Linux-Advocacy Digest #36, Volume #29 Sun, 10 Sep 00 10:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: How low can they go...? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows (Kenny A. Chaffin)
Re: Windows+Linux=True (Mig)
Re: How low can they go...? ("JS/PL")
Re: How low can they go...? ("JS/PL")
Re: How low can they go...? ("JS/PL")
Re: Windows+Linux=True ("Ingemar Lundin")
Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years ("MH")
Re: Windows+Linux=True (Ian Pulsford)
Re: The internet was built on WIndow 95? (was Re: How low can they (lyttlec)
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man! (Jim Broughton)
Re: The internet was built on WIndow 95? (was Re: How low can they (lyttlec)
Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years (sfcybear)
Re: what's up with Sun? ("Raz A Mattazz")
Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years (JoeX1029)
Re: Popular Culture (Mark S. Bilk)
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! (lyttlec)
Re: How low can they go...? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: How did Tux the Penguin come about? (JoeX1029)
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! ("Nik Simpson")
Re: How low can they go...? (lyttlec)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[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: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 09:04:25 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> As for software design, all I care about is whether I want to buy it, or
> whether the many people who ask me or pay me for advice want to buy it.
> In that case, I'll remind you that while 'componentized software' might
> make things easy for developers, it sucks as a *software design*. When
> developers get their head out of their asses, and realize that software
> *users* care about different things than software *developers*, maybe
> we'll get some software that isn't only 'better than nothing'.
Examples of bad user experience due to componentized software please?
Simon
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kenny A. Chaffin)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 04:57:08 -0600
There are no alternatives,
Bill is a jealous god.
KAC
--
KAC Website Design
Custom Programming, Web Design, and Graphics
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.kacweb.com
------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows+Linux=True
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 12:54:47 +0200
Ingemar Lundin wrote:
> Know what i would like?
>
> Linux kernel and shell plus Windows 2000:s GUI
>
> Yeah thats right....easy enough for inexperienced users, and still the
> possibly to do some good ol' fashion die-hard nerd work in the shell (or
> "behind the GUI", whatever you like)
>
> KDE and Gnome? well version 1.2 of Gnome comes a long way, but still not
> easy enough for millions of Window users that Linux (hopefully) will
> attract... still no gnome windowmanager and a whole lot of inconsistencies
> in the GUI.(AND rather buggy still)
>
> there you have it
No we have not. Windows GUI is slow, illogical and inconsistent. Look at
the fancy newer stuff like Actide Desktop ans Channels.. nobody uses it and
if one does it just causes irritation. Look at dialogs like "Search" -
pretty messy for i dialog dont you think? (unfortunattely KDE emulates it).
Look at the "Start" button: You click on that one to close the system..
dont you think this is confusing? Try to make a new user right-click with
their mouse on a icon.. They just dont get it. Try to make them resize or
move a Windows. Doesnt work.
So why do you exactly feel the Windows GUI is so good? Why not emulate the
MAC's -its consistent and logic and from where Windows got most of its
ideas.
Or what about doing something completely different; something that dumps
the "desktop" thingy.
Cheers
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 06:52:55 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> [...]
> >The quicken 2000 and 2001 user interface is entirely written in
HTML.[...]
>
> I don't CARE! It doesn't MEAN anything. This is *after the monopoly*.
> It doesn't MATTER what the ISV's do now, in order to maintain their
> markets (as long, of course, as its precisely what Microsoft wants them
> to do.)
>
> Go away; you're annoying. NO, Microsoft software does not fail to be
> crap because 'Quicken 2000' has a user interface is "entirely written in
> HTML". All that means is that I'd never consider using Quicken 2000. I
> don't go in for such nightmarishly and pathetically inefficient
> mechanisms. Web browsers make halfway decent web browsers; they make
> really shitty application interfaces.
Why?
>
> This is the kind of stuff that makes people like Erik so horribly
> draining. The whole thing is so disfunctional after fifteen years of
> monopoly that people actually can't tell a good idea from a stupid one.
It's the next generation interface for all document related applications.
And logically, it should be.
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 07:22:33 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> [...]
> >Because if you're happy enough to be factually INCORRECT with this, how
do
> >we know that you're basing your arguments on corroborated facts rather
than
> >your own hallucinations?
>
> Everything else I've said, and nothing more. Get it?
I get it.
0+0=0
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 07:18:28 -0400
"Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sun, 10 Sep 2000 12:30:59 +1000, Christopher Smith wrote:
> >
>
> >1. What is bad about HTML as a help file format.
