Linux-Advocacy Digest #362, Volume #29 Sat, 30 Sep 00 02:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Chris
Sherlock)
Re: Windows+Linux+MacOS = BeOS (Chris Sherlock)
Re: Why I hate Windows... (Chris Sherlock)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Goldhammer)
Re: Why I hate Windows... (Chris Sherlock)
Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years (Chris Sherlock)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (FM)
Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time?
("Blacknight")
Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the (Chris
Sherlock)
Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the (Chris
Sherlock)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: How low can they go...? (Mike Byrns)
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: How low can they go...? (Mike Byrns)
Re: How low can they go...? (Chris Sherlock)
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 15:08:11 +1000
From: Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
FM wrote:
>
> Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >How much do you think I make?
>
> Well you don't have to make much at all to beat me. Check where my
> messages are coming from.
Ah... college student! That explains all :)
> >Common Lisp? Wooo... I've seen a bit of Lisp and it looks like line
> >noise :) Maybe one day when I get around to it I will have a look at
> >these languages. I've heard pretty good things about Scheme and Lisp,
> >but that's about it.
>
> Scheme's simply awesome.
Any URLs?
> Common Lisp, I have dubious feelings about, but it
> seems to allow people to get real work done, in a
> portable manner.
That's good enough for me!
> Dan.
Chris
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 15:16:37 +1000
From: Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows+Linux+MacOS = BeOS
Perhaps it's because computer geeks don't make cool music.
Chris
Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
>
> Philo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spoke thusly:
> >...don't have alife right now...
> >but i had one...and probably will again soon
> >
>
> Don't count on it. Once you get into computers you are
> pretty much done having 'a life'. ;-)
>
> If it wasn't for the fact that the girl I ended up
> marrying had enough guts to almost literally club me over
> the head and drag me out of my computer room, I probably
> wouldn't even have the semblance of a life. At least now
> when I get frustrated with my computers I have someone to
> complaign to about it :-).
>
> Oh, and BTW, I'm only 26 at the moment, and gave up my
> life for computers about five years ago. Before that I
> was a guitar geek (and it's still my favorite hobby).
>
> So, why are guitar geeks considered cool for their
> aloofness, and computer geeks are considered outcasts and
> wierd? Must have something to do with the stage lighting.
> I have yet to see good stage lighting on a computer geek's
> desk.
>
> --
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 15:23:28 +1000
From: Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why I hate Windows...
And far, far more expensive.
Chris
James Stutts wrote:
>
> "mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> <snip>
>
> > Spoken like a true astroturfer, not a user. Because win98se is so
> unstable,
> > it is necessary to save files every minute or two (particularly for those
>
> Actually, the better approach is to not use a home operating system (Win98)
> in
> a corporate environment. NT was designed for this. While not perfect, it
> is
> far more stable than Win98.
>
> JCS
------------------------------
From: Goldhammer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 04:21:32 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Goldhammer wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Sep 2000 04:16:26 GMT, Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > >Half the OS projects out there are about being a thousand times
> > >more efficient, reliable, and secure than Unix and it will never
> > >be sufficient.
> >
> > Can you explain what you mean here? Can you provide specific
> > examples?
>
> OS supremacy has to do with politics and nothing more.
I would say that OS advocacy has to do with politics, fashion,
vogue, and nothing more.
OS supremacy has to do with performance under specified
(sometimes extreme) condition.
That I require my OS to by responsive on demand while
concurrently execting mind-boggling side-tasks, is not
a political exercise.
It's something I require.
--
Don't think you are. Know you are.
--
Don't think you are. Know you are.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 15:28:10 +1000
From: Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why I hate Windows...
James Stutts wrote:
>
> "D. Spider" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[snip]
> > And the DOS (renamed "Win9x" then renamed "WinME") line is less
> > commercial than the NT line?
>
> Sure it is. It costs quite a bit less than NT. You do get what you pay
> for.
I pay hardly anything for Linux and I have an *extremely* stable O/S! I
guess that *I* got what I paid for.
