first place.
He rails about schools "failing", but from what I can see of what he
thinks the job of the school is, he rants on about *what* kids need to
learn. But the real job of schools in the modern world aren't to teach
kids what they need to know; it is to teach them how to learn. It is a
bootstrapping process, so knowledge is the overwhelming proportion of
the fundamental stuff (primary school). But all of the real work,
teaching kids to *think*, rather than trying to teach them *what to
think*, is just the 'leftist liberal propaganda' stuff that he complains
about. His ultra-right-wing mind-set seems rooted in a desire for the
world to be a simple place, and is predicated on the idea that teaching
children how the world is a simple place will solve the problem. The
truth is, since the world is quite obviously *not* a simple place, this
is what causes the problem to begin with.
Neither the question "who was President during the Civil War" nor "what
is a molecule" is a productive indication. Because neither answer is at
all important in any real sense. The difference between the educated
and the non-educated is not whether they know the answer; its whether
they know when the answer is important, and where to get it when they
need it, and whether or not they will *comprehend* it, rather then
whether they have it memorized.
--
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! ======
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Windows stability(Memory Comparison)
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 30 Aug 2000 19:57:53 -0600
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8ojf9r$q75$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > 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.
Total Memory Used 57636
- Cache Memory -20776
========
Total Memory in use 36860
(of which, 34028 is shared with libraries)
Where do you come up with 57MB? Admittedly, 36MB isn't 32MB, but it
isn't far off...
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Steve Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: It's official, Microsoft porting applications to Linux
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 02:02:27 GMT
Loren Petrich wrote:
> >2) M$ has the source for windows (allthough they claimed to have lost the
> > source for W95 during the Caldera lawsuit)
>
> Did someone's dog eat it? :-)
I'm thinking the Crud Puppy got it.
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why doesnt SuSE and RedHat wait until later this autum?
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 01:56:43 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" escribió:
>
> [Snip a lot of stuff I am in no position to discuss]
>
> > KDE 2.0 is also essentially formalization of existing 1.X components
> > that have been evolving over the last year.
>
> Not really. A whole lot of very important code is completely new.
> For example, when you start the system, not a single pixel in
> the screen is part of the interface of a program that existed on
> KDE 1.x
>
> The icons were from kfm, they are now from kdesktop, new code.
> The panel was kpanel, now it's kicker, new code.
> Window decorations were kwm, they are now kwin, new code.
Yup. It looks like SuSE will also be including the "Preproduction"
version (latest available).
Notice that someone already knew what was in the code?
Notice that someone already had USED KDE 2.0?
The key distinction of the "Formal" release is that this is when
whatever bugs remain will have been fleshed out and the vendors
can say "We're ready to provide support contracts for this".
Remember, Linux distributors don't make a whole lot of money
distributing Linux. They make their money selling support. Even
that $20 price for the shrink-wrapped box, includes 90-day
installation support. In some cases, the commercial software has
license keys that are tied to additional support as well.
If SuSE, Caldera, or Red Hat ships "Unofficial releases" of Linux 2.4
and KDE 2.0, that means that if you call with set-up problems, you
would probably not get the friendly support you'd get for the official
packages.
The new products are probably pretty stable, but you would want to
stick with "Kosher Releases" if you are a consultant trying to support
a cash paying client.
> --
> Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
>
--
Rex Ballard - I/T Architect, MIS Director
Linux Advocate, Internet Pioneer
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 42 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 5%/month! (recalibrated 8/2/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: 31 Aug 2000 02:19:32 GMT
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000 23:03:32 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On 30 Aug 2000 00:41:06 GMT, Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 03:51:27 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>>> > > > "Daddy has a roommate" "Heather has two mommies"
>>
>>[ snip ]
>>
>>>Please tell me exactly WHAT purpose is served by teaching 6-year olds
>>>about human sexuality (heterosexual or homosexual), other than
>>>propagandizing them to engage in such before they are ready.
>
> ...so they don't get themselves PREGNANT at 11 you spooner boob!
Let the record show that Jedi is responding to Mr Kulkis here.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David M. Cook)
Subject: Re: Why doesnt SuSE and RedHat wait until later this autum?
Date: 31 Aug 2000 02:34:16 GMT
On Wed, 30 Aug 2000 10:48:54 GMT, Grega Bremec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>You kind of have a point, but I think Ingemar was complaining about
>"why call it a new major release", rather than about companies following
>their regular release cycles.
Red Hat always does two "point releases" and then goes to the next integer.
That's been their pattern since the 4.x series (AFAIR, there was a 3.3).
