Linux-Advocacy Digest #920, Volume #29 Sun, 29 Oct 00 17:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Why don't I use Linux? (2:1)
Re: Why don't I use Linux? (2:1)
Re: Ms employees begging for food (Bernd Paysan)
Re: Linux (sfcybear)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Caldera OpenLinux User)
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Is Linux some kind of a joke? ("javaduke")
Re: Tuff Competition for LINUX! ("Bruce Schuck")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Bruce Schuck")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Charlie Ebert)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why don't I use Linux?
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 23:03:43 +0000
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (2:1) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >I have no frigging idea what the hell corel paradox is. I saw it as an
> >icon on the desk top and obstinantly didn't open it, just to prove you
> >wrong.
> >
> >I happen to know what exel does because I have used it, so no, it's not
> >that funny, really. Don't be an idiot. are you really trying to pretend
> >any of the above are less cryptic than (to take some classic examples)
> >sed, awk, grep, ls. They're avery bit as cryptic. You'd have no clue
> >what they did until you were told/used them.
>
> Cryptic they may be but they are more commonly known, much more so than the
> list original given on UNIX.
They are more commonly known by chance. I STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT COREL
PARADOX IS!
Those names may be more commonly known, but they are no less cryptic. Go
up to any non computer user and ask what Quark Express is. Ask what grep
is. You get the same blank expression both times.
n the cases I names, they are cryptic because the names are not
descriptive. Is Excel really a descriptive name?
> >No, it's not vapour ware, because you can look at how it's really
> >progressing. You can get a beta version.
>
> My point is that it hasn't been release yet as 2.4.
My point is is that betas are there to look at, so it isn't vapourware.
> >Word is more like a fancy gold ornament from the stone age. Pretty* to
> >look at but fuck all use.
>
> And I write letters with it.
>
> And I write reports with it.
I write letters and reports in LaTeX. Your point?
> I would agree it is a pig to use beyond that, but its a helluva lot simpler
> than LaTeX or any other such package.
The learning curve is steeper, but after that it becomes easier to use.
Besides, there's LyX if you want a shiny front end.
> >No, you don't use Linux becaus eyou wnat microsoft. That's fine by me:
> >use what you prefer, but don't assume everyone else wants the same as
> >you.
>
> You're statement is incorrect. I do not want Microsoft, I want a platform
> that is stable (and Windows 98 SE is not) and has everything I want (and
> Linux is very close). Please do not make such statements about what you
> _think_ I want.
You make trollish claims about Linux (the one about cryptic names for
instance) and ignore everyone who tells oyu about packages that you
want. That's why I thought that. So far, you have given me no reason to
change my thoughts.
-Ed
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why don't I use Linux?
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 23:06:28 +0000
Gary Hallock wrote:
>
> Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> > [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.
> >
>
> And yet, I don't have a clue what any of those do. hotmetal pro? Is
> that for molding bronze statues? quark express? Must be some program to
> help in detecting those subatomic particles. MS Exel? Well, I exel quite
> well without MS. Corel paradox powerpoint? Gee, I don't think I should
> trust my data to anything with the word "paradox" in the name.
FYI HotMetal pro is a web site editor. Quark express is a DTP (I think)
and I now (after trying it) think paradox is a spreadsheet.
global regular expression print. At least it means something.
-Ed
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Bernd Paysan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc
Subject: Re: Ms employees begging for food
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 22:00:08 +0100
Caveman wrote:
> 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.
I find it the other way round. There's so much nice free stuff with an
ordinary GNU/Linux distribution, and it runs all on x86 (while the
commercial Slowlaris stuff typically requires SPARCs), and the basic
setup is so much better than Solaris (csh and "original Bill Joy" vi
can't compete against bash and Emacs; not even against bash and vim).
You don't get much useful work done on Solaris without installing most
of a GNU/Linux distribution but the kernel on it.
If you suggest Linux developers to leave the compatibility behind and go
to something experimental, you forget that the purpose of a free
operating system is to provide a platform for existing free
applications. Most of them have been written for Unix (over decades!),
not for some yet not existing experimental system.
