Linux-Advocacy Digest #802, Volume #29 Sun, 22 Oct 00 04:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: He yttrx...Tell me again about RAS and PSSP....... (.)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why the Linonuts fear me (Terry Porter)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Win 2k Rocks!!!! Linux? It's days are numbered on my system. (Terry Porter)
Re: Why the Linonuts fear me ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Win 2k Rocks!!!! Linux? It's days are numbered on my system. (Terry Porter)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Win 2k Rocks!!!! Linux? It's days are numbered on my system.
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Win 2k Rocks!!!! Linux? It's days are numbered on my system.
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 00:06:59 -0700
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Blah, blah, blah. I read just fine, thanks.
Then why have you, on at least 4 separate occasions (three in the last few
days), attributed quotes to the wrong people?
Comprehension problem then?
Bad memory perhaps?
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: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 00:05:18 -0700
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> 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. (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.)
You were claiming it ran on top of DOS -- in Windows, DOS is a subsystem,
unless you have real-mode drivers, in which case they're loaded by DOS
first, and then Windows thunks down to them.
Simon
------------------------------
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 03:14:06 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[...]
>> >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....
>
>The only one brain-dead here is you. Smiley emoticons are used signify
>humor. Nobody in their right mind would take such a statement as an order.
Perhaps "nobody in their right mind" might include people who work for
Allchin, but I wouldn't go that far. The smiley indicates a smile.
Whether it is a humorous grin or a sign of predatory self-satisfaction
is unfortunately up to interpretation.
>> [...]
>> >No. Again, you're misinterpreting things.
>>
>> And your interpretation is authoritative because... you're a Microsoft
>> fan, right?
>
>Whether my interpretation is authoritive or not is irrelevant. I've
>provided technical facts which support my position.
No, you've provided empty protestations which you insist are technical
facts which support your position.
[...]
>> Yes. The Sherman Act.
>
>And which section of said Act specifically states that "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."?
Section 1. If I might paraphrase, for brevity: "All contracts in
restraint of trade are illegal; the making of such contracts is a
felony." A great deal of legal opinion is available which points out
that it is not a specific act, but all acts which might lead to these
results (restraint of trade, that is, a lessening of competition), which
are outlawed.
[...]
>> They conclusively prove they were designing things to debilitate
>> competition, rather than to improve the product. 'Nuff said.
>
>One more time Max. The emails did *NOT* suggest any method of debilitating
>the competition. It only suggested a method of not enhancing the
>competition. The suggested method did not make Windows running on DR-DOS
>run slower, it simply did not enhance DR-DOS to run faster.
>
>Your continuing use of such terms incorrectly is the problem here.
No, your continuing defense of an illegal monopoly is the problem here.
That you need to maintain studious ignorance to hold such a position is
entirely beside the point. Note that the suggested method was not used,
nor was "just fail to run", and "crash soon after" were also not used.
Instead, a simple FUD strategy was employed. As I've mentioned, it
makes no difference what acts in restraint of trade you perform; if the
intent was anti-competitive, the acts are illegal.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: He yttrx...Tell me again about RAS and PSSP.......
Date: 22 Oct 2000 07:12:20 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>>Actually claire, some of us have lives. I had a nice day today enjoying
>>mine, thanks.
> Your an idiot, who lies and tries to imply that you have some type of
> experience with things that you don't.
That sounds familiar.
Dork.
> You expect that people won't
> challenge you, but I did, and YOU HAVE BEEN CAUGHT trying to bullshit
> someone who has 20 years of experience.
Uh huh. Nice soundblaster.
> Go back to playing with Tin and your shell account. I'll bet you're
> some script kiddie Linux wannabe.
Shell account?
> I'm not wasting anymore time with you.
Good thing too. I bet the guy you asked to write the last few posts
for you is getting tired of typing.
=====.
------------------------------
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 03:17:11 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 20:32:23 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>
>> >You believe that Lotus is omnipotent, and incapable of making a
>programming
>> >error?
