Linux-Advocacy Digest #551, Volume #29 Mon, 9 Oct 00 18:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Gardiner Family)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Linux Sucks (Gardiner Family)
Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-) (Gardiner Family)
Re: SE is simply unstable!!!
Re: Newbie: How do you setup 2 PC's using Rhat Linux 6.2? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It....
Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It....
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It....
Re: Linux Sucks
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:38:50 +1300
Microsoft wanted to grab the enterprise market, and to do this, they had to
ensure that when they release it, it was as stable and bullet proof as they
could possibly get it. The big difference between Microsoft and Linux, is that
Microsoft must turn a profit to make the share holders happy, I have nothing
against this, however, I do think, when it comes to their consumer products,
they donot put as much effort into ensuring realiabilty as they should. I have
no grudges against Windows 2000, as I have used it quite alot with no problems,
but like my other posts, I prefer to use Linux because of the Unixness of it.
matt
Drestin Black wrote:
> Funny how if I switched in W2K into this paragraph you wouldn't buy it for
> why W2K was late. It was release as stable and bugfree as any OS you could
> name but was later than the original optimistic release dates. Sure, people
> will still complain that it was late but those same people won't take the
> time to make note that, DAMN, this is one stable and bugfree OS!
>
> And I don't hear MS crying foul. The only time I hear any crying is over at
> /. when they whine about another delay in 2.4 or more bugs in RH distribs.
>
> While previous releases of Windows were buggy and unstable (even NT4 started
> off shitty in that respect), W2K is another thing. It started off fantastic!
> And only gets better...
>
> "Gardiner Family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > The argument is that when the original time was set they were over
> ambicious,
> > however, I say, its ready when it is ready, Linux developers want this
> version
> > of the Linux Kernel to be as stable as possible, not like microsoft that
> shifts
> > half baked products to the market place and then crys foul when a bug is
> found.
> >
> > Matt
> >
> > Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > > http://www.wininformant.com/display.asp?ID=2944
> > >
> > > Making a modern operating system isn't that easy after all: Linux
> creator
> > > Linus Torvalds announced the third major delay in the release of the
> next
> > > Linux kernel last week, placing the release of Linux 2.4 in late 2000 or
> > > early 2001 at the earliest. The Linux 2.4 kernel, which was original due
> to
> > > ship in October 1999, has now been in the works for almost two years
> > >
> > > ...Linux is a different beast altogether, and proponents have argued
> that
> > > the open source development model is superior to the closed, monolithic
> > > models used by Apple and Microsoft. But the public failure of both Linux
> and
> > > Netscape, with its Mozilla/Netscape 6 project, to deliver upgrades on
> > > schedule is now casting doubts on the entire open source process.
> > >
> > > "...But today, Linux is not very useful beyond simple Web, mail, and DNS
> > > services on small Intel-based servers, she says. Linux is "not for
> database
> > > servers or online transaction processing. The independent software
> vendor
> > > support [is not there]"
> > >
> > > <yawn>
> >
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 21:26:47 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Roberto Alsina wrote:
> > You described empathy as knowing how the other felt. Well, I have at
>
> Nope. Even psychopaths can do that. Get that Alzeihmer's test ....
You know, it's boring to see you claim I remember wrong and just quote
you:
You said "Empathy is knowing exactly what someone is feeling". Check it
for yourself at http://x73.deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=675716833
Guess I passed the Alzheimer test and you didn't.
> > least a TNG episode on my side, saying that there is still an
empathic
> > bond between the formerly molten.
>
> Only from the human's side because humans can't get rid of the
> memories they've absorbed during the meld (which isn't the same
> thing as empathy *AT ALL*). What about the Vulcan's?
I don't know. Ask a Vulcan.
> > > Killing someone is a perfectly logical thing to do if you feel
> > > absolutely nothing for them, don't care how they feel (lack
> > > empathy), they annoy you, and you don't expect to be caught.
> >
> > Not really. Ignoring them is less work.
>
> And by that reasoning, doing absolutely nothing is the best thing
> to do. Hey, who says the psychopath won't enjoy himself murdering
> people?
Only if "by that reasoning" you mean "by this reasoning I am thinking
about that has nothing to do with what you just said".
> Perfectly logical ....
>
> > > Riiiiight. That they could interbreed with humans "merely"
contradicts
> > > everything biologists know about speciation. So of course, it's
"to be
> > > proven".
