Linux-Advocacy Digest #995, Volume #29 Thu, 2 Nov 00 00:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! (Mike Marion)
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! (Mike Marion)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Steve Mading)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Why Linux is great ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: solution to the Msoft problems ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux (JoeX1029)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: $1,000 per copy for Windows. ("Les Mikesell")
Re: More on Megashit security ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
[My $0.02] The Indrema Box (OS2nLinux)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 04:00:03 GMT
In article <8tqocl$t78$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> INI files where the way it went.
> And it went *badly*
And the registry is certainly no improvement. I run Norton WinDoctor on
customer boxen daily, and finding 50 to 100 "ActiveX" errors in the
registry is not uncommon. If there were that many errors in the config
files in the "/etc" directory in Linux, Linux probably wouldn't even
boot. I don't know whether that's faint praise or damnable condemnation
for the Windows registry, but having 50 "ActiveX" corruptions in Windows
can keep programs from running, from stopping, aborting abnormally, or
doing all sorts of strange things without offering the victim^W user a
clue as to what the problem really is.
I'm also an IBM AIX sysadmin; AIX has something similar to the Windows
registry called the Object Repository; it sucks. And it sucks galaxies
through a soda straw. The whole idea sucks; having a cryptic, binary,
unreadable, uneditable database for system components that the entire
operation of the system depends on. It sucked on AIX, and it sucks on
Windows. I hope the AIX Object Repository rots and dies, and I wish the
same fate for the Windows registry.
The Windows registry was a bad idea badly executed.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 04:14:10 GMT
Christopher Smith wrote:
> *shrug*. I ran Word 95 on Win95 at school for some time on a 386 w/12MB
> RAM. It was usable.
Bah.. I had a 486 when I first got 95 and couldn't stand it, I had to upgrade
right away. Just the OS takes up more then 12 meg so you're swapping as soon
as you boot.
> Using a window manager like KDE or GNOME, I find that difficult (nay,
> impossible) to believe.
There were many wms before KDE and Gnome you know.... fvwm had a very small
footprint and ctwm was barely bigger but added a ton of functionality.
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc. - http://www.miguelito.org
Sworn in by a fool, and vouched for by a scoundrel... I'm a lawyer at last.
-- The Rainmaker.
------------------------------
From: Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 04:15:51 GMT
Chad Myers wrote:
> I had to install NetWare 3.11 from floppies once... I think it had
> somewhere in the neighborhood of 50 floppies? I could be wrong, but
> it was some ungodly amount. Inevitably, Disk 24 would be bad and would
> screw the whole installation.
One of the companies that makes a tester unit we have at work (which runs
Solaris 2.4 x86.. how's that for up to date? :) ) sent their Y2k patches last
year on about 30 floppies! I guess they never heard of this neat invention
called a CD-ROM drive.
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc. - http://www.miguelito.org
Sworn in by a fool, and vouched for by a scoundrel... I'm a lawyer at last.
-- The Rainmaker.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 04:23:30 GMT
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:XuVL5.5529$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > To me the thing came of age in 1994. Before Win95.
>
> Remember, there were something like 100,000 copies of Win95 "Final beta"
> available since late 1994.
But up through the initial win95 release, IE was only included in
OEM installs and in the Plus pack. In fact, until OS/2 warp was
released including a web browsers Microsoft was claiming that
they would never have a free one.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: 2 Nov 2000 04:20:16 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Relax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:8tndv0$mds$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Relax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> : ..but it is a major one. If you can't get people to write apps, your
:> : platform is dead.
:>
:> Whoosh! right over your head. The point is that it doesn't matter
:> whether or not *PAST* apps use the feature or not. What matters
:> is whether or not it is possible to use the feature on a *NEW* app
:> you create today. That's why asking how many already existing
:> apps use it is a totally irrelevant question.
: OK, it is possible to use the new feature today. How many apps are (will)
: take advantage of it is still unclear but let's put this aside as it won't
: be easy to find out.
:> :> The users don't see the
:> :> difference between the old and the new techniques.
:>
:> : They 'see' it indirectly. When a massive toolkit is linked into an app
: and
:> : there is many instances of that app running concurently, they may feel a
:> : performance hit.
