Linux-Advocacy Digest #886, Volume #29 Sat, 28 Oct 00 04:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE ("Brandon Van Every")
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! (.)
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! (.)
Re: Linux (Terry Porter)
Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World? ("Bruce Schuck")
Re: Debian vs RedHat/Mandrake ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Debian vs RedHat/Mandrake ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux Beats NT! ("anneluca")
Re: Why don't I use Linux? ("Mike")
Re: Debian vs RedHat/Mandrake (Mike Marion)
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! (Shannon Hendrix)
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! (Shannon Hendrix)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux Beats NT! ("Drestin Black")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Brandon Van Every" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 05:41:24 GMT
"Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> That's amazing. I'm a Linux user, and thus presumably not at the very
bottom
> rung of computer cluebieness, and yet for some reason nothing is
intuitive at
> all when I sit down in front of a Windows box.
>
> I rather suspect that you are deluding yourself about not having to
learn
> anything to use Windows.
It is rather true. I think people seriously underestimate how much of a
learning curve a graphical UI really involves. Back in 1989 I did *not*
find a Macintosh fundamentally easy to use, there was a learning curve.
And I'd been using an Atari 800 since 1981. I knew BASIC, machine code,
and memory maps. w2k has a lot of continuity from 9x and NT4, but every
once in awhile I come across something that they rearranged and so I'm
like "huh?" But mercifully, the OS has a Help file with it. This Help
file is not genuinely helpful. I've just learned so much about
searching and sifting through Help files, both for OS documentation and
for surfing the net the past 8 years, that I know how to converge on
what I need to know. That's a learned skill in and of itself. I still
think the newsgroups and deja.com are the only good interfaces to the
Internet, because it's the only place where people ask questions and
give answers in human intelligible terms.
--
Cheers, www.3DProgrammer.com
Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: 28 Oct 2000 05:59:04 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Joseph T. Malloy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > You mean the "X mouse" functionality? Why not use TweakUI? There's no
> reason
>> > to edit the registry.
>>
>> This indeed works (but only under win95, 98 and ME). But it only offers
>> "sloppy focus" (that is, when the cursor is over the root window, no
>> other windows can have focus). It would be nice if there were more
> options.
> "Sloppy focus?" The TweakUI implementation works just fine on all the
> Windows NT4W on which I've put it in addition to working of Windows 9x and
> ME. And the window over which the mouse pointer is located at any given
> moment *has* the focus.
You do not understand what sloppy focus means. Sloppy focus means that
any window that the mouse is over has focus except the ROOT window (the backround)
which must be clicked on to gain focus.
> Yep, just now I moved my mouse to another window
> and I could do things in that window but not in the window that I was typing
> this message in. Methinks you need to look at TweakUI a bit more closely.
Methinks you need to understand windowing terms.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: 28 Oct 2000 05:59:40 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Joseph T. Malloy" wrote:
>>
>> > > You mean the "X mouse" functionality? Why not use TweakUI? There's no
>> reason
>> > > to edit the registry.
>> >
>> > This indeed works (but only under win95, 98 and ME). But it only offers
>> > "sloppy focus" (that is, when the cursor is over the root window, no
>> > other windows can have focus). It would be nice if there were more
>> options.
>>
>> "Sloppy focus?" The TweakUI implementation works just fine on all the
>> Windows NT4W on which I've put it in addition to working of Windows 9x and
>> ME. And the window over which the mouse pointer is located at any given
>> moment *has* the focus. Yep, just now I moved my mouse to another window
>> and I could do things in that window but not in the window that I was typing
>> this message in. Methinks you need to look at TweakUI a bit more closely.
> You misunderstand the term sloppy focus. Sloppy focus works fine: there
> is no problem with it. It si simply sloppier than mouse focus in that it
> doesn't ever focus on the root window. Other than that, the window with
> the mouse pointer in has focus.I personally prefer this.
There should be a way to tune it more finely, thats all im really
saying. :)
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 28 Oct 2000 06:11:44 GMT
On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 05:03:54 GMT, Brandon Van Every
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>
<snip>
>> virus eaten
>
>"Virus eaten?" You realize it's virus eaten solely because it's got the
>mass market volume, right?
