Linux-Advocacy Digest #713, Volume #29 Tue, 17 Oct 00 23:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Claire Lynn (Paul Colquhoun)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Gardiner Family)
Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux ("Scaramanga")
sysadmin == secondary role (Was: Astroturfing (Perry Pip)
Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web! ("Otto")
Re: Why I hate Windows... (Bob Hauck)
Re: Why I hate Windows... (Bob Hauck)
Re: What I would like to see in an OS: (Gardiner Family)
Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-) (Gardiner Family)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Darin Johnson)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum ("Christopher
Smith")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Darin Johnson)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Colquhoun)
Subject: Re: Claire Lynn
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 01:16:16 GMT
On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 13:24:28 +1300, Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|what is COLA?
|
|matt
Usenet newsgroups are commonly abreviated to an acronyn created
from the initial letters of the group name.
Comp.Os.Linux.Advocacy => COLA
Normaly it's the initial letter, then the letters that follow the dots.
If one word is hyphenated, the hyphen and the following letter are sometimes
included.
--
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.
------------------------------
From: Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.windows98
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 14:17:45 +1300
In the case of Linux, include the version number, ie, Linux 2.2.16 lags
behind windows 2000, then people will know what areas you are talking about
and whether it is recycled MS bullshit.
matt
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Malmat) wrote in
> <WyuB5.308$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >When declaring a Microsoft operating system to be unstable, it is not
> >necessary to include the suffix.
> >
> >For example, one need not say that Windows 98 "SE" is unstable, or the
> >Windows "98" is unstable.
> >
> >Simply say "Windows is unstable". This applies to all flavors, all
> >versions, all releases.
>
> Do you include Windows NT and Windows 2000. They are not unstable.
>
> Or would you prefer me to say "Linux lags behind Windows" instead of
> qualifying what I mean by that.
>
> --
> Pete Goodwin
> ---
> Coming soon, Kylix, Delphi on Linux.
> My success does not require the destruction of Microsoft.
------------------------------
From: "Scaramanga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 03:33:24 +0000
> This is a piece of cake with either Norton Firewall, ZoneAlarm (free) or BlackIce or
>SonicWall which I believe is also free
> for personal use.
ipchains doesnt allow remote users to execute shell commands though.
--
// Scaramanga
------------------------------
From: Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: sysadmin == secondary role (Was: Astroturfing
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 01:27:25 GMT
On 17 Oct 2000 08:12:41 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Perry Pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 16 Oct 2000 16:35:11 -0500,
>> Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>"Perry Pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>>news:8sd7b3$1vd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>> In article <39e7dbae$0$42822$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>>> "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > > Conversely, I've never met a 3rd year computer engineering
student
>>>> who had
>>>> > > a hope in the world of making more money than a 17 year old
sysadmin
>>>> in
>>>> > boston.
>>>> >
>>>> > amazingly, I concur with abracadabra on this one.
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> In your wet dreams, Dristan.
>>>>
>>>
>>>wow - truth hurts? Dristan - that was almost funny...
>>>
>
>> Like we've never seen this before. A drop out attempting to diminish
>> the value of a good education because he couldn't make the grade
>> himself. No different from the fact he attempts to diminish Unix
>> because he can't handle actually learning it.
>
>> Why don't you provide some data to back up your claim, Alex. Show me
>> some stats to show the average MCSE with no college education at all
>> makes more than the average Purdue Engineering graduate. For that
>> matter, simply show the average MSCE makes more than the average EE.
>
>I said "sysadmin", moron, not "MCSE". Sysadmins routinely make between
>65 and 95k, and often make over 100. And they need *never* have been
>to college.
Instead of blowing hot air why don't you provide some real data.
According to the SANS 1999 survey which you can get from
http://www.sans.org/sal99.htm
Average sysadmin: $54,660.
54% w/ college degrees. 20% w/ some college.
Those with degrees averaging $5000 more than those without.
And from EETimes: http://www.eetimes.com/salarysurvey/1999/money.html
Average EE: $75,500
That's a 20K difference.
