Linux-Advocacy Digest #946, Volume #30 Sun, 17 Dec 00 17:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Sun Microsystems and the end of Open Source ("mud")
Re: Kulkis digest, volume 2451895 (tholenbot)
Re: Uptimes (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Whistler review. (JM)
Re: Corel to pull out of Linux (JM)
Re: Corel to pull out of Linux (JM)
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. (JM)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (JM)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "mud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Sun Microsystems and the end of Open Source
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 21:15:23 GMT
"Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:TI9%5.35991$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> ROTFL
Hmm, a 4k quote for this response.....
Does ANYONE out there know how to quote correctly ?
------------------------------
From: tholenbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Kulkis digest, volume 2451895
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 16:20:08 -0500
In article <7tS_5.3874$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> But there's still that monster .sig of Aaron's.
Of what relevance is the length of Aaron's signature?
--
On what basis do you claim that my mother was a hamster? Typical invective.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 21:28:50 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Charlie Ebert
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sun, 10 Dec 2000 21:08:01 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Sun, 10 Dec 2000 11:15:05 -0700,
>Adam Ruth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>I just came up with a potential solution:
>>
>>I rebooted my web server (running Linux and Apache) on Monday. I just went
>>and checked it with Netcraft. Lo and behold! They recorded my reboot
>>correctly!
>>(http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=&site=www.intercation.com) I
>>propose a more thorough test.
>>
>>Everyone who reads this, go to Netcraft and query my server
>>www.intercation.com. This will keep them checking my uptime. I will reboot
>>the machine at 5 pm Mountain Time this Tuesday 12/12/00. We'll see if they
>>figure it out.
>>
>>Then, after that, we need to do a test with IIS on Windows. I don't
>>currently have access to a machine that I can test and reboot, does anyone
>>else? I'll see if I can round one up. If anyone has access to one post it
>>on here and we can perform the same test.
>>
>>Adam Ruth
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>The Netcraft number are valid. Windows has the lowest uptime of
>them all.
>
>Linux is the highest of them all.
[1] As another poster already pointed out, Irix beats Linux.
[2] Because of a bug in NT which precludes them reporting an uptime
of more than 49.7 days, as opposed to Linux's limitation of
497 days, it's far from clear that NT has bad uptimes. Of course,
that doesn't mean NT has good uptimes, either.
[3] There are other metrics to measure the "height" of an operating
system; uptime is but one of them. Others include:
- interrupt latency
- context switching time
- total cost of ownership
- network, I/O, or serial throughput
- number of outstanding bugs, defects, or issues (Linux may have some
minor problems with measurement here; how does one report a bug? :-))
- number of users (Windows beats Linux handily here; BFD)
- kernel footprint size
- kernel+loaded module footprint size
- total distribution storage size
- number of hardware devices supported, and not supported
and, most importantly,
- general satisfaction of user number X, who happens to own machine
Y, running distribution Z. :-)
>
>Charlie
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
up 84 days, 5:14, running Linux.
------------------------------
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: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 21:31:38 GMT
Tom Wilson writes:
> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> Tom Wilson wrote:
>>> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>>> I wrote:
>>>>> Steve Mading writes:
>>>>>>> My statement wasn't applied to "at the time". I'm talking about
>>>>>>> now.
>>>>>> You didn't say so.
>>>>> I shouldn't need to say so for those who understand context.
>>>>>> (See I can be a pendantic pain too. Your game is fun.)
>>>>> You're erroneously presupposing that I'm playing a game, Steve.
>>>> Tholen...
>>>> when you finally realize how utterly worthless your life is...
>>>> remember to slit lengthwise.
>>> ....Along the femoral artery. It's quicker that way.
>> Let's see if Tholen can follow directions...
> He'll probably misplace them in his ass like he did his head, I'm afraid.
Typical invective, as expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
------------------------------
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: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 21:33:06 GMT
Tom Wilson writes:
>>> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>>> I wrote:
>>>>> Tom Wilson writes:
>>>>>> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>>>>>> I wrote:
>>>>>>>> Steve Mading writes:
>>>>>>>>>> My statement wasn't applied to "at the time". I'm talking about
>>>>>>>>>> now.
>>>>>>>>> You didn't say so.
>>>>>>>> I shouldn't need to say so for those who understand context.
