Linux-Advocacy Digest #490, Volume #29 Fri, 6 Oct 00 16:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Unix rules in Redmond ("Drestin Black")
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (FM)
Re: Unix rules in Redmond ("Drestin Black")
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: Unix rules in Redmond ("Drestin Black")
Re: Unix rules in Redmond ("Drestin Black")
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? ("Drestin Black")
Re: Unix rules in Redmond (.)
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? ("Drestin Black")
Re: Unix rules in Redmond (.)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? ("Drestin Black")
Re: Unix rules in Redmond (.)
Re: Unix rules in Redmond (.)
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? ("Drestin Black")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 6 Oct 2000 14:53:05 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
> > Come on Mike, you know one answer doesn't fit every question. Obviously
> > there are situations where Gig adapters will excel but not in the
scenario I
> > was discussing/discribing (unless I misunderstood the situation). I'm
using
> > gig over copper quite happily at two installations - we find multiple
NICs
> > perform better when there are more users doing large amounts of
relatively
> > small requests. When the transfers are long/streams the bigger
individual
> > pipes are the way to go. Depends on usage, I know you know that.
>
> Only on sucky MS operating systems that have difficult with
> context switches.
If I thought you even knew what you wrote means I would ask you to explain
it but you don't and I won't.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FM)
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: 6 Oct 2000 19:54:37 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Again, easily reducible to human actions.
>Not reducible *at all*! Not anymore than evolutionary theory is
>reducible to physics.
And applying human psychology to describe corporate
behaviour makes as much sense as using physics to
explain evolutionary theory.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 6 Oct 2000 14:56:15 -0500
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8rfmgr$r59$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Drestin Black wrote:
> >> >
> >> > what? WHAT? hahahahhahhhahahahahhhahahahaahhahhahhaahhhahahaahhaha
> >> > <breath>
> >> > hahahahhhahhahahahahahahaaahahahahahaaahahahhahahhaha
> >> >
> >>
> >> No you know whe he's called Dresting LACK of facts...
>
> > "No"? Perhaps you'd like to learn to spell/type before making shit up
eh?
>
> 1. you're an idiot, as youve shown repeatedly for a long, long time.
> 2. you dont know anything about computers
> 3. you lie *constantly* (see your little stories about copyrighted code
for details)
> 4. the names you drop consistently have never heard of you
> 5. you believe that windows can compete with ANYTHING (this really shines
a very
> powerful light on your complete ignorance)
> 6. you consistently are unable to back up your claims with either FACTS or
at the
> very least some appropriate-techno-babble. You arent even very good at
> PRETENDING that you know what youre talking about.
> 7. you're an idiot.
Ya know, i've never EVER known anyone so lacking of ammunition in this sort
of thread. Go away pierced-boy.
------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 19:57:59 GMT
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> El jue, 05 oct 2000, Richard escribió:
> >Are Vulcans human? If not, then can they be psychopaths?
>
> Vulcans seem to be human. I'd say it requires testing to be sure. Vulcans can
> not be psychopath, however, because they behave only based on logic, in a way
> that even leads them to self-sacrifice for the good of others, as in ST3, IIRC.
Logic is value-less. Psychopaths behave only based on logic as well.
Now what about Klingons, are they human too? What about Cardassians? The
Jem Hadar? The changelings? What about the Drazilas (sp)? The multi-
tentacled aliens that were going to wipe out the colony of humans on the
planet with all the radiation?
I can keep going on forever. Produce a clear and precise definition of
"human" that does not rely on your personal judgement.
> >> >Learn to be consistent, cretin. At least in the same fucking sentence!
> >>
> >> I don't see any inconsistence in "My having a religion doesn't impose any
> >> religiousness on you."
> >
> >It's a non sequitur meathead. You aren't even talking about the same
> >thing in the same sentence.
>
> non sequiturs are not necessarily inconsistent. If you wanted to say it was a
> non sequitur, you should have done so.
Non sequitur is one thing, what you pulled was sleight of hand by being
inconsistent with your word usage.
> >Their stock is liquidated and the proceeds turned over to the employee.
>
> You can't force him to liquidate his stock. Want more trouble? Usually, the
> employees just don't have enough money to buy all the corporation.
