Linux-Advocacy Digest #586, Volume #29 Tue, 10 Oct 00 22:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: Does anybody offer free Linux access?~! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
The great Linux caper: Operating System invades Jim Henson's creature shop.
("ostracus")
Re: Does anybody offer free Linux access?~! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The Power of the Future! (Dolly)
Re: The Power of the Future! (Dolly)
Re: Does anybody offer free Linux access?~! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Does anybody offer free Linux access?~! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Does anybody offer free Linux access?~! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Free ISP for Linux? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux and Free Internet? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Free ISP for Linux? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux and Free Internet? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Unix rules in Redmond (Gary Hallock)
Re: The Power of the Future! (Dolly)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 01:15:33 GMT
Steve Mading wrote:
> Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : Not if you want the code to remain understandable. Mixing
> : OO and functional code is a BAD idea for one thing. It may
> : or may not be inevitable but it's certainly undesirable.
>
> Since there is no hard and fast definition of what is and isn't
> OO, splitting things up as OO vs functional isn't going to
> work. The dividing line is too fuzzy.
There is a simple practical definition; OO is what you get
after you rip out every low-level concept that evolved into
the functional paradigm from the procedural paradigm. Then
you take these concepts and take them to a higher level of
abstraction. OO is the other side of the coin from a still
unknown (and maybe impossible) Ideal language that treats
both objects and functions equally, like the procedural
paradigm does, but at a high level.
> No, but unlike you I don't see language paradigms as being
> the only kind that exist. You could split according to
> functionality, or according to areas of expertise. Say for
> example that you wanted to make a world simulator, for
> simple physics demonstrations (bouncing a ball in a cube,
> that sort of thing). It might make sense to seperate the
> system into a graphical display part and a physics engine
> part. (Stuff for calculating motion according to the laws
> of physics kept seperate from stuff for displaying the
> 3d rendition of the picture. If you had some sort of
> multiple host ability, for different machines to insert
> objects into this world, then you might want a module
> for this networking communication, and so on. Splitting
> into modules by purpose makes more sense than splitting
> by language capabilities, from a design standpoint.)
Can you provide a case where the two are different?
(and in the case of networking, if you're implementing this then
you're reimplementing the OS because it isn't doing its job)
> That's an interesting planet you're from, where programmers
> are expected to be ignorant of high-school algebra. But
> meanwhile here on Earth, where the rest of us live, nobody
> gets confused by the concept of order of operations because
> they've already had it.
It doesn't matter whether they know the ordering, what matters
is that they have to know that your language implements that
ordering. This doesn't come "free".
And why the hell should you have this special case anyways?
What about if someone wants to reuse the + and * operators
to do something completely different? Sure it's bad practice
but now you're fucking them over for that reason?
And didn't you notice the slippery slope argument I used?
There *IS* a tendency among language and systems designers
to add "just one more feature". And of course, the language
designer is so busy designing/implementing all your useless
features that they forget the crucial ones (like block
closures in Java). Pretty soon, instead of Smalltalk you
get Java.
Treating ANY methods as special is simply a Bad Idea! And
designing by example, no matter how "normal" the example
is, no matter how "used to it" programmers are, is an
invitation to code
bloat.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Does anybody offer free Linux access?~!
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 01:12:02 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029) wrote:
> this most likely isnt the right group but since most
> of you have Linux boxes on the net i'll ask anyway:
> Does anyone offer FREE or low(er) cost dialup access
> in IL???
<SARCASM>
You're kidding, right? Everyone knows that Linux, being
a free operating system, is ONLY used by high-income
people who can afford to pay for Internet access!
</SARCASM>
That <SARCASM> was roughly the response I received when
I asked the same question a few weeks ago. People
generally said "gee, how come you can't afford Internet
access? you're using Linux, aren't you? everyone knows
that only high-income people use Linux!"
The fact is that there are Free ISPs for Windoze and
even for Macintosh, but no free ISP has chosen as yet
to create a Linux version of their "ad-bar" software
for Linux users.
NetZero is creating a version for Linux, but apparently
it will only run on some new "Network Computer" (i.e.,
silver toaster) and no version is planned for regular
Intel-based PCs.
Someone has suggested using WINE with the ad-bars, provided
that the ad-bars don't use some esoteric Win9x instruction
set not covered by WINE.
Right now the only free Linux access is through a
local-only ISP. Try www.freedomlist.com, and all the ones
which list "linux" under supported OSes require either
that you live in Washington, Oregon, Puerto Rico, or
New York; or some complicated system involving you getting
a local ISP (any local ISP) and then a company to whom you
grant your credit card number reimbursing you the ISP
monthly fee in exchange for you completing a monthly
survey.
