Linux-Advocacy Digest #869, Volume #29 Thu, 26 Oct 00 23:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE (Charlie Ebert)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Ms employees begging for food (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: And another one, Claire, sweetie ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! ("Les Mikesell")
Re: An entire morning wasted on a Linux install. (Charlie Ebert)
Re: An entire morning wasted on a Linux install. ("Bob B.")
Re: Linux "Family Edition" (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: $1,000 per copy for Windows. (Terry Porter)
Re: Sorry, Claire, but this is urgent (Terry Porter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 02:07:14 GMT
MH wrote:
> Another self proclaimed "IT expert" in cola rambled....
>
> ---Speaking authoritatively on Win2K--
>
> > > Only had to reboot twice, both times due
> > > to conflict from newly installed
> > > hardware devices.
> >
> > Pretty much the norm. Also adding third party software, especially
> > NT software that hasn't specifically been updated to run on W2K can
> > be an adventure. And if you run Office 95 or Office 97, you'll have
> > to upgrade to Office 2000.
>
> What are you talking about? This is more FUD. You're telling me that if I
> have Office 97 on my PC and upgrade to win2K, I'll have to upgrade to office
> 2000?
> Funny, I'm running office 97 on a w2k machine right now and it RUNS FINE.
> Why is it I'll have to upgrade again???? Man o man. This place (cola) is an
> aholes paradise.
>
> > Of course, you'll also have to upgrade other NT software as well, and
> > you really DON'T want to try and run video games on it.
>
> Anybody who uses winNT to run video games is as idiotic as someone who
> expects a decent web browsing experience under Linux.
>
> > Generally, you won't blow away your entire system, but you can blow
> > away applications for no good reason.
> >
> > The bad news is that if you try and run too much 3rd party legacy
> > stuff, The system can choke and blow away your hard drive.
>
> What the F? Blow away my hard drive? From running legacy "stuff?"
> What are you smoking??
>
> > > Windows 2000 is stable, powerful, and easy to use.
> >
> > It's pretty much the same as Windows NT 4.0 with IE 5 Active Desktop,
> > but faster and cleaner. There are a few cosmetic changes, but nothing
> > significant.
>
> It's NOTHING like NT4 with IE 5 active desktop. NOTHING.
>
I agree and I'm fucking GLAD!
Nothing works as well as Linux.
>
> Do you read about these things?
> It seems you like to make them up as you go along.
> Win2K is in many ways different than NT4 with active desktop.
> Why don't you read the technological changes implemented in win2K before you
> make such assertions. Your statemtent is ludicrous.
>
> [massive snippage]
>
> You really must love to read your verbiage & sig online, huh? It shows.
> I thought I was wordy. Sheesh!
--
Charlie
By 2005 Microsoft will be displaced by
LINUX - THE POWER OF A GNU GENERATION!
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 21:58:36 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 10/23/00
> >> at 06:37 AM, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >>
> >> 1. I wouldn't know your unit, because I don't read all the drivel you spill
> >> out. -- You really are full of yourself to think anyone with a brain is
> >> interested in your line of crap.
> >>
> >> 2. Haven't seen one person anywhere else who believes you either.
> >>
> >> 3. Its time for you shut up. You're a useless loud mouth that no one wants to
> >> be around.
> >>
> >> 4. Will there ever be an end to your bullshit?
>
> >Do you have a point?
>
> Certainly -- You are a total, complete asshole who is also too stupid to
> understand that no one wants you here or anywhere on the usernet, because we
> don't give a crap about what trolls like you have to say.
>
Sure thing, Letard. now...please refrain from posting while under
the influence of Thunderbird or other cheap intoxicants.
--
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 (C) 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: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc
Subject: Re: Ms employees begging for food
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 01:57:52 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Michael Meissner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Caveman) writes:
>
> > As for giving things away as a business strategy, AT&T was pretty
> > smart about giving away UNIX.
