Linux-Advocacy Digest #234, Volume #31 Thu, 4 Jan 01 01:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge (*)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (Alan)
Re: Uptimes ("JSPL")
Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Big government and big business: why not fear both - www.ezboard.com (T. Max
Devlin)
Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge ("JSPL")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 05:18:56 GMT
"R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" wrote:
> > > > the individual doesn't know what's best for the masses.
> > >
> > > But Bill Gates thinks he does.
> >
> > and this is counter to my argument because..
>
> One person has used monopoly control of legacy systems (MS-DOS, then
> Windows 3.1 then Windows 9x then NT) to force nearly everybody to use
> Microsoft's operating system, whether they want to or not.
>
> Put simply Bill Gates has the power to say:
[paranoid waxing snipped]
umm. my argument was that any one individual cannot know what's best for
everyone else.
because you, or billy, think you know what's right for me doesn't mean you
actually do.
and that is counter to my argument because..
> > > > and if you're not the individual then you're part of the masses.
> > >
> > > Actually, you're an individual who is one of many individuals.
> > > There may be millions who disagree with you, and millions more
> > > who agree with you.
> >
> > obviously. but if i am not you
> > - which thankfully is not possible - i am
> > one of everyone else.
>
> You assume that I am the only one. I assert that roughly between
> 40 and 60% of the general population would stop using Windows if
> Linux were available on equal terms
and use what? linux?
well stop asserting. easily 60% of the population uses their computers for
1 of 3 things: web browsing, game playing and entertainment, or multimedia
development.
all 3 are things linux does worst.
> (based on USA today polls
> taken during the Microsoft trial in which 40-60% of respondents said
> they would stop using Windows if they could).
USA Today? well then, it MUST be true.
> You happen to be in the other 40-60% who would keep using Windows 98
> even if Linux provided every feature of the top-of-the line $50,000
> workstation AND the $2 million supercomputer - all for $1000 or less.
well, i'm convinced.
bartender! i'll take 2 of whatever he's having. and you'd better tie me
down first!
> > we are still saying basically the same thing. i was just also making a
> > point.
>
> No we are not. You are upset because Linux advocates want others
> to use Linux IF THEY SO CHOOSE.
umm. i do not get upset about things so trivial as computer os's.
if anything i want linux advocates to stop hyping linux as the digital
cure-all.
because it's not.
at all.
> Yet your very criticism of that
> advocacy (in a group dedicated to Linux Advocacy) implies that
> we should not even be allowed to advocate.
umm. actually i'm posting this in alt.linux.sux. blame whoever started this
thread for the cross-posting.
> MacIntosh users were literally forced to give up their Macs and switch
> to Windows 95 or Windows NT 4.0 even though the Mac offered features
> that NT couldn't even approach. Even today, many artists in the
> advertizing and marketing departments rent Macs to circumvent
> company policies which forbid the purchase of Windows systems.
ehh? Mac market is stronger than it's been in a very long time.
what are you talking about 'forbid purchase of Windows systems' ?
what are you saying?
who are you?
> > umm. but if you are informed then shouldn't
> > you already be aware of the choices offered?
>
> But the fact is that I don't have the option of going to a computer
> store and test-driving SuSE, Mandrake, and Red Hat to see which
> distribution I might like best.
that's because it would take too bloody long to configure.
> Instead, I have to purchase and
> configure 3 computers to do a side-by-side comparison.
and that is bill's mom's fault because?
> To make matters worse, this misinformation and contractual silence
> coupled with optimistic and often unrealistic claims has lead to
> security holes that
z z z z z..
> For 10 years Microsoft has been telling corporations to "wait for
> the next release", which is supposed to be "A better UNIX than UNIX",
> while Linux not only delivers the "better UNIX than UNIX", but also
> fosters the only really useful technology on Windows (The Web, E-mail,
> Chat and other Internet services).
ahh. some breed of sysadmin i presume.
generally only your kind has such a limited imagination as to reduce the
concept of 'useful technology' to the must banal of banal things.
last time i checked windows was still better than linux at all variations
of multimedia and web production and design. and no. i'm not talking about
hosting. that is something your box does, not you.
oh. and i wager a lot of UNIX people would take difference to that Linux
delivers the 'better UNIX than UNIX' remark. probably for the groundless
spit that it is.