[snip]
Chris
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 15:47:01 +1000
From: Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years
Along the lines of "Navigating" through a solar system/file system, has
anyone seen the Doom version written to kill processes? Can't remember
to URL, but AFAIK the larger the process the harder it was to kill.
Chris
Bob Hauck wrote:
>
> On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 15:21:09 -0500, Mike Byrns
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >KDE is *not* a clone of CDE. CDE more closely resembles Windows 3.1,
>
> CDE has programs in "drawers" that pop out of a Panel that looks a lot
> like the one in KDE that has menus of programs. It also has multiple
> workspaces that are selected by buttons on the panel, as in KDE. It
> also offers a Motif look & feel.
>
> >KDE window frames and button placement are virtually identical to
> >Windows 95.
>
> You can change the button placement in the KDE Control Panel. You can
> also change the window frames if you have the Theme Manager installed
> (on 1.1.2). Win95 doesn't offer those features IIRC. Nor does it
> offer multiple workspaces or allow you to move the taskbar around.
>
> KDE has borrowed from several places. CDE is one, Win95 is one.
>
> >Or they may be failing to innovate, preferring rather to ride on the
> >coat-tails of Windows UI success.
>
> As Windows rode on the Mac's coat-tails?
>
> >I'd like to navigate into folders like I walk into a room
> >in Unreal Tournament.
>
> Someone actually wrote a program that allowed you to navigate through
> the Linux filesystem that way. IIRC it showed the various different
> types of files as different kinds of planets in a solar system and file
> sizes were denoted by the size of the planet. It was amusing to play
> with but didn't seem to have any real advantages as far as day-to-day
> use.
>
> --
> -| Bob Hauck
> -| To Whom You Are Speaking
> -| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FM)
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: 30 Sep 2000 04:36:54 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>FM wrote:
>> Well you don't have to make much at all to beat me. Check where my
>> messages are coming from.
>Ah... college student! That explains all :)
Yup :)
>> Scheme's simply awesome.
>Any URLs?
http://www.schemers.org
http://www.cs.rice.edu/CS/PLT/Teaching/Lectures/Released/
And the infamous SICP (Structure and Interpretation
of Computer Programs), of course, though it really
isn't meant as a book to teach scheme, but rather as
a book that uses scheme to introduce fundamental
concepts for programming and Computer Science in
general.
Dan.
------------------------------
From: "Blacknight" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.windows98
Subject: Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time?
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 05:12:40 GMT
That is correct, However this threat is insinuting that Windows98 freezes up
all the time. And the fact is that it does not. There are plenty of people
who have managed to run it nearly seemlessly myself included. I am not a
Linux expert and do not claim to be, but I have had no problems using
Windows in it's intended environment. For you to wholesalely deminish
Windows to Not a Good Operating System is an unfair conclusion.
"Bruce Malmat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:CaaB5.893$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I heartily disagree.
>
> A good operating system CANNOT be crashed by poorly written applications.
> Poorly written apps don't crash a good O/S. Rather, the O/S dumps the
poorly
> written application.
>
> A good operating system rejects invalid requests made by poor apps.
>
> A good operating system restricts access to system resources that should
not
> be monkeyed with by apps.
>
> A good operating system is ... NOT WINDOWS.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> --
> Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Blacknight) wrote in
> <RvTA5.3419$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >I'm Sorry but I disagree with you completely I am running Windows 98se
> >and have not experienced a lock up in over a year. Believe it, it's
> >true. Lock ups are caused by poorly programed applications, not by
> >Windows98. The key to a stable operating system is purchasing reliable
> >software and keeping to a minimun the number of TSR's, and applications
> >running in the background of your machine. If you are constantly
> >installing and uninstalling programs/TSR's your OS will become unstable
> >eventually weather you are using Windows98, Linux or even MacOS.
>
> After a year of running my Windows 98 SE system is starting to crack
around
> the edges. Recently, the scan registry program decided there was a problem
> and reverted my system to a configuration from several months ago. I'm
> still picking up the pieces of that one.
>
> I would not say I am constantly installing/uninstalling programs. As for
> TSR's, they went out yonks ago - this is Windows 98, it doesn't need DOS
> style TSR's anymore.
