Linux-Advocacy Digest #354, Volume #30 Tue, 21 Nov 00 22:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: The Sixth Sense (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: LINUX USED BY THE NEW ZEALAND ARMY FOR ARMED FORCES SIMULATION:
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Mandrake 7.2 and KDE2 - Congrats ! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Mandrake 7.2 and KDE2 - Congrats ! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (Russ Lyttle)
Re: Linux for nitwits (Glitch)
Re: Another happy Linux user (kiwiunixman)
Re: Linux for nitwits (Glitch)
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (Russ Lyttle)
Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (Russ Lyttle)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: The Sixth Sense (The Ghost In The Machine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 02:12:23 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Donovan Rebbechi
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on 13 Nov 2000 06:03:51 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Mon, 13 Nov 2000 06:53:18 +0200, Ayende Rahien wrote:
>>
>
>>Make moziila support activex, and other such standards, and I don't see a
>>reason why you can't.
>
>ActiveX is not a standard
I for one would surmise that ActiveX is a de facto standard.
It's not a particularly secure one, though -- although recent
advancements might at least mitigate the user trying to
use untrusted applets.
(I'm also not sure how well documented a "standard" it is.)
>
>>> > And when the agreement with Citirix runs out, there will be RDP clients
>>for
>>> > all OS.
>>
>>IE now run on three OS that I know of. Win*, Mac, Solaris.
>
>No, it doesn't "run" on Solaris, it crawls.
You would too, if you had to drag along half of your
own operating system along for the ride. :-)
(At least, such is my understanding. I suspect that Microsoft
could port IE to Linux, but why? :-) )
>
>--
>Donovan
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: LINUX USED BY THE NEW ZEALAND ARMY FOR ARMED FORCES SIMULATION:
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 02:14:07 GMT
And where are they today?
Protecting the sheep in the fields?
Give me a break....
claire
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 14:56:27 +1300, kiwiunixman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Historically, New Zealand has had the largest contingent of troops, per
>capita, when New Zealand particpates in any war. Where was the o'l US
>of A during WWI and WWII? wasn't in there until the ol' Japanese bombed
>perl harbour. Get ya bloody facts right claire or keep your trap shut!
>
>kiwiunixman
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> I didn't realize New Zealand had an army?
>>
>> claire
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 21 Nov 2000 22:37:04 +1300, kiwiunixman
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Read the story below:
>>>
>>> http://www.stuff.co.nz/inl/index/0,1008,497306a1896,FF.html
>>> Who said Linux wasn't ready for the big league?
>>>
>>> kiwiunixman
>>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Mandrake 7.2 and KDE2 - Congrats !
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 02:17:37 GMT
So he can't get his CD writer and DVD working and you call this a
success?
The apps are "not quite there?"
USB is there but not by default?
Is this the best you can do?
You must be a fucking idiot.
All of these things worked perfectly for me under Win2k and BTW I
didn't have any greyed out Netscape menues either.
Try again asshole....
claire
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 15:01:56 +1300, kiwiunixman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>good on ya chum. Claire (if you are reading), for every nitwitt who
>complains of Linux's "Complexity" there are 5 like this guy who have
>been able to set up Linux flaulessly on their machine. Claire, if you
>"friends" are experiencing problems, give them the book, "Linux for
>complete and utter fuck witts Vol 1".
>
>kiwiunixman
>
>James wrote:
>
>> Guys,
>>
>> Have just spent a few days playing with ML 7.2 using KDE2. Must admit that
>> I am very impressed with the improvements. Even between ML 7.1 and 7.2.
>> Now USB printing, USB scanning is working (albeit not by default). And my
>> modem and ppp worked first time in KDE2.
>> In fact all my hardware that I have tested is working OK, including UDMA-66
>> on /dev/hda. Still have to try out the specific capabilities of my
>> CD-Writer (an HP9310) and DVD reader, however.
>>
>> Well done Linux community! You now have a desktop which may stand a chance
>> against W2k. The apps are not quite there yet. E.g., downloaded Netscape
>> 6 which is even worse than Netscape 4.7 (why is the file>page_setup menu
>> grayed out? Cannot even select landscape mode when printing).
