Linux-Advocacy Digest #249, Volume #29 Thu, 21 Sep 00 16:13:09 EDT
Contents:
Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively (dc)
Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively (Peter Ammon)
Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively (dc)
Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT (C Lund)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (The Ghost In
The Machine)
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows (Tony Tribelli)
Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Another "feature" in IE discovered. ("Ingemar Lundin")
Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (The Ghost In
The Machine)
Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT (dc)
Re: Unix more secure, huh? (sfcybear)
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows (Brian V. Smith)
Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively (Mayor Of R'lyeh)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: dc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 13:08:18 -0500
On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 13:26:48 -0400, Peter Ammon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>dc wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:05:05 -0500, Mayor Of R'lyeh
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >>> Also the movies are a business not an Apple welfare office. Do you
>> >>> realy think that if Compaq made a better offer they'd turn them down?
>> >>
>> >>Yes, frankly, I do.
>>
>> LOL! Apparently I missed this the first time around. C'mon
>> Peter...think about it. That's a riot!
>
>You can't argue with facts.
>
>http://www.apple.com/hotnews/features/starringapple.html
>
>"It’s sometimes as easy as the director saying, ‘It has to be a Mac, and
>we can’t use anything else.’ That happens a lot.”
Facts? From Apple marketing? Don't be silly.
------------------------------
From: Peter Ammon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 14:20:48 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
dc wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 13:26:48 -0400, Peter Ammon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >dc wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:05:05 -0500, Mayor Of R'lyeh
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >>> Also the movies are a business not an Apple welfare office. Do you
> >> >>> realy think that if Compaq made a better offer they'd turn them down?
> >> >>
> >> >>Yes, frankly, I do.
> >>
> >> LOL! Apparently I missed this the first time around. C'mon
> >> Peter...think about it. That's a riot!
> >
> >You can't argue with facts.
> >
> >http://www.apple.com/hotnews/features/starringapple.html
> >
> >"It’s sometimes as easy as the director saying, ‘It has to be a Mac, and
> >we can’t use anything else.’ That happens a lot.”
>
> Facts? From Apple marketing? Don't be silly.
I trust Apple's knowledge on the demand for their products in film more
than I trust yours.
-Peter
------------------------------
From: dc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 13:25:28 -0500
On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 14:20:48 -0400, Peter Ammon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>dc wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 13:26:48 -0400, Peter Ammon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >dc wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 11:05:05 -0500, Mayor Of R'lyeh
>> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >>> Also the movies are a business not an Apple welfare office. Do you
>> >> >>> realy think that if Compaq made a better offer they'd turn them down?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Yes, frankly, I do.
>> >>
>> >> LOL! Apparently I missed this the first time around. C'mon
>> >> Peter...think about it. That's a riot!
>> >
>> >You can't argue with facts.
>> >
>> >http://www.apple.com/hotnews/features/starringapple.html
>> >
>> >"It’s sometimes as easy as the director saying, ‘It has to be a Mac, and
>> >we can’t use anything else.’ That happens a lot.”
>>
>> Facts? From Apple marketing? Don't be silly.
>
>I trust Apple's knowledge on the demand for their products in film more
>than I trust yours.
Just like you trust Apple's ByteMarks.
It's called spin, Peter. I can't believe you're seriously disagreeing
on this point.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (C Lund)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 20:40:04 +0100
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, dc
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's where we differ. It's *YOUR* homework, because it's *YOUR*
> problem and *YOUR* lack of knowledge, not mine.
*You're* the one with your knickers in a bunch, not me. That makes it your
problem.
--
C Lund
http://www.notam.uio.no/~clund/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:42:31 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sun, 17 Sep 2000 17:20:44 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[snip for brevity]
> Sooner or later, you're going to have to let the user
> take the training wheels off. You simply can't get
> around that without conspiring to cripple the system.
>
>[deletia]
>
>BTW, there's nothing in Unix keeping one from ensuring that the
>user that can restore /home can't overwrite /etc. Although, why
>a user would want to overwrite all of /home is somewhat of a
>mystery. (IOW, your example is somewhat artificial)
Not necessarily. Suppose one was playing host to a multi-user system
(even one as simple as the owner, the owner's spouse, their two kids) and
the disk holding /home died. Assuming the owner (= superuser) actually
did things right, and had backups on a regular basis, he'd want
to restore them all.
Now, naming a user 'etc' is a bit peculiar. :-)
(To be pedantic, of course, one would be overwriting an empty
/home directory in this case -- unless things such as /home/ftp,
/home/httpd, or /home/samba exist on a fresh new install of RH 6.2,
SuSE, or whatever one is using. Obviously, it's highly
dependent on how one sets up one's system -- mine is rather
customized, for example.)
