Linux-Advocacy Digest #734, Volume #29 Wed, 18 Oct 00 21:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: KDE starting to stress out a little? (sfcybear)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Bob Hauck)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Bob Hauck)
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? ("Christopher Smith")
Re: Why I do use Windows (2:1)
Re: Astroturfing ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Tim Smith)
Re: Ms employees begging for food ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
memory WHINING! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Astroturfing ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 23:30:08 GMT
FM wrote:
> T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Yes, I noticed that (about Richard). What is it about object oriented
> >programming that differentiates it from functional programming?
>
> Let me say that there's really nothing similar between
> the two, since one is about describing a computational
> process (FP) and the other is about organization of
> data and code (OO).
And as we all know, "true" *programming* paradigms are only
computational paradigms since programming has absolutely no
relation to organizing data and code, as can be proved from
the complete absence of any long monologues on the long-term
maintenance of computer software.
FP is no more a "complete" computational paradigm than OO is.
The only "true" computational paradigm is the Turing machine
(not even machine code, let alone assembler and imperative!)
since you can't do anything in FP that you can't do with a
Turing machine and it is verbotten to characterize a paradigm
(a "true" rigorous/formal paradigm since we all think in 2nd
order logic!) by what is impossible in it instead of what is
possible.
Here's a clue: FP is no more "fundamental" than chemistry.
And functional programmers calling OOP "less fundamental"
than FP is like chemists complaining that astrophysics is
not a fundamental science. It's hypocritical, irrelevant
and nonsense.
FP is defined by the abstractions it provides over low-lewel
procedural details. These abstractions do away with any detail
on how to compute values. They do *not* talk about what values
are to be computed or even what computations are possible,
let alone provide abstractions so that users can grasp these
things easily. That's what OOP does.
You're an idiot Dan. Every accusation you've ever laid on me
is hypocrisy combined with limited self-knowledge. You attack
me for holding OOP sacred and yet you defend your sacred cow
of Computation. I'd give more examples but it would require me
to look up your braindead articles. You wondered how I could
respond to every article in this thread; well, I can't because
three major projects have landed on me a couple days ago.
Ciao, cretin, it hasn't been nice knowing you, and unlike /every/
other person I have ever interacted with (including the people I
insult and denigrate) I can say I haven't learned a single thing
from you ...
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE starting to stress out a little?
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 23:33:04 GMT
You are making huge assumptions about what is going on in KDE. It is
more likely that one person is being over worked at his real job and
does not need the extra stress. I remember the response to the gnome
project letter. they said they would not have writen it but there were
so many people asking questions. It seems an approprate response, a hell
of a lot easier than sending a response to everyone that asked. I think
you are reading WAY to much into this.
In article <8sl7ne$l48$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <8skidf$1k2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > One person does not the KDE project make. You can not claim that the
> > whole of KDE project members are stressed based on ONE person.
>
> It seems symptomatic of a larger problem, though. I personally don't
> mind KDE and I'm not trying to start a FUD thread here. It's just,
> lately, there have been so many things going on that make it seem like
> they're scrambling. The GNOME foundation set off a bunch of responses
> like "KDE's official position on the GNOME foundation", etc., and then
> there was the GPLing of the code, only to have RMS toss it back in
> their face on www.linuxtoday.com, then there's this "Meet the Folks
> behind KDE" series of articles that just absolutely REEKS of
well-timed
> PR, and then there was that article about whether or not KOffice and
> OpenOffice were going to be heavy competitors with denials all around.
>
> I don't know about the project itself, but something is giving off
some
> weird vibes lately, IMHO. It's all press release stuff and maybe
> sensationalist geek journalism, but it's still there.
>
> -ws
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 23:43:45 GMT
On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 13:30:57 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Most of the reports I've read say that Caldera settled for less than 1% of
>the amount they asked for in their suit. I'd say that Caldera is the one
>that settled, not MS.
