Linux-Advocacy Digest #670, Volume #29 Sun, 15 Oct 00 12:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux Sucks (Brendan Heading)
Re: Linux Sucks ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web! (Bob Hauck)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("James A. Robertson")
Re: welcome to the world of objects (FM)
Re: Astroturfing (lyttlec)
Re: Astroturfing (lyttlec)
Re: Astroturfing (lyttlec)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Static66)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("JS/PL")
Re: Need expert for info on troubleshooting Linux (lyttlec)
Re: Linux Sucks (Terry Porter)
Re: Need expert for info on troubleshooting Linux (lyttlec)
Re: Convince me to run Linux? (lyttlec)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Brendan Heading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Sucks
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 15:10:41 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
>They probably stole it from someone.
>
>Where do you think Firestone got the idea to use vulcanized (I'll bet
>you guys love that word) rubber in a tire, albeit with a couple of
>bugs?
Why did you complain that "the linux movement is cloning interface,
applications etc in an effort to compete with windows" when it is clear
that Microsoft aren't shy of stealing ideas in order to compete
themselves ?
--
Brendan Heading, Belfast, Northern Ireland
Tús maith leath na hoibre...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux Sucks
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 14:32:30 GMT
I'm not complaining about Linux copying the interface, programs etc.
I am saying that the fact that they ARE doing this is proof that they
are targeting the Wndows desktop user market. Something the die-hard
nixer's refuse to accept.
claire
On Sun, 15 Oct 2000 15:10:41 +0100, Brendan Heading
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
>>They probably stole it from someone.
>>
>>Where do you think Firestone got the idea to use vulcanized (I'll bet
>>you guys love that word) rubber in a tire, albeit with a couple of
>>bugs?
>
>Why did you complain that "the linux movement is cloning interface,
>applications etc in an effort to compete with windows" when it is clear
>that Microsoft aren't shy of stealing ideas in order to compete
>themselves ?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web!
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 14:43:42 GMT
On Sun, 15 Oct 2000 11:10:36 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Bob Hauck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>on Sat, 14 Oct 2000 18:43:44 GMT
>>On Sat, 14 Oct 2000 07:02:58 GMT, R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Ironically, Microsoft has been killing it's own market. They
>>>created checks that now make it impossible to develop server
>>>software on workstation editions.
>>
>>Can you clarify what you mean by this? What sort of "checks" are done?
>
>This generated some traffic a few months (years?) ago on this newsgroup.
>Basically, the kernel for NT Workstation and NT server was identical,
Yes, I remember that. But MS did eventually back off and dropped the
technical means of enforcing the 10 connection limit. It seemed to me
that Rex was referring to W2K having some new scheme along the same
lines.
Some software won't install on NT Workstation because it checks for the
registry entry. Maybe that's what he means? This will somewhat
increase your development costs if you have to buy Server for every
developer, but it isn't too serious given that you don't need CALs for
that situation.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
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: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 14:50:46 GMT
Weevil wrote:
>
> Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > http://www.gallup.com/poll/indicators/indMicrosoft.asp
> >
> > Also see the related analysis links at the bottom of that page.
> >
> > That being read, it seems that the boss is winning points for giving
> people
> > their choice of operating systems at work. As it should be. They made
> that
> > choice at home.
>
> People use whatever comes on their computer. They don't "choose" one
> operating system over another, especially when they're not even aware of a
> choice.
Sure they do. I know I made such an explicit choice back in the late
80's when I decided to replace my Apple IIe. I initially wanted to buy
a Mac, as I was predisposed to stay with Apple. However, after looking
at prices (in the neighborhood of $3K for the feature set I wanted in a
pc, as opposed to $5K for what I wanted in a Mac), I decided to tolerate
DOS even though I would rather have used MacOS.
There was a very clear choice to be made then - Apple was getting very
good press, but had explicitly chosen to go for margin over volume. Had
they gone the other way, things might well be very different now.
> Microsoft has for years required PC manufacturer to pay for DOS and
> Windows on every PC they sell, whether they include Win/DOS on the computer
> or not. It's that so-called "per-processor license" you've heard tell of.