Wrong!!!
Its "Virus eaten" because of the Windows design, ie NO security, and single
user.
> Trust me (but I'm sure you won't),
At last we agree, I wouldnt trust you mr new Wintroll, your too ignorant to be
trusted.
> if Linux
>were as popular as Windows you'd see plenty of viruses for it. Better
>under-the-hood engineering does not magically confer an immunity to
>viruses.
Wrong BADLY wrong, better engineering *does* provide a mechanism to deal
with virii.
> It just makes them a little harder to write. Which makes it a
>little more fun for an enterprising hacker to write them.
yawn.
Ever hear of password security, superuser rights, logs ?
No ... I'm not supprised, your a Windows user, right ?
>
>
>--
>Cheers, www.3DProgrammer.com
>Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA
>
>
>
>
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 1 week 6 days 2 hours 22 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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?
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 23:22:07 -0700
"David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8sscst$q11$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Mike Byrns wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >> What is "the Unix worm" ?
> >
> >> >Say ... has Linus ever admitted how much stock he owns in Transmeta?
ANn
> >> how
> >>
> >> Transmeta is a hardware company which makes CPUs.
> >
> >They hired Linus for some reason. He doesn't design CPUs :-)
> >
> They hired Linus because he is an expert programmer. The Transmeta CPUs
> make use of a software translation layer, and for that they need
programmers
> who know all about the x86 chips. They may also have hired him for
prestige
> and publicity reasons.
Wrong. Transmeta wants to be THE embedded chip company. They needed an
embedded operating system.
Their embedded OS is Mobile Linux. Guess who helped them write it? Linus.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Debian vs RedHat/Mandrake
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 02:27:00 -0400
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote
> > on Tue, 24 Oct 2000 02:34:51 GMT
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >Read his statement.
> > >
> > >He said applications run faster, and offered 0 proof.
> >
> > It would be interesting to see if Win2k can run both Linux
> > and FreeBSD binaries faster than Linux and FreeBSD, respectively... :-)
> >
> > [rest snipped]
> >
> > --
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
>
> Ha ha, shit!
> Give Bill Gates another 10 years and Windows will probably
> be another NIX if he had it his way!
Well, considering that Bill *does* run Microsoft....why don't they
junk that shitty Neutered Technology and make a "another Unix" right now?
>
> Charlie
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Debian vs RedHat/Mandrake
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 02:33:39 -0400
Michael Marion wrote:
>
> "R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" wrote:
>
> > Of course, when comparing the Win2K machine with 512 meg of RAM,
> > 40 gig hard drive, and 1 gigaflop/BIPs processor to the SunOS 4.0
> > with 8 meg of RAM, 512 meg hard drive, and 10 Mips processor, it
> > would be silly to thing that little underpowered toy would be a
> > useful as a machine nearly 100 times bigger and 100 times faster.
>
> When I was at SDSU, our main server (ucssun1/rohan) was a Sparc 1000E with
> 512Meg of RAM.. definately not as small as you describe, but not a huge server
This is about 5 generations later.
What Rex is talking about are old Sun III machines, which were
powered by a 10 MHz Motorola 68010 [no internal cache, and seperate
memory management chip]...cutting edge at the time, and significantly
faster than the typical VAX-11/7xx of that era (1 Mhz, 1Mb main memory).
> either. It used to average about 450 simultaneous users, many running full X
> sessions on NCD X-terminals, plus tons of copyies of Netscape (of course)...
Consider yourself lucky that you weren't going to school in the days when
a dual vax ( 2x 1MHz CPU w/ 1 Mb memory each) was quite the impressive machine,
able to just barely limp along with 30 simultaneous users (that is, you
type a command line, go get a drink of water at the drinking fountain,
and then come back...and when your typing is finally displayed...check
for typos before hitting return).
> not to mention all the people playing netrek, xpilot, students compiling code,
> reading news, Email, etc. The machine's response was always great.
>
> I've yet to see NT/2k come even remotely close to this level of user support,
> even with a huge W2k server using WTS/Citrix.
