Linux-Advocacy Digest #648, Volume #29 Sat, 14 Oct 00 03:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Legal issues - Re: Linux DVD player! (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("James A. Robertson")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("James A. Robertson")
Re: Aaron R. Kulkis [Off-Topic Idiot Tres Grande] (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Astroturfing ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: The Power of the Future! (Mike Byrns)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: The Power of the Future! (joseph)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 22:08:02 -0700
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >
> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >Which apps are those, Max? You declined to mention any.
>
> No, I didn't 'decline' to mention any until someone asked. I didn't
> mention any, because I'm not interested in wasting time arguing with
> people who are stupid enough to pretend that there are no such things.
>
> Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
Max Devlin is a crossdresser with a penchant for Chanel No'5!!! I had proof,
but I left in in my other pants because I'm not interested in wasting time
arguing with people who are stupid enough to pretend that he's not. Besides,
if I don't give you anything to work with, you can't disprove my claim.
So, from now on, let's call Max his stage name -- "Michelle", and we'll all
live happily ever after.
Simon
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 22:05:08 -0700
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:xXOF5.9099$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> How about this scenario: initial versions of MS software used
> undocumented API's that were later moved into DLL's that are
> supplied by the app(s) that need them? How else do you get
> from a situation where IE isn't even included as part of the OS
> to one where they can claim it is an essential part? Why else
> would MS apps update the system DLL's?
So presumably this would fixup the apps somehow so that the original app
using the "undocumented" function would access that function from the system
DLLs instead of from the original place that the function was?
That requires patching of some sort. It won't automagically happen.
Functions are bound to the DLL or Executable they're in. You can't replace
one function with another from a different DLL without hacking the linker
fixup mechanism.
Simon
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Legal issues - Re: Linux DVD player!
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 05:03:24 GMT
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <8rtr5m$1bn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Bartek Kostrzewa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> My dear friends, soon, really soon (ok, or a little later, but who
> >> cares) Linux will finally have the DVD player it deserves.
> >>
> >> http://www.intervideo.com/jsp/LinDVD.jsp
> >>
> >> Hmm, I'm really looking forward to the release of this thingie,
let's
> >> wait and see.
> >
> > Unfortunately, the MPAA is doing everything they can to prevent this
> > thing from coming to market. Furthermore, they are allowing
Microsoft
> > to do exactly what they are trying to prevent LinDVD and DeCSS from
> > doing.
> >
>
> I believe you are mistaken here. InterVideo
> is licensed to produce DVD
> players.
This is true. However, the InterVideo solution only works on their
hardware (not even a generic chipset), and isn't easily available.
> During the DeCSS trial the MPAA made claims that there was
> already a DVD player for linux and cited
> InterVideo as its creator.
> The thing is, InterVideo says they have no
> intention of producing a consumer
> version of the software.
Actually, they probably couldn't. Even though a software-only
solution is possible, the license seems to mandate that the software
be tied directly to the hardware.
> So, it may actually be vaporware, all smoke and
> mirrors for the benifit of the MPAA's position in the DeCSS trials.
>
> DeCSS is entirely separate from LinDVD
Actually, according to the website, LinDVD uses the DeCSS descrambler,
but wraps it in a package that prevents the use of DeCSS for piracy.
(the media retreival, descrambler, and mpeg-display are linked into
a single binary. This prevents the exposure of unencrypted content
that could be streamed or rebroadcast.
The lessons from the attempts to CopyProtect MS-DOS software pretty
much proved that it's nearly impossible to protect static content.
You can delay, frustrate trivial piracy attempts, and even thwart
amateur crackers. Unfortunately, the hard-core pirate will actually
be encouraged to pirate and remarket the software because it's more
valuable (not trivially copied).
Microsoft still uses keys, but puts legitimate keys on the CD-ROMS.
The keys aren't very effective at stopping pirates (there is a trivial
way to defeat the code). What it does do is provide unique and
verifiable identification of software. When coupled with the
"snitchware" features of Internet Explorer, Windows 9x, or
Windows 2000 (and possibly some of the NT4 Support packs),
large-scale pirates are easily identified, apprehended, and
prosecuted.
I unwittingly turned in a pirate. I purchased a laptop for a friend,
which appeared to have Windows 98 preloaded. I asked for a CD-ROM
and was told that Microsoft didn't allow them to give out CDs. When
I got home, I found that a dll needed for internet access had been
removed from the system. I purchased a copy of Windows 98 upgrade
(the other store was closed) hoping that I could get the needed file.