Actually, UNIX was more like an accident. A few guys at Bell Labs
were trying to get Multics running on a pretty expensive computer
and their funding was cut by AT&T.
Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson put together a skunkworks demo that
gave them a shoestring budget to produce a "sharable text editor".
The earliest versions make MS-DOS seem sophisticated. Later versions
added pipes, fork, and shells. Essentially, they needed something that
would run on a really cheap computer.
Eventually, AT&T decided that since the couldn't sell it (as pointed
out below, they were prevented from doing so by a court order), that
they could give it to colleges and universities as a tax break and
good will gesture. The last "public domain" version was Version 6.
And even this version contained a number of patented algorythms.
Version 7 was released after the copyright Act of 1976 went into
effect, giving the publisher the right to specify the terms under
which the software could be used. Again, AT&T gave copies to a number
of universities, but this time with some license terms, which included
restricting access to the source code.
Meanwhile, students UC Berkeley took Version 6 source code and tweaked
and tinkered with it to get better performance out of the PDP-11. This
went through several iterations ending at BSD 2.4. When the Vax 11/750
came out, boasting 1/2 million instructions per second, AT&T started
working out agreements which would give AT&T the ability to sell UNIX
to students (who were begging for license terms in their businesses
when they graduated). System 3 was originally introduced to AT&T
vendors and suppliers. But when Berkeley added a whole bunch of
new features and practically every student project and master's degree
project implemented or implementable under UNIX, the consumers were
expecting AT&T to provide a comparable product.
Shortly after divestature was ordered (allowing AT&T to market Sys3),
they found that they already had a nasty competitor. Eventually
AT&T had to license distribution rights to BSD (in exchange for
royalties and control of pricing policies), and BSD licensed commercial
rights to AT&T for the BSD libraries and suites.
IBM and DEC worked very hard to focus attention on the "forking" of
UNIX, trying to point out how different the two system were. They
were hoping to keep AT&T off balance long enough to get VMS and EDX
into the Minicomputer market. Ironically, IBM lost most of the EDX
market to CP/M and CP/M-86, but UNIX was also doing damage.
Eventually, DEC decided that UNIX on VAX was cutting too heavily into
their software profit margins. DEC even went so far as to send service
technicians to VAX sites suspected of running UNIX and asked them to
perform "upgrades" to VAX that involved reinstalling VMS. In some
cases, the technicians, possibly out of ignorance or just mischief,
would go up to the computer room, wipe out UNIX, and install VMS,
perform the service upgrades, and leave, thinking they had done the
customer a favor. Many UNIX administrators had their CEOs put armed
guards at the door, with orders to detain, at gunpoint if necessary,
anyone appearing to "service" the machine.
Microsoft still uses this strategy to "torpedo" competitor products,
including Linux. But it's fun to realize that they didn't invent
the strategy. They are much more clever at being able to do it
without sending human beings anywhere. Just install the next
mandatory service pack, and kiss your old 3rd party software goodbye.
Eventually, AT&T made peace with DEC by setting "floor" prices for
the core software broke the package into modules. The minimum price
for UNIX was about $700 (for a PC) and went on up to about $50,000
for source code on a VAX 11/780.
Keep in mind, customers weren't buying the source code because they
wanted to learn about computers or copy the technology, they just
needed to be able to fix the darn things when the software crashed.
Version 7 crashed about once every week or two, and BSD 4.0 crashed
every month or two. But when you have 200 employees making the
equivalent of about $100/hour in today's money, you can't afford
to spend an hour rebooting and reconfiguring the thing $20,000 an
hour seems small by today's internet standards, but back in those
days, the CEO watched crashes very carefully.
The most important thing that AT&T brought to the table was
reliability. Many of the first UNIX users were creating services
for AT&T, such as call routing, directory assistance, and even
switch control. Given that many Directory Assistance systems were
cranking 20,000 calls per minute at 50 cents/call, the cost of
down-time had jumped to $10,000 per MINUTE, downtime of more than
5-10 minutes per year was unthinkable. Source code was no longer
an option, it was a necessity.
