Linux-Advocacy Digest #222, Volume #29 Wed, 20 Sep 00 00:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: The Linux Experience (David M. Cook)
Re: The Linux Experience (David M. Cook)
Re: filename extensions are NOT a kludge (Richard)
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Re: The Linux Experience (David M. Cook)
Re: Computer and memory ("Chad Myers")
Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT ("Chad Myers")
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:12:24 GMT
In article <VKtu5.43238$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry to reply to myself, but I found even MORE evidence
> of Linux developers trying as hard as they can to copy
> everything from Microsoft including Icon layout, wording,
> and colors:
>
> http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/previews/2013/1/
> http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/previews/2013/1/screenshot1376/
> http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/previews/2013/1/screenshot1375/
>
> Is this not a DIRECT copy from Outlook in every respect of the
> appliction?
>
> Jesus, for bashing Microsoft so much, you guys sure try hard to
> copy everything they do!
>
> -Chad
I think there's actually a symbiosis going on here. Microsoft has
recently adopted some concepts from KDE and GNOME for Windows ME,
and Gnome and KDE have been sprucing up applications to make them more
like Windows.
In some cases, this isn't even coincidental. Microsoft often
undercompensates ISVs for the software it appropriates, and this
often results in support for competitiors (like Linux, UNIX, and Mac).
Ironically, FVWM95, which provided a "Windows 95 look and feel", never
really caught on. Most people prefered KDE which was a look-and-feel
clone of CDE used in AIX, Solaris, HP_UX, and other UNIX flavors.
Others preferred Afterstep which was a clone of NeXtStep.
The similarities aren't always accidental. In some cases, the original
designers of the original interfaces are directly involved in the Open
Source effort and are often committed to making the Open Source version
bigger and better than the originials.
This isn't new. It's been going on even before Richard Stallman decided
to GPL Emacs after Gosling tried to rip off a commercial verion with
proprietary extensions. Xerox PARC contributed most of their best work
(including STiX - Smalltalk for X) to UNIX and X11. Furthermore, Xerox
introduced virtual desktops to X11 an a nearly exclusive basis.
We are even beginning to see Microsoft explicitly excluded from
Open Source software through the use of licensing terms that
prevent linkage to proprietary libraries.
The qt library used for KDE is free to Linux users and nearly
$6000 per developer to Windows programmers.
> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:zFtu5.43236$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > 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)
Real preemptability has been available for quite some time
under both UNIX and Linux. The main problem with true real-time
preemptibility is that it enables a single high priority service
to consume all CPU time, which can lead to system failures
elsewhere.
Both Linux and UNIX use a form of scheduling that assures that all
processes are scheduled eventually. With 40 levels of "Nice" (used to
calculate priority), it's usually only a matter of months before an
application that previously required real-time service could be handled
by a "nice -20" routine. The typical uses where true real-time is
actually critical (microjets used to trigger a sequence of chemical
reactions, a series of explosions to cause a nuclear reaction, or the
precise timings required for optimal fuel economy in an automobile) are
usually programmed in FORTH, not UNIX/Linux.
The best-known real-time version of UNIX is Lynx, which is used to
process satellite feeds (where no resend is possible), or to control
sattellites. In these applications, an extra 20 nanoseconds will
make a difference, and there won't be a second chance later.
Modern Linux systems running on 500 mhz pentium class machines can
perform an average of 1 million context switches per second, which
includes ONLY those processes which are ready to run.
One can go into the blood and guts of OS theory and chip
micro-architecture for the last 1/10th of 1% of performance, but when
your OS spends 98% of the time waiting for the disk drive to spin
(8 milliseconds per access on a 7200 RPM drive with cache), it's
a bit silly to try and haggle over the extra 200 picoseconds
you'd save by switching to the top priority process every time it's
interrupt is triggered.
The applications where it might actually make a difference would be
things like controlling the spark, fuel injection, and cam-shaft
positioning for an automobile. Even then, the engine cranks
1200 RPM even with 8 cylinders, that's only 38,400 "cycles" and
about 1/4 million critical events to manage per second. A 300
mhz transmeta chip would still have enough time to refresh video
displays for the entire dashboard AND do DSP on the audio and video
of a digital video system.