Not only would it not install the DLL, it also refused to boot windows
98. I called Microsoft's support number (at my expense), gave them
my credit card (for a $35 service charge), which happened to be the
same credit card I'd used to pay for the computer and the software.
After explaining the problem, the operator gave me a key which allowed
me to reinstall Windows 98 from scratch as a "kosher" system. The
operator told me that I **should** have gotten media (Microsoft
requires retailers to provide media).
Two days later, I went to the store to see if I could pick up
the CD-ROM. The store was closed, there was police tape inside,
there was a legal notice on the door, and there were indications
that a struggle had taken place.
About a week later, the inventory was gone, the tape was gone, and
there was a "for lease" sign on the space. It appears that the
owners were arrested for piracy, the franchise owner revoked the
franchise, and one of the owners was deported. I don't know what
happened to the other owner.
Instead of using 400 "40 bit des keys" which can easily be compared
against the hash, something like IBM's "digital watermark", which
is invisible to the player, publisher, and even the producer, but
provides an easily traced audit trail, makes much more sense. Even
if you knew that a graphic or video were watermarked, you'd have to
find every single one and replace it with a different legitimate
watermark. If you missed even one, you'd be toast. It's a bit like
giving someone a suitcase full of unmarked bills, but before you
packed the bills, you xeroxed 3 percent of them so that you'd know
the serial numbers, and then you shuffled the bills so that no one,
not even the agent making the delivery, would know which bills were
copied. Any attempt to spend even a few of them would result in
the arrest of the person attempting to spend them (since convenience
store clerks, gas station attendents, and diner waitresses seem to
have a pretty good memory for anyone who walks around with a roll
of $20s).
--
Rex Ballard - I/T Architect, MIS Director
Linux Advocate, Internet Pioneer
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 50 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 5%/month! (recalibrated 8/2/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "James A. Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 05:23:16 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
>
> Nobody ever said everything they create is junk because they don't know
> squat about designing operating systems. I said its junk because its
> monopoly crapware, which only has to be good enough to keep people
> locked in until the next version, and is therefore more profitable to
> Microsoft the less functional it gets. But I don't know about D'Arcy.
>
The 'monopoly' here is the OS, right? However, there are other OS
choices:
MacOS, Linux, BEos, OS/2, Solaris, Solaris on Intel, HPUx, AIX, Irix,
etc. There are choices, and have been for years. Consumers have made a
<choice> to favor Windows. One can argue that it was a poor choice (I
would), but it was a freely made choice - mostly because other vendors
cheerfully allowed MS to take the high volume/low price end of the
market as they chose to take the high margin/low volume end.
>
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
>
> ======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
>
> Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
>
> http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
--
James A. Robertson
Technical Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>
------------------------------
From: "James A. Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [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: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 05:25:31 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said James A. Robertson in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
<snip>
>
> >The win32 API seems to have little in common with the X Windows system,
> >thus making any emulation that much more difficult.
>
> Oh, I'm sure. Every little bit helps, when you're trying to prevent
> competition.
>
So in your view, they should have modeled Win32 on either X or Mac in
order to make your life simpler. Hmm...
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
>
> ======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
>
> Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
>
> http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
--
James A. Robertson
Technical Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Aaron R. Kulkis [Off-Topic Idiot Tres Grande]
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 05:41:15 GMT
In article <TM1F5.1122$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Ingemar Lundin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Jeff Glatt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skrev i meddelandet
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >"David T. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >Aaron R. Kulkis has posted a total
> > > of at least 256 unique messages in
> > > comp.os.os2.advocacy during the month
> > > of September, 2000 on five related
> > > threads, none of which have anything to
> > > do with OS/2, OS/2 advocacy,
> > >computer software, or even computers:
> >
> i didnt even know there was an ng for os/2...
> thats the system that was put
> out of its misery by ms ...right?
No, that was the operating system for which IBM paid several hundred
Million dollars to Microsoft to develop (most of which Gates redirected
to the development of Windows - cased settled out of court for
undisclosed terms). IBM then paid Microsoft another huge chunk of
money to Microsoft for total control of the 32 bit version that
was supposedly being developed by Microsoft (again, most of the money
was diverted to Windows 3.1 and NT - case settled for undisclosed
terms).