>
> Not terribly printable.
The help file system in Win2k seems pretty printable, one can right click
inside the left frame and choose to print the selected topic, OR the
selected heading and all subtopics. Or you can print whatever is displayed
in the right frame. Or you may copy and paste just certain selected text in
the right frame. Or you can view the source code of the right frame and save
it as a separate html file.
Not to mention the numerous printing methods...print to paper, print to
file, make a pdf file out of it, fax it......
It's printable.
------------------------------
From: "Ingemar Lundin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows+Linux=True
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 11:29:37 GMT
> No we have not. Windows GUI is slow, illogical and inconsistent. Look at
> the fancy newer stuff like Actide Desktop ans Channels.. nobody uses it
and
> if one does it just causes irritation. Look at dialogs like "Search" -
> pretty messy for i dialog dont you think? (unfortunattely KDE emulates
it).
> Look at the "Start" button: You click on that one to close the system..
> dont you think this is confusing? Try to make a new user right-click with
> their mouse on a icon.. They just dont get it. Try to make them resize or
> move a Windows. Doesnt work.
Active desktop is a MS thing and can hardly be incorporated in to Linux...
Exactly why do you think thats confusing?
confusing for new users? well for a Linux user perhaps...
> So why do you exactly feel the Windows GUI is so good? Why not emulate the
> MAC's -its consistent and logic and from where Windows got most of its
> ideas.
> Or what about doing something completely different; something that dumps
> the "desktop" thingy.
c'mon, Mac consistent? bah!
Windows do not! get its ideas from Mac, thats pure BULL! regardless what
Steve Jobs want to make out of it!
/IL
> Cheers
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 09:09:59 -0400
>It's sad, really. It's sad that they bash on Microsoft for
>the same things they try to emulate (and do a shitty job
>of, BTW).
Yes, that's the current state of Linux advocacy. Tear down your opponent(s)
instead of singing the virtues of what you are advocating. Makes absolutely
no sense what so ever, does it?
But then I suppose that is all they can do, given that when trying to
convert new users they must have compelling reasons for those users to
switch. Which they don't, and never will. Most users simply have what they
want in their computer already. A reason to make that sort of switch will
require more than "winbloze", Gates bashing, and Navy warship stories going
on over a year. Not to mention that these advocates twist the facts (more
often than not they are not facts) as much as MS does. My theory on this is
that I think most of COLA regulars are malcontents, bent on finding some
area of their life in which they can feel superior. Being fringe and bashing
the 90% mainstream user is one way to do just that. The group really should
be named:
"comp.os.linux.user.who.hates.windows.and.has.nothing.better.to.do.than.say.
so"
Sorry state of affairs. Not Linux itself, I rather enjoy using Linux.
It's Linux advocacy I think is a complete mess.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 11:09:50 +1000
From: Ian Pulsford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows+Linux=True
Ingemar Lundin wrote:
> Know what i would like?
>
> Linux kernel and shell plus Windows 2000:s GUI
>
> Yeah thats right....easy enough for inexperienced users, and still the
> possibly to do some good ol' fashion die-hard nerd work in the shell (or
> "behind the GUI", whatever you like)
>
> KDE and Gnome? well version 1.2 of Gnome comes a long way, but still not
> easy enough for millions of Window users that Linux (hopefully) will
> attract... still no gnome windowmanager and a whole lot of inconsistencies
> in the GUI.(AND rather buggy still)
>
> there you have it
I'd rather see OS/2's workplace shell than windows desktop. I could drag
proggies to another folder and all the system configuration info would
automatically follow them around (except entries in the config.sys file);
another point windoze disappointed me on (crap multitasking being another)
when I found it did not have it. Still I suppose these arguments could go on
forever.
IanP
------------------------------
From: lyttlec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The internet was built on WIndow 95? (was Re: How low can they
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 13:18:17 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "lyttlec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > I'm sorry, but BBS's were not using Netscape in 1995, and Intranet
> hadn't
> > > even been coined yet. I doubt many companies were using Intranets and
> > > Netscape much in 1995, certainly not 30+ million users
>
> > IIRC, the 40,000,000 number originated with MS. The word "Intranet"
> > hadn't been coined yet, but IBM and MS were competing for the business
> > of connecting up business'. One bank at the time was trying to hire
> > 20,000 programmers to build their system. We were all like "yeah, right"
> > about their ads. Cisco was doing good already. IBM was marketing
> > software to permit corporate headquarters to monitor the amount of
> > memory in PCs at remote offices ( memory was expensive). I had a lot of
> > work during that time wiring buildings for "internal computer networks".