And yes, I've had disks die. They don't last forever.
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
From: Tony Tribelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:54:38 GMT
John Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[Topic: OS/2 and IBM and MS]
> Now, the joint agreement for the project allowed each company
> access to each other's code, so Microsoft used IBM's Presentation
> Manager code to develop their own GUI user interface for Windows
> (Program Manager) that had significantly lower hardware
> requirements than OS/2 (also less capable, but that's another
> story). They then used their exclusive MS-DOS licensing
> arrangements with manufacturers to tie Windows to DOS and force
> manufacturers to bundle Windows with their PC's. Meanwhile, MS
> kept delaying in their own applications projects for OS/2.
> Needless to say, IBM was not pleased with this and felt Microsoft
> was diverting resources that should have been used for the OS/2
> projects to Windows instead and thereby undercutting IBM's
> potential revenues from the project.
I think MS was far more supportive of OS/2 than you suggest, at least
initially. I recall viewing video tapes of a 1987 (?) MS Developer
Conference and MS was making it perfectly clear that OS/2 with Presentation
Manager (PM) was the future. Windows 3.0 was discussed briefly and described
as a bridge for non-power users to get from DOS to OS/2 PM. Power users were
advised to go straight to OS/2 PM.
> To make a long story short, the OS/2 joint project fell apart in
> 1989 when IBM wanted to make OS/2 fully 32-bit while Microsoft
> insisted on keeping it 16-bit ...
I thought MS initially wanted OS/2 to be 32-bit but IBM didn't want to
exclude PC/AT systems?
Also, I thought that two parallel OS/2 projects were started. IBM would do
one and MS the other. The IBM project would be released first and it would
be 32-bit and Intel x86 specific. The MS project would be the next major
release after that and it would be CPU portable, support SMP, ... All those
NT "buzzwords".
> ... The companies parted ways, but
> the divorce left IBM with access to the Windows v3.x source code
> and Microsoft with license revenues for copies of Windows bundled
> with OS/2 and for the HPFS filesystem. Microsoft later went on
> to develop their own 32-bit operating system (Windows NT v3.1 --
> what happened to v1, you may ask? Ask the MS Marketing Dept.)
> using OS/2 code jointly delevoped in the earlier project.
It was called 3.1 to match the 16-bit Windows 3.1. The two were remarkably
alike in terms of user interface. Microsoft also went through a stage where
everything had the same version numbers. The development tools had some big
jumps due to this.
The rumors are that WinNT was previously known as OS/2 NT, and before that
OS/2 3.0. Recall the parallel projects, IBM's 2.0 being the 32-bit x86
specific, MS's 3.0 being the CPU portable 3.0.
Tony
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:57:30 GMT
Nathaniel Jay Lee writes:
>> Mark Kelley writes:
>>>>> It appears that the only person who does not seem to think Dave is
>>>>> suffering from a cerebral wedgie is Dave, himself.
>>>> "Will he be able to resist replying? Nope. So little
>>>> self-discipline, such a weak will. I guess he CAN be
>>>> controlled by others."
>>>> --Mark Kelley
>>>>
>>>> How ironic.
>>> And thanks for proving it yet again, Dave!
>> "Will he be able to resist replying? Nope. So little
>> self-discipline, such a weak will. I guess he CAN be
>> controlled by others."
>> --Mark Kelley
>>
>> How ironic.
> Jesus Christ on a crutch!
There is no deity involved. "It was my cross-circuiting to B that
recovered them."
> If you're going to be a moronic defensive knee-jerk respondent, at
> least don't prove yourself an idiot with your own post.
The key word here is "if".
> You do realize that by responding with a post that basically says
> anyone that replies is an idiot you are calling yourself an idiot.
On the contrary, it's pointing out the irony of the situation.
Will Mark Kelley see himself?
> If you don't, then I suggest you take a few moments to just
> back up and look at yourself real hard.
Hey, I'm not the one who made the statement. Mark Kelley did. It
can therefore be applied to him, but I've never bought his argument.
> My second point: show some goddamned originality.
Why should I waste originality on someone like Mark Kelley?
> I don't mind trollers,
Why not?
> and I don't mind morons so much as long as they are entertaining.
So, we can add you to the list of people actually encouraging such
behavior and therefore contributing to the overall decline of USENET.
> But saying the same thing over and over and over and over and over
> and over and over and over... do you get the idea yet?
