Linux-Advocacy Digest #285, Volume #29 Sun, 24 Sep 00 10:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: TEST---DO NOT READ (Jacques Guy)
Re: hypocritical Unix apologists (Richard)
Re: Win2K ("James")
Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively (Andres Soolo)
Pan newsreader and an RIAA lawsuit--a joke? ("Adam Warner")
Re: Pan newsreader and an RIAA lawsuit--a joke! ("Adam Warner")
Re: The Government's Decision to Use Microsoft (Steve Mading)
Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451800 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Win2K ("Adam Warner")
Re: Win2K ("Adam Warner")
Re: Win2K ("PistolGrip")
Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively (lyttlec)
Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively (lyttlec)
Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively (Jack Troughton)
Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively (Timberwoof)
Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time? ("Osugi
Sakae")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 08:18:36 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: TEST---DO NOT READ
Juan Manuel Ramos wrote:
> TEST TEST TEST TEST
TESTES -- DO NOT SQUEEZE
------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: hypocritical Unix apologists
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 08:25:52 GMT
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> Unfortunately, Richard seems to display the opposite of discipline,
> and instead of bothering to do something, he's become an armchair
> critic ( which is a role well suited to lazy people with big egos )
I'm very curious here; exactly what does this make you? I've made
my own design and I'm programming it. Exactly what have you done that
gives you the right to criticize my design, which you know nothing
about, as overly complicated, unimplementable, or not widely useful?
------------------------------
From: "James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win2K
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 10:26:42 +0200
For me, there is one app though that manages to BLUE SCREEN even Win2k. And
that is Adaptec Easy CD Creator. I did a quick search on DejaNews and
amazingly found over 1100 posts with Adaptec spelt "aCRAPtec". Apparently a
lot of other users are also not impressed ...
James
"jbarntt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:5Ngz5.111777$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <8pni5u$dlb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Adam Warner wrote:
> > >Too many factual errors to even respond to.
> > >
> > >Enough said (it looks like a poor troll).
> > >
> > >Adam
> > >
> > >PS: Aaargh. Can't stop myself:
> > >1. Of course Win2k can multitask.
> > >2. Many application crashes do not bring down explorer.
> >
> > So many application crashes do bring down explorer - the shell.
>
> I've been using w2k since it was commercially released and have yet to
have
> a crashed app bring down the OS.
>
> >
> > >3. Even if explorer halts, it can be restarted (the computer will NOT
> > >spontaneously reboot).
> >
> > Always, or just sometimes?
> >
> > >4. Win2k is a stable operating system (but of course it is not "the"
most
> > >stable OS).
> >
> > Err, how do you know? The previous poster was quite convinced that it
> > be unstable. So much so that he'd rather use linux at home. Looks like
> > Win2k is unstable. In his view, at least.
>
> W2k is stable. My experience is limited to the desktop version and the
> server version running in stand alone mode purely as a terminal server.
>
> >
> > >
> > >Phew. Enough said.
> > >
> >
> > Very little said, I thought, but an awful lot stated without a hint of
> proof.
>
> Likewise for your statements.
>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mark - remove any ham to reply.
> > (Killed (sigserv (This sig is reserved by another user)))
>
>
------------------------------
From: Andres Soolo <[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: 24 Sep 2000 08:41:33 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy samurai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How can you possibly explain them using APPLE products in the movie
> "Hackers"?! Geesh, what self-respecting technophile (let alone hacker)
> would use an APPLE these days? I see paid advertisements in movies all the
> time for APPLE.
Many. Especially after the wide dissemination of Linux :-)
And besides, it's really nothing wrong with the guts of an Apple system.
In most cases, the Apple machines turn out to be even better from the
technical point of view.
--
Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I waited and waited and when no message came I knew it must be from you.
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Pan newsreader and an RIAA lawsuit--a joke?
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 21:34:32 +1200
Hi all,
I'm trying to establish whether the guys over at www.superpimp.org are
joking about whether the RIAA is suing them for the Pan Newsreader being
able to decode binaries from newsgroups. I can't find any credible news
report of the matter and it must be too frivolous to be true ;-)
The more I read it's really a great joke. I can't believe I fell for an
urban myth!
Thanks,
Adam
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pan newsreader and an RIAA lawsuit--a joke!
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 22:07:52 +1200
Their FAQ answers this definitively.