Moreover, you sysadmin types need to get your head out of the clouds
and realize your job is nothing but a secondary role. Whether it is
desktop PC's or supercomputers your job is merely to keep the machines
running securely. It's the people who actually use the machines to
produce a product are playing the primary role in a business. When the
machines don't run, the shit hits the fan and the sysadmins hear
it. When the machines do run the cutomers forget who the sysadmins
are. How is that any different from being an HVAC mechanic? The only
way to really do well as a sysadmin is to be a consultant. Othewise,
it's a thankless job.
This thread was about MCSE's, btw. You switched it to sysadmin.
>And I didnt say "engineering graduate", you idiot, I said "3rd year
>computer engineering student".
You also said 17 year old sysadmin, which makes your whole statement
meaningless.
>> The only reason MSCE's have any decent salary data at all is because
>> many of them actually do have college degrees.
>
>I see you dont work in the field.
Most MCSE's have degrees, and they tend to be higher paid than the
ones who don't. From MPC magazines MCSE survey (1999):
http://www.mcpmag.com/members/99jul/charts.asp?cid=37
As far as whether I "work in the field", I wouldn't want to. I'm an
aerospace engineer working in an avionics lab on a research
prototype. We have an onsite contractor who does our sysadmin work for
our offices and many of the machines in our labs. A few specialized
machines we do oursevles. I appreciate the work the sysadmins do. I
appreciate the mechanic who fixes my car as well. But both are generally
thankless jobs.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web!
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 01:43:44 GMT
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: Otto wrote:
:
: > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: >
: > : And this might be where RED HAT comes in.
: > : RED HAT helps to keep you from having RED ASS.
: > :
: > : http://24.94.254.33/Linux/intro.html
: >
: > Interesting point of view at the above link, not to mention your
: > interpretation of the article. However, there are some perspective which
: > isn't mentioned on the site and you might've drawn the wrong conclusion.
: > The masses rather have "RED ASS" than "RED HAT" for the time being. This
: > might change by year 2005, but that would require couple of things to
: > happen, they are actually related to one and other and somewhat
overlooked
: > in the article.
: > Linux need to become as easy to use as Windows, or the masses will be
: > proficient to use Linux. The former one already started, to the dismay
of
: > hardcore Linux advocates, Linux will be controlled by the GUI instead of
the
: > CLI. Only time will tell how successful this will be, anyone's guess is
: > valid on this subject at this time, including the author of the article.
: > As for the masses becoming proficient in the present form of Linux, good
: > luck. The masses have no interest in the inner working of the OS.
Microsoft
: > built, or exploited their business on this fact.
: >
: > Otto
:
: I'll disagree with that Otto as the embedded market is going to make
: some very cheap alternatives to a full blown PC. It's likely that
: a significant number of people will opt for this despite the failure
: of WEB T.V.
:
: WEB T.V. has two problems. The cost. The difficulty in upgrading
: your software. The fact your locked into a certain ISP route.
You have some good points Charlie, although I wasn't talking about the WEB
TV. However, there are people who don't need more than what the WEB TV can
provide. They probably wouldn't even now what software upgrade is. The jury
is still out if MS will provide service for those people, or exploit them?
Otto
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Why I hate Windows...
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 01:43:41 GMT
On Tue, 17 Oct 2000 13:48:35 +1300, Matthew Gardiner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>a decent mail client would be one that is a mail client and usenet
>client, that is small, fast and feature rich (such as spell checkers).
Like...Pine?
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Why I hate Windows...
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 01:43:43 GMT
On Tue, 17 Oct 2000 09:43:36 GMT, Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>You are aware you can use an IMAP client with the Exchange server
>(provided your admins have not disabled IMAP support, and also
Yes, and an LDAP client can access the address book. Netscape mail
works fine with a little tweaking.
>providing you can find a SMTP server that will let you send through it)?
Yeah, Exchange 5.5 seems to be unable to relay for a specified IP block
only, just all or nothing. Or maybe it is just our admin. Anyway, I
just use one of our Linux machines to send through.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in an OS:
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 14:59:14 +1300
The reason why I suggest the windows GUI is because many users are already
familiar with it and so that the learning curve is not as great. I donot
particulary like the Windows GUI, I would rather have a GUI like BeOS or QNX
RTP, both are lightweight and very fast.
matt
Steve Mading wrote:
> Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : I am no win advocate or Linux advocate, however, if I were to design an
> : OS these are some of the features:
>
> : 1. Linux Kernel
> : 2. Standardised GUI, either, MacOS or Windows like interface
> : 3. Simplified Library structure similar to what Amiga had (ie,
> : icons.library, fonts.library, printers.library)
> : 4. ReiserFS as the file system
> : 5. A windows interpreter, when a program makes a call it goes through a
> : filter (like wine) and matchs the windows dll call with the UNIX
> : equivilant.
