Linux-Advocacy Digest #443, Volume #29 Wed, 4 Oct 00 09:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Off-topic Idiot Olympics (Donovan Rebbechi)
RE: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop ("Raul Iglesias")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Otto")
Re: GPL & freedom (Roberto S. Teixeira)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (Loren Petrich)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Loren
Petrich)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Loren
Petrich)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (saifikhan)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Loren
Petrich)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Loren
Petrich)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Richard Bos)
Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-) ("Chad Myers")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-) (Jarmo Ahonen)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Off-topic Idiot Olympics
Date: 4 Oct 2000 11:21:51 GMT
On Wed, 04 Oct 2000 04:11:24 GMT, Marty wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 04 Oct 2000 00:18:55 GMT, Marty wrote:
>> >Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, 03 Oct 2000 23:05:33 GMT, Marty wrote:
>> >> >> Now that's what I call a Tholen-war.
>> >> >
>> >> >On what basis do you make this claim?
>> >>
>> >> On the basis that it satisfies the definition of the term previously
>> >> posted.
>> >
>> >Classic illogical circular reasoning.
>>
>> It's logical
>
>Classic pontification.
On what basis do you make that claim ?
>
>> unless you object to either the aforementioned definition
>
>What alleged "aforementioned definition"?
My original definition of the term "Tholen-war".
>> or the assertion that this discussion satisfies the criteria for that
>> definition.
>
>You're presupposing an "aforementioned definition", Donovan.
Such a definition indeed exists.
http://x58.deja.com/
threadmsg_ct.xp?AN=673419664.1&mhitnum=62&CONTEXT=970658051.1634205764
===================================================
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
Yeah, he's in my killfile. I'm just hazarding an educated guess about
the content of the debate.
[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. A flame war is characterised by it's
ferocity, whereas a "Tholen-war" is characterised by its
triviality and silliness.
====================================================================
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "Raul Iglesias" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 11:28:29 GMT
> I bought Solaris 7 both x86 and sparc versions about a year or so ago
> for $10 plus shipping.
Yah, me too, but anyway, Solaris a general purpose OS ??? (even less
than Windows NT/2000).
------------------------------
From: "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.lang.c,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 11:43:04 GMT
"unicat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
After a few snipping...
: Of course, given Microsofts history, this was probably inevitable....
: (As seen in the movie "Pirates of Silicon Valley")
: They didn't write the original DOS, but conned some poor sucker out of
: the code for $50K, without disclosing that IBM was willing to pay
: millions
IBM wasn't willing to pay millions for the "original" DOS, it was more like
in the range of $50K. As part of the contract they allowed Microsoft to sell
DOS to other hardware, since there was none at the time. Little did IBM
know.....
: for it. They obtained the source code for the Mac OS by promising to
: port MSWORD
: to it, then used it to create the first commercial version of Windows
: instead.
And the Mac OS originated from where? Not like it matters now days....
: Some of us think that Internet Explorer is a rip-off of Netscape, and
: that
And some of you would be wrong. The following is from "About Internet
Explorer" under Help:
Based on NCSA Mosaic. NCSA Mosaic(TM); was developed at the National Center
for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign.
Distributed under a licensing agreement with Spyglass, Inc.
Contains security software licensed from RSA Data Security Inc.
Portions of this software are based in part on the work of the Independent
JPEG Group.
Contains SOCKS client software licensed from Hummingbird Communications Ltd.
Contains ASN.1 software licensed from Open Systems Solutions, Inc.
Multimedia software components, including Indeo(R); video, Indeo(R) audio,
and Web Design Effects are provided by Intel Corp.
Unix version contains software licensed from Mainsoft Corporation. Copyright
(c) 1998-1999 Mainsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Mainsoft is a
trademark of Mainsoft Corporation.
: the new MS directory services are an imitation of Novell Directory
: services....
That explains why W2K AD doesn't work well with NDS...
: So it makes sense that when Microsoft figured out that the PC was dying,
:
: they would copy their next-generation architecture from their most
: successful competitor.
"Most succesful" in what sense? For businesses the criteria should be market
saturation. And you were saying?
