Linux-Advocacy Digest #799, Volume #29 Sun, 22 Oct 00 01:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World? ("Christopher Smith")
Re: He yttrx...Tell me again about RAS and PSSP....... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World? (Andy Newman)
Re: Real Linux Advocacy ("James E. Freedle II")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Chad Myers")
Re: Why Linux is great. ("James E. Freedle II")
Re: Redhat and TurboLinux announce support for the entire new IBM eServer line
(Andy Newman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 00:12:08 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:qcdI5.896$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > 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,
>>
>> True. It just looks evil in this context.
>
>Why did you remove my statement about the emoticon being used to infer humor
>or jest? You seem to ignore the point of my statement, which is that the
>emoticon clearly indicates it was a joke, not an order.
Well, that might be "clear" if you are voluntarily brain-dead, but
otherwise....
[...]
>No. Again, you're misinterpreting things.
And your interpretation is authoritative because... you're a Microsoft
fan, right?
>The VxD did not make windows
>incompatible with DR-DOS, it simply did not patch any OS other than MS-DOS
>to use the 32 bit (faster) version of the function. This allowed systems
>running MS-DOS to work faster than non-MS-DOS based systems. This is the
>equivelant of adding a turbo-charger to supported systems, rather than
>making unsupported system not work. Those are two totally different things.
Which is why the question of whether or not to simply refuse to run
might not be more in keeping with Microsoft's intent was so important.
It proves, beyond any reasonable doubt, that these "two totally
different things" are really one and the same thing: anti-competitive
development.
[...]
>> We are not holding court, here. This is Usenet. Still, what they were
>> talking about is practically a textbook example of one form of illegal,
>> anti-competitive practice. A company is not allowed to deliberately make
>> one product incompatible with someone else's product in order to benefit
>> another of said company's products.
>
>Really? Can you cite the law which states this is illegal?
Yes. The Sherman Act.
http://www.ripon.edu/Faculty/bowenj/antitrust/INTRO.htm
>In any event, the emails you cite do not infer that they are making the
>products incompatible, only that they are making their product work better
>(something, BTW, Novell could have done themselves, by providing their own
>VxD which does something similar).
They conclusively prove they were designing things to debilitate
competition, rather than to improve the product. 'Nuff said.
--
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: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 00:13:11 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >And, of course, the problem was due to Lotus' poor programming. The
>> >fix MS implemented should not have broke anything, but because Lotus
>> >designed Notes as a hack, it broke.
>> >
>> >MS actually had to pull back a security fix to the OS because of Lotus'
>> >incompetency.
>>
>> Yes, yes, we know; its always the poor programming of competitors; its
>> never Microsoft's anti-competitive development. Sure.
>
>You believe that Lotus is omnipotent, and incapable of making a programming
>error?
LOL! Of course not. Are you again trying to claim that Microsoft's
Silverberg did *not* say "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run?"
--
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: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 00:15:13 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> [...]
>> >Again, I repeat IT'S ONE SINGLE REFERENCE. I found NO other references
>> >offering 'proof'. Surely with as oft quoted a phrase as "DOS ain't done
>till
>> >Lotus won't run", SOMEBODY would have other proof?
>>
>> Why? This seems to be a logical fallacy, at best. Because it is
>> oft-quoted means there is strong evidence? Isn't that a bit backwards,
>> like you're assuming the reason it is oft-quoted is because there is
>> strong evidence? In fact, the quote provided is entirely convincing
>> evidence. Silverberg was asked if he said it, and he confirmed that he
>> had. What more evidence do you expect to find?
>
>No, Silverberg wasn't asked.
Oh, you're right again. I was mistaken. It was Steve Balmer, not
Silverberg, who said "DOS ain't done 'till Lotus won't run." My
apologies for posting (on several occasions) this inaccurate
information.
>> You don't have to talk to anyone, Simon. But you should state your case
>> or shut your trap. Your trolling is... growing tiresome. :-)
>
>Your inability to read is growing tiresome.
Blah, blah, blah. I read just fine, thanks.
--
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.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World?
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 00:17:46 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Bruce Schuck in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Bruce Schuck in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> [...]