:>
:> Not with the way libraries and executables work in Unix - many instances
: of
:> the same program in memory end up having only one copy of the code in RAM,
:> and the only thing that gets duplicated for each process is the data
: (stack
:> and heap).
: Can you say that for all Unix implementations? If I recall correctly, fork()
: used to copy the whole process memory to the child's address space.
: Beside that, Windows NT/2000 does exactly what you describe but goes an
: extra mile: data is shared too until one instance needs to modify it. At
: this very moment, the modifying process will get a private copy of the page
: it intends to modify. This is called Copy-On-Write. The advantage it that
: only the strict minimum gets copied.
That's what Linux does. It's had it for a while now. I don't know
enough details of the other Unixen to know if they do it too. I first
heard about copy-on-write in the kernel about 3-4 years ago, if memory
serves me right.
:> I've noticed that this problem isn't fixed by the way Windows does it,
:> since different Windows apps vary widely in the quality of their output.
:> The "quality" of the output depends more on the application code than
:> on the underlying drivers. Bad drivers can prevent good output, but
:> good drivers don't guarantee good output if the application program
:> doesn't use them intelligently. (For example, drawing to the printer
:> with the same code that draws to the screen, without using any variables
:> to take into account that the printer has a much higher pixel density.)
: This is were you show you've not used GDI. Device independent drawing frees
: you from details such as actual device resolution. The rasterizer will
: render at the device resolution but you still talk to GDI in arbitrary units
: of your choice, like inches and points.
Yet I still keep seeing programs that choose to use pixels directly,
making them render in different sizes on different resolutions. The
feature is there, but people aren't using it - kinda like you are
saying is happening with the X printing system discussed earlier.
:> : That also means that most apps
:> : will have their own built-in color management system which must be
:> : calibrated separately, they own fonts, etc. What a mess.
:>
:> Not true. Color management is in the postscript driver, not the app
:> code. The same is true with fonts too.
: So there is probably a similar implementation in the PCL driver, and every
: video card driver, every scanner and digital camera drivers etc... with as
: many color profiles formats.
: Windows 98 and 2000 have a built in color management system called ICM 2.0,
: which uses standard profiles (see www.color.org) for monitors,
: scanners/digital cameras and printers. All color devices automatically
: inherit the functionality and can take advantage of it, it's just a few
: mouse clicks away right there in the UI.
I can't speak to this, no knowing much about it, but I also don't
really care, since color management serves merely to tweak colors
slightly in ways too small for me to care about. (Ooh look, this
shade of magenta is 1% too dark, let's fix that...). I'm not saying
it's irrelevant for everybody - some people in the document printing
biz probably care - but I suspect most others don't care.
:> Incedentally, I do agree that from the programmer's point of view,
:> the method of having printer 'device contexts' like Windows does
:> is actually better, but not for any of the trumped up reasons you
:> mention above. It's better simply because it's simpler for the
:> programmer - that's it. As far as output prettiness goes, I don't
:> see an appreciable difference between Windows apps and Unix apps.
: At the end of the day, that's probably right. My point is that it's *much*
: easier on Windows because everything you need is built in and nicely
: integrated. You can count on it no matter where your app is running,
: workstation, server or both.
This is only a temporary deficit on Linux's part. The technology is
there now. It's just a matter of waiting for it to become ubiquitous,
which is pretty inevitable in the long run.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 04:36:29 GMT
"Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8tqc0e$buq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > >I know that this is probably hard for you to believe, but I'd say that
> the
> > >WWW didn't really mature until around early 1997, which is when
magazines
> > >*explaining* what the WWW actually was died out.
What does 'mature' mean? It really was an incremental change from
ftp and gopher (a similar but text-only system) usage that went back at
least
to the mid 80's.
> So what *is* your definition of a "mature" WWW then? Mine is when you've
got
> large numbers of people using it, when the content isn't just homepages,
> when business has entered, and when most people know about it.
Mine is when government and business use it for real work. It was
surprising at the time but government sites really lead the pack in
1993 and 1994 using it to replace more costly ways of distributing
public information. People were using Netscape on Mac's and
on Win3.1 with 3rd party TCP stacks to access it and the servers
were all unix. Maybe you think 'mature' happened when the vast
numbers of x-rated sites appeared a little later.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Why Linux is great
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 04:28:09 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> I've memorized the syntax. I've found I use sed so much, I know it
> pretty well now. It is extremely useful and powerful once you learn
it.
