Linux-Advocacy Digest #912, Volume #29 Sun, 29 Oct 00 08:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: To all you WinTrolls ("JavaDuke")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (C Lund)
Re: Linux (Terry Porter)
Re: Tuff Competition for LINUX! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Tuff Competition for LINUX! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Tuff Competition for LINUX!
Re: Another poor dork in deep shit, Claire! (Terry Porter)
Re: Can Linux "cut and paste" ? (Terry Porter)
Re: The BEST ADVICE GIVEN. (Peter Hayes)
Why Red Hat is as bad as Microsoft
Re: Ms employees begging for food (Caveman)
Re: MS Hacked? (Tim Smith)
Re: MS Hacked? (Tim Smith)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Peter Hayes)
Re: Ms employees begging for food (Caveman)
Re: Ms employees begging for food (Caveman)
Re: I'm sick and tired of you (was: Linux) ("MH")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "JavaDuke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To all you WinTrolls
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 23:13:53 +1300
Testify brother, praise the tux! spread the good word of Linux to save
Windows users from eternal damnation in hell with Bill Gates.
Javaduke
David.L <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> This is to all of you morons who write posts such as: "Linux sucks",
> "Windows Rulez" and such in linux newsgroups.
>
> Almost every linux user i know including myself has used Win9* Win 2000
> etc... either at work, at school or at home. I used Windows NT/Win 9*
> four years before i switched over to Linux. I have even tried out
> Windows 2000, and yes Windows 2000 is pretty good file://by Windoze
> standards//. So i, and most linux users has had first hand experience
> with Windoze and know at least the basics. But the morons who write
> "Linux sucks" have usually not even seen a Linux screenshot. So before
> you write "Linux sucks" try out Linux for an year or two. Until you have
> done that shut up!!!
>
> file://Sorry for the bad english//
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (C Lund)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 12:53:50 +0100
In article <UvNK5.20512$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad Myers"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Where is this tax-free capitalist utopia? Is there one?
Try Monaco, Barbeidos, Seaworld, and half a dozen other lilleputian
states, most of which are tropical islands. Not all of them are tax-free,
but they aren't far away from being so. That's why 90+% of the shipping
industry is registered in palces like that.
--
C Lund
http://www.notam.uio.no/~clund/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 29 Oct 2000 10:56:41 GMT
On 28 Oct 2000 21:03:33 GMT, michelle makitra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Ok, there a few problems when people attempt to show knowledge but instead
>show ignorance.
And its amazing how they do this with opening lines similar to yours.
> Sfccybear, you need to understand a few things and open up
>your eyes.
You think Sfcybear should take your advice as your no longer using it ?
> Currently, what's the most used, most popular OS today? I'll
>give you a hint, it's not Linux.
The US Justice Dept will tell you the same thing, and why.
>
>Being a software engineer myself, I know Linux has a looooong way to go
>before it offers competition on the desktop against Windows or Mac, or other
>Unices for dev projects, etc..
Your welcome to your opinion, lets not forget, thats all it is ?
> It has a good chance as a server when 2.4
>comes out (assuming it won't suck), but not before. 2.2 Linux just plain
>sucks compared to BSD and commercial Unices) when it comes to performance.
>Crap SMP support, poor I/O performance, etc. I/O performance is lacking on
>my scsi system, where it naturally flies on Win2k and Solaris. Network
>performance is not terribly impressive with Linux, either.
>
>Yet an ignorant person such as yourself
Pot kettle ... black.
> will defend Linux till the end,
>pertending it'll "take over the world", etc, a natural talent of a true
>Religous Zealot. Linux is good, but for performance, software, ease of use,
>easy maintainability, Linux just lacks.
Your *facts* lack, thats obvious.
> Not to mention software support is
>also lacking; that is, lack of GOOD software.
Hahahahahah oh yeah, *good* software. Your expertise is in the use of emotive
words, I think your a *marketing engineer*, not a software engineer ?
>
>Anyway, stop being ignorant
Once again pot, kettle ....
> and look at the industry for a moment. Look at
>facts, listen to what people say, and gather some truth from people's
>experience with Linux.
Sure my experience with Linux may help, said experience tells me you lack any
ability to judge facts on a rational sientific basis ..
> Don't just judge on what YOU like about it. Have a
>nice day.
Please use some of your advice, youll be a better Wintroll for it.
<snip>
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 weeks 7 hours 22 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tuff Competition for LINUX!
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 11:09:30 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'll tell you what! After this weeks events in
> Microsoft history, I would not want to be any
> kind of systems administrator or developer
> for ANY Microsoft product.
>
> NOOOO WAY man!
