Linux-Advocacy Digest #897, Volume #29 Sat, 28 Oct 00 15:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. ("Les Mikesell")
Re: The BEST ADVICE GIVEN. ("Chad Myers")
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Debian vs RedHat/Mandrake ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Why don't I use Linux? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World? ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Why don't I use Linux? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: The Linux Experience (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Why don't I use Linux? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. ("Chad Myers")
Re: Linux (sfcybear)
Re: The BEST ADVICE GIVEN. (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Astroturfing (Jason Bowen)
Re: Astroturfing (Jason Bowen)
Tuff Competition for LINUX! (Charlie Ebert)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:12:08 GMT
> >
> > I seem to recal you are people like you continually bashing Microsoft
> > for the lateness of Win2K. But Win2K was much better than anyone
> > expected and included more features than anyone expected. It advanced
> > the state of OS technology. Linux is trying to play catch-up. When you
> > look the feature list for Win2k and the feature list for Linux 2.4,
> > Win2K still has more features.
>
> What new technology is there in win2k?
>
> -Ed
The main innovation is a perversion of kerberos that allows them to
use the name of a standard while still preventing usable interoperability
with any other vendor.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The BEST ADVICE GIVEN.
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:02:37 GMT
"Peter Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 04:22:09 GMT, "Chad Myers"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Considering today's events about Microsoft and
> > > their being HACKED into,
> >
> > I wouldn't say "hacked", an employe was deceived
> > into opening an email.
> >
> > Unfortunately, the weakest link in any good security
> > plan is humans. Note that the "hackers" or "crackers"
> > weren't able to actually "hack" into MS, they had to
> > deceive an employee to run an app on their system.
>
> The real question is why M$ were daft enough to have their source code on
> any machine(s) that were in any way connected to the outside world.
It wasn't, they weren't. Didn't you read the article? Perhaps you should
read it before you embarass yourself further.
-Chad
------------------------------
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: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:20:23 GMT
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:KlsK5.16133$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > > How come no other OS has this problem on any hardware? It's _JUST_
Linux.
> > > Why? Why does Linux have this problem?
> > >
> >
> > Have you submitted a patch that makes it work on all machines?
>
> Why would I do that? I'm not an OS developer. Supposedly, these clowns
> claim to be OS developers, yet they can't manage the basics.
Perhaps so someone might take your complaint seriously. Show us
how easy it is to get the correct memory size from a faulty bios
without modifying any memory locations yourself because they
may still be in use during the initialization process. Note that those
other OS's that you claim get it right generally don't care if they
are being loaded by some other OS that might still be running.
> Hell, maybe that is a good idea, maybe I should write the memory
> detection algorithim. It'll probably be the only thing that works
> correctly in Linux.
>
> -Chad
Add a couple of lines to /usr/src/linux/arch/i386/boot/setup.S and
you're all set.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Debian vs RedHat/Mandrake
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:23:03 GMT
"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >Well, considering that Bill *does* run Microsoft....why don't they
> >junk that shitty Neutered Technology and make a "another Unix" right now?
>
> I suspect the following two reasons.
>
> [1] Doing so would bankrupt his credibility, since NT was once touted
> as the "Unix Killer", if memory serves -- of course, that might
> have been the stated position of people other than Bill.
> [2] I seem to recall an agreement with somebody (DoJ? SCO? Who?)
> that Microsoft would not compete in the Unix market, as a result
> of their spinoff of SCO. Anybody have details on this?
Agreements with other companies haven't made much difference to
Microsoft's actions in the past. If they were so inclined they could
easily buy SCO and terminate any agreements anyway.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Why don't I use Linux?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:27:51 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2:1) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>That's bullshit and you know it.
>
>What does MS Exel do? Corel paradox powerpoint, access, hotmetal pro,
>quark express, mscdex.exe?
>All of those are cryptic names. They all come on windows.
And yet I know and so do you, what they all mean. Funny that.
>It's there to see: go look at 2.4.0-testX. You can see it woth your own
>eres. Therefore it's not vapourware.
Where's V2.4. The FINAL NON BETA NON TEST version. Is it there yet? Nope.
Therefore it's vapourware.
>> Yes I tried some. I was not impressed.
>
>LaTeX beats the hell out or word on many, many counts.
Ah yes let's go back to stone age computing shall we?
--
Pete Goodwin
---
Why don't I use Linux?
Lack of support for my sound card for one thing.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:31:14 GMT
"R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8tdjgk$to2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > For that matter, just ship 2.4-pre-something and call it good.
>
> Corporations get REALLY nervous about betas shipped as production.
>
> This makes mutual fund managers and market analysts very nervous.
