Linux-Advocacy Digest #766, Volume #29 Fri, 20 Oct 00 19:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Clearing things ("Nigel Feltham")
Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World? (Andy Newman)
Re: Clearing things ("Nigel Feltham")
Re: Real Linux Advocacy ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why Linux is great. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("John W. Stevens")
Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-) (Steve Mading)
Gallup site down, Call Microsoft support (Jeff Hall)
Re: who's WHINING dipshit! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Redhat and TurboLinux announce support for the entire new IBM eServer (Gary Hallock)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Weevil")
Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web! ("Otto")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Michael
Livshin)
Re: Linux or Solaris (Bloody Viking)
Re: who's WHINING dipshit! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Claire Lynn (Steve Mading)
Re: Run for the hills! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux or Solaris ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Weevil")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Clearing things
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 23:11:27 +0100
> Well, last time I tested it had not multiaccounting and it freezed more
>than
>desirable.
>
It does have multiple accounts for receiving email but only one account for
sending (at least in KDE1 - may be even better in KDE2).
> Companies' wars does not matter me, be it one or another, they'll behave
>always the same. And if IE had not been better, it would have not
succeeded.
>I tested IE since 2.0 and for that times I liked it more than Netscape.
>
If it had not been forcefully installed with the operating system it would
not have succeeded - Netscape could have easily competed until they were
forced out by illegal bundling of IE ( read DOJ finding of fact for
details).
> Netscape is not stable and is not worth to run in a stable OS like
Linux.
Try KFM or the new KDE2 equivalent (no java in kfm but I think it is in KDE2
version).
>
> It is free. I can download it for free giving no name, no money and no
>data.
>
Cannot install the operating system without it though can you?
> Here an official SuSE one is almost as expensive as Windows ME. Yeah, I
>know it is only mailing costs, and I know it comes with 5 or 6 CD's full of
>things that are obsolete when they finally arrive.
>
You can also install the same copy of SUSE on several hundred machines if
you want to - try doing this with a single copy of winme without getting
arrested for copyright theft - a lot of home users also have more than 1
machine which makes suse much cheaper depending on actual number of
machines.
> I decided, not MS. And I decided to use a lot of OS's and to try not
>to fall into loving one blindly.
>
Which is why you are anti-linux and blindly praising microsoft?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy Newman)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 22:26:57 GMT
Oh, today's news...
Love virus variant plagues email systems
By Paul Festa
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
October 20, 2000, 1:10 p.m. PT
Five months after its first disastrous outbreak, the
"I Love You" virus is still churning out destructive
mutants.
The latest mutant making the rounds is a month-old variation
with new window dressing but the same destructive payload
that deletes image files and spreads itself via Microsoft's
Outlook address book. The subject header reads....
------------------------------
From: "Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Clearing things
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 23:19:38 +0100
>Who uou didn't include appache here!
>
Maybe he didn't include apache because it is a webserver not a browser -
maybe he is also embarassed about apache beaing 3 times more popular than MS
IIS.
Maybe why he didn't include kfm (and gnome & kde2 equivalents), opera and
several other less well-known linux browsers would be a better question.
On the subject of webservers, TUX kernel-space webserver performs about 3
times better than IIS on the same hardware (see specweb 99 results on
www.spec.org ).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Real Linux Advocacy
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 22:25:52 GMT
dork
On 20 Oct 2000 20:53:28 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Pretty much what I would say as well.
>
>Because you cannot think for yourself, partially because you have no
>experience at all with the subject at hand.
>
>
>
>
>-----.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Why Linux is great.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 22:28:24 GMT
oops...
sorry..
claire
On Fri, 20 Oct 2000 19:03:11 GMT, "Idoia Sainz"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> He speaks from his experience, as I do. I think you Linux guys are
>> conditioned and brainwashed by some psycho penguin lover :)
>
> She, please :-)
>
>
------------------------------
From: "John W. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 16:22:05 -0600
Simon Cooke wrote:
>
>
> No; that's an IF vs. IFF statement.
>
> If software is written that is compatible with other software, people will
> pay for it.
> If software is written that isn't compatible with other software, people
> will pay for it.
>
> One does not necessarily exclude the other.
But, on point: most people do not make individual purchases as part of a
long-term, strategic plan. This failing is what allows monopolies to be
created, and to flourish.
> Look at the bottom line:
> It costs more to develop a compatible version of something than one that
> doesn't care.
I question this assertion.
Think about the benefits of OO, and you can see that in any situation
where a product is going to be part of a system, or you expect to
maintain it for a lengthy period of time, it is actually CHEAPER to code
to a "standard" (to be compatible).