I had checked out the site a while back and it had left an impression in my
mind that the RIAA were suing a producer of newsreader software. That's why
I stated that I had fallen for an urban myth. It's a good lesson.
Here's one site that really fell for it:
http://www.dmusic.com/news/news.php?id=2742
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Government's Decision to Use Microsoft
Date: 24 Sep 2000 10:09:32 GMT
The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: I think you might has misunderstood me; my understanding is that
: the app died, but the OS stayed up. (However, without the app,
: the computer unit wouldn't be able to control its part of the ship.)
: I fail to see how Linux would be more intelligent in that situation,
(Not directly, but there is the fact that unix programmers *tend*
not to put all their eggs in one basket and have the whole system
running on one monolithic process. A typical unix solution would
have seperate processes for different functions, such that a crash
in one doesn't take out the whole system. This, of course is not
enforced, it's just a general style programmers *tend* to follow.)
: although by default Linux doesn't kill things that divide by 0 (instead,
: one gets a NaN, which is a fairly funny number), so maybe that was
: the problem in a nutshell.
That depends. With double-float values it returns infinity.
(A bogus representation that gets printed as "inf" by printf.)
But with integers, dividing by zero generates an exception.
At least that's what happened when I just tested it now.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 12:00:27 GMT
Donovan Rebbechi writes:
> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>> Can we please argue about something a little *less* important here? :-) :-)
> Summary of the latest Tholen-war [1]
>
> >>>>>>>>>> did
> >>>>>>>>> didn't
> >>>>>>>> did too
> >>>>>>> did not
> >>>>>> did too, see above.
> >>>>> incorrect
> >>>> illogical
> >>> incorrect
> >>I know you are but what am I ?
> >illogical
> incorrect
> ....
> ad infinitum
Yet another person suffering from reading comprehension problems, given
that the above is not an accurate "summary". You've left out all the
explanations I provide, as well as the evidence that the other party is
posting for "entertainment" purposes.
> Yeah, he's in my killfile. I'm just hazarding an educated guess about
> the content of the debate.
Poor education.
> [1] In response to these discussions, I propose the following definition:
>
> A "Tholen-war" is an argument that so severely degresses along
> did/didn't/did too lines that neither party recalls what the discussion
> was about, and the did/didn't/did too makes up the bulk of the debate.
Why name it after me, given that I haven't engaged in any such argments?
> A flame war is characterised by it's ferocity, whereas a "Tholen-war"
> is characterised by its triviality and silliness.
Why name it after me, given that I haven't engaged in any such argments?
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win2K
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 00:14:11 +1200
Hi Mark,
I appreciated the compassion of your post about an employee with dyslexia.
You have to realise that what I posted was correct. The initial poster made
the logical fallacy of implying that a particular instance of something
happening means it will always happen (Some A is B does not imply all A is
B).
> >1. Of course Win2k can multitask.
IIRC, the original poster said that Win2k cannot multitask any better than
Win 3.1!
> >2. Many application crashes do not bring down explorer.
Making the point that not all application crashes bring down explorer...
> So many application crashes do bring down explorer - the shell.
Of course some can.
> >3. Even if explorer halts, it can be restarted (the computer will NOT
> >spontaneously reboot).
>
> Always, or just sometimes?
Caught me there. That would be sometimes.
> >4. Win2k is a stable operating system (but of course it is not "the" most
> >stable OS).
> Err, how do you know? The previous poster was quite convinced that it
> be unstable. So much so that he'd rather use linux at home. Looks like
> Win2k is unstable. In his view, at least.
To deny that Win2k can be a stable OS is just plain silly.
> Very little said, I thought, but an awful lot stated without a hint of
proof.
(Sigh). Do I really need to provide proof that Win2k can multitask better
than Win 3.1? (3.1 couldn't even pre-emptively multitask). Do I really need
to provide proof that all application crashes don't bring down explorer? Do
I really need to demonstrate how to restart explorer using the Task Manager?
Do I really need to labour the point that Win2k CAN be a stable OS? (and
look how I tempered my initial comment)
Any person that disputes these simple issues is a poor alternative-OS
advocate. Let's stick to debate about debatable issues :-)
Regards,
Adam Warner
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win2K
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2000 00:14:13 +1200
> For me, there is one app though that manages to BLUE SCREEN even Win2k.
Yep, suffered from that:
http://www.wininformant.com/display.asp?ID=2868
Unconscionable responses from both MS and Adaptec.