>
> What are you talking about? This discussion is *SOLELY* about how many
> Windows 3.1 users were using Trumpet Winsock with Netscape Navigator.
> That's it. Nothing else.
>
Your original quote :
"Rex. You should really... I mean *REALLY* look this stuff up before
posting
it. The internet did not exceed 10 million estimated users until about
1996. There is no way that 40 mllion Windows 3.1 users could have been
using the internet in 1995."
But Rex never said anything about the 40million users being connected to
the internet. He was talking about the number using winsock and either
Mosaic or Netscape. How many were claimed by Netscpe, I don't recall.
But it was some *BIG NUMBER* to justify their stock price.
> > I don't know how many users Netscape had, but Mosaic and Crimera had a
> > lot. Tim O'Rielly had already launched his "Web Crawler" and "Internet
> > in a box" products. AOL was doing good and Sears had launched its
> > unspeakable service. So 40,000,000 connected to some kind of network and
> > using winsock wasn't so unreasonable as to be dismissed out of hand. It
> > was probably inflated though.
>
> At the time of Win95's release, AOL had 3 million members and was not
> providing internet service to it's users. It only had internet mail
> gateways. Internet service began in early 1996.
>
That is what I said. The the internet was still small, but when you add
in the internet users, plus AOL plus Web Crawler plus all the others
that eventually became part of the internet, you get 40,000,000. That
number doesn't make allowance for the fact that some people had two or
three services that reduced to one service later. But it sounded good to
MS advertising types who were trying to prove they had more users than
IBM.
> It's fact. The number of users on the internet did not break 10 million
> until 1996. There certainly were not 30+ million using Netscape on Windows
> 3.1 in 1995.
Well, the 40 million number was the number claimed by Windows. The
orignal claim made by Rex and disputed by you was "By the time Microsoft
came out with Windows 95, there were already
over 40 million Windows 3.1 users using trumpet winsock and Mosaic
or Netscape.".
There were others using various Unix, DEC, and Appel platforms. Given
the propensity of big companies to inflate market numbers, I don't know
how you would find out how many people who were networke connected used
winsock and Netscape vs how many used winsock and something else.
------------------------------
From: Jim Broughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man!
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 13:24:27 GMT
Will Ganz wrote:
>
> >It seems to me that in Softwareland, everybody copies the best thing
> >that's around at the time. This has been going on for quite a long time
> >now. The trick seems to be: "Copy and Enhance", meaning that you take
> >your competitor's (or mentor's or different platform developer's) piece
> >of work and add stuff you think your customers/users are going to like.
>
> What is/are the difference(s) between your "Copy and Enhance" and
> Microsoft's "Embrace and Extend"?
The difference is that 'copy and enhance' is open source and NOT
proprietary. Embrace and Extend is microsofts way of proprietary
enhancement of a given standard in hopes of shoving it down the users
throats. Because microsoft's software is NOT open source this can
possibly lead to a lockout where others cannot impliment microsofts
EXTENDED "standard".
--
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.
------------------------------
From: lyttlec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The internet was built on WIndow 95? (was Re: How low can they
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 13:26:43 GMT
Simon Cooke wrote:
>
> "lyttlec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I was just quoting where the 40,000,000 number came from. It was all the
> > users who eventualy merged into what we know as the "internet" today.
> > The number wasn't made up from thin air, but has some foundation in
> > fact. Because the number does have some foundation it is fair to say
> > "40,000,000 Windows 3.1 users using trumpet winsock and Mosaic or
> > Netscape". They just weren't necessarily connected to the "internet" as
> > it defined today, but the "intercommunications networks" as they existed
> > then.
>
> Which weren't using TCP/IP -- FIDONET is a Z/X/YModem based system, for
> example. Compuserve & AOL were proprietary systems that only started
> switching over to the Internet around early 1996 (IIRC); until that point,
> they had mail gateways, but that was it.
>
> Trumpet provides TCP/IP connectivity; ergo that claim must refer to internet
> users.
>
> Simon
At that time at home I used winsock, zmodem and mosaic. I had accounts
with AOL and had to run their software. Don't recall exactly how I got
those to work together. It was worse than getting Linux 0.9 to run. Work
and school used winsock and Netscape to connect to the internet and what
is now called the intranet. But both also used lots of Unix. I think the
original claim made by Rex is within an octave of being correct. i.e.