> > What's on your desktop if you're
> > not running NT? Once USL entered the picture, they got really
> > ugly about it, sort of like Unipress now, but at least you have
> > to admit that UNIX was about the only marketable piece of
> > intellectual property USL had as startup capital,
> > so they held it pretty dearly.
Unfortunately, USL actually slit their own throats. Because they
put a price "Floor" of $700 for the basic system, no documentation,
no compilers, very little more than MS-DOS in terms of utilities,
and then proceded to charge hundreds of dollars for each additional
package, it was very easy to spend $3500 on software for a $3000
computer.
What made matters worse is that USL also controlled the prices of
BSD as well. Since BSD still used the AT&T patents, they couldn't
charge less for the code. Keep in mind, the minicomputer makers
were worried that PCs would squeeze them out of the lower end, and
mainframes would lock them out of the high end.
It wasn't until Ray Noorda convinced Novell to purchase the rights
to UNIX, that that "floor" was broken. But Novell wanted $200 for
the OS (which contained everything BUT TCP/IP) and $500 for TCP/IP
and NFS. Novell was hoping to control the infrastructure and
proliferate IPX and SPX along with Netware 4.0. Unfortunately,
the UNIX community had already reached the point where Novell
address limitations were blown.
The next "crippling blow" was when Microsoft came to visit Novell
and gave them a "one day offer" to agree not to sell workstations,
in exchange for which, Microsoft wouldn't sell servers. It wasn't
worth the paper it was written on, and NOORDA knew it. He was so
furious at the board that he eventually left the company and formed
Caldera to begin commercializing the new Linux operating system.
SCO didn't trust Novell either and made a very generous offer for
the rights. SCO was being squeezed by Microsoft who was threatening
to take some of their franchise business. SCO was probably also
concerned that Linux would be certified as a UNIX platform, which
would leave SCO vulnerable to even more competition.
> > Like McKusick, I hated this but I also can understand it from a
> > management perspective. I think the product was simply overpriced.
Again, HP, Dec, and Sun, along with several other Minicomputer and
workstation makers used to selling workstations for $50,000 and servers
for $1/4 million were afraid that a PC version of UNIX would kill
their markets. Eventually, they began to realize what IBM knew
all along. Businesses don't pay for hardware and software, they
pay for a computer that works. In fact, both IBM and the other
big UNIX server vendors have reached the point where they depend
very little on royalties and very heavily on consulting. You can
get the server software for a few thousand dollars, and spend a few
million in consulting and support services.
Ironically, it took Linux to actually tap the real market potential
of UNIX. Sun Microsystems discovered that almost all of their
Enterprise series server customer had done the prototyping and pilot
on Linux. Linux was not only selling Suns, but it was selling the
consulting services required to tune and tailor the system to the
the application and environment. Some companies such as Pyramid
could increase performance 10-fold by knowing both the OS and
Database source code.
> Ummm, at the time AT&T (well Bell Labs really)
> started 'giving' away UNIX, they
> (AT&T in this case) were under a consent
> decree that they wouldn't get into the
> computer business and if memory serves,
Correct.
> IBM was under a similar decree that
> they wouldn't enter the phone business.
Partially correct. IBM couldn't carry voice, but
they could carry data on their SNA links.
> Also, unlike current Linux and *BSD,
> the UNIX code was covered by trade secret
> laws, where legally you could only
> exchange UNIX source code with other
> UNIX source code licensees (biggest damn
> trade secret I ever saw).
Actually, only Version 7 and after were covered by license
terms which included nondisclosure agreements. Many MIT
graduates had studied the V6 code as part of an OS class.
There was even a "fully annotated UNIX" which included equisite
details about how the code worked.
> UNIX seems to be the beast that just won't die, no
> matter what internal roadblocks come up.
This is largely because it's a customer driven market. Even today,
it is the expectations of Windows users converting to Linux that
drive current desktop development efforts.
One of the key ingrediants is the entire telecommunications network.