The latter survey company isn't taking new signups now,
so you're stuck either paying for access or moving to
Washington, Oregon, New York, or Puerto Rico.
Another option is simply shelling out the bucks for some
version of Windoze (Win95 is good enough) and running
one of the free ISPs on a Windoze machine (or even
multiboot your existing Linux machine).
NetZero claimed they were releasing their version for
Linux *in general* back in June 2000, so maybe we'll
see a testing version out sometime soon. They certainly
haven't gone out of their way to draw attention to it
on their website (support merely E-mails you saying
"There are no plans to create a Unix version of our
software" as if the June 2000 press release never
happened).
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "ostracus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: The great Linux caper: Operating System invades Jim Henson's creature shop.
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 20:16:38 -0500
http://www.linuxnews.com/stories.php?story=398
A nice success story with memorable quotes.
---
There was once a young man who, in his youth, professed his desire
become a great writer.
When asked to define "great" he said, "I want to write stuff that
the whole world will read, stuff that people will react to on a
truly emotional level, stuff that will make them scream, cry, howl
in pain and anger!"
He now works for Microsoft, writing error messages.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Does anybody offer free Linux access?~!
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 01:15:56 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029) wrote:
> last time i checked they didnt offer linux access.
According to their website, they don't.
According to a NetZero June 2000 press release, they
*will*, but they haven't updated their website or their
support e-mails to reflect this fact.
This covers the NetZero press release:
http://www.internetnews.com/isp-news/article/0,,8_403361,00.html
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 12:52:51 -0400
From: Dolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Dolly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On another off topic note... guess what database/commerce
> > solution manged to get C2 security? IBM's. MS has applied,
> > but like their last attempt at C2 with NT, they will fail.
> > YES, MS failed in the C2 rating for NT on a network, so
> > they reapplied with no network card or modem to get the
> > bogus rating they weasled out which is of course useless
> > in the real world).
> >
>
> Guess which database solution managed to get C2 security? MS SQL 2000
> Guess what rating NT4 has ON a network: C2
>
> You were wrong 2 outta 2 times.
http://www.gcn.com/vol19_no3/guide/1259-1.html
Really? This clearly states that DB2 has it, that
NT only has it if not networked and that SQL
Server (MS) has applied for it but not gotten it.
So do numerous other publications.
So - time to eat your words. :-)
Dolly
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 12:54:05 -0400
From: Dolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Dolly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ah yes... MS says they will stop doing something.
> > They dont. MS lies and says they did stop. They
> > didnt. MS finally publicly admits they never did,
> > and the answer is... "ooh, just turn it off" by which
> > I presume you mean the machine - good answer for
> > a server... and since if you install TCPIP and NOT
> > NetBIOS, it still installs NetBIOS code that is
> > hard-coded into the stack I know it's not NetBIOS
> > you mean I should turn off.
> >
>
> Dolly - we have all challenged you - respond please: Document this NetBIOS
> vulnerability you are talking about. I say it doesn't exist and challenge
> you to prove your silly claim. DO it or shut up.
Damn - I think I already provided a DOZEN websites
that indicate the vulnerability - a number of which
state that it's installed irregardless of whether
NetBIOS is bound to TCPIP.
How many more do you want?
Dolly
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Does anybody offer free Linux access?~!
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 01:27:34 GMT
In article <8rnkkr$2v3q$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"mlhickok" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "JoeX1029" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > this most likely isnt the right group but since most
> > of you have Linux boxes on the net i'll ask anyway:
> > Does anyone offer FREE or low(er) cost dialup
> > access in IL???
>
> Most of the "free" providers force you to download
> advertizing and it MUST be on your screen while you
> are connected. If it is not on your screen, you
> are in violation of the license agreement and there
> are stiff financial penalties if you are caught.
Using XFree86 version 4, you can do multiple monitors
and thus the ad-bar is "on your screen", just not on
the monitor you happen to be *using*.
Windoze98 provides the same multi-monitor feature.
> I have never seen any of these "free" providers
> like Netzero, KMart Walmart, Altavista, Spinway,
> etc. provide the software to Linux users.
NetZero posted a press release back in June 2000 that
they would be creating a Linux version of their software,
but there has been zip in the way of news on this
development since then.
http://www.internetnews.com/isp-news/article/0,,8_403361,00.html
...well, with the exception of this one story, which
doesn't provide any hope for home users of Linux:
http://www.justreviewed.com/articles/20000713170224/
"NetZero Taps Into Internet Appliance Market
With Oracle's New Internet Computer"
> Note: Has anybody tried doing this?