> >
> > You act as if anyone has ever had any neanderthal specimen in a lab,
or
> > even a DNA sample to check. I have seen bilogists suggest that
> > chimpanzees are quite close to interbreeding with humans, and
> > neanderthals are quite closer.
>
> And you think that what? That this means they *could* interbreed with
> humans ???
They were pretty close genetically.
> If we hadn't killed neanderthals, they would only have deviated from
> us, *NOT* interbred!
There is no proof that we didn't interbreed, you know.
> > Of course, that is the same right you have asked for yourself.
Notice
> > how I just say that perhaps, in the future, some new thing currently
> > unknown could make the current definition of human less than ideal.
> > Claiming the opposite would be stupid.
>
> No, moron, you claim that in the future things currently KNOWN *will*
> make your current definition worthless.
Such as the existence of aliens? You KNOW aliens (intelligent ones)
exist?
> > I have seen cooperatives get loans. Cooperatives can get loans. Is
it
> > hard? MAybe. Is it harder? I don't know. Can they get loans? Sure!
>
> I see. And how exactly would you interpret "blacks can't get loans"?
As a false statement, unless it was qualified.
> > If each individual loans enough money to buy his piece, they can
> > associate into a cooperative later.
>
> Forgetting the fact that they'd be investigated for fraud unless
> they all got loans for "undisclosed reasons". And hey, it would
> probably still be illegal (never mind that corporations do it all
> the time (capitalize a business on credit cards) ... selective
> prosecution and all that.)
Getting personal loans and using them to start a company is pretty much
legal.
>
> > > And who is it that brought up the question of property? Have you
never
> > > heard of *possessions*?
> >
> > Sure. However, you must know that stocks are property.
>
> Only in corporations, imbecile. And that's *EXACTLY* what makes
> corporations psychopaths: the shareholders are absentee landlords
> and act with the total disregard of any absentee landlord.
Your pseudo psych blabber is getting old.
> Stocks owned by employees are possessions. Stocks owned by people
> whose only goal is to exploit others (ie, people who operate in
> that instance exactly like psychopaths) are property.
You make up the difference in your own mind and present it as fact. Even
though I know you can't comprehend why that seems fishy to anyone
outside your head, I will ask you to accept it.
> > I am probably not an extremist. Except to a left-wing extremist.
>
> You mean you don't even *know* ??
I don't know if others consider me an extremist, because I don't usually
ask.
> > > Not until the employee liquidates the stock, which can only happen
> > > when the employee quits, is fired or retires.
> >
> > That makes no sense.
>
> Are you unable to do arithmetic? Is 2 + 2 a mystery to you?
Indeed it is not, and indeed what you said is not 2+2=4, or anything
near.
> > > > >Owning stock in a cooperative isn't an option, it's an
obligation.
>
^^^^^^^^^^
> > > > And it makes no difference to the argument.
> > >
> > > Of course it does. If you have to buy the stock for 10$ and it
> > > *would* sell for only 9$ as non-transferrable, this doesn't mean
> > > that you can't still charge the employees 10$ for it.
> >
> > Of course it means the employee would be stupid to buy it instead of
a
> > transferrable one for $10.
>
> The employee has no fucking choice you fucking moron!
You can't take his $9 without his consent. Remember you are not a
cooperative yet.
> The goal is to eliminate all transferrable stock in the first fucking
place!
If you do that by dumping stock without the intent to create value for
current stockholders, you will go to jail.
> Owning stock in a cooperative is part of the terms of employment!
They already are employed. You can't fire them for not buying the stock.
> > > The company
> > > has until the employees retire to make up the difference in value
> > > instead of having to absorb the difference at cooperative
formation.
> > > And as long as you hire replacements for the employyes that
retire,
> > > you never have to make up the difference.
> >
> > You only need a whole lot of stupid employees.
>
> Man, you are an extreme right-winger. Figures. After all, the right-
> wing is correlated with lack of intelligence.
Ask Aaron K. He will tell you I'm a bleeding hart liberal.
> [I am not investing more than the bare minimum time possible to
> followups to your articles. Which means that anything serious,
> like Godel's theorem, is dropped.]
Your fear of inadequacy is showing. You obviously can't even understand
the Goedel Theorem. You can't even spell they guy's name. It's Goedel or
Gödel.