This is the crux of Microsofts problem. They are now in an
untenable position as far as I can see. For any companies
mission critical applications they cannot use Microsoft s/w.
Unless of course Microsoft realise that they must make their
source code open so that companies can audit it themselves.
Isn't it sad? :-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tuff Competition for LINUX!
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 11:14:18 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andy Newman) wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Charlie Ebert wrote:
> ..all sorts of rampant speculation...
>
> Wow Charlie. Take that medication quick smart! You're starting
> to make the Chads look good.
>
> What MS say is that they have no evidence that anything was
> stolen (see press release). But they only found out a Qaz
> trojan was running on a machine inside their network the other
> day. And reports of its age range from 1 to 3 months. Who
> really knows what went on in that time. They don't log
> everything and may not always be able to tell the difference
> between an intruder's actions and those of the legitimite
> user in any case.
you tell Charlie to take medication and then go on to say that
nobody, including Microsoft, knows what actually has been done.
Well we know that their network was wide open for a long time
to whoever got the passwords. It is irrelevant whether they took
Microsoft s/w or modified it. You cannot trust their s/w from
now on. Even they don't know if it has been modified. How do you
audit 50 million lines of source code?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tuff Competition for LINUX!
Date: 29 Oct 2000 06:02:38 -0500
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:chpft8.4oe.ln@gd2zzx...
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
>>
>> Hee hee, I really enjoyed that. Imagine what will happen if
>> hackers get access to M$ code. They have found enough exploits
>> without it! How can anyone say they trust M$ s/w now (not that
>> they could have before). :-)
>
>But none of the Windows or Office source was stolen. Oh,
>that's right, you guys don't care about those pesky "facts" do
>you?
How do we know that they're facts if we can't verify them? Are we to
simply take _your_ word for it?
--
Microsoft Windows. Garbage at your fingertips.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Another poor dork in deep shit, Claire!
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 29 Oct 2000 11:09:07 GMT
On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 14:05:48 +0200, James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Guy,
>
>You are becoming a bit of a pain in the butt. Claire/Steve is normally
>quite creative in her/his trolling
Bullshit "Claire_Lynn/Heather/Keys88/Amy/Sponge et al" is a lying, fradulent
Wintroll, who has no original Trollisms left past 1999!
> - and therefore provides entertainment
Wrong.
>for many of us. You on the other hand, now pasting in problems from other
>NGs, is behaving like a child. But, perhaps you are one ...
I think its excellent, I vote that Guy keep up his excellent anti Wintroll
methods. Furthermore I vote that Guy receive Linux Advocate of Oct2000!
I also vote that James_Bond go back to Wintroll land.
<yer plonked Bond>
>
>James
>
>
>"Jacques Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> >Okay, here's the deal:
>>
>> >I have a Windows 2000 server running SQL Server 7.0. This server also
>> >performs the system backups which includes itself and a Novell server.
>> >The windows 2000 server is having problems connecting to the Novell
>> >Server. I have GSNW & IPX/SPX installed on the 2000 server. I have
>> >reinstalled GSNW & IPX/SPX several times. They both appear to be
>> >working properly.
>>
>> >Here is the strange part. I was able to connect to the Novell server
>> >until I installed Veritas Backup Exec v8.0. After this installing all
>> >connections to the Novell server are reported to have an unknown
>> >username or wrong password.
>>
>> Make his Windows 2000 rock, luv!
>
>
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 weeks 7 hours 22 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Can Linux "cut and paste" ?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 29 Oct 2000 11:29:37 GMT
On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:39:11 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> No good. I should have mentioned I had already tried that (middle
>> button I know about). Cut and paste works fine if I go between 2
>> copies of editors say, but not between an editor and webpage input
>> box. I can't even copy a URL from netscape location box to the
>> location box on KFM.
>
>Works for me. Why not you?
Works for me too, pasting is a cinch under Linux, in 3 years I've only
had one app that didnt paste, and that was "PCGrasp", a programmers State
Diagrammer.
>
>oh yeah...I forgot...you have a history of lying about linux.
Thats COLAS best kept secret ;-)
>
>
>> And why is paste not highlighted on the other application after I do a
>> copy?
>>
>> Any other ideas?
>>
>> claire
>>
<snip>
>> >> I write a text article using kedit and I want to cut and paste it
>> >> into a web page currently displayed by Netscape. I highlight the text,
>> >> select copy or cut and then put my mouse over the box displayed by
>> >> Netscape where I want to paste the text. Only problem is the Paste
>> >> selection in the menu is greyed out.
>> >[cut}
>> > > What am I doing wrong here?
>> >
>> >Nothing, you're just not to bright.
>> >Use the middle button of your mouse! Dont have one? Have a scroll-mouse?