In fact, they usually do but they are never, EVER given the chance to. In
many states, it is illegal to offer your corporation to employees before
fellow capitalists and of course, it's not like employees can secure bank
loans (because banks are corporations and they won't deal with cooperatives).
Ever heard of pension funds?
And you can force someone to liquidate their stock by retaining the stock
for them. This is also how you stop them from selling out their stock.
> The incompleteness theorem doesn't involve anything about being human. It's a
> rather dry mathematical thing. It's pretty complex, though.
A "rather dry mathematical thing" that has deep implications for the
philosophy of mathematics. And it's not that complex.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 6 Oct 2000 14:58:15 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Drestin Black wrote:
> > > >
> > > > what? WHAT? hahahahhahhhahahahahhhahahahaahhahhahhaahhhahahaahhaha
> > > > <breath>
> > > > hahahahhhahhahahahahahahaaahahahahahaaahahahhahahhaha
> > > >
> > >
> > > No you know whe he's called Dresting LACK of facts...
> >
> > "No"? Perhaps you'd like to learn to spell/type before making shit up
eh?
>
> Drestin Lack of facts.
>
> Happy now
I'll be happy when you go away and stop using up bandwidth with that
self-mocking .sig of yours (hasn't anyone told you how stupid it makes you
look)?
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 6 Oct 2000 14:58:16 -0500
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8rfm9h$r59$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8rd6gr$26rc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >> > I'm sorry dude, but sometimes you hear something so silly you can't
stop
> >> > from laughing...
> >>
> >> > I'm sure he'll post the tux results ... it's all they've got...
> >>
> >> Dont you have something better to do?
>
> > Yup - it's what I do the rest of the time... right now I'm laughing at
the
> > sun rep who tried to sell some 10000s to one of my clients...
>
> Oh I remember you, youre the one that thinks (incorrectly) that microsoft
> can compete in the heavy-server market. We've all been laughing at you
> for some time.
One name: "w2k data center" - that's all I need say today. It'll speak for
itself in months to come.
>
> And whos the client? I wont tell anyone, I promise. :)
grow up.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: 6 Oct 2000 15:02:04 -0500
"Michael Marion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
>
> > Your milage may vary - of course :) I've personally found the asus
drivers
> > to be no where near as good as the reference drivers - I suggest you use
> > those instead of the repackaged drivers - I think you'll have far better
>
> As did I, but like I said, even nvidia's drivers failed until det 3 came
out.
>
> Tried both these cards on two different mobos too (one Microstar(?) the
other
> asus). With the det3 drivers, the box is finally stable... well it still
> treats my CD-R drive wierd where 98, Linux and even Be work fine with it.
>
> --
I'm sorry - but I must remain amazed that the only people who seem to report
non-stop "mysterious" problems with equipment under Windows
(version-i-am-currently-slamming) but which work pefectly under
(os-i-prefer) are "professional" unix users. How come I can get my equipment
to work equally well under Windows and BSD no problemo? Had some problems
with RH linux but, hey, I didn't really try that hard I guess...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 6 Oct 2000 20:03:29 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Drestin Black wrote:
>> > Come on Mike, you know one answer doesn't fit every question. Obviously
>> > there are situations where Gig adapters will excel but not in the
> scenario I
>> > was discussing/discribing (unless I misunderstood the situation). I'm
> using
>> > gig over copper quite happily at two installations - we find multiple
> NICs
>> > perform better when there are more users doing large amounts of
> relatively
>> > small requests. When the transfers are long/streams the bigger
> individual
>> > pipes are the way to go. Depends on usage, I know you know that.
>>
>> Only on sucky MS operating systems that have difficult with
>> context switches.
> If I thought you even knew what you wrote means I would ask you to explain
> it but you don't and I won't.
Aw. Dresden doesnt know what a context switch is.
Thats sweet.
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: 6 Oct 2000 15:04:13 -0500
Gee... Thanks Perry - couldn't have put it better myself.
See abracadabra... you won't even find support from your own NG...
"Perry Pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On 4 Oct 2000 17:57:25 GMT,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In comp.os.linux.advocacy Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Sure you can. You can measure a CPU's frequency to 10 decimal places,
easily.
> >
> >> Assuming you can count the oscilations exactly, you will have a +-0.5
error in
> >> the count.
> >
> >> Measure time in seconds with an error of less than 1E-25, and count the
> >> oscillations in 1E15 seconds.