The real question is whether you get the idea.
------------------------------
From: "Ingemar Lundin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another "feature" in IE discovered.
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 19:02:12 GMT
"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skrev i meddelandet
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <8pvp36$snu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, MH wrote:
> >I'd gladly trade my movements being tracked for a browser that can:
> >
>
> I wouldn't for anything Microsoft could offer me.
>
> Has anyone else noted that Netmeeting seems to set up TCP connections
> with a Microsoft site, even when using a 'local' server (ie., one
> within an intranet)? I spotted these when listing my masq firewalls
> state with ipfwadm.
>
> Yes, I have to use Win98 SE for work. I do not like it.
and? whats the problem? you do know that you can change that under settings?
/IL
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 19:01:30 GMT
Nathaniel Jay Lee writes:
>> Try directing your fire extinguisher at the base of the flames. It's
>> more effective that way. Feel free to count the number of words
>> posted by Jason, Aaron, and myself to this global warming thread
>> prior to the time of your complaint. Then tell me why you're
>> complaining to me and not them.
> I came complaining to you because all that you did was
> repeat your favorite phrase over and over and over.
Incorrect. I see that you didn't bother to count. No surprise
there. Here's another "favorite phrase" for you: you just made
an unsbstantiated claim.
> I'm sick of seeing you say the same things over and over and
> over and I've only read a very few of your posts.
See a doctor.
> I'm not trying to put out the fire caused by my flames to you,
I was talking about the fire that Jason and Aaron were pouring
fuel on.
> I'm just trying to prevent others from being burned by flames
> that aren't aimed at them.
Why aren't you trying to put out flames, regardless of who they
are aimed at? Oh, that's right. You like morons as long as they
are entertaining, including their flames.
> I was not bothered by the conversation between Aaron and
> Jason because they were at least writing 'something'
Like insults. Interesting that you weren't bothered by that.
> instead of just hitting 'cut-n-paste' a thousand times and
> trying to pretend that showed how intelligent they were.
Who allegedly did that in the "Global Warming" thread, Nathaniel?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 19:01:38 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sun, 17 Sep 2000 17:41:48 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Sat, 16 Sep 2000 18:11:53 GMT, Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>>
>>> I guess you could write an "openfile" command that does this using the
>>> existing functionality. The reason why no one's written such a thing is
>>> more lack of interest than anyone else.
>>
>>Which is quite telling. But it's not a big surprise that programmers
>>wouldn't be interested in helping users, even if they are (technically,
>>not mentally) users themselves.
>>
>>And writing an "openfile" command would not be sufficient for
>>consistency. The shell would still treat "executable" and "non-
>>executable" files in completely different ways for no justifiable
>>reason whatsoever.
>
> Bullshit.
>
> There's a very GOOD reason to distinguish between the two.
>
> Data != programs.
>
> It never has.
Pedant point. A program is data to the microprocessor (and to the
program or library loader embedded deep in the kernel); data may
be interpreted as a program at some level; some files are both
(a C++ file may be text data to a naive text editor, just another file
(text, binary, it doesn't really care) to copy to a file copy
utility [*], and source input to a compiler/linker combo that ultimately
generates a native executable.
But as for the issue regarding "opening" a file in a visual shell such
as Explorer, it's not clear to me that one would meaningfully want to
"open" an executable unless one wanted to hex dump it, copy it, or
"string" it ('strings' is a Unix command), looking for printable text
stuck deep in the source code and ultimately compiled into the executable.
Similarly for shell scripts (which are also editable via a simple
text editor).
So I have to agree with you. :-)
Side note: creating a .reg file results in a popup menu having
"Merge", not "Open", as its first entry; this suggests that the
system can be changed to e.g. have "Execute" or "Run" instead of
"Open". Not that that fixes things all that much, as double-clicking
will still do the first thing, instead, perhaps, of the right thing.
Note also that a .reg file can be edited with a text editor and can
instigate all sorts of wackyness; it's not quite as bad as a
.VBS file, as shown by Melissa and ILOVEYOU, but it can do quite
a bit of stupid damage if one double-clicks on it and doesn't
know what one is doing!
[rest snipped]
[*] some older operating systems, such as Apollo DOMAIN Aegis and
VAX/VMS, enforcement of data types (record types) is done at
the OS level, not at the DLL or application level; this means that
file copying can be tricky, although both Aegis and VMS had
the ability to open a file in "block" or "raw" mode, for the
purposes of just such an operation.