Otto
------------------------------
From: Roberto S. Teixeira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: GPL & freedom
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 09:15:45 -0200
Em Wed, 04 Oct 2000 07:34:02 GMT, Simon Cooke escreveu:
> I can't. But that doens't mean that *my* work shouldn't have all the
> protection under law against people copying it when *I* want to charge
> them for that work, not give it away.
>
> It's my choice to give it away or not -- and I choose not to.
>
Of course it is. No one says it is not.
However, I would like to remind you that the GPL does not forbid you to
sell your GPL'ed products. Damn, I work for a company that only develops
under the GPL and this is a multimillion dollar company.
The GPL only specifies that the software is free as in free speech. We sell
our products with technical support, manuals, etc... but anyone can get it
on the internet or copy CD's if they choose to do so. This is freedom.
--
Roberto Teixeira
------------------------------
From: Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 12:34:41 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wrong. Millions of people go to college while earning
> what is considered to be "poverty level" incomes.
ROTFL. Their tuition is always subsidized, however, whether by their
parents or by government-backed loan guarantees. Furthermore, most
college students come from middle-class or upper-class homes, meaning
that they got much more in handouts from their parents than most poor
kids do.
Also, dealing in illegal drugs is not living off of handouts.
Even theft is not living off of handouts; victims of theft ought to
be glad that thieves are trying to provide for themselves.
--
Loren Petrich
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Happiness is a fast Macintosh
And a fast train
------------------------------
From: Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 12:37:51 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Loren Petrich wrote:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[welfare recipients...]
> > Even if a lot of them *are* losers, I don't see how they are worth
> > that kind of venom.
> They're not just losers...they're PARASITES.
Pure venom.
I hope that if Mr. Kulkis ever gets stolen from, that he feel
grateful that the thief tried to provide for him/herself instead of
trying to live off of handouts.
--
Loren Petrich
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Happiness is a fast Macintosh
And a fast train
------------------------------
From: Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 12:39:38 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Loren Petrich wrote:
> > And Mr. Kulkis seems to like everything that he professes to object
> > to when it's military. So the ideal way to get even the grossest pork
> > past the Kulkises of the world is to claim some "national defense"
> > purpose to it.
> I'm one of the first to admit that defense spending is abused.
Praise with faint damns.
> What I can't figure out is why you advocate running the ENTIRE
> ECONOMY IN THE SAME FASHION.
I've never advocated that.
> Robinhood stole from the tax collectors and returned the money to the
> people.
Law-abiding means paying taxes. What part of that do you not
understand?
--
Loren Petrich
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Happiness is a fast Macintosh
And a fast train
------------------------------
From: saifikhan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 12:33:03 GMT
A reminder:
Let every man speak well of the bridge that he crosses over.
If you can't be thankful for what you get,
atleast be thankful for what you escape !!!
Kid, I hope you remember that Linux got created because of
the fragmentation among UNIX family, high cost of compilers,
proprietary implementations like Solaris, AIX etc.
MS was no where in the picture!!!
Sun was never Microsoft's most successful competitor and will
never be!!! It was a honest company like Novell. Heard of it???
Please donot use MS Office as it can give you varicose veins.
Please use the StarOffice, that the star McNealy quickly acquired
to hide the chinks in the Sun's armour.
Have you ever used a Sun C Compiler. There is no concept of quality
out there and see how much they charge!
Refer to a recent article on DDJ. Here is the link
http://www.ddj.com/articles/2000/0008/0008a/0008a.htm?topic=graphics
Regarding XML, I donot think that you have clear concepts.
Please refer to some good tutorial site to understand the
conepts. Here is one such link.
http://www.xml.org/
AAh, finally for Sun's NetCentric computing or "NET effect"
as they like to call, please see the details at this link.
http://www.redherring.com/
Relax and give your prejudice a break!
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
unicat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The following are the opinions of the author, nothing more, nothing
> less.
>
> I saw a presentation of Microsoft's new ".net" strategy recently, and
> their new logo should be a cartoon of Steve Balmer and Bill Gates
> worshipping
> a statue of Scott Mcneally.