>>
>> The system seems pretty fast - once I set up UDMA-66. Is there any way
>> that I can determine whether my graphics system, a NVidia GeForce256 made
>> by GigaByte, is optimally configured? Dragging screens seem a bit sluggish.
>>
>> James :-)
>>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.sux,alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Mandrake 7.2 and KDE2 - Congrats !
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 02:18:06 GMT
So he can't get his CD writer and DVD working and you call this a
success?
The apps are "not quite there?"
USB is there but not by default?
Is this the best you can do?
You must be a fucking idiot.
All of these things worked perfectly for me under Win2k and BTW I
didn't have any greyed out Netscape menues either.
Try again asshole....
claire
On Wed, 22 Nov 2000 15:01:56 +1300, kiwiunixman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>good on ya chum. Claire (if you are reading), for every nitwitt who
>complains of Linux's "Complexity" there are 5 like this guy who have
>been able to set up Linux flaulessly on their machine. Claire, if you
>"friends" are experiencing problems, give them the book, "Linux for
>complete and utter fuck witts Vol 1".
>
>kiwiunixman
>
>James wrote:
>
>> Guys,
>>
>> Have just spent a few days playing with ML 7.2 using KDE2. Must admit that
>> I am very impressed with the improvements. Even between ML 7.1 and 7.2.
>> Now USB printing, USB scanning is working (albeit not by default). And my
>> modem and ppp worked first time in KDE2.
>> In fact all my hardware that I have tested is working OK, including UDMA-66
>> on /dev/hda. Still have to try out the specific capabilities of my
>> CD-Writer (an HP9310) and DVD reader, however.
>>
>> Well done Linux community! You now have a desktop which may stand a chance
>> against W2k. The apps are not quite there yet. E.g., downloaded Netscape
>> 6 which is even worse than Netscape 4.7 (why is the file>page_setup menu
>> grayed out? Cannot even select landscape mode when printing).
>>
>> The system seems pretty fast - once I set up UDMA-66. Is there any way
>> that I can determine whether my graphics system, a NVidia GeForce256 made
>> by GigaByte, is optimally configured? Dragging screens seem a bit sluggish.
>>
>> James :-)
>>
------------------------------
From: Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 02:18:49 GMT
mlw wrote:
>
>>
> At last we can pull this thread back to the original premise:
>
> C++ is not strictly an OO language, it is a super set of C with a rich
> set of features which facilitate OO design.
>
> The whole point is that procedural code can be written just as easily in
> C++ as in C, but the big win are the features of C++ which are not part
> of C.
>
> A procedural approach can be used with C++, just as in C, but "inline"
> are officially part of the language and variables can be declared
> anywhere in the scope of the brackets. C++ offers better type checking
> and function overloading and a lot of features that are compile time
> based. Code compiled as C++ code has NO degradation than if it were
> compiled as C code, but can be more efficient because the compiler is
> smarter.
>
> If you want to write OOP software, which, if designed correctly, can be
> more efficient and easier to maintain than OO C code, C++ is the only
> way to go.
>
> --
> http://www.mohawksoft.com
OK, lets agree that one procedural language is as good (in general) as
another.
Lets also agree that you can use C++ as either a procedural language or
a OOP language.
Now, on a distributed open source project such as Linux ( or GNU) for
example, how do you enforce conventions that result in understandable
code? One contributor uses the procedural subset, another uses an OOP
subset, there are dozens of conflicting class hierarchies, etc.
With C its a non-problem. There is an established C culture with lots of
extant proven code and an (mostly) agreed upon objective way of judging
code. (Code gets rejected because it isn't "elegant". Most C programmers
agree that it wasn't "elegant" :) That does not exist with C++. But
again I ask, If you are going to use C++ as a procedural language, why
not just use the simpler C?
I disagree with your statement that C++ is a superset of C. If it were
then all C++ compilers would compile all C programs, no exceptions. But
enough of that.