>
> --
> Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc. - http://www.miguelito.org
> A Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer is to computing what a
> McDonalds Certified Food Specialist is to fine cuisine
> -> Stolen off of a /. post.
--
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: "anneluca" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Beats NT!
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 18:34:19 +0200
and nasdaq ? w2k and NT4
ok, ok nasdaq is not critical...
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:iSeK5.19475$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Gardiner Family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > 1. READ THE FUCKING POST, I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT FUCKING WEBSERVERS YOU
> > FUCKING CUNT HEAD, I AM TALKING ABOUT BIG FUCKING SERVERS USED INSIDE
BIG
> > FUCKING CORPERATE NETWORKS SERVING HUNDREDS AND THOUSANDS OF EMAILS,
FILES
> > AND APPLICATIONS TO THOUSANDS OF USERS PER DAY.
>
> Ok... Windows is taking over this space day by day. If you look at IDC
> and Gartner studies on Windows penetration in the Fortune 500 space,
you'll
> see it's rapid.
>
> > 2. TCP.ORG IS ACTUALLY THE WEBSITE FOR THE TEXAS CHURCH PLANTERS YOU
FUCKING
> > CUNT HEAD, GET A FUCKING LIFE YOU FUCKING DICK HEAD.
>
> TPC.ORG half-wit.
>
> > 3. RESEARCHED A NUMBER OF SITES (YAHOO.COM, GOOGLE.COM, REAL.COM,
> > WHITEHOUSE.GOV, BE.COM, IBM.COM, APPLE.COM, ZDNET.COM, WINZIP.COM) ALL
USE A
> > UNIX VARIANT INSTEAD OF WINDOWS, GET THE FUCKING HINT, NOBODY WANTS TO
USE
> > WINDOWS AS A WEBSERVER EXCEPT FOR THOSE TO GUTLESS TO STAND UP AGAINST
THE
> > WINTEL MONOPOLY.
>
> Um... who cares about all those sites? The only one that has half-way
> respectable numbers is Yahoo, and up until their recent deal with
Google.com,
> they were NT on the front end.
>
> How about sites with real numbers? Dell.com and Gigabuys.com, the two
> largest e-Commerce sites on the 'net. Powered by....? Windows 2000 and
> SQL Server 2000.
>
> Barnes and noble? Win2K
>
> Lycos? Win2K
>
> Hotmail? Win2K
>
> Anyone of those sites has more hits than all the sites you listed
> (except for yahoo) combined.
>
> Pull your head from the sand and open your eyes.
>
> -Chad
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why don't I use Linux?
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 06:45:35 GMT
"A transfinite number of monkeys" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 27 Oct 2000 21:44:15 GMT,
> Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : Why haven't I switched from Windows to Linux?
> :
> : In a word: Software.
...
> : Borland Delphi and C++ Builder are two of these packages. They are going
> : to appear on Linux, but not yet.
>
> True enough, there isn't a really good pascal compiler, visual & OO or
> otherwise. It hasn't seemed to have hurt Linux so far. There are several
> C/C++ IDEs available already, however.
Ummm.... already?
------------------------------
From: Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Debian vs RedHat/Mandrake
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 06:58:07 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> This is about 5 generations later.
I know.. I was just trying to make a point that even when it's still not
a cutting edge box, Unix servers tend to be useful to _far_ more people
then any nt/2k box is.
> Consider yourself lucky that you weren't going to school in the days when
> a dual vax ( 2x 1MHz CPU w/ 1 Mb memory each) was quite the impressive machine,
> able to just barely limp along with 30 simultaneous users (that is, you
> type a command line, go get a drink of water at the drinking fountain,
> and then come back...and when your typing is finally displayed...check
> for typos before hitting return).
Actually I did learn assembly on a Vax. Damn it was slow. One user in
the class (no, it wasn't me ;) ) accidentally made a macro that had the
same name as a command she used in it, which made the assemble go into
an infinite loop. One user could drag the whole machine down to a crawl
for 15 minutes until someone figured out what it was and the ^C finally
took effect.