>
> Just as on the real internet the ".net" domain is a pale shadow of the
> ".com" domain, so now Microsoft's ".net" strategy is a pale shadow of
> Sun's
> dot in ".com" strategy.
>
> The two biggest components of ".net" are the use of XML to replace
HTML,
>
> and then putting your applications on the server and using a thin
client
> to
> get to them. The XML langauage lets web pages have "dynamic" content -
> that
> is you can run little programs in real time to produce the information
> to
> be displayed, and pull in data that is retireved from remote
procedure
> calls... which is pretty much what Java does already. And by going
back
> to server-centric computing, your data won't be stuck on your desktop
> PC's
> hard drive, so that you can retrieve it from the server from anywhere,
> using
> any access device -laptop, PDA, etc. - Just like you already could by
> using
> sendmail and Java apps on a Sun server with an IMAP client and a JVM
> that could run
> on any device(laptop, PDA) ....
> .... Hmmmm,
> in other words, MS has reinvented Java and Java clients.
>
> Of course, given Microsofts history, this was probably inevitable....
> (As seen in the movie "Pirates of Silicon Valley")
> They didn't write the original DOS, but conned some poor sucker out of
> the code for $50K, without disclosing that IBM was willing to pay
> millions
> for it. They obtained the source code for the Mac OS by promising to
> port MSWORD
> to it, then used it to create the first commercial version of Windows
> instead.
> Some of us think that Internet Explorer is a rip-off of Netscape, and
> that
> the new MS directory services are an imitation of Novell Directory
> services....
> So it makes sense that when Microsoft figured out that the PC was
dying,
>
> they would copy their next-generation architecture from their most
> successful competitor.
>
> But why is MS doing this? Why abandon PC-centric computing?
> To paraphrase Bill Clinton, It's the money, stupid!
> MS stock started falling when Win2K was announced, and took a 10-point
> nosedive when Win ME came out.
> WHY?
> Could be because people realized that Microsoft has run out of gas.
They
> can't
> find any new bells and whistles to hang off of Windows to make people
> buy new
> versions. And MS makes exactly $0 from people who just continue to use
> the old Windows OS. Remember, MS isn't in the business of helping your
> business to prosper, they're in business to make MONEY. Think of the
> last decade
> or so. It used to take a 16Mhz 386 PC with 4MB of RAM and a 120MB hard
> drive to allow you to run WORD, Excel, and a project planner, and to
> send and
> receive e-mail. Since then we've thrown out our hardware and replaced
> our
> software five or six times, and for what?
> The same basic office functions!
> And support staff demands have probably doubled at the same time. Some
> people are fed up. They're tired of the MS churn-and-burn cycle that
> pumpscash out of their wallets and delivers nothing but hype in
return.
>
> So now, in order to protect MS revenues, Redmond will have to switch
to
> a mode where people "rent" Windows instead of buying it. Of course, in
> order to
> do this, they'd have to kill off all those existing PCs that are
working
>
> just fine with the old windows. So.. just coincidentally, along comes
> the MS
> X-box. Which they "claim" is a game console. But with the reported
> 733Mhz pentIII, 64MB RAM and 8GBHD, and High-speed LAN CONNECTION, it
> sounds
> more like the box is designed to be a client machine for a network
> centric
> next generation Windows - which just by coincidence MS is also
starting
> to
> hype now.
>
> So the next gen windows may be an Xbox client, accessing applications
on
>
> an MSN server by subscription. With the buzz that MS has for eating
its
> own
> children, if I worked for a PC manufacturer right now I would be
hitting
> the panic button!
>
> Of course, If your users LIKE the PC centric model of computing, and
you
>
> don't want to have to rewrite all your business apps into a whole
> new computing paradigm, and you don't want to pay, say, $50/user/month
> in "software rent" to MS, you can always use Linux!
>
> It has free office suites (like Star Office, and KOffice) which will
let
>
> you keep all your data in its CURRENT format, instead of the absurdly
> difficult task of converting ALL your data to XML, and with the WINE
> (www.winehq.com) windows environment it will even let you keep
> running the office suites that you already OWN!