>
> Take a Windows 9x computer with a dial-up modem
> and a Network card. Dial up a free service and run
> one of the many Win-Proxy programs out there (also
> comes with Win98) and then connect your Linux box
> to the Network card for free access.
Wouldn't work. All the ad-bars out there right now
that I've put on other people's computers (about
six different free ISPs so far) require that you
have activity on the computer which the ad-bar is
running on. No activity, no connection. If you
do your proposed setup, the user would not be doing
any activity on the Windoze system, only on the Linux
system. Bye-bye connection.
There are utilities which work with AOL and other
fee-based ISPs to prevent logoff which work with
some of the free ISPs ("MoveThis" even moves the
mouse around on your screen to simulate physical
as well as Internet activity), but the free ISPs
know about them and have made changes.
For example, "MyFavoriteI" (SNAP.com and NBC)
requires that you click once on the ad-bar every
now and then to "let them know you're still using
the Internet". Activity on a non-SNAP.com website
or non-affiliate doesn't count.
Reconnection is also equally complicated and cannot
really be automated, so you can't send proxy
requests to connect to a free ISP the way you can
with a fee-based ISP.
You know what I'd really like to see? An ISP
which offers nationwide service for $10 a month,
and for this you get ONLY a PPP connection. No
attempt to provide E-mail or newsgroups, or webspace,
or anything other than a 56k Internet connection.
My reason is that you can get e-mail and newsgroups
and everything else on the Internet itself, meaning
that one could strip out the services and offer
"bare-bone" Internet access for less.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Does anybody offer free Linux access?~!
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 01:33:00 GMT
In article <39df9df6$0$38534$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Philo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> this is a very interesting question.
> first of all...as we all know, there is no free lunch...
> the free isp's are being paid for by the advertisers
> of course.
...but they are not paid for by the *end user*, hence
the term "free ISP".
> just to see what it was all about i set up juno
> (on windows, of course) and got an add banner atop
> the browser. when i shut the as banner down...the
> browser simply closed.
>
> if an isp were to do the same with linux...
> it is not too likely they'd want to supply the source
> code as one could easily disable the ad banners then...
> and to not supply the source code would be against the
> priciples behind linux (as i understand them)
>
> so i do not see much likelihood of a free linux isp...
> but i sincerely hope someone proves me wrong here.
While the Open Source movement does help Linux get
along, Open Source is not Linux. Proprietary code
gets used on Linux all the time. Having something
which you didn't have the source code for is not
new on Linux. Since the exchange is free Internet
access for no source code, a lot of people who have
never compiled--and will never compile--a program,
would take them up on their offer.
You're right in that NetZero and FreeInternet won't
release a GPL version of their ad-bar software, but
not everything on Linux is GPL, or even BSD-licensed.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Does anybody offer free Linux access?~!
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 01:38:24 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey) wrote:
> In article <39df9df6$0$38534$3936f1fe@news-
core.twtelecom.net>, "Philo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >if an isp were to do the same with linux...
> >it is not too likely they'd want to supply the
> >source code as one could easily disable the ad
> >banners then...
>
> With Linux you could easily place the ads on another
> desktop and just forget about them (or is there a way
> they could force a window to be sticky whether a
> user wants it to be or not?).
My suspicion is that any version of ad-bar software would
be "sticky". The program would read in the number of
virtual desktops and spawn itself into all four (six on
some X managers I've seen). Then again, they may be
Windoze-brained and not understand about multiple
desktops.
Now, with XFree86 v4.0.0, you can use multiple monitors.
Some folks using Windoze already get around the ad-bar
with multiple monitors which show one desktop. Since
the ad-bar is technically on the desktop on one monitor,
you simply go to the second monitor and use it for
Internet access. This can work regardless of whether
you are using XFree86 v4 or Win98.
The only catch is that some free ISPs require that you
click on the ad-bar from time to time, which would
require that the first monitor be on all the time.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: chi.internet
Subject: Re: Free ISP for Linux?
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 01:40:34 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Tony Atoms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <NzeE5.5334$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "NO SPAM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Do any of the free ISP's work with Linux? How about with "Wine"?
(the
> > Windows emulator that comes with some Linux installations).
> >
> I used freewwweb.com for a while. The connection method was not
platform
> specific. Of course, it may have been a bug. ;D
>
Freewwweb has merged with JUNO and now there is only
JUNO. Hence, no more Linux connections.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux and Free Internet?