There were between 20 and 80 million people using winsock and Netscape.
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 13:17:10 GMT
Only SOME of the GUI's are trying to be like windows. MS has been
striving to be more like Linux/Unix for YEARS! i.e. as secure as Unix,
as stable, mutli-user.... Unix had all this and MORE years before MS.
In article <zFtu5.43236$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS7572420206.html
>
> Real preemptability (not the fake they have now),
> somewhat less than laughable SMP (as opposed to the
> laughable MacOS 9-ish SMP they have now)
>
> "For example, as a desktop user I want to be able
> to watch a movie and hear the sound, while also
> running a browser and my mail program. And when
> I use the mail program and the browser, I don't
> want any glitches in the movie or sound. That
> really requires improvements in Linux responsiveness"
>
> I must apologize. I had been giving Linux FAR too much
> credit. I had assumed that they had at least a decent
> PMT implementation, but according to this article, it
> appears it's no better than the MacOS's CMT.
>
> Can't watch a movie and check email at the same time?
> And this is supposed to be the OS that's the death of
> the MS OS? Give me a break!
>
> Linux strives to be more like Windows in every iteration.
>
> Case in point?
> http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/previews/2285/1/
>
> Let's look at the screenshot up in the upper-right
> corner of this web page.
>
> - At the top of the screen, we have a MS Win95-ish
> task bar, completely with pop-up menus, shortcuts
> on the bar (like IE4 shell integration or Win98),
> a SYSTRAY-like program notification area on the
> right-hand side. It's bad enough they copied everything
> lock, stock, and barrel, but they even had to put it
> in the same positions. Linux developers are copying off
> of the $millions of research Microsoft did to develop the
> Win95 interface to make it efficient and conducive to
> productivity.
>
> - We have Icons on the desktop that look remeniscent of
> Win95. Of course, with the icons on the left-hand side.
>
> - We have another Win95 taskbar knock-off on the bottom of
> the screen complete with clock.
>
> - We have a web-browser file navigator just like the IE4/
> Win98 "View as Web Page" function that so many Linux
> idiots make fun of Microsoft for, yet try so hard to
> immitate (KDE, Gnome, and now Eazel)
>
> - We have the ability to "view as icons" which is a
> direct knock-off of Windows 2000's "View as Thumbnails"
> option
>
> Shall I go on?
>
> It's sad, really. It's sad that they bash on Microsoft for
> the same things they try to emulate (and do a shitty job
> of, BTW).
>
> -Chad
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Raz A Mattazz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: what's up with Sun?
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 02:24:04 +0200
"David C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: > A queved command advantage that you
: > have no noticable use for in any "normal" computer use.
:
: You and I have very different definitions of "normal".
Maybe I should have said "typical" instead. Clarification; By
"normal" I was referring to everyday home computer activities
like browsing the web, wordprocessing, playing games. Stuff that
wouldn't require any extraordinary performance from the hard
drive/s.
: > SCSI is grossly overhyped.
:
: Yes. But that's no reason to underhype it in response.
I'm a SCSI (only) user myself, but I know that when someone
*asks* if he needs SCSI, it usually means he doesn't really need
it. It's not decent to recommend an overkill solution to someone
who's just a bit in the dark at the moment.
You *can* use a Jaguar for transporting groceries, but a light
truck is usually the more reasonable option.
Raz
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029)
Subject: Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years
Date: 10 Sep 2000 13:47:10 GMT
>Linux developers are copying off
> of the $millions of research Microsoft did to develop the
> Win95 interface to make it efficient and conducive to
> productivity.
So who cares?? M$ copied the GUI off Apple who had originally copied it from
Xerox. Along with the mouse. Stop your bitchin
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Subject: Re: Popular Culture
Date: 10 Sep 2000 13:50:08 GMT
In article <8pboij$mup$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>A wonderful musical score, that fists in that catagory of music I mentioned
interesting metaphor 8^)
>above, by a contempory group was for the movie Dune. I think the group was
>Devo?
Toto
Original music by
Brian Eno (prophecy theme)
Roger Eno (prophecy theme)
Daniel Lanois (prophecy theme)
Steve Lukather (as Toto)
David Paich (as Toto)
Marty Paich (additional music)
Jeff Porcaro (as Toto)
Mike Porcaro (as Toto)
Steve Porcaro (as Toto)
Joseph Williams (I) (as Toto)
Dune (1984)
http://us.imdb.com/Soundtracks?0087182
Superb movie and music! Like much of Frank Herbert's work,
it's about becoming *fully conscious*.