Consider the cost not only to MS, but to their customer base, that
constantly changing the Word document format engendered.
> Not to mention that compatibility generally only goes one way when it comes
> to system components -- that is, things are compatible with those *below
> them*.
Generally . . . due to the rather random and ad-hoc engineering methods
that are all to prevalent in most companies.
But "generally", doesn't mean "this is the way it must be".
--
If I spoke for HP --- there probably wouldn't BE an HP!
John Stevens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-)
Date: 20 Oct 2000 22:29:52 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Perhaps, but I'm not talking about them.
Yes, I've noticed that you are adept at the art of merely
*implying* fallacies rather than saying them outright, so that
you have deniability. Technically what you say is true,
you never *said* you were talking about two-facedness. The
accusation was merely strongly implied by your smugness.
------------------------------
From: Jeff Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Gallup site down, Call Microsoft support
Date: 20 Oct 2000 22:30:17 GMT
This is kind of fun. Here is an example of a site (Gallup polls) that
uses Microsoft.
Right now it is down, and there is abundant evidence exactly what is at
fault. It is the Microsoft memory allocation failure! This is really
convenient to show the shortcomings of Microsoft's operating systems.
Poor Gallup, got sucked in by the MS hype.
http://www.gallup.com/election2000/default.aspThe page cannot be
displayed
There is a problem with the page you are trying to reach
and it cannot be displayed.
Please try the following:
Click the Refresh button, or try again later.
Open the www.gallup.com home page, and then
look for links to the information you want.
HTTP 500.100 - Internal Server Error - ASP
error
Internet Information Services
Technical Information (for support personnel)
Error Type:
Microsoft OLE DB Provider for ODBC Drivers
(0x8007000E)
[Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver]Memory
allocation failure
/include/e2000testdsn.inc, line 8
Browser Type:
Mozilla/4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.16-22 i686)
Page:
GET /election2000/default.asp
Time:
Friday, October 20, 2000, 6:27:44 PM
More information:
Microsoft Support
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: who's WHINING dipshit!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 22:30:44 GMT
dork
clcaire
On 20 Oct 2000 20:49:34 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 18:32:06 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Redhat and TurboLinux announce support for the entire new IBM eServer
The subject line says it all
http://www.redhat.com/about/2000/press_ibm3.html
http://www.turbolinux.com/news/pr/ibmeserver.html
For those not familiar with the new terminology:
zSeries is S/390
pSeries is RS/6000
iSeries is AS/400
xSeries is Netfinity
Gary
------------------------------
From: "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 17:34:49 -0500
Simon Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8sl9ui$jab$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > How about this -- can I get you to say that Microsoft just absolutely
does
> > not do that? Deliberately break other people's products, I mean.
> >
> > Do you have the courage of your convictions?
>
> Yes. I have the courage enough to state that to my knowledge, Microsoft
does
> not write its products so as to deliberately cripple competing companies'
> products. Its applications have no innate advantage over other
applications
> on the same OS.
>
> Simon
>
Sorry it took a couple of days to get back to you -- I've been spending most
of my time helping my son with a school project.
Anyway, here is the evidence you feared. It is correspondence dated
September 27, 1991:
=======
Brad Silverberg (big shot in Microsoft): drdos has problems running windows
today, and I assume will have more problems in the future.
Jim Allchin (bigger shot) -- You should make sure it has problems in the
future. ;-)
======
By the way, the little "evil grin" emoticon is Allchin's, not mine. If
you're wondering exactly how they planned to accomplish their little scheme,
here is Silverberg, four hours after receiving Allchin's "evil grin"
directive:
======
Silverberg: can you tell me specifically what we're going to do to bind
ourselves closer to ms dos? since you haven't been replying to my messages,
I don't know how to interpret your silence. Let me emphasize the importance;
ibm is going to announce the drdos deal at comdex (almost 100% certain).
Barrett: Sorry for the silence -- dont interpret it as ignoring you.
The approach that ralph and I have discussed is to use a vxd to 'extend' dos
by patching it. In this case, we would create a subfunction in the
findfirst/findnext family-findabunch to allow filemanager to make a single
call to get directory information. We would not patch unknown OSs and, most
likely, would only patch MS DOS 5.x. The big advantage here is that it
provides a legitimate performance improvement. However, it wont prevent us
from running on foreign OSs (unless we explicitly decide to refuse to
run) -- they just wont run as fast.