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 01:49:26 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joseph Mrozek) wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Oct 2000 13:21:34 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> >
> >Yeah, if I lived somewhere else, I'd have free internet. :)
> >
> >Here in the Midwest of the U.S.A., if you look at a map
> >showing the major cities wherein free internet (or in
> >fact any major backbone connection to the internet can
> >be found), you can connect the dots to form a *circle*
> >around the 48 connected states...which neatly circles
> >where I live and leaves no place really that close to
> >where I live.
> >
> >America has some servers for local users in Wisconsin,
> >Oregon, and I think Washington D.C., which all do
> >standard PPP and allow Linux access. My complaint was
> >that there are no free ISPs [a] in my area, and
> >[b] which have dialup numbers all over the place to be
> >in other people's areas and where people travel to.
>
> But I bet you don't get metered phone calls, do you?
> Think yourself lucky you don't live in the UK. I'd
> give anything to be able to pay a monthly subscription
> and nothing else. Wanting it COMPLETELY free is
> just plain greedy.
If the government paid for my health care, I'd be able to
afford Internet access. I think myself very unlucky I
don't live in a country which prides itself on public
transportation and a national health system. Plus all
the decent comedy is on the other side of the Atlantic!
:)
In any case, I would have to put up with ADS, so
technically I'd have to "give something back" to get it.
Just not money.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: chi.internet
Subject: Re: Free ISP for Linux?
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 01:45:40 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
mst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> NO SPAM wrote:
> >
> > Do any of the free ISP's work with Linux? How about with "Wine"?
(the
> > Windows emulator that comes with some Linux installations).
>
> Try this:
> http://www.freedomlist.com/
Been there, done that, got NOTHING.
Here's www.freedomlist.com's choices for "free ISPs" for
Linux:
[1] Live in Washington State, Oregon, Puerto Rico, or New York
State; or call there long-distance.
[2] Buy a Windoze machine and use it for Internet.
[3] Give your credit card number to a company and fill
out a survey once a month, and they'll promise to credit
your credit card $19.95 a month so you can afford a
regular local ISP. Remember that you are handing
out your credit card number over the Internet. Oh,
and they aren't taking any new signups for an
indefinite period of time, so it really isn't a
choice.
Sorry, but those three choices aren't really choices.
NetZero promised a Linux version back in June 2000, but
the only thing we've heard from them on that subject
is that their new Linux version will only run on some
proprietary Network Computer.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux and Free Internet?
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 01:54:34 GMT
In article <39dc3796$0$2898$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"philo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i like the idea of linux and a free isp...but there
> is a possible problem...
>
> i've helped many of my friends set up free isp's
>
> freeweb was a good one as it was pretty easy for me to
> configure it to log on to the net and *avoid* all the
> banner ads etc...
> (of course they went out of business or were swallowed
> by juno)
Swallowed by JUNO after they went bankrupt.
> and of course...if you disable the ad banners in juno,
> the browser shuts down...
>
> since a linux system would easily be hackable to
> disable the ads...the free providers may not be so
> happy to provide their services...
>
> thats my $.021 worth anyway...
Not all Linux software has to be GPL, meaning that
there can be ad-bar softwares out there for Linux
for which the source code is NOT AVAILABLE.
Anyone who can write the kind of code required to
hack into an ad-bar program probably has the
computer skills for a job which either pays enough
for DSL connections or includes it in the benefits
package. I make this claim only about the U.S.A.,
and do not attempt to make it for the UK or
anywhere else.
Its a case of the lack of skills in the people who
would be interested in a free ISP, serving to make
the ad-bar software remain unhacked. :)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 21:20:49 -0500
"Peter da Silva" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8rtf3u$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> John Lockwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 3) Notepad is a trivial windows application. (Defined as an
> > application a good Windows programmer could complete in a week or
> > two).
>
> Are you saying that you would expect a good Windows programmer to take a
> week or two to implement Notepad? Is that a reasonable estimate of the
> time it would take for a program like that?
Actually, Notepad is an app that should only take any decent developer a few
hours to write.
The vast majority of notepad's functionality is provided by the windows edit
control. The rest is just writing the text to disk, Searching in the text,
and adding a help box.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 22:01:54 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Drestin Black wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8ru4kt$1du$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:8rtqq8$1lap$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > >> >> You're right, dresden. How could I have ever doubted you. IBM's
> 4096
> > >> >> processor mainframe solution will never be able to hold a candle to
> W2K
> > >> >> running on 32 processors.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Yep.