Unix (and Linux), by contrast, treat a file as an ordered bucket
o' bytes. These bytes are readable in serial or random order
(using lseek()). Sparse files appear during reading to have
lots of zeroes (and may have to be specially created and copied;
I'd have to look at cp to see how smart it is, although there is
a --sparse option), but otherwise it's pretty straightforward.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: dc <[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: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 14:00:26 -0500
On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 20:40:04 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(C Lund) wrote:
>In article
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, dc
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> That's where we differ. It's *YOUR* homework, because it's *YOUR*
>> problem and *YOUR* lack of knowledge, not mine.
>
>*You're* the one with your knickers in a bunch, not me. That makes it your
>problem.
I am? You're the one whining because I won't explain it to you, so
it's pretty obvious it's your problem, CLund.
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix more secure, huh?
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 18:59:52 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> sfcybear wrote:
> >
> > In article <sS0x5.2269$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > "sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:8q0n8r$ipc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > And I supose that all the MS OS users are current on patchs??? I
> > doubt
> > > > that.
> > >
> > > No, I think that there are lots of users out there under the
mistaken
> > > impression that they can install a Linux firewall and "forget
about
> > it"
> > > because it "just runs".
> >
> > Yeah, Linux is more stable than MS's OS's
>
> No. It's not. The stability of both systems depends on their drivers
and
> configuration.
Overall, My opinion is Linux is more stable, Even Eric (a windows
supporter) stated that. I just agreed!
as Eric stated:
"No, I think that there are lots of users out there under the mistaken
impression that they can install a Linux firewall and "forget about it"
because it "just runs""
The point he seems to be making here is that many users tend to forget
about patching such a stable system as Linux
>
> > > I know people running firewalls on 2 or 3 year old
> > > copies of Linux or FreeBSD. Never applying even a single patch
> > because they
> > > aren't Unix people.
Wow 2 or 3 years of operation by someont that is NOT a linux user or
Unix person???? I think that is a great Kudo for linux! Granted patches
*SHOULD* have been added. But it is apperant that these firewalls did
'just run' as eric claimed above.
They just installed the firewall on the advice of
> > a
> > > unix person that is no longer with the company.
> > >
> >
> > And with MS OS's some clone that thinks he/she is and admin
>
> That's a bit categorical there buddy. The majority of Windows
> administrators I know are highly individualistic. But maybe they just
> "think" they are administrators. It's easy to see how they could be
> fooled into thinking that what with those paychecks and all :-)
Hey, Why didn't you bitch when a windows user made the claim that
"windows users are expected to be behind in security patchs"? I'm using
statements that WINDOWS users have made somewhere else in the thead.
>
> > click a few
> > ICONS and *THINKS* they have installed a firewall.
>
> Well haven't they? If you close the ports where the exploits are the
> exploits cannot be used. I can go into Windows NT or 2000 TCP/IP
> properties and disable all ports without any additional software.
Just
> try to exploit that machine :-)
And how do *YOU* know if *they* closed the ports, many point and
clickers don't understand the IP stack well enough to know what they
did. Please follow the thead, we were talking about *some* admins. Not
you, Miss. Center of the World.
>
> > The point I made
> > still stands. If you do not keep up with patches you are asking for
> > problems no matter wich OS you use.
>
> Agree. A server with *no* ports open is no much of a server. You
just
> need to have *only* those ports you need open and have properly
patched
> server software behind them.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Brian V. Smith)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: 21 Sep 2000 19:00:26 GMT
In article <eNqy5.27045$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
|> In comp.os.linux.misc Brian V. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|> : Really? Which ones were those that came with the source code?
|>
|> BSD
|> Perhaps the original AT&T UNIX as well?
I think you had to pay as well as sign a non-disclosure agreement
to get the AT&T (then Bell Labs) Unix sources.
--
===============================================================
Brian V. Smith ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www-epb.lbl.gov/BVSmith
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
I don't speak for LBL; they don't pay me enough for that.
Check out the xfig site at http://www-epb.lbl.gov/xfig
To the optimist, the glass is half full. To the pessimist, the
glass is half empty. To the engineer, the glass is twice as big
as it needs to be.
------------------------------
From: Mayor Of R'lyeh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 14:26:23 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 21 Sep 2000 13:35:18 -0400, Peter Ammon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
chose to bless us with this bit of wisdom:
>Mayor Of R'lyeh wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 23:30:19 -0400, Peter Ammon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> chose to bless us with this bit of wisdom:
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >Mayor Of R'lyeh wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 19:21:56 -0400, Peter Ammon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> chose to bless us with this bit of wisdom:
>> >>
>> >> >Timberwoof wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "samurai"
>> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Facts don't really change anything for brainwashed Mac people. You
>> >> >> > had to go to APPLE's web site and find the information for them...