> It's considered an irresponsible risk. This was valid for Windows,
> where betas were rarely stable. It's less valid for Linux,
> but policies are policies. Like it or not, Linux is in the "big league"
> complete with NYSE corporate backing.
>
> Meanwhile, IT managers who have been holding out for Linux servers
> powered by 2.4 are sweating bullets right now.
How long can the situation continue before someone puts together
a funded consortium to manage kernel development in a more
predictable way and forks the code base?
And how much pain is involved in the switch from 2.2 -> 2.4 after
shipping? Do all programs that need large file support have to
be recompiled to get it? How much will break when you start
using large files with programs that were compiled without support
for them?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World?
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:34:11 GMT
"Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:NeuK5.115713$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > 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.
Is it released as GPL? Will we ever know if it contains any parts
contributed
by others under the GPL?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Why don't I use Linux?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:35:08 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (A transfinite number of monkeys) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Oh! You tried *ONE*. Well, if you didn't like one, you'll probably
>just hate them all, right? Let's see, I can think of CodeFusion, from
>the Cygnus (now part of RedHat) people, CodeWarrior from Metrowerks,
>KDevelop from the KDE people, and others. Here are links to several
>Linux IDEs (from a Linuxberg mirror site):
>
>http://rutgers.linux.tucows.com/x11html/dev_env.html
Oh probably. Do I hear people raving about these things?
KDevelop is the one I tried. I didn't like it. I believe I tried CodeFusion
as well, didn't like that either.
>: >Not familiar with the GIMP, I see.
>:
>: Yep. Doesn't even come close.
>
>Maybe in your world. I regard it as about 90% good as Photoshop, which
>in turn is (IMO) about 400% better than Paint Shop Pro.
We must be in different worlds then. I had a look at Gimp and all the other
graphics programs on Linux Mandrake 7.1 and felt none of them offered what
I found with Paint Shop Pro 7.
>: Not completed?
>
>Yes, you're familiar with the term, right? It means that the product
>functions, but is not completely done yet. It IS possible. After all,
>you don't think someone belts out thousands of lines of code instantly,
>right? Not even in the Linux world does that happen.
And the lack of completion makes it a pretty tricky tool to use. After all,
you don't really know what works until it breaks. Hardly a good advert for
the product, right?
>So, you're downloading what's going to be on the tube a couple of months
>ahead of time??? Don't take this the wrong way Pete, but you're either
>in dire need of a life, or need to discover that there is indeed such a
>thing as "too much organization."
So I like to watch TV. So you don't. So what? I don't get newspapers and
the magazine the cable company supplies me is out of date within a week,
hence I miss programs I might want to watch.
>: Why don't I use Linux?
>: Lack of support for my sound card for one thing.
>
>Gee, I guess it's time to get rid of that lame excuse...
One excuse. There are others. Read what I said.
--
Pete Goodwin
---
Why don't I use Linux?
Lack of support for my sound card for one thing.
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Linux Experience
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:35:28 GMT
Tim Palmer wrote:
> Linux doesnit compair with Windos period
>
That would be.
"Linux doesn't compare with Windows period"
{snip}
>
Linux actually has SECURITY.
--
Charlie
By 2005 Microsoft will be displaced by
LINUX - THE POWER OF A GNU GENERATION!
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Why don't I use Linux?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:37:25 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2:1) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Don't talk bollocks. Over here, the listings aren't finalised that far
>in advance except the regularly schedualed programs, but you know when
>thay are anyway...
Over here, we have a magazine for a month. It's regularly wrong
unfortunately.
TiVo tries to keep listings for a week or two ahead - except the one I
bought I took back due to problems with the sound and picture.
So, how am I talking "bollocks"? Maybe true where you are...
--
Pete Goodwin
---
Why don't I use Linux?
Lack of support for my sound card for one thing.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:21:50 GMT
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:YFEK5.12083$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > I seem to recal you are people like you continually bashing Microsoft
> > > for the lateness of Win2K. But Win2K was much better than anyone
> > > expected and included more features than anyone expected. It advanced
> > > the state of OS technology. Linux is trying to play catch-up. When you
> > > look the feature list for Win2k and the feature list for Linux 2.4,
> > > Win2K still has more features.
> >
> > What new technology is there in win2k?
> >
> > -Ed
>
> The main innovation is a perversion of kerberos that allows them to
> use the name of a standard while still preventing usable interoperability
> with any other vendor.
Ah yes, more of the Slashdot mentality and falseness.
Please, Les, since you know so much about it, explain to use why
it's not able to interoperate with any other vendor?