>
> Uhm...Roberto...do you know how long 1E15 seconds is?? You must
> believe in reincarnation:)
>
> >> You will have 10 significant decimal places for the frequency of that
CPU, with
> >> plenty to spare (check the error propagation, if you want).
> >
> >*significant* decimal places?
> >
> >Thats not enough to cover the 13 offered in the original post. :)
>
> You are measuring frequency in Mhz. One Mhz is equal to 1,000,000
> Hz. One Hz is defined as one oscillation per "second". So now what
> exactly is a "second", Dr. Einstien?? A "second" is defined by
> international agreement as 9,192,631,770 oscillations of Cesium-133
> excitation microwave radiation. So if you can count 9,192,631,770
> Cesium-133 oscillations you've counted for one second exactly by
> definition.
>
> Now we wanted Mhz to ten decimal places. That's the same a Hz to four
> decimal places. So instead of spending all your cash on W2K plus all
> the buggy software that goes with it, get yourself a Cesium-133
> clock. Then count CPU oscilations for exactly 10,000 seconds (exactly
> 91,926,317,700,000 cesium-133 oscillations). Divide the count of CPU
> oscilations by 10,000 for Hz or 1E10 for Mhz. If you really want to be
> sure the last digit is accurate, run the test for 20,000 seconds or
> more.
>
>
> >Yes, just a teeny weeny one. You also have to take into consideration
variance
> >according to temperature, humidity, acts of god and whether its the
second tuesday
> >of the month.
>
> True. You'll get a different result every time you do the test.
>
>
> >Once you reach out to that kind of placement, you're beginning to
> >deal with a quantum-like quality;
>
> Not even close. A 666Mhz chip has a period of 1.5 nanosecs. The cesium
> 133 radiation has a period of approx 109 picosecs. Visible light is
> about a 1E4 times shorter than that and gamma rays are about 1E9 times
> shorter.
>
> Perry
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 6 Oct 2000 20:04:26 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Drestin Black wrote:
>> >
>> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > Drestin Black wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > what? WHAT? hahahahhahhhahahahahhhahahahaahhahhahhaahhhahahaahhaha
>> > > > <breath>
>> > > > hahahahhhahhahahahahahahaaahahahahahaaahahahhahahhaha
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > No you know whe he's called Dresting LACK of facts...
>> >
>> > "No"? Perhaps you'd like to learn to spell/type before making shit up
> eh?
>>
>> Drestin Lack of facts.
>>
>> Happy now
> I'll be happy when you go away and stop using up bandwidth with that
> self-mocking .sig of yours (hasn't anyone told you how stupid it makes you
> look)?
Actually, a more appropriate term for what his sig uses is "disk space".
And as annoying as his very long sig is, its nowhere near as annoying as
your continual ignorance and incorrect terminology.
=====.
------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 20:05:26 GMT
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> El jue, 05 oct 2000, Richard escribió:
> >Cancerous cells are single cells. And insofar as you have people under
> >you, then you have infected others and your section is no longer part
> >of the corporate body.
>
> I have not infected others, since my personal positions and values are not
> imposed on them. I don't believe in proselitism.
Then you're a benign tumour cell.
> Not at all. And I don't conform to their ideals any more than theirs conform to
> mine. I call that "choosing where I work".
Of course you don't.
> >> > They beat up annoying shareholders over there.
> >>
> >> You saw Black Rain once too many.
> >
> >Is that some kind of movie?
>
> Yup. Maybe you saw Rising Sun, instead.
Does seeing the advertisement count?
> >"some" includes ALL large anglo-american corporations and nearly every
> >small one. Every public corporation acts psychopathic as a matter of course.
>
> So, corporations in general don't have a tendency to psychopathy, except in
> some circunstances?
Corporations in general DO have an EXTREME tendency to be psychopathic, except
under same bizarre circumstances.
In particular, every corporation in South America is going to be psychopathic.
> >> rather, the shareholders, (which BTW, in another subthread you declared had no
> >> corporate decision-making power)
> >
> >Reference.
>
> Memory, really.
Better get a test for Alzeihmer's.
> >Shareholders qua shareholders are psychopaths. Shareholders qua humans are
> >usually not psychopaths. This is another example where circumstance creates
> >a *completely* different person.
>
> You are imposing schizoid behaviour on people.
