Linux-Advocacy Digest #903, Volume #28 Mon, 4 Sep 00 21:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! ("Ingemar Lundin")
Re: Why I hate Windows... (Thomas Corriher)
Re: How low can they go...? (Seán Ó Donnchadha)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Seán Ó Donnchadha)
Re: How low can they go...? (Zenin)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Open lettor to CommyLinux Commy's, and all other commy's to. ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: Why I hate Windows... (D. Spider)
Re: How low can they go...? (Christopher Smith)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Ingemar Lundin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!!
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 00:32:25 GMT
You should really get some help "Aaron"...
Its obvious that you've having a severe case of MSfobia...(and how knows
what other perverted things...)
And i promise you, insulting people in this NG isnt going to better your
condition
For being a "Unix System Engineer" (whats thats supposed to mean?) you sure
seem to have a lot of
time writing crap in this NG.
Just come straight now...youre 45+, living with your mother, never had a
girlfriend, and trying to fool yourself and others that you are som sort of
educated person...right?
/IL
>
> I despise liars such as yourself.
>
> Does that help?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Corriher)
Subject: Re: Why I hate Windows...
Date: 5 Sep 2000 00:22:05 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], abuse@[127.0.0.1]
>Windows is the product of a very thorough monopoly - it has
>been since Win95 (Win 3.11 was their last good product, IMHO).
I completely agree. Their next "desktop" was Win 95. This
was when Microsoft changed its' design priorities from producing
better software to crippling other's software. "DOS isn't done
till Lotus won't run." We have many other examples like their
having given Netscape the wrong TCP/IP stack specs for the
Win 95 release. None of us can forget the dirty tricks played
on Dr DOS or OS/2 either. The list appears endless. With a
monopoly position, a company does not need to concern itself
with such trivial issues as stability, reliability, standards,
security, professional ethics, or even price. Customers will
return for more because they do not have a choice. Customers
can only hope that they are at least given a kiss before the
company 'gives it to them'.
I liked Win 3.11 (WFWG), also. It was cute, and it was fast.
Note to the Penguins reading this: I am not being sarcastic.
WFWG got the highest praise of any system that MS ever
produced. It was great for individuals use, or for very small
networks. I was using it when Win 95 was released. I remember
that Win 95 was released so far behind schedule that it was
nicknamed "Win Ever". I knew there were going to be problems
with this release when one of my regions best gurus stated that
people should avoid Win 95 like a leper. He said that he knew
it would be very good for (his) business, but his ethics
required him to advise people against downgrading to Win 95.
My nose smelled something rotten with Win 95.
By the way, DOS was renamed after it was bought ("innovated")
by Microsoft. It was originally called QDOS. QDOS was an
acronym for Quick and Dirty Operating System. The original
name, Dirty Operating System, seems more appropriate than the
new name.
Changing the lingo and "buzz words" for a product is an
effective strategy for a marketing company in its' promotional
efforts. If we describe Microsoft in terms of being a
marketing company (which it is), then we can honestly state
that they have always been very good at what they do.
They promoted Win 95 in the same way that they have promoted
everything else. They were praising WFWG highly prior to its
release. I do not remember the exact wording of their self-
praise, but I am sure they frequently used the words "features"
and "innovations". Just before Win 95 was released, they made
their signature vaporware announcements about how Win 95 was
"even better!". They described how it would be the "best yet!".
They stopped their boasting just short of saying that it would
end world hunger, poverty, and war. (Remember that Bill G. has
been mapping out our "Road Ahead". He is my hero.) When
Win 95 was FINALLY released, they completely reversed their
marketing of WFWG. They began attacking the technical failures
of WFWG to show it as a second class operating system. They
suggested that the only logical thing for people to do was to
"upgrade" to the new "innovative features" of a "modern", and
"32-bit operating system". Their endless marketing cycle
repeats like clock-work. The question is always: "Were they
lying to us when they released the last version, or are they
lying about it this time?" I think the answer to the question
is that they are always lying, so it was a bit of a trick
question.
For all their failures, no one can claim that they made the
mistake of overestimating the intelligence of the average
person. You will be more sucessful in business if you also
do not assume your customers are intelligent.
>Those who trade away their privacy in favor of security
>will soon find that they have neither.
Very true. I suppose that great minds think alike! :)
--
From the desk of Thomas Corriher
The real email address is:
corriher at surfree.
com
------------------------------
From: Seán Ó Donnchadha <[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: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 20:38:35 -0400
"Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>So you don't understand the complexities of supporting 6 different OS's, the
>costs involved, and how much work that would be with today's applications?