>>>>>>>>> (See I can be a pendantic pain too. Your game is fun.)
>>>>>>>> You're erroneously presupposing that I'm playing a game, Steve.
>>>>>>> Tholen...
>>>>>>> when you finally realize how utterly worthless your life is...
>>>>>>> remember to slit lengthwise.
>>>>>> .....Along the femoral artery. It's quicker that way.
>>>>> Desperate for attention, eh Tom?
>>> Nah, desparate for a recursive twit filter..
>> So it can ultimately work on you?
> ....for me.
That's not what I wrote. Suffering from reading comprehension problems
as well, Tom?
>>>> Goddamn, Tholen... somebody offers you clever and helpful advice,
>>>> and you insult him in return.
>>>>
>>>> What a fucking ingrate you are.
>>> And, to think I was going to add that he do it in a hot bath so as
>>> not to cause himself undue pain...
>> Desperate for attention, eh Tom?
> No, merely in need of your keen wisdom.
Then pay attention, Tom.
>>> You wound me, Tholen.
>> Illogical, Tom.
> Sarcasm, Tholen.
Your sarcasm is illogical, Tom.
------------------------------
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: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 21:36:07 GMT
Tom Wilson writes:
>>> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>>>> I wrote:
>>>>> Aaron R. Kulkis writes:
>>>>>>> Steve Mading writes:
>>>>>>>>>> I've adjusted my statement, to, "Okay, it does require a puny
>>>>>>>>>> amount of movment of the arm to get the pinkie up to the esc key,
>>>>>>>>>> but it's so tiny and trivial that it never entered into my
>>>>>>>>>> consious thought, and it doesn't fucking matter, since it it's
>>>>>>>>>> merely a 'stretch' motion, which doesn't make you lose your
>>>>>>>>>> place, like a 'swing' motion does.
>>>>>>>>> I'll adjust my statement as well: "Okay, it does require a puny
>>>>>>>>> amount of movement of the arm to get the pinkie down to the cursor
>>>>>>>>> keys, but it's so tiny and trivial that it never entered into my
>>>>>>>>> conscious thought, and it doesn't matter, since it it's merely a
>>>>>>>>> 'stretch' motion, which doesn't make you lose your place, like a
>>>>>>>>> 'swing' motion does.
>>>>>>>> You enjoy this game of replacing what I say fill-in-the-blank
>>>>>>>> style,
>>>>>>> Enjoyment has nothing to do with it. I'm simply noting that
>>>>>>> whatever you can say about Esc can be applied equally well to the
>>>>>>> cursor keys.
>>>>>>>> but the difference is that what I said was actually true.
>>>>>>> What I said is also actually true. Where is the alleged difference?
>>>>>> 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.
>>>> Tholen...
>>>>
>>>> When you finally realize how utterly worthless your life is...
>>>> remember to slit lengthwise.
>>>>
>>>> Or maybe you can offer yourself to one of the local Hawaiian volcano
>>>> gods.
>>> I think the point of that exercise is to appease the volcano, and not to
>>> piss it off royally.
>> Yet another person more interested in invectice than a logical argument.
>> No surprise there.
> Levity is the only response I have to this particular thread.
Incorrect, given that you gave invective, Tom.
> A Plato-like dialog on the intuitiveness of a simple toggle switch that
> stretches into weeks.
Go on; your sentence is incomplete.
> Pedants on parade, as it were.
You and Steve and Aaron and Russ and Les?
> Paradise Lost's bulk with a Nila Wafer's substance...
If that's all the substance you can offer, that's your problem, Tom.
------------------------------
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: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 21:38:35 GMT
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.
>>>>>>>> Note: still no response.
>>>>>> Note: still no response.
>>>> Note: still no response.
>> Note: still no response.
Note: still 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.
>>>>>>>> Note: still no response.
>>>>>> Note: still no response.
>>>> Note: still no response.
>> Note: still no response.
Note: still 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.
>>>>>>>>> Next time you are in Arizona, give me a call.
>>>>>>>> What's your number? I usually get to Arizona at least once a year. It's
>>>>>>>> a big state, however. Don't expect me to look you up in Yuma.
>>>>>>> Tucson/Pheonix. E-mail me.
>>>>>> Most trips are to Tucson. Somewhat fewer to Flagstaff, which usually
>>>>>> involves arrival at Sky Harbor.