Ahhhh, so you're a psychologist now?
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 17:07:05 -0300
El vie, 06 oct 2000, Richard escribió:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> El jue, 05 oct 2000, Richard escribió:
>> >Are Vulcans human? If not, then can they be psychopaths?
>>
>> Vulcans seem to be human. I'd say it requires testing to be sure. Vulcans can
>> not be psychopath, however, because they behave only based on logic, in a way
>> that even leads them to self-sacrifice for the good of others, as in ST3, IIRC.
>
>Logic is value-less.
Vulcans do have values. They apply logic to act according to those values. At
least, that's as much as I gather.
> Psychopaths behave only based on logic as well.
If they did, they wouldn't ever kill people. After all, I don't think they want
to die in the chair, which is one of the logical outcomes of such actions.
>Now what about Klingons, are they human too? What about Cardassians? The
>Jem Hadar? The changelings? What about the Drazilas (sp)? The multi-
>tentacled aliens that were going to wipe out the colony of humans on the
>planet with all the radiation?
You know, I don't have so much time to spend on hypotheticals. Are pink
unicorns mammals? Are thinking rocks sentient? I don't care.
>I can keep going on forever. Produce a clear and precise definition of
>"human" that does not rely on your personal judgement.
I gave you one, but I'll give you another: anything that can breed with a human
is a human, anything that can breed with something that can breed with a human
is a human, and I am human.
>> >> >Learn to be consistent, cretin. At least in the same fucking sentence!
>> >>
>> >> I don't see any inconsistence in "My having a religion doesn't impose any
>> >> religiousness on you."
>> >
>> >It's a non sequitur meathead. You aren't even talking about the same
>> >thing in the same sentence.
>>
>> non sequiturs are not necessarily inconsistent. If you wanted to say it was a
>> non sequitur, you should have done so.
>
>Non sequitur is one thing, what you pulled was sleight of hand by being
>inconsistent with your word usage.
Then say so.
>> >Their stock is liquidated and the proceeds turned over to the employee.
>>
>> You can't force him to liquidate his stock. Want more trouble? Usually, the
>> employees just don't have enough money to buy all the corporation.
>
>In fact, they usually do but they are never, EVER given the chance to. In
>many states, it is illegal to offer your corporation to employees before
>fellow capitalists and of course, it's not like employees can secure bank
>loans (because banks are corporations and they won't deal with cooperatives).
I am an employee, I can easily get a bank loan. All it takes is a good credit
history, and a proof of gainful employment. Where do you get that employees
can't get bank loans?
>Ever heard of pension funds?
Sure. I have money in one.
>And you can force someone to liquidate their stock by retaining the stock
>for them. This is also how you stop them from selling out their stock.
Then it's not quite "their stock", is it? In those conditions, you would have
to sell them the stock cheaper than you buy the stock from outside sources.
That makes the operation even harder, because you won't have enough money to
keep on buying the stock.
>> The incompleteness theorem doesn't involve anything about being human. It's a
>> rather dry mathematical thing. It's pretty complex, though.
>
>A "rather dry mathematical thing" that has deep implications for the
>philosophy of mathematics.
Sure. However, you described it as trivial, didn't you?
> And it's not that complex.
Ever tried to follow the proof?
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: 6 Oct 2000 15:07:18 -0500
"Nathaniel Jay Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spoke thusly:
> >Ignorance is bliss?
> >
> >Surround yourself with only what you want to hear and ignore anything
> >contrary to your own opinions...
> >
> >ahhh... golden silence...
> >
> >silly.
> >
>
> Apparently you missed the part where it was mentioned that
> you should killfile the idiots on both sides of the
> debate. I have as many (maybe more) people from the Linux
> side as I do from the MS side of the OS debate, and I'm a
> staunch Linux supporter (no, not a zealot, which would
> explain why plenty of zealots end up in my killfile. I
> don't mind saying, "there's a problem with X in Linux",
> and that's not real popular with the zealot crowd).