>
> : Both Windows and Linux have great attributes, Linux, opensourced and
> : very stable. Windows, easy to use and administrate. By combining the
> : power of a UNIX core and the simplicity of the Windows GUI there would
> : be a balance between simplicity, functionality and flexibility. (a
> : concept very similar to the MacOS X project).
>
> : feel free to reply, no flaming please.
>
> Well, the problem is that you are going to get a lot of people
> who disagree (myself included) with the premise that the Windows
> GUI is good. It's got a lot of things about it that irk me:
> - Doesn't have user-pickable focus and raising policy, it's
> hardcoded to: click-to-focus, and auto-raise-on-focus. This doesn't
> mesh well with how I want to work. I like to be able to type into
> one window while view a different one on top of it (So I can, for
> example, compose a bit of code while looking at the relevant on-line
> manual)
> - Gui isn't natively remotable - requires an expensive add-on.
> - Ships with fonts that are ugly for fixed-width work, such as I
> spend most of my time doing (editing source code). (Xfree86 has
> ugly proportional fonts, I'll admit, but I spend more time with
> fixed-width programming stuff, so that doesn't hurt me much.)
>
> No, this isn't a flame. I'm just pointing out that making something
> mandatory is going to meet with a lot of complaints if it's not
> something that's universally loved. It would be a good idea to
> have such an OS bundle as you describe ONLY if the Windows GUI was
> one option of many, not if it was effectively required.
------------------------------
From: Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-)
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 15:01:27 +1300
they, as refering to amazon.
matt
Drestin Black wrote:
> "Gardiner Family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > love the reply, I have used Windows 3.1/98/NT 4/2000, until I obtained a
> copy of
> > UNIX (and then later, Linux) I naively, like you, believed Windows NT was
> the "bees
> > knees". Yes and I do know what a PCI card is, the card I removed was a
> Soft-modem
> > from an Intel BX motherboard. I have also installed a ISA card as well
> whilst the
> > machine is on, and no adverse effects. However, I did lie a bit, I was
> using
> > Solaris 8. Windows does have its uses, however, not as a server. If you
> look at
> > the various technologies included with Windows NT/2000, many of these have
> been
> > borrowed from UNIX and other OS's, here are some examples is Terminal
> Server, a
> > quick rehash of the of X-Server and X-Dumb-Client setup used back in the
> 1980's
> > (surprised Microsoft went for the centralised processing model considering
> they were
> > the first to jump up and say Sun Microsystems idea of the Sun Ray as a
> stupid idea,
> > trying to resurrect time sharing and centralised processing of the 1960s),
> HTFS, a
> > close replication of HPFS used by OS/2 Warp, TCP/IP how long has the UNIX
> world had
> > this protocol in service for? a long time.
> >
>
> How strange. You say that W2K has it's uses but not as a server - then you
> go on to list the server qualities that W2K has that, according to you, it
> borrowed from Unix - which we all know is definately a server OS. I would
> say that definately makes W2K server material. Thanks for proving that.
>
> > Centralised processing does lower TCO below the typical fat client setup.
> The most
> > commonly used example would be at Amazon where there telephone operators
> use Sun Ray
> > Network Appliances. Unfortunately they never released the actual figure
> in terms of
> > cost savings, however, they did state it was substantial
>
> Ahhh "they" - such a reliable source for specific facts...
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
From: Darin Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 02:10:08 GMT
Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It is. This is a democracy. Read the Constitution.
But it is not "majority rule". We're really a representative
democracy anyway. In fact, the majority of the population can not
even decide to amend the constitution, only a majority of States
(well, a majority could decide that the constitution was irrelevant I
suppose :-).
"The Great Compromise" also provided for a legislative branch where
each state, regardless of population, got the same representatio.
Basically the compromise kept both the large population and small
population states happy (or grudgingly in agreement anyway).
