Linux-Advocacy Digest #406, Volume #30 Sat, 25 Nov 00 03:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (T. Max Devlin)
Re: The Sixth Sense (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: The Non Sense: people who are clueless about the WindowsNT registry... (was Re:
The Sixth Sense) (T. Max Devlin)
Time for another Lynn bait, this one's a beauty! (Jacques Guy)
Re: Linux=Stink*Stank*Stunk (Topaz Crow)
Re: Linux=Stink*Stank*Stunk (Jacques Guy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 02:14:22 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Curtis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 24 Nov 2000 13:11:39 -0500;
>T. Max Devlin wrote...
>> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 24 Nov 2000 12:34:10
>> [...]
>> >> And so now suddenly you're suggesting that others should give a shit
>> >> about languages they don't use, even though you just said previously
>> >> that you see no reason to do that yourself.
>> >
>> >They shouldn't, they give shit about what *they* are using.
>> >Got that?
>>
>> No, I don't "got that". You're prevaricating. They do care about what
>> they're using. That's why Linux has so many languages it supports. It
>> doesn't support the one or two you wanted, because you don't give a shit
>> about what language you're using, as long as you can get it on monopoly
>> crapware, because you're too brain-dead and deluded to recognize the
>> inferiority of such a solution.
>
>Inferior for what purposes? Can one ignore the application support that
>Windows offers.
Yes. And indeed, one must, if one is to consider the merits of the
operating system, rather than the merits of the applications.
>Win2k offers a stable environment in which I may run my
>preferred apps, all of which are not from MS.
Yes, it is a monopoly; we are aware of that. I think many may argue
about the term 'stable environment', but that's beside the point.
>I'd be beside you saying the same thing if Win9x was all there was to use
>to run the apps I wish to run.
Somehow, I doubt that.
>> IOW, your whole language rant was a
>> ruse, and had it not been language, you would have found some other
>> miscellaneous issue to try to discredit the more functional system in
>> order to defend your bogus choice to use monopoly crapware.
>
>More functional system to do what?
That's the point. Presuming the answer to that question is advance
makes for rinky-dink toys, not computers.
>It doesn't make sense using a more
>functional system if you're not interested in the greater functionality
>functionality it offers over the others. It doesn't make sense running
>this more functional OS, if it will not run the apps you wish to run in
>it.
You apparently aren't aware of the crucial nature of the application
barrier in maintaining the illegal OS monopoly. Or perhaps you just
want to pretend it isn't valid; I'm not sure.
>Most will benefit from the stability that Linux offers. But that's all it
>has to offer that's worth mentioning to the typical user. They can get
>the same level of stability using Win2k. If they hear that another OS
>which will run their apps more stably exists
Well, I guess lower prices never were a very attractive marketing point.
Not to mention that I see no reason to hand-wave stability (and no, W2K
merely approaches closer to such a level of stability than Win/DOS; it
is not even close to commensurate.)
As for whether they hear that another OS which will run their apps more
stably exist, you seem to propose that the applications predated the
operating system in the users experience. YOU might already be locked
into a Windows monopoly, unable or unwilling to use any other
applications, but most people don't have such a limited perspective.
>What good is an OS without apps to run on it? What good is BeOS when
>there are no apps for it. It's a fine OS, but useless without
>applications. Why the hell do you think 'Wine' exists, or Odin for OS/2
>or Soft Windows for the Mac?
>
>I find your line of argument largely pointless, isolated and impractical.
>You just wish to whine don't you?
Quite the opposite. You don't even have a line or argument; all you
have is recognition that the application barrier can maintain an
operating system monopoly almost indefinitely. Too bad Bill Gates beat
you to it; had you had the idea three decades ago, you might be today
the richest man in the world, but then your company would also be facing
the federal judiciary.
[...]
>> Most people who use computers do know English, and your fantasy that
>> catering to every minor language in the world is a free market response,
>> regardless of how hard you insist it is a valid explanation, is simply
>> not correct.
>
>Have you used any applications with multilanguage support and then take
>part in discussion groups for that said app? Please don't be silly.
