Linux-Advocacy Digest #845, Volume #31 Tue, 30 Jan 01 12:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) (Cray Drygu)
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! (Salvador Peralta)
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux Myths -- What I'd call Part II is here! (Craig Kelley)
Re: Linux Myths -- What I'd call Part II is here! (Craig Kelley)
Re: Linux Myths -- What I'd call Part II is here! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Who was saying Crays don't run Linux? (Craig Kelley)
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows (Craig Kelley)
Re: Linux headache ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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?)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cray Drygu)
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 15:27:11 GMT
>He thinks that since there's an NTFS driver (although it's read-only for
>the most part) for Linux that NT is somehow now vulnerable to a Linux
>boot disk.
Well, it is, isn't it? So what if you can't write, most people who'd
do this are mostly interested in reading your data.
>What he forgets is that a Linux boot disk can also read ext2, which means
>a Linux box would be vulnerable to a Linux boot disk as well.
And this somehow changes the fact that NT is vulnerable? No, it doesn't.
Besides, as long as you have physical access to the machine, and you're
already rebooting it, just boot into single-user mode. Instant root
access!
--
cray [at] org
silverlight [dot]
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 07:36:06 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pete Goodwin quoth:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > you said something to mlw about it in this thread. Something like not
> > having many apps besides opening CLI's in multiple terminals. This is
> > simply untrue. Mandrake Linux comes out of the box with better word
> > processing applications, better text editors, games, etc. than
> > windows.
>
> You're kidding right?
> Except for the CLI tools, none of the GUI style tools are out of beta
> yet. StarOffice you only get with a deluxe version of Mandrake.
Star Office sucks. It's kludge. and I'm not kidding. again, the
extensible, interoperable applications found in the unix cli have partners
on the linux desktop.
Out of the Box:
Word processing: AbiWord Word Pad - edge, AbiWord
Browser: Konqueror IE - edge IE
News: knode Outlook - edge knode
Text editor: Advanced text Editor NotePad - edge ATE
Binary editor: Binary editor none
terminal: rxvt dosterm - edge rxvt
editor: gimp MS Paint - edge Gimp
ftp: gftp none
html/xml ed: quanta, bluefish none
net games: freeciv none
general games: KDE, Gnome, et al ms games - edge linux games
IRC: kirc none
By my count, linux comes with 5 sets of things not available out of the box
on windows and has an edge in 5 of 6 other categories. The lone exception
is konqueror vs. IE, and I think Konqueror will be a better application
than IE within a year.
I could care less which of those applications are in or out of beta. With
no commercial pressures forcing those products to market prematurely, their
beta period is better than most commercial releases. The question is, do
they work and are they generally bugfree. And the answer is yes.
>
> > You've also said that the desktop is less reliable than the windows
> > desktop. In my experience, this is also untrue. Again, x crashes can
> > and will occur. But usually, you do not lose services, and startx will
> > get you going again 99% of the time. And so we are clear on this
> > point... I have had 1 crash in the last week running X. I'd have that
> > at least once per day on windows.
>
> I don't recall if I said that - however, I'd say Linux + X + KDE is
> buggy and is sometimes less usable than Windows.
The biggest weakness is that cut and paste and dnd
> > "Linux is simply a fad that has been generated by the media
> > and is destined to fall by the wayside in time."
>
> Maybe...
Kind of a prick for snipping the fact that the quote was pulled from
microsoft.com, aren't you?
--
Salvador Peralta -o)
Programmer/Analyst, Webmaster / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 15:35:53 GMT
Every piece of software has bugs, of course. But in your honest
opinion, is your Linux system more stable than the Windows you have
used? My answer would be that vs Windows 95/98/Me, Linux wins hands
down: they all carry the dead body of MS-DOS on their backs. Vs NT, the
contest is perhaps closer, though I don't have enough experience to
give an honest judgement.
While I've experimented with the various 'desktops', I've now settled
on the excellent fvwm, which has yet to fail me. Previously, I
occasionally had GUI crashes. But in every case I was able to kill
either the misbehaving program (with a so-called 'surgical strike' from
another console), or, once only, kill the X server with <Ctrl-Alt-
Backspace>. NEVER has the kernel crashed on me, and I've been using it
for a year.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 15:52:36 GMT
"Christopher L. Estep" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Which browser? If you are referring to IE 5.5 SP 1, you have a point;
> however, this updates several critical DLL files used by both the OS
and UI.