> > But it's not, and the constitution and laws of the US work to protect
> > the minority from the tyranny of the majority.
>
> Really? I thought it's aim was to represent the majority through
> representation.
And to protect the minority from sudden changing whims of the
majority. To get a new law through, it must first be created by the
representative legislature, approved by president, and upheld by the
courts. A lot of hurdles stand in the way of the majority.
> > Forcing a UNIX developer to use Windows would hurt productivity, yet
> > I've seen it happen (ie, they use X Server on top of Windows to get to
> > the dwindling supply of UNIX workstations).
>
> Cool. Developers are service providers, not folks that should mandate policy.
Huh? What service? In my example, the folks were creating a product
to be sold to provide revenue. It wasn't even the development VP who
dictated the change, but the information services VP. If a developer
isn't given essential needed tools it hurts the company.
> > I've seen computer
> > support services refuse to connect non Windows machines to a network,
> > even though one or more groups may be doing their work on other types
> > of machines.
>
> That's great too! Folks that can't do their jobs on the corporate
> standard ought to be unhappy. Maybe they can find a Linux house?
And corporate standards get changed underneath people, developers all
leave, inexperienced people get hired, and the company suffers. Sure,
it's a company's right to shoot itself in the foot, but that's not
"great" in my view.
> > And I've seen a someone dictate to a technical
> > documentation team that they must use Word for the 300+ page manuals,
> > but the writers revolted and eventually got their way (and went on
> > using more mature applications than Word).
>
> Like a Mac? OK. I'll give them that. They are "creative". A niche. Don't
> expect support.
I said "Word", not Windows. They were using Windows, but a real
documentation tool (Framemaker). Word couldn't even do decent cross
references and indices at the time. And they got support (not that
they needed any MSCE robots getting in the way).
> > People shouldn't necessarily be "forced" to use anything.
>
> I weep.
Ok, so you don't care about non Windows users. If we're going extinct
and our opinion is irrelevant, why do so many Windows users keep
attacking non Windows solutions? If we eccentrics were just left
alone, it'd be a lot quieter all around :-)
> Outlook supports open standards.
Exchange Server, which is what I really meant, doesn't support open
standards very well.
> > firewalls get changed
> > to require a Windows program to get through them,
>
> Please show a firewall std that requires Windows.
I'm no longer at the company that required this so I can't look it up.
It wasn't a standard, it was a product. To compute and provide the
key to get through, a Windows 95 program was required (maybe WinNT
worked, but it wasn't "supported"). If you want to assume I'm lying,
that's your perogative.
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[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: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 12:18:29 +1000
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8sikng$2t12$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8sii7v$2t12$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> The problem with it is that many useful OS/2 apps (not to mention *all*
> > graphical
> >> ones) simply do not and CAN not work inside this environment. Whether
or
> > not
> >> the reason for this is ultimately the greater security and stability of
NT
> > is
> >> somewhat beside the point; they advertize an OS/2 compliancy when in
> > actuality
> >> what little is there is absolutely useless.
>
> > They advertise OS/2 1.3 "compliancy", with the same caveats as Win16 and
DOS
> > compatibility - amongst them no direct hardware access. What "useful"
OS/2
> > 1.3 programs require hardware access, and why the hell do they require
it ?
>
> Ive already given a couple of examples.
Not in this thread you haven't.
> The compliancy is no lie; it is indeed 'compliant' in a very basic and
technical
> sense of the word, but again, its utterly useless in the real world.
Utterly.
If you have to run OS/2 applications that badly, get OS/2. It was never
meant to be any more than a token gesture to legacy support, which is why it
only supports OS/2 1.3.
However, it's implemented in the same manner as the Win32 and POSIX layers,
so there's no fundamental reason for it to be any less useful. Unless, of
course, the OS/2 1.3 API on its own isn't especially useful in itself.
> Just like their POSIX layer--which no one ever uses. Because they CANT
use it,
> because it DOESNT WORK.
Of course it works. The simple fact is POSIX.1 *on its own* isn't
particularly useful.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
From: Darin Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 02:22:32 GMT
Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I bought an Amiga in 1985.
...
> These groups weren't around then. Where did you see verifiable data on this
> that you can post? Andecdotal.