Adam
------------------------------
From: "PistolGrip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win2K
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 07:18:35 -0500
"James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:39cdbac4$0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> For me, there is one app though that manages to BLUE SCREEN even Win2k.
And
> that is Adaptec Easy CD Creator. I did a quick search on DejaNews and
> amazingly found over 1100 posts with Adaptec spelt "aCRAPtec". Apparently
a
> lot of other users are also not impressed ...
There is a patch for EZ CD Creator and Win2000. Not sure of the URL, but it
works fine here on both W2k Pro and W2k Server with the Patch,
Dave
------------------------------
From: lyttlec <[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: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 12:23:40 GMT
Bob Germer wrote:
>
> On 09/23/2000 at 05:47 PM,
> Timberwoof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > On the other hand, the Macintosh platform is well supported with
> > software by such industry leaders as Adobe, Macromedia, and Microsoft
> > itself. Far from being so "proprietary," they adhere to all sorts of
> > hardware and software standards. Apple is a leading force in creating
> > some of these standards. And because of the Macintosh's excellent
> > support for networking, Apple product users are well-connected.
>
> Well, I had occasion to visit CompUSA earlier this afternoon. Just for
> fun, I counted the software titles for Intel and Mac platform. There were
> 498 different titles for Intel platform machines. For Mac, 44 of which 36
> were games.
>
> This proves that Macs are not well supported other than for games.
>
> --
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 14
> MR/2 Ice 2.20 Registration Number 67
> Finishing in 2nd place makes you first loser
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MS is an owner of CompUSA. CompUSA employees tell me that they have a
demand for Linux and Mac products, but cannot get them. I was looking
for a sound card and modem for one of my Linux machines. All the cards
on the shelf were WinModem and windows "optimized" sound cards. The
clerk, who new computers, told me that they had cards I wanted on order
for months. But only one or two would come in every 6 weeks or so. He
said that there were announced plans to make all their computers
strictly MS-only. But cheap, very very cheap. This policy, BTW, screws
the local franchise holder who sees 20% of his business walk.
------------------------------
From: lyttlec <[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: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 13:19:38 GMT
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, lyttlec
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on Sat, 23 Sep 2000 22:27:51 GMT
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> >>
> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, lyttlec
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote
> >> on Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:34:03 GMT
> >> <[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?
> >> >>
> >> >> -Peter
> >> >Get the "Killer Tomato" series movies. you gotta watch them all.
> >>
> >> Including the cartoon series? :-)
> >>
> >> --
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- catchy tune, though
> >Haven't seen the cartoons on tape. Got any or know where I can get them?
> >Do they have any puns on the order of "Who's that ringing in the Seine?"
> >The product placement jokes were all in the full length movies.
>
> Dunno, admittedly. If memory serves, they were originally shown
> on Fox, but they're probably kicking around the syndication circuit,
> or mouldering away somewhere. I don't know where they are now.
>
> As for product placement...I don't remember anything specific.
> The girl tomato was rather cute, though. :-) Just don't throw
> any salt her way...or was it pepper? One changed her into
> a tomato, the other changed her back into a human-looking girl,
> with mutant powers.
>
I think the product placement jokes were in "Killer Tomatoes Strike
Back". In the first half of the movie, beer comes in white cans with the
word "BEER" stenciled on it, Breakfast cereal is in a big white box with
"Corn Flakes" on it etc. In the second half of the movie the actors
spend time turning beer cans around so you can read the Bud. label, a
waitress sets a big box of Kellogg's Corn Flakes in front of one of the
actors face. He moves it aside, she puts it back, etc.
"Return of the Killer Tomatoes", BTW, stars George Clooney
If you look closely at the logos in movies you will notice that they are
ofter larger, more colorful, and placed differently than on
off-the-shelf products. That is so they can be read without the actors
having to be obvious about it.
> The other characters I remember were a prepubescent boy (a friend
> of the girl, who was definitely post-pubescent) and someone
> who was always wearing a parachute and flight suit of some sort
> (Wilbur?) on the good side, and the mad -- no, angry -- scientist
> who created all of the tomatoes in the first place, with his
> blonde (in both senses of the word) male sidekick, who was more
> of a surfer dude than a proper sidekick.
>
> IMDB has now reminded me of the names of these characters, and
> that the series was made in 1990, and that the boy delivered pizza.