>> >From this Timeline, please tell us what 4 years DOS did not improve or
>> >Microsoft was not working on Windows or OS/2?:
>> >
>> >http://www.worldowindows.com/wintime.html
>>
>> "While DOS continues to be our most important and most profitable
>> product over the last four years we have done very
>> little with it technically."
>>
>> Bill Gates, November 29, 1989
>>
>> Talk to Bill, Bruce. I'm not entirely sure what he meant. And I don't
>> think whether they were working on Windows or OS/2 has anything to do
>> with the issue, which is whether they were improving DOS.
>
>If you were smart enough to read the timeline I posted, you would notice
>that from 1985 to 1989 Microsft released: Windows 1.0 / Windows 2.0 /
>Windows 2.1 / OS/2 1.1 and shipped Windows 3.0 in 1990.
>
>An intelligent person would conclude that Microsoft was trying to move past
>DOS into the Windows world.
>
>A moron ... like you ... would whine that they didn't spend much time on
>DOS.
I've never made any such claim. You're confusing me either with Weevil
or Bill Gates. I'm not sure which.
"While DOS continues to be our most important and most profitable
product over the last four years we have done
very little with it technically."
Bill Gates, November 29, 1989
>I know Linux geeks pine for command line interfaces, but as long time user
>of Win NT and Win2k I'm glad Microsft spent their resources on something
>other than DOS in those years.
All I pine for is a competitive free market, and the most efficient and
effective software for the job at hand.
--
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.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World?
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 00:19:58 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Andrew J. Brehm in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> > Microsoft has competitors for every product they make.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Where are the IBM Windows and Sun Windows and even Red Hat Windows
>> >> operating
>> >> systems? You know, Microsoft's competitors in the Windows market.
>> >
>> >Thats one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. Thats kind of like
>> >accusing Ford of having an Explorer monopoly because GM or Toyota doesn't
>> >make Ford Explorers.
>>
>> Figures you wouldn't get it. You'll notice that Ford making Explorers
>> doesn't prevent all other car manufacturers from marketing SUVs.
>
>You will notice that Microsoft's making their operating system also
>doesn't prevent anybody else from marketing their operating systems
>either. BUY one of them! Then complain.
I have the right (and duty) to complain, regardless of what I've bought
or from who. You will notice that Microsoft is a criminal monopoly.
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
[...]
>> Remove the Unix clones, and you're left with OS/2, and Netware.
>
>What's wrong with UNIX clones, and why are you leaving out MacOS?
Nothings wrong with them, but they've already been cloned, you see? And
cloning MacOS is entirely irrelevant, since Mac is a separate hardware
platform. Get it?
--
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.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World?
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 00:22:31 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Chad Myers in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>To reply to T. Max's "compete with Windows to be the OS for MS Office..."
>comment, IOW, he's asking, "but GM doesn't compete with Ford in
>making motors for Ford cars".
No, I'm asking why nobody competes with Microsoft in making Windows, and
nothing else. If you can't tell the difference between a car and an OS,
that's not my problem.
>It's simply a rediculous statement/question anyway you look at it.
Yes, I'm sure. Such confusion does deserve some ridicule, to be honest.
Operating Systems are not cars; they aren't even useful products, by
themselves. If you desperately need an analogy in order to fit the idea
into your tiny little head, try this: its as if GM doesn't compete with
Exxon in making gasoline.
--
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: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World?
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 14:25:03 +1000
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Chad Myers in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> [...]
> >To reply to T. Max's "compete with Windows to be the OS for MS Office..."
> >comment, IOW, he's asking, "but GM doesn't compete with Ford in
> >making motors for Ford cars".
>
> No, I'm asking why nobody competes with Microsoft in making Windows, and
> nothing else. If you can't tell the difference between a car and an OS,
> that's not my problem.
For the same reason no-one competes with Apple in making MacOS, no-one
competes with IBM in making OS/2, no-one competes with Novel in making
Netware, no-one competes with <insert product vendor here> in making <insert
vendor's product here>.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: He yttrx...Tell me again about RAS and PSSP.......
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 04:43:09 GMT
On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 23:14:17 -0400, Gary Hallock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Sure have.
>>
>> And I know you do :)
>>
>> But yttrx hasn't not that 5L matters because I am talking about
>> LINUX.