> It is more akin to a kernel and X upgrade in Linux, which usually
requires a
> reboot (if not two).
This is of course the result of the "tighter integration of Internet
Explorer into Windows to give a complete, web-based experience" (that
is, upgrading your web browser replaces a piece of your kernel).
Another result is that when IE crashes (roughly once a day), the entire
GUI, including the taskbar, vanishes in a puff of smoke.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Myths -- What I'd call Part II is here!
Date: 30 Jan 2001 09:00:54 -0700
"Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Silly boy - X-box uses embedded W2K with DirectX - hardly taking attention
> away from windows...
Yes, but they aren't "selling" Windows, they're selling licenses to
games and the hardware expansions. They can make money without all
the FUD about Linux.
> Games written for the xbox can be very easily ported to windows and
> visaversa - just expanding their marketplace. Don't think we'll be seeing
> any linux power game boxes any time soon ! haha
Actually, X-Box games can't be direct ports -- developers must
substantially change their games.
Linux isn't about "power game boxes" just yet, and I somehow doubt
that cutting-edge games will ever be open source.
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Linux Weekly News (daily updates) is reporting this new small piece of
> work
> > > by Microsoft about Linux. It appears Microsoft can no longer concentrate
> on
> > > the technical capabilities of Linux so it's fantasy reporting from here
> on.
> > >
> > > Here's the link:
> > > http://www.microsoft.com/Windows/serverappliance/kempin.asp
> > >
> > > I don't want to spoil the surprise. Suffice to say that Windows is far
> > > better advocated in this forum than by Microsoft.
> >
> > I hope the X-Box is a wild success.
> >
> > Yes, you heard me right. I hope it becomes the best next-generation
> > console out there.
> >
> > The X-Box is a great machine, to be sure. It has 64MB of unified
> > architecture RAM and a ton of secondary storage space (hard disk);
> > virtually unlimited save space compared to other consoles and it's
> > made by a newcomer to the field that isn't deathly afraid of piracy
> > (Nintendo is going to die with this next round). Oh, it can also push
> > 4 times the polygons and anywhere from 8-12 times the textures as
> > compared to the PS2. It's a game programmer's dream.
> >
> > But MORE IMPORTANTLY -- it would take Microsoft's focus away from the
> > operating system arena. If they had a reliable revenue stream that
> > wasn't associated with Windows, they would stop this silly nonsense
> > and do something productive instead. They could make cool games,and
> > who doesn't enjoy that?
> >
> > If the X-Box is a success, Microsoft can finally give up their futile
> > battle with Linux and anyone else who they deem a "threat" while at
> > the same time remain a viable company with plenty of potential. The
> > possible attacks on hardware drivers and such that Microsoft could
> > propagate against free operating systems is pretty much limitless.
> > They could obfuscate interfaces in the PC and require exclusive
> > Windows licenses from hardware vendors which prevent the development
> > of drivers for free operating systems. Think winmodems squared. They
> > *will* do these things if they do not have something else to do, and
> > if the X-Box fails they will be grasping for whatever straws they
> > can; articles like this will be more regular and 'strategic alliances'
> > with hardware vendors (like Nvidia) will become more commonplace.
> >
> > --
> > The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
> > Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
>
>
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Myths -- What I'd call Part II is here!
Date: 30 Jan 2001 09:03:34 -0700
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> > I hope the X-Box is a wild success.
> >
> > The X-Box is a great machine, to be sure. It has 64MB of unified
> > architecture RAM and a ton of secondary storage space (hard disk);
> > virtually unlimited save space compared to other consoles and it's
> > made by a newcomer to the field that isn't deathly afraid of piracy
> > (Nintendo is going to die with this next round). Oh, it can also push
> > 4 times the polygons and anywhere from 8-12 times the textures as
> > compared to the PS2. It's a game programmer's dream.
> >
> > But MORE IMPORTANTLY -- it would take Microsoft's focus away from the
> > operating system arena. If they had a reliable revenue stream that
> > wasn't associated with Windows, they would stop this silly nonsense
> > and do something productive instead. They could make cool games,and
> > who doesn't enjoy that?