--
Roberto Alsina
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Sucks
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:42:11 +1300
Programs for families like Microsoft Fine Artist and Creative writer, Movie Maker,
Barneys Education games, and other games.
matt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:07:24 +1300, Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [typical, Linux must do in the future what it's doing already]
> >never happen until the Linux community realise that users do not give a toss about
> >technical details, all they want is a OS that works (stable and reliable) and can go
> >down to Dick Smiths Electronics and buy their favourite game.
>
> You mean like Quake III, Unreal Tournament, Descent III, Majesty,
> Anarchy Online, Black & White, SimCity 3000 Unlimited, Theocracy,
> Myth II, Heavy Gear II, Shogo Armour Division, Terminus, or
> Soldier of Fortune?
>
> [deletia]
>
> --
>
> Murphy's Law is recursive. Washing your car to make it rain doesn't work.
>
> Excellent time to become a missing person.
>
> Don't read any sky-writing for the next two weeks.
------------------------------
From: Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:45:37 +1300
a few months ago I was stuffing around with netcraft and found out that they
were running freeBSD. "www.yahoo.com is running unknown on FreeBSD" was the
response.
matt
Drestin Black wrote:
> How do you know?
>
> "Gardiner Family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Yahoo uses BSD UNIX.
> >
> > matt
> >
> > The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> >
> > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Chad Myers
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote
> > > on Thu, 05 Oct 2000 12:54:17 GMT
> > > <ZR_C5.25757$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > >
> > > >"Gardiner Family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >> adam, gid-day from a fellow kiwi. Here are some sites that use
> > > >> linux/UNIX for their website:
> > > >>
> > > >> WINZ (Work and Income New Zealand)
> > > >> New Zealand Government Website
> > > >> Telecom
> > > >> ihug
> > > >> zfree
> > > >> majority of proxy servers in New Zealand
> > > >> RNBNZ (IBM AIX)
> > > >
> > > >Wow, what a list. The combined total number of hits/day of all those
> sites
> > > >is what? 1 million? 2 million?
> > > >
> > > >What about:
> > > >
> > > >Barnesandnoble.com
> > > >Dell.com } The top eCommerce sites in the world
> > > >Gigabuys.com }
> > > >microsoft.com
> > > >ebay.com
> > > >hotmail.com
> > > >and on and on and on...
> > > >
> > > >All of which run NT 4.0 or Windows 2000 and all of which get
> > > >millions of hits per day.
> > >
> > > I can verify the fact that they run IIS, anyway. And they do.
> > > Even hotmail.
> > >
> > > Interestingly, yahoo (www.yahoo.com) does not report what server
> > > it uses and botched the HEAD request to boot (cf RFC2068, section
> > > 9.4). My understanding is that yahoo is one of the busiest servers
> > > in the world, but apparently at this moment it's not one of
> > > the most compliant. :-) (The problem may lie elsewhere;
> > > www.yahoo.com got mutated to www.yahoo.akadns.net when I telnetted
> > > into port 80.)
> > >
> > > The problem with Netcraft's basic survey methodology is that it can't
> > > distinguish between a very high traffic website, such as the
> > > ones mentioned above, and a vanity website that's set up on
> > > a 56k line in someone's garage.
> > >
> > > Netcraft does try to rectify that, apparently, based on their
> > > explanation further down on their website at:
> > >
> > > http://www.netcraft.com/survey/
> > >
> > > so perhaps they aren't quite as dumb as I am. :-)
> > > But Microsoft does have 19.56% of the market, and I suspect
> > > many of those are middle-end and high-end corporate websites
> > > (in other words, those that can afford both a license and
> > > a support contract.)
> > >
> > > It's ridiculously easy to set up an Apache server (all the default
> > > distributions AFAIK have one as part of their install options, and it
> > > hits the ground running with a "success" page, all ready to be probed
> > > by Netcraft, among others), but it's far from clear how many of them
> > > are actually doing something useful.
> > >
> > > I hope Netcraft has the brains to remove hostnames
> > > such as 'paix-alg-gw8-2.ncal.verio.com'. (I'm not quite sure
> > > how one would do such, admittedly; one possibility is a crawler
> > > methodology similar to those employed by Yahoo, Lycos, Webcrawler,
> > > or Infoseek.)
