Linux-Advocacy Digest #852, Volume #30 Wed, 13 Dec 00 16:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: OS and Product Alternative Names - Idiocy in action ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: OS and Product Alternative Names - Idiocy in action ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Predictions (featuring Drestin Black) (JM)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (JM)
Re: Whistler review. (JM)
Re: Whistler review. (JM)
Re: Suggestions for Linux (JM)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 20:38:11 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis writes:
>> Russ Lyttle writes:
>>> For those not inclined to read below I will recap. Tholen claims use of
>>> power cords is intuitive.
>> Correct; people do not generally need to consult a manual to know what
>> to do with a power cord. Do you disagree?
> Sometimes, this disregard is at their own peril.
Most times, no peril is involved.
> Tholen...
> when you finally realize how utterly worthless your life is...
> remember to slit lengthwise.
Kulkis, when you finally realize how utterly worthless your invective
is, remember to come back here and apologize.
>>> I give several counter examples about power cords behaving in ways
>>> people do not expect, and of people doing strange things with power
>>> cords.
>> None of your so-called "counter examples" prove that people generally do
>> not know what to do with a power cord without reading a manual. For those
>> inclined to not believe me, read below.
>>> Tholen counters that that wasn't fair as the users couldn't have known
>>> about that or couldn't see inside the TV set or some such.
>> Where did I allegedly say anything about "fair", Russ? I simply stated
>> that people generally know what to do with a power cord without consulting
>> a manual. What might happen inside a set is quite irrelevant to that issue.
>> Whether the circuit is broken by a fuse or an internal socket-plug interface
>> is also irrelevant. The issue is whether people generally know what to do
>> with a power cord without consulting a manual.
>>> This attitude is one think I especially dislike about MS software.
>>> Everything is proclaimed to be "intuitive", when in fact, nothing in
>>> this universe is "intuitive", not even the simple power cord.
>> Really? You need a manual to know what to do with a power cord on some
>> new appliance??? Why do you think the word "intuitive" exists?
>>> If you don't test your product agains a naif user, expect it to fail in
>>> the field, no matter how "intuitive" you thought it was.
>> Looks like you're one of those people who thinks "intuitive" is an
>> absolute. If it doesn't work for everyone, then it can't be intuitive.
>> Sorry, but the word isn't defined that way.
>>> Murphy originally said, "If someone can f**k it up, they will." It lost
>>> meaning in the translation.
>> Doesn't render everything non-intuitive.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Steve Mading writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why are you citing evidence that destroys your argument, Aaron?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Familiarity (or experience, to use my word for it) does not have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be universal before something can be declared "intuitive".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here's a good rule of thumb: if you need to consult the manual,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it's not intuitive.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Everyone has to "consult the manual" (or a friend, or the on-line
>>>>>>>>>>>>> help) at some point early in their learning process.
>>>>>>>>>>>> I know some first-time computer users that did not need to consult
>>>>>>>>>>>> the manual or a friend to know what to do with the power cord, for
>>>>>>>>>>>> example.
>>>>>>>>>>> I have earned a lot of money plugging in power cords for people.
>>>>>>>>>> Congratulations. I know people who replace water heaters, and they
>>>>>>>>>> also plug in the power cord for customers while installing the
>>>>>>>>>> replacement appliance.
>>>>>>>>>>> The first electronics job I had was making calls to fix TV sets.
>>>>>>>>>> Not to install them? Televisions that hadn't yet been used don't
>>>>>>>>>> usually require fixing.
>>>>>>>>> Both. The most common was after the set was at home. Most people, by
>>>>>>>>> that time, were trying to install the sets themselves.
>>>>>>>> And you're claiming that they didn't know enough to plug it in? Do
>>>>>>>> these people use a toaster? A lamp? A microwave oven?
>>>> Note: no response.
>> Note: still no response.
>>>>>>>>>>> About half the time the problem was the power cord wasn't plugged in.
>>>>>>>>>> But was it because they didn't know that it had to be plugged in, or
>>>>>>>>>> had it accidently become unplugged without them knowing it? There's
>>>>>>>>>> a big difference there. I've seen it happen to people many times.
>>>>>>>>> They didn't know all the subtilities of operating a power cord.
>>>>>>>> What "subtleties"?
>>>>>>>>> Plug it in all the way.
>>>>>>>> What's subtle about that?
>>>> Note: no response.
>> Note: still no response.
>>>>>>>>> Unplug it before moving the set.
>>>>>>>> Are you saying that the cord was damaged from strain?
>>>>>>> No, I'm saying that your description of how to use a power cord is
>>>>>>> missing sum subtilities. Such as : a power cord has *two* ends.