--
Russ Lyttle, PE
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 21:23:20 -0500
From: Glitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux for nitwits
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> You must be a real idiot then because at least where I live the cable
> company comes and sets the entire thing up. Unfortunately they haven't
> reached my street yet and if you happen to mention Linux, they will
> not come at all.
They won't come b/c they are too stupid to know anything about Linux and
think that Windows is the only OS in the world.
Besides, what's hooking a cable modem up to a computer have to do with
using "Direct Cable Conncetion" in Windows? DCC allows to computers to
be hooked up using the parallel port, which like the person below, I
have yet to get to work. However I *have* been able to install Linux on
my laptop using NFS over my personal LAN and didn't have any trouble.
>
> claire
>
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2000 18:37:49 -0500, "Clifford W. Racz"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> First, I too am a Linux nitwit, but unfortunately
> >> your solution to install Linux on your laptop is
> >> already supported by Windows 9x. "Direct Cable
> >> Connection" uses the parallel port to directly
> >> connect computers together in Windows, thereby
> >> allowing the same procedure to work in Windows as
> >> it did in Linux.
> >
> >A "direct cable connection" is the biggest PITA I have ever dealt with wrt
> >Windows. I have yet to get 1 to work. I would rather use Linux than rely
> >on that.
> >
> >
> >
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another happy Linux user
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 15:16:05 +1300
There was actually quite an abusive post after several of his (Jaques)
posts. Claire, IMHO, I do not really care if you run windows and
believe that it is the cream of the crop. I base my Linux/UNIX advocacy
on experience (approx. 5 years), using both Commercial UNIX's (IRIX (on
an O2) and Solaris (both x86 and Sparc)) and freeware (Linux and FreeBSD
(both x86)). I know it is a sad fact that there are certain distros
that are not properly intergrated resulting in disgruntled users,
however, due to the fierce competition between Linux Distributors, the
quality and intergration will increase, although many of the distro's
may be a little rough around the edges, the best intergrated Linux
Distro I have found was SuSE Linux Pro 7.0, although it did cost me
$NZ189.95, I believe that it was money well spent, 3 books, 6 CD's and a
Rego card, all the ingrediants for a night of fun! :)
kiwiunixman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The truth can sometimes be painful Frank.
>
> BTW why didn't any of you Penguinista's complain when Jaques"le-foot"
> the bare foot pirate (a linonut par excellance) kept posting Windows
> user troubles for me to fix. Which I did.
>
> claire
>
>
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2000 22:54:18 +0100, "Frank Van Damme"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> CL,
>>
>> didn't _someone_ or maybe even more people draw your intention on the
>> fact that ngs are not made to manually transfer the contents of one to
>> another? This is the most idiot way of illustrating Linux' 'bad' quality.
>>
>> Try discussing broad topics instead of bombing these ng with junk. we
>> know you aren't satisfied with Linux, others are. We know you just love
>> Windows, I don't, so be it.
>
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 21:25:34 -0500
From: Glitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux for nitwits
> Another thing you should realize before you
> label me some kind of Windows nut, is that there
> is a very easy way to install Linux on a laptop
> that has no CDROM: pull the hard drive out of the
> laptop and mount it on an existing desktop with
> a CDROM drive. You might have to change some of
> the X Windows settings if the distribution is
> fairly automatic (i.e., "forces you to accept its
> choices over your own") but you will still end up
> with a hard drive that has Linux installed on it,
> without anything more complicated than plugging
> it into an IDE cable or adjusting the SCSI ID#.
You must not have ever owned a laptop, or at least never looked at a
laptop hard drive.
Laptop drives don't use the standard 40pin IDE cable that desktops use
so your idea won't work. What I did when my sony laptop didn't have a
built-in cdrom was use a boot floppy and install linux over my LAN using
my 2nd desktop as an NFS server. I entered the info the installation
program was asking for and I was installing Linux within a few minutes
(after I picked out what packages I wanted from the plethora that comes
with Suse).
>
> Put it back into your laptop, and Linux will
> reconfigure your hardware settings when it boots
> up again (at least, RedHat with Kudzu does this),
> or you can do it using one of the various "Linux
> for Dummies"-type books.