>
> You don't understand how big corporations work, then, MS would think it's
> nice & important to have the X-Box generating cash for them, they will also
> think that it's nicer and more important to increase the cash flow from
> windows toward them.
Perhaps, but at least it wouldn't be a sink-or-swim mentality.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux Myths -- What I'd call Part II is here!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:05:04 GMT
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 20:41:20 +1200, "Adam Warner"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Thanks for the support David and Jim,
>
>Regards,
>Adam
Add me to the list Adam.
We may be on opposite sides of the fence, but you back up your points
and at the very least seem like a nice person.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Who was saying Crays don't run Linux?
Date: 30 Jan 2001 09:11:08 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >J Sloan wrote:
>
> >> Spotted this today on the news - FYI
>
> >Yeah, it looks like Linux is the future of supercomputing, at least for the
> >next "generation" of IT.
>
> For *some* sorts of problems, that undoubtedly true. If you can do with
> comparatively coarse parallelism and comparatively slow individual
> processors, and get your "super" from the sheer number of processors, then
> a Beowulf cluster is certainly a great value/money solution.
>
> Quite many of the problems demanding a "supercomputer" can be adapted to
> that approach. But some simply can't, and for those, there is still a need
> to come up with fast-as-hell non-clustered machines. Sometimes you might
> "just" need a closer coupling of all the processors, like full shared
> memory[1], but sometimes, you really need just one greased-lightning sort
> of processor, and an environment around it to keep it happy.
Enter Linux/NUMA from SGI.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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,soc.singles
Subject: Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:12:14 -0500
Marty wrote:
>
> Edward Rosten wrote:
> >
> > >> It has now moved on from that.
> > >
> > > Actually, the situation hasn't changed. I'm still ignoring Malloy like
> > > I was at the beginning of the thread, and Malloy is still posting his
> > > ridiculous responses like he was at the beginning of the thread. He
> > > hasn't moved on.
> >
> > That part of the situation has changed, but Marty has since joined in,
> > which means that some parts of the situation have changed.
>
> Actually, the situation hasn't changed. I'm still ignoring Tholen, and have
> been for over a month. Dave is still posting his ridiculous response like he
> had in other threads.
....for over a decade.
> He hasn't moved on.
Understatement of the decade.
--
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]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:14:54 -0500
Nick Condon wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Myers) wrote in
> <Qppc6.27759$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >"Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> What a load of bull - most studies are sponsored, yes, but not
> >> necessarily by one of the parties being judged in the study.
> >> A study sponsored by a third party can be impartial, but a study
> >> sponsored by one of the parties being judged by the study cannot.
> >
> >I'm not saying that influce CAN'T happen, I'm saying that there
> >are trusted scientific sources which can provide unbiased,
> >uninfluenced results in a study. NTSL, Gartner, and others.
>
> Gartner are unbiased? hahahaha.
>
> I read a Gartner quote about the recent conclusion of the Sun-vs-Microsoft
> Java case. They said (something like) "Sun is upset with Microsoft for
> making a better JVM than they do. The message from Sun is: if want to do
> Java you have to do it on Unix".
>
> Wow, I thought. Has this "analyst" even heard of Java before today? And
> then I spotted he was from Gartner. Still, kudos for putting a pro-
> Microsoft spin on *that* story, I'd have thought it was impossible.
Even Gartner can hire idiots.
--
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: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows
Date: 30 Jan 2001 09:19:33 -0700
"Christopher L. Estep" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Oh?
>
> I run @Home here on a dual-boot (soon to be quad-boot) Windows 98 SE/2000
> Professional box (the added OSes will be Whistler and Linux-Mandrake 7.x
> once a distro wtih 2.4 AND XFree86 4.0.2 ships). During install of Win2K
> Pro, I entered my computer name for @Home and the workgroup name. Then I
> simply configured the ICW to use a LAN connection and plugged in my mail and
> news server settings. Automatic IP adressing and DHCP. No DNS. No WINS.
> No automatic configuration or proxy servers. Instant warp-speed Internet
> connection, instantly usable. On L-M, you CANNOT use the DHCP client (it
> always fails to get the settings from the DHCP server on bootup, so I have
> to configure everything statically). I did NOT use the @Home CD at all.
