Linux-Advocacy Digest #640, Volume #30 Mon, 4 Dec 00 02:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux ("kiwiunixman")
Re: Linux is awful ("Dennis Popov")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: how come Dell makes you buy Windows with all their PC's? ("kiwiunixman")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: OS tree - SOUND OFF! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: how come Dell makes you buy Windows with all their PC's? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Charlie Ebert)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 06:21:12 GMT
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> > The sad part is, the legal system WAS designed to handle crybaby losers
> > like Gore, however, the Gore lawyers, the almost entirely Democrat
> > controlled election system in Florida, and 7 Democratic activists -- er
> > -- FL Supreme Court Justices managed to ursurp the Constitutional
election
> > power from the FL legislature and make a mockery of the Rule of Law.
> >
> > But then, this is nothing new for the Democrats, take the Impeachment.
> > Clinton and Gore are bullet proof. Laws do not apply to them, so they
> > can bend it and stretch it to however they see fit. It's unfortunate
> > that there are so many willing accomplices willing to throw conscience
> > to the wind and do whatever he says no matter the Constitutional
> > ramifications.
> >
> > The really, really sad part is, the American public is too ignorant to
> > understand it, let alone get angered about it. A large portion of them
> > think Hilary is right when she wants to do away with the electoral
college.
> > If it were her druthers, she'd abolish the Constitution all together.
>
> I'd stop listening to AM radio if I were you. Start reading newspapers.
> Find some good history books. Start looking into the shenanigans of
> your own party.
HEAR HEAR....
------------------------------
From: "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 19:34:03 +1300
<snip>
> Or you can just get a real OS with a real windowing and display system
> that support advanced font rendering, color correction, aliasing or anti-,
> etc.
>
> -Chad
or chad, you could go and fuck yourself and your winbox.
kiwiunixman
------------------------------
From: "Dennis Popov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 01:29:40 -0500
200+ replies. god damn those wintrolls are good.
Skully1900 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Comparing Linux to Windows 2000 is like comparing the Space Shuttle to a
bottle
> rocket and Linux isn't the Space Shuttle. I just installed Mandrake 7.2
and I,
> and the 3 other people using it are not impressed at all. This is our
first
> venture into the world of Linux, and will be our last at least until Linux
can
> match Windows 2000 in some very basic area's. First off we used Mandrake
7.2
> complete from Mcmillan and you should be warned about the false
advertising on
> the box. First of all this is NOT a complete version of Linux if only for
no
> server version install offered. Also the tech support is for TWO INCIDENTS
via
> Email and for installation only. They don't tell you about the two
incident
> part on the box. We sent several questions, none of which were answered.
The
> install program is broken badly. If you type the command for expert setup
at
> the boot prompt which is supposed to turn off hardware checking etc, it
doesn't
> work. It still goes off on autopilot and tries to detect hardware anyway.
This
> was a major problem on a laptop we were trying to install on because it
kept
> detecting the wrong video chip and all we got on bootup was a white screen
with
> no way of killing it except power off. No killing the X-server and no way
into
> an alternet console. There was also no way around this because even on
boot up
> selecting i for interactive was interactive only up to starting X and it
did
> that no matter what we selected.
>
> On the other 2 systems things installed better but KDE 2.0 is very
unstable. It
> too locks up frequently, especially when exiting it but we can kill it and
it
> doesn't take things down. So now it was time to play with the systems. We
were
> able to set up the network ok and get Internet Connection Sharing up and
> running even easier than with Windows 2000 but why no dial on demand that
will
> work with kppp and the Gnome dialer? I know it can be done with scripts
but a
> newbie is going to use kppp which is set up as part of the install.
Security
> seemed preety good taking a trip over to Gibsons site. Most things seemed
to
> work, but there is a major problem and that is what is going to send
people
> back to Windows.
>
> Linux gui just looks terrible. No matter what screen fonts, resolution or
> refresh rate is picked it is simply hard on the eyes. Many of the Gnome
themes
> are dark and hard to see. Netscape is the worst in this reagard being
painful
> to look at even with imported Windows TT fonts using DrakConf. By contrast
> Microsoft Windows is smooth and crisp looking. Mind you were using an
Nvidia
> and a Matrox card, both of which look stunning on Windows. People are
going to
> take one look at this mess and they will return it because it looks so
boxy and
> awful.
>
> We have played with fonts, colors and themes and quite frankly have had
it.
>
> Between the crashing of the GUI, crappy look and yes the lack of quality
> (although there is no lack of quantity) applications, Linux is a non issue
> around here. It's off our systems and we have fired off a letter to
Mcmillin
> requesting a refund for deceptive packaging.
>
> Rozzi
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 00:39:14 -0600
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >That is what mlw originally specified.
>
> Only because that's the only possible way to do it in Windows.
Not true.