>
> After all, Linux is supported by virtually every computer maker -
> IBM,.HP, Sun, Compaq, Dell, SGI, etc.etc. Which WON'T likely be true
of
> MS once
> they enter the computer business themselves and start competing with
> their
> former allies.
>
> But if you really want to convert your whole enterprise to the Sun
> vision of "The network is the computer" network-server-centric
> computing, why not
> use the time-tested, standards-based, enterprise approved original
from
> Sun,
> instead of being a guinea pig for MS as they struggle to survive into
> the post-PC era???
>
>
--
Thanks
Saifi
__________________________
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 12:40:21 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Loren Petrich wrote:
> > And that was from someone who had lived off of taxpayers' money for
> > awhile.
> >
>
> When?
I should not need to remind of when it was.
--
Loren Petrich
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Happiness is a fast Macintosh
And a fast train
------------------------------
From: Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 12:43:59 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Loren Petrich wrote:
> > The Marxism here is your posture of being an exploited, oppressed
> > worker.
> Wrong. That's HUMAN RIGHTS.
So Marxism is human rights?
> The human right to keep what you earn without having it confiscated
> by the government.
It's not confiscated. It's legally mandated. The law says pay taxes,
and if you wish to break the law, then don't call yourself law-abiding.
I'm surprised that Mr. Kulkis is not organizing a big tax strike.
--
Loren Petrich
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Happiness is a fast Macintosh
And a fast train
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Bos)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.lang.c,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 12:55:49 GMT
unicat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Because they're too stupid to even _copy_ real software. 'nuff said.
Richard
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-)
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 12:58:08 GMT
"Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8recd9$lr9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi all,
>
> I've just set up two dual-processor Redhat GNU/Linux 7 computers both
> booting with RAID1 for high reliability. I am also making use of the newly
> GPLed MySQL on both computers.
>
> One computer provides NAT and IPChains firewalling services. Both also
> provide an Apache/PHP development environment.
>
> To set this all up has cost $0 for the software. Knowing that Microsoft
> provides a lower total cost of ownership ;-) I'd be interested to know what it
> would cost to move these computers to a full Microsoft solution.
In the typical enterprise environment, the MS solution provides the lower
TCO. For someone at home with intimate knowledge of Linux, perhaps it doesn't,
but it's rather irrelevant. Many have established that Linux is the king of
cheap home installations, I don't think anyone's arguing that. It's when you
guys start claiming that Linux is ready for the enterprise that we laugh.
> It appears I would need this software:
>
> 1) 2xNT4 or Window 2000 Server licenses to provide RAID1 on both computers.
Windows 2000 professional will do all this.
> 2) 4xCPU licences for MS-SQL.
MSDE (essentially a free copy of MS SQL Server 7.0 limited to 2GB of db size)
is free and runs on everything from Win95 to Win2000 DC server.
> 3) 1xMS Proxy Server(?)
Win2K has ICS (with NAT functionality) built in.
> 4) 1xOffice 2000 Premium for Mail client, Frontpage, etc.
Outlook Express is free and comes with IE which is free. FrontPage is not
necessary for web development, in fact, it's not recommeneded unless you've
never written one line of HTML in your life.
So the list actually comes down to:
1.) 2 x copies of Win2K Professional at ~ $200ea. You can get OEM prices since
you
purchased new hardware, contact your vendor.
That's it!
> Now there will be advantages/disadvantages to both configurations. But is
> the software cost differential and loss of freedom really worth it?
Well, OEM Win2K is around $100 or so IIRC, so for $200 or so you can get
all the extra features of running a full IIS5/MSSQLServer environment!
(my price numbers may be off, if anyone has exact figures, please refute me)
> Who really believes MS provides a lower TCO?
Hmm... just about everyone that has worked in an enterprise environment
and had to use Linux for anything.
At my current employer I hear the phrase, "The mail server is down again,
it should be back up after a reboot". The mail server, of course, being
a Linux mail server. I imagine there will be only a few more of these before
our management complains that they are missing emails.