>>>>>> What has that got to do with unplugging before moving the set?
>>>> Note: no response.
>> Note: still no response.
>>>>>>> On a toster one end is usually fixed to the toster.
>>>>>> On many televisions, one end is usually fixed to the television.
>>>> Note: no response.
>> Note: still no response.
>>>>>>> On TV sets and computers neither end is fixed.
>>>>>> Not always. My television does not have a detachable power cord.
>>>>> It does if the set is in the US.
>>>> The set is in the US, and the power cord cannot be removed from the
>>>> rear of the unit.
>>> Bet if you open the box the power cord will stay with the case and
>>> unplug from the chassis.
>> Irrelevant, given that the case you brought up was moving the set,
>> not taking it apart.
>>> Or did you think they had 6 feet of power cord
>>> curled up inside the case?
>> Also irrelevant to the case of moving the set that you brought up.
>>>>> If you open the case the power cord comes unplugged from the set.
>>>> When people move a set around, they don't usually open the case
>>>> first. You were talking about moving a set around, not opening
>>>> a case. Do try to be consistent.
>>> No but they yank on the power cord.
>> Not necessarily. Some of us were taught to grasp the plug, not yank
>> on the cord.
>>> On older sets it was pretty obvious.
>> That they yanked on the power cord?
>>> I can understand people not grasping that fact on the newer sets.
>> The fact that they yanked on the power cord?
>>>>> You have to use a "cheater" cord to power
>>>>> up the set once it has been opened.
>>>> But you weren't talking about opening a set. You were talking about
>>>> moving a set around, which doesn't require that it be opened up.
>>> Sure. Move the set. Forget to unplug it first or step on the cord. The
>>> resulting strain unplugs the cord at the set end.
>> Isn't that what I first asked about?
>> RL] Unplug it before moving the set.
>> DT] Are you saying that the cord was damaged from strain?
>>> Intuitive, right?
>> Irrelevant, right?
>>>>> Sometimes the set end comes loose,
>>>>> especially if someone doesn't unplug before moving the set.
>>>> If you're talking about some internal connection that can't be seen
>>>> by the user, then that doesn't serve as an argument against my claim
>>>> that the power cord is intuitive.
>>> Its a power cord. It should be intuitive.
>> And it is. They plug the appliance in and expect it to be powered.
>> You claimed that it's not intuitive, and tried to prove it by pointing
>> to service calls that you made, but you have yet to describe a single
>> case involving someone who didn't know enough to plug it in. Instead
>> you've talked about an internal connection coming undone, bent prongs,
>> and such, none of which illustrates a case in which the user didn't
>> know enough to plug the cord into a wall outlet without consulting a
>> manual.
>>>>> It can often be reinserted by simply pushing on the back of the set
>>>>> near the power cord.
>>>> Does that somehow make the power cord not intuitive?
>>> Was it intuitive that you should push on the back of the set to
>>> reconnect the power cord?
>> I wasn't talking about that end of the cord. What is intuitive is the
>> end that people plug into a wall socket.
>>>>>>> You need to make sure *both* ends are plugged in.
>>>>>> Same situation applies. Usually people know how to do that, but were
>>>>>> simply unaware that one end had come unplugged.
>>>> Note: no response. It's very easy to be unaware of an internal
>>>> connection coming loose.
>>> Lets see. You say a power cord is intuitive.
>> Correct; people do not generally need to consult a manual to know what
>> to do with a power cord. Do you disagree?
>>> I point out some non intuitive things about power cords.
>> You point out some thing that has nothing to do with the end that
>> people generally know goes into a wall socket (strain that causes an
>> internal connection to become lost, which says nothing about the
>> user's intuition regarding what to do with the other end of the power
>> cord).
>>> You say they weren't intuitive because the user didn't know about them.
>> On the contrary, I said "It's very easy to be unaware of an internal
>> connection coming loose." That has nothing to do with knowing what
>> to do with the other end of the cord.
>>> My Websters defines intuitive as "capable of being know by intuition.
>>> And it defines intuition as "direct perception of fact independent of
>>> any reasoning process".
>> And experience with other electrical appliances means that people
>> generally do not need to apply any reasoning process to know what to
>> do with the power cord of a new appliance.
>>> But you argue that my examples of non intuitive facts about power cords
>>> are invalid because they are not intuitive.
>> On the contrary, I said "It's very easy to be unaware of an internal
>> connection coming loose." That has nothing to do with knowing what
>> to do with the other end of the cord.
>>>>>>> Also power cords are polarized. Try to plug them in the wrong way and
>>>>>>> they don't fit properly.