Your argument neatly jumps from whether producing software for a certain
language is profitable to whether there are any users at all of such
software. To presume that supporting every language is worth the
investment can only be done if you are ignorant of all details.
Thinking in terms of monopolization allows that, of course. You just
have to look at the fact that MS still makes money, no matter how many
inefficient decisions they make, and viola. I never said that there
weren't people who benefit from multilanguage support, nor that there is
not a very large number of people who use computers and do not use
English.
>There are a number of apps that I use, that many users flock to because
>it supports their primary language (not English) when the close
>competition next door doesn't.
>
>If MS has the capital to invest in supporting these other languages, then
>it's to their benefit. I think you confuse monopolizing with using
>capital to better satisfy customers in this particular instance.
I think you confuse using capital with engaging in capitalism.
>> It is not profit which drives MS development; this has
>> been clearly admitted by those in charge: it is the protection of the
>> monopoly which guides their development.
>
>Give the customers what they want.
Make sure the customers never want anything except what you give them:
first rule of monopolization.
>> You may be too dumb to
>> understand the difference, but that doesn't prevent there from being
>> one.
>
>LOL! What a guy.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 02:14:24 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 24 Nov 2000 19:29:24
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 23 Nov 2000 22:55:44
>> [...]
>> >Windows support a lot of languages, including full translations of most
>of
>> >the popular software from Microsoft. (Windows & IE & Office the most
>notable
>> >of them, but not the only one.)
>> >Linux? I don't know.
>> >I *do* know that to the languages that *I* need, Linux is no alternative
>> >unless I plan to make a dist of my own.
>>
>> So you're just going along with the monopoly, haven't even examined
>> whether other systems meet your needs, and expect us to give a rat's ass
>> about your opinion of operating systems?
>
>Yes.
>Because the language thing is only a small reason why I like Windows.
>Unlike most people, I've a good knowledge in english, and I can handle all
>english system.
>I've experiance with several OS, including half a dozen or so linux dist
>(excluding versions), I choose windows because it's the one best suited to
>my need.
Why does that always sound so silly? "I chose the monopoly product
because it is best suited to my needs," such needs always to weigh
heavily towards application barrier issues, lack of competitive
alternatives, and the high cost of avoiding the more expensive solution.
You chose Windows because it has a monopoly, Ayende. I can't help it if
you didn't realize that at the time, but you really should be honest
with yourself. All these "reasons" you have for using Windows were
manufactured by Microsoft; they prevented anything else from fulfilling
those needs, as opposed to fulfilling them better or cheaper than
anybody else.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 02:14:26 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Curtis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 24 Nov 2000 13:29:14 -0500;
>T. Max Devlin wrote...
>> Perhaps from your perspective, but I assure you it is merely do to your
>> lack of experience. Anybody who would be satisfied with W2K simply
>> doesn't know enough about using computer *efficiently and effectively*
>> to be able to tell whether my statements are idiotic or not.
>
>You have totally lost perspective and you're too wrapped up in your own
>idiotic self-righteousness to see otherwise. You're really an idiot.
I'm sure it probably sounds that way to you. That's merely because its
the only thing about my statements you're paying any attention to, and
you don't know anything else about me than what I post here. OF COURSE
I seem to have a skewed perspective: you know nothing else about my
perspective than what you've read here.
>Or is this the typical usenet performance that everyone has to put up
>with?
>
>I won't dive into technical arguments since I'm a medical professional
>who just loves using his computer and loves a challenge. However, I do
>know enough to make a competent choice. I've use Win3.1, Win9x, Linux,
>BeOS, MacOS, OS/2, NT and now Win2k. I used OS/2 in particular for years.
>
>Win2k with Perl installed, a text editor that supports Perl seamlessly,
>as well as a decent e-mail client suites my purposes just fine where
>needing Linux type functionality is concerned. I can then enjoy the rest
>of the Windows apps available, running them in a stable environment.
>
>Don't come here with your crap and think I'm about to fall for it. I know
>personally and have corresponded with many experienced users as yourself
>and find your vitriolic rhetoric quite amusing to read.
