Linux-Advocacy Digest #850, Volume #31 Tue, 30 Jan 01 17:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! (Salvador Peralta)
Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) )
(Steve Mading)
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! (Salvador Peralta)
Re: XFS 1.0 is getting close! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: XFS 1.0 is getting close! (.)
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! (.)
Re: Kernel upgrade - not bad at all (John Travis)
Re: C2 ("Conrad Rutherford")
Re: C2 ("Conrad Rutherford")
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Re: XFS 1.0 is getting close! ("Adam Warner")
Re: XFS 1.0 is getting close! ("Adam Warner")
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: Bill knows what's best for you ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! ("Bennetts family")
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 20:46:41 +0000
>>While I've experimented with the various 'desktops', I've now settled on
>>the excellent fvwm, which has yet to fail me.
>
> After playing with fvwm, windowmaker, enlightenment, kde, gnome, and all
> the other 'fancy' desktop management stuff, I've reverted to trusty old
> vtwm. Simple, uncluttered, and very very stable.
FVWM2 is very uncluttered if you set it up right. But I might give vtwm a
try. If you want really uncluttered, give yourself 11 text terminals (and
1 for X) and run SVGATextMode.
>>Previously, I occasionally had GUI crashes.
>
> The only serious GUI crashes I remember having were caused either by
> KDE, or by Exceed. I've never had a local X server crash.
>
>> NEVER has the kernel crashed on me, and I've been using it
>>for a year.
>
> I've been using Linux for 3 years, and unix for almost 12 years. I've
> never seen a linux kernel crash, and the unix kernel crashes I've seen
> can be counted on my fingers.
I've seed 2 kernel panics. One was when I put in the wrong boot disk
which told the kernel the root partition was in the wrong place (so it
paniced) another one was on an old Cray EL90[*] (I think) which had some
faulty hardware. I don't think it ran UNIX though. It was something
called IOS which had a compatibility layer.
[*] Sharp brought out a graphical calculator called the EL-92. I think
someone was having a laugh.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 20:39:05 GMT
Hmmm, where did UNIX, OS2, and MacOS, come from,
Europe? Further, since Linus has moved here,
Linux is a product of the US too.
You can trash our politics all you want, but I can
see no excuse for attacking our technical
community.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Bill Delphenich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Steve Withers wrote:
>
> > It is intersting that the US produced
Windows......the country with
> > one-party (two faction) politics has also
given us no choice on the
> > desktop. While politically diverse Europe with
multi-party, proportional
> > systems as the politcal norm, has given us
Open Software and Linux....
> >
> > Sort of the illusion of freedom (US politics)
vs the reality of freedom
> > (European politics - outside Britain).
>
> Sadly ironic, huh?
>
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 12:54:23 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Edward Rosten quoth:
>
> Word Processing: vi Wordpad edge: vi
> Text editor: vi notepad edge:vi
> html/xml ed: vi none edge: vi
> games: vi none ...
>
> -Ed
>
I couldn't agree more. vi is my #1 favorite editor. Period. But we were
talking about graphical desktop applications.
--
Salvador Peralta -o)
Programmer/Analyst, Webmaster / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.microsoft.sucks
Subject: Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does)
)
Date: 30 Jan 2001 20:58:46 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Kyle Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Kevin Ford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:> The price is the thing. We can get ten Linux servers as good or
:> better than 1 AIX server, 4 Solaris servers or 3 Windows servers.
:>
:> This is why Linux rules.
: Except for the small issue that Windows NT is still in place, while you
: linzealots insist that Linux can replace Windows on the desktop. It can't,
To the lurkers, please note that under the version of English that
Kyle is using, "can" means "100% likely to", and thus "cannot" merely
means "has at least some chance that it won't happen". This might not
be the same as the version of English that you and I are used to using.
: sadly, dolts like Kulkis (who would sooner lob off his left testicle then
: admit to a UNIX based anything having anything less than total perfection)
: are your biggest, most well heard, albeit unofficial spokesmen.
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:14:17 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pete Goodwin quoth:
> I wouldn't rate AbiWord too highly.
It's formatting method is better than MS Word. The icons are obvious,
powerful, and well-placed. It saves in open formats. Sit is small, light,
efficient. IMO, it's actually one of the better word processers I have
used.
> I wouldn't rate Konqueror too highly either.
Konqueror rocks for as young an application as it is. Way ahead of where
IE or Netscape were at similar phazes of development.
> ATE doesn't seem to let you set fonts. The basic editor does. Notepad has
> a 64k limit on Windows 9x but no limit on NT/2000
No limit? Not true. Both notepad and wordpad fall over and die well
before you get to 100 megs. This is a problem when you want to look at
logs. vi has no such limit AFAIK.