>> >Click on the scroll button. Dont have one? Click right and left at the same
>> >time.
>> >
>> >Greetings to all lemmings
>
>
>--
>Aaron R. Kulkis
>Unix Systems Engineer
>ICQ # 3056642
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 weeks 7 hours 22 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The BEST ADVICE GIVEN.
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 12:10:37 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 28 Oct 2000 21:56:24 -0400, Richard Hoskins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > 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.
>
> Gee, all the GNU source is on machines connected to the outside world,
> and I've always considered that a GOOD THING.
Yes, many educated eyes being cast over GNU sources leaves little chance
for stealth code.
OTOH, who knows how much stealth code has been slipped into M$ apps and OSs
by these "hackers". Maybe we'll find out when the code finds its way into
the public domain. We'll also find out if there's secret NSA or Echelon
code in there. (Cue the black helicopters...)
Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Why Red Hat is as bad as Microsoft
Date: 29 Oct 2000 07:24:22 -0500
Red Hat Linux is one of the distributions (perhaps the only distribution)
referred to in the following e-mail message:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-announce/2000/msg00003.html
Red Hat Managers, being aware of their responsibility to RHAT
shareholders and the need to pull in some money for them, decided
not to wait for GCC 3.0, and shipped Red Hat 7 NOW with a DEVELOPMENT
version of GCC 3.0 as the default compiler (a CVS snapshot for crying
out loud!). The reason for doing this instead of using an older,
stable version of GCC, such as egcs-2.91.66 (the version of GCC
installed on the computer I'm posting from), was that the new version
of GCC generates faster code, and Red Hat Managers thought they could
be "competitive" against a little-known commercial Linux-i386 C/C++
compiler. A stable version of the C/C++ compiler is also included,
and is used to compile the kernel. Its name is "kgcc". Red Hat does
not tell you that you're getting a development compiler (they call it
a "new" compiler instead). They might have used the beta compiler to
compile the applications that come with the system. Several Red
Hat employees that happen to be non-Managers were opposed to
the idea of releasing with a CVS snapshot for a C/C++ compiler. But
since they are not Managers, they're not allowed to make any of
the decisions.
--
Microsoft Windows. Flaky and built to stay that way.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc
Subject: Re: Ms employees begging for food
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Caveman)
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 12:24:03 GMT
In article <8tanet$j42$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[content elided]
As I recall, the Internet's history is very different from what you
state here. You're starting to sound Rhondaesque.
I also don't see what this has to do with Linux. Linux was basically
nothing but a cleanroom reimplementation of what Bach described in his
book done originally as an academic tool, and then expanded into a
marketable product. It was held back severely for a long time by the
failure of Larry McVoy to convince Sun's lawyers to release his
unified buffer cache code.
Linux is somewhat impressive, but vastly boring IMHO when I can buy a
$75 license for Solaris 8 on either Intel or SPARC with a free developer
licensed copy of Oracle 8i Enterprise thrown in.
There's just too much nice commercial stuff in Solaris that makes Linux
look really crude, ugly and backward by comparison, and by the time
Linux developers manage to come up with a comparable presentation
model, things will have moved far ahead.
If you want my opinion, I think the whole Linux/open source community
should do what BTL did years ago with Plan9 and stop chasing commercial
UNIX or NT and diverge creatively into something better. I see a huge
amount of creative effort being wasted by people trying to emulate what
some other creative people did decades ago, instead of developing
something new. Of course maybe that says something. I'll leave the
interpretation of that statement to the reader.
I would say that Larry's homepage is a good jumping off point. I see
the Linux community in general stuck on trying to emulate something that
people within BTL went way beyond a decade ago.
--
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when
the need for illusion is deep."
-- Saul Bellow
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: MS Hacked?
Date: 29 Oct 2000 04:07:48 -0800
Reply-To: Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000 07:57:06 -0400, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Very cool. All we have to do is wait. Sooner or later the code will be
>posted, and we will get a good laugh.
If the Windows source code got posted, one consequence would be Windows
would become more stable. As someone who on occasion has to write
Windows device drivers, I find that many things in the kernel
environment are simply not documented, or the documentation is wrong.
I believe that a lot of Window's unstability arises from the fact that
there is kernel code (i.e., device drivers) written by people who had to
guess at how many things worked.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: MS Hacked?
Date: 29 Oct 2000 04:13:05 -0800
Reply-To: Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000 20:22:42 -0400, MH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The stuff is near to impossible to read because of the virulent use of
>> Hungarian notation. A practice which has a place, in moderation.
>
>Hungarian notation has nothing to do with the quality of source code. If it
>makes the collaboration of 100's of programmers lives easier by having a
>common grammar, then so be it. This does not support your claim one iota.