Then, after IBM spent nearly 8 months cleaning up the mess and fixing
all the bugs (thousands of them, the product delivered my Microsoft
wouldn't even compile), and another year making the transition from
OS/2 2.0 (which wasn't really ready for prime-time) to Warp/3.0
(which could at least be repaired after a Trap 0D fault) and another
year and another several million (nearly a billion total) to get
to Warp/4.0 (a really decent system), only to be told by Microsoft
that unless IBM agreed to stop selling it, not only would Microsoft
NET give IBM AND Windows 95 licenses, but they also wanted $40 million
in License fees (for OS/2 systems sold without Windows 3.1), AND if
IBM didn't cooperate Microsoft would start a nasty lawsuit that would
paint IBM as a bunch of software stealing pirates (coal calling the
kettle black).
Sure, Microsoft eventually did give IBM the right to distribute
Windows 95, 15 minutes before the curtain went up on the "grand
unveiling" (only because the IBM logo was prominent on the backdrop
and there wasn't time to repaint it).
Of course, not only did Microsoft represent less of a threat to
companies like Dell, Gateway, Micron, AST, and Compaq than OS/2,
but Microsoft had all convinced them to sign exclusive contracts
that effectively locked OS/2 out of the market.
Ironically, OS/2 seems to be the OS that just won't die. It still
has one of the most popular (with it's users, the highest level of
satisfaction) Desktop systems on the market. In Germany and
Australia, there were actual riots when IBM discontinued Warp 4.0 as
an officially supported product (supporting Linux instead).
IBM isn't the only PC company that figures it's better to have an
operating system that nobody/everybody owns and can't be "locked up",
than to be at the mercy of a competitor like Sun, or a monopoly like
Microsoft. In fact, IBM is supporting several flavors of Linux just
to make sure that there will continue to be strong competition between
the players.
Better to get 5% of 6 billion users at 30% profit than to drive
yourself into bankruptcy to get 80% of 200 million users
(who already have machines). When your losing money on each
machine, you can't make it up in volume.
The good news is that Windows 2000 hasn't been a spectacular marketing
success, and Windows ME seems to have become a non-event. Linux is
like a fresh breeze, giving consumers something new and interesting
to play with. Windows isn't dead, but Linux has a very exciting
market window.
As for the bad news, some of the OEMs seem to be dragging their feet,
hoping to wait until the 2.4 kernel is "officially blessed" by the
great beermeister (Linus). They are worried that if they release
with Linux 2.2 and their competitors have 2.4, that they might be
obsolete. They seem to forget that with Linux, backward
compatibility isn't just "nice to have", it's critical to the
acceptance of an upgrade.
Meanwhile, there's KDE 2.0, Koffice, new versions of all the
applications, and smarter USB drivers that can run on either kernel.
The only question now is "who will be the first to put Linux
on the retailer shelves" so that people can play with it, get
the feel of it, and make an informed choice.
I can tell you one thing, the first "Big 8" company to do it
will "hit the jackpot", since it will be the one that sticks
out in people's minds as the one that "broke the Linux story".
It will become a permanent part of history.
Personally, I'm cheering for the home team (IBM), but I'll salute
who ever "steps out boldly".
--
Rex Ballard - I/T Architect, MIS Director
Linux Advocate, Internet Pioneer
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 50 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 5%/month! (recalibrated 8/2/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 05:54:16 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> The bizarre part is that I can't for the life of me figure out where
> anyone got the idea that a vendor *isn't* actually *supposed* to try to
> make their product compatible with everybody else's, regardless of their
> market share.
Up to a point, it's counter productive to do so. Why would anyone do so if
it costs more? If people will pay for that compatibility, then software will
get written that's compatible. If it's not an issue -- that is, it's not
something that will sell more of the product, then it won't get put in.
Simple economics.
Simon
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[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: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 05:57:02 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >The win32 API seems to have little in common with the X Windows system,
> >thus making any emulation that much more difficult.
>
> Oh, I'm sure. Every little bit helps, when you're trying to prevent
> competition.
I thought people were supposed to compete on doing the best job, not by
copying each other and trying to compete on API implementations.
X Windows, frankly, sucks as it is. Making Win32 identical to X would be a
stupid move.
Simon
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 01:19:58 -0500
"2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > What's wrong with Windows 2000? Surely you must acknowledge that
Microsoft
> > has the freedom to innovate, building on the strengths of Windows NT
Server
> > 4.0, the Windows 2000 Server Family delivers three increasingly powerful
> > products that set a new standard for reliability and scalability. The
> > Windows 2000 Server Family also demonstrates how well an operating
system
> > can be integrated with a standards-based directory, Web, application,
> > network, file and print services, and end-to-end management. This
> > combination of reliability and functionality provides the best
foundation
> > for integrating your business with the Internet.