> > >
> > > >
> > > >> the list goes on and on, Windows NT is a product that never lived
> > > >> up to its supposed "UNIX Smashing" reputation that was originally
> > > >> declared by bill gates back in 1993-1994.
> > > >
> > > >See above...
> > >
> > > NT/W2k is clearly far from being dead. Dunno about WinMe and
> > > "Whistler"; WinMe is a bridge product; "Whistler" has been promised
> > > in some form ever since the Cairo days, eliminating the Win/DOS split
> > > that has existed in some form ever since the Windows 3.1 days,
> > > and possibly even earlier.
> > >
> > > We'll see.
> > >
> > > >
> > > >-Chad
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
> >
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: alt.windows98
Subject: Re: SE is simply unstable!!!
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 21:46:40 -0000
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:24:43 +1300, Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am not really bothered if I have to pay for software. I am also sick and tired
>of the old argument, "Linux is free", argument, Linux, essential, is just the
>kernel, nothing more, nothing less. Joe bloggs does not care whether it is free
>or not, joe bloggs just wants his computer to work without any hassles.
Don't be an idiot.
Of course Joe Bloggs cares if Linux is free (or rather gratis).
The perception that DOS is free or that WinTel is cheap has
always been one of DOS's key strengths against better
engineered competitors.
[deletia]
Besides, WinDOS is the essense of hassle.
That's why console gaming is a more lucrative market than PC gaming.
--
Hard work never killed anybody, but why take a chance?
-- Charlie McCarthy
We have art that we do not die of the truth.
-- Nietzsche
God helps them that themselves.
-- Benjamin Franklin, "Poor Richard's Almanac"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: Newbie: How do you setup 2 PC's using Rhat Linux 6.2?
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 21:49:00 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 09 Oct 2000 17:56:11 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>RTFunnyM or the How-To's.
>
>There are thousands of them so you should be busy for a while.
I would have expected something from you more along the lines of:
[1] Buy two copies of Win2k.
[2] Use the RH6.2 as a coaster for a coffee mug, as you wait
for the install, which should take 5 minutes at most anyway.
[3] Install the two copies of Win2k.
[4] Reboot.
:-)
(Disclaimer: I happen to like RH 6.0 and 6.2, so don't take
this too seriously. But I'm surprised you didn't take this
opportunity to push what you obviously think is a
far better operating system. [*] :-) )
(Disclaimer #2: There are a number of HOWTOs, but he'd not have
to read all of them; the ones that appear relevant are the
Networking howto, the DNS howto, the Printing howto,
the Apache installation instructions, and possibly the howto
on how to rebuild the kernel whose name I forget offhand, since
he's going to have to add the 'ne.o' module for the NIC; he
won't get far otherwise. :-) )
>
>claire
>
>On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 16:16:38 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Hi, I have 2 PCs that I'd like to setup together to
>>learn Apache webserver, printer server and DNS. Can
>>someone help me please.
>>
>> I have 2 NIC cards (NE2000), 1 hub and Rhat Linux 6.2.
>>
>> Can someone give me the step-by-step procedure?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>>Leo
>>
>>
>>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>>Before you buy.
>
[*] I reserve judgement at this time as to whether W2k is "far better"
than RedHat. I use Redhat, but I have yet to touch W2k. I
use NT4 on a regular basis, however, and am not horribly fond
of it.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It....
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 21:49:28 -0000
On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 20:59:01 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>You are a dreamer jedi.
No, you just choose to hide your head in the sand.
Linux is creeping up on "the easy OS" and there's nothing
but inertia to keep it from creeping any farther.
>
>Maybe on a programmers desktop, but not on any home user I know. Oh
>sure I know plenty who have tried Linux, most try several
>distributions in fact, but I know of none, zippo, zero, who have
>stayed with it. Most popular reason seems to be that everything takes
>longer, requires more steps and is not as good as under Windows.
You present an unimpressive level of detail.
[deletia]
Besides, "not like Windows" is enough to put some people off.
This would be true if the other alternative was BeOS or Mac.
--
: is not an identifier
Meekness is uncommon patience in planning a worthwhile revenge.
"I have just one word for you, my boy...plastics."
- from "The Graduate"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It....
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 21:55:04 -0000
On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 21:11:18 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Is name calling, changing the subject, twisting words and playing
Diversity doesn't buy you anything if you aren't free to use it.