> You actually think that you could do without UNIX or Linux. But what
> would happen if the UNIX community suddenly decided that they had had
> enough of Microsoft's tactics and decided to route all traffic from
> Microsoft systems to the bit bucket. No internet, no web, no chat, no
> stock quotes, no e-mail, no communication whatsever. You couldn't even
> call Microsoft's help desk because UNIX controls the flow of the
> telecommunications lines. You couldn't fly to redmond because UNIX
> controls the Air Traffic Control system, the airport ticketing
> interfaces to most travel agents, and the credit card clearing system
> used by your bank to clear the purchase of th airplane ticket. You
> couldn't rent a car, you couldn't even take a train since the track
> switches are all controlled by UNIX. You couldn't even mail them
> a letter because the letters are sorted by Linux systems.
good fucking lord!
maybe i'll just stick Diablo II in my CD and kill a couple hours.
oh. UNIX. can't. do that. can it?
or maybe. i'll just turn off my computer and go outside. there is. an
outside you know.
and a whole world too. beyond the paranoid blue-glow of your vector display
or whatever the hell you psycho's use.
> And yet you arrogantly demand that Bill Gates be allowed to demand
> that I stop using Linux and UNIX.
you used 'demand' 2 times in a sentance.
you moron.
look. didn't you read my last post? god knows you fucking took some
liberties replying to it.
i said i DON'T agree with microsoft's behaviour and i DO think they should
be prosecuted. ehh.
> Unfortunately, it's a bit like a "Dr Who" episode where technicians
> who have been stranded for several generations replace perfectly
> functional equipment because all they have left is the "religeon
> of the maintenance cycle". They don't even know how to fly the ship.
> The "seveteem" is actually the descendents of the original survey
> team, which included the original pilot.
oh. my. god.
you are that fat comic-store owner on The Simpson's aren't you?
> When I first found out about Linux, I had been digging for months.
on and on..
> I first heard about Linux in February of 1992. And even then I was
> poorly informed. I downloaded the "TAMU" release, which barely offered
> gcc, the kernel, and some basic shell commands (bash, sed, awk, grep,
> and make). I didn't find out until almost a year later that there
> were over 80 floppies to be downloaded over 2400 baud lines.
alright. you got me crying with your gay life story.. jesus
> Actually, I'm basing estimates on how many people like to use the
> internet, how many people don't like Windows, and how many servers
> are running UNIX or Linux on the Internet. If I were going to really
> stretch, I would actually suggest that 70-80% of all computers would
> be runing some variant of UNIX.
but linux is weak for the internet. only very recently can it compete with
MICROSOFT browsers on either windows or mac for stability and plug-in
support.
> > within the realm of 'linux' anyway - but i'm
> > not critisizing microsoft because their goals are the same as any
> > business in the capitalist market.
>
> Most businesses are seeking a modest and reasonable profit in a
> competitive market in which the largest market share is as little as
> 30%. They provide the customer with a superior quality of service
> in some areas and charge a price that represents a modest mark-up.
first of all. that's ridiculous.
second of all. law of economics says companies will charge whatever the
market will bear.
> Microsoft's management expects a profit of over 50% of revenue, with
> 95% or more of the market, in every market it enters, and usually
> within 12 to 18 months. Once control is established, all competitors
> are targeted until they are either bankrupt or taken over by a neutral
> corporation which will primarily grab the intellectual property and
> terminate all employees and nonessential managers. The essential
> players are given stock shares (with killer taxes if they ever try
> to sell them) worth less than 1 percent of the true value.
umm. have you been asleep. forever? you are describing business as usual in
america. since well. the beginning.
> Unfortunately, Microsoft has come to represent both the pinnicle
> of success and the most flagrant examples of illegal and unethical
> behavior at the same time. If Microsoft were run by Bill Gotti
> instead of Bill Gates, the feds would be crawling all over him with
> racketeering investigations, charges, and court cases.
so you are saying Bill Gotti should wear tacky clothes then?
> > it's easy to persecute gates and compare him to hitler. or his 'cult
> > following' employees to the nazis. but why stop there?
> >
> > when the secret ones pulling all the strings are
> > the billion stockholders who just want to see a
> > return on their buck?
>
> That's a good point.
>
> Hitler wanted to conquer the world. Gates just wants to buy it,
> at half-price of course.
yeah. nothing like ending with a remark so stupid it nullifies the13,765
long words that came before it.
you sir. are an idiot.
y'r pal -kK
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alan)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 05:23:35 GMT
On Tue, 02 Jan 2001 03:13:49 -0500, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Alan wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 01 Jan 2001 01:28:58 GMT, "Chad Myers"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >Please show me ONE, just ONE example where the Republicans "bent" the law.