>
>Then QUIT SUGGESTING THAT IT WOULD BE EASY, OR "DEALABLE WITH".
>
What do you expect from the guy who said that software products can't
be damaged because it's all just bits?
------------------------------
From: Seán Ó Donnchadha <[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, 04 Sep 2000 20:38:52 -0400
Curtis Bass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> 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.
>
>"His own" definition, Sean? Or simply the *correct* one?
>
Was that a serious question?
>
>Just because something is "common" it certainly doesn't follow that it's
>"correct."
>
Yeah, that Max is such an independent thinker.
>
>It's precisely this "common wisdom" that Max is arguing *against.*
>
Give me a fucking break. Max admits he knows shit about most of the
things he argues about here. He thinks his superior intellect gives
him the ability to formulate grand theories about things with which he
has little to no experience. In reality, without that experience,
common wisdom is all he has.
------------------------------
From: Zenin <[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: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 00:36:59 GMT
Simon Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Zenin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
:> The source is available free of charge for anyone with such an interest
:> to examine. The complete record of the progress is available to for all
:> to download.
:
: So, there's history documentation in there for every line, every change?
: The idea was to know how difficult it was. First hand.
'Tis why god invented revision control systems. Gimp is available
via AnonCVS:
http://www.gimp.org/devel_cvs.html
It's hard to get a more accurate history of a software product then
via a well utilized revision control system.
--
-Zenin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) From The Blue Camel we learn:
BSD: A psychoactive drug, popular in the 80s, probably developed at UC
Berkeley or thereabouts. Similar in many ways to the prescription-only
medication called "System V", but infinitely more useful. (Or, at least,
more fun.) The full chemical name is "Berkeley Standard Distribution".
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 20:44:29 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>Are you saying that Matthias, in 1996, knew that in 1998 TT, which
>in 1996 consisted of 3 guys in a tiny office in Norway, would hire
>him, and that made him choose Qt for KDE?
This would be the Matthias Ettrich, founder of the KDE project, who's a
TrollTech employee? The Matthias Ettrich, TrollTech employee, founder
of the KDE project that you didn't mention when I asked you "what is the
relationship between KDE and TT", and you said, I believe, "KDE uses QT,
and that's all?"
Are you saying that in 1996, Matthias Ettrich didn't know any of the
three guys in Norway? Nobody suggested any quid pro quo except you, the
fact remains that Matthias Ettrich, founder of the KDE project, is a
TrollTech employee.
>That is:
>
>a) Your guess, based on nothing.
Based on the fact that Matthias Ettrich, founder of the KDE project, is
a TrollTech employee. Which raises it slightly above suspicion, and
generally puts it at least near the range of supposition.
>b) Grossly unfair to both Matthias and TT
Matthias Ettrich, founder of the KDE project, is a TrollTech employee.
To be unfair to one is to be unfair to the other.
>You are saying that he sold himself, and based on nothing.
Based, again, on the fact that Matthias Ettrich, founder of the KDE
project, is a TrollTech employee. I'm not casting doubt on Matthias
business ethics (his personal ethics are not bolstered by the situation,
but I don't know him or his circumstance, and don't care, as he's only
an employee (?)), I think the concern everyone has is with Troll Tech.
So let's see, the 'potentially threatening email' was... when? 11/30/98
was the archive date. The situation is murky. Obviously, though, the
question concerning harmony would have arisen after, and almost
undoubtedly because of, the new fact that Matthias Ettrich, founder of
the KDE project, was now a TrollTech employee. So TT hires Matthias,
harmony asks 'would you sue a clone', and TT makes odd noises about a
threat from Microsoft.
Well, now that Troll Tech has finally recognized that they can't screw
around like that, and GPL'd QT, I'd say it all came out well in the end,
and its a good thing that Matthias Ettrich, founder of the KDE project,
is a TrollTech employee.
>Now, that is terribly unfair, IMHO. In fact, I'd say it
>is way more FUD than whatever TT has done, since you are
>effectively saying "KDE was founded by a guy who did it
>to get money from TT". That's downright insulting.
LOLROTFLMAO
Such wonderful dramatic posturing, Roberto. HA!