> >> If you mean "disabling", i.e. making it unavailable to any user,
locally
> >> and remotely, which is what is normally required, you can do it without
> >> rebooting, and without affecting any running application, except
> >> applications using TCP, of course.
> >
> >Same with NT. Under NT4, for instance, right click on Network
Neighborhood,
> >choose properties. Select the Bindings tab. choose All Protocols from
the
> >Show Bindings for dropdown. Click on TCP/IP and choose Disable. Choose
Ok.
> >It will rebind the protocols and ask you to reboot, however you don't
have
> >to (this is a long standing bug. NT asks you to reboot, but in almost
all
> >cases it's not necessary). Check your TCP connections, they no longer
work.
> >Go back in and reenable TCP/IP, still without rebooting and they work
again.
>
> Now go back and reboot, even though they work. They won't work, because
> its disabled, of course. Turn them back on. They won't work, until you
> reboot.
Not true. I tested what I said before I posted it. You do *NOT* have to
reboot. Do it yourself if you don't believe me.
> The "bug", unbeknownst to Erik, is that they don't require the reboot,
> not that they put the window up saying they do. Imagine the hell your
> apps will have trying to figure out what's not working, when the TCP/IP
> connection has been disabled, but not removed. Being disabled but not
> removed, after all, isn't a state that the OS recognizes. As indicated
> by the fact that you need to reboot to turn it back on, _unless you
> haven't rebooted yet_.
You do *NOT* have to reboot to turn it back on. I stated so specifically,
and I've tested it before saying it.
You don't know what you're talking about.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 00:41:34 -0600
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >
> > > I'm glad you pointed out that you CAN remove TCP/IP (and other
modules)
> > > from Linux, since you can't do that in any Windozzzzzzzzz version.
> > > Although you might be able to remove some DLLs and put up with chronic
> > > error messages (?)
> >
> > Of course you can remove TCP/IP. Open the network settings dialog,
click
> > TCP/IP and click remove. It's gone. No error messages.
>
> So you're saying TCP/IP is not built into the NT kernel, but is built into
> the Linux kernel?
Correct.
> I guess I don't understand what this thread is now belaboring.
It's belaboring the point the mlw made a silly statement about having to
reboot to remove TCP/IP in windows (presumably implying that you don't have
to in Linux, which was wrong).
------------------------------
From: "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: how come Dell makes you buy Windows with all their PC's?
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 19:41:10 +1300
When I bought my computer I got Windows 98SE, Microsoft Works 2000 bundle
(incl. Encarta, Word, Works, Gretting Card Workshop), I was not able to say,
"take them off the computer, instead I would like more ram", I was told that
it would not be possible as Dell has a contract with Microsoft (told to me
by a Dell sales person).
kiwiunixman
jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> But I believe you should only pay for what is necessary.
> Clearly bundling things like Microsoft Works or Microsoft Office
> along with Windows ME, forces users to buy software they do not
> want. All I want is a Dell Dimension with a service contract that comes
> with
> a diagnostics diskette that's certified to run Linux without any other
> software.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, 02 Dec 2000 18:55:07 -0500, jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >but, the trouble is every single one of those machines are the more
> > >expensive
> > >models. Look at their cheapest Dell Dimension series, all Windows,
with
> > >no
> > >option to buy them without Windows, at an even cheaper price.
> >
> > Better yet, look at the pre-loaded software you get with the Windows
> > machines compared to the linux machines. Professional, Commercial
> > quality software, not free wannabe MS Office clones that even Windows
> > users don't use.
> >
> > If you compare models, feature for feature (difficult on the site),
> > the Windows machines are much better deals. This may have changed
> > since I looked a couple of months ago, but at that time it looked like
> > a better deal to order the Windows PC and if you want to run Linux,
> > install it yourself.
> > There was hardly any reason to order a Linux pre-load, in fact
> > considering Linux is free, it was simply a ripoff.
> >
> > claire
>
>
> -----= 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: "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: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 01:46:35 -0500
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:qqqW5.8444$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Aaron R. Kulkis writes:
> >
> > > Tom Wilson wrote:
> >
> > >>> Aaron R. Kulkis writes:
> >
> > >>>>> Donovan Rebbechi writes:
> >
> > >>>>>> The movement keys are placed sensibly in vi (hjkl),
> >
> > >>>>> Which is not intuitive. First-time vi users, if they try to do
> >
> > >>>> Big fucking deal. NOTHING about computers is "intuitive"
> >
> > >>> Incorrect; consider the power switch.
> >
> > >> You'd be surprised....
> > >> Never underestimate the idiot factor.
> >
> > > The power switch is NOT "intuitive"
> >
> > You mean you need to consult a manual to learn how to turn a computer
> > on???
>
> Considerring whom you are talking to, I wouldn't be surprised.
Are you trying to compete with Tholen for the title of
Biggest complete dumbass on the internet?
--
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] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: OS tree - SOUND OFF!