>>
>> Microsoft is, apparently, so why not Lotus?
>
>Not at all. MS makes all kinds of errors. It's the Linux advocates that
>seem to think MS is omnipotent. After all, they attribute every error,
>every but, every poorly designed feature as a plot to foil the open source
>movement.
Not a plot to foil open source; a plot to foil competition. Ironically,
the GPL itself is every bit as anti-competitive as Microsoft. More
importantly, however, the GPL is legal, and Microsoft's anti-competitive
efforts are not.
>Hanlon's Razor says "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately
>explained by stupidity".
This is why you will more often seen Microsoft zealots like yourself
accused of stupidity, rather than malice.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Why the Linonuts fear me
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 22 Oct 2000 07:13:09 GMT
On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 20:06:42 GMT, Haoyu Meng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I think Linux is better than Win95/98 because it is stable. Stability is
>crucial for a production environment. Win95/98 crashes so much
>spontaneously, that I turned away in disgust and switched to Linux
>desktop. But I always very sober to the fact that in terms of core
>functionality
Really, multiuser and remote GUI are primitive compared to your
single user, non remote GUI os ?
> and scope of software support, the Linux desktop is by far
>the primitive and immature.
Totally wrong.
> Its only and decisive strength is *IT NEVER
>CRASH*! Win95/98 are very useful, but too flakey.
>
>But then came Win2000. All the good things of win95/98, and yet rock solid
>as Linux.
Yeah, proven to be in the few months youve been using it ?
> So for the first time in more than 3 years, Microsoft is taking
>over my desktop exclusively again.
Have fun, your paying for that right, with a little luck youl be even happier
with Win2001 ?
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Why do my posts generate so much hate and semi-intelligent insults
>> from the Linux world?
Because your paranoid ?
>>
>> Because you fear me that's why.
Ho hum, I fear ignorance, thats as close to "fear" of you as I'll ever get.
>>
>> Unlike the typical WinTroll, I actually use current versions of the
>> software I am exposing.
Yeah theyre on your pc, but your posts expose your total cluelesness neverless.
> I have used every single distribution up to
>> and including Mandrake 7.1 and with the exception of Slackware they
>> all suck in one way or another.
>> Sorry but it is true.
No need to be sorry Wintroll, we forgive you :)
>>
>> Why doesn't Slackware suck? Because it is not trying to be a half
>> assed clone of Windows that's why. It is Linux, does not try to claim
>> otherwise and stands on it's own for better or worse.
>> I respect that. Slackware is Linux at it's best, like it or not, it is
>> an honest attempt at the Linux philosophy and I like that.
>>
>> You yo-yo's are so caught up in your own pile of bullshit that you
>> have not a clue as to what the rest of the world wants, needs or is
>> asking for.
Hmm the DTG group places Linux growth at 180% PA, this seems to refute your
claim ?
>>
>> You think desktop users want Linux?
DTG do.
>>
>> Think again. You can't even give it away.
Wrong ... again. Please stay behind class for 1/2 hr tonite "Clear_lying" and
write 500 times on the board, "I must not lie about Linux".
>>
>> You think we want (taking Terry Porters list) Compilers, editors,
>> schematic diagram thingies, flowchart programs? Think again.
No you want Solitare, and Minesweeper, while you figgure out how to use your
pirated copy of MSWord.
<snip of more nonsense>
>>Linux.
>>
>> claire
>
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 1 week 3 hours 22 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
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 03:19:32 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"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]...
>> >> >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?"
>
>First of all, we're not talking about DOS. We're talking about NT. Second,
>the statement was referring to Lotus 123, not Lotus Notes. Third, MS pulled
>the fix within 24 hours and added a compatiblity feature for Notes.
Fourth; we were talking about whether Lotus programmers are substandard,
or whether Microsoft programmers are employed by a criminal monopolist.