>
> As for your assertion that the same will eventually take out Linux or even
> MacOS, I couldn't say, but I doubt it. Windows 98 SE was never designed as
> a real OS - it doesn't have proper memory protection for applications,
only
> Windows 2000 does, and does Linux.
>
> My beef about Linux is the lack of decent software for it, and the desktop
> seems to be behind Windows.
>
> --
> Pete Goodwin
> ---
> Coming soon, Kylix, Delphi on Linux.
> My success does not require the destruction of Microsoft.
>
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 16:11:24 +1000
From: Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.windows98
Subject: Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the
This is why I search in Google when I need to find info about MS
products. I put the words site:.microsoft.com in front of my keywords.
Chris
John Garrison wrote:
>
> M$'s site is so vast I wouldn't know where to post a bug report if I had
> one!
>
> --
> Counfucious said:
> He cannot die happy; that hasn't owned a Jeep.
> "Dan Jacobson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8r0jck$k9h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "David M. Butler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ?????
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > It's all well and good saying that people perhaps ought to report, and
> > > > give more accurate info on bugs, but who has time? If I reported
> > every
> > > > time win98 needed rebooting, I'd never be off the phone!
> >
> > But won't reporting bugs possibly lead to an M$ investigation to see if
> > your 'papers are in order' and registered letters from their lawers if
> > your licences aren't 100% up to date or whatever? Therefore the silent
> > user mentality is produced.
> >
> > > I've wondered for awhile now why MS doesn't have a semi-automatic bug
> > > reporting tool. Have a safe process running in the background that
> > grabs a
> > > dump of whatever when the system crashes. Ask the user if they'd like
> > to
> > > automatically (and anonymously) email the bug to MS when the system
> > reboots.
> >
> > I notice the Windows Update homepage says it garners no info from your
> > connection... of course it could easy do a license check and turn off
> > your windows if you didn't pay up... therefore folks sometimes fear a
> > 'free update' being 'party's over'.
> > --
> > www.geocities.com/jidanni E-mail: restore ".com." ???
> > Tel:+886-4-5854780; starting in year 2001: +886-4-25854780
> >
> >
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 16:29:48 +1000
From: Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.windows98
Subject: Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the
ROTFWL!
Chris
Brian Langenberger wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy David M. Butler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> :> It's all well and good saying that people perhaps ought to report, and
> :> give more accurate info on bugs, but who has time? If I reported every
> :> time win98 needed rebooting, I'd never be off the phone!
>
> : I've wondered for awhile now why MS doesn't have a semi-automatic bug
> : reporting tool. Have a safe process running in the background that grabs a
> : dump of whatever when the system crashes. Ask the user if they'd like to
> : automatically (and anonymously) email the bug to MS when the system reboots.
>
> <snip!>
>
> I can see the headline now:
>
> "Microsoft Hit By Distributed Denial of Service Attack"
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 01:36:00 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>El jue, 28 sep 2000, Richard escribió:
[...]
>>> That if permanent contact was an important cause of psychopathy, it would be
>>> simple to show cases where it occured.
>>
>> "When, for a time, we created a program at Oak
>> Ridge which had only psychopathic patients in it, there
>> was constant intense interaction. But it was all heat and
>> no light. It's tough for people with a well developed
>> conscience -- trusting, empathic, affectionate people to
>> survive emotionally in such a setting even with powerful
>> protections built into the system. Entropy seems to lie
>> in the direction of the emotionally hardened,
>> suspicious, and uncaring."
>> -- E.T.Barker
>
>I meant "a permanent contact with corporations".
He did provide a rather elegant quote, I thought, for the theory that
empathic humans are at the mercy of hardened, suspicious, and uncaring
people, and I think most corporate executives and officers would
qualify, unfortunately.
[...]
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[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: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 05:35:01 GMT
"." wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "chrisv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> How anyone can be so stupid as to "root" for Microsoft, is waayyy...