> How did they require OEMs to do this? By refusing to allow them to sell
> Win/DOS at all unless they signed the contract. Now, OEMs are in a highly
> competitive market. They can't afford to charge their customers twice for
> an OS (once for Microsoft's per processor license and once for, say, OS/2),
> because their competitor across town will just undercut their prices by
> selling MS-only machines. So...the result is exactly what you'd expect:
> home users have been locked in to Win/DOS for years. They didn't "make that
> choice at home," as you claim.
Would MS have been able to do this if Apple had tried to make the space
competitive in the late 80's? I really doubt it. But Apple misplayed
their hand badly.
>
> The truth is that the average user at home thinks of Windows as part of the
> machine. Everybody he knows uses Windows It was on there when he unpacked
> it and plugged it in. He thinks it's part of it. It wasn't a "choice" he
> made -- it was just there, like the carburetor on his car.
>
Now, perhaps. But this is a consequence of Apple's stupidity in the
years 1985-1990, and MS's marketing intelligence filling the breach.
> > Just face it folks.
> > Windows is where it's at today because it's better at what people want to
> do
> > with their computers.
>
> Well, no, it's not. It's where it's at today because Microsoft forces it on
> people.
>
No, because MS did a far, far better job at market penetration in the
early days when it mattered. Now they just have to sit back and enjoy
it.
> jwb
--
James A. Robertson
Technical Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FM)
Subject: Re: welcome to the world of objects
Date: 15 Oct 2000 14:01:46 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thomas Corriher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It is quite interesting how a remark which intentionally
>attacked Christians on a personal level is considered
>"appropriate" in a Linux group, whilst attempts to defend
>Christians is considered grossly inappropriate.
The more illogical one's position is, the more assumptions
one needs to prove one's point. Why do you presume that
your post was considered grossly inappropriate or the
previous poster's, appropriate? Do I sense that you had
already made up your mind as to what sort of response you
would get?
>Of course,
>the reactions of those respondents were merely "logical"
>and "scientific", right? Stifling dissent with personal
>attacks must be part of the "logical scientific method",
>eh? I suppose I can only be logical when I accept their
>religion.
Perhaps if you could distinguish between your preconceived
notions of your opposition and what you're really arguing
against, then you'd make a bit more sense. No one ever said
anything about anything scientific or scientific method.
>I will not be silenced by those with despicable motives.
>I will stand for my beliefs, and for what is noble. Some
>of the audience will not like this, and no good deed ever
>goes unpunished.
Beautiful rhetoric with little substance.
>The malicious attacks by a few individuals demonstrate that
>I am a better person than them. I have no regrets about
>anything that I stated, and I intend to again speak candidly
>in the future. If some people hate me for this, then I will
>know with certainty that I am doing right. I do not answer
>to anyone here.
I don't hate you; I'm just slightly amused. Speak as candidly
as you can, but don't let your prejudices cloud your ability
to think logically. It's often hard for one to see that one's
own position is logically flawed.
Let's analyize the above paragraph, for example:
>The malicious attacks by a few individuals
- AFAIK, two people responded. I was one of them and my
post contained no malicious attack whatsoever.
> demonstrate that I am a better person than them
- No, it doesn't. Aside from the fact that the word "better"
(or "good") has no single logical meaning and should not be
used for logical arguments, it is a logically bankrupt
position that being maliciously attacked by some people
somehow means you're a better person. It's quite easy to
come up with a contradiction.
> If some people hate me for this, then I will know with
> certainty that I am doing right
- Let's take this "logic" to an extreme example. If you kill
a person, then some people will most definitely hate you for
that. Does that mean you will know with certainty that you
are doing right?
>The fact that no person has yet defended my logic or even
>my right to dispute the attack on Christians is not a very
>positive sign about the character of the Linux community.
>I am honestly surprised and disappointed.
There was no logic in your previous post. There was only
a vague attempt at presenting an argument. The fact that
no person yet defended your "logic" probably has more to
do with the quality of your argument than the character
of the Linux community.