This should be interesting, considering your wrong.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:34:26 GMT
In article <a0tK5.2613$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Brandon Van Every" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8tdbv1$oce$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > > > Computer enthusiasts are the smaller market, the ones who want
> > > >
> > > > They are the trend setters and the peole who other people go to
> for
> > > > advice! I advise Linux now.
> > >
> > > They aren't "trend setters," they're a subspecies of computer user
> > that
> >
> > insults, is that the best you can do???
> >
> >
> > > has existed since the dark ages of computerdom. A rareified and
> > > distinguished clan. The trend setters are the AOL idiots who buy
a
> > > computer for $500 to get on the Internet.
> >
> > Yep, and
>
> It seems that you agreed with the use of insults when it suited you
I
> prefer to think of them as fair characterizations of different market
> segments.
>
You would! Grow up.
> > > People pay money for ease of use.
> >
> > But you should look a the new stuff coming out for Linux! IT is
better
> > and easier to use that MS!
>
> Could you give me a few specific product examples?
http://www.linux-mandrake.com/en/
Istalation right off the bat. two office suites, Koffice and the Gnome
Office Suite, are istalled at the time of install (this can be stoped if
not wanted) so the User does not have to:
1 get in the car
2 Drive to the store
3 find the Office applications
4 stand in line at the cashier
5 pay hard earned cash (yes, I count the hours worked inordet to pay for
Office as part ot the hasle of MS)
6 get back in the car
7 Drive home
8 Start the install
9 type in a horably long number inorder to complete the install
Hm, having An office suite installed sounds a whole lot easier to me.
now a photo editor?
Linux: gimp installed (would meet most peoples needs)
MS: See 9 steps above
Wow 2 trips to the store and how much have you spent? with linux I still
have only payed the ~ $50 I started with. I haven't even wasted any gas
money running back and forth to the store!
The list goes on and on!
>
> > Linux is only easy to use if you have the skill of a
> > > super-hacker and want to exercise that skill a lot.
> >
> > what a laugh, you really have not looked at the new releases have
> you???
>
> To be honest, no I haven't. I have looked at recent deja.com archives
> about people's user experiences however.
Then you do not know what you are talking about Just as I thought. The
news groups are were people go who have problems. If I only read the
trouble tickets at MS I would think all MS products are SH*T, oppps, I
already think that! But I have used the newest MS products So my opinion
is based on personal experiance!!!! you?
>
> --
> Cheers, www.3DProgrammer.com
> Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The BEST ADVICE GIVEN.
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:41:53 GMT
Chad may be right.
Accusing Microsoft of being HACKED would
be the right term anyway and I quoted it from
the web page referenced.
Stealing Material from Microsoft is very much
like an adult stealing candie from a baby.
Microsoft has NO concept of security
anymore than they have a concept of UPTIME.
Charlie
Chad Myers wrote:
> "Peter Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 04:22:09 GMT, "Chad Myers"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Considering today's events about Microsoft and
> > > > their being HACKED into,
> > >
> > > I wouldn't say "hacked", an employe was deceived
> > > into opening an email.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, the weakest link in any good security
> > > plan is humans. Note that the "hackers" or "crackers"
> > > weren't able to actually "hack" into MS, they had to
> > > deceive an employee to run an app on their system.
> >
> > The real question is why M$ were daft enough to have their source code on
> > any machine(s) that were in any way connected to the outside world.
>
> It wasn't, they weren't. Didn't you read the article? Perhaps you should
> read it before you embarass yourself further.
>
> -Chad
--
Charlie
By 2005 Microsoft will be displaced by
LINUX - THE POWER OF A GNU GENERATION!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: 28 Oct 2000 18:47:24 GMT
In article <39fb0657$1$yrgbherq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In <8teuj4$rlg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 10/28/00
> at 04:24 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen) said:
>
>>Since you feel that you were right Ed, describe the cpu cache on any x86
>>processor and specifically the caching of the 430VX chipset. The topic at
>>hand was the 430VX and it's inability to cache more than 64Mb of ram. This
>>means that everytime an address above 64Mb was used the cpu had to fetch it
>>from memory as opposed to first hitting the cache, this is a huge performance
>>hit. This was the topic and no software will make hardware run faster. Bob
>>was stupid enough to think the setting for OS/2 to use more than 64Mb on some
>>motherboards was the topic. You decided to add irrelevant information about
>>os memory management. The discussion was on a purely hardware level. You
>>and Bob were wrong but being such little people you can't admit that. You
>>are free to cuss and name call all you want. The opinion of somebody that
>>was obviously wrong and can't admit that is an opinion that isn't valid in my
>>eyes.