There are certainly crude parts in the Unix interface; but at least the
free software community has successfully smoothed the edges. Unix is not
the best of all possible OS, but it is good enough. It is friendly
enough to programmers (though I don't understand why I have to open
sockets with htons and htonl instead of just
open("/ports/tcp/www.foo-bar.com/http"); or why all the asynchronous IO
and file descriptor polling must suck the way it does - Linus Torvalds
recently proposed to add an event-handler mechanism to Linux, something
I proposed years ago, probably to the wrong people ;-).
--
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://www.jwdt.com/~paysan/
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 21:13:06 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Could someone please tell me what thew whole pot, kettle, black thing
> is?
>
> -Ed
It's from a saying used in the US. The whole text goes something like
is'nt that like the pot calling the kettle black.
it comes from the days when cooking was done over fires and both the pot
and the kettle were black with soot. It is a way of calling someone a
hyocrite
>
> Terry Porter wrote:
> >
> > 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 **
>
> --
> Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward
Rosten
> binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
> first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
> commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 14:24:56 -0800
From: Caldera OpenLinux User <[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!
Bruce Schuck wrote:
> "Caldera OpenLinux User" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> > What happened to MS doesn't indicate a superior security model. MS's
> feature
> > rich design puts too much empahsis on HUMAN decisions to enable security.
>
> Open Source = a wonderful opportunity to alter source and distribute
> original source with binaries made from altered source.
Oh yeah - mail me your version of LINUX and I'll run it (we'll call it
SCHUCK-IUX). Let's assume you've got the mental horespower to create one -
how do you get a LINUX distributor like Caldera to blindly accept your code,
compile it and distribute it to me?
Let's keep our eye on the ball, MS has a flawed security model which is highly
integrated and relies more than others OSs on human decisions. No amount of
FUD is going to reduce the hacks and losses caused by MS's weaker security
model. MS "I LOVE YOU".
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 21:27:39 GMT
Let's review.
Bob Hauck wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Oct 2000 01:29:14 GMT, R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > bobh{at}haucks{dot}org wrote:
>
> >The problem really isn't even Compaq's. It has to do with the
> >underwriters, mutual fund managers, and analysts who influence
> >the price of Compaq's stock, which in turn influences how much
> >they are able to borrow for new ventures (such as Linux).
>
> Pffft! Compaq is borrowing to fund Linux development? I don't think
> so. Maybe to fund their marketing of Linux, which is not the same
> thing at all.
>
Bob Rex
1 0
>
> >Keep in mind that Jon "Maddog" Hall played a major role in getting
> >Compaq's executives to adopt Linux is the first place. Jon works for
> >Compaq and has been the "Corporate Ambassador" for Linux. His neck
> >is sticking out like a giraffe right now. Meanwhile, executives who
> >argued for excluding Linux and sticking exclusively with Microsoft
> >are pointing to these "Delays" as failures of Linux and Open Source.
>
> As if W2K wasn't delayed? As if practically every single MS release in
> recent memory, with the exeception of NT 3.x, wasn't delayed for
> _years_ beyond when they were expected? Do corporate executives really
> have memories that short?
>
Bob Rex
2 0
>
> >> Is Compaq actually doing anything to help their own cause, or are they
> >> just upset because the world doesn't revolve around their silly
> >> policies?
> >
> >Compaq took a big risk in crossing Microsoft and adopting Linux.
>
> That wasn't what I was asking, Rex. Is Compaq *doing any work*? Them
> taking a marketing risk doesn't count as "helping their own cause". If
> they want it done sooner, they know where to find the code. Haul out
> some programmers and fix the bugs and Linus will release it.
>
Bob Rex
3 0
>
> >Compaq was created because they were willing to cut a deal with
> >Microsoft instead of licensing the technology through IBM.
>
> >For Linus to impose artificial delays at this point is a glaring
> >failure.
>
> There have been problems with the VM system. I don't think that is
> "arbitrary". There have been debates on whether to include a JFS or
> not. That's not "arbitrary" either. As a user, I appreciate the idea
> of shipping it when it is done. If corporate involvement means that
> Linus has to ship something that isn't done, well, then I guess I'll
> need to start looking at FreeBSD a little harder.