>> >
>> >-Chad
>>
>> Didn't a republican county allow faxed in ballots (against Florida
>> state law) to be used in determining total votes. This was a "bending"
>> of the law.
>>
>> Face it Chad. Bush won fair and square based on the law. However, in
>> that brief period after November 4, a lot of ugly politics was played
>> on both sides. For the first time that I know of, the back room deals,
>> arm twisting etc., that has been going on for decades was out for the
>> public to see (on both sides). For you to say that democrats did this
>> or that IS ad homenim. At least say that "elements of the democratic
>> party did this or that." You're implying there is one grand
>> conspiracy dude, and for that you should go to alt. conspiracy.jfk.
>
>Why do YOU think that almost all Democrat counties use punch-card ballots
>to the exclusion of other more reliable technology?
There are over 15,000 counties in this country. Have you done some
research to back that statement up?
>It wouldn't be so that they can play the "recount" game, would it?
>
<snip>
Objection! Introducing conjecture in place of facts.<g>
This link is only valid for a few days, the original article was much
longer and really a good rip on the whole process.
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/elect2000/pres/money/20001111/t000108149.html
------------------------------
From: "JSPL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 00:29:15 -0500
Reply-To: "JSPL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I'm afraid you are *really* lost. Netcraft's results are certainly in
> keeping with the tiny shreds of reality you have in there. Yes, default
> packet size can be altered; this would explain cases where Netcraft
> reports on the web server from the http headers, but can't identify the
> OS. The default size is 576 octets for "most machines", because most
> machines are Microsoft's TCP/IP stack.
Actually the default size for Microsoft Windows95/98 is 1500 which would
constitute "most" of the machines YOU are talking about. But I was referring
to most Internet routers. So once again, your wrong. It is ONLY when a
person changes the MTU in Windows to match most routers that his transfer
rate dramatically improves because the routers then do not have to have to
fragment the datagram to move it through Internet routers.
I'll snip the rest because your basicly arguing that my VIRTUAL QUOTING of
RFC 791 is wrong, which is assinine.
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge
Date: 4 Jan 2001 05:39:16 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: *Luckily* for me, the company never even *heard* about telnet. Took me
: several hours to get to some guy who was willing to admit that telnet
: actually existed, but I got a flat out refusal to grant me access via
: telnet.
: The reason I was given? It's not safe to do so.
: Turned out that they don't support PHP or any other web languague on their
: Solaris box.
Telnet is very unsafe, but ssh can do the same job in a reasonably
secure fashion.
A PHP installation, or any other environment capable of generating
dynamic content, can create huge gaping security holes if not done
properly. People who aren't knowledgeable enough to do so really
shoudln't try. But part of what you're paying for when you select a
professional Web hosting service is the expertise it will have in
providing tools for dynamic content generation while simultaneously
making sure that your site, and everything it depends on, is as secure
as it possibly can be. If you're not getting that kind of service,
then you have every right and reason to take your business elsewhere.
Joe
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 05:44:06 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>"R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" wrote:
>>
>
>>
>> I actually think that the forced break-up on involuntary terms
>> suggested by Judge Jackson are a bit extreme. The primary goal
>> is to create a competitive market, not to destroy Microsoft.
>
>After 15 years of consent-agreement violations, i'm of the opinion
>that the ONLY way to restore a competitive market is to destroy
>Microsoft.
>
>
>--
>Aaron R. Kulkis
>Unix Systems Engineer
>DNRC Minister of all I survey
>ICQ # 3056642
You know. The one thing I would like to know is WHY IBM decided
to JUMP on this new ATA spec thing for hard drives..........
I'd also like to say that signing an agreement with Microsoft
forcing them to be GOOD BOY'S has failed several times in
the past and it won't work this time either.
To make comments like "forced break-up is a bit extreme" is
like telling a convicted AX murder he must stick to butter
knifes from here on out.
The solution for Microsoft is definitely a court ordered breakup
of the company. It's the only answer to this problem.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 05:44:16 GMT
Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 04 Jan 2001 01:10:00
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 03 Jan 2001 14:11:20
>> [...]