The issue of whether we are referring to the Notes failure from the
service pack upgrade or the 123 failure to work well with Windows 3.1 is
merely obfuscation on your part.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Win 2k Rocks!!!! Linux? It's days are numbered on my system.
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 22 Oct 2000 07:18:03 GMT
On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 03:26:12 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've finally installed Win2k after using Windows 3.1/95/98/98se all of
>these years. I am still using Windows 98SE for all of my digital audio
>work though.
>
Good, does that mean youll actually be able to do some work now, and stop
posting your bs to COLA, Wintroll ?
Oh btw, 4 versions of windows since ... 1996, lets see thats 1 version per year
Bill must love you "Steve/Hearher/Claire/Keys88/Amy/S" ?
Value for money ?
Did you like paying to be the lab rat for MS, were all your
versions pirated like a good little lawbreaker ?
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 1 week 3 hours 22 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Why the Linonuts fear me
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 07:21:39 GMT
Dork.
claire
On 22 Oct 2000 07:13:09 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry
Porter) wrote:
>Nothing of any value.
------------------------------
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 03:25:48 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> 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. (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.)
>
>You were claiming it ran on top of DOS -- in Windows, DOS is a subsystem,
>unless you have real-mode drivers, in which case they're loaded by DOS
>first, and then Windows thunks down to them.
So if you have real-mode drivers, they're loaded by DOS first, but
somehow it is a sub-system of an OS that hasn't loaded yet?
We're all well aware that Microsoft zealots can play an endless game of
recursive logic by continually re-defining what is meant by "DOS", in
the same way that MS themselves redefined "Windows" to include
applications (IE and Media Player). Nevertheless, this doesn't change
the fact that Microsoft was being untruthful in their representation of
what Win95 was, and that Win95 runs *on top of* DOS. Caldera has even
proven that Win95 will run on top of DR-DOS, replacing the MS-DOS 7
which is *underneath* Win95.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Win 2k Rocks!!!! Linux? It's days are numbered on my system.
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 22 Oct 2000 07:20:26 GMT
On Sat, 21 Oct 2000 07:15:25 +0000, Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> I've finally installed Win2k after using Windows 3.1/95/98/98se all of
>> these years. I am still using Windows 98SE for all of my digital audio
>> work though.
>[etc.]
>
>Ma'am, once upon a time, not so very long ago, your
>favourite answer to a post with which you disagreed
>was "Arsehole". With hindsight, that must have been
>your signature. For you are full of shit. Anyone
>can verify this by just paying a visit to comp.windows.misc,
>where they will be treated to sundry horror stories from
>people who are just trying to get wonderful Windows,
>Windows 2000 included, to work. As for your "digital
>audio work", don't make me laugh, j'ai les lèvres
>gercées as we say in my lingo. You spend so much time
>posting your fantasies that your digital audio work
>must mean sticking your digit up your audio,
>i.e. sticking a finger up your rear, as we say in
>English.
Hahahahahahah, poor "steve/heather/keys88/clear_lying" :))))
Wintrolls dont always get what they want, but sometimes they get what they
need ;-)
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 1 week 3 hours 22 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
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 03:27:22 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Blah, blah, blah. I read just fine, thanks.
>
>Then why have you, on at least 4 separate occasions (three in the last few
>days), attributed quotes to the wrong people?
>
>Comprehension problem then?
>Bad memory perhaps?
Lack of concern for pedantic details. When somebody takes up another's
argument, I have a bad habit of not really caring about who precisely
said what, since the inaccuracy of their positions are essentially
identical. Sorry for the confusion.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Win 2k Rocks!!!! Linux? It's days are numbered on my system.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 07:52:53 GMT
Dork.
Claire
On 22 Oct 2000 07:18:03 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry
Porter) wrote:
>Nothing of any value.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Win 2k Rocks!!!! Linux? It's days are numbered on my system.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 07:53:24 GMT
Dork.
claire
On 22 Oct 2000 07:20:26 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry
Porter) wrote:
>Nothing of any value.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