What the...? Of course they were around then. I first got on USENET
back in 82-83, and it had been around for quite a few years before
then too.
Can you provide verifiable data that the USENET did not exist back
then? How do we know you'll believe our evidence if we find it. If
you're the one going against popular wisdom (that we were all
hallucinating and no network existed in 1985) why shouldn't you be the
one to provide the proof?
But here's a link if you can't find any yourself:
http://www.geocities.com/~anderberg/ant/history/
Looks like USENET was created in 1979.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 09:10:55 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >Max - just grow up. It's not just Microsoft that abides by the rules I laid
>> >out -- it's all software development that isn't 'free' in the Stallman sense
>> >of the word.
>> >
>> >Though I'm sure you can offset development costs. Let's see... if it costs
>> >Corel $15,000 to implement a converter for Word Perfect that takes
>> >AppleWorks files and converts them into WP native format, and only 3 people
>> >will buy it, they won't do it.
>> >
>> >Or they'll charge all 3 of the people who want it $5,000 a piece.
>> >
>> >Grow up, Max. This IS how the world works.
>>
>> Funny, I could have sworn its only how your imagination works. I'm
>> presuming that you made up these numbers, and the example.
>
>Going from my experience, that's a rough estimate of how much it would cost
>to write a converter, assuming that all the documentation is present, that
>one or two people can be put on it for a month, that the new work has to be
>documented, and that it has to go through QA. All in all, at least 6-8 weeks
>of work to get it done, and make sure that it works *correctly* before
>unleashing it on the outside world.
Well, you obviously have extremely limited experience in business, if
you think costs are allocated per feature like this.
>> Your grasp
>> of the simplistic principle of supply and demand is to be commended, but
>> such grade-school ideology does not prevent Microsoft from being
>> anti-competitive and guilty of federal crimes.
>
>Your inability to grasp the simplistic principle of supply and demand amazes
>me, and by the way, I was explaining why *generally*, compatibility with
>other systems is not a hard requirement for any software development
>project.
It doesn't have anything to do with grasping the principle of supply and
demand; merely your desire to use a simplistic excuse for the principle
in order to defend a monopoly. Make a note: supply and demand only work
in free markets, which means there aren't any illegal monopolies
preventing actual competition.
>You claimed that all software HAD to be compliant with its competitors.
>That's just plain wrong. So why are you bringing Microsoft into it? Afraid
>to admit that you're wrong?
No, I pointed out that for the entire history of packaged wordprocessing
programs (you supposed example), ALL wordprocessing packages have
included converters, and you can generally tell how popular a program is
by how many *other* programs it is 'compatible' with in this way.
Microsoft brought themselves into it, by acquiring and maintaining an
illegal monopoly.
>Compatibility costs money. If MS won't certify something as compatible,[...]
It is not for Microsoft to 'certify' anything, but for their customers
to enjoy compatibility, or seek a vendor which provides it, if this is
their desire. Your rather pitiful attempt to pretend that nobody
desires it, and that's why it isn't provided, is naive to say the very
least, and certainly shows an ignorance of reality.
>Businesses are around to do one thing and one thing only -- make money.
Yada yada yada. They have to produce something to make money;
otherwise, they're around to do one thing only: rip off their customers.
>The
>moment they stop doing that, the accountants come in and kill it off, like
>vultures around a carcass. As long as they don't break the law, that's fine.
Well, see, that's the problem....
--
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! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 09:13:05 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Mike Byrns in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>Weevil wrote:
[...]
>> Interesting stuff, huh? According to the poll you cite, people believe that
>> breaking up Microsoft would help the economy, consumers, and the computer
>> industry. But they're against it. Why is that, Mike? What does this tell
>> us about this poll? Does it tell us anything about Microsoft's PR machine?
>
>It tells us what people think.
Or, more accurately, it tells us that people don't think.
>Not what you think about it. Joe on the street
>thinks Linux is for nerds and will never use it.
Joe on the street obviously listens to idiots like you, instead of
thinking about what provides value and is worth purchasing. Mostly
because they don't have to; their 'purchasing' decisions are already
made for them, by the pre-load lock-in which Microsoft has forced on the
OEMs.
Thanks for your time. I doubt it will help.
--
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! ======
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