UNIX system administrators used "UNIX to UNIX COPY Protocol" (UUCP)
to move files between machines. Very quickly this evolved into
e-mail and newsgroups. In about 1982, the DOD/ARPA did an
interoperability test called "Project Dahlgren". For years,
those involved had to keep secret the fact that TCP/IP had
made it possible for numerous computers of numerous brands
to communicate with each other using inexpensive hardware and
free software. This was the actual "Birth" of what we now
know as "The Internet", which was the merger of the UUCP network
known as usenet, and the DOD network known as ARPANet.
I was one of several hundred involved in this project, and most
of us worked rediculous hours, often performing more traditional
tasks during the day and then working well into the wee hours
of the morning. People like Henry Spencer, who architected
the first international e-mail distribution schemes, and Bill Joy,
who literally came up with the "dotted name" notation used in DNS
(he literally put "the dot in dot com"). I worked with a number of
people, including Oded Feingold, Don Black, and Vicky Stuart, and
a number of other interesting people to deal with the commercial
interests. This included creating a number of legal structures
INCLUDING helping Richard Stallman with his "General Public License",
establishing software and license terms that made it possible for
businesses using UNIX to get the real-time support they needed while
protecting the interests of the creative elements that the vendors
needed.
It took almost 10 years to create a legal, cultural, and economic
model that made it possible for Linux to become what Red Hat, Caldera,
and the others have made it today. From that very modest beginning
in 1982, to the extraordinary growth to over 1/2 billion internet
users in 2000, growing to 1 billion by 2001, it has taken thousands
of voluteers, some eager, some reluctant, to create this thing we
call the Internet.
And it has taken almost 20 years to transform UNIX from a "laboratory
rat" to the invisible conduit through which nearly 90% of the world's
information eventually passes. Many, like John Postel, didn't live
to see their dreams bloom into full reality (John's vision was a
global network in which even the poorest members of the smallest
and remote village could communicate with the rest of the world
via the Internet.
Others like Vint Cerf and Vicky Stuart have had to stay in the shadows
while others took the limelight. Vint is deaf and nearly mute, barely
understandable when he speaks at a podium. Vicky is a transexual.
Oded was a holocaust survivor. And Don Black was the Grand Dragon
of the KKK. Other unsung heros include a man falsely accused of
molesting his daughter, several are fathers who lost their wives and
children, partly in persuit of this higher goal. Some are "old
hippies" who never shaved off the beard, never cut off the pony tail,
and never stopped challenging the "established order". Several
had used illegal drugs at one time or another.
Whatever their contributions, whatever their personal lives, these
were the people who dedicated their lives to making the "New Economy"
possible.
> Over the years we've seen PWB vs. V7,
> AT&T vs. BSD, OSF vs. AT&T/SUN, Linux & *BSD vs.
> the commercial vendors.
This I respect! Not only does he sign his name and provide his
email, but he even includes his phone number and corporate identity.
We know that you aren't an "official spokesman of Red Hat", but at
the same time, it's great to see you making the presence of Red Hat
felt and known.
> --
> Michael Meissner, Red Hat, Inc.
> PMB 198, 174 Littleton Road #3, Westford, Massachusetts 01886, USA
> Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: +1 978-486-9304
> Non-work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] fax: +1 978-692-4482
>
--
Rex Ballard - VP IS Architecture
Linux Advocate, Internet Pioneer
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 60 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 9%/month! (recalibrated 10/23/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: And another one, Claire, sweetie
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 02:04:05 GMT
In article <8taisu$d28$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Next you'll be checking my grammar and spelling.
>
> > You know what I meant.
>
> > And you also ignore the fact that I answered, correctly I might add
3
> > out of 4 of his stupid, insipid questions. The last one needs more
> > information posted and the screen saver one does as well.
>
> > You're an idiot .
>
> And you have extranious spaces.