>> >> >> > and they will still go back to OSTRICH MODE. Damn capslock key (must
>> >> >> > be my cheap beige keyboard).
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > --Samurai
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> >> > > Peter Ammon wrote:
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > Mike Byrns wrote:
>> >> >> > > > >
>> >> >> > > > > You mean Jeff Goldblume? The same Jeff Goldblume that has
>> >> >> > > > > appeared in several Apple Computer television commercials? The
>> >> >> > > > > one that's on the Apple payroll? Do you know that Apple pays
>> >> >> > > > > big bucks in hollywood to get it's computers in "cool" movies
>> >> >> > > > > like Independence Day?
>> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> > > > I don't believe you. Can you back this up?
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > Sure! Here you go.
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > http://www.info.apple.com/pr/press.releases/1996/q3/960628.pr.rel.fo
>> >> >> > > x.ht ml
>> >> >> > >
>> >> >> > > Heh.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> But for the rest of us Mac people who aren't brainwashed, facts work.
>> >> >> What's the big deal about Apple paying for product placement? You know,
>> >> >> if Apple *didn't* do that, someone somewhere would be throwing a hissy
>> >> >> fit that Apple isn't following up this most obvious marketing technique.
>> >> >
>> >> >I take issue with the implication that Apple has to seek out producers
>> >> >and ask them to add their machines. On the contrary, it looks as though
>> >> >the producers are falling over themselves to get Macs into their films.
>> >> >
>> >> >-Peter
>> >>
>> >> Then please explain the purpose of the Apple Product Placement Team
>> >> refered to in the article. If everyone is falling all over themselves
>> >> why does Apple need a team dedicated to getting their products placed?
>> >
>> >At the very least, they need a team to interact with producers who want
>> >to place their products.
>>
>> If you think that's all they're doing then you need to think again.
>
>If you think that Apple doesn't need a team to interact with producers
>who want to place Apple products, you need to think again.
Again I say if you think that's all they do you need to think again.
They are also activiely seeking opportunities to place Apple's
products. I don't know why this is so hard for you to accept. Its not
an unusual practice.
>
>>
>> >
>> >People were falling all over themselves to order Beta.
>>
>> Beta what? Betamax? Betacam?
>
>Mac OS X Beta, of course.
Well why didn't you just say so. When you say 'Beta' Mac OS X Beta is
about the last thing that comes to mind for me.
>
>>
>> > By your logic, Apple should therefore have made no provisions to let people order
>Beta.
>> > :-)
>>
>> I know of no Apple product called Beta for people to order.
>> No doubt you think the sales force does nothing but sit on their asses
>> all day and answer the phones since orders are pouring in at such a
>> huge rate there's no need to actively sell.
>
>I haven't seen Apple actively selling OS X Beta much. It seems to have
>sold itself.
To a handful of people. You are aware that Apple sells more than the
Mac OS X Beta aren't you? :)
>
>>
>> >> Also the movies are a business not an Apple welfare office. Do you
>> >> realy think that if Compaq made a better offer they'd turn them down?
>> >
>> >Yes, frankly, I do.
>>
>> Peter Ammon- Cornell student and RDF sufferer. Please give generously
>> so that we may rid this poor boy of his affliction. Mail your checks
>> to:
>>
>> The Peter Ammon Help Fund
>> PO Box 104
>> Middletown, IN 47356
>
>I don't see why this is hard to accept.
Because its bullshit.
> There's an image and a symbolism associated with Apple that isn't there for Compaq
>or HP.
>Producers can take advantage of that to help develop the characters and setting.
How many characters do producers really want to come across as
semi-computer literate mindless members of cult that worships a
company?
>
>Here's an analogy. A man, tired from a hard day of work, is shown at a
>drive through. He orders a burger, some fries, and a Coke. The
>audience nods assent...they've been there before.
>
>The next man orders a burger, some fries, and a Safeway Select Cola.
>The audience looks confused.
And how does that relate to Apple? The confusion (Such as it is.
People going into a movie are already suspending a large amount of
rationality in order to enjoy those movies about aliens, ghosts and
characters who are able survive situations that would kill 100 people
in real life.) in that situation would be that fast food joints don't
sell grocery chain house brands. If anything the prescence of Apples
everywhere would be confusing since everyone knows thats not the case
in real life.
--
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
http://members.xoom.com/Aickman
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