>>>>>>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>>>> Looking at your post you definately said your concept of a power switch
>>>>>>>>> has "One position is "on" and the other position is "off"."
>>>>>>>> Yet you illogically turned that around and tried to make it sound like
>>>>>>>> every switch with an "on" and an "off" must be a power switch.
>>>>>>>>> So if that isn't your concept of a power switch, what is?
>>>>>>>> Something that changes the state of the power applied to a device:
>>>>>>>> power on, power off. That doesn't mean every switch with an "on"
>>>>>>>> and an "off" is a power swtich. That's just plain illogical.
>>>>>>> You said the intuitive concept of a power switch was a switch with one
>>>>>>> position "on" and the other "off".
>>>>>> I said my concept of a power switch is that one position is "on" and
>>>>>> the other position is "off".
>>>> Note: no response.
>> Note: still no response.
Note: still no response.
>>>>>>>>> And why did you say it was your concept of a power switch?
>>>>>>>> Because you asked me about my concept of a power switch.
>>>>>> Note: no response.
>>>> Note: still no response.
>> Note: still no response.
Note: still no response.
>>>>>>>>> why won't my computer fire 30-06 rounds from the magazine when
>>>>>>>>> the power switch is in the "on" position.
>>>>>>>> You're erroneously presupposing that your computer has a magazine
>>>>>>>> from which it might be able to fire rounds.
>>>>>>> No, I'm supposing my computer has a switch with one position marked "on"
>>>>>>> and the other marked "off".
>>>>>> Why did you mention a magazine from which rounds are fired?
>>>> Note: no response.
>> Note: still no response.
Note: still no response.
>>>>>>> The '03A4 loads from a magazine when in the switch is in the "on"
>>>>>>> position.
>>>>>> Is it a power switch? If not, then it is irrelevant to the present
>>>>>> discussion.
>>>> Note: no response.
>> Note: still no response.
Note: still no response.
>>>>>>> Therefore it is intuitive that the computer would do the same.
>>>>>> Illogical, given that the discussion is about power switches, not
>>>>>> some other kind of switches.
>>>>> Your definition of a power switch :
>>>> On the contrary, you asked me for a concept of a power switch, not a
>>>> definition.
>> Note: no response.
Note: still no response.
>>>>>>>>>>> One position is "on" and the other position is "off".
>>>>> Therefore, by your define both are power switches.
>>>> Illogical. All pulsars are neutron stars. Does that mean all
>>>> neutron stars are pulsars? No. Classic illogic on your part.
>> Note: no response.
Note: still no response.
>>>>> Want to change your definition?
>>>> I didn't give you a definition. You asked for a concept. I gave
>>>> you a concept.
>>>>
>>>> Want to change your accusation?
>>> What is your intuitive concept of a power switch?
>> I already answered that question. You erroneously declared my answer
>> to be a definition.
Note: no response.
>>> Care to try to duck the question again?
>> You're erroneously presupposing that I ducked it previously. From
>> above:
>>
>> RL] OK, what is your intuitive concept of the operation of a power switch?
>> ]
>> DT] One position is "on" and the other position is "off".
>>
>> Your claim that I ducked it is rather ironic, considering all the
>> statements of mine that you've ducked. For evidence, see above where
>> I've written "Note: no response."
> Until you give an intuitive definition of a power switch, nothing you
> say or ask has any meaning whatsoever.
Then why did you ask for a concept first, Russ?
> Therefore, it gets no response.
How convenient for you, Russ.
------------------------------
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: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 21:42:07 +0200
On 16 Dec 2000 21:03:47 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>It wouldn't if they'd done it the proper way, calling the OS an Unix.
>> "AN Unix"? Is this a deliberate mistake?
>You might say so. The idea was they should've given proper credit instead
>of bragging about `their' new innovative ideas.
I was referring to the grammar.
------------------------------
From: JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Corel to pull out of Linux
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 21:42:08 +0200
On Sat, 16 Dec 2000 14:52:41 -0600, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:91ga16$42iqv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Don't forget that downloading distro's and most apps from the net is not
>> illegal like it is with windows - several distro's have iso images of
>their
>> distro's on their own ftp sites for users to download instead of buying it
>> (most of my distro's have come from the cover CD on linux magazines as
>> it is not illegal for magazine publishers to download iso images and
>> redistribute
>> them either). Other than possibly Corel linux I cannot think of any way
>thay
>> downloading a distro instead of buying it could ever be illegal (even if
>the
>> person downloading it resells copies this is allowed in the GPL licence).