>>>>>> The polarized plugs that I've used won't fit at all if you try to do
>>>>>> it the wrong way. My television has a three-prong plug, however. Only
>>>>>> goes one way.
>>>>> I'll send you the next three pronged plug I get that has had the third
>>>>> prong bent or broken by the user. I kept one for years that someone had
>>>>> managed to plug the third prong into the hot side of the socket. They
>>>>> didn't understand why their GFI tripped every time they turned on the
>>>>> set.
>>>> Was it bent or broken intentionally so that the set could be plugged
>>>> into a outlet that hadn't been upgraded with three-prong outlets? I
>>>> can't think of any other reason why someone would do that.
>>> It was intuitive.
>> "nothing in this universe is 'intuitive'"
>> --Russ Lyttle
>> Do make up your mind.
>>> You only need two prongs to get electricity, so if you break off the
>>> third prong, you will use less electricity and your bill will be
>>> cheaper.
>> Which is the unneeded third prong?
>>>>> The classic case for this is an event in Idaho where a technician
>>>>> plugged a multi-pronged cord in backwards and killed himself when the
>>>>> research reactor he was working on "pulsed". No one living could
>>>>> understand why he went to the trouble to bend those pins to make it fit.
>>>> Does that make the power cord non-intuitive?
>>> It is a good example of how relying on things being "intuitive" is
>>> dangerous.
>> Oh really? Was it intuitive to intentionally modify the prongs to
>> permit plugging the cord in backward?
>>>>>>>>> If the light doesn't come on check the power cord. That sort of thing.
>>>>>>>> What's subtle about that?
>>>>>>> People don't do it. For computers it is worse. The light on the computer
>>>>>>> can come on, but not the monitor, or vice versa.
>>>>>> Same situation applies. Usually people know how to do that, but were
>>>>>> simply unaware that one of the two was unplugged.
>>>>> If the power cord was that intuitive, they would have checked, now
>>>>> wouldn't they?
>>>> Did they succeed in plugging both in, in the first place? When something
>>>> stops working that was previously working, they tend to think of what
>>>> might have changed. If there is no reason for the power cord to have
>>>> become unplugged, then it makes sense to consider the possibility that
>>>> there is a problem with the unit itself and not the power cord.
>> Note: no response.
>>>>> They wouldn't bend prongs to get it plugged in. They
>>>>> would unplug it before trying to work on the set. In this industry, you
>>>>> cannot assume that anything is intuitive for a sufficient percentage of
>>>>> your customer base.
>>>> And just what percentage of the people do you need to plug power cords
>>>> in for them?
>> Note: no response.
>>>>>>>>>>> I learned very quickly not to just plug in the cord and send a bill
>>>>>>>>>>> for $50. I would futz around a while, take the back off, look intent.
>>>>>>>>>>> Then put the back on and plug it in.
>>>>>>>>>> You're admitting to what some people would consider a "dishonest"
>>>>>>>>>> service call?
>>>>>>>>> No. They got charged the same, the fee for one hour service call.
>>>>>>>> Even if it took one minute?
>>>>>>> Yes. The minimum charge is one hour. Same as auto repair shops and other
>>>>>>> such services.
>>>>>> Why? Travel time for an on-site visit can be justified, but why a
>>>>>> minimum? Would you like to pay for an hour long-distance telephone
>>>>>> call, even if it lasted only a minute?
>>>>> Never had your own service business have you? Overhead, book keeping,
>>>>> accounting, taxes, etc. all mean that a charge less than a minimum is a
>>>>> loss. The service charge for one hour is that minimum in this case.
>>>> It takes you an hour to do all the book keeping, accounting, and so on
>>>> for a one-minute service call?
>> Note: no response.
>>>>>>>>> I just decided not to upset them by pointing out that they didn't know
>>>>>>>>> how to operate a power cord.
>>>>>>>> Which would have been rather presumptuous of you.
>>>>>>>>>>> When PCs came out, there were more power cords not to be plugged in
>>>>>>>>>>> and thus more business.
>>>>>>>>>> Some people prefer to have experts install new gizmos for them.
>>>>>>>>>> Doesn't mean that they don't have the intuition to plug it in for
>>>>>>>>>> themselves.
>>>>>>>>> But that doesn't mean the power cord is all that "intutive" either.