No, he made it sound like it was, that Troll Tech hired Matthias
Ettrich, founder of the KDE project, in order to stop Harmony from
cloning QT, and then refused to give even token assurances that they
would not sue anybody cloning QT for infringement, or whatever other
pretense would prevent the project from being a threat to their monopoly
on the QT API. After taking a massive amount of heat from the Linux
community, Troll Tech has realized they have no choice in the matter but
to GPL QT, and their lawyers have given them enough reason to believe
that it won't entirely ruin their ability to profit on non-GPL licenses
that it didn't matter anyway. They were never going to be able to do
what they would have liked to do, which is monopolize, and that's a good
thing.
[...]
--
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
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 20:45:03 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
>>
>> Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
>> > > > [snip announcement, Qt is now under the GPL, anyone can follow
>> > > > the link for details]
>> > >
>> > > Have you forgotten about the people who have usenet access but do not
>> have
>> > > internet access?
>> >
>> > No, they have your post. I saw no reason to repeat. And besides, it
>> > says not much beyond "Qt is now under the GPL".
>>
>> Your exclusion of the quote is not a problem, in fact it was appropriate to
>> exclude it from your reply. It was your comment of "anyone can follow the
>> link for details" that appears to be a chatisement for my taking into
>> consideration the needs of those without access to the "web site".
>
>No, if I wanted to chastise you, you would not have to look for
>something
>so subtle ;-)
GUFFAW!
--
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
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 20:48:23 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>> >Of couse this many soon all become a moot point with the release of Qt/Unix
>> >2.2 under teh GPL. Although this message does reinforces point of
>> >centention. A possible true reason for KDE to have used Qt instead of
>> >somethine else, since Matthias Ettrich, founder of the KDE project is a
>> >Trolltech employee.
>>
>> Well this would only make sense if TT hired him before he founded KDE.
>
>Which they didn't. IIRC they hired him around the date of KDE 1.0, which
>was about 2 years later.
Yes, but that's another problem, in the end. When and why, precisely,
did they hire him. What was he doing before that? What was his
relationship to harmony?
--
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: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux.sucks,comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!!
Date: 5 Sep 2000 00:48:50 GMT
In comp.lang.java.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Exactly the point. Anyone who creats a FrontPage web at the root of their
: filesystem isn't too bright to begin with.
Front Page is touted as a "content" creation tool for ordinary people,
not IT professionals. As such it ought to be geared to the experience
level of these ordinary people.
BTW, I've yet to find anyone familiar with Front Page who doesn't
despise it. The concept is a good one, but the implementation is
about as flawed as it possibly could be.
Joe
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 20:52:08 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] escribió:
[...]
>Of course I will not argue that. However, I must tell you Matthias is
>one heck of a programmer. But yes, I am sure it was his involvment
>with KDE that made TT aware of him. Why is that a problem?
Its a problem because in hiring him, Troll Tech may have been executing
an anti-competitive strategy to monopolize Linux GUIs.
When was GNOME started?
>> Also try to argue that the his being hired
>> could not be viewed as an attempt to cement the connection between KDE and
>> Qt so that KDE would not jump ship and use another library.
>
>If jumping libraries was Matthias'decision, what you say could make
>SOME sense. KDE is pretty much not a dictatorship. Dropping Qt is
>practically impossible. There are about 2 million lines of code
>that would have to be almost rewritten. It just won't happen.
Yes, we know, that's the problem. That's why TT hiring Matthias may
have been all that's necessary to cause the market to reject KDE
entirely, evidently. Now that they've GPLed QT, we don't have a
problem. ;-)
--
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
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2000 20:52:49 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Donovan Rebbechi in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >On Sun, 03 Sep 2000 19:36:55 -0400, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>> [...]
>> >>No, its a trade secret.
>> >
>> >So the only difference between the API and the recipe is secrecy.
>>
>> The only difference between tears and rain is quantity. They are two
>> entirely different things.
>
>And both saline content and acidity? ;-)
Temperature, and specific gravity, too.
--
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: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Open lettor to CommyLinux Commy's, and all other commy's to.
Date: 5 Sep 2000 00:57:55 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: One night, Drestin Lack-of-facts decided to go rumble in the
: Cass Corridor of Detroit, and was never heard from again.
: pity.
How does *anyone* survive in Detroit?
Joe
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (D. Spider)
Subject: Re: Why I hate Windows...
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 00:59:25 GMT
It appears that on 5 Sep 2000 00:22:05 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Corriher) wrote:
>>Windows is the product of a very thorough monopoly - it has
>>been since Win95 (Win 3.11 was their last good product, IMHO).