> (It's an off brand -- and on more than one occasion, Wilbur's
> culinary concoctions were very off, as they didn't use tomatoes,
> presumably because of Gangreen's possible involvement therewith.)
>
> Dr. Putrid T. Gangreen (What a name! No wonder he's evil...)
> Igor (his sidekick)
> Wilbur Finletter (the guy with the parachute)
> FT (the little fuzzy mutant tomato who was discarded
> by Gangreen and adopted by the good guys)
> Chad (I think this is the kid)
> Zoltan (?)
> Whitley White (male TV newscaster, for laughs, I guess :-) )
> Tara (the very female tomato)
>
> Apparently Wilbur was lifted from the 1978 movie; the others don't
> show up. ("Dr. Nokitofa"? One wonders what *he* did.)
>
> Bizarre. :-) But then, so were the movies (they made more than one??),
> as I understand it. (Maybe we just like bizarre movies.
> _Killer Klowns from Outer Space_ must have sounded like a good idea
> at one point to somebody, but...??? There's also one I have
> somewhere which has four tall women dressed in black who were
> ostensibly some sort of space siren/vixen/something, but I can't
> remember the title now; I have it on tape somewhere.)
>
> Ahem...back to Independence Day...I'll admit that the idea of throwing
> a human virus into an alien ship's computer system struck me as
> being this side of silly at the time, and it still does. Unix,
> for example, is remarkably resistant to virii (even Win95 would be
> hard to infect from a Mac virus, without very careful engineering
> and knowledge of the fact that the virus should infect Win95),
> and infecting the Space Shuttle's flight computers -- which are
> very stupid by today's standards, but ultra-reliable -- seems
> to me well nigh impossible. (Presumably, shields and weapons
> control would be as tightly protected on the alien spacecraft.)
>
> Good thing, too. Imagine the havoc if one got a
> smiley-face and some music on a visual panel display, instead of
> critical flight data such as airspeed or engine power! :-)
> NASA would probably die of embarrassment, and the shuttle crew
> might simply die. Somehow, I doubt this would be A Good Thing. :-)
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- who still can't get that tune out of his head
Ever wonder how those aliens ever conquered any planet? Much less were
able to get into space.
Ever wonder why they would even bother with planets at all? Everything
they need is around Jupiter or in the Oort cloud and easier for them to
get to. "Preditor" and "Janissaries" offered the only reasonable
explanations I can think of for aliens hanging around Earth.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jack Troughton)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 13:11:29 GMT
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 23:08:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charles Kooy)
wrote:
>Chris Wenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> >>>>> "Bob" == Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > No, my intellectual argument against using Macs is that they are largely
>> > unsupported, proprietary oddities far from the mainstream of the real
>> > computer world. Apple product users are the hermits of the 21st Century.
>>
>> That's not an argument, intellectual or otherwise. That's an opinion.
>>
>And a particularly ironic one considering the author of the opinion is a
>user of OS/2, which is rapidly removing itself from the mainstream
>thanks to the truly astounding inability of IBM to sell the thing
>properly, despite its obvious technical merits. Apple, on the other
>hand, is introducing a new OS based on Unix, which I think even the most
>vocal and biased wintellistas would find hard to classify as an
>unsupported, proprietary oddity.
Oh, I don't know about that. They did manage to make (this is profit)
92 million off of OS/2 sales in '99. There's an article on ZDNet
somewhere by Esther Schindler with this number, in case you should
doubt the provenance:). However, most of these sales are not in places
that most PC users would see it: cash registers (all those touch
screen jobs you see in bars run OS/2), equipment control systems
(Hydro Quebec, Canadian National), banks (Bank of Montreal and Canada
Trust are banks that use it extensively here in Canada, for example;
Deutches Bank and Bank of Brazil are a couple of others), and so on.
Also, OS/2 supports a very large number of open protocols. Its TCPIP
stack is one of the best.
Admittedly, IBM has done a very poor job of selling it on the desktop.
However, they are far from the only company that has problems <koff
koff a-HEM> competing on the desktop with MS. It kind of sucks for
competition when the OEMs are locked into providing only one company's
software on the units they sell, thereby removing the main channel of
distribution to end users.
If you'd like to see where OS/2 is going on the desktop, take a look
at eComStation, which should go GA by the end of this year. The (so
far incomplete) website is at http://www.ecomstation.com, and you can
go look at the mail list at http://www.egroups.com/ecomstation to get
a feel for what's happening on the ground.