Is this the approach you want to take? Or would you prefer a simple check
and refuse to run? Thats a lot easier but clearly quite defeatable. I'll
come and talk to you about it.
======
In case your blinders are on, Simon, here is what they were doing. They
were going to make a change to their operating system (DOS) by adding a
subfunction, and then they were going to have one of their applications
(Windows 3.x) use this subfunction (knowing that it wouldn't exist in any
competing DOS).
This was illegally anti-competitive, in case you weren't aware of that. But
this is how Microsoft worked, and still works. They break competitor's
products, period. All the suspicions about this habit that people have had
for many years are true.
A lot of very damning internal memos and emails somehow escaped Microsoft's
offices. They seem like a lot, but they really must represent only the tip
of the iceberg in a mega-corporation like Microsoft. I'm not sure how all
this evidence made it out of their offices, but It seems that at least one
person fairly high up in Microsoft had a guilty conscience and couldn't
stand what they were doing. Look up the mysterious case of Roger Sour some
time.
jwb
------------------------------
From: "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web!
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 22:34:53 GMT
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:ncXH5.9636$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:
: "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:HSMH5.31016$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: >
: > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: > news:QDCH5.13035$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: > :
: > : "Mike Coleman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: > : news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: > : > "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: > : > > The industry started out with Unix and along came NT beating the
crap
: > out of
: > : > > the "xNIX". When the 64-bit version of NT becomes available
sometimes
: > in the
: > : > > next year, it'll be lights out for the "xNIX". All of the "real
: > : > > professionals" will be flipping burgers somewhere and they can
keep
: > : > > wondering about what hit them.
: > : >
: > : > I'd rather flip burgers in hell than aid and abet in Redmond.
: > :
: > : With that kind of attitude, it won't be long then...
: >
: > You'll be ordering burgers using CLI pretty soon.....
:
: $ordrbrgr -p dill -t ripe -c american -b low-fat -bn sesame-seed >
: grill -medium-well < money -value $5.00
Nah, that's like Windows scripting, it'll be more like this:
*nix_rulz:>./make -vfz brgr.ltossb.ver_moe.tar.gz
*nix_rulz:>./ccc -co.cc.pc_m<$.gz
*nix_rulz:>gnurpm
Otto
------------------------------
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: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 17:57:26 -0500
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:C5PH5.10150
> In every way possible. How long was MS developing Word for Windows
> while misleading Wordperfect about the future of OS/2?
You do realize that MS developed a GUI version of Word for OS/2 before the
Windows version, don't you?
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
From: Michael Livshin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 21 Oct 2000 00:32:11 +0200
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (FM) writes:
> That means it is a *poor example* for a functional
> language. You can write imperatively in Lisp but is
> it a good example for an imperative language? I
> think not. He hasn't argued that Lisp is a poor
> functional language.
yes, fair enough.
[
though this exchange is one more shining example of the relevance
and usefulness of advocacy discussions. ;)
]
--
(only legal replies to this address are accepted)
May all your PUSHes be POPped.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Subject: Re: Linux or Solaris
Date: 20 Oct 2000 22:38:18 GMT
Idoia Sainz ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: We have Oracle on several Sun servers and it goes fine, even
: when setting it up is a little of a mess (suppose Linux version
: would be similar, nor better netiher worse). I would recommend
: Solaris because of the Sun support (the more you pay the more
: they give) and because of the very important thing when important
: data are around : hardware rock solid.
Linux is fine for dirt-cheap systems, but support is rather lacking. For a
major business, you will want solid support, and that's going to cost you! As
far as hardware, Intel stuff when properly built will work fine but again, the
support issue crops up.
To cut costs, you can mix Solaris and Linux in a cluster, with the Oracle on
the Solaris boxes and the Linux doing things like play Router, Mail Server,
etc. The only problem of this approach is that you get to learn two flavours
of UNIX. For example, NFS is easy to do on a pair of Linux boxes (so long as
you install nfsd on install at least) but how you do NFS on Solaris might be
different.
--
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: who's WHINING dipshit!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 22:39:52 GMT
dork
claire
On 20 Oct 2000 20:52:41 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Claire Lynn
Date: 20 Oct 2000 22:37:53 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: Whatever.
: Most of the Linvocates in this group can't advocate their collective
: ass's out of a paper bag. They may be technically astute, but their
: companies lock them away in rubber coding rooms far from the clients
: because they are so, well, geeky.
The fact that you use the word "geek" as if it were an insult
shows that you don't understand at all. Stop pretending to.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Run for the hills!
