Linux-Advocacy Digest #817, Volume #31 Mon, 29 Jan 01 10:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Yup, it's definatly Mandrake (Charlie Ebert)
Adam Warner is a fucking idiot! (Charlie Ebert)
Investicije 2001 (Damijan Sencar)
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! (mlw)
Re: Microsoft is fired. (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
And after all that, it worked! (Pete Goodwin)
Desktop MTTF, Linux, lets get some numbers. (mlw)
Re: Linux Myths -- What I'd call Part II is here! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe ("Chad Myers")
Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4 ("Chad Myers")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Chad Myers")
Re: Sound a networks ("MH")
Re: Windows is fired again (Matthias Warkus)
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Gates Vaccine (Bruce Scott TOK)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Yup, it's definatly Mandrake
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:10:47 GMT
In article <Vk7d6.90292$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kyle Jacobs wrote:
>Ok, I've herd a lot of comments about Linux Mandrake being the biggest pile
>of shit Linux available, and a lot of commentary exclaiming otherwise, I
>think I've landed on: get this...
>
>I install Mandrake 7.2, finish & reboot. Upon starting KDE2, I ran
>"mandrakeupdate" because I knew that there were a lot of things "out of
>date".
>
>Ok, downloaded all the RPMS out of date (from "normal" list) and reboot.
>What happens just minutes later? My Debian style KDE2 menus (part of
Your Debian style menu's?
Well, I know you've never fucking run Debian as your
not that fucking intelligent.
Mandrake would fall over in it's crap before they used anything
from Debian.
>Mandrake 7.2) are MISSING. My "office" section, my "networking" sections
>are both eradicated from the list. I figure it was a glitch, so I rebooted.
>
>Upon getting BACK into KDE2, the menu's are STILL Missing! I guess I had
>hit a defective mirror, so I REINSTALLED Mandrake 7.2.
>
>Did the same thing, rebooted into KDE2 after the reinstall, and ran
>mandrakeupdate, tried a more "offical" mirror, rebooted.
>
>This time, "Networking", "Configuration" AND "Office" are ALL missing from
>the menu! I reboot AGAIN! STILL MISSING.
>
>Can't wait till 7.3 when mandrakeupdate blows out your video card through
>software...
>
>
http://www.debian.org
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Install this.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Adam Warner is a fucking idiot!
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:15:36 GMT
In article <953q2q$osj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Adam Warner wrote:
>Dear Charlie,
>
>> What really cracks me up is people like this dipshit Adam Warner,
>> run up here and post a message from something **THEY READ** of
>> the microsoft.com site, pretend like it's the truth before
>> even investigating it, and start spreading it around the worlds
>> internet highways as if it were the *FACTS*.
>
>I hope an apology will be quickly forthcoming. I am never been treated so
>disgustingly.
>
>Regards,
>Adam Warner
>
No Adam, Your a total fucking **TROLL** dipshit!
Your a **WINTROL** fucking liar.
You are just like all the rest, you take some peice of
crap off the http://www.microsoft.com website - when it's
up- and you start spreading it around the internet like
they know what the fuck they are talking about anyway!
There is NOTHING that's printed at http://www.microsoft.com
which is truthful. Nothing.
And posting something from there is so unintelligent, it
would be like you comming over to my house, pulling your
pants down and shitting on the living room floor!
An appology. Somebody should kick your fucking ass.
***BTW**** this just in. George Bush refuses to
pardon Microsoft. Appearently somebody asked him to????
Charlie
------------------------------
From: Damijan Sencar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Investicije 2001
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 14:25:10 +0100
Zdravo,
tukaj je nacrt investicij. Nekaj je za DATEKO, nekaj pa za CAOP!
2 Načrt investicij za leto 2001
2.1 Strojna oprema
Barvni tiskalnik 400.000,00
Tiskalnik črtne kode 1.000.000,00
Prenosni računalnik (2) 1.500.000,00
Nagradnja računalnikov 1.000.000,00
Čitalec chip kartic z ustrezno programsko opremo 1.000.000,00
Visor s čitalcem črtne kode 200.000,00
2.2 Programska oprema
Nadgradnja programa Visio 100.000,00
Nadgradnja programa MSProject 100.000,00
Nadgradnja programa Jbuilder 100.000,00
Nakup CASE orodja System architect ali Rational Rose 1.500.000,00
Programska knjižnica ORBACUS 4 1.500.000,00
Nadgradnja programa Exceed 400.000,00
2.3 Izobraževanje
Tečaj programskega jezika Java 1.000.000,00
Tečaj programskega jezika C++ 1.000.000,00
Tečaj vodenja SW projektov 500.000,00
Seminarji, strokovna srečanja, sejmi 1.500.000,00
Obiski računalniških podjetij, transfuzijskih in ostalih ustanov s
podobno ciljno tehnologijo 1.500.000,00
2.4 Računalniško omrežje
Pilotna uvedba brezžičnega rač. omrežja 500.000,00
Požarni zid 1.500.000,00
Dograditev optičnega omrežja MF-ZTK 1.500.000,00
2.5 Ostalo
Adaptacija prostorov AOP (?)
l.p.