> > "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"
Actually, Linux can play multiple video channels quite smoothly.
In most cases, the only "glitches" come if the video feed is
coming from an NT server. Linux was playing MPEG on 100 mhz
pentiums back when Windows was still trying to process 9600 baud
serial ports (due to interrupt handling difficiencies in Win 3.11).
> > 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.
There is a radical difference between the PMT used in a real-time
system and the preemptive multitasking used by EITHER NT, Linux, or
Win2K.
NT, Linux, and Win2K all support preemptive multitasking that manages
the load across multiple contending processes. At the same time, all
of them contain measures in their schedulers to assure that every
process that can run is given at least SOME time slice. This is
critical when a system is experiencing a denial of service attack.
The preemptive multitasking used in real-time systems are based on the
assumption that some processes MUST run IMMEDIATELY (within picoseconds
of the satisfying interrupt or signal). This is most critical when you
have 200-300 signal sources and all of them need to be handled within
picoseconds of the event. Typical applications are Nuclear weapons,
electronic switching systems (100 or more DS-5 lines for example).
Ironically, many, including myself, have often criticized Linus for not
using interrupts as signals instead of doing "real processing" during
the interrupt. Back in the days of 80386SX/16 processors, you needed
to handle interrupts immediately. Most recent Linux drivers have the
interrupt set a semaphore and then pass control back to a high priority
process through the scheduler. Unfortunately, we are still suffering
from a few drivers that try and manage the ethernet buffer during an
interrupt cycle.
> > Can't watch a movie and check email at the same time?
Sure you can. You can watch 2-3 movies at the same time. You just
might be challenged if you wanted to watch 300-400 movies at the same
time, AND you wanted to decrypt DVD-CSS on all 400 channels. In this
case, one lost byte would result in loss of the channel. This is where
a real-time kernel (for routing 400 video channels in real-time to 4000
destinations) would probably be better handled with a true real-time
operating system.
> > And this is supposed to be the OS that's the death of
> > the MS OS? Give me a break!
Microsoft still only supports 3 priorities, which makes it even harder
to manage multiple tiers of high priority channels. Linux offers 40
priorities, which means that the one or two extremely high priority
processes (nice -20) won't be waiting very long. Which is why video
actually plays smoother over Linux than on Windows (for the same CPU,
memory, and bus bandwidth).
Fortunately, with 700mhz K6 and Athalon chips running under $200,
including the motherboard, even Windows ME can show smooth-scrolling
video. I don't even want to think what ME would do to video on a 100
mhz pentium with 32 meg of RAM.
A good example of Video on Linux is the TIVO box, which lets you watch
one program while storing another.
> > Linux strives to be more like Windows in every iteration.
There's a convergence. Microsoft is borrowing more and and more from
UNIX and Linux, while Linux is using more and more axioms from
Microsoft.
For obvious reasons, icons and trademarked logos are avoided by both
sides, but many of the core features are the same on both systems.
> > 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.
Ironically, this was something that was originally part of the Motif
Window Manager. A similar feature was included in Open Look Window
Manager as well. And the concept of shortcuts on the bar was from CDE.
Microsoft introduced many of these features in Windows 95 because they
were so popular among UNIX users. Microsoft copied a number of concepts
from MWM (OSF), OLWM (Sun), Open Desktop (SCO), and NeXtStep (NeXT).
> > 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.
Which was a rip-off of $millions in R&D performed by Sun, HP, IBM,
SCO, BSDi, and other UNIX vendors, as well as Apple, Xerox, and
of course Linux.
Furthermore, many of the new features from Windows ME are also borrowed
from KDE, GNOME, and NextStep.
And speaking of royal rip-offs, Windows ME's hottest feature, video
editing, was kept out of Linux because the DeCSS was blocked by the
courts while Microsoft put "Lock-stock-and-barrel" piracy tools into
ME.