>>
>
>Well, 5L matters because it provides a Linux compatible API - all part of
>IBMs plan to provide a common environment across platforms. No, you
>probably wouldn't run Linux on an ASCI White, but you will be able to run
>Linux programs on AIX 5L on ASCI White.
I realize that, I meant it didn't matter in the context of RAS or
concurrent maintenance.
>>
>> But that has nothing to do with it. My question is how is IBM going to
>> maintain RAS and interface with PSSP using LINUX NOT AIX.
>>
>> Example:
>> Replace a redundant (N+1 if you will) power supply
>> concurrently with client operations under REDHAT LINUX.
>>
>> Can't presently be done as far as I know because Linux doesn't yet
>> support chrp in order to generate an SRN, which is how you know what
>> power supply to replace, and how to tell the system to fence it (via
>> pssp) and that you are going to replace it.
>>
>> Aix already does that quite well by itself.
>>
>> This is just one of the many items that a client will be giving up by
>> running Linux on the box instead of AIX, or AIX 5L.
>>
>> How about Concurrent Diagnostics?
>>
>> Try typing in diag on an aix screen and see what happens.
>> Now try it under Linux.
>>
>> 5L will simply allow easy migrating of Linux applications.
>>
>> I wasn't questioning you, or any one else around here, except for him
>> and his lies.
>>
>> He wouldn't even know what RAS (in IBMspeak) meant if I didn't tell
>> him first.
>>
>> So now I've let him off the hook, but it doesn't matter because he had
>> no answer. He doesn't even have a clue as to what I am talking about.
>>
>> claire
>>
>
>Like I said, I don't know about RS/6000, but IBM is will be working
>closely with Redhat and TurboLinux. As for S/390, you get full RAS
>support from VM/ESA or the new Virtual Image Facility for Linux:
>http://www.s390.ibm.com/marketing/g2219105.html
Great site!
This is encouraging and in fact I know of one major NYC firm that is
running many Linux sessions (under VM I assume) on a CMOS and have
saved a fortune on hardware and software.
Development, test and production images all on one box.
That is exciting!
>From this web page:
>
>---------------------
>
>Improve system reliability, availability and serviceability
>Since the Virtual Image Facility is highly efficient, it compares
>favorably to the
>performance of logical partitioning while expanding the flexibility in
>processor, memory,
>and I/O sharing. Applications running on high-availability S/390 hardware
>architecture can
>isolate and recover from many hardware and software failures, ensuring
>the availability of
>the application to the end user. These advantages include computational
>integrity, fault
>tolerant cache hierarchy, transient error recovery, memory chip sparing,
>CPU sparing,
>zero outage hardware repair, and concurrent microcode updates.
>
>No other platform can recover from failure without impact to the
>application as well as
>the S/390. The Virtual Image Facility is self-diagnosing and provides
>problem data
>collection procedures that can be activated by using the supplied client
>program.
>
>---------------------
>
>Clearly, IBM understands the importance of RAS. Don't be surprised if
>new features are added to Linux for RS/6000.
I know that and I also know that they will HAVE to add the features to
Linux, or find another way, if they are to continue the current
maintenance philosophy.
Left above quoted because it is good news.
Thanks for the inforation Gary.
Claire
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy Newman)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 04:54:58 GMT
Bruce Schuck wrote:
>Dave Culter started designing NT in 1988.
>
>http://www.worldowindows.com/wintime.html
He designed it when he was still at DEC :)
--
Oi! Oi! Oi!
------------------------------
From: "James E. Freedle II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Real Linux Advocacy
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 00:50:51 -0400
"Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8ssg7q$b33$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> James E. Freedle II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : I have been wondering, why use Linux?
>
> Because it's robust, standard-compliant, powerful, supports almost all
> useful applications ever written, allows me to learn a great deal,
> helps me to get my work done, behaves in a reliable and predictable
> fashion, and causes me no problems at all.
I can say the same thing about Windows. It works, and it is easy to work
with.
>
> Now why would I want to use Windows????
That is what I was asking about Linux.
>
> What would Windows give me, besides problems, that I don't already
> have?
>
>
> Joe
Right now the only use for Linux for me, is to learn a little UNIX. I have
to to UNIX at work to run one application, that I could easily rewrite for
Windows. I have had problems with Windows at work, but I can attribute that
to the IR department, and they probably know nothing about Operating System
theory or design, and yet the muck up the system and expect it to work
properly.