--
> Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc. - http://www.miguelito.org
> A Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer is to computing what a
> McDonalds Certified Food Specialist is to fine cuisine
> -> Stolen off of a /. post.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Shannon Hendrix)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: 27 Oct 2000 03:34:38 -0400
In article <XYfJ5.15977$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The problem is that when Linux is being loaded, a check was made,
> > basically a BIOS call for memory (can't remember which one), and it
> > often returned 64M at the most. If you knew you had 128MB of RAM then
> > you added a boot parameter to Linux to tell it how much RAM you had
> > since your BIOS/motherboard combination couldn't get it right.
> >
> > This is a PC/BIOS bug, not a Linux bug.
>
> No, it's a linux bug. Windows detected it just fine. In fact, I've
> installed BeOS on a couple of my systems and BeOS detected it just
> fine as well.
No, moron, it's a BIOS bug. That Windows or BeOS can see memory has
nothing to do with wether or not BIOS memory checks work. They don't.
The bug is in BIOS.
No current Linux/LILO setups have this problem anyway.
> It's most certainly a Linux bug, or rather, like everything else
> in linux, a major design flaw.
I'm sure the Linux world will callopse now that you have enlightened
everyone.
Are you really just another personality of Don Kool?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Shannon Hendrix)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: 27 Oct 2000 03:40:33 -0400
In article <IXfJ5.15976$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ask several frequent posters of your own COLA group, they admitted it
> earlier that Linux uses a broken BIOS call that only returns the
> first 64MB of RAM. Their words, not mine. If you don't believe them,
> well...
Why should I believe someone who is incorrect?
More than one referred to outdated HOWTO documents.
> Sounds like a cop-out. Windows does it perfectly every time broken
> BIOS or not.
No, it was an explanation of what old versions of LILO did. They used
the Microsoft/Intel/PeeCee method and it failed. No surprise. Now
they do another way which works.
> > How about this: try booting Windows on a system that doesn't support
> > the DOS 640K/high memory/A20 crutches.
>
> Show me a system that doesn't support these.
You avoided the question, but I'll bite: Any system which can flash a
BIOS that doesnt support that.
You can get Intel VMEbus motherboards whose BIOS can be changed so
that they don't support the DOS memory model. Not even WinNT or Win2K
will boot on them, but most any UNIX will.
The point is that Windows is broken just like your imaginary Linux is
broken. Luckily I can check into reality and Linux (and my other UNIX
systems) are fine. My Windows box (love playing Homeworld) dies but
that's OK, I don't trust it for anything.
--
"There is no such thing as security. Life is either bold adventure,
or it is nothing -- Helen Keller"
______________________________________________________________________
Charles Shannon Hendrix s h a n n o n @ w i d o m a k e r . c o m
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 03:36:35 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Richard in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>Almost no programmer ever needs to manipulate successful messages (eg, to
>redefine what happens during message sends).
And by what presumption can we assume they are successful? I don't know
if this has any bearing on your point, but it seems to be an ambiguity
in any technical discussion, a "successful message".
[...]
>> I mean class as in a language construct, the only meaning used this far in the
>> reasoning.
>
>In that case, in systems with class constructs, it is NECESSARY for every
>object to be associated with some class in order to consider that object
>an object. Otherwise, you have first-class objects and second-class "fake"
>"objects".
Indeed. Also known as, I would suppose, "prototypes" and "instances",
in some regard, depending on the arbitrary definitions we wish to
provide for such terms.
>> >What isn't a given is that every object is associated with a language construct
>> >that is confused with conceptual classes.
>>
>> I am not confusing anything, and I don't claim what you just said to be true,
>> so put a sock on it.
>
>Of course. And that's why you wrote that an object "belongs" to another
>object, right? Next you'll be saying that class constructs instantiate
>themselves.
Yes, that seems reasonable, for what you previously referred to as
"conceptual classes" (as if there were any other kind). A class could,
at least in my ingenuous understanding of the concepts, be considered to
"instantiate itself", in that it is not a singular thing, but other
classes are not simply other instances of a thing, either.
[...]
>> You have not understood the argument. You wrongly assume I changed meanings at
>> the middle, and I didn't.
>
>Oh, so you completely misunderstood what I said from the start?
On the hope that it will at least make this discussion more
entertaining, if not more informative, I believe the point was that you
misunderstood what he said, not the other way around.