Caldera was asking for $27.5 billion? I don't think so.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 23:43:44 GMT
On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 03:03:20 GMT, Chad Myers
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Odd. I use POSIX applications every day.
Which ones?
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 09:56:39 +1000
"Gardiner Family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> look at the marketing machine of Microsoft, blantant lies and manipulation
of
> the facts.
Examples ? Preferably ones that can't be demonstrated as existing in every
other "marketing" machine.
> Microsoft can't even release a program that is not being exploited
> by script kiddies, remember the lovebug?
You mis-spelled "mis-used by stupid end users". HTH.
> The perfect example of when the
> marketing and PR machine take over the places of programmers resulting in
> crapping, third rate products such as Windows ME/98/95 and the biggest
joke
> Windows 2000 Pro, mega bloatware, both memory and harddisk space.
Examples of an OS that does as much using significantly less memory and disk
space ?
> I am not
> anti-microsoft, I am anti-sloppy programming, if microsoft said to
> programmers, "write Windows 2000 pro so that it takes as little space up
as
> possible (say 200MB), uses only 16MB ram and the BSD kernel as the heart
of
> the os", this could be done, it would be just a matter of efficient
> programming.
No, it couldn't.
Your discussion on why the NT kernel is so bad it needs replacing by the BSD
one would be welcome, as well.
> If this was done I would be more than happy to go out and pay
> even $600 for it, however, until that day comes, MS will never be
technically
> superior, only their marketing think tank has the advantage over Linux.
As far as I'm concerned Win2k/NT is technically superior to Linux right now.
I can't think of a single thing Linux does better.
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why I do use Windows
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 03:07:16 +0100
Gonzalo Pardo wrote:
>
> > So you count all of linux's text editors as 1 app, but all of windows
> > photo-editors as seperate apps.
>
> I think you undestand me, by application I mean application not tool; I
> do not even mean application at the style windows.
I can't parse that. Sorry.
> > Whatever.
> > I suppose that you count Word and word perfect as seperate apps, whilst
> > counting emacs and vi as 1 app?
>
> I do not think I could count as applications my own scripts, could I ? I
> think Wordperfect has some more code than vi does ...
You could well count scripts as applications, or parts of them (see
later). How does WP having more code than vi make it more of an
application.
> > I thing OPEN/GL is coming along quite nicely. The only thing I've heard
> > that it's missing is 3d sound.
>
> Is coming does not mean is here ... so is coming Windows stability ...
You misunderstand me. I meant that it is here and doing well. The Linux
benchmarks are comparable (but not quite as good) for the same games on
the same hardware, compared to the windows benchmarks.
> > I'm happy with netscape news. As for a mial client, I wouldn't give up
> > pine for the world.
>
> Well, I find pine some limited, and even you could find by yourself some
> of them ...
I don't do anything really fancy with my mail, so I don't find pine
limited. I object to using fancy formatting just to send text, anyway.
> > So all the people working at RedHat are non professionals?
> > There are plenty of applications, but you seem unwilling to use them.
>
> How much of the GNU/Linux distribution has been developed by them ?
> Do not mean recopilating and integrating together, just developed.
I don't understand why an application has to be developed exclusiely by
professionals for it to be an application.
> > gcc is an application, but you seem not to want to count it as something
> > useful. Do you count VC++ and Borland C++ at al as applications?
>
> I count it as a compiler (and I find it good one), but to be an
> application it
> would need some add-ons. Don't even mind if they are separated tools if
> they integrate 100%.
What does it need. Most of the text utilitis in UNIX do integrate 100%
>
> > LaTeX + (vi|emacs|pico|LyX) counts as an application. Do you count it?
> > if not, why not?
>
> LaTeX is not an application, I found it more like a system or method, LyX
> is an application, and it works fine for a lot of things. Sadly I can't open
> the
> documents I need with it ... I know, it is not Linux fault, but so are the
> things ...