> Besides, it's nice having a language that auto-obfuscates.
My last job was decommissioning UNIX systems and porting DBMS's to MSFT
Access. "sed" was the tool of choice to generate importable MSFT quoted
comma-separated fields from Informix pipe-separated export files.
In my current job, I'm still using "sed", but this time it's to convert
MSFT CSV export files into something I can load into MySQL for serving
up webpages with PHP.
It doesn't seem to matter which way the OS pendulum swings with the
PHB's, I still keep getting to use my favorite OS to do the same things
with the same tools over and over again. Maybe next week the
powers-that-be might decide on using an IIS webserver; and it'll get
populated using Linux, not that anyone will care or know.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: solution to the Msoft problems
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 22:42:32 -0600
Microsoft did not ignore the consent decree. If they had, they would have
been found guilty of contempt of court. The judge ruled that MS was not in
violation of the consent decree.
That's why the DOJ brought the new trial, because they decided they wanted
to change their mind about how MS should be allowed to operate after they
signed the deal.
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8tqmts$6gj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> A lot of the companies that could have benefitted from your suggested
> solution have been driven to near insolvency by MSFT's anti-competitive
> practices. Remember, this present DOJ action was not the first against
> MSFT; there was a prior consent decree that MSFT agreed to and
> subsequently ingnored. MSFT is more than just a ruthless competitor;
> MSFT has repeatedly committed numerous criminal acts to ensure their
> absolute monopolistic dominance of the desktop market. The corrective
> actions proposed by Judge Jackson were, in fact, lenient considering the
> degree to which MSFT went to eliminate competition. And you can bet your
> bottom dollar that MSFT, like the proverbial leopard, won't change its
> spots.
>
> In other words, you're a day late and a dollar short. And pretty much
> without clue when it comes to MSFT business practices.
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029)
Subject: Re: Linux
Date: 02 Nov 2000 04:46:14 GMT
>On 01 Nov 2000 01:36:46 GMT, JoeX1029 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On 27 Oct 2000 23:27:37 GMT, JoeX1029 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>i tend to agree. GNU/Linux was not and is not for the desktop.
>>>
>>>I tend to disagree, GNU/Linux is most certainly for the desktop :)
>>>
>>>I should know, its been on my desktop exclusively since August97.
>>>
>>>
>>>Kind Regards
>>>Terry
>>>--
>>
>>What i meant was Linux is not ready for the mass desktop (ie average windoze
>>user).
>Sorry but I have to disagree, the average Windows user doesnt know a lot
>about anything, its all point n click.
I know thats why i said GNU/Linux is NOT for the desktop.
>
>> Moreover, I dont think it should be. Im decently certain theres no way
>>to make it completely idiot friendly (refer to mass desktop) and still
>reatin
>>the security/scalibilty/roubustness it currently enjoys.
>This just doesnt make sense to me ...
>Windows has NO security and no remote admin, Linux has these.
Thats what im saying! GNU/Linux cant be made like windoze (for the average
idiot) and still be a excellent, stable etc platform.
>
>If Linux was pre installed, then it would be far more secure than Windows, at
>least it has ths *capability*.
>
>None of these "average windows users" install Windows themselves, so why
>should
>they install Linux themselves ?
>
>A properly installed Linux box, would reduce the worldwide pain of having a
>desktop by a huge margin!
>
>No IloveYOU virii, no overwritten dlls, no lost security etc.
i fscking hate those damn dll's....
>
>Kind Regards
>Terry
>--
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 22:47:20 -0600
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"Bruce Scott TOK" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> A big event occurred here: the crash of comet SL/9 into Jupiter in July
> >> 1994. What made that one new is that due to the speed with which
> >> observatories were putting up press articles and pictures, much of the
> >> material was available _only_ via WWW. I had heard of it for a bit
less
> >> than a year before, but this event was what made me install Mosaic
under
> >> my home directory. A _lot_ of people got to know the web during the
> >> month or so all this was going on.
> >
> >Hmm.. Are you sure it was 94? I thought it was 95...
>
> You figured it was Microsoft. Turns out you were deluded. (Again.)