>
> > > Debatable, for various reasons. One issue is support by a
> > > reputable vendor. (I would include Cygwin, now owned by
> > > RedHat, as a reputable support vendor, but I'm not sure
> > > everyone would, especially since Microsoft has effectively
> > > brainwashed so many.)
> >
> > I have to agree. I was sitting in a coffee shop and
> > nearly choked on my coffee when I heard someone state
> > quite authoritatively, "Linux, that runs on Microsoft."
> > Obviously the person was ignorant about what an
> > operating system is.
>
> Considering the plethora of Linuxes that run using
> LOADLIN and no repartitioning, its an easy mistake
> to make.
>
> > >>#3. Linux will never be the OS for nitwits.
> > >One advantage for Linux is that nitwits can't screw it up,
> > >if they don't have root access. :-) I for one would
> > >think that this makes it especially suited for children.
> >
> > I use it on my notebook to take notes in class and I
> > am an Arts major, so I like to think that I am living
> > proof that nitwits can learn something about Linux.
> > {I use Windows at school, but only because the
> > Unix systems are not available to Arts students}
> >
> > I love Linux and FreeBSD for all the free software.
> > I cannot find software with the same capability
> > under Windows for free. (Grip is a prime example)
>
> Do you mean "GIMP"?
>
> In any case, if you load up the Linux system in GUI
> mode and hand it to a child, your child will be just
> fine with it. Use something similar to computers the
> child may have used in school (such as Enlightenment
> or FVWM95, or whatever KDE comes with) and the child
> shouldn't even notice much of a difference from
> computers s/he is used to using. The "username
> password" thing may even get a smile out of the child,
> thinking that s/he has password protected files on
> your home computer (you can educate them about "root
> access" later on in life :).
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 02:23:00 GMT
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Tue, 21 Nov 2000 23:30:15 GMT, Russ Lyttle wrote:
> >mlw wrote:
>
> >So? Want to compare procedural C++ with procedural C? OOP with
> >procedural? If the program is to be procedural why use C++ at all? The
>
> Using procedural functions doesn't preclude using OO code. C++ is a multi
> paradigm language after all. I think you'd have a hard time convincing C++
> programmers to stay away from the math library because it's "procedural".
>
Ever try to direct or maintain a "multi paradigm " project?
> >fact is that, in general, procedural languages/designs produce faster
> >tighter code than OOP languages/designs.
>
> But there's also the 80/20 rule.
>
> BTW, you still haven't addressed my observation that cout.write() actually
> performs quite well. Which would seem to lend strength to the argument that C++
> performs quite well if you know how to program efficiently.
>
Haven't tried it because one function does not a million lines of code
make. I only posted an example of *why* C++ code is not used in projects
such as Linux. Flea bites, true, but lots of flea bites exist. It is
easy to show how to correct one flea bite, but not how to stop all flea
bites at once.
"Its hard to remember that your objective is to drain the swamp when you
are up to your a** in alligators" -- old Creole saying.
> --
> Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
> elflord at panix dot com
--
Russ Lyttle, PE
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 21:24:18 -0500
Keldon Warlord wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Keldon Warlord wrote:
> > >
> > > "Uncle Fester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Now if it only had some decent multimedia programs to run like
> > > > > SoundForge or Cooledit or Cubase or Cakewalk or DVD or some Direct-X
> > > > > plugins then we would be in business.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Linux would be worth it just to finally break free of DirectX!
> > > > You're right though, we're missing a lot of programs in LinuxLand.
> > > > Let's see... Happy99, Melissa, Navidad...
> > > >
> > >
> > > are all Linux users this dense or just you? he said DVD and other
> multimedia
> > > programs....or is it insane jealousy that the MPAA won't give away those
> DVD
> > > source codes for FREE like the other dozen brainwashed companies that
> have?
> > >
> >
> > So...what you're saying is...being held hostage to the likes of
> > Sony and Time-Warner is a good thing?
> >
> >
>
> no...what I'm saying is that this is the only DVD player that I have...and I
> sure as hell don't want to mess it up!