Dan.
------------------------------
From: lyttlec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 14:57:33 GMT
Mike Byrns wrote:
>
> lyttlec wrote:
>
> > MS had to change the name. Now its Microsoft Certified Software
> > Professional.
>
> No. They didn't. It's not changed at all. See
>
>>http://www.microsoft.com/trainingandservices/default.asp?PageID=mcp&PageCall=mcse&SubSite=cert>/mcse&AnnMenu=mcse
>
I'm only going by the titles of the *current* edition of books on the
shelves at B&N and Borders. I've noticed that MSCE has been replaced by
MSCP.
> > You can't hold yourself out to the public as an Engineer
> > unless you have completed 4 years of college, had 4 years experience and
> > passed the EIT and PE tests.
>
> Wrong. Only in Texas. And Canada. And there are "engineers" at Corel working on
>.NET
> :-)
>
Nope. Texas and Canada have Software Engineers. All control the right to
hold your self out to the public as an engineer. No one cares what job
title Corel uses. Just don't you put on your card or business add that
you are an engineer.
> You must produce a statutorial argument of this assertion. Please post one. I've
>held
> an engineer title for a more than a decade without a related degree, 4-year
>experience (
> early on ) or any FE /EIT / PE crap. Those are for Civils, Mechanicals,
>Electricals, and
> Chemicals. Not ITs.
>
All states have legislation restricting who can call themselves
Architects, Engineers, CPA, RN, RPN, Doctor, etc. Many ever have
educational/experience requirements for Barbers and Beauticians. You
will have to look them up in your state.
> > If you do insist on using the title MSCE,
> > then you can be held personally liable for all damages everytime a
> > system in your charge crashes.
>
> Nope. The certifier is only in TX.
>
Claiming to be an Engineer makes you liable in every state. Tx is, afik,
the only state currently registering Software Engineers. (Others are
working on it) Everywhere else you register as an Electrical,
Mechanical, or Industrial Engineer, or as a CPA.
> > My advice to anyone using the MSCE on business cards : DON'T!
>
> My advice? DO. You get a 100K job on simple to administer systems! Whoo hoo!
> Downside? You get a pager and a notebook like everyone else.
Send me your business card. I'll forward it and the complaint to your
local Board of Registration for Surveyors and Engineers or what ever it
is called in your state/country. Got a lawyer? The boards like to make a
big deal out of one or two cases each year to justify the tax dollars.
Perhaps yours will be the one.
------------------------------
From: lyttlec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 14:58:57 GMT
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Drestin Black
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on 13 Oct 2000 23:05:15 -0500
> <39e7dac5$0$42775$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> >
> >> > The black helicopters are coming for you right now.
> >> >
> >>
> >> It's well known that Microsoft pays people to post FUD to this newsgroup.
> >
> >Prove it. Document "well known"
>
> There will be no proof either way. Surely the Nixon Administration
> taught us all about "plausible deniability"! (Or was that Reagan?)
>
LBJ, about CIA operations in SEA.
> Microsoft is far too cagey to be caught in *that* trap.
>
> Maybe we should argue something else? Like, maybe how good
> the software really is? :-)
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Microsoft may be good, but Linux is better :-)
------------------------------
From: lyttlec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 15:07:37 GMT
JS/PL wrote:
>
> "2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> > WHICH APPS ARE CRASHING ON YOU. How do you expect to be believed if you
> > don't provide even the slightest speck of information.
>
> Well, the dial up app has crashed several times, but the big problem is,
> hardly any will even open at all. It's not a bad hard drive as Win2k doesn't
> seem to have a problem using the same drive.
>
> http://badlinux.dynip.com/1.gif
> note - the time at the bottom right
>
> http://badlinux.dynip.com/1a.gif
> note - only the top choice of newsreaders will open at all
>
> http://badlinux.dynip.com/2.gif
> note - it's still "working" at opening up that directory.
>
> I had a screenshot of HardDrake showing 66mb of memory even though 256 is
> installed, but I forgot to put it on the floppy.