> Actually there used to be DEBUG on MSDOS which could some crude editing.
> Never tried it though.
DEBUG is still around.
> > terminal: rxvt dosterm - edge rxvt
>
> Windows don't need no terminal nor no CLI.
bullshit. Try manipulating large logfiles or using a scripting language,
or even use the jdk without a shell.
> > editor: gimp MS Paint - edge Gimp
>
> I don't rate GIMP to highly - I prefer Paint Shop Pro.
Paint Shop pro comes with windows? Does paint shop pro come with an api
that you can integrate into scripts to generate images on the fly? Does
PhotShop? The gimp is a programmer's image editor. It is one of the best
image editors ever made for that reason. Combine it with imageMagick and
its PerlMagick extensions and you have functionality that simply is not
matched on Windows.
> > general games: KDE, Gnome, et al ms games - edge linux
>
> Games in general are more plentiful on the Windows platform than Linux.
Not out of the box, they aren't.
> > 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 think AbiWord is good?
No, I think AbiWord is excellent. I prefer it to word and wordperfect. I
do not like applications that try and guess ( badly ) as to what I am
doing. I spent 5 minutes today trying to keep word from screwing up
Autoformatting list elements in a document that I was working on. i have
no such problems with AbiWord.
--
Salvador Peralta -o)
Programmer/Analyst, Webmaster / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: XFS 1.0 is getting close!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:11:46 GMT
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 14:28:40 -0600, Eric Sandeen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The installer still has a few bugs (we prefer to spend our time
>improving the filesystem, not the installer...) but in general it works
>quite well, and it can make you a shiny new Linux box running completely
>on XFS.
It figures.
Now I know why it is so difficult to reliably and consistently install
programs under Linux.
Doesn't matter how good the file system is if the user gets frustrated
battling bugs trying to install it.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: XFS 1.0 is getting close!
Date: 30 Jan 2001 21:14:43 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 14:28:40 -0600, Eric Sandeen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>The installer still has a few bugs (we prefer to spend our time
>>improving the filesystem, not the installer...) but in general it works
>>quite well, and it can make you a shiny new Linux box running completely
>>on XFS.
> It figures.
> Now I know why it is so difficult to reliably and consistently install
> programs under Linux.
> Doesn't matter how good the file system is if the user gets frustrated
> battling bugs trying to install it.
Ladies and gentlemen, may I present Claire;
Shes smarter than an SGI developer.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: 30 Jan 2001 21:17:44 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 30 Jan 2001 19:30:39 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> 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
>>
>>What the hell are you talking about?
> I particular commercial game, rather than the ~ 20 currently
> available or the 20 known to be in active development.
Oh I knew what diablo was, im just not sure what that has to do with an
old, slow mac running linux and therefore capable of handling dozens of
services, including BIND, routed, gated, DHCP and mail while never loading
over 1.00.
>>
>>> Ooopps looks like Linux is out of the picture.
>>
>>You are a moron.
> I wouldn't be surprised if he's only familiar enough
> with Diablo II to use it as a FUD club. It may even
> run under Wine (Diablo and Starcraft do).
Diablo II runs great under VMware, though I must admit that it helps
when you're running dual 800 with 784 megs of ram.
=====.
------------------------------
From: John Travis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Kernel upgrade - not bad at all
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:11:07 GMT
And on Tue, 30 Jan 2001 10:15:31 GMT, "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
spoke unto us:
>Jumping into Thread....
>It works beautifully. And, another thing, the basic edition is only 79.00.
>I've used it with great success running 98/NT/95/and 2K. I haven't switched
>to it exclusively yet as I only have 128MB of RAM installed. As soon as I
>get the chance, I'll up it to 512MB and do my Windows development work
>straight from Linux.(Wndows Crash? Just restart the VM!) I'm quite sure
>you'll want to keep a Windows partition handy if you play any sort of
>games, though. I didn't try it, but I'm sure Need For Speed, Falcon 4.0,
>and etc won't work well at all under a virtual machine <g>...
I'm in pretty much the same boat. I'll need a little more RAM if i
decide to attempt it. But isn't the $79 version only for '95/'98? I
think to run NT or 2K now you have to shell out the big bucks :-).
>Indulging in a little cage rattling, are we? :)
Of course ;-).
jt
________________________________________
Alternative Computing Solutions...
Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org
------------------------------
From: "Conrad Rutherford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: C2
Date: 30 Jan 2001 15:29:13 -0600
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <3a75c002$0$52713$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Conrad Rutherford
wrote:
> >
> >"Kevin Ford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Chad Myers once wrote:
> >> >
> >> >"Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >news:3a73729a$0$11937$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >>
> >> >> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > >I believe NT is certified on several different hardware
platforms,
> >> >> > >all of which are available to the average joe (mainly through
> >> >> > >Compaq). One could buy similar hardware to the boxes tested and,
> >> >> > >while not technically C2, you could obtain the level of security
> >> >> > >tested in the C2 certification because, as I stated before,
> >> >> > >the OS is the main focus of the certification.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >-Chad
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > And as WE stated before. It's software and hardware.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > And now you finally admit it.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > That's a good boy.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Charlie - C2 applies to the OS - only. Period.
> >> >
>
> Ah, no it doesn't.
Sigh. yes it does.
>
>
> >> >Well, Charlie's assertion earlier was that the OS had nothing
> >> >to do with it, and that NT wasn't C2 certified, the hardware
> >> >was.
> >> >
>
> The certification is hardware and software both.
> That is the rules.
Show me those rules. Quote me them. Show them to us. Cause I've shown you my
proof on the official site but you've show me squat!
------------------------------
From: "Conrad Rutherford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: C2
Date: 30 Jan 2001 15:30:20 -0600
"Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Conrad Rutherford wrote:
> >
> > I'll always admit when I'm wrong - why not?
> >
>
> Advocacy NGs seem to get a bit heated and personal, so
> people are less inclined to admit they were wrong in such
> situations.
Agreed.
>
> If you're prepared to admit you don't know everything
> (or admit what you thought you knew was wrong) when shown
> otherwise you'll actually *learn* something amongst the flames.
ABSOLUTELY agreed.
>
> I'd rather admit I'm wrong and learn something than "prove"
> I'm right and remain ignorant.
>
>
> I shouldn't have a nice cold beer when I'm reading c.o.*.a,
> it makes me too mellow :-)
I'll share a beer with ya anytime :)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:41:23 -0000
On 30 Jan 2001 21:17:44 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> On 30 Jan 2001 19:30:39 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>> On 28 Jan 2001 23:18:27 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
[deletia]
>> I wouldn't be surprised if he's only familiar enough
>> with Diablo II to use it as a FUD club. It may even
>> run under Wine (Diablo and Starcraft do).
>
>Diablo II runs great under VMware, though I must admit that it helps
>when you're running dual 800 with 784 megs of ram.
Do tell. Some of the latest offerings from 'certain' vendors
who compete with Blizzard are generally emulation hostile.
Tried starcraft under vmware?
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: XFS 1.0 is getting close!
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:43:03 +1200
Hi Eric,
> > The XFS 0.9 Pre-Release is now available for the 2.4 kernel:
> > http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/index.html
>
> If you want to really give XFS a workout, try the installer we've
> released along w/ the filesystem.
>
> It's a modified version of the Red Hat 7.0 system installer which will
> let you install & run your whole system on XFS.
Sounds like a good plan. I already have to supply ide2 and ide3 kernel
parameters at install to get RH7 to recognise the HPT366 controller. I'll
give it a go and hope supplying the parameters will also work for your
modified installer.
> ISO image at ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/download/PreRelease-0.9/iso/
Downloading now. I'm back to 56k modem tomorrow so your suggestion came not
a moment too soon :-)
> You'll need the original RH 7.0 discs along with it.
I have them.
> The installer still has a few bugs (we prefer to spend our time
> improving the filesystem, not the installer...) but in general it works
> quite well, and it can make you a shiny new Linux box running completely
> on XFS.
I really appreciated the reply from an SGI/XFS developer!
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: XFS 1.0 is getting close!
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:49:39 +1200
Hi [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> >The installer still has a few bugs (we prefer to spend our time
> >improving the filesystem, not the installer...) but in general it works
> >quite well, and it can make you a shiny new Linux box running completely
> >on XFS.
>
> It figures.
Well it's prelease software. So, duh.
> Now I know why it is so difficult to reliably and consistently install
> programs under Linux.
Tell you what, you have a go getting Windows to completely run on the XFS
filesystem and I'll have a go at getting Linux to completely run on XFS.
> Doesn't matter how good the file system is if the user gets frustrated
> battling bugs trying to install it.
People using pre-release software are a little more insane than your typical
user, flatfish. Though it's funny how some users will PAY to install a beta
of Windows. It's all about achieving new functionality. I can't wait to see
this filesystem in action.
By the way I have tried to email Microsoft about software bugs and never
received a reply by a developer. This is exciting territory. When you see
your own bug report actually fixed and signed off you'll realise how
responsive OSS can be to the user.