>
Needs commas after "add" and "posted" also.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 02:17:29 GMT
"JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> > If a each client were handed a thread (Win32 system), if the thread
> > screws up resources, the whole process has to be WHACKED out of memory
> > and the MAIN PROCESS DIES (leaving extra stuff allocated by child
> > threads behind with NO cleanup). Meaning the in the web server world,
> > you just lost 100+ client connections, for one thread that acted up,
> > and you'll probably have to re-boot just to free the memory. Sad isn't
> > it.
>
> Funny you should mention having to re-boot to free up memory - assuming a
> Win2k machine was being actively used for an average 18 hrs a day running
a
> large assortment of different applications, by at least five users, three
> being kids 8-14 years old, banging away at random all afternoon, every day
> of the year. How often, in your opinion, would said machine need to be
> re-booted to free up the memory it so poorly handles?
This depends, of course, on how many of those programs have been
running continuously and whether the ones that have are all perfect. If
you exit from the program eventually it is going to release the
memory regardless of thread problems.
>While your putting
> together an answer I'll be looking the cd archives for some old
screenshots
> I made before making the machine a dual boot computer.
Win2k hasn't been around long enough to have an impressive uptime
and production machines have all been rebooted recently after
installing the necessary security fixes from sp1 anyway. But here's
one of my busy Linux web servers:
$uptime
9:13pm up 344 days, 1:33, 1 user, load average: 0.21, 0.21, 0.16
(well it is busy in the daytime - the load runs a bit over 1.5 most days).
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An entire morning wasted on a Linux install.
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 02:21:21 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Oct 2000 03:35:47 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >The #1 bitch of Wintrolls is no support for Linux.
> >And yet you managed to install it on an unframiliar
> >laptop and get it running in just an hour or so.
> >
> >With the help of people from COLA yet!
>
> I've been called worse :)
>
> But yes, you guys did help me out, and I dropped off the laptop last
> night during the World Series (GO METS!!!).
>
> Claire
Bitch as in WHINE Claire.
Not Bitch as in Claire , Claire...
--
Charlie
By 2005 Microsoft will be displaced by
LINUX - THE POWER OF A GNU GENERATION!
------------------------------
From: "Bob B." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An entire morning wasted on a Linux install.
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 19:26:18 -0700
Terry Porter wrote:
>
> On Wed, 25 Oct 2000 14:22:19 -0700, Bob B. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >>
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> >
> >> > IBM Thinkpad 765L with 3 gig blank un partitioned hard disk.
> >> > Sigma Data 24x CDROM (says IBM certified on label) in Ultrabay.
> >> > USR PCMCIA 56K modem.
> >> > Linksys Cardbus PCMCIA Ethernet card.
> >> > 64 Meg memory.
> >> >
> >> > And one friend who asked me to install Linux, no particular
> >> > distribution in mind. Just something "nice" so he can try Linux.
> >>
> >> Bullshit.....
> >>
> >> Large blob of bullshit below...
> <snip>
> >Now here is great representative of the Linux "community" - he doesn't
> >try to refute or explain anything, his only contribution is to say
> >"bullshit".
> Thats because "Claire_Lynn" is a Wintroll and a waste of time, nothing
> this person says is believable, hence the "bullshit".
Did you even read the thread you are replying to ? The CD problem was
confirmed by at least one other poster, and several people offered
suggestions on how to solve the other problems, and the problems were
reported to be fixed. A nice civilized discussion. Except for Aaron R.
Kulkis, and now you.
>
> If you want tech advice take it to a relevant newsgroup, this is
> Linux ADVOCACY, tech help is the third door down on your right.
>
> And as if this wasn't already wasting enough bandwidth, he
> >includes a 37 line signature.
> Your point being ... ?
Hey, if you don't see anything odd about a 37 line sig, I'll never be
able to explain it to you.
>
> >
> >With advocates like this, its a wonder that ANYONE is using Linux.
> With Windows advocates like YOU, its a wonder anyone replied to your lame post.
Windows advocate ? I love these knee jerk reactions.. You had problems
with Linux ? BULLSHIT! You dare question a rude reply ? WINDOWS
ADVOCATE!