I don't adovcate Windows or Linux, just the user. I want to be able to use
my computer and get what I need done. I keep hearing that Linux will be the
Windows replacement, but I see nothing that would backup that claim.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 04:39:16 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Win95 relies on msdos.sys being a certain size, because DOS relies on
> >> msdos.sys being a certain size, and Win95 is a bundle of DOS 7 and Win
> >> 4.0. "If you wish to boot into DOS, it will still be backwards
> >> compatible", indeed. You *have* to boot into DOS to load Win95,
> >> remember?
> >
> >Untrue, Neither Win95, nor the DOS that ships with Win95 rely on msdos.sys
> >being a certain size. In fact, this is easily proven by simply editing the
> >msdos.sys and removing the padding. There are, however, certain third party
> >programs that rely on msdos.sys being a certain size, which is why the
> >padding is there. To make those programs compatible with Win95.
>
> You are correct. Thanks for reminding me. Now, the question is, why
> would Microsoft care if third party programs were broken in this way,
> when all the other times a third party program is broken by Microsoft's
> churn, it is considered the third party's fault?
Microsoft makes the effort, that's the difference. Take the Lotus/NT SP6
issue.
The issue was clearly Lotus' fault. They went against best practices,
the had several hacks that hooked too deep into the networking stack
and when MS had to make a change (TCP syn predictability I believe was
the issue), it screwed Lotus' poor programming. What'd MS do? Immediately
pulled the SP, worked out the issue for Lotus (probably rewrote it for
them) and then re-released SP6 as SP6a with the issue resolved.
MS went above and beyond the call of duty when, IMHO, they shouldn't have.
They could've taken that chance to bash a competitor and expose their
poor coding for what it was, but instead they worked out a solution.
> The very fact that a DOS file must be handled specially in order to make
> programs compatible with Win95 entirely undermines your argument that
> Win95 does not include DOS.
Not really. It's common sense, actually... oh that's right, you're incapable
of that. Let me explain: Win95 can run dos programs. You can also reboot
into "DOS compatability mode" which acts just like old DOS did and lets
DOS apps do their business without interference from Win95. Some of these
older apps relied upon MSDOS.sys being a specific size.
> (Of course, such a position is baseless,
> anyway, considering Microsoft has already provided evidence of their
> deception in this manner, through the emails from the period that have
> been made public.)
>
> http://www.drdos.com/fullstory/factstat.html
"Fact" statement. It reads like a little kid in the principals office
attempting to explain why it's Bobby's fault that he had to hit him.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "James E. Freedle II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux is great.
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 00:54:58 -0400
"Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:brgI5.1162$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> James E. Freedle II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:N%MH5.8704$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Actually the probably keep erasing the folders that the applications
were
> > installed in. I have been using Windows and Office for years, and it has
> not
> > yet once crashed the system. I have more problems at work, because
> somebody
> > in the IR department really does not know what they are doing, and
> therefore
> > keeps doing something stupid to screw up Windows. I am sure that if they
> are
> > having problems with their Windows machines, it is because some IR
person
> > that like Linux, it messing up Windows and trying to get the company to
> use
> > Linux instead of Windows.
>
> I have no idea what is causing your problems at work. I also have no idea
> what is causing my problems witn Office 2000 at home. I installed it a
week
> or so ago and have been using it to help my son with a school project.
> Twice in one night (Wednesday night, I think), my entire system locked up
> tighter than a drum while I was trying to type in Word. Couldn't Alt-Tab
to
> another program (there was nothing else running). Couldn't even
> CTRL-ALT-DEL to try to kill the process. Frozen solid. Had to kill power
> both times and start over. The third time I got smart and saved my work
> every couple of minutes, but for whatever reason, it didn't crash that
time.
> Finally got a printout.
>
> jwb
>
>
Your problem with Office 2000 is a new one, but I have had problems in
Windows 98, but it was not Office 2000 that was causeing the problems. It
was the new alert thing from MSNBC and also ZipMagic was causing a problem
and locking up the entire system.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy Newman)
Subject: Re: Redhat and TurboLinux announce support for the entire new IBM eServer
line
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 05:04:59 GMT
Burp... EREP...Burp...
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