Hungarian notation certainly does have something to do with the quality
of source code, when the code is part of a long-term ongoing development
effort. Hungarian notation tends to cause certain programming errors
when applied to such a project.
Note that Microsoft does not use Hungarian notation in the NT/Win2K
kernels.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 12:29:35 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 20:38:35 -0700, "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > There has been much talk about hidden ports in
> > the back end of all windows products in the last
> > year.
>
> Anyone who runs Zonealarm -- which reports unauthorized TCP/IP traffic IN
> and OUT knows you are full of sh*t.
>
> We Zonalarm users know who has the hidden ports -- Real Audio , Adware etc
> etc.
>
> It ain't the Microsoft OS.
With Microsoft's source in the hands of some very clever "hackers" all bets
are now off.
> What a bunch of morons you Linux advocates are.
>
> If you think Microsft could sneak hidden TCP/IP traffic past all the
> Microsoft haters masquerading as security experts you are dummer than a bag
> of hammers.
Someone's been sneaking hidden TCP/IP traffic past Microsoft for the past
three months at least.
QED
Peter
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc
Subject: Re: Ms employees begging for food
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Caveman)
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 12:40:31 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Dennis Ritchie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>The place where Toon is wrong is that BL didn't give
>Ken the PDP-11, he stole it. Maybe that's why "gives."
^^?
>
> Dennis
I don't know if I would call it "stolen," it was more like
taking control of an underutilized corporate asset.
I would reserve "stole" for what I did at a former employer
when I took a broken HP G40 (literally, someone had dropped
it off the loading dock) which belonged to some other business
unit and brokered a deal for a manager in a third business unit
with HP to essentially trade it for a new K450. The only thing
he paid for was the Jamaica box.
Grace Hopper's statement comes to mind.
--
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when
the need for illusion is deep."
-- Saul Bellow
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc
Subject: Re: Ms employees begging for food
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Caveman)
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 12:50:08 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>He was trying to get space war (remember the vidoe arcade game?--it was
>already about 10-15 years old by the late 60's ) to run on Multics...but
>it wouldn't run well...so they hacked a streamlined version of Multics
>on a pdp-7....hence the pun Un-ics
It was done as an experiment to implement an idea for a filesystem.
I'm sure there was some economic incentive to get Space Travel (It wasn't
the "Space War" arcade game, that was a later derivative) running on an
unshared system that didn't cost hundreds of dollars per run like the
GE635 (it was a G(E)COS box, not the 645 MULTICS box with the 4-ring
hardware memory protection).
--
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when
the need for illusion is deep."
-- Saul Bellow
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I'm sick and tired of you (was: Linux)
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 08:05:58 -0500
> >> But both in terms of marketing and technology, I see no future for
Linux
> >> as a mass-market, consumer-friendly OS.
You aren't the only one. But I won't say it can't happen.
They're going to elect Bush aren't they?
> >Shut up, would you? Your babbling won't do any good or bad. I've seen
> >people make this statement again and again ever since I read this
> >group, and magically, Linux has in the same time not shown any signs
> >of slowing down on its way towards becoming exactly that: A
> >mass-market, consumer-friendly operating system.
> >
> >Early in the eighties, we had a text editor and some odd tools. They
> >said we'd never have a compiler
OK, you've a compiler. Every mass-market, consumer-friendly operating system
needs one.
Should be one in every box. 99% of mass-market, consumer-friendly operating
system users compile their own utilities. Uh-huh. Does it come with a punch
card reader too?
> >Late in the eighties, we had a compiler and a complete set of Unix
> >tools. They said we'd never have a kernel.
You got the compiler twice? What a deal! Unix tools? Cool! Let's all take a
trip back in time.
Something tells me that "mass-market, consumer-friendly operating system"
and "Unix tools" don't belong in the same sentence. But, I'll go your way on
it."
> >Early in the nineties, we had the complete foundation for a Unix
> >system, including the kernel. They said we'd never have a friendly
> >user interface.
Did you get the compiler again? What's that? You want to use a bloated,
multiple layered architecture designed for multiple user networked computing
on a mass-market, consumer-friendly operating system? --to go along with
over a dozen window managers in order to claim some semblance of a GUI?
When 99% of these mass-market, consumer-friendly operating systems users are
single-users doing basic computing chores?
I don't know about your compiler from the 80's, but mine right now is saying
"ERROR 429 cannot create object :Unix == mass-market, consumer-friendly
operating system: "
Face it. At this point linux is a slightly interesting rip off of 30 year
old technology with a face job being touted as a mass-market,
consumer-friendly operating system. Quite a concept if only someone could do
it right!
Wonder why Steve Jobs didn't think of that.
Hold on, what's that???.........
hehe...
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