>
> The whole goddamn point of the Open Source development process is that
> it is *user* and *developer* driven, not corporate marketing weenie
> driven. That crap is what brought us Microsoft and the "good enough"
> attitude of many software developers. If Linux turns into another one
> of those exercises in stupidity, it is doomed because the core group of
> people who got it where it is today will walk. Them's the facts Rex,
> and if Compaq and "mutual fund managers" don't get it then good
> riddance to them because they will not win the war with Microsoft by
> doing exactly what lost them the war last time.
>
Bob Rex
4 0.
Rex, I'm just about to make you sit out in the penalty box
for this comment.
Bob. You are dead RIGHT MAN!@ NO MORE CORPORATE
MARKETING WEENIE administration of software projects!
MAKE IT WORK AND FUCK THE MARKETING!
>
> >Actually, it's Linus who "Changed the rules". It's Linus who has
> >delivered 9 "beta revisions" for the first time in 5 years.
>
> Bullshit. There was a long drawn-out process leading up to 2.2 as
> well. They got up to 2.1.100-something IIRC. It is done when Linus
> thinks it is done. If _you_ or Compaq or anyone else think it is done
> sooner, they are always free to ship it. Nobody is stopping them. If
> it is stable enough, then it is stable enough. If not, not. If Linus
> were to stamp "2.4.1" on the current pre-release, that doesn't change a
> damn thing except the label.
>
> You say Compaq doesn't want to assume risk. That's _their_ problem,
> not Linus'. They can't sue him if there's a problem with 2.4.1 any
> more than they can sue him if there's a problem with 2.4.1-pre9.
>
> The "risk" is infinitesimal in any case, since they ship all of their
> products with an EULA that says "you can't sue us" anyway.
>
Bob Rex
5 0
>
> >Very simply, Linux has been providing a very cost-effective solution
> >and as companies reach the point where revenue growth is slowing,
> >they need to get more "bang for the buck". Linux has been shown
> >to reduce labor costs (freeing resources to support further revenue
> >generating, customer retention, or cost saving projects).
>
> You forgot "better poduct".
>
> But there's a tradeoff for those advantages. That being that the
> companies don't get to control things any more. TANSTAAFL.
>
Bob Rex
6 0
>
> >Part of the problem is that they don't know
> >what to expect. Behavior has been inconsistent,
> >communication has been poor, and the established
> >rule of "Release early and often" has suddenly
> >been revoked.
>
> Huh? You can download the current development kernels. The rule has
> not changed.
>
Bob Rex
7 0
>
> >Suddenly billions of dollars are
> >being taken out of play by someone who has no
> >direct accountability for the economic impact.
>
> No, Rex, billions of dollars are being taken out of play by corporate
> executives in thrall to arbitrary labels. Executives who have signed
> on for a new development methodology without the slightest
> understanding of how it works. Maybe you need to explain this to
> them rather than making excuses for them.
>
Bob Rex
8 0
>
> >> This seems rather, well, "insane"
> >> is a word that comes to mind.
> >
>
> >Arguing for total chaos, for absolutely no established "ground rules"
> >creates just the sort of contriversy Microsoft can take to the press
> >and to corporate IT managers.
>
> Is that what I am arguing for? No. I am arguing for taking
> responsibility for what you ship. If the current 2.4pre-whatever is
> really good enough, then ship it. You don't have to ask anyone's
> permission. If it isn't good enough, then shut the hell up and help
> make it good enough. That is how the process works.
>
Bob Rex
9 0
You know, I think I've said this before Rex.
Are you saying I'm just a great big dumbshit here?
>
> >If there are too many more delays,
> >Microsoft will be rubbing our noses in it for the next two years,
> >possibly long enough for yet another Windows release.
>
> Again, Microsoft has far more to answer for regarding delays than Linus
> does.
>
Bob Rex
10 0
>
> >This is true for hackers and experienced Linux users, but Compaq
> >was designing a product directed at the consumer line, novice Linux
> >users who may have known nothing other than Windows 98 and possibly
> >a little NT.