I disagree with your definition of application. You seem to think that
an program must have many functions built in to it in order for it to
become an application. The UNIX way is oppersite: you have many small,
well defined tools that you use, which give you more versitility and
power than one monolithic application.
gcc isn't an application
make isn't an application
vi isn't an application
xterm isn't an application
gdb isn't an application
etc
together, they can provide the equivalent of an application (an IDE for
instance), and much more besides. Despite you not counting them as
applications, together in combination, they make up an application.
There is no inherent difference in the user typing make at the command
line and pressing the build button in an IDE.
Another example.
According to you:
ispell is not an application
pico/vi/whatever is not an application
TeX is not an application
Together they provide the functionality of a (very high quality)
wordprocessor. You don't count them as an application, despite them
behaving like one if you use them together.
> > Wordprefect is an application
>
> Sure, the same that Staroffice, but I do not like Corel approach of using
> wine to run last version, do you count that one as a native application or
> as
> a Windows application running under Linux ?
Good question.
> > Abiword is an application
>
> No. It is abandoned. And nowadays it is really alpha.
>
> > Koffice
>
> Haven't seen a final release, anyway, I count it as an application, even
> a
> bad one.
>
> > Applix,
>
> Application ... do you use it ? Do you feel is a good one ?
No, so I can't comment.
>
> > LinuxCADs competitors (who's name I forget) are apps (LinuxCAD doesn't
> > count as a useful app, from the review I read).
>
> Again I count it as an application.
>
> > MATLAB (which I have just got) is definitely an app.
>
> I have it and Mathematica too, for both Windows and Linux.
Hells bells! You have mathmatica and matlab for windows and linux?
> > GIMP (which you counted) is an app.
> > XV is an app
> > GNUPlot is an app
>
> Sure they are.
>
> > Many utilities perform the functions which the bigger apps don't need to
> > do (th apps don't do them because the utilities exist) but you won't
> > count them.
>
> We have to put a line between a miriad of tools used to do something
> and an application.
The thing with UNIX is the myriad of toold give the equivalent
functionality of an app. The same equivalent doesn't exist under
windows. I do not believe that you are doing a fair comparison.
For instance, winzip is an app.
tar is a tool
gzip is a tool
tar | gzip gives the same functionality as winzip.
>
> > Is GNOME a reason to use windows? If it is then you're very stupid,
> > since gnome is not necessary unser linux.
>
> Those're obvious both of them. I am not stupid (otherwise I could not
My apologies.
> understand you), and GNOME is not a duty to run Linux. But you have
> to admit that there are always mentions to it when talking about a Linux
> desktop to take the world, as if GNOME was the mankind salvation and
> open source the only way to get saints.
:-)
-~Ed
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 20:20:48 -0400
2:1 wrote:
>
> > MCSE is a hardware and networking certification. It has nothing to do with
> > programming. That's the MCSD (Microsoft Certified Solution Developer) and
> > has been in existance for at least 5 years.
>
> Certified solution developer ?! ROFL!!!
Microsoft keeps misspelling "pollution"
>
> -Ed
>
>
> > An MCP is a Certified Professional, and is sort of a catch-all. Anyone that
> > has any MS certification (or has completed at least one test) is an MCP, but
> > you have to complete specific tests for specific certifications.
>
> --
> Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
> binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
> first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
> commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: 18 Oct 2000 17:16:38 -0700
Reply-To: Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 02:22:32 GMT, Darin Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 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.
That was before the big reorganization. It wasn't *these* groups back
then, it was *those* groups.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Ms employees begging for food
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 20:22:12 -0400
Ketil Z Malde wrote:
>
> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Revenues down 20% from hundreds of billions vs revenues up 270%
> > from nothing doesn't really mean a whole heck of a lot.
>
> It could mean that the cash value of the software market is
> shrinking. If free software becomes a (more and more) viable
> alternative, it means that pure software companies will struggle to
> keep their niches, and they'll eventually die off. OTOH companies
> that are consumers of software are likely to benefit, and in
> particular I'd expect an increased demand for consultants and
> programmers.