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: 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: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:52:46 GMT
Eric Bennett writes:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>>>> 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?
>>> Listen fuckwit:
>> Yet another person with a foul mouth.
> How ironic, given your own foul mouth.
Where is the alleged irony, Eric?
------------------------------
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: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:54:47 GMT
Edward Rosten writes:
>>>>> It was origionally a tholen.vs.malloy thread.
>>>> Incorrect, given that I haven't responded to Malloy.
>>> Granted. It was a malloy vs tholen thread---he had responded to you.
>> Rather one-sided to be using "vs".
> Mabey, but he is still arguing with you (even though you don't respond).
Illogical, given that it takes two to argue.
> I think vs. is justified.
What you think is irrelevant; the fact is that it takes two to argue.
>>>>> 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.
>>> I have now restated a more accurate version.
>> Not accurate enough.
> I believe it is, but that's just an opinion.
What you believe is irrelevant; the fact is that it takes two to argue.
>>> 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.
Not the parts relevant to you calling it "malloy vs tholen".
------------------------------
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: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:55:42 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.
>>> I suggested it based on past experience. That is stated below in the
>>> quoted text.
>> I countered your suggestion. That is stated below your quoted text:
>>
>> "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."
> That may be the case, but that is still the reason I said that. I
> acknowledg now that is is incorrect.
Good.
>>>>>>> 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.
>>> I have no wish for him to argue with me, as well as him arguing with
>>> him.
>> Then you'll have to live with Malloy's continued ridiculous postings.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.microsoft.crash.crash.crash,alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.sad-people.microsoft.lovers,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,microsoft.windows.crash.crash.crash
Subject: Re: Bill knows what's best for you
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:05:05 -0600
"Trebor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:YkEd6.29287$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Install the Windows Media Player version 7.00.00.1958 update on Windows
2000
> and, when the install is finished, your machine will be rebooted by the
> installer program .. WITHOUT giving you an option to reboot now or reboot
> later. Isn't that wonderful?
This isn't true. When it gets to the last screen, it says it's finished,
and tells you specifically that clicking next will reboot the computer. All
you have to do is click cancel at this point to abort it.
> I'm also thankful that W2K - at least, according to MS marketing info -
has
> new enhanced installation features that reduce the need to reboot a
computer
> after installing software. It is so nice to see that the WMP 'engineers'
> teamed up with the W2K 'engineers' to integrate all the latest MS has to
> offer in their latest OS and media application ;-)
This is slightly annoying.
------------------------------
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: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:58:14 GMT
Marty writes:
> 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.
Correction: you're merely not responding to me directly. You're still
on the offensive in other discussions. For example, with Sten.
> Dave is still posting his ridiculous response like he had in other threads.
What alleged "ridiculous response", Marty?
> He hasn't moved on.
Illogical, given that the issue was "malloy vs tholen", Marty.
------------------------------
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: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:59:54 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis writes:
> 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.
Still lying about that, eh Kulkis? Well, you've tried invective, you've
tried lies. What will you think of next?
>> He hasn't moved on.
> Understatement of the decade.
How ironic.
------------------------------
From: "Bennetts family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:04:07 +1100
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9564fc$mif$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
snip
> Eesh, never say "incompetence". Linux does demand a little more in terms
of
> the
>
less-than-obvious-things-you-never-thought-you'd-have-to-learn-to-get-it-wor
k
> ing-well department. I'll probably get flamed to kingdom come for coming
into
> this conversation so late and offering obvious advice, but what the hell.
> You've unzipped the whole 2.4 kernel somewhere, right? Have you switched
to
> that directory and run "make xconfig" during an X-session as root? Getting
> your sound card to work is as easy as picking the right Sound driver in a
> nifty little GUI program, and then moving on with the rest of the compile.
> Had no problems with my sound card... Just curious. Recompiling kernels is
> actually a snap if you follow the right steps. Is it just a complicated
piece
> of hardware that you have?
Yeah, I installed the right drivers in the kernel for it (in fact, I believe
that 2.4.1 will have a lot of good bugfixes in it for me, so I'll patch to
that), it's just the devices and getting the rest of it "gelling" together.
> > [snip] Who needs backups (no tape drive, Wintroll):-)
>
> Well, apparently someone who's going to run the risk of frequent sudden
> crashes and... oh, whoops, I probably shouldn't say any more. That's
> sure to hit a sore spot.
I've got all my important stuff on two separate FAT partitions, duplicated,
of course.
--Chris
------------------------------
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: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 22:00:21 GMT
Edward Rosten writes:
> Who is Dave?
Letterman?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