"The sleeper must awaken!"
I like the director's original version, with the intro by
Princess Irulan (Virginia Madsen). It's her best scene, too.
In fact, there are a lot of strong female characters:
Francesca Annis .... Lady Jessica
Linda Hunt .... Shadout Mapes
Sian Phillips .... Reverend Mother Gaius Helen Mohiam
Sean Young .... Chani
and at age 8 or 9,
Alicia Witt .... Alia (as Alicia Roanne Witt)
http://us.imdb.com/Bio?Witt,+Alicia
------------------------------
From: lyttlec <[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: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 13:56:37 GMT
Simon Cooke wrote:
>
> "lyttlec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > OK NT when it BSODs. Explorer.exe when it performs an illegal operation
> > (about twice a week for me). MSWord. Netscape. For some reason, I can
> > kill Netscape and it sometimes leaves a zombie running that doesn't
> > register in task manager.
>
> Have you tried getting it to crash in SafeMode? You should consider checking
> your video drivers, or running in standard SVGA only.
>
> Simon
Why? Those aren't the modes commonly used. But whether it is the fault
of the video driver or of Netscape, NT BSODs with processes still
running. If the video driver is at fault, there is a problem with the
mouse driver and keyboard driver. I can understand that the mouse driver
is still running, but wonder why the keyboard is ignored.
I had one NT box BSOD with "the ping of death". It kept pinging away at
something like every .01ms and brought down 3000 computers. I was away
from my desk when this happened and didn't know that my PC had decided
to BSOD so it took a while before I shut it off and rebooted. That cost
a couple of million dollars to fix. Mine wasn't the first or last to do
that. So the network hardware was upgraded to include intelligent
switches that would detect high repetition pinging and isolate the
offender.
BTW, I know my system has a problem that can be fixed only by a complete
reinstall. The previous user did something strange and damaged it in
some subtile way. But the "Certified Microsoft Professionals" keep doing
just a surface re-install that preserves the problem. I've been told by
others that the only way to get the problem fixed is to go in reformat
the hard drive and then trash the MBR. Then they will reinstall NT.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
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: 10 Sep 2000 13:57:14 GMT
On Sun, 10 Sep 2000 00:32:24 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>Are large stores like Electronics Boutique and Babbage's and their customers
>pirating software when the stores purchase preowned computer games from the
>public and resell them back to the public again?
I'm pretty sure these EULAs allow transfer.
The only place where I've seen restrictions on resale is for MS OS licenses.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029)
Subject: Re: How did Tux the Penguin come about?
Date: 10 Sep 2000 13:59:30 GMT
Torvalds liked penguins. TUX stands for Torvalds Unix
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Nik Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Nik Simpson" <[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: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 10:03:37 -0400
"lyttlec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> So, as you ask, what painted the BSOD on the screen?
The same thing that prints kernel PANIC messages in UNIX, it's the OS
kernel's last dying effort, not the BIOS.
--
--
Nik Simpson
------------------------------
From: lyttlec <[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: Sun, 10 Sep 2000 14:05:53 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:cEGu5.593$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > On Sat, 9 Sep 2000 21:52:10 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > >Actually, if you legally purchase a piece of software, you legally own
> it
> > > >regardless of the EULA (Own here means to own a copy of the liscense
> and
> > > >media upon which the software has been placed). Whether or not you
> have
> > the
> > > >right to USE that software is an entirely different matter and is what
> > the
> > > >EULA is all about.
> > >
> > > Does this mean that you may transfer ownsership ( that is sell ) the
> > software
> > > if you don't agree to the EULA ? ( for example, Win98 licenses are
> > definitely
> > > non transferable if you accept the EULA. )
> >
> > Yes, you can sell the software and the liscense to someone else. The
> EULA,
> > however, may not be valid after doing so. That doesn't mean you haven't
> > sold it, or that the new owner has not purchased it. It just means the
> EULA
> > does not allow the use of the product after having transferred it to
> someone
> > else (if the EULA is so written).
>
> Are large stores like Electronics Boutique and Babbage's and their customers
> pirating software when the stores purchase preowned computer games from the
> public and resell them back to the public again?
Bookmans here in Tucson said that the games they sell permit transfer.
Only MS has written threatening letters based on the EULA. The used
computer shops have started turning away systems that don't have only
the OEM original MS software.
It has not been tested here to see if the MS EULA is enforceable. No one
has the money to fight MS just to prove a point.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