> > >>
> > >> > Then why hasn't IBM entered this beast into the running and nuked
> > >> > all the competition?
> > >>
> > >> Because its not a "web solution", though it can be used as such.
> >
> > > TPC doesn't meter "web solution"s, it meters transactions for all
> > > sorts of things. Namely, financial transactions, manufacturing
> transactions,
> > > just about any type of transactional processing etc. What exactly do
> these
> > > beasts do if they do not process anything? Granted some due science
> > > and mathematical calculations, but is that all? Why would transactional
> > > processing metrics not apply to them.
> >
> > >> There are alot of companies which make enormous machines that are fully
> > >> capable of blowing everything that compaq makes completely away.
> >
> > > But they haven't?
> >
> > You're right chad. As right as dresden. Theres no way a 4096 processor
> > mainframe could ever beat a compaq machine.
> >
>
> Perhaps it could. But has it yet? Does IBM have a 4096 processor machine up
> and running and able to actually perform a benchmark so we can compare it to
> something useful? I mean, if IBM has this killer rig out there - why don't
> they fire up a TPC score and completely utterly blow both MS and compaq (and
> sun) so far outta the water that we'll all just cringe at the mere mention
> of it's name (which you've never stated, by the way).
>
ASCI White. Developed and built in the building next to where I work.
http://www.llnl.gov/asci/platforms/white/
It was delivered a couple of months ago.
Gary
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:10:44 -0400
From: Dolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Mike Byrns wrote:
>
> Dolly wrote:
>
> > Mike Byrns wrote:
> > >
> > > Dolly wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sam wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, 07 Oct 2000 15:03:43 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >Is of course Linux.
> > > > >
> > > > > Exclusively ? I think not!
> > > > >
> > > > > >The power of Linux is of course the GNU/GPL.
> > > > >
> > > > > It may also be it's weakness.
> > > > >
> > > > > >Does everybody agree that Linux has the best desktop? NO, HELL NO!
> > > > > >Is Linux still growing? YES HELL YES!
> > > > >
> > > > > From zero it's all up from there
> > > > > <snip>
> > > > >
> > > > > >How fast is Microsoft growing on that hill top? 1%.
> > > > >
> > > > > If Microsoft kept growing at the rate it did for the last 5-10-15-20
> > > > > years (pick one) it would soon be, not only the total IT industry,
> > > > > but the entire economy. Obviously not sustainable
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >How fast is Linux growing? 5 - 7 % per year for almost 8 years.
> > > > >
> > > > > From zero it's all up from there
> > > > >
> > > > > <snip>
> > > > >
> > > > > >Does Microsoft make hardware? Hardly, NO. That Microsoft mouse or
> > > > > >keyboard is subcontracted out.
> > > > > >They don't make anything but software.
> > > > >
> > > > > AMD don't own a fab shop, does that make them not a threat to Intel ?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Really? That's weird... AMD has MADE chips for
> > > > Intel when Intel couldnt keep up... what do you
> > > > think the little M AMD meant? MANUFACTURED by
> > > > AMD. I have a bunch here they made for Intel.
> > > > It's part of what gained them access to the
> > > > Intel x86 architecture - making a bunch for
> > > > Intel when they were in the bind.
> > >
> > > Christ are you going to be one of those Kulkis, Devlins and Blacks that
> > > make these wild ass statements that stretch credibility and then post no
> > > evidence to back it up? When the hell was this momentus event supposed to
> > > have happened? AMD did make 386 and 486 chips but they were NOT Intel
> > > designs. BTW, I agree with you that AMD do own fabs, in Texas and Germany
> > > but I, after having been a Intel and Microsoft systems engineer and
> > > programmer for over a decade have no recollection of AMD EVER making chips
> > > for Intel.
> >
> > You want evidence? How about a picture of one? Or perhaps you
> > are one of those people who believes if a tree falls on your
> > house but no one is there to see it, then it didnt happen.
> >
> > I'll send you an AMD Chip with the (M) AMD imprint
> > and an Intel chip with the (M) Intel imprint.
> >
> > Would you be satisfied then? Just because you
> > dont know something doesnt mean it's not
> > true. Actually, apparently from your posts, just
> > because YOU *think* you know something generally
> > is proving that it isnt true.
>
> Miss, I tire of you. Post the pic and prove your point. I have a feeling that
> I've been around this block more than you.
OK, if you want... though others here have supported
my claim already and I thought you had
agreed with it finally.
Dolly
Keep an eye out for the pic... gotta take and scan one
just for you it seems.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
