Linux-Advocacy Digest #940, Volume #28 Wed, 6 Sep 00 00:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes ("Chad Myers")
Re: Open lettor to CommyLinux Commy's, and all other commy's to. ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes ("Chad Myers")
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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 23:55:16 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> [...]
>> >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?
>>
>> No, I don't *care* about the complexities and work involved, because I
>> don't have to do it. I'm more than prepared to pay for someone to do
>> it, if necessary, *in a competitive market*. Competition is supposed to
>> be really hard; its how we keep things efficient.
>
>Okay... how about this scenario: What if the price of every piece of
>software you bought increased by a factor of ~ 5, because it had to be
>ported to 5 other OSes?
OK. If it *had* to be, it *had* to be. What's the problem? In a
competitive market, it would already probably be 1/5th the cost, but
we'll ignore that. If its expensive, its expensive. What's the beef?
>So... for example, Half Life would cost $250 a copy.
>
>Would you buy it?
>
>Probably not.
No, I didn't buy it at $50, either. I'll wait till my brother gets
bored with it, and use his.
>OK... so what if the company decided to support two or three really popular
>OSs? ie. the most popular. They'd get the best return on their effort, and
>sell more copies.
That would depend on 'market share', wouldn't it? The two or three most
popular out of 5 certainly wouldn't necessarily sell more copies than a
product which supported all 5, no. Again, depending 'market share'. To
be perfectly honest, I don't care about 'market share'. But it would
help if I knew which OS I had, if I'm supposed to decide what software
is worth what to me.
Anyway, I thought the software *had* to be ported to five OSes, isn't
that what you said?
>End result: eventually only 1, maybe 2 of those OSs still exist.
Horse-hockey.
>Now do you see why this argument is futile?
Why, because you can't even grasp the possibility that technical network
effect has absolutely no relationship, despite pretenses, to
'popularity' and marketing 'network effect'? It does seem to make it
rather futile, but I'm willing to keep trying, if you are.
You haven't bothered telling me why I need new software, anyway. I'm
still playing DOOM II, and there's dozens more add-on levels than I'll
probably get to in my lifetime. (OK, that's a fib; I actually bought
StarCraft two years ago, so I'm still playing add-on levels for that,
and only occasionally playing DOOM II.) I don't need Half Life just
because its flashy new trash, 'superior' to what I have or not.
>Is it any wonder that there used to be 20, maybe 30 different computers, and
>now you've got Apple and Intel?
No, it isn't. If allowed to, and particularly if encouraged to by the
stupidity of the masses, companies will monopolize, rather than compete.
Since the market didn't allow them to monopolize, we're left with Apple
and intel-compatible PCs. So now, instead of 20, maybe 30 different
computers from different manufacturers, I've got 200, maybe 3000
different computers from different manufacturers, and they all work the
same, generally. And people who still want proprietary hardware can buy
Apple. Or something else, I don't know. I want a PC, myself. I like a
competitive market; it keeps costs down.
>Have you observed what happens in the highly competitive console market? You
>get three pieces of hardware, one of which dies in a year, one of which dies
>in two years (or hangs on by a thread), and the other ends up with 90%
>market share for four years. Rinse, repeat. I stopped buying consoles
>because I didn't want to back a lemon and have to buy a new one.
What, you mean game consoles? My original Nintendo still works, and I
could pick another up at a local swap meet real cheap if it didn't;
couple months ago, I saw one in a new box (only slightly dented, and
shrink-wrapped). The Sega Genesis and the PlayStation still work, too.
I hear that someone might be building Intellivisions again, soon; I'll
buy one of them, as soon as it comes out, you betcha.
I'll stop buying consoles when they stop making consoles I want to buy
at a price I'm willing to pay. I'd never have bought the PlayStation,
myself, its actually my son's.
You ought to read this article, considering your idea that a system
becomes a 'lemon' when its not "the one" that's currently considered
'successful'.
http://www.freep.com/news/metro/dicker30_20000830.htm
>End result though: for a while, one manufacturer comes out on top. Then the
>cycle starts up again.
Really? I could have *sworn* I learned a different market theory in
school. Maybe what Mr. Dickerson said (link above) is true, and that's
not the case, anymore.