>>>>>>>> Doesn't mean it isn't "intutive" [sic] either.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>SNIP<<
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 20:35:50 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis writes:
>> Russ Lyttle writes:
>>>>>>>>>> Steve Mading writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not exactly uncommon. When my VCR is "off", it's still on by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enough to keep a clock running and monitor its programming to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> determine whether to turn "on" (or should I say "more on") and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> record a program. Doesn't make the power switch any less
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intuitive.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually, I would say that that sort of power switch is highly
>>>>>>>>>>>>> unintuitive. Intuitively, you'd expect that turning something
>>>>>>>>>>>>> off would, you know, actually turn it off.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Depends on what you consider "off" to be. When you turn your
>>>>>>>>>>>> microwave oven off, do you expect it to lose the time? (Yes,
>>>>>>>>>>>> that does presuppose an oven with a clock on the display.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Are there any new models that don't have one of those built in?)
>>>>>>>>>>> I haven't seen any microwaves with an on/off button lately.
>>>>>>>>>> Okay then, "Start/Stop", if you must be pedantic.
>>>>>>>>>>> If they had them, then yeah, I'd expect them to at least turn
>>>>>>>>>>> the display off, and go down to a trickle that only serves
>>>>>>>>>>> to maintain a few K of RAM (for the clock and maybe some programs)
>>>>>>>>>>> (which takes very little power, as evidenced by calculators and
>>>>>>>>>>> watches, and could be done by battery like it is for CMOS
>>>>>>>>>>> settings on computers.)
>>>>>>>>>> Even with the display on, it could still be a trickle.
>>>>>>>>> All this "unintuitive" behavior of power switches is causing a major
>>>>>>>>> problem in California.
>>>>>>>> Illogical. It is quite possible that people will generally know what
>>>>>>>> to do with a power switch without needing to consult a manual, but will
>>>>>>>> not generally know how much power is consumed in the on and off states.
>>>>>>>> Consider the AC adaptor for a modem, for example. The power switch is
>>>>>>>> on the modem, not the AC adaptor.
>>>>>>> Logical. The behavior of the power switch changed from its traditional
>>>>>>> role. People *think* it still works the way it did 10 years ago.
>>>>>> Oh really? Your Curtis Mathes is older than that. You claim it kept
>>>>>> the power on.
>>>>> Yes, but it was very unusual for its time.
>>>> Really? I had a clock-radio that when "off" kept the clock on. Very usual
>>>> for its time.
>> Note: no response.
>>>>>>> Its behavior isn't capable of being comprehended without logical thought.
>>>>>> And with logical thought, the average consumer will know how much power
>>>>>> is still being consumed by a unit even when the switch is in the off
>>>>>> position? That's not the issue here.
>>>>>>> (See definition of intuitive).
>>>>>> Practice what you preach.
>>>>>>> They are still trying to make decisions
>>>>>>> based on the traditional use of the power switch - power cord setup.
>>>>>> On the contrary, sounds like your example involves a mislabeled
>>>>>> button. There is a difference between "video blank" and "power off".
>>>>>> You've described the former. I've been talking about the latter.
>>>>> No, they concern the device that serves as a power switch these days.
>>>> An "off" switch that leaves 10 amps of power running isn't much of an
>>>> off switch.
>> Note: no response.
>>>>>>>>> The issue of all these devices still drawing power is keeping a
>>>>>>>>> load on the system that it wasn't designed to handle.
>>>>>>>> Are you suggesting that systems outside of California were somehow
>>>>>>>> designed to handle it?
>>>>>>> No. Outside CA, NY, and MA, there have been more plants built. These
>>>>>>> plants are now selling some of their excess off peak power to CA. In the
>>>>>>> past CA would sell power to Texas during the peak time in Texas and
>>>>>>> Texas would sell to CA during the peak time there. Now the transfer is
>>>>>>> all one way. To CA. But it is getting difficult for Texas utilities to
>>>>>>> justify building more plants just to have power to sell to CA. They have
>>>>>>> to justify the need for plants based on need in Texas.
>>>>>> That has nothing to do with being designed to handle the load.
>>>>>>>>> That coupled with lack of new power generation in California is putting
>>>>>>>>> a strain on the system now, promising a major breakdown in the near
>>>>>>>>> future.
>>>>>>>> Sounds like those Californians are going to have to do without their
>>>>>>>> 72-inch projection televisions. (Did your Curtis Mathes need 10 amps
>>>>>>>> to keep its filament going?)
>>>>>> Note: no response.
>>>>>>>>> Relying to much on intuition and not enough on reason is going
>>>>>>>>> to get a lot of people killed.
>>>>>>>> The power consumed by a device in the off state has absolutely
>>>>>>>> nothing to do with the issue of whether the power switch itself
>>>>>>>> is intuitive.
>>>>>> Note: no response.
>>>>> OK, what is your intuitive concept of the operation of a power switch?
>>>> One position is "on" and the other position is "off".