> Easier than 98 SE or even Windows ME (both of which are easier than L-M,
> even though you cannot use the DHCP client in SE or Windows ME).
>
> Rock-solid stability, and no "fiddling" needed.
This is a bit disengenious, unless your claim is that monopoly power
is technically better (in which case, this illustrates your point
beautifully). @Home uses Microsoft DHCP, and so Linux, which uses
RFC-Compliant DHCP can't function with their servers. I used the DHCP
client in '98 just fine, but I had to use static addressing in
RedHat.
Now then, how come this Sandisk USB flashcard reader works with Linux
2.4 just fine, but fails miserably under Windows 2000 and bluescreens
Windows 98? Hmmmm.
> PS: I even updated my video card via said "instant Internet" connection: I
> told it to pull the current certified AIW Radeon drivers via Windows Update
> once said connection was up and running.
Linux users have been doing that for years.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux headache
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:19:13 -0500
Jasper wrote:
>
> On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 12:18:09 -0600, "Robert Morelli"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >3. Because the Linux/Unix paradigm is designed for multiuser
> >client/server environments, and this paradigm is totally useless for the
> >typical home user. For instance, the root user under Linux can do
> >things you should never do, while the non-root users can't do ordinary
> >things you need to do. The root/non-root distinction in Linux is a
> >nuissance which has no purpose for the home user.
>
> You're quite correct. The fact that people are currently attempting
> to use a thin client system like Unix as a desktop OS is nothing short
> of bizzare. I can only assume this has come about through blind
> hatred of MS without any consideration of the nature of Linux/Unix.
>
> Not only is Unix thin client it also has it base firmly rooted as a
> CLI driven OS. Each time I attend to a Windows PC and open a DOS
> prompt the immediate (and somtimes hostile response) from the user is
> "You don't expect me to do this do you?"
And your point is?
That's what they said in the transition from Full Service to Self Service
gas stations.
Users are as fucking LAZY as you *LET* them be.
Somehow, when EVERYONE had to work at a DOS CLI prompt, work still got
done.
Why is that?
>
> I for one will be amazed if Linux succeeds on the desktop in a
> networked environment. Especially when all you need do is have one
> single powerfull Linux server and simply install xwin32 on your
> Windows based clients. At a keystroke you can have the best of both
> worlds. Any half decent administrator should realize this and guide
> their users in this direction. It is simply non-sensical to go around
> installing an OS like Unix which is designed to support thin clients
> on client PC's.
You are truly an idiot. Unix has had a VARIETY of full-fledged GUI's
since the early 1980's.
>
> Perhaps the home user may be able to justify Linux on the desktop.
> However with the advent of faster and faster modems an indusrious ISP
> may be able to serve this need with a cluster of Linux servers
> connected to Windows based X clients. Imagine how easy it would be
> for the ISP to trouble shoot home user problems with this type of
> configuration? However I cannot imagine the demand for such a service
> would be great.
You are not only ignorant, but a liar as well.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:24:36 GMT
On 28 Jan 2001 23:18:27 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>Hmm. Lets compare that with the number of processes running under W2K, thats
>WITH a copy of unreal tournament running, internet explorer and all my happy,
>useless toolbar button thingies:
I prefer to compare the number of processes running while playing
Diablo II
Ooopps looks like Linux is out of the picture.
Sorry,
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:21:43 -0500
Nick Condon wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Harlan Grove) wrote in <94si7f$7nq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >Absolutely true. It's how we define 'freedom'. For those in the US of
> >Libertarian bent, Microsoft can do what it wants to within certain
> >legal bounds (which it's overstepped, IMO).
>
> Microsoft has a centrally planned, state granted, exclusive monopoly.
> That's not very libertarian.
No, it's not "state granted" If it was, they wouldn't have been
CONVICTED of criminal conduct in Federal Court.
>
> Americans are so busy watching and being suspicious of their government,
> they've missed the big corporations sneaking up behind them, until it's too
> late and there's nothing left to do but bite the pillow.
Must be why Microsoft has been REPEATEDLY **CONVICTED** in Federal court
for behavior nearly identical to that which got IBM REPEATEDLY
***CONVICTED***
of crimes back in the 1960's-80's.
>
> Europeans have the opposite problem.
All too true.
--
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.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