>
>Listen you idiot -- Can you read? I never said software will make hardware run
>faster. What I said, and which you are obviously are incapable of
>understanding -- is that this hardware limitation does not matter in terms of
>real-world productivity.
>
>You ***really need to talk with a shrink*** to find out why being right --
>when in fact you are not right in the context of the larger argument, and you
>have to continue for years with a grudge over it. Now go find a good shrink
>and shut up.
And the original topic was never about that. Who needs the shrink? The
person unable to admit that they added extraneous information to divert
attention from the mistake of a fellow OS/2 advocate? So tell me, why
bring in off topic material to the conversation?
>
>
>--
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: 28 Oct 2000 18:54:57 GMT
In article <39fb0810$2$yrgbherq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen) said:
>
>>In article <39fac6cd$3$yrgbherq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 10/27/00
>>> at 02:31 PM, chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>>
>>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>
>>>>>That is because you're an asshole who refuses to understand or consider any
>>>>>argument you don't want to hear. Your parents really should not breed any
>>>>>more like you.
>>>
>>>>Why, there's a lot of factual information.
>>>
>>>>Sore loser. You lose the arguement, so you lash out with insults.
>>>
>>>Ah, another asshole arrives. Are you a friend of Jason or just another idiot
>>>troll?
>>>
>>>There is no factual that the cache is the factor that so overwhelmingly
>>>controls performance and *user productivity* that nothing else matters. This
>>>is jasons claim. And it is what he ignores, in order to focus on a tiny point
>>>so he can be the big guy in more then his dreams.
>
>>We were talking about hardware and accesses to memory. Ed was dumb enough to
>>try to claim that OS/2 somehow made these accesses faster. If he could admit
>>his error
>>>
>>>His claim, is like saying tire tread design is the factor that decides how
>>>fast the operator can actually drive a car in the real world -- and all other
>>>factors, even when you put them all together, cannot out weigh the effect of
>>>tread design.
>>>
>
>>We weren't talking about the overall system, this is something you've tried
>>to add to save face and it isn't working you dishonest asshole.
>
>What you mean here is that when in a discussion that you are whining (or think
>you are), that no one can point out there is a whole forest and not just the
>one tree you are looking at.
The discussion wasn't about a whole system. Go to deja.com/usenet and
prove that it was about more if you think you can.
>
>This is why you are an asshole. You can't see the forest from the trees --
>and you have continued to carry a grudge over it for nearly a year. Face it,
>you're a petty, whiney, little idiot who can't stand anyone who sees you for
>what you are. Go home and growup little boy.
>
You know Ed, for thinking I'm so immature you sure like to argue with me.
We were talking about hardware memory access and you interjected with OS/2
memory management. At least I understood the topic at hand.
>BTW, I use to do the technical hiring for a very large A/E. I have seen
>enough of you to understand that you could not be assigned to shovel shit with
>any confidence, because the instant there was a change in the texture or
>color, you couldn't be depended on to figure out if it was still shit.
>
What is sad is this is your typical response. I'm really sorry Ed and I'm
sorry for the company that had you working human resources. When you get
a clue I'm sure we'll all be happy.
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Tuff Competition for LINUX!
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 19:08:15 GMT
China has announced that CHINA 2000 will be released
in in US Markets for the December Christmas rush!
A Chinese official was quoted saying this new operating
system is designed to go head to head against America's
Microsoft Windows 2000.
China also toughed it's ADVANCED TRACK
development system which allowed them to
completely develop the entire system in just
2 months but they warned such fast development
would inevidably leave bugs. It was also said
that the MARKETING thrust for this product
in ASIA was too great for them to wait for a
final debug.
Thus beating Microsoft, Linux and just everybody
in two weeks CHINA 2000 has become a
real threat on the OPEN SOURCE MARKET.
NEXT issue we will be discussing why
RUSSIA 2000 was released in January 2001
and WHAT'S UP WITH THAT! RUSSIA
begins work on faster E-mail system also!
Also in the next issue we will be discussing
all the GPL'ed code found in CHINA 2000
and why it was there in the first place.
What does CHINA 2000 and FreeBSD have
to do with the TCP/IP STACK code being
identical, BUGS TOO! The state department
warns CHINA of the possible dangers of
mixing VB script with their CHINA OUTLOOK
EXPRESS product. And finally why does
CHINA 2000 BLUE SCREEN it's users and
will RUSSIA 2000 be any better?
So get ready for next week as me and my
special guest Chad Meyers plans on discussing
the CHINA 2000 open source model.
--
Charlie
By 2005 Microsoft will be displaced by
LINUX - THE POWER OF A GNU GENERATION!
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