Damijan
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 08:27:34 -0500
"Bobby D. Bryant" wrote:
>
> Bennetts family wrote:
>
> > You are in fact conceding that anyone using a server should be using Linux,
> > and you're right!
>
> The entire history of the anti-Linux FUD campaign has been a step-by-step
> narrowing of the argument to specific applications. They've pretty much
> painted themselves into a corner, with no turf left to battle on except the
> desktop marketshare, and the main argument there being limited to the fact
> that Windows still gets more vendor support because it's more popular.
>
> There's not a very good exit strategy from that position.
I am truly amazed at the sudden and universal shift in multiple people's
arguments. Within a day, Win2K went from reliable yada,yada,yada, to "Linux is
unstable with a GUI" and :its not "good on the desktop."
This is in some ways very good.
Every argument they have had, has been squelched, and they know it. Linux beats
their system hands down in all the criteria they used to use, thus have to come
up with new criteria.
Desktop, Linux is a very good desktop for most people, and the applications are
coming.
stability vs GUI? This is a new argument, this is the first time I have seen it
mentioned. I have had my current machine for 6 months, it has been on steady
for about 24x7 with a few planned reboots due to kernel changes, yet I have had
no X/GUI failures.
As I see it, my machine currently has 4320 hours, with 0 failures. If my
machine failed right now, I would have an MTTF twice as good as Win2K, and I am
running KDE2.
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft is fired.
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 11:20:02 +0100
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> Just because you're not aware of it, doesn't mean it's not documented.
> Hell, .lnk is also hidden.
>
> Scrap files (.shs) is documented in knowledge base entry Q138275. My
> January 2000 copy of MSDN shows a last review date of October 31st 1999.
> Although it doesn't mention that the extensions for SHS files are hidden,
> it does mention that they're special OLE shell objects, which if you know
> anything about the shell, you know that extensions for shell objects are
> hidden.
>
Well, Erik, there you got one which certainly tells all the world how right
you are.
knowledge base entry Q138275
Aha.
That is something which even the dumbest windows-luser MUST know about.
Well, there's still the problem that you have to conjecture that because
it's a OLE shell object it's also hidden, therefore SHS is always hidden.
Well, really obvious otherwise.
We, as linux users, who on a daily base have to work with man pages and
how-to's, which, according to Wintendo(tm)-trolls were written by drunken
programmers, have a certain sympathy with you. They (MS) could not have
found a place a little more obscure to hide that little treasure.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: And after all that, it worked!
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:25:38 GMT
A half day later and the Linux box is up and running.
FTP into the box runs _slowly_. No idea why that one occurs.
Telnet works fine.
SAMBA works fine, though one PC had to be reconfigured to "see" it.
Now we wait for the dev. kit. 8)
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Desktop MTTF, Linux, lets get some numbers.
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 08:46:18 -0500
OK, the latest FUD tactic of the winvocates is to say that Linux is unstable
with a GUI.
Lets get some numbers together about desktops.
Take the number of hours, total not just current uptime, that your system has
been running, and divide by the number of crashes you've had. Lets be accurate
and generous, an X crash that can only be fixed using telnet or ssh, should be
counted as a crash.
Send this information to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Each mail should have these lines:
machine: name
hours: 4000
crashes: 0
Machine, followed by hours, followed by crashes. Each one on its own line, and
each with a number following a colon after the word. You may have more than one
machine per document. Only one mail (multiple machines) per email origin will
be counted.
I will write a quick program to calculate.
I will try to reduce spam data by:
email from Windows machine will be rejected.
questionably high crash numbers will be double checked.
unreasonably small crash numbers will be double checked.
If I get a usable response, I will post these numbers periodically.
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux Myths -- What I'd call Part II is here!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 30 Jan 2001 00:07:25 +1100
"Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Did they just say there are only 500 million people in the world?
>Yes.
In Microsoft's defense, it is likely that the "Nikkei Industry News"
is not published in English, whereas the interview itself probably *was*
conducted in English. Thus, there is a pretty good chance that the orginal
words have been translated from English to Japanese, and then again from
Japanese to English; Such treatment will usually introduce some quirks.