>
> These people DON'T NEED 2.4! These people need KDE2 or Helix plus
> something like Webmin. These things have nothing to do with the 2.4
> kernel, except for USB, which has been backported. Your argument about
> "a backport might go away in the next release" doesn't make any sense
> since the next release is right there on the FTP site with the USB
> stuff in it.
>
Bob Rex
11 0
>
> >Part of the deal was that Compaq had to pay higher royalties to
> >Microsoct in exchange for the ability to offer Linux. And now,
> >when they have the chance to recover the revenue, Linus has put
> >the 2.4 release on "idefinite hold", possibly until the middle of
>
> You keep talking as if Compaq has to wait for Linus. They don't.
> However, _he_ doesn't think the current 2.4 is good enough and frankly
> I respect his judgement on this matter a lot more than I do that of
> some Compaq marketing flack. Life will go on.
>
Bob Rex
12 0
I DON'T CARE WHAT FOOLISH DEALS COMPAQ HAS MADE
WITH MICROSOFT! I JUST DON'T GIVE A DAMN.
MICROSOFT IS THE ENEMY. THEY ARE NOBODY'S FREINDS.
>
> >It's a very good way to push OEMs, VARs, and corporate executives
> >right back into the Microsft camp. At least with Microsoft, if
> >Microsoft doesn't make it's numbers, it suffers as badly, even worse,
> >than everybody else.
>
> Since when? NT5 was how many years late? I don't see MS suffering
> from this. I don't see them being held accountable in any way at all
> for lateness or bugs or anything else.
>
Bob Rex
13 0
>
> >According to your web page, you've owned a business, and you've
> >dealt with things like making a payroll, and feeding a family.
> >If your ability to feed your family were threatened because your
> >employer decided to delay your paychecks for roughly 3-6 months,
> >and also held the mortgage so that you couldn't quit, you'd
> >be naturally upset.
>
> This is a very bad analogy. When I ran my business, if I needed
> something from a development kernel I could decide whether to assume
> the risk and use it now, or wait until Linus blessed it. But _I_ had
> to make that decision, not Linus. Not being insulated by layers of
> bureaucracy and bullshit artists, I could not whine to my employees and
> customers and push the blame onto Linus. The servers worked or they
> didn't and it wasn't Linus' fault either way.
>
Bob Rex
13 0
Rex,
Caldera already has a release with the 2.4 kernel on it.
It's their preview edition.
Why can't Compaq just do the same thing with RedHat 7?
Be truthful here. Compaq is just being a PISS ANT because they
can. Isn't that right Rex.
YOU GET NO WARRANTY OF ANY KIND WITH GNU/LINUX.
THERE IS NO STATEMENT OF GUARANTEED USABILITY WITH
GNU/LINUX NOR MICROSOFT PRODUCTS.
Compaq is being a PISS ANT REX. Don't you understand.
>
> >The Cavelaier attitude that "Suits have no right to expect anything"
> >is like saying "employees have no right to expect to be paid".
>
> If the suits want to control Linux, they are free to fork it at any
> time. They can have exactly what they want. But that would cost money
> and entail risk. Can't have that. It is much easier to stick with the
> main kernel and whine about Linus, just like they whine about Microsoft
> (not too much...don't wanna get sued). Well, at least with Linus they
> have options, even if they refuse to take them.
>
Bob Rex
13 0
What Linus does is his own damn business.
I'm just greatful that we have a Linus and
a GNU/LINUX.
>
> --
> -| Bob Hauck
> -| To Whom You Are Speaking
> -| http://www.haucks.org/
Good work Bob and Rex, I still like you.
I still do. But if Compaq want's to run this new kernel
then they JUST CAN DO IT THEMSELVES.
Linus's endorcement isnt' necessary for them
to fail in marketing.
Let me just say this about Compaq as I have
some experience with the company.
The Compaq of 10 years ago was a good little
company which made a very nice high quality
product which you could rely on for several
years of trouble free operation.
Lately, I have a MAJOR BITCH about
Presarios which just DIE in 2.2 years.