What the hell are you talking about? The subject I am responding to was
about the date of Shumaker-Levy and had nothing to do with MS.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 23:50:51 -0500
Relax wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Bruce Schuck wrote:
> > > So, it might cost you 10,000,000 retail for Oracle software and hardware
> and
> > ^^^^^
> >
> > $10,000,000 ??? Oh, really.
>
> They say you _have_ to buy all they recommend _and_ pay their consultants
> for tuning your system up to the point your web site is three times faster.
> They say is they can't do it, they give you a million [back].
If it's too outrageously expensive, then the whole exercise is pointless,
even from a promotional point of view.
And you know that, don't you.
--
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: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: $1,000 per copy for Windows.
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 04:52:43 GMT
"Chad Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:VY%L5.17040$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > >
> > Read the question - it shouldn't be a problem replacing *SOME* servers
on
> an
> > NT network with Win2K. W2K works fine (by all accounts - I have not
tried
> > it) with W2K, but how well do W2K servers co-operate with NT4 servers,
or
> > Unix servers, and with different clients (w2k, Win9x, NT4, unix)?
> >
>
> Fairly seamlessly. They are backwards compatible. NT4 workstations log
in
> fine. The only issue I had is the domain controllers need to be upgraded
> first.
Which means you have to pay for client licenses for everything
that authenticates against them, a change in policy from NT
pricing. And if you were using the samba NT domain controller
emulation, as you might expect, win2k clients are incompatible.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More on Megashit security
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2000 22:53:32 -0600
"Jacques Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Actually...I find that M$ deliberately cripples parts of
> its software. On comp.windows.misc a chap was asking how
> to get help on the DOS commands under Win95 -- HELP COPY
> doesn't work as it did under DOS6 and earlier.
Copy /?
> I was
> wondering why DOS7 could see my CD-ROM only _after_ I
> fired up the GUI. Simple: the relevant lines in
> AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS have been _commented out_
> by Win95 during its installation. Oh, I can think of
> reasons all right, but they are all lame. The true
> reason, it seems to me is the old "DOS ain't done
> until Lotus won't run".
No, the reason is that real-mode CD-ROM drivers often interfered with the 32
bit buffered driver, causing the CD to either not be detected under Windows,
or causing the CD-ROM to run in "compatibility mode", which is as much as
10x slower. It depended on the real-mode driver though. Some did not not
interfere, some did. MS made the assumption that most people will only use
the CD-ROM in windows, and if they want to use DOS, they'll use the "Boot to
MS-DOS" option which will install the cd-rom driver.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 23:51:41 -0500
gm wrote:
>
> On Sun, 29 Oct 2000 18:58:15 -0500, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> 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.
> >
> >Then why did Microsoft suffer 3+ months of unauthorized access from Russia?
>
> MS did not sneak hidden TCP/IP traffic past the MS haters. TCP/IP
> traffic was snuck past MS -- do you see the difference?
Pretty funny, isn't it.
--
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]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2000 23:55:11 -0500
Bruce Schuck wrote:
>
> "The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote
> > on Mon, 30 Oct 2000 17:43:32 -0500
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > [snip for brevity]
> >
> > >Microsoft admin: Better order pizza...the server's down...again...
> > >
> > >UNIX admin: zzzzzzzzz...oh? time to go home? Oh Good.
> > >Glad MY SHIT **WORKS***
> >
> > [.sigsnip]
> >
> > If this is accurate (one wonders), this may explain the good press
> > NT got until recently; after all, certain management types highly
> > prefer hard-working employees to those that sleep on the job
>
> Especially when the Unix admin should be investigating whether all the
> software is up to date.
Why "investigate" .... the vendors NOTIFY YOU IN ADVANCE.
>
> Considering how many holes there are in unix/linux packages ( can anyone say
> "resource strings" ) if the Admin is sleeping it's because someone else has
You really are delusional. At least resource strings can be tracked down
with a whole variety of tools...as opposed to the LoseDos Registry Settings
> broken root and is running the box nice and smooth so it will be up and
As opposed to NT, where all one has to do is get on the machine,
and there is not need to 'break root'...because you already have it!
> running for the DDOS atack on Yahoo.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (OS2nLinux)
Subject: [My $0.02] The Indrema Box
Date: 02 Nov 2000 04:59:51 GMT
www.indrema.com
deja vu. reminds me of Commodor 64 or the Amiga. The good-ole-days. |-)
I think I'll buy the Indrema.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