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 18:02:52 -0500
I've owned a TiVo for about 3 months. They've been here in the states for a
good 6-9 months.
It's really a cool device and it's pretty stable, though the hardware seems
to be a bit flaky. I've had to restart it about 3 times (or once a month or
so) because the modem stops responding and I notice that it seems to get
slower the longer it's on.
But all in all, it's a good device. I've even hacked in a new 80GB hard
disk to give 127 hours of recording time.
As for your busy signals, they probably don't have enough local lines for
you.
"Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8soueq$ki9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Oh my, I have my first "Linux appliance".
>
> It's a featureless grey box, built by Thompson with a couple of lights
> on the front, an IR receiver, a whole host of connectors on the rear (no
> less than _three_ SCART, an IR cable, UHF in/out, audio, serial and
> phone line), a large hard disk inside... and... gasp... it's running
> Linux!
>
> Of course, I couldn't tell if it is Linux or Windows or whatever from
> the screens it produces. TiVo presents me with pleasant and fairly
> friendly menus to navigate on a restful cloudy background (Hey! Didn't
> Windows 95 have clouds?).
>
> Here in the UK TiVo has appeared without any kind of advertising so far.
> In the shop I bought it they told me I was their first customer. Judging
> by the "The lines are busy, please try later" message my phone kept
> playing the TiVo lines were flooded last night!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux or Solaris
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 22:44:26 GMT
Double standard alert.
When Windows users point to market share we get a response like:
Lemmings.
Or just because it has more users doesn't make it good.
Same thing applies to Oracle for Linux.
In addition, the Windows version has been around a lot longer than the
Linux version.
For a major Linux supporter like Compaq to make a statement like I
posted says a lot.
claire
On Fri, 20 Oct 2000 22:55:53 +0100, "Nigel Feltham"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>>Here's a little article on what Compaq thinks of Oracle for Linux:
>>
>>http://www.wininformant.com/display.asp?ID=2944
>>
>>Notice the last paragraph, and I quote:
>>***************************************************************************
>>But today, Linux is not very useful beyond simple Web, mail, and DNS
>>services on small Intel-based servers, she says. Linux is "not for
>>database servers or online transaction processing. The independent
>>software vendor support [is not there]: Oracle has to do the next
>>version of its database [for Linux] because the current one is
>>horrible."
>>
>>**********************************************************************
>>
>>claire
>>
>
>
>It's still getting 4x the downloads of the windows version according to
>oracle (and they should know).
>
>
>
------------------------------
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: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 18:16:34 -0500
"Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:wD3I5.43$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Brad Silverberg (big shot in Microsoft): drdos has problems running
windows
> today, and I assume will have more problems in the future.
>
> Jim Allchin (bigger shot) -- You should make sure it has problems in the
> future. ;-)
> ------
>
> By the way, the little "evil grin" emoticon is Allchin's, not mine. If
> you're wondering exactly how they planned to accomplish their little
scheme,
> here is Silverberg, four hours after receiving Allchin's "evil grin"
> directive:
That's not an "evil grin" that's a smile and a wink, usually inferring jest
or humor.
> Barrett: Sorry for the silence -- dont interpret it as ignoring you.
> The approach that ralph and I have discussed is to use a vxd to 'extend'
dos
> by patching it. In this case, we would create a subfunction in the
> findfirst/findnext family-findabunch to allow filemanager to make a single
> call to get directory information. We would not patch unknown OSs and,
most
> likely, would only patch MS DOS 5.x. The big advantage here is that it
> provides a legitimate performance improvement. However, it wont prevent us
> from running on foreign OSs (unless we explicitly decide to refuse to
> run) -- they just wont run as fast.
> Is this the approach you want to take? Or would you prefer a simple check
> and refuse to run? Thats a lot easier but clearly quite defeatable. I'll
> come and talk to you about it.
> ------
>
> In case your blinders are on, Simon, here is what they were doing. They
> were going to make a change to their operating system (DOS) by adding a
> subfunction, and then they were going to have one of their applications
> (Windows 3.x) use this subfunction (knowing that it wouldn't exist in any
> competing DOS).
No. That's not what they were suggesting. If you had any technical clue,
you would know that a VxD is a windows device driver. You can't change DOS
with a windows device driver. DOS doesn't use Windows device drivers at
all. They were not talking about making a change to DOS, they were talking
about adding a function to Windows which would replace or extend an existing
DOS function, causing that funciton to operate faster when MS-DOS is the OS
being used.