UNIX has had video editing capabilities since before Star Wars (the
original). Pixar used UNIX on Crays and Power 6/32 servers back in the
early 1980s.
Linux has Video editing and has already established a pretty
substantial market with it's TIVO boxes.
Now, when you have sweeps, fades, special effects, conversion to 3D
objects, talk to me about innovation.
> > - We have Icons on the desktop that look remeniscent of
> > Win95. Of course, with the icons on the left-hand side.
It's just one of several placement options. You can specify gravity
on most window managers, move ICONs left, right, top, or bottom. To
suit your preferences. Most people prefer top or bottom.
> > - We have another Win95 taskbar knock-off on the bottom of
> > the screen complete with clock.
Of course, this one has some additional features, like multiple
desktops, the ability to rearrange your top and bottom menu bars
in any way you like, the ability to select your desktops. Add to
that the fact that this is only the latest contender in a number of
different desktops (often possible to use more than one at a time),
and was probably specifically arranged to look more like NT for this
screen shot (to reduce the exlanation required).
What you can't see in the screen shot is that there are a number of
different themes that can make this screen look about 40 different
ways.
With GNOME, you can make the screen look more like a Mac, more like
Motif, more like Windows, or like something "out of this world" (arctic,
space, jukebox...). It really boils down to how much real estate you
want to waste on eye-candy.
> > - 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)
The joke here is that UNIX and KDE had blurred the distinctions between
web page and file almost 6 months before Windows 98 was released. The
KDE 1.0 version didn't support JavaScript on the pages.
> > - We have the ability to "view as icons" which is a
> > direct knock-off of Windows 2000's "View as Thumbnails"
> > option
Which is a direct knockoff of TWMs "view as icons" feature. You seem to
think that Microsoft is the only company that ever innovates. You pull
up a screen shot which was deliberately arranged to make the desktop
look more like Windows 9x to reduce the need for explanation of the
screen shot. What isn't in the screen shot is the hundreds of options
that X11 and Nautilus have to offer.
I've often been amused by the number of options available to KDE users.
It borders on the ridiculous. But if you have the CPU Bandwidth,
memory, and screen resolution,...why not!
> > Shall I go on?
You should! You should get yourself a copy of Linux, go through
all the various window managers, desktops, and GUI tools and explore
them completely. You should give us a comprehensive chart of all
of the features available on Windows 98, 2K, and ME, along with KDE,
Gnome/Enlightenment, AfterStep, and Fvwm and give us an feature by
feature breakdown of who supports what features.
Would you like to take bets on which OS as the widest variety of
options, the most features, and the most innovations? Of course,
you would probably not notice any of the features not available for
Windows.
I'm sure it took some real effort to mix up the exact same shade of
putrid blues used on Windows 9x/ME. Windows has some nice options as
well, and if you have LOTS of memory, you can even run the virtual
desktop from the NT toolkit under NT (will it run on Win2K?).
> > 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).
Actually, nearly all of the "innovations" you mention above were
actually features of other systems before they were implemented in
Microsoft windows. The few exceptions (ctl-alt-del to get task
manager), were kludges created to make up for deficiencies of Windows
3.1 and Windows 95 first edition. Thank goodness for the 95B release,
NT 4 with Service pack 3, 5, and 6a, and Windows 98 Second Edition.
We already have Windows 2000 with SP1, and ME is already putting the
critics to sleep in the isles.
Again, the biggest feature of ME, video editing, was a feature
of TIVO, which has been out for over 9 months now, and is based on
Linux.
I like Windows 2000. It's clean, fast (when you have 160 meg in your
laptop and 500 meg to swap), and it even runs some of the NT
4.0 applications without modifications. But I've also noticed that even
Microsoft's "updates" includes a whole series of patches for Office,
replacement of Explorer, upgrades to numerous Microsoft applications,
and replacements for most of my drivers. And even then, I had to
install my own drivers for a number of devices, some of which didn't
work.
I've noticed that there isn't a big rush by Lotus, Borland, Corel, or
much of anybody else, for that matter, to make things work for Windows
2000. Microsoft may actually have to reengineer their next patch to
provide backward compatibility with NT 4.0.