>Artificially enforcing that there be 6 different main systems out there is
>guaranteed to destroy the computer market. Heck, consoles can't even manage
>it -- and they've tried.
I'm really entirely unaware where you got this idea of 'enforcing that
there be' anything. Last I knew, we were talking about the market
making it profitable to support multiple OSes, not some form of
regulation of competition.
>The closest you could get to this situation is what happened with MSX. But
>guess what? That's what a PC is today.
Are you sure? I don't think PCes use Z80 chips, anymore.
I didn't know anything about 'MSX', so I did a quick search; within
thirty seconds, WebFerret had found over a hundred hits. On the Usenet
newsgroup faq, I found out what an MSX is:
http://www.komkon.org/fms/MSX/MSX.faq
============================================================
The MSX standard has been designed by a company called ASCII in
cooperation with Microsoft which provided a firmware version of its
BASIC for the machine. There is a widespread rumor that "MSX" stands for
"MicroSoft eXtended". The MSX machines were produced by such giants as
Sony, Yamaha, Panasonic, Toshiba, Daewoo, and Philips. The only MSX
model ever sold in USA appears to be an early SpectraVideo machine.
In spite of its sad history, MSX is a very nice computer, especially
useful for educational purposes which is clearly indicated by example of
the Soviet Union. Russian Ministry of Education bought hundreds of MSXes
(and later MSX2s) grouped into "computerized classroom systems" of 10-16
machines connected into a simple network. Entire generation of
programmers has grown up using these computers.
============================================================
ASCII, by the way, a japanese company, is still in business. They don't
make computers anymore, other than specialty 'pocket computers' for the
educational market.
"The Ultimate MSX Faq", a web page last updated in June of 2000, is also
available at http://www.faq.msxnet.org/msxgeneral.html#whatmsx. It
included this tidbit:
============================================================
Nowadays, there exist a lot of expansions on the MSX system, such as the
Moonsound card, based on OPL4, the GFX9000
card, SCSI interfaces, etc.
============================================================
But except for the MS-BASIC in ROM (a standard gambit MS monopolized on
years and years ago) and the Z80 chip and other 1982 technology, I can
see why you see a parallel between the MSX and the PC. Still, I'm not
sure what you think the point is, concerning competition. Something
about if it isn't 'the one', its gone and forgotten? No, I know, its "a
lemon".
Luckily, despite your example and Dickerson's fears, even 8 year olds
can learn better. Maybe some day ASCII will sell a "Pocket Study" in
the US with some lessons on competing in a free market, who knows?
--
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.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 23:59:17 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Christophe Ochal in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>Has anyone actually tried to return his windows licence that came with a
>computer?
The wording of the license prevents this, and some have indeed tried.
The license says "the product" can be returned if you don't like the
license, but it also says "the product" is the whole computer.
--
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] (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: 6 Sep 2000 03:59:03 GMT
On Tue, 05 Sep 2000 23:02:12 -0400, T. Max Devlin wrote:
[ drivel ... the entire post, snipped ]
Look Max, get this --
NO ONE IS COVERING UP.
The information is out there. It is publically available. A quick perusal
of publically available mailing list archives reveal that some KDE developers
are TT employees. Roberto is not obliged to tell you this -- you didn't
ask specifically, and it's not his job to voluntarily feed you with
information for you to misapply in your illogical conspiracy theories.
Do your own damn research. TT are not obliged to do your research. Roberto
isn't obliged to do your research. I am not obliged to do your research. If
you are incapable of doing research, I suggest you stay away from debates,
because looking to the people on the opposite side of the debate to yourself
for research is a very unsuccesful strategy.
It's not TT's fault, not my fault, and not Roberto's fault that you are
too darn lazy to do the research to construct a coherent argument. Your
arguments are absurd and I'm afraid we do not have very much interest in
helping you defend your absurdly false statements. ( then again, if you had the
discipline to actually consider facts before making libelous statements,
perhaps you wouldn't be in a position where you found it necessary to defend
such absurd positions )
Not only do you wish to post misinformation, but you suffer from the
delusion that those who argue against your misinformation are obliged
to provide a service for you by exhaustively researching the topics
on which you wish to post falsehoods.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!!