Bernie
--
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for the
appointment by the corrupt few
George Bernhard Shaw
Irish playwright, 1856-1950
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:29:50 GMT
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
>
> > "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Chad Myers wrote:
> > >
> > > > The obvious question is, why isn't Linux on the TPC?
> > >
> > > Because no distributions have shipped with the 2.4 kernel yet?
> >
> > So you think 2.4 will suddenly make Linux jump into the future
> > and suddenly be stable and a serious contender
>
> As you know, the 2.4 kernel smokes everybody in
> specweb99 - do you dispute that?
Smokes, by 3%? Oh yeah, and just on web servers. I don't know about
you, but I don't consider web serving a real enterprise task. What
improvements does 2.4 have for the enterprise?
>
> > as opposed to the joke it is now?
>
> I'm sorry, I don't understand your point.
>
> IBM thinks Linux is worth a billion dollars, but you say
> it's a joke. Please, enlighten us by explaining why
> you think it's a joke.
Ah yes. And IBM has never made a bad investment. In fact,
IBM is batting 1000 on their choices of products. I mean,
just look at how wildly successful Lotus has been since they
purchased it *snicker*.
IMHO, When IBM takes interest in you and likes what you're doing,
that's an insult and a sign of failure, not a boon.
>
> > I'm sorry, you mustn't have taken your pills this
> > morning. Linux 2.4 is really a catch-up measure, bringing Linux's
> > feature set into circa 1998. Everyone has moved on.
>
> This is really incredible - you have no idea what you're
> talking about, so you stoop to name calling and insults.
No, really. If you take a look at all of Linux 2.4's improvements
and added features, it's basically everything NT 4.0 had in 1994.
Better scalability, better SMP, better filesystem (supposedly),
etc. None of this is brand-new or innovative, it's basically just
bringing Linux into the league of everybody else. Meanwhile, everyone
else is working on the next best thing while Linux is still trying
to establish itself in today's terms.
Really, if you want to succeed, you have to be the leader, not the
follower, and Linux is about 4 laps behind, sitting in the pit
getting a tune up.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:33:04 GMT
"Tim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:t1p97t07fol5ab7nnsham3stsdh5ci09i9@news...
> On 24 Jan 2001 16:28:08 -0600, "Conrad Rutherford"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >OK, lesse...
> >
> >W2K:
> >Insert CD into a CD ROM and turn on computer. It boots and begins to
> >install. Enter your CD key, name and answer a few default prompts and
> >shortly thereafter you have the a very massively feature packed OS with a
> >familiar GUI up and running with all your hardware ready to rock. HTTP, FTP,
> >Media Server, Journaling file system, DirectX hardware acceleration of every
> >device, OpenGL running at the right refresh for that autodetected monitor
> >and video card and the list goes on. Browser ready, wordpad ready,
> >mediaplayer supporting pretty much every format (and others are a codec
> >autodownload away), graphics editor and viewers, handicapped accessiblity,
>
> From the sound of your post, you really use that (mentally)
> HANDICAPPED accessibility feature... Hehehhehh.
>
> Stupid troll.
Ah yes, the ad hominem attacks fly. Yet another play from the
penguinista play-book. When confronted with obvious and undisputable
facts, attack the person. Even better, try to offend as many minority
or disabled groups in the process.
The fact is, there are millions of disabled persons out there for which
the Internet could bring a major improvement in their life quality, but
it seems that computers and the Internet have left them behind, not
caring about them.
If you'd look, you'd see that Microsoft has been the most innovative
and staunch supporter of accessibility for disabled people. They have
invented, and are still inventing more and more convenient ways for
all sorts of disabled people to use Windows and therefore the Internet.
Where is Linux's support for the disabled? Non-existant.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?)
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:35:58 GMT
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
>
> > "Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > It also tells that with Win2k they weren't able to keep their site up
> > > for more than half a day.
> >
> > Which means they were incredibly incompetent. You could try to break
> > Win2K and you still couldn't get it to crash that often. They must
> > be switching the power on and off or rebooting for the hell of it.
>
> Come now chad, it's not like windows is some unknown
> quantity such that you can impress us with stories about
> how swell it is - after all, most of us Linux users see win
> 2k all the time - there's no mystery there!
>
> We all know and love windows, and we all have a pretty
> good idea how it acts in real life.
You've never used Windows 2000 have you?
Didn't think so. Really, you'd have to try REALLY hard to get
it to crash that often. Otherwise, you'd have to be a real moron
to have that happen. It really sounds like these Delphi guys
are complete and total morons in every sense of the word.