>
I'm no fan of killfiles (made only two exceptions in as 10 times as many
years) - but I know what you mean about "zealots" (both camps). I don't mind
saying there is a problem "Y" with "Z" - but just can't sit still when I
someone makes an untrue claim as fact. But it seems to brand you a zealot
just because we're in the NT advocacy forum and the topic is NT and the
malignment is against NT. I hate that! :)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 6 Oct 2000 20:07:15 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8rfmgr$r59$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> Drestin Black wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > what? WHAT? hahahahhahhhahahahahhhahahahaahhahhahhaahhhahahaahhaha
>> >> > <breath>
>> >> > hahahahhhahhahahahahahahaaahahahahahaaahahahhahahhaha
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> No you know whe he's called Dresting LACK of facts...
>>
>> > "No"? Perhaps you'd like to learn to spell/type before making shit up
> eh?
>>
>> 1. you're an idiot, as youve shown repeatedly for a long, long time.
>> 2. you dont know anything about computers
>> 3. you lie *constantly* (see your little stories about copyrighted code
> for details)
>> 4. the names you drop consistently have never heard of you
>> 5. you believe that windows can compete with ANYTHING (this really shines
> a very
>> powerful light on your complete ignorance)
>> 6. you consistently are unable to back up your claims with either FACTS or
> at the
>> very least some appropriate-techno-babble. You arent even very good at
>> PRETENDING that you know what youre talking about.
>> 7. you're an idiot.
> Ya know, i've never EVER known anyone so lacking of ammunition in this sort
> of thread. Go away pierced-boy.
Drop some more names. Get "bandwidth" confused with "disk space" some more.
Misunderstand what "SU" means and what its for. Continue to have no idea
(until you look at up and understand it at least a tiny bit, thats sure
to take days) what "context switching" is. Talk about more "code" that youve
"copyrighted" but are never willing to show.
In short, please, please dont ever change, dresden. We love you just the
way you are.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 6 Oct 2000 20:08:44 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8rfm9h$r59$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:8rd6gr$26rc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > wrote:
>> >> > I'm sorry dude, but sometimes you hear something so silly you can't
> stop
>> >> > from laughing...
>> >>
>> >> > I'm sure he'll post the tux results ... it's all they've got...
>> >>
>> >> Dont you have something better to do?
>>
>> > Yup - it's what I do the rest of the time... right now I'm laughing at
> the
>> > sun rep who tried to sell some 10000s to one of my clients...
>>
>> Oh I remember you, youre the one that thinks (incorrectly) that microsoft
>> can compete in the heavy-server market. We've all been laughing at you
>> for some time.
> One name: "w2k data center" - that's all I need say today. It'll speak for
> itself in months to come.
Oh yes. The ghostly, non-existant product whos praises youve been singing
for nearly a year now.
Where is it again?
Can I install it on a 64x64 processor G6 mainframe?
I said *heavy* server market, dresden. I didnt say "compaqs idea of a webserver"
market.
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: 6 Oct 2000 15:09:12 -0500
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8rfmtf$r59$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8rd9a4$26rc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> > news:8rbsj5$29bm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >> > why? are the linux IDE drivers that bad?
> >> >>
> >> >> No, but DMA is often optional. You can turn it on, you can turn it
> > off.
> >>
> >> > Why wouldn't you want to use DMA?
> >>
> >> If you had read all of the posts in this thread dresden, you would
> > understand
> >> that both chad and I have covered that point in some detail.
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> You can also set its parameters in great detail. Its really very
> > handy.
> >>
> >> > DMS parameters ... ALL of them, SO many of them.
> >> >>
> >>
> >> Depending on the hardware, up to 22 of them. But you probably didnt
know
> >> that, since you know next to nothing about computers.
>
> > or perhaps I a) don't use IDE unless I'm pennyless and b) couldn't care
less
> > about 20 of those and c) use operating systems whos drivers are already
> > optimized enough that I don't NEED to deal with 20 of them. Lastly, why
> > don't you talk to us about some of these 22 parameters and tell us just
how
> > they effect us and why we should need to know about them?
>
> Man hdparm. Look it up dresden, if youre at all capable.
and I say: yawn. So? Again, I don't need to be concerned with it.
>
> Dont try to rope me into one of your 'you dont know what youre talking
about'
> circles, friend. Your argument style is childish and sophomoric and very
> obviously self-serving to anyone with a single firing synapse.
Funny - I've got you down as being the most prolific of these types of
remarks. And, of course, I call them as I see them, so if you are used to
seeing me write to you saying "you don't know what you're talking about"
often - buy a clue! It's because YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT!
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
