Linux-Advocacy Digest #728, Volume #30 Fri, 8 Dec 00 02:13:03 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: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 12:27:24 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 6 Dec 2000
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> reflect's Erik's own argument, that you can't 'remove' TCP/IP, like you
>> can in Windows. Erik undermined his argument, of course, by pointing
>> out that 'removing' TCP/IP doesn't remove it, but merely disables it,
>
>No I didn't. I said you *CAN* disable it if that's all you want to do.
But you can't! All you can do is remove it, and then take advantage of
the fact that it fails to do so, and call it "disabled" because even
though you shouldn't be able to, you can still enable and then continue
to use it. You have to actually reboot if you really want it removed.
>Simply click the Disable button rather than the Remove button.
Which version of Windows are you talking about? There is no "disable"
button for protocols on NT, and I don't recall seeing one on WinDOS,
either. I think you might be talking about disabling the binding of the
protocol to the adapter, rather than removing either the protocol or the
adapter. As you are so fond of saying, that's not what the discussion
is about.
>And I said
>that this disables without requireing a reboot. And also clicking the
>Enable button enables without requiring a reboot. This is different from
>removing the stack, which does remove it, not just disable it.
No, it doesn't disable the stack at all; it disables the binding of the
protocol to an adapter.
>> but that's beside the point. In Windows, you can 'remove' TCP/IP as if
>> it were a driver or a service, and you can't on Linux. All you can do
>> is disable it. This would be the equivalent of "removing the bindings"
>> on Windows, which corresponds to the Unix concept of assigning IP
>> addresses. Remove all IP addresses from all cards on Unix, and you've
>> 'turned off' IP. But on NT, there's an extra thing; removing TCP/IP as
>> a protocol, since its not built in to the kernel.
>
>No, Binding a protocol to an adapter is not the same thing as adding an IP
>to that adapter. And removing the bindings is not the same thing as
>removing it.
You're even more thick-headed than I figured. Yes, binding a protocol
to an adapter in Windows is effectively the equivalent of adding an IP
address to an adapter, in Unix.
[...]
>But you can *DISABLE* the protocol without rebooting. That's the point.
>And you can enable it when it was disabled (not uninstalled) without
>rebooting.
No shit? Really? So?
--
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: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 12:27:30 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Giuliano Colla in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 06 Dec 2000
>Anonymous wrote:
>>
>
>What's happened? Tired to receive tons of spam?
>
>May I suggest you to become T. Max Anonymous?
>It would help tracing your postings on deja archives!
Its this crappy news service my ISP uses. I'll be changing ISPs soon,
so hopefully it won't be an issue for long.
--
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: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 12:27:34 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 6 Dec 2000 11:24:57
>"Anonymous" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 4 Dec 2000 13:27:01
>> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 3 Dec 2000 00:36:39
>> >
>> >> >Users can of course write to HKCU.
>> >> >Please check MS guidelines to programming in windows, you'll see that
>it
>> >> >states very clearly that user spesifics settings in HKCU.
>> >> >Beside, the very same mecanism (HKCU being user spesific) works in
>win9x.
>> >>
>> >> And as I've explained (quoted below), this does cause the kind of
>> >> problems you're addressing. And they're *Microsoft's* problems, since
>> >> the app isn't supposed to have to be re-written to work on NT.
>> >
>> >It doesn't need to be re-written for NT.
>> >It need to be written correctly the first tim.
>>
>> Even if it was written for WinDOS? Years before MS shoved NT down
>> everyone's throat as a desktop OS?
>
>If it was written to dos, it doesn't use the registry, so yes.
>If it was written to win9x, it uses the registry and need to use it
>*correctly*.
That is for the market, not Microsoft, to decide. And, yes, "WinDOS" is
what you call "9x". Windows plus DOS, covers Win95, Win98, and 98SE and
ME, as well.
>This guidelines has been published long ago.
Yay.
[...]
>> No, that's not the point in permissions. The point in permissions is
>> that the administrator can determine what is the machine's
>> configuration, not the application configuration. This isn't a host
>> we're talking about; its a desktop or a workstation or a server, not all
>> three or any one, like a Unix system. (:-D I'm just funnin' with ya'.)
>
>NT is a workstation/desktop/server.
Yea, right. Now if only it didn't suck at all three, compared to Unix.
>And you are wrong, applications configuration is part of the machine's
>configuration.
Not if its user-specific stuff.
>You want a situation where anybody will have access to anything, I fail to
>even begin to understand why you want such a situation.
No, I just want an OS which is competitive; I don't really care how it
ensures that I have access to anything I want or need, as long as it
does.
[...]
>> >If I log on as a different user on purpose, I *expect* to get different user
>> >settings, and that is what I get.
>>
>> Unless you don't, or you do want to, and don't get it. Whichever.
>
>No, I'll always get this on a properlly written program.
Ah, the naivete.
[...]
>Show me those settings that can't be clearly defined as HKCU or HKLM and
>needed to be update by anyone.
<*chuckle*> How about you waste your time on this, and just let me know
when you're done. I prefer that market competition take care of
identifying requirements like this. It is an unassailable point,
however, that you are apparently satisfied with monopoly crapware.
--
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: Thu, 07 Dec 2000 12:27:37 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 6 Dec 2000 11:25:46
>T. Max wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 4 Dec 2000 13:03:28
>> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 3 Dec 2000 00:09:31
>> >> [...]
>> >> >*Developing* software is what cost money.
>> >> >Which you don't get in return if you GPL it.
>> >>
>> >> But you don't get it in return if you copyright it and wrap it in a
>> >> trade secret, either. Whatever it is you do make money on has to cover
>> >> the cost of developing, either way. Your argument is specious.
>> >
>> >Yes you do.
>>
>> No, you get money selling licenses, not developing software.
>
>Pedantic, you develop software which you later sell licenses to.
No, it isn't pedantic; its the point of the discussion. You don't make
money developing software, whether it is GPL *or* trade secret. Yes,
you can get the money you spent back by selling licenses. But you can
also get it back by selling distribution, support, or further
development.
Now, it is true that you have to compete when you do it the open source
way, while current commercial reality allows you to profiteer on
copyright code wrapped in a trade secret. But that just guarantees that
it isn't competitive software, so when software that supports
competition, like GPL code, is included in the market, the trade secret
crapware can't possibly keep up, in a free market. I don't expect that
it will be more than five or six years, tops, before trade secret
software is reduced to a niche where it belongs.
--
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! ======
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