Try just a command line (no KDE) and see what free and df say. It looks
like you have a KDE problem somewhere. Which distribution are you
using? I didn't see it mentioned in the thread.
I do like to make the point that GUIs are not part of Linux, but a neat
add on. GUI problems are hindering the adoption of Linux somewhat.
------------------------------
From: Static66 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 15:11:06 GMT
On Sun, 15 Oct 2000 00:25:06 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim
Richardson) wrote:
>On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 05:45:42 GMT,
> Loren Petrich, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jim Richardson
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> On the plus side, GWB doesn't own a polluting Zinc mine, which is under
>>> consideration by the state of Tennessee to close down due to toxic runnof that
>>> Gore hasn't cleaned up despite several citations.
>>
>> I thought that environmentalists were all economic saboteurs.
>>
>> And it is not for nothing that Libertarians have been described as
>>Republicans who smoke pot.
>>
>
>I am a little confused as to what your response has to do wrt Mr "Earth in
>the Balance, but zinc mining profits in my checkbook balance" Gore.
>
>What do the libertarians or the republicrats have to do with Gore polluting a
>river in Tennesee?
What you have just witnessed is a typical "Loren duck and weave"
..Loren cannot digest truth when it is not in accordance with his/her?
liberal belief system.
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 11:11:43 -0400
Reply-To: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:iIeG5.30167$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > http://www.gallup.com/poll/indicators/indMicrosoft.asp
> >
> > Also see the related analysis links at the bottom of that page.
> >
> > That being read, it seems that the boss is winning points for giving
> people
> > their choice of operating systems at work. As it should be. They made
> that
> > choice at home.
>
> People use whatever comes on their computer. They don't "choose" one
> operating system over another, especially when they're not even aware of a
> choice. Microsoft has for years required PC manufacturer to pay for DOS
and
> Windows on every PC they sell, whether they include Win/DOS on the
computer
> or not. It's that so-called "per-processor license" you've heard tell of.
> How did they require OEMs to do this? By refusing to allow them to sell
> Win/DOS at all unless they signed the contract. Now, OEMs are in a highly
> competitive market. They can't afford to charge their customers twice for
> an OS (once for Microsoft's per processor license and once for, say,
OS/2),
> because their competitor across town will just undercut their prices by
> selling MS-only machines. So...the result is exactly what you'd expect:
> home users have been locked in to Win/DOS for years. They didn't "make
that
> choice at home," as you claim.
There was never a requirement to sign a per processor license agreement. Get
your facts straight. ONLY at the urging of OEM customers did MS offer a per
processor license agreement. And then over the span of a few years, a
maximum of about 40% of the OEM's even opted into the deal. Your lies are
woefully out of date. It's time to think up some new ones because those
particular lies (forcing to sign per processor...) were debunked about 10
years ago.
> The truth is that the average user at home thinks of Windows as part of
the
> machine. Everybody he knows uses Windows It was on there when he
unpacked
> it and plugged it in. He thinks it's part of it. It wasn't a "choice" he
> made -- it was just there, like the carburetor on his car.
Next time you buy a new car bring your own carburetor in and plop it on the
counter, and say "Put this in it will you" to the salesman.
Let me know the consequences it places on your deal.While your at it bring
in your own ignition system and ask for it to be put in place of the
existing system.
They should have no problem just crediting you for the equipment you don't
want and at the same time maintaining the 5 year warantee.
> > Just face it folks.
> > Windows is where it's at today because it's better at what people want
to
> do
> > with their computers.
>
> Well, no, it's not. It's where it's at today because Microsoft forces it
on
> people.
Computers have always been available without an operating system installed.
It's not Microsofts fault 95% of the people don't care what runs the
hardware and loads the applications.
------------------------------
From: lyttlec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Need expert for info on troubleshooting Linux
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 15:21:17 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Linux in and of itself is an experiment in progress fostered on the
> public. It is a semi-ready for prime time pile of junk masquerading as
> an alternative to Windows and nothing could be farther from the truth.
>
> If you're a geek running a server farm go and try it. If you are
> looking for a desktop alternative to Windows, look elsewhere (Mac
> would be a good choice).