As a person who uses warp extensively at home, and knows both it
strengths and weaknesses well, this is going to be sweet. A fully
journalled file system will be part of the package. For the record,
NTFS only journals file system entries, not the files themselves. SMP
support will be an extra-cost addon, if you want it. Lotus SmartSuite
will be included as well. Warpzilla will be in there, UDF support,
Desktop on Call (it has a java applet that will let you use your
desktop remotely through a browser) and Java 1.3. Also, the company
that is putting this together (Serenity Systems) will be including
WiseManager/WiseMachine (same app; one setup for network, one setup
for standalone) for managing apps and users. If using WiseManager on a
network, it is possible to add an application to up to 4000 machines
simultaneously. IIUC, this is dependent on the THREADS setting in the
config.sys in warp, which has a maximum setting of 4096. The company
used warp server for their initial development because of its superior
threading over that of NT, according to the lead developer. He said
that he found NT to start falling over after initiating several
hundred threads. He has done demos with networks of over a hundred
machines being completely reinstalled and reconfigured in under two
minutes. Windows client support for this is being worked on now.
Finally, they're going to include a CD full of useful
freeware/shareware. This is going for $139 USD to owners of warp 4
licenses; eCS Pro upgrade (includes SMP) is $249 USD.
Personally, I'm going to go for the standard edition: I don't have any
SMP hardware here.
There are also plans to release two developer releases, called
'Developers Workbench'. The first one will include all the
documentation and freeware dev tools such as gcc, virtual pascal, etc,
to be sold for a nominal fee (50-100 bucks is the figure being noised
about on the mail list) and a professional one with the high end
tools, like Visual Age for Java and C, Simplicity for Java, etc. This
one will cost a lot more; those tools aren't cheap.
Seeing as IBM is clueless when it comes to marketing to home, SOHO,
and small- and mid-sized businesses, outsourcing marketing to another
company is probably the smartest move they've made with OS/2 in a long
long time.
They've already sold two licenses of the first release (a beta!) to
Walt Disney. It's being used as a control system for the Main St. USA
exhibit at Walt Disney World.
I guess Walt Disney must be convinced that it's a worthy product if
they're willing to let a beta release control one of their flagship
exhibits at their largest theme park.
The preview release should be hitting the desktop sometime in the next
two weeks...
--
==========================================================
* Jack Troughton jake at jakesplace.dhs.org *
* http://jakesplace.dhs.org ftp://jakesplace.dhs.org *
* Montréal PQ Canada news://jakesplace.dhs.org *
==========================================================
------------------------------
From: Timberwoof <[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: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 13:35:48 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine) wrote:
> >Most people use NT and ME?
> >
> >You're out of your mind (what little apparently remains).
>
> I dunno; 100 million units is awful hard to argue with.
> Or is it 200M now? I'd have to look. (Mind you, that encompasses
> Win 3.1 all the way to Win2k -- which is an NT evolutionary derivative
> anyway, further confusing things; I guess the marketeers didn't like
> "NT" anymore :-) ).
Are we establishing a new standard for counting an operating system's
installations, where old, obsolete, and most likely retired computers
are still counted? I thought we weren't supposed to do that ... remember
the hullabaloo that erupted four years ago when Apple claimed 65 million
users?
> Personally, I wish Linux had 100M copies. :-)
Well, if you count all the times anyone ever downloaded a distribution,
then multiplied by a factor representing the expected number of users
for systems being ported and developed now, you might just could get
that... }: )
--
Timberwoof <timberwoof at infernosoft dot com> Chief Perpetrator
Infernosoft: Putting the No in Innovation. http://www.infernosoft.com
"The opposite of hardware is not easyware."
------------------------------
From: "Osugi Sakae" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time?
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 22:55:19 +0900
In article <QdLx5.1913$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jason N"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's simply software bugs and poor design. Enough said. The next
> version of windows is supposesd to fix all this.
>
> -Jason
>
>
Simply software bugs and poor design? Simply? Those are huge problems for
a company that makes billions of dollars and (more importantly) claims to
spend billions of dollars developing their software.
Which next version of windows. NO, scratch that. MS has been claiming "the
next version ..." since, well, as long as I can remember (not that long,
admittedly).
I doubt MS software will be fixed before 2100. But thanks for the laugh.
Osugi Sakae
remove dev-null to email me, if you really must.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