>>> The switch marked "on" and "off" on my 1903A4 Springfield is a Power
>>> Switch?
>> Show me your 1903A4 Springfield.
>>> Not all switches marked thus perform the same functions or
>>> perform the same functions the same way!
>> Irrelevant, given that I didn't say they do.
> Tholen...
> when you finally realize how utterly worthless your life is...
> remember to slit lengthwise.
Kulkis, when you finally realize how utterly worthless your invective
is, remember to come back here and apologize.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS and Product Alternative Names - Idiocy in action
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 15:42:08 -0500
mitch wrote:
>
> On Tue, 12 Dec 2000 14:56:49 -0500, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >But INFERIOR OPERATING SYSTEMS ==> Inferior applicatoins.
> >
> >There's no getting around this.
>
> Utter pish.
>
> It is entirely possible for an application on an inferior operating
> system to be far better than the equivalent application on a superior
> operating system.
>
At what cost?
How many extra man-months of programming?
With how many subtle, hard-to-disect bugs?
> --
> Smileys are nothing but conceptual wheelchair ramps for the humor impaired.
> - Geoff Miller
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS and Product Alternative Names - Idiocy in action
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 15:42:57 -0500
mitch wrote:
>
> On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 08:53:25 -0500, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >Perhaps, but with a disproportionate amount of work.
>
> Ok - I see the cause of argument here: I am a user of the apps, you
> are a developer.
>
> I know nothing of development of software for linux vs. windows, so
> I`ll just trust you on this one.
>
> I don`t care how the apps are created...
The more difficult it is to create the app, the more expensive it
is. Both in up-front costs (paying the programmmer(s), and in
damage control (bugs).
>
> --
> Smileys are nothing but conceptual wheelchair ramps for the humor impaired.
> - Geoff Miller
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
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: JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Predictions (featuring Drestin Black)
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 20:43:38 +0200
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 07:08:57 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> kiwiunixman wrote:
>> >
>> > I wasn't aiming at Canada (I have visited Canada, and it ROCKS!),
>mainly
>> > the neighbour towards the south of Canada.
>>
>> Canada's neat...as long as you're not a resident in the country.
>Yeah. Sigs are neat too...as long as you're not some dumb loser
>with "size" issues who needs to make his 20+ lines long.
They do say that sig length is inversely propoertional to penis
length.
Note: I have no sig >:-)
------------------------------
From: JM <[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: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 20:43:40 +0200
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 08:28:08 -0500, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>> >
>> > Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> > >
>> > > I think I'll just call myself a freethinker. Too many
>> > > people have projected their own delusions onto the
>> > > word "liberal".
>> >
>> > If you think left-wing liberalism is about freedom, I suggest
>> > that you go visit North Korea, Russia, China or Cuba, or talk
>> > to any of the millions who risked their lives to escape the
>> > Warsaw Pact countries to North America.
>>
>> So you're just being politically correct. Instead of using
>> the deprecated word "communist", you now use the p.c. word
>> "liberal". I get it! Gee thanks.
>>
>> And, since some people in the U.S. call themselves
>> "liberals", that must mean they're what we can no longer
>> call "communist". Your logic is subtle, yet awesome.
>
>
>Actually, most liberals ARE communists.
You may find that communism is the opposite of liberty.
------------------------------
From: JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 20:43:41 +0200
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 07:06:51 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Monkeyboy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"Real computers don't do x, y or z" is a stupid argument. Computers are
>hardware. Hardware fails. OSs are software (yes, even ROMs). Software fails.
>Accidentally (bugs) or deliberately (user). To pretend otherwise is not
>unlike an eunuch attempting to masturbate. Distracting but ultimately
>futile. Nothing of any consequence will come of it (pun intended).
Actually, eunuchs can masturbate etc, they're just jaffas.
------------------------------
From: JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 20:43:42 +0200
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 14:36:40 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>> >> It has no recovery, no protection, it's purely a large
>> >> application in itself.
>> >I still have to run into an application that will crush Win2K.
>> A low intensity 2D game using a mature version of DX will do.
>Can you name one available for download?
YES! You can get it from www.josephmrozek.net
------------------------------
From: JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Suggestions for Linux
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2000 20:43:43 +0200
On 13 Dec 2000 04:21:59 -0500, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>And how are you going to pipe one command to another if there is no command
>>>>>line?
>>> By getting a reel OS and using reel softwair that has graffix and not pipes.
>>So, you want drag-and-drop pipes with graphically superior 3D textures?
>>The idea is fun. And it's so crazy someone might actually develop it.
>Microsoft wil do it then Linux wil take 10 yeres to coppy it.
Troll? Correct?
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