You see, Windows, when running, has first crack at all interrupts, including
DOS interrupts. Normally, these interrupts are passed directly down to DOS,
but they can also handle them natively in Windows. This is done in Windows
95 for the most part for things like long filenames, and disk caching
support.
> This was illegally anti-competitive, in case you weren't aware of that.
But
> this is how Microsoft worked, and still works. They break competitor's
> products, period. All the suspicions about this habit that people have
had
> for many years are true.
It has not been proven in a court of law that what you originally suggested
was illegal, much less what the real circumstances are (which are not what
you claim).
> A lot of very damning internal memos and emails somehow escaped
Microsoft's
> offices. They seem like a lot, but they really must represent only the
tip
> of the iceberg in a mega-corporation like Microsoft. I'm not sure how all
> this evidence made it out of their offices, but It seems that at least one
> person fairly high up in Microsoft had a guilty conscience and couldn't
> stand what they were doing. Look up the mysterious case of Roger Sour
some
> time.
They were court ordered to turn over all emails. Things like server backups
are where this came from. This has nothing to do with mysterious evidence
leaked from the company.
------------------------------
From: "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 18:01:26 -0500
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:OgXH5.9637$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ah yes, it's always Microsoft's fault when a misguided company fails...
>
> Which APIs did MS throw in to purposely cripple Wordperfect? After all,
> that is the current topic.
>
> -Chad
>
You say that as though Microsoft would never ever do such a thing.
How about the "FindaBunch" sub-function they talked about adding to the
"FindFirst/FindNext" function for the specific purpose of making DR DOS and
Windows incompatible. I don't know if they actually ended up doing it or
not, but the fact that they discussed it in email and spent time researching
schemes for introducing incompatibility between the products is what's known
as a smoking gun.
So Chad, do you know if they ever did add the FindaBunch sub-function?
Maybe you can tell us all the different things they actually DID do to make
DR DOS and Windows incompatible.
You *are* being honest, aren't you?
jwb
------------------------------
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, 20 Oct 2000 16:03:15 -0700
"Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:wD3I5.43$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> This was illegally anti-competitive, in case you weren't aware of that.
But
> this is how Microsoft worked, and still works. They break competitor's
> products, period. All the suspicions about this habit that people have
had
> for many years are true.
Not in the team I was on.
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, 20 Oct 2000 15:58:02 -0700
"Tired O'Shills" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Oooh! I'm being taunted by an anonymous person! Better get that flameproof
suit on. Or phone my mummy.
> It's easy to verify the fact that this phrase was regularly used by Steve
> Ballmer. As reported by Fred Langa (in his 09/02/98 column titled
"Reasonable
> Doubt?"):
>
> Years ago, I asked top Microsoft executive Steve
> Ballmer about the stories that claimed he'd shout
> "DOS ain't done until Lotus won't run" at DOS
> product manager's meetings. He said the statement
> was out of context, and that it referred to adding
> legitimate new features to DOS (a perfectly legal and
> good way to compete); it didn't refer to planting
> software booby traps to create artificial barriers to
> competing products (a sleazy and possibly illegal
> way to compete).
Really? He's the only person who seems to be able to 'verify' it at all.
Interestingly, not much detail is given ('years ago'? what kind of crap is
that?).
Do a search for "Lotus won't run" and "Ballmer" -- you'll get just one that
makes any claims that Ballmer ever even said it.
I'd say that one article for such a well-known phrase is kind of odd,
wouldn't you?
Who the hell is Fred Langa anyway?
Hmmm... he must have a major scoop! So why isn't he crowing about it? Why
haven't we heard more?
Because -- my guess -- is HE'S WRONG.
I've done an extensive internet search for anything with the phrase "Lotus
won't run" -- and Fred's is the only article that claims to have any
evidence.
Now, don't you think that if it was true, there would be more than *ONE*
link that claims this?
> Anyway, Simon knows that the standard of proof he requires is
unachievable.
> Therefore he feels safe to deny everything and make any bet without risk.
But
> that denial is just bullshit.
Really? Wow. That's news to me. I'd just like to see some evidence. A memo.
A name.
> Tell you what, Simon. You honor you're bet, and I'll gladly post "Simon
Cooke
> Has Integrity"
> in my signature for the rest of my Usenet days. I figure that's equivalent
to
> the risk you took, which is to say: none.
Oh, Mr. Tired O'Shills, I don't have to do ANYTHING for you. How about you
go back and come up with some firm evidence instead of hearsay?
And posting anonymously? Wow. That's a fine way to speak about "integrity".
Simon (aka. Tired O' Tired O' Shills)
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