I'm glad your personal experience has turned out so well for you. Too
bad your perspective is so narrow, however. One might even say that you
simply don't have any perspective at all. When given a choice, I'd
prefer to have had a perspective and "lost", then to have never had one
at all. ;-)
You've already fallen for it, buddy-boy. Why do you think you aren't
still using OS/2, right now, considering it is a technically superior
system, and would meet your needs much better, if MS hadn't broken the
law to prevent that?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 02:14:28 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Curtis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 24 Nov 2000 13:58:50 -0500;
>T. Max Devlin wrote...
>> >> >That's a nice broad statement that makes you look good and MS fans look
>> >> >bad. :=) Care to give some practical examples?
>> >>
>> >> Ever tried to adjust your file associations? Ever tried to organize
>> >> your desktop, only to have Windows "forget" where things are supposed to
>> >> be? Ever sent someone a script that would configure their computer for
>> >> them as a launchable email attachment? These are off the top of my
>> >> head. Feel free to check Deja News for T. Max Devlin; I'm sure you'll
>> >> find plenty more examples. I'll try to keep the thread updated with
>> >> immediate examples as I come across them.
>> >
>> >Yes, yes & yes.
>>
>> I was asking Curtis. I knew you'd just handwave, thereby strengthening
>> my suspicions that you are an inexperienced kid, despite your eagerness
>> to claim a great deal of intricate familiarity with Windows.
>
>Yes, I've adjusted file associations without difficulty.
And you still don't recognize how badly implemented it is? Well, you're
not a professional technologist, so I guess that's quite possible. Let
me tell you; there were tons of complexity which you luckily managed to
avoid in those experiences when you adjust file associations "without
difficulty". I'm glad it worked out for you, but it merely indicates
that your adjustments were rather trivial.
>Yes, I've rearranged and organised my desktop. Windows always remembers,
>unless it was shutdown unexpectedly as with a hang. However, I haven't
>used Win9x since early 1996 so I haven't been having unexpected shutdowns
>when using WinNT or 2k since I've been using them.
>
>The last thing? No I haven't done that.
Yes, I knew that, too.
[...]
>Is there any practical reason for me to know more than I do presently.
Yes. The practical reason is that you don't know for what practical
reason you will need to know more than you do presently.
>I
>make associations without difficulty.
Relatively speaking, I assure you.
>I realised that I can only
>associate one default application with a particular filetype. An annoying
>limitation at times. However I can associate multiple applications for a
>particular filetype. Being able to associate applications on a per file
>basis is great but not a show stopper for me, meaning that I will not
>drop Windows and it's advantages to embrace that functionality in another
>OS.
>
>Anything else?
Yes. What do you do if the file type doesn't already exist? Or if you
wish to change, not the association of an extension to a file type, but
the file type to the application? Or if you want to re-arrange which
extensions belong to which pre-existing file types? (This last would
be, for instance, if you wanted multiple extensions to remain part of
one file type, and multiple extensions to change to a different file
type.)
[...]
>I only really care about the end result.
Well, the end result sucks, whether you've personally encountered a
reason to recognize it or not.
>Any particular OS you use will
>never be perfect.
And monopoly products will never be competitive.
>You choose the one that offers the best balance for
>your needs, monopolies and all being considered. :=)
If you consider the monopolies, you end up having to either throw out
the balance of your needs, or just avoid any consideration at all, and
go along with the monopoly. :-(
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 02:14:31 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Stuart Fox in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 24 Nov 2000 17:46:31
GMT;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 23 Nov 2000
>> [...one line obnoxious rant on a huge friggen post, plus that
>goddamn
>> sig file, like usual...]
>>
>> Sorry, old bean, but its back into the killfile for you.
>>
>
>You see Max, we do agree on something :)
I've told you before, Stu. You agree with me on everything; you just
don't know it, yet, because you haven't worked things out far enough.
;-)
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Non Sense: people who are clueless about the WindowsNT registry...
(was Re: The Sixth Sense)
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 02:14:35 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Curtis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 24 Nov 2000 13:31:28 -0500;
>T. Max Devlin wrote...
>> I don't know about you, but I think programs often work damn slow on
>> Windows, and it notably seems to be because of the registry. I think
>> the fact is that, since a hierarchical database is not properly
>> "searched", a record not being "located" so much as "called", they
>> *don't* hash or cache it, explicitly!