I bought my last company a slew of 12 of these
units and they all dies at 2.2 years +- 2 months.
My daughters just died at 2.3 years.
What is up with this shit!
I'm getting a little tired of this continual Compaq
thing and I'm almost convinced to go have
a word with a president or two and steer us
back to Dell where we can be safe.
Aside from this hardware issue we have them
bitching about this 2.4 kernel issue.
Well, Dell ain't bitchen.
Despite Rex, I haven't heard IBM bitchen.
I think Compaq has some problems which go beyond
that of just Linux.
--
Charlie
By 2005 Microsoft will be displaced by
LINUX - THE POWER OF A GNU GENERATION!
------------------------------
From: "javaduke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Is Linux some kind of a joke?
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 21:25:22 GMT
Worst part is that he does not have the the balls to display his proper
email address. Just because you have some wazoo branded computer with
components nobody on earth has ever heard of does not mean Linux is shit.
Get a proper computer with standard components (big brand components from
companys such as NVIDIA, Creative) and you will find that you will
experience no problems. Yes there are games for Linux, her they are
(available via lokigames):
Civilization: Call to Power
Myth II
Railroad Tycoon II
Eric's Ultimate Solitaire
Heretic II
Heroes III
Quake III Arena
Heavy Gear II
SimCity 3000
Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri
Soldier of Fortune
Descent3
MindRover
Unreal Tournament
Kohan: Immortal Sovereigns
As for USB devices grab the latest kernel (2.4test9) and compile it,
although it is not ready for production I have heard that it is pretty
stable.
javaduke
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Is Linux some kind of a joke or something?
> I mean I instaled Redhat and it looks like shit. No games, no support
> for my video card. No support for my soundcard or any of my USB
> devices...
>
> This has to be a joke?
>
> Why should I return to the 1980's just to run Linux?
>
> Linux is a piece of shit....
>
>
> The Whore...
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Bruce Schuck" <[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 13:32:20 -0800
"Andy Newman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> 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.
The trojan was running on a machine at the home of a Microsoft employee. I'm
assuming that person had VPN or dial-up access to Microsofts LAN.
The real lesson is: Say NO to VPN's. Say NO to dial-up access from outside
the secure LAN.
DO NOT TRUST ANY MACHINE OUTSIDE YOUR FIREWALL.
------------------------------
From: "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 13:33:45 -0800
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> No...what we need is a couple of assasins to knock off the leadership
> of this criminal organization.
Just the usual comment from the nutcase Unix fanatics.
And companies trust people like this?
Scary!
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[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 21:34:31 GMT
Bruce Schuck wrote:
> "Peter Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[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.
>
> So you suggest that no open source software is secure?
>
> I tend to agree with you. It's one of my beefs with Linux.
>
> Luckily Microsoft can now change their source code and keep those changes
> hidden.
>
> Linux users will always feel very afraid about the backdoors people could
> intorduce in their source.
>
No Bruce. Your dead wrong here.
Because of the OPEN source model the GNU/LINUX system is
light years ahead of Microsoft. And people couldn't break into
a root account if no telnet services or FTP services were offered.
And you have the power to do that Bruce.
Microsoft can't change the source code of the world in under 2 years
time.
Closed source doesn't come under the scrutiny of 200,000 developers
whilst Linux does.
Finally, if closed source is so secure then why the break in at Microsoft
in the first place.
Clearly, nothing you've said has any basis in reality.
>
> >
> > > 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.
>
> Actually, the QAZ trojan infected a Microsft employees home computer which
> was then used to browse some of the Microsoft LAN via an authorized VPN
> connection.
>
> Microsft caught the intruder when some accounts were created.
>
> I think the message is "NO HOME OFFICES GET ACCESS TO THE CORPORATE LAN."
>
> That will make many people unhappy. But it is a valid comment.
Microsoft did not catch the intruders until after they had downloaded software
for
3 straight months.
And those are the fact sir.
And it's also a fact that if the typical Microsoft shop doesn't find
an alternative OS in 2001 they will be paying a new price in viruses
and hacks due to this disaster.
And frankly they shouldn't go back.
--
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
******************************