>
> Invest in consultancy companies with high technical competence, system
> integrators that aren't too dependent on particular software, and
> hardware manufacturers instead.
In other words... Microsoft's goose is cooked.
They have no technical competance, and all who DO have technical competance
would sooner die than work for Bill Gates and his asswipe minions.
>
> -kzm
> --
> If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: memory WHINING!
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 20:29:36 -0400
JS/PL wrote:
>
> "Ian Davey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "JS/PL"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> When I said use your brain, I meant use it, not repeat the same stuff
> in
> > >> detail. There is probably something very badly wrong with your
> > >> installation. C corrupted filesystem or a bad harddisk or something.
> > >> There are kernel options to allow Linux to see more memory.
> > >> Try mem=256M or something like it.
> > >
> > >That's the point, my objective isn't to hack the kernel, it is to insert
> a
> > >disk, hover over the return key for a few minutes and have the thing work
> in
> >
> > You don't need to hack the kernel, there's a point in the Mandrake 7.1
> install
> > where you get to enter how much memory you have. All you do is amend the
> > 64MB value in the text box and change it to 256MB. Not rocket science.
>
> I've done that on the second of three installs, it still shows 66mb when the
> install is complete. I also have a pretty good feeling that just typing
> mem=256M will not magically work if it doesn't already see the maximum
> amount available.
It's a command line argument for the kernal
boot: linux mem=256M
There's your fucking answer, now quit whining.
read the man page on lilo.conf, and insert it there as well.
and remember...STOP WHINING!
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 20:30:50 -0400
Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > >
> > > You should just be able to add append "mem=256" to the relevant section
> of
> > > your lilo.conf and rerun lilo and it will work. That'll tell Linux
> exactly
> > how
> > > much memory it can use, overriding what the BIOS told it.
> >
> > Windows 2000 doesn't have a problem figuring out how much ram is
> available,
> > neither does the system bios which is aware of total ram.
>
> There is an 'old' standard way for bios to pass the memory size that is
> limited to 64M (probably thought up by the same guy who brought us
> the 640k limit, the 32M disk limit, then the 2.1G disk limit, then the
> 8.4G limit, and so on. There is also a 'new' standard way for larger
> numbers that Linux understands. Obviously your bios isn't using it.
>
> > My needs, and most others I would guess are to let the OS handle the basic
> > hardware with no input form me, no editing .conf files, no anything.
>
> Then you would be wise to buy equipment that follows the standards.
>
> > I can
> > insert the Win2k disk, and basicly let it install with minimal input.
>
> Microsoft has no trouble prying secrets from hardware vendors.
You misspelled "Dictating secrets TO hardware vendors" under penalty
of bankruptcy if they dare reveal them.
>
> > I did however attempt to edit the lilo.conf which is on the boot floppy,
> > unfortunately for some reason I got an error message instead of a look at
> > the disk when I tried to open it, why wasn't I surprised.
>
> The lilo.conf file should be in /etc. Just edit it and run /sbin/lilo, then
> reboot.
>
> > I'll install the next Linux release I get my hands on, maybe it'll work
> > right on my system.
>
> I don't think that will make a difference. There are some gory details
> here:
> http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/BootPrompt-HOWTO-3.html#ss3.3
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 20:33:06 -0400
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?articleid=RWT101600000000
>
> That's the headlines once they fail to support this chip.
>
> Linux will be supporting it just like they currently have IA64 working!
>
> Microsoft doesn't even have the IA64 working!
>
> Microsoft is NOT keeping up with technology!
>
> The are falling into the shit pile!
Close.
M$ ***IS**** the shit-pile, and always has been.
The FACADE is merely falling off now.
>
> Charlie
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 20:36:47 -0400
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cfm?articleid=RWT101600000000
>
> That's the headlines once they fail to support this chip.
Better yet, they will STRANGLE Microsoft (and Bill Gates)...and
leaving the festering corpses to rot in the ditch.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