There'll be lots of new stuff in the next release, stuff that'll make things
a lot easier for a lot of uses, but not a lot of *glamorous* new stuff.
Dave Cook
------------------------------
From: Steve Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Microsoft Linux: what if?
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 02:36:02 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Mine is DOS and Disk Operating System. At the time almost all OS when by
> those names until......
I have to wonder about this one. IBM had a product called "Disk
Operating
System" for the 360 mainframe we had at technical school back in 1973,
long before Microsoft even was providing interpreters for the Apple.
Could they challenge Microsoft's use of "DOS" based on previous use
in trade?
------------------------------
From: MrTroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: 31 Aug 2000 02:42:40 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: Jure Sah wrote:
: >
: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: > > Reminds me of the microsoft FUDsters touting how great windows 95 was,
: > > invading the os/2 newsgroups.
: >
: > Hey, Windows'95 works just fine and fast,
: That's a funny way to spell "crashes alot"
: > you just have to care about it a little.
: you misspelled "constantly"
: > For instance, I fixed 2 computers at my previous school from a very deep
: > dungeons to nice functionality with Windows'95 and all my friend's
: > attempts to ruin the system again have failed so far.
: Try using a NON-windows Operating System, and get back to us.
: Unix was more stable in 1975 than Windows can manage today.
I use both FreeBSD and Win2k server. I setup my Win2k box about a week or so
after setting up my FreeBSD box.
FreeBSD - Last Crash...Never
Time Up as of now...92 days 22 hours
Win2K - Last Crash...4 days ago
Time Up as of now...4 days
Results like these speak for themselves. You just don't get more stable and
reliable that Unix.
P.S.
Win98 - Up for about 28 hours. Hasn't crashed lately, but only because I reboot
it every couple of days so that it won't.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Joe Otterson | When walking in open territory, bother
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | no one. If someone bothers you, ask him
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.
| -Anton Szandor LaVey
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
------------------------------
From: MrTroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: 31 Aug 2000 02:46:22 GMT
Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: Here's the problem. Each version of Windows gets better and more powerful,
: and, yes, more stable, in general. But then Microsoft crams more into the
: package... more processes and threads (in NT, anyway) running. So more
: likelihood of a mistake in their interactions.
Not to mention the $200 - $3,000 to upgrade Windows. Linux - FREE
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Joe Otterson | When walking in open territory, bother
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | no one. If someone bothers you, ask him
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.
| -Anton Szandor LaVey
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
------------------------------
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 02:56:12 GMT
Mike Byrns wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 15:17:04 -0700, Simon Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> It would be if you were the robber baron that conspired to ensure
> > >> that anyone that wanted to drive would have to buy your particular
> > >> brand of car.
> > >
> > >Build your own system then. Even during the days before the consent decree,
> >
> > That is pure bullshit.
>
> What is bullshit? I've been able to get machines without Windows forever. Again,
> you have no point since you have no proof.
>
> >
> > >I was able to get a machine without Windows.
> >
> > ...and run what on it?
>
> I ran BeOS r4.5 and Mandrake linux on my dual 600.
Me neither. I haven't gone out and bought a computer since a Packard
Bell 166 back in (?)'96 or so. Total dog, too. I've got four running
computers around here now, one running Windows, the rest Linux.
Of course, if you need a laptop, you're pretty much stuck.
--
It's a good thing we don't get all the government we pay for.
------------------------------
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2000 02:58:32 GMT
Mike Byrns wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 29 Aug 2000 22:21:01 +0100, Robert Moir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> > >
> > >"Christophe Ochal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:paOq5.282$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
> > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >>
> > >> So? Should we feel sorry for them? I'll pay for winblows when they bring
> > >out
> > >> a version i actually enjoy using...
> > >
> > >Theft is still theft. Would it be ok to steal your car if I didn't like the
> > >colour?
> > >
> >
> > It would be if you were the robber baron that conspired to ensure
> > that anyone that wanted to drive would have to buy your particular
> > brand of car.
> >
> > There is no immorality in unlicenced use of an "essential facility".
> >
> > That any you cheapen the notion of theft with your usage of the term.
>
> It's sad that so many folks have bought into the Ellison, Case, Jobs media machine so
> wholeheartedly that it compromises the very fiber of their morals. What was said
>above
> is that it is legal to steal as long as the entity you are stealing from is
>Microsoft.
> That's just not true. No court nor rational person will agree with you.
I strongly support the activities of the Business Software Alliance in
their visits to businesses, as long as Sun is able to go in ahead of
them and replace all those Windows desktops with Linux running Star
Office, as they're doing in Indochina and South America.
--
It's a good thing we don't get all the government we pay for.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