>> >However, liberals in America like to make up rules as they go,
>> >to suit their needs, so the liberal FL SC decided to just
>> >wing it and make up laws and changed the already prescribed
>> >election certification process ad hoc. This was in gross
>> >violations of the Seperation of Powers, and of the laws
>> >set forth in Amendment 14. See, back in the post-slavery
>> >days, local governments would be constantly changing laws
>> >to prevent Black people from voting. Amendment 14 prevented
>> >laws from being written to exclude people, and it also
>> >prevented laws from being changed AFTER the election to change
>> >the result of the previously held election. This 2nd part
>> >is EXACTLY what happened in Florida (by the FL Supreme Court)
>> >and is why the US SC stepped in and vacated their decisions.
>>
>> Honestly, you can't see how this kind of flagrant partisan poppycock
>> undermines your position?
>
>T. Max Devlin Dictionary for the Mentally Inept:
>
>"Partisan Poppycock" n. syn. see "truth" 1.) To provide accurate,
>fact based, and substantive arguments.
Guffaw.
I'll take that as a 'no'.
--
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
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.fan.bill-gates,alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.microsoft.sucks
Subject: Re: Big government and big business: why not fear both - www.ezboard.com
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 05:44:18 GMT
Said Johan Kullstam in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 04 Jan 2001
>"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> "Johan Kullstam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> > > "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > > Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 3 Jan 2001
>> 14:44:18
>> > > > >The customer can easily find out why the price differ so much.
>> > > >
>> > > > No, they can't, despite your contentions. The vast majority of
>> > > > consumers don't even know they have winmodems or winprinters, or
>> > > > understand what that means, until they get burned trying to change
>> OSes.
>> > >
>> > > Igonrance is not an excuse, they can ask.
>> > > Period.
>> >
>> > well, you can ask all you want, but do you expect an answer? have you
>> > been to a best-buy/compusa/&c and asked "do you have a modem which
>> > would work under linux" and gotten a compentant answer?
>>
>> Don't have those here, but I can ask for a hardware modem, or a
>> non-winmodem, or just *gasp* check the bloody box.
>
>i ended up getting an external. gotta love blinkenlights. but all
>the internals i saw had "requires windows 95" and such on the box.
>who can tell? it's in the manufacturer's of the winmodems best
>interest to obscure the facts.
Now that, to me, is a clear indication that winmodems are not a response
to market demand, but purposeful manipulation of the market to
disadvantage the consumer (using his own price-conciousness, since
they're not conscious of much else when it is intentionally obscured)
and inculcate the monopoly.
Do you think the Microsoft apologists would even see the problem if they
were shown proof that Microsoft strongly encourages peripherals
developers to build "win"-crap? I don't know where the proof is, though
I'm reasonably (positively) sure it exists.
>> And at the worst, I can ask for the guy that knows, there is always
>> at least one guy there that can answer me.
>
>where do you shop? i'd like to go there.
Unfortunately, its in a imaginary make-believe land.
--
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
------------------------------
From: "JSPL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 01:07:50 -0500
Reply-To: "JSPL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:92vpkt$ej2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > hackerbabe wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > "JSPL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >I can hear the weeping and wailing of the Linux advocates
> > > > now! Their supposed 3% (actually .03%) share of the desktop market
> > > > will be7
> > > > eliminated as though it was never there.
> > > > http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2000/October/os.html
>
> This is great! They normally don't publish these numbers.
>
> I also found that
> http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2000/November/os.html worked as well.
>
> Keep in mind that most Linux browsers are identified as
> Unknown (20,548,518 identified user IP addresses).
They are?? How nice that you've taken over the complete "unknown" column for
Linux. I guess it just too bad for the millions of crawlers, email
harvesters, and WYSIWYG html editors.
>Add this to the
> number of Linux users (1,686,370), plus the BSD Unix users (most of
> 951,599) which gives you 23,186,487. Multiply that by a factor
> of four
A factor of FOUR! How nice. How about a multiplier of .0001? I like that
number much better since we're introducing multipliers with no facts to back
them up.
(since MSN and AOL publish more IP addresses and don't
> offer Linux connectivity support (forcing Linux users to lie and
> tell the ISP that they are running IE or Mozilla, and the users
> who use Netscape on Wine because the Linux version has memory leaks.
Yea, there most likely a whole lot of Linux users connecting through MSN &
AOL. mmm...hhmmm.
major snippage, due to being based on the above idiocy.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