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 06:46:38 GMT
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000 18:24:13 +1300, kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>1st Computer: BBC Micro w/ 32K memory + 360k 5.25 Floppy Disk drive
>2nd Computer: Atari 2600
>3rd Computer: Amiga 500 w/ 2 880k 3 1/2 (9cm) disk, 512k mem (later updraded
>to 1.5MB), 7.2Mhz Processor, Kickstart version 1.3, Workbench 1.3.2,
>Kindwords, Crazy Cars, Fusion Paint, minigolf, Mortal Combat (both I and
>II), Street Fighter (I and II), mouse, joystick and 35.5 cm Colour Monitor.
>4th Computer: Pentium 75 w/8MB Ram, 850MB HDD, 35.5 cm screen, kb, mouse,
>Winblows, Works and Encarta
>5th Computer: Pentium 550 w/ 128MB Ram, 10Gig HDD, SuSE Linux 7.0 Pro.
>Hypothetical 6th Computer: eith SGI O2 or SUN Ultra Sparc 5.
>
>kiwiunixman
>
>
><snip>
>
>
A lot of people wanting to get that Ultra Sparc box.
This makes 3 I believe who've expressed a desire.
Since Red Hat is no longer supporting it, you
can use Debian.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: how come Dell makes you buy Windows with all their PC's?
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 01:06:43 -0600
The problem is that it's not in Dell's best interests to sell you a computer
without Windows. They'll sell you a Linux system, because they don't want
to lose that piece of the market, but selling a computer without any OS puts
them at a disadvantage.
What disadvantage, you ask? The more copies of Windows they sell, the
cheaper their cost to buy it per unit, the more profit per unit they make.
Since their competitors are also doing things to get cheaper per unit costs,
they must as well. If they allowed people to buy computers without an OS,
their profits would go down.
"kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:90fe8o$l2v$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> When I bought my computer I got Windows 98SE, Microsoft Works 2000 bundle
> (incl. Encarta, Word, Works, Gretting Card Workshop), I was not able to
say,
> "take them off the computer, instead I would like more ram", I was told
that
> it would not be possible as Dell has a contract with Microsoft (told to me
> by a Dell sales person).
>
> kiwiunixman
> jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > But I believe you should only pay for what is necessary.
> > Clearly bundling things like Microsoft Works or Microsoft Office
> > along with Windows ME, forces users to buy software they do not
> > want. All I want is a Dell Dimension with a service contract that comes
> > with
> > a diagnostics diskette that's certified to run Linux without any other
> > software.
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 02 Dec 2000 18:55:07 -0500, jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >but, the trouble is every single one of those machines are the more
> > > >expensive
> > > >models. Look at their cheapest Dell Dimension series, all Windows,
> with
> > > >no
> > > >option to buy them without Windows, at an even cheaper price.
> > >
> > > Better yet, look at the pre-loaded software you get with the Windows
> > > machines compared to the linux machines. Professional, Commercial
> > > quality software, not free wannabe MS Office clones that even Windows
> > > users don't use.
> > >
> > > If you compare models, feature for feature (difficult on the site),
> > > the Windows machines are much better deals. This may have changed
> > > since I looked a couple of months ago, but at that time it looked like
> > > a better deal to order the Windows PC and if you want to run Linux,
> > > install it yourself.
> > > There was hardly any reason to order a Linux pre-load, in fact
> > > considering Linux is free, it was simply a ripoff.
> > >
> > > claire
> >
> >
> > -----= 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 07:05:40 GMT
On Mon, 4 Dec 2000 00:41:34 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> > "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >
>> > > I'm glad you pointed out that you CAN remove TCP/IP (and other
>modules)
>> > > from Linux, since you can't do that in any Windozzzzzzzzz version.
>> > > Although you might be able to remove some DLLs and put up with chronic
>> > > error messages (?)
>> >
>> > Of course you can remove TCP/IP. Open the network settings dialog,
>click
>> > TCP/IP and click remove. It's gone. No error messages.
>>
>> So you're saying TCP/IP is not built into the NT kernel, but is built into
>> the Linux kernel?
>
>Correct.
>
>> I guess I don't understand what this thread is now belaboring.
>
>It's belaboring the point the mlw made a silly statement about having to
>reboot to remove TCP/IP in windows (presumably implying that you don't have
>to in Linux, which was wrong).
>
>
>
Reboot Linux to remove tcp/ip?
Fukenbusch! Your on drugs!
You don't have to reboot Linux for ANYTHING EXCEPT, changing out
the kernel! And you don't have to change the kernel to turn off
TCP/IP.
Now, they may have finally come around and fixed W2K to finally
allow people to adjust network settings without rebooting the
box, but you are not going to feed anybody here this line of
crap about having to reboot Linux to adjust or just turn off
TCP/IP. That's just total bullshit and your not going to
get away with it.
Charlie
Why reward Microsoft for 'possibly' achieving stability?
Linux has had stability from day 1.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