I wonder how much business has already been lost because of it?
Sure, it's anecdotal, but then, you really haven't provided any evidence
to the contrary.
> Or more importantly, who really believes MS can sustain a lower TCO if a
> MS solution is indeed more attractive at this point in time?
Everyone who has deployed an MS solution properly and is reaping the
benefits.
> Open source software just keeps getting better and better,
This is a relative term. While, yes, they are "better", they're still not
"good". The ones that are "good", if any, are direct copies from MS software,
ironically.
> and the development rate appears much faster.
And quality has fallen through the floor as a result. Cite: Red Hat 2500+
bugs in a rushed 7.0 release.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 09:00:01 -0400
Loren Petrich wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Wrong. Millions of people go to college while earning
> > what is considered to be "poverty level" incomes.
>
> ROTFL. Their tuition is always subsidized, however, whether by their
Mine wasn't.
Purdue out-of-state tuition is NOT subsidized, and I wasn't
getting anything from my parents, either.
> parents or by government-backed loan guarantees. Furthermore, most
> college students come from middle-class or upper-class homes, meaning
> that they got much more in handouts from their parents than most poor
> kids do.
Thase parents who fail to properly provide for their kids have
only themselves to blame.
>
> Also, dealing in illegal drugs is not living off of handouts.
Where did this come from?
>
> Even theft is not living off of handouts; victims of theft ought to
> be glad that thieves are trying to provide for themselves.
Is this how you justify Communism...another name for Theft-ocracy.
>
> --
> Loren Petrich
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Happiness is a fast Macintosh
> And a fast train
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
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
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
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
her 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.
------------------------------
From: Jarmo Ahonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-)
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 15:49:45 +0200
Well, at least to us it seems that MS solution is clearly much much more
costly for many uses. Of course there are software which is available
only for Windows NT/2000. But if you do not need that sw, then it
is fairly easy to configure workstations with a very low TCO.
We have evaluated that solution. Unfortunately there is one piece of
software that does not have a Linux version: Lotus Notes Client.
Therefore we have postponed possible upgrades to Win2000 or
changes to Linux - we need some time to think about the situation.
Best regards
Jarmo Ahonen
Adam Warner wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've just set up two dual-processor Redhat GNU/Linux 7 computers both
> booting with RAID1 for high reliability. I am also making use of the newly
> GPLed MySQL on both computers.
>
> One computer provides NAT and IPChains firewalling services. Both also
> provide an Apache/PHP development environment.
>
> To set this all up has cost $0 for the software. Knowing that Microsoft
> provides a lower total cost of ownership ;-) I'd be interested to know what it
> would cost to move these computers to a full Microsoft solution.
>
> It appears I would need this software:
>
> 1) 2xNT4 or Window 2000 Server licenses to provide RAID1 on both computers.
> 2) 4xCPU licences for MS-SQL.
> 3) 1xMS Proxy Server(?)
> 4) 1xOffice 2000 Premium for Mail client, Frontpage, etc.
>
> Now there will be advantages/disadvantages to both configurations. But is
> the software cost differential and loss of freedom really worth it?
>
> Who really believes MS provides a lower TCO?
>
> Or more importantly, who really believes MS can sustain a lower TCO if a
> MS solution is indeed more attractive at this point in time? Open source
> software just keeps getting better and better, and the development rate
> appears much faster.
>
> Regards,
> Adam
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 09:01:21 -0400
Loren Petrich wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Loren Petrich wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [welfare recipients...]
> > > Even if a lot of them *are* losers, I don't see how they are worth
> > > that kind of venom.
> > They're not just losers...they're PARASITES.
>
> Pure venom.
PARASITES deserve nothing else.
>
> I hope that if Mr. Kulkis ever gets stolen from, that he feel
> grateful that the thief tried to provide for him/herself instead of
> trying to live off of handouts.
I hope that if you ever get shot, that you are grateful that
somebody wanted to give you a gift.
>
> --
> Loren Petrich
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Happiness is a fast Macintosh
> And a fast train
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
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
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
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
her 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
******************************