>
> I'm not paranoid, and I don't believe that MS needs (or does) pay for
> people to buts, but this sounds like a sales pitch.
Of course it does, It was pretty obvious to me that the poster was making
fun of the original authors claim of anyone spouting sales jargon being a
paid lackey.
Is your sarcasm detector on the fritz? I expected Aaron to fall for it, but
I thought most others would see the joke.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 01:25:04 -0500
"Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:00101318293500.28373@pc03...
> Allow me to give you the idiot-proof version of how to make a masquerading
> firewall between a LAN and the internet through a dialup link using Linux.
...
> Step 2: Configure a masquerading firewall.
>
> The command for this is as follows
>
> ipchains -A forward -s 10.0.0.0/255.255.255.0 -j MASQ
>
> Replace 10.4.0.0 with your real network and netmask. Simpler syntax:
>
> ipchains -A forward -s 10.0.0.0/24 -j MASQ
You know, not once does it mention in the ipchains how-to this command line.
It took many hours of frustration and fiddling the first time I set up a
masq box. The documentation on this just plain sucks and is years out of
date.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 01:29:56 -0500
"Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Word and Excel circa 1993 certainly did use undocumented functions.
> So did quite a few of the other "big" apps at the time.
> The "official" functions were either too slow or too clumsy, so
> the undocumented underlying functions were called into service.
> I suspect Norton Utilities, etc still uses undocumented functions.
According to Andrew Schulman, the author of Undocumented Windows, Word did
not use any of the undocumented functions, and Excel only made use of 3
(IIRC), of which equivelants that were just as fast and did the same things
were available in a documented form. Why would the code use the
undocumented functions? Legacy holdover. Much of the Excel code was
written for Windows 2.x, which needed those functions. In Windows 3, they
were not.
> Using the undocumented functions was always a risk, because they
> were liable to change with every new Windows release. Microsoft's
> application division would have had advance warning of the changes.
Tell me, how would this advanced warning make a 3 year old version of Excel
continue to work? What everyone that makes these claims seem to forget is
that old versions of Office still run fine, despite these supposed changes
to undocumented API's that are used all over the place.
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[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!
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 06:17:07 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> Mike Byrns wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > >
> > > Drestin Black wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > > > Why don't you just threaten to shoot him, Rambo?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > cause he can't get that right either... ask his CO
> > >
> > > I have a BETTER idea....coward.
> > >
> > > How about YOU ask my CO.
> > >
> > > Bet you won't....COWARD.
> > >
> > > heh heh heh
> >
> > Why don't you just threaten to shoot him, Rambo?
>
> You first, shit-for-brains.
Nah, you go :-)
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 01:36:25 -0500
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >It's like they can't decide whether MS is incompetant or omnipotent.
>
> Gee, maybe they just change them after someone already starts using
> them. You ever think of that, bright boy? Other WinTrolls have already
> loudly proclaimed that any developer has to deal with some level of
> undefined behavior. Well, any developer that MS doesn't like can easily
> find that this undefined behavior has mysteriously changed after the new
> OS, IE, or Office 'upgrade' or service pack. And you would demand its
> never happened, I'm sure, but that's what makes you an incompetent boob.
Max, listen to me closely. I won't say this again. Even Word 2.0 and Excel
4 still run perfectly fine in Windows ME and Windows 2000. If these
programs depended on those hidden API's, they too would break when those
API's changed.
Don't start talking about patches and service packs, because no such thing
exists for those old binaries. They simply work.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 23:19:25 -0700
From: joseph <[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:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> BTW There's been a revolt over high Windows prices - enterprise
> customers refused to pay MS for the privilege of writing over the OEM
> Windows image with their own configuration. Mid and small sized
> customers lack the clout so they're paying.
>
> ==========
>
> Funny - you say that but I have seen none of it. Waiting? Not the thousands
> of seats we've converted. Revolt? What revolt? Sorry - I don't see any facts
> supporting your claims.
You beg a question, "Where is your head stuck?"
The revolt was covered in the standard IT press. Gartner Group blasted MS for
raising fees on users by chargeing them a windows fee to erase an OEM windows
seat and reinstall a corporate defined disk image of the same windows OS. For
a guy in the know - well we know you're not and this is just another example.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