You can either choose to refute this observation head on or
just spew more empty rhetoric whining about it. Like all of
your rants, this response is deviod of any details.
>semantic games your only way of trying to cover up your lack of a
>decent arguments?
You are the one with no argument and only gross generalities.
>
>claire
>
>
>On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 20:52:09 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 20:33:00 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>>Nothing wrong with that, and for the desktop user, aka Jane Computer,
>>>Windows is a better solution simply by the amount of applications
>>>availible.
>>
>> Yet when Jane User tries to actually take advantage of that
>> diversity she'll be bitch slapped into the gutter. That
>> aspect of the Lemming culture is why many of us don't run
>> WinDOS anymore.
>>
>> What's the use of "all the apps" if you aren't free to use them?
>>
>> Besides, it's non-obvious what consitutes Jane User's set of
>> needed apps.
Now, this is a very relevant point and not the sort of thing
that you can just wave away. There are many different users
out there. Most of them don't need the entirety of CompUSA
to be happy. Some would be equally well suited just by the
Mac section, or even with OS/2, Linux or BeOS.
[deletia]
You are still a hypocrite. You berate our choice for no good
reason and try actively to prevent others from running the
risk from your little "clique".
There is nothing in your rants that would indicate to a particular
user with a particular set of needs why it is that something other
than DOS would be usuited to them.
--
If I can have honesty, it's easier to overlook mistakes.
-- Kirk, "Space Seed", stardate 3141.9
Four thousand throats may be cut in one night by a running man.
-- Klingon Soldier, "Day of the Dove", stardate unknown
Simulations are like miniskirts, they show a lot and hide the essentials.
-- Hubert Kirrman
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 19:03:53 -0300
El lun, 09 oct 2000, Richard escribió:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Roberto Teixeira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Ok, I hate to interrupt your discussion, but I just *have* to know why
>> > H2O is not water...
>>
>> My personal guess: H2O is also steam, ice, etc.
>
>Steam, yes. Ice and water, no. No more than a bunch of monomers
>are a plastic. The functional unit of water isn't the individual
>water molecule, nor is this the case for most ice states.
Water has been considered, loosely, by chemists as a polymer, but it is not
strictly one. And indeed ice is cristals of H20. Just ask your friendly chemist.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It....
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 21:57:04 -0000
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:14:51 +1300, Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Claire, I donot believe a word many of the Linux Advocates go on about, like, "my
>machines never crashed", or "my machine hasn't needed a reboot in 2 years", however,
Then you've lived a pitiful existence when it comes to computing.
2 years of uptime is nothing to be necessarily skeptical about.
[deletia]
It is the state of consumer computing that has lead you to this
dire perspective on things.
--
If you are afraid of loneliness, don't marry.
-- Anton Chekhov
Waste not fresh tears over old griefs.
-- Euripides
Beware of the man who knows the answer before he understands the question.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux Sucks
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 22:08:57 -0000
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:42:11 +1300, Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Programs for families like Microsoft Fine Artist and Creative writer, Movie Maker,
>Barneys Education games, and other games.
Those are educational titles. You said games.
The Loki titles more than adequately demonstration of proof
of concept for many of the sorts of things that Linux
currently gets flak for.
>
>matt
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:07:24 +1300, Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [typical, Linux must do in the future what it's doing already]
>> >never happen until the Linux community realise that users do not give a toss about
>> >technical details, all they want is a OS that works (stable and reliable) and can
>go
>> >down to Dick Smiths Electronics and buy their favourite game.
>>
>> You mean like Quake III, Unreal Tournament, Descent III, Majesty,
>> Anarchy Online, Black & White, SimCity 3000 Unlimited, Theocracy,
>> Myth II, Heavy Gear II, Shogo Armour Division, Terminus, or
>> Soldier of Fortune?
>>
>> [deletia]
>>
>> --
>>
>> Murphy's Law is recursive. Washing your car to make it rain doesn't work.
>>
>> Excellent time to become a missing person.
>>
>> Don't read any sky-writing for the next two weeks.
>
--
A holding company is a thing where you hand an accomplice the goods while
the policeman searches you.
Silence is the only virtue you have left.
Idaho state law makes it illegal for a man to give his sweetheart
a box of candy weighing less than fifty pounds.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