>
>Gosh ... which applications are you using? You are so hypocritical.
How is it hypocritical to note that there is no free market, and I am
not immune to the problems this causes? If I were to say that it is
important there were a free market, but it is feasible for me to easily
and cheaply avoid Microsoft platforms, wouldn't that be contradictory?
I'm using Agent, BTW, because it is the best product on the monopoly
platform. I'm using Office, because it is what my employer provides,
and converting would not be worth it, so long as the monopoly is free to
make my life more difficult, even after I have ceased using their
products personally.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 07:43:33 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Time for another Lynn bait, this one's a beauty!
Sorry for spamming so many newsgroups on this problem.....but could use some
help with a problem....
Someone (i.e. no one is taking the credit/blame for this one!) set a
password on the content advisor for IE4.0....no one can recall doing it, and
whatever the settings are, we can't even go the sites like MSNBC (or
microsoft.com) in IE anymore - we are constantly asked for the supervisor
password.
I've looked through the sysedit, the registry, and explored all the hidden
files I could think of to try and find the password. Of course, you can't
un-install IE either without major complications. Trying to load IE5 or
IE5.5 over IE4 doesn't work.
Does anyone know how to find the password, or what DLL's or other files need
to be deleted to be able to use IE again? Thanks in advance....
============================================================================
And if you're good, and you eat your vegetables, I'll tell you how Microsoft
addles the brain. It's rather technical, it has to do with sorting
dictionary entries in languages which use diacritics, and it's been
thrashed on sci.lang. There's a fellow there who can't get his
Excel spreadsheet to sort Chinese words properly unless the tone
follows the last letter of each syllable, so he holds that
the tone mark can only be there and not anywhere else. For example:
"China" has to be written zhong1guo2, not 1zhong2guo nor zho1ngguo2
(the digits here represent the tones, in real Chinese transcriptions,
they are accents over the vowels). The poor fellow does not realize
that the obvious solution is to write a small routine that, before
comparing two strings, gathers all the tone-signs and moves them
to the end of the strings! E.g. zho1ngguo2 --> zhongguo12,
go4ngcha3nzhu3yi4 --> gongchanzhuyi4334. Completely trivial, but
for a Microsoft (tm) user, "I can't do it in Excel, so it
can't be done". He's even got a web page at geocities where he
argues the point:
http://www.geocities.com/jlzhang_2000/bdf4.html
(Don't bother, it's pathetic).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Topaz Crow)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux=Stink*Stank*Stunk
Date: 25 Nov 2000 07:49:07 GMT
Reply-To: alt.anonymous.messages;ATTN: Topaz Crow
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000 02:02:20 GMT, Sir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The Grinch couldn't have said it better himself. I've spent the last 4 days
>attempting to install Mandrake 7.2 on 3 different systems and have yet to
>find myself successful on any of them.
>Is this really what Linux is about because I just have a real hard time
>understanding what is so difficult about installing Linux. I have installed
>many windows systems and have never had a problem that wasn't easily
>solved. This Linux crap is a horror story by comparison.
>You can keep your half dead penguins because Linux in it's current state is
>headed down the drain.
>Nobody in their right mind would run this piece of crap especially when
>alternatives exist all of which are better than Linux.
>
>I'm heading to FreeBSD because it can't possibly be any worse than this
>Linux trash.
>
Don't blame linux for your inadequacies. If you can't fly a plane does that
mean all planes are crap?
--
Topaz Crow -- No replies by email, sorry.
Reply to alt.anonymous.messages Subject: ATTN: Topaz Crow
PGP/GPG: DSS: 0xBADA36EA RSA: 0x357245A1
Using SuSE 7.0 and Slackware 7.1
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 08:11:45 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux=Stink*Stank*Stunk
Topaz Crow wrote:
> Don't blame linux for your inadequacies. If you can't fly a plane does that
> mean all planes are crap?
He's likely the same fellow who hired a Mercedes to
tour Germany. "Nice car, but noisy above 50mph".
Only familiar with automatic transmissions, he had
it in second gear all the time. Probably an urban
legend, but who knows?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