Meanwhile, Lotus Notes runs on Wine for Linux quite nicely now,
and a number of old third-party Windows 95 applications run quite
well under Wine.
Microsoft has again become a victim of it's own success. Microsoft now
has to compete with Microsoft for market share. It's discovering, the
hard way, just how effective it's monopoly really was. Not that
Microsoft will give up control of the market. They're more determined
than ever to push exclusive, proprietary technology into the internet
(giving them control of the net), and more stubborn than ever about
refusing to adhere to standards they don't control through exclusive
NDA contracts.
Meanwhile, there are about 600 million Windows 9x machines out there,
that don't need replacement. There are about 60 million NT machines out
there, that don't need replacement. IF people are looking for something
new and different, they are looking at Linux, not 2000 or ME.
> > -Chad
--
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] (David M. Cook)
Subject: Re: The Linux Experience
Date: 20 Sep 2000 03:18:48 GMT
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 05:52:12 GMT, Jake Taense <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Yet another moron with minimal reading skills.
My apologies. I only glanced at your post and missed the context. I don't
read things c.o.l.a all that carefully, and I'm probably not going to start
anytime soon, no matter how many times I'm called a moron.
However, in the situation you describe (which I would call "an undetermined
state", i.e. fucked up), I would have just reinstalled the Red Hat XF*
packages and reconfigured the video if necessary.
The XFree86 documentation may not be that good; it's a community project, so
it depends on people taking initiative to fix problems rather than posting
pissy rants on newsgroups.
Dave Cook
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David M. Cook)
Subject: Re: The Linux Experience
Date: 20 Sep 2000 03:20:05 GMT
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 05:49:58 GMT, Jake Taense <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hmmm... there is that reading comprehension issue again.
Hmmm...at this point you might consider that your writing lacks clarity.
Dave Cook
------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: filename extensions are NOT a kludge
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:22:18 GMT
Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
>Most of what you are saying is based on the assumption
> that users 'want' to be educated on how to use a computer.
> While that would be an admirable goal, it isn't a
> realistic one.
Why not? Please distinguish learning to use a computer
from learning how it works ...
Users do care about using their computer to do their
job, and they don't give a shit about learning how the
computer works. These are completely independent
things.
> You are assuming that the user doesn't want to have his
> hand held. But at the same time that two or three people
> like you are saying, "Stop holding my hand" you will see a
> thousand people saying, "Please, hold my hand. Don't make
> me think. Don't make me learn how to do it properly."
If you have to hold their hand, it will be easier to do it
in a clean system than otherwise.
> My personal feeling on the entire issue is, there are
> always going to be a few that want to know how to use the
> system (no matter how 'easy' or 'kludge-free' it is) and
> there will always be far more people that don't want to
> know how to use the system, they just 'want' the system.
Now why would they do that?
> Filename extensions is no less a kludge than any of the
> other methods being discussed. Yes, it's easily
> recognizable to someone that is familiar with computers
> already, but for a relative novice, especially if that
> novice wants to no nothing about the computer he is
> 'using', that little difference means exactly nothing.
>
> It's always going to boil down to education of the user.
> And until we have the 'walk up and talk to it' type of
> system (maybe even then), education of the user is always
> going to be a factor.
Good point. However, being a kludge (an ad hoc repair
to a bad design) has little to do with being unintuitive.
Hmmm, put that way it doesn't make much sense. How
about, good design doesn't imply intuitiveness (and in
reality there is no such thing as intuitiveness) but it
does imply ease of learning.
Interfaces can be of three types,
functional
metaphoric
idiomatic
functional interfaces (what we have) correspond
to the internals of the software and require users to
know the workings of the machine in order to make
sense of the interface. This is Bad design. It's also
what we have.
metaphoric interfaces are also crap, btu they're
separated enough from the internals of the machine
that programmers unthinkingly use idiomatic ideas
when going for metaphors.
idiomatic interfaces treat parts of the interface as
a set of self-contained concepts which the user must
memorize.