>
I don't run a server farm and I have been using it on the desktop
beginning way back in the early 90s. Even at the 0.9 stage it was the
best at attaching to the borning internet. At least if you didn't want
to pay $2000 for Xenix.
> claire
>
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2000 23:14:59 GMT, lyttlec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> I thought it came optimized perfectly right out of the box and ready
> >> to boot after which you should not have to reboot it for at least 28
> >> months or so baring act's of God and such?
> >>
> >> Could I be wrong here?
> >>
> >> claire
> >>
> >> On Fri, 13 Oct 2000 14:39:46 -0700, "Seth S."
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Hi,
> >> >
> >> >I'm in desperate need of an expert or two to help me develop an article on
> >> >troubleshooting (or optimizing) RedHat Linux 7. If anyone thinks they can
> >> >help, or knows of someone who can, please email me at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> >
> >> >Thanks,
> >Just to save someone a bit of trouble. By tradition any Linux release
> >ending with an even number is "experimental". That is they have lots of
> >new features that might not all work well out of the box. Odd numbers
> >are traditionally more stable. Also you will hear about the "most stable
> >release" usually two or three back with some patches.
> >
> >One big difference is that you can get whichever you want. You have
> >enough history to make an informed decision. Unlike MS where everything
> >is hidden.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux Sucks
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 15 Oct 2000 15:22:38 GMT
On Fri, 13 Oct 2000 17:15:32 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 13 Oct 2000 16:26:21 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry
>Porter) wrote:
>
>
>>> Whatever the
>>>semantics involved (ie:Linux is the kernel), it is a fact that Linux
>>>is trying to compete with Windows for the desktop simply by virtue of
>>>the number of Windows program look a likes
>>Nonsense, Linux stands on it own, there is real innovation here in the Linux
>>world.
>
>Of course Linux stands on it's own, and there is certainly a
>contingent of Linux supporters that want to keep it that way and to
>not try and compete with home use desktop Windows.
Hahahahah, only Wintroll "Linux users" like you "Steve".
> Personally, I feel
>this is the way to go as Linux's strengths are geared more toward the
>technical end of the business like servers and such.
Wrong, as usual ... again.
Linux strengths are widespread, in both server, and desktop areas, do I really
need to give you the list again, (for the 1000 time) "Steve" ?
>
>
>>> as well as kde and Gnome.
>>>It is also for sale in CompUSA for anywhere from $29 to about $100
>>>depending on distro.
>>>
>>>You can pull all the word twisting you want out of the hat
>>Look whos talking ;-)
>>
>>> but Linux
>>>is not taking any market share away from the Windows desktop.
>>Linux took my Windows95 market share off my pc in 1997.
>
>So we have been told, about a 1000 times already.
Some people need a lot of repetition "Steve", and your one of them.
>
>>> Joe and
>>>Jane that is. Programmers? Students? maybe, home users? Nope.
>>Bull, Ive had a lady friend using Linux the last 3 weeks, before that she had
>>*never* seen Linux. She loves it, uses Xchat to IRC and is amazed how much
>>easier it is than mIRC under Windows98. In fact she rues the day that she
>>upgraded from Win95 to Win98.
>
>If she did a migrate instead of a fresh install, she should. That was
>a nightmare.
Who said anything about a install ???
She didnt install, migrate, or fly south for the winter ;-)
Shes a user, plain and simple, its using Win98 she hates!
>
>If she's happy, that's great.
>Does she run DVD's?
Nope, and shes back home using her Windows98 box again, it was my Linux
pc she used for 4 weeks. All I did was create a account for her, and let her
choose from one of 4 window managers on my system (she chose XFWM), after that
she used the system easily.
>
>>>
>>>And if it doesn't get it's ass in gear it will remain a niche' system.
>
>>More bs from the Wintroll master "Steve". Still pretending to be a girl I see
>>shame, shame, shame.
>
>I don't see Linux going anywhere on the desktop, do you?
Yes I do, Linux is an excellent desltop system imho.