> >> beyond me. These people are evil. Don't you know that? They didn't
> >> get to where they are by playing fair. Do you really think that
> >> playing fair gets you to where they are in that amount of time? Do
> >> you really think that Microsoft's products are that much better than
> >> anyone else's?
>
> > In the Windows arena, yes, they often are better than other Windows
> > programs.
>
> > Office got to be king because it's competitors sat on their laurels and
> > didn't improve their products, or didn't do so in a timely manner.
>
> What you meant to say, im quite certian, was this:
>
> "it's competitors sat on their laurels and didnt release a new version
> every 3 months whether there were improvements or not, and create a
> little clickety button for *everything* and instead kept things in
> menus where windows users (but not mac or unix) couldnt find
> them".
A clickety button? :-) For "everything"? Heh.
I disagree with the position that Windows users couldn't find them. Have you
considered that maybe "clickety buttons" WERE and improvement for Windows
users AKA the customer? I'm just in awe...
--
Mike Byrns
Microsoft Windows Software Engineer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 01:44:40 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said James A. Robertson in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>>
>> Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> Said James A. Robertson in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >
>> >> >Hmm ? the base installation runs less than $50. How much lower do you
>> >> >suppose it can get and still be profitable?
>> >>
>> >> $0.
>> >
>> >As if the profit on Microsoft Windows is any of your business whatsoever
>> >Max.
>>
>> Of course it is. The legal conduct of every company in the country is
>> everyone's business.
>
>Can you read? He said the profits are none of our business
Can you read? I said he was wrong.
[...]
>No one can predict what the Appeals Court will do. Once you go to court
>in this country, all bets are off. Nothing would surprise me.
Only because your entire understanding of jurisprudence is based on
'popular wisdom', and the only capability which such an
over-simplification has of representing court decisions is as an endless
series of 'special cases' resulting in convoluted rules. This is a
false representation; in fact, the laws, both court and statutes, are
quite clear. Any anti-competitive act is a felony; if it isn't
'restraint of trade', it is 'monopolization'. This is called the 'rule
of reason', and if you'd actually read enough court cases, you'd see (if
you can parse the rather complex and inferential text) that it is a
consisent guiding principle. The only reason one would be 'surprised'
by an appellate court decision is lack of understanding of the legal
principles involved.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 01:46:13 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
>> >As if the profit on Microsoft Windows is any of your business whatsoever
>> >Max.
>>
>> Of course it is. The legal conduct of every company in the country is
>> everyone's business.
>
>We were talking about profit not being your business, your dimness.
And I was pointing out that 'profits' are only not my business so long
as 'profits' don't become a legal issue, your ineptness.
>We won't
>know the legal conduct until the trial is over when appeals have run their
>course.
Unless one is smart enough to understand legal conduct.
>My bet is that the legal conduct of Microsoft will be found to be
>stellar and perfectly "pro-competitive", once it's heard by a panel of wiser
>judges instead of a clueless and collusive lower court judge.
Thus my presumption that you are clueless and, in fact, rather stupid.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[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: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 05:46:54 GMT
chrisv wrote:
> "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >My bet is that the legal conduct of Microsoft will be found to be
> >stellar and perfectly "pro-competitive", once it's heard by a panel of wiser
> >judges instead of a clueless and collusive lower court judge.
>
> Yech. Scum. Let me guess, you make a fat living with Microsoft
> products somehow?
>
> Anyways, I've had lawyers tell me that findings of fact like those
> that were made in the Microsoft case are almost never overturned.
You know lawyers of the caliber of David Boies (no longer doing the Microsoft
case)? Have you heard that the Federal anti-trust lead has stepped down too?
How about Reno? How long will she last? Understand that no matter how corrupt
Microsoft was it was their further corruption at the behest of the US government
that will get them out. Microsoft had virtually no cash contributions to the
players in DC a few years ago. Now they are like #5 (an appropriate position
considering their wealth). The anti-trust case came about for the reasons that
Jackson's conviction did -- Microsoft refused to play ball with the bureaucrats
and pay their lunch ticket like McNealy, Ellison and Case did. That's what left
them open. Now they have adapted and are countering the case on it's real
ground. Microsoft scared Washington and Washington listened to Microsoft's
competitors. They worst that could happen is that the scared bureaucrats would
get their palms greased. So government wins by corrupting Microsoft even more.