An interface should be self-contained. Users should
not have to know why the machine does something,
only that it does what the interface says consistenty
and that this interface is itself simple, elegant and
consistent.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 13:33:45 +1000
> > > > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > Britain recently outlawed handguns. Murder rates have
> > > > > > > > tripled
> > > > > > > > since.
> > > > > > > > Australia outlawed ALL firearms. Murder rates have
> > > > > > > > quintupled.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So...quite obviously, the correlation between gun ownership
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > murder is tenous at best.
Any refs for this??? I must have been dreaming when Michael Diamond won
Olympic gold medal trap shooting yesterday then?? Maybe he was using a toy
shotgun???
Has the murder rate trippled in Aus???? Not from what I see, although I dont
have any figures to quote
FYI:
http://cs.nyu.edu/phd_students/amygreen/Links/gunslong.html :
In 1992, handguns were used to murder 36 people in Sweden, 97 in
Switzerland, 60 in Japan, 128 in Canada, 33 in Great Britain, 13 in
Australia, and 13,495 in the United States.
(Embassies and foreign crime reporting agencies, FBI Uniform Crime Reports)
and from the same page:
"The presence of a gun in the home triples the risk of homicide in the home
and increases by five the chance of a suicide"
New England Journal of Medicine
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David M. Cook)
Subject: Re: The Linux Experience
Date: 20 Sep 2000 03:35:21 GMT
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 16:08:24 GMT, Jake Taense <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>From XFree86's web site she found that TrueType support was introduced in
>version 4. She knew she had 3.3.6. There was no hint that RedHat's
>distribution of XFree86 wasn't standard, and she had no reason to suspect
Does this not suggest to you that Red Hat is to blame for not making this
clear, not the XFree86 folks?
Dave Cook
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:39:41 GMT
"Ingemar Lundin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:l7Sx5.329$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skrev i meddelandet
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > No wonder 3rd world countries are excited, but when those same 3rd
> > > world countries try to sell their products in the US they find all kind
> > > of protectionist measures, which has been my point in this thread: the
> >
> > It has nothing to do with market protectionism and EVERYTHNG to
> > do with national defense.
> >
>
> national defence?
>
> <LoL> against what?...el salvador invading usa?
>
> typical paranoid right-wing thinking...
typical left-wing oblivion and arrogance
How about if a foreign telco company bought out some
of our major infrastructure companies. Much of our
telecommunications resources (arguibly the most
precious resource America has, next to humans) would
be in the control of another country who, should they
become hostile or unfriendly decide to flip the switch,
pull out and leave us screwed. Our nation depends on
our internal telecommunications. Our external is a little
differnt despite what "No Name" would have you believe.
Of course you liberals would be just as happy selling off
everything to the Red ChiComs like Fearless Leader has
almost done.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2000 03:42:50 GMT
"Loren Petrich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8q8nvv$gj9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <Vgbx5.6097$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"Loren Petrich" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:8q3c2q$gel$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >> Actually, Win2K is simply WinNT 5 -- same kernel, save overall
> >> features, the works.
> >Not the same kernel. Based on the same kernel, much of the same
> >code, but there have been many enhancements. More features,
> >more works.
>
> Like, for example
www.microsoft.com/windows
see for yourself.
I listed a few in another post in this thread.
Please read the thread before posting.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 23:36:18 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Britain recently outlawed handguns. Murder rates have
> > > > > > > > > tripled
> > > > > > > > > since.
> > > > > > > > > Australia outlawed ALL firearms. Murder rates have
> > > > > > > > > quintupled.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > So...quite obviously, the correlation between gun ownership
> > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > murder is tenous at best.
>
> Any refs for this??? I must have been dreaming when Michael Diamond won
> Olympic gold medal trap shooting yesterday then?? Maybe he was using a toy
> shotgun???
>
> Has the murder rate trippled in Aus???? Not from what I see, although I dont
> have any figures to quote
The Ne'er-do-wells in Aussie have declared Open Season on the public
since the total firearm ban.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: 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: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
their behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