Perhaps you are confusing Win9x? It's a typical Penguinista mistake.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Sound a networks
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:06:01 -0500
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Somebody should have told Mandrake to provide a link to it..
Why? So the DL could eradicate all of your menus and destroy your
net-config?
hehe...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Subject: Re: Windows is fired again
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:30:21 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Mon, 29 Jan 2001 10:39:28 +0000...
...and Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Winfile.exe is the Win3.11 file manager, IIRC. It was not too bad IMO.
Yeah. Unlike the user interface design desaster which is the Windows
95 Explorer, it was actually quite usable.
In the same verge, Windows 3.1's file requesters were the last ones
that were halfway decent. The sideways-scrolling nightmare introduced
with Windows 95 was so bad that I was truly surprised how Microsoft
managed to make it worse with every release.
mawa
--
better to dance with an airhead than be reading soc.singles on Friday
night.
-- Edmond L. Meinfelder
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,soc.singles
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 14:44:54 GMT
Edward Rosten writes:
> It was origionally a tholen.vs.malloy thread.
Incorrect, given that I haven't responded to Malloy.
> It's moved on since, hence the new suggestion for the name.
You're erroneously presupposing that it was origionally [sic] a
"tholen.vs.malloy" thread.
> Because I am not the only person who objects to these (I cite Kulkis,
> for one),
You do realize that it's Kulkis who is responsible for it, don't you?
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,soc.singles
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 14:46:18 GMT
Edward Rosten writes:
>>>>> AAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!
>>>>>
>>>>> Its going to be another Tholen vs. Malloy thread.
>>>> On what basis do you make that claim? I suggest you pay more
>>>> attention; I haven't responded to Malloy for several months.
>>>>> Why don't you start up a group:
>>>>>
>>>>> comp.tholen.vs.malloy
>>>>>
>>>>> And argue away on that?
>>>> Why would I want to do that?
>>> I honestly have no clue,
>> Then why did you suggest it?
> See below.
There is no answer below.
>>> but past experience suggests that you like arguing with Malloy.
>> Past experience shows how I ignored Malloy for over a year, but he
>> continued to litter the newsgroups with responses that did nothing more
>> than claim that I had posted nothing of value, which is incredibly
>> ironic.
>>
>> Current experience shows that I've been ignoring Malloy for several
>> months, but he continues to litter the newsgroup with responses that do
>> nothing more than claim that I've posted nothing of value, which is
>> still incredibly ironic.
> Which supports my idea that you will continue arguing, or at least one
> of you will.
Take it up with Malloy.
>>> Since the arguments relate mainly to themselves, it is more logical
>>> that they have a newsgrouop devoted to them.
>> Well, create it and encourage Malloy to post them there. I doubt you'll
>> succeed. Malloy needs an audience.
> Sadly, i agree.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 14:48:00 GMT
Raena writes:
> How's about alt.flame.tholen.vs.world?
That would be inaccurate.
> The comp hierarchy does not need this kind of besmirching...
Then do something about it.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Date: 29 Jan 2001 15:50:04 +0100
In article <953jn1$mqd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It seems that they bounce around from group to group. I remember that it
>was on COLA about a year ago, and its probably the same one back here
>again. I've got myself pulled in for a few threads (i'm practicing my
>touch typing at the moment).
>
>But since it's such an ancient and well known flame war that belongs to
>no group, I think it really deserved a group on comp. for itself.
>
>It's definitley one of the things you should join in when it pases. In
>years to come when it has finally died, you'll be able to look back and
>say I was there :-)
What I can't understand is how a professional astronomer allows his time
to be wasted in such a fashion.
This particular case however was started by Aaron Kulkis for reasons
that to me are totally unknown.
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Subject: Re: Gates Vaccine
Date: 29 Jan 2001 15:59:02 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Matthias Warkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It was the Sat, 27 Jan 2001 16:34:34 -0500...
>...and mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I think not. One should not be able to buy a good reputation with the proceeds
>> of criminal acts. To think otherwise would imply that if you stole enough, you
>> could be deemed a saint if the meager portion you gave away is sufficient to
>> impress the ignorant. This is clearly what billy boy has in mind.
>
>However, this is truly American (another good reason not to like the
>US).
>
>Who was it again who said (these are not the exact words) "In America,
>it doesn't matter how you acquire your wealth, the important thing is
>to keep it for twenty years"...? A saying that was often taken to
>allude to the Kennedys, but I suppose it's older than that.
The difference between a nobleman and a thief is the time of the crime.
Ask yourself where all these old families in Europe got their money
(more specific: land).
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