>
> Kind Regards
> Terry
Bob B.
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux "Family Edition"
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 02:17:40 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> That's pretty funny :)
>
> Looks like the last LUG meeting I went to.
>
> claire
>
> On Sun, 22 Oct 2000 18:38:55 -0400, Sponge<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >I just got this great idea to boost the sales of Linux. What if they
released a
> >distribution called Linux "Family Edition" like Norton and other
companies have
> >done?
> >
> >It would certainly make Linux seem more attractive to a casual buyer.
> >
> >I have even found the perfect family for them to put on the cover of
the box!
> >
> >http://www.firstworld.net/~smcdonal/trailerpark.html
As soon as I started reading the link, I knew this had to be
the home page of "da_sponge", and sure enough, when I came back
to see who posted it, there you were.
As usual, you have provided a perversely amusing bit of entertainment.
Although, your spelling and grammer in the posting itself are far
better than your usual. I guess you can't be a creative genius
all the time.
Your lampooning of a Microsoft Troll is ingenious. It's a tribute
to the style of Jerry Lewis, Robin Williams, and Jim Carey.
I salute you.
> >Sponge
> >
> >"Available day and night to muse
> > about this garbage we call Linux!"
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Rex Ballard - I/T Architect, MIS Director
Linux Advocate, Internet Pioneer
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 60 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 9%/month! (recalibrated 10/23/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: $1,000 per copy for Windows.
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 27 Oct 2000 02:54:30 GMT
On Thu, 26 Oct 2000 00:22:12 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
>> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > > Well why?
>> > > >
>> > > > Microsoft OS's almost double in price with every version they
>> > > > put out. W3k is $350 a throw in most places.
>> > >
>> > > What are you talking about? Windows 2000 is the next version of Windows
>> NT
>> > > 4. If you had any sense, you'd notice that Windows 2000's price is
>> > > identical to that of Windows NT 4.
>> >
>> > Bullshit!
>> >
>> > Windows NT 4.0 was $189 at Comp USA.
>> > Windows 2000 is $350 almost!
>>
>> Look at the MSRP. And I think you'll find the $189 version is the upgrade.
>>
>
>Geeze dumbshit! You just finished telling me I lied about the price
>of NT as it was too high then you told me the price I quoted was
>only for the UPGRADE!
>
>What kind of low grade moron are you ?????
>
>What!!!
>
>
>You going to get pissed with me and then tell me I was
>even more right than before!
>
>You are going to tell all these people that shoe spoon
>to get your head out of your butt???
>
>
>What! What! What!
>
>
>Charlie
>
>
>
>>
>> > Pull your head out of your ass man!
>>
>> You're the one that seems to not know what he's talking about.
>>
>> BTW, street price on Win2k Pro is $299
>> http://www.compusa.com/products/products.asp?prodzip=&srch_type=catg2&catego
>> ry_id=16
>
Here in Western Australia I spotted Win2k new install at $380 the other day
in a major PC dealer shop.
But I wouldnt give you $10 for it as thats $2 more expensive than this version
of Linux cost me, and I also got multiuser and remote X thrown in for free, not
to mention a couple thousand high quality programs like this newsreader I'm
using right now.
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 1 week 4 days 23 hours 22 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Sorry, Claire, but this is urgent
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 27 Oct 2000 03:04:39 GMT
On Thu, 26 Oct 2000 10:10:38 +0000, Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> After trying unsuccessfully to install a MIDI cable, WIN 2000 would no
>> longer boot.
>
>Yeah, mebbe it doesn't boot, but it rocks all right, doesn't it
>luv?
Gee Jacques is really giving it to "Clear_Lying" heheheh, "Keys88/Heather/
Amy/Steve" will soon be thinking of me as a friendly Linux advocate at this
rate ;-)
Keep up the good work Jacques, this Wintroll deserves it!
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 1 week 4 days 23 hours 22 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