--
Mike Byrns
Microsoft Windows Software Engineer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 16:49:07 +1000
From: Chris Sherlock <[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...?
How do you know that he isn't using Free Agent running under WINE?
Chris
JS/PL wrote:
>
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> > >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >> Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> > >> >
> > >> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >> >
> > >> >I hate to break it to you but - you are supporting Windows. You are
> > >> >unnecessarily relying on the very company you are bashing, which only
> > >> >mirrors you ingnorance to the world.
> > >>
> > >> So now "supporting" becomes "relying on"?
> > >
> > >No - it becomes "unnecessarily relying on", dim bulb... notice the word
> > >"unnecessarily".
> >
> > Care to supply the amazing amount of research you've done to determine
> > if I or ELTRAX has incorrectly determined what is necessary for us to
> > run out business?
>
> What's this have to do with the fact that you post anti-microsoft statements
> to usenet in your leisure time USING the very software you apparently hate?
> And then grasp at straws trying to justify it. You haven't got a leg to
> stand on when it comes to the issue. Your a hypocrite... you are to this
> issue as a person bringing a six pack of Bud to an AA meeting, and then
> justifying it by saying it's cheaper to keep drinking than it is paying for
> treatment.
>
> > >Less expensive than "free".
> >
> > No, less expensive than 'avoiding the monopoly'.
>
> What does it cost to avoid MS products, Your Dimness? The only cost I can
> see is maybe replacing a winmodem and maybe a video card or sound card, but
> most of the latter are supported. The value of the thousand apps that come
> with most distros would probably more than compensate you for that.
>
> The fact that a pro-MS person like me has to explain this to you is quite
> ironic. Get a clue from it! There isn't a legitimate reason on earth which
> forces you to use MS software to post to usenet in your leisure time. If you
> need the hardware to make it possible I'll get you an old 486 system to help
> you out, I can probably pick one up for less than $100 complete with
> monitor, unless that's beyond your means. I'll even let you use your laptop
> as a proxy server if you can't afford a non-winmodem.
> Let me know.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 01:56:45 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"chrisv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> How anyone can be so stupid as to "root" for Microsoft, is waayyy...
>> beyond me. These people are evil. Don't you know that? They didn't
>> get to where they are by playing fair. Do you really think that
>> playing fair gets you to where they are in that amount of time? Do
>> you really think that Microsoft's products are that much better than
>> anyone else's?
>
>In the Windows arena, yes, they often are better than other Windows
>programs.
Of course they are; they cheat!
I think its amusing how the whole array of apparent astroturfers have
come out to attempt to refute ChrisV's statements. Mike Byrnes,
'JS/PL', Erik Funkenbusch, and Simon Cooke ALL responded individually
during daytime hours to one guy pointing out that Microsoft doesn't have
superior products, by any means.
>Office got to be king because it's competitors sat on their laurels and
>didn't improve their products, or didn't do so in a timely manner.
Office got to be 'monopoly' because it was force-bundled with Windows
("accept this deal, or the price of Windows goes *way* up, or maybe
we'll just 'audit' you....") and all the competitors where hampered by
having to build on top of Win32, which was specifically engineered to
prevent competition in the Office market.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2000 01:58:22 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] () in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>>Office got to be king because it's competitors sat on their laurels and
>>didn't improve their products, or didn't do so in a timely manner.
>
> Some of those products really didn't need any improving. Furthermore,
> when pressed for any actual detailed reasons why office might be
> "better" than any arbitrary competitor, Lemmings tend to fall silent.
>
>[deletia]
>
>--
>
> There is always something new out of Africa.
> -- Gaius Plinius Secundus
>
> prairies, n.:
> Vast plains covered by treeless forests.
I'm afraid the subtlety of your 'closing remarks' (why do you post them
after the sig delimiter?) were lost on the astroturfers.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