>
>My user group is full of people who have tried Linux and dumped it
A meaningless statement, from the Wintroll "Steve".
>just as quickly because it requires more effort to do less than what
>they can do under Windows.
Please "Steve" at least put a *little* effort into this ??
* More effort to do less of what ?
Hahahahah, how much effort was required to earn the money to purchase Windows,
and pay for the never ending "upgrade" path ?
How much effort was required to upgrade the hardware to run "new" versions
of Windows ?
How much effort was required to pay for the software they needed, which is
probably available (equivalent or better) under Linux for *free* ?
How much effort was required to reload Windows, when the registery became
corrupted, or a virus totaled their sustem ?
How much effort was required to discover someone using their Windows pc, via
Netbus or similar ?
"Steve" you havent improved your techniques since I was last reading this
group, perhaps its time for a holiday, I hear the English countryside is good
for that kind of thing ?
Perhaps your owners at IBM will give you a few weeks off ?
>
>
>claire
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 11 hours 22 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: lyttlec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Need expert for info on troubleshooting Linux
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 15:25:22 GMT
Paul Colquhoun wrote:
>
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2000 23:14:59 GMT, lyttlec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> |[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> |>
> |> I thought it came optimized perfectly right out of the box and ready
> |> to boot after which you should not have to reboot it for at least 28
> |> months or so baring act's of God and such?
> |>
> |> Could I be wrong here?
> |>
> |> claire
> |>
> |> On Fri, 13 Oct 2000 14:39:46 -0700, "Seth S."
> |> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> |>
> |> >Hi,
> |> >
> |> >I'm in desperate need of an expert or two to help me develop an article on
> |> >troubleshooting (or optimizing) RedHat Linux 7. If anyone thinks they can
> |> >help, or knows of someone who can, please email me at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> |> >
> |> >Thanks,
> |
> |Just to save someone a bit of trouble. By tradition any Linux release
> |ending with an even number is "experimental". That is they have lots of
> |new features that might not all work well out of the box. Odd numbers
> |are traditionally more stable. Also you will hear about the "most stable
> |release" usually two or three back with some patches.
>
> This applies to Kernel versions (and 1 or 2 other programs, I think GIMP
> uses this scheme) but it does *NOT* apply to distribution version numbers.
>
> RedHat 7.0 uses kernel 2.2.16 which is a stable version.
>
> Of course, many people treat x.0 versions of all software with a little
> waryness.
>
> |One big difference is that you can get whichever you want. You have
> |enough history to make an informed decision. Unlike MS where everything
> |is hidden.
>
> --
> Reverend Paul Colquhoun, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Universal Life Church http://andor.dropbear.id.au/~paulcol
> -=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-
> xenaphobia: The fear of being beaten to a pulp by
> a leather-clad, New Zealand woman.
Thats true. On occasion I still think of the days when Linux was new and
everyone followed the convention. Marketeers seem to get involved and
screw up every good idea.
------------------------------
From: lyttlec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Convince me to run Linux?
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 15:32:31 GMT
Linux wrote:
>
> I really do want to run Linux but I can't find any viable reason to
> switch from Windows ME to Linux?
>
> My Dell comes with Windows ME installed as well as internet access and
> all of the programs, including Quicken, encyclopedias and children's
> scholastic program's all pre installed.
>
> Why should I switch to Linux?
>
> I asked Dell about Linux when I placed my order, about 2 weeks ago,
> and they laughed saying that 99 percent of the Linux pre-loads they
> shipped come back with the customers asking for the Windows pre-load
> instead.
>
> According to them, it is just a matter of them exchanging the hard
> disk?
>
> I have not committed to my order yet, but I am having second thoughts?
>
> What viable reasons are there for going with Linux?
>
> Izzy
Lets see : you post an MS marketing release under the name Linux. Did
you forget to properly edit the e-mail bill sent you before posting it
here?
Just to be helpful: these posts and e-mails that claim poster wants to
do something completely contrary to the logic of the message only make
the poster look stupid. Please edit them better. Otherwise someone like
Dell might take unkindly to your slander.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