[...]
>> >Why do you believe that being arrogant, aggressive and belligerent /on a
>> >newsgroup/ (especially one such as this) says something about being (or not
>> >being) a good human being?
>>
>> Statistical correlation, and a hunch.
>
>That's so utterly pathetic Roberto. Did you perform the study yourself? Was
>it published in a peer-reviewed journal? And of course, your hunches are
>trustworthy because they have been honed by years of practice in the field
>of clinical psychology, right?
I don't know the answers to your questions, but so far I'd have to say
that Roberto's hunch seems to be correct, at least in your case, whether
its supported by his putative statistical correlation or not.
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
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: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 03:43:24 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8t4rqa$i9f$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:8t4nn3$4vt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >
>> > "chrisv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > Said the guy who just lost the debate.
>>
>> Well, if that's losing, bring it on.
>>
>> >
>> > Personally, I won by leaving it. And as long as I stay out of debates
>with
>> > Max, I'll have a happier life.
>>
>> Less patchy baldness, too ;).
>
>I want to killfile T Max Devlin, did you get that, would you like me to
>repeat it?
>
>Oh wait... I already did. Life has never been better! Since killfiling Max
>I've regained my cheerfull outlook on mankind, lost 20 pounds and have a
>renewed "bounce" to my step.
More support for the age-old wisdom "ignorance is bliss." ;-)
--
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: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Beats NT!
Date: 28 Oct 2000 02:45:09 -0500
"Gardiner Family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> 1. READ THE FUCKING POST, I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT FUCKING WEBSERVERS YOU
> FUCKING CUNT HEAD, I AM TALKING ABOUT BIG FUCKING SERVERS USED INSIDE BIG
> FUCKING CORPERATE NETWORKS SERVING HUNDREDS AND THOUSANDS OF EMAILS, FILES
> AND APPLICATIONS TO THOUSANDS OF USERS PER DAY.
I did and you're still a fucking cunt head. servers inside big fucking
companies DO prefer to run Windows - get used to it.
>
> 2. TCP.ORG IS ACTUALLY THE WEBSITE FOR THE TEXAS CHURCH PLANTERS YOU
FUCKING
> CUNT HEAD, GET A FUCKING LIFE YOU FUCKING DICK HEAD.
No, it's not you fucking dick head:
Registrant:
TPC (TPC2-DOM)
777 N. First Street
San Jose, CA 95112
US
Domain Name: TPC.ORG
Administrative Contact, Billing Contact:
Lawson, Lucinda (KS10123) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TPC
650 N. Winchester Blvd, Ste 1
San Jose, CA 95128
408-295-6411 (FAX) 408-271-6648
Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
@Work Hostmaster (WH76-ORG) (WH76-ORG) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
AT&T Hostmaster / @Work Division
425 Broadway Street
Redwood City, CA 94063
US
1-888-456-WORK
Fax- 1-650-569-5101
Record last updated on 22-Jan-1999.
Record expires on 08-Mar-2001.
Record created on 07-Mar-1995.
Database last updated on 25-Oct-2000 21:12:07 EDT.
Domain servers in listed order:
NS1.HOME.NET 24.0.0.27
NS2.HOME.NET 24.2.0.27
>
> 3. RESEARCHED A NUMBER OF SITES (YAHOO.COM, GOOGLE.COM, REAL.COM,
> WHITEHOUSE.GOV, BE.COM, IBM.COM, APPLE.COM, ZDNET.COM, WINZIP.COM) ALL USE
A
> UNIX VARIANT INSTEAD OF WINDOWS, GET THE FUCKING HINT, NOBODY WANTS TO USE
> WINDOWS AS A WEBSERVER EXCEPT FOR THOSE TO GUTLESS TO STAND UP AGAINST THE
> WINTEL MONOPOLY.
Researched another number of sites (microsoft.com, dell.com,
barnesandnoble.com, hotmail.com, msn.com, lycos.com, nasdaq.com, nfl.com,
disney.com, intel.com, hotbot.com, bigcharts.com) and they all use Windows
instead of another forked variant of some fragmented code. get the fucking
hint?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