>
And how is Linux going to overwrite the firmware ROMS
in your DVD player exactly?
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
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: Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 02:26:10 GMT
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 Nov 2000 01:30:48 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
> >There are also some not-so-pretty issues regarding STL on Microsoft.
> >I think Microsoft C++ is the only one where one has to use
> >'std::map', 'std::vector', etc., whereas everyone else is more
> >or less sensible --
>
> Wrong. The way VC++ (and practically every other compiler) does this
> is right. g++ does it wrong. This is very annoying because it makes
> it easy to write nonportable code in g++.
>
I write G++ code that runs in Windows and Solaris and Linux all the
time. How often do you write Solaris code using VC++?
> Get yourself an up-to-date reference (like Stroustrup's latest)
>
> > although part of that sensibility is because G++
> >didn't get around to implementing namespaces until rather recently. :-)
>
> And they still haven't got around to conforming to the standard wrt the
> standard namespace.
>
> >(Side point: Microsoft's C++ implementation of ostrstring sucks eggs:
> >O(N^2) time problem because of the way it allocates memory. I've
> >seen this in no other system, and it's had me do some ugly workarounds.)
>
> If you're talking about ostrstream (there's no ostrstring), it's obsolete.
>
> ostringstream (int the <sstream> header) should be used instead. This is
> another flaw in g++ (which doesn't ship this header, though you can download
> it)
>
> --
> Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
> elflord at panix dot com
--
Russ Lyttle, PE
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 21:36:07 -0500
sfcybear wrote:
>
> In article <fJfS5.9250$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8vbkvc$iii$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Translation: Microsoft is incapable of writing an accurate
> "uptime"
> > > > > program for LoseDOS Neutered Technology.
> > > > >
> > > > > Why is that?
> > > >
> > > > Well, neither is Sun or or the Linux developers either. Since
> both of
> > > those
> > > > give incorrect results after a ceratain amount of time as well.
> > > >
> > > > When will you learn that you should watch what you say, since the
> same
> > > > argument can be used against you?
> > >
> > > The Linux Unix uptime has always been as accurate as the system
> clock
> > > for up to 497 days. As you have pointed out that not only is the
> length
> > > of time that NT records it 1/10th of that, it also was not accurate
> > > (reporting random times). The statement was about ACCURACY. The
> Linux
> > > and Unix programers have proven them selves far better than the NT
> > > programers in this regard
> >
> > Only one version of NT ever had random uptime reporting problems.
> SP5. It
> > jus so happens that SP5 is probably the most common service pack being
> used
> > on most web servers.
>
> That still leaves the FACT that NT uptime clocks are only acurate for
> 49.7 days while Unix clocks are 10 times more acurate than that.
> remaining accurate for 497 days. BTW, I thought service pack were to FIX
> problems, not create them! looks like the programers that worked on
> service pack 5 didn't get that training.
Microsoft programmers have training?
coulda fooled me.
>
> >
> >
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
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] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 02:36:23 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Bruce Schuck
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Tue, 14 Nov 2000 16:41:21 -0800
<5XkQ5.126727$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Bruce Schuck wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Well, MS underwent a big effort to undermine this joke,
>> > > blackmailing OEM's and playing other nasty tricks.
>> > > Can you tell why?
>> >
>> > Microsft gave away IE because Netscape gave their product away for free
>you
>> > twit.
>>
>> Sorry, it's the other way around. Period.
>
>Nope. Netscape was always free to use.
>
>http://home.netscape.com/newsref/pr/newsrelease8.html
Sorry. Technically, a later version of Netscape had a trial
period of about 30 days; after that, one should pay for the
software (I forget precisely how, but presumably a check to
Netscape would have taken care of that). This was about the 3.0
time period.
Did anyone bother? Unknown.
>
>"Netscape Navigator 1.0 is available for free downloading on the Internet
>for academic and non-profit use, as well as for free evaluation purposes."
It's not the first time that 1.0 was free, but 2.0 was not, of a
piece of software.
(It's also not the last; Mi/X is no longer freeware. Sigh.)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