>>
>> Linux software (or at least the GPL parts) can never be pirated as it is
>> owned
>> by everyone - you are only giving away a copy of something the person you
>> are giving it to already has rights to own.
>
>You're forgetting that a distribution may have some GPL'd software and some
>non-GPL'd software. You're free to copy the GPL'd stuff, but not the
>non-GPL'd stuff, which means you need to examine the license of piece of
>software on the distro unless you can be reasonably assured (ala debian)
>that everything is indeed free to copy.
Or you could just copy it all anyway (Who's going to know?)
------------------------------
From: JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Corel to pull out of Linux
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 21:42:10 +0200
On Sun, 17 Dec 2000 00:30:09 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>I can't download (very sucessfully) 650MB iso images as I only have a
>56L modem. If I were in the US, I would not have any problems (due to
>the affordability of cable modems etc.).
And the cheap prices of the phone calls.
>
>kiwiunixman
>
>Nigel Feltham wrote:
>
>> kiwiunixman wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>>
>>> Well if (as you (MH) said) all Linux users pirate, then I must be a
>>> loner in the fact that I BUY all my Linux software LEGALLY, everything
>>
>>>from distro to applications. Yes, I could easily download these
>>
>>> illegally off a hotline server, however, the only person at the end of
>>> the day I will be hurting is my self, as companies will discontinue
>>> selling Linux software due to piracy. However, I have little, or no
>>
>>
>>
>> Don't forget that downloading distro's and most apps from the net is not
>> illegal like it is with windows - several distro's have iso images of their
>> distro's on their own ftp sites for users to download instead of buying it
>> (most of my distro's have come from the cover CD on linux magazines as
>> it is not illegal for magazine publishers to download iso images and
>> redistribute
>> them either). Other than possibly Corel linux I cannot think of any way thay
>> downloading a distro instead of buying it could ever be illegal (even if the
>> person downloading it resells copies this is allowed in the GPL licence).
>>
>> Linux software (or at least the GPL parts) can never be pirated as it is
>> owned
>> by everyone - you are only giving away a copy of something the person you
>> are
>> giving it to already has rights to own.
------------------------------
From: JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 21:42:11 +0200
On 17 Dec 2000 14:17:34 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Ilja Booij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> > And what OSes are less of an administrative headache?
>>
>> Well, Windows has gone a long way into making administrative tasks easier,
>> and more straightforward. Apple is showing that UNIX can be powerful and
>> simple to administer. And for the diehard maschorist, editing the legacy
>> UNIX settings is also available.
>>
>> > > Exactly, it was invented in the 60's, instituted in the 70's, and
>> abandoned
>> > > in the 90's. Why? Because the OS is a whole component, it's programs
>> are
>> > > another component. Blending the two togather is an unnessecary,
>> complicated
>> > > and dumb idea when we no longer have to resolve issues as "terminal
>> > > compatibility" and "technological propriotorization".
>> > >
>> >
>> > And does Linux blend them together more than other OSes?
>>
>> No, Linux splits the user interface and treats it like it were a program.
>> UNIX did this because IT HAD NO CHOICE. Linux does this because...???
>> Well, the CLAIMS are pretty lame, ("Winloosers" is the worst excuse I've
>> ever herd for keeping Linux being as intuitave as a rectal exam.)
>
>Name any advantage for making the GUI a part of the operating system
>(and don't just say that's "it's the way of the new century" of
>something, just name a REAL advantage.
Don't hold your breath.
------------------------------
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: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 21:42:13 +0200
On Sat, 16 Dec 2000 16:23:17 -0500, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>Tom Wilson wrote:
>>
>> "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:918t6h$qhq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > : Yes...the term liberal (root: liber = freedom) has been absconded
>> > : with by the freedom-hating socialists.
>> >
>> > Then why help then mis-use it? Stop calling them liberals then.
>>
>> They get mad when you call them Socialists because it sounds un-American.
>Communists always hate being confronted with their lies.
I thought you were talking about liberals, not communists. The two are
complete opposites.
>
>
>> --
>> Tom Wilson
>> Registered Linux User #194021
>> http://counter.li.org
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