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 23:52:21 -0400
lyttlec wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > Paul Mindeman wrote:
> > >
> > > Chad Myers wrote:
> > >
> > > > Well, then you don't know what you're talking about. Windows 2000 is far
> > > > superior in it's security infrastructure than almost all versions of
> > > > Unix except special breeds created for the highest levels of the government
> > > > which have special non-standard kernels and inner-workings which
> > > > essentially make them non-Unix anyhow.
> > > >
> > > > Windows NT 4.0 has acheived C2 red and orange book security ratings from
> > > > the DoD. A feat no other Unix has achieved except for special varieties
> > > > which incorporate home-grown add-ons (including a DAC implementation
> > > > since the DoD recognizes what a backwards and insecure method the
> > > > G/U/E scheme is).
> > > >
> > > > Educate yourself before making wide-eyed assumptions that "Unix is
> > > > better" which is simply ignorant and arrogant. Each has their pluses
> > > > and minuses, but when it comes to the security implementation in Win2K
> > > > (which has had major improvements in security even over NT 4.0 and
> > > > incorporates all the modifications in NT4SP6 to make the orange-book
> > > > C2) there's no comparision to Unix (especially Linux, which is a joke
> > > > for anyone who has an impartial view of things -- e.g. non-Slashdot
> > > > drones)
> > > >
> > > > -Chad
> > >
> > > I've seen you say this numerous times in this thread, but you haven't said how
> > > WinNT/2k security is superior to Unix style security. In my (admittantly little)
> > > experience with NTFS, the file and directory permissions look alot like Unix
>style
> > > permissions, only with a fancy GUI. I'm curious to know what magic makes
>WinNT/2k
> > > security so much better
> > >
> >
> > When the OS blows up, nobody can hack your data.
> >
> I can.
How do you hack the data when the M$-machine is crashed.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 03:59:50 GMT
"Courageous" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > I'm not trying to turn this into a life/abortion thing. There are
> > reasonable views on both sides of that debate, but there is NO
> > reasonable defense for partial birth abortions, none. It could
> > be argued that they would be needed in emergency situations, but
> > even then, a C-section would be more humane and more ethical
> > for reasonable obstetricians to perform.
>
> Eh? But the point is, most of these "partial birth" abortions
> are actually first trimester abortions. They are actually quite
> rare, and the few physicians who engage in them believe they
> have a medical basis.
I don't think you know what you're talking about.
Partial-birth abortions are 3rd trimester "partial birth"
operations.
1st and 2nd trimester abortions typically use solvents to
disolve the fetus or, if the fetus is more developed, they
use surgical devices to essentially chop up the fetus, then
vacuum the remains into waste.
3rd trimester abortions are not so easy and the only
pratical way is to do a PBA. Most OBs refuse to do them
because it's so obvious unethical, inhumane and a crime against
humanity.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Open lettor to CommyLinux Commy's, and all other commy's to.
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 23:53:19 -0400
Jim Broughton wrote:
>
> "Joseph T. Adams" wrote:
> >
> > 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
>
> It's easy! Live in the suburbes ;-)
> Only venture into the city limits for Red Wings hockey games.
Sumfin' like that.
>
> --
> Jim Broughton
> (The Amiga OS! Now there was an OS)
> If Sense were common everyone would have it!
> Following Air and Water the third most abundant
> thing on the planet is Human Stupidity.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2000 04:01:16 GMT
"Courageous" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Read up where?
>
> Hint: most "partial birth" abortions are actually conducted during the
> first two-three months of pregnancy. And there aren't that many annually,
> in any case.
See my other post.
You're confusing "abortion" in general with a PBA. PBA's are always done
in the 3rd. If you find someone doing a PBA in the 1st or 2nd, they're
either a.) not a physician, b.) a phys. practicing without a license,
or c.) completely void of any humanity.
1st and 2nd's are usually disolve and dispose, or chop and vacuum.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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, 06 Sep 2000 00:02:47 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
>Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[...uncommented repost...]
>What happened, an freak newsreader accident, or did my posting leave you
>speechless?
>IOW where are your new comments?
That's happened to me quite a few times with Christopher, as well.
Twice yesterday, in fact. ???
--
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
******************************