>
>I completely agree. Their next "desktop" was Win 95. This
>was when Microsoft changed its' design priorities from producing
>better software to crippling other's software. "DOS isn't done
>till Lotus won't run." We have many other examples like their
>having given Netscape the wrong TCP/IP stack specs for the
>Win 95 release. None of us can forget the dirty tricks played
>on Dr DOS or OS/2 either. The list appears endless. With a
>monopoly position, a company does not need to concern itself
>with such trivial issues as stability, reliability, standards,
>security, professional ethics, or even price. Customers will
>return for more because they do not have a choice. Customers
>can only hope that they are at least given a kiss before the
>company 'gives it to them'.
>
>I liked Win 3.11 (WFWG), also. It was cute, and it was fast.
>Note to the Penguins reading this: I am not being sarcastic.
>WFWG got the highest praise of any system that MS ever
>produced. It was great for individuals use, or for very small
>networks. I was using it when Win 95 was released. I remember
>that Win 95 was released so far behind schedule that it was
>nicknamed "Win Ever". I knew there were going to be problems
>with this release when one of my regions best gurus stated that
>people should avoid Win 95 like a leper. He said that he knew
>it would be very good for (his) business, but his ethics
>required him to advise people against downgrading to Win 95.
>My nose smelled something rotten with Win 95.
Yeah. The only advantage I ever saw in it was the expanded heap space.
The limited User and GDI heaps in win 3.x was a major design
limitation. Of course some of us held out by just using Windows for
minor stuff, and running all the serious programs in a Dos Window.
This drove MS nuts, but they eventually got the companies that made
those apps to quit selling the Dos versions. I know there had to be
some arm-twisting or bribery to it, because the Dos versions in many
cases were still selling almost as many copies as the Windows
versions.
>By the way, DOS was renamed after it was bought ("innovated")
>by Microsoft. It was originally called QDOS. QDOS was an
>acronym for Quick and Dirty Operating System. The original
>name, Dirty Operating System, seems more appropriate than the
>new name.
>
>Changing the lingo and "buzz words" for a product is an
>effective strategy for a marketing company in its' promotional
>efforts. If we describe Microsoft in terms of being a
>marketing company (which it is), then we can honestly state
>that they have always been very good at what they do.
Yep.
>
>They promoted Win 95 in the same way that they have promoted
>everything else. They were praising WFWG highly prior to its
>release. I do not remember the exact wording of their self-
>praise, but I am sure they frequently used the words "features"
>and "innovations". Just before Win 95 was released, they made
>their signature vaporware announcements about how Win 95 was
>"even better!". They described how it would be the "best yet!".
>They stopped their boasting just short of saying that it would
>end world hunger, poverty, and war. (Remember that Bill G. has
>been mapping out our "Road Ahead". He is my hero.) When
>Win 95 was FINALLY released, they completely reversed their
>marketing of WFWG. They began attacking the technical failures
>of WFWG to show it as a second class operating system. They
>suggested that the only logical thing for people to do was to
>"upgrade" to the new "innovative features" of a "modern", and
>"32-bit operating system". Their endless marketing cycle
>repeats like clock-work. The question is always: "Were they
>lying to us when they released the last version, or are they
>lying about it this time?" I think the answer to the question
>is that they are always lying, so it was a bit of a trick
>question.
It sounds so mean to say it, but I have to agree. Of course, that's
not just MS, that's marketing. MS just pays top dollar to hire the ver
best liars available. Sun, Oracle, AOL are just as bad in principle.
>
>For all their failures, no one can claim that they made the
>mistake of overestimating the intelligence of the average
>person. You will be more sucessful in business if you also
>do not assume your customers are intelligent.
>
>
>>Those who trade away their privacy in favor of security
>>will soon find that they have neither.
>
>Very true. I suppose that great minds think alike! :)
#####################################################
My email address is posted for purposes of private
correspondence only. Consent is expressly NOT given
to receive advertisements, or bulk mailings of any
kind.
Since Deja.com will not archive my messages without
altering them for purposes of advertisement, deja.com
is barred from archiving my messages.
#####################################################
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Smith)
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: 5 Sep 2000 01:08:54 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>Said Darren Winsper in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>On Sun, 03 Sep 2000 23:25:12 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> And if the prior version was DOS from three years and two owners
>>> previous, and you don't have that disk?
>>
>>Then get around it. [...]
>
>Been there, done that. Are all these consumers really so stupid as to
>think that they can be forced to have to 'get around' something put into
>a product for no benefit whatsoever to them, and that's OK?
>
>No, I *won't* get around it, dammit. Its *illegal*.
>
>--
>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! =-----
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
