Linux-Advocacy Digest #901, Volume #31 Thu, 1 Feb 01 22:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: I edited my inetd.conf with Word. (John Travis)
Re: My open-source quote ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: I edited my inetd.conf with Word. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux headache (Bob Hauck)
Re: What do you do if your language of discussion is subverted? ("mmnnoo")
Re: My open-source quote (Perry Pip)
Re: My open-source quote ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Paul Thurrott reports: "Microsoft Executives Trash Linux" ("nuxx")
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance ("Chad Myers")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Chad Myers")
Re: Storm Linux & Applixware ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Chad Myers")
Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe ("Les Mikesell")
Re: What do you do if your language of discussion is subverted?
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Aspects of open-source that MS will co-opt: Predictions? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: My open-source quote (Donn Miller)
Re: The 130MByte text file (Bob Hauck)
Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) )
(Bob Hauck)
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! (Bob Hauck)
Re: Linux headache ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Travis)
Subject: Re: I edited my inetd.conf with Word.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 01:00:37 GMT
And [EMAIL PROTECTED] spoke unto the masses...
^M^M^M^M^M^M^LOL. A good example of why that whole mess was pointless. I tried
to edit this 654 meg DivX;-) dvd rip I made in wordpad and it hung
windows...erm...then by definition windows must suck...either that or the whole
concept was retarded.
jt
--
Debian Gnu/Linux [Sid]
2.4.1|XFree4.0.2|Nvidia .95 drivers
You mean there's a stable tree?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: My open-source quote
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 01:19:20 +0000
Dan Hinojosa wrote:
>
> "Open source is like a bicycle without a seat. Sure it works like other
> bicycles, but the comfort using it is not there."
>
> --Dan Hinojosa, Java Developer
Yeah but it does at least have the possibility you can add a seat
yourself. With closed source, you have to get a whole new bike!
--
http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I edited my inetd.conf with Word.
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 01:22:12 +0000
Adam Warner wrote:
>
> > "It's natural to expect there might be people doing stupid things
> > with computers"
>
> Yep :-) I don't think Microsoft intends Microsoft Word to be used to edit
> Unix-style text files. It's obviously adding a CR & LF.
>
> But a valid point that the editor should leave the specific format
> unmodified.
>
> Regards,
> Adam
Well that is really to be expected. DOS/Windows does use the CRLF
combination as a line termination.
--
http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Linux headache
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 01:43:44 GMT
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:55:42 -0600, Robert Morelli
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bob Hauck"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy? Surely you jest. Half of the people who
>> post here are just trolls who come up with all sorts of obscure problems
>I don't hang out here, so I don't know, and ultimately I don't really
>care. Troll or not, the original poster's experience is plausible.
It is only really plausible if he was trying to do something that his
default kernel doesn't support and which can't be compiled as a module
(e.g. Caldera kernels don't do APM because they do SMP and the two
conflict). Adding a driver is almost never a reason to compile a
kernel.
> The issues raised need to be acknowledged and discussed so Linux can
> move forward.
Compiling a kernel is really not necessary for the type of users for
whom it would be an issue. The issue has been addressed. Perhaps it
could be better in some ways, but the areas of concern seem small enough
that it isn't a big deal. This is one of those things that people
complain about, but give proprietary systems a pass on even though they
often "solve" the problem by either including everything (bloat) or
removing functionality.
>My thinking is that Windows advocates can be an asset. I want more
>of them pointing out the places where Linux needs improvement, I
>want more Mindcraft comparisons.
Sure, I can go along with that. But by the same token many issues
raised by some of the Winvocates here are just FUD and trying to "fix"
them is a waste of time. One needs to keep that in mind.
>> If you're referring to the "curse of the gifted" rant, that's not even
>> close to what he said.
>May be there have been several such rants. In fact, I hope so because
>there seem to be several recognized problems with the kernel development
>model.
There are rants of all sorts all the time on the kernel mailing lists.
I happen to agree with Alan Cox that there should be some kind of
version control (e.g. CVS or similar). I really don't like to program
without that, it feels like working without a net.
>The rant I was referring to was about modularity in the kernel. Linus
>responded saying that he thinks the importance of modularity is
>overblown.(!)
I recall a discussion about the importance of keeping internal
interfaces from changing. IIRC, Linus was of the opinion that trying
too hard to keep them fixed causes bloat and cruft buildup. There is
some truth to that, but there is also the question of making it easy to
parcel the work out. That's a judgement call, and it will probably keep
coming up over and over. Which is a good thing, since the situation may
change in the future.
The people doing the actual work do worry about a lot of the issues you
bring up. They are generally not idiots or fanatics.
>What the Linux community needs to do is stop making excuses for things
>like this. Maybe you've been numbed to it, but the rest of the world
>would consider it mind blowingly bizarre that an end user would ever,
>for any reason, need to contemplate setting hundreds of parameters and
>rebuilding the kernel.
Most "end user" systems address this mainly by removing functionality,
or at least removing it from the user's control. This is not an
appropriate solution for Linux given it's current user base. Making
things more flexible without having to rebuild the kernel is one of
those things that is always being worked on.
Most of the other things you mention are also being worked on. It is
not the case that these issues are being ignored. I'm sorry that it
isn't going fast enough for you, but you know what to do about that if
it is a serious concern. I also disagree with you about the necessity
of some of it. For example, I think the admin/user dichotomy is a good
thing, the ability to completely customize the kernel is very important,
and I'm not too worried about a lack of uniformity in GUI's.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: "mmnnoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What do you do if your language of discussion is subverted?
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 01:51:12 GMT
That's definitely part of the battle, which is why words
like 'homophobe' get invented. Instead of using language
accurately, you choose a euphemism or epithet to
tilt things in your favor. Get your slant on things into
common usage and you're really making headway.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Adam Warner"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Flacco raised an interesting point a couple of days ago about what
> aspects of open source Microsoft would co-opt.
>
> That question cannot even be sensibly asked if Microsoft is able to
> manipulate what certain phrases mean, such as "open source." We have
> seen that Microsoft is employing the term "open" in their restrictive
> licensing practices, and now Microsoft (through Miller) is now telling
> the world that the Windows source code should indeed be considered open.
<snip>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Subject: Re: My open-source quote
Date: 2 Feb 2001 01:52:15 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 01 Feb 2001 16:13:05 -0700,
Dan Hinojosa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Open source is like a bicycle without a seat. Sure it works like other
>bicycles, but the comfort using it is not there."
Open source is a bike you can fit with any seat you want, or for that
matter change out any component you want. Closed source is like owning
a bike without even owning a wrench, or for that matter an air
pump. As soon as something doesn't work, you have to upgrade the
entire bike to get a fix.
>
>Java Developer
>
Is that supposed to impress us??
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: My open-source quote
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 02:04:42 GMT
"Closed-source is like a bicycle without handlebars. Pedal all you can,
but the bicycle is going to go where it wants, not where you want."
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: "nuxx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Paul Thurrott reports: "Microsoft Executives Trash Linux"
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 10:15:41 +0800
What exactly is Linux verification? Just wondering...
nuxx
"Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> http://www.wininformant.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=19818
>
> "Steve Ballmer recently revealed the not-so-surprising notion that Linux
was
> his company's number-one threat. For any other company, this would be a
sure
> sign that it was finally taking the Linux threat seriously. But for
> Microsoft, you can only tell they're worried when the trash-talking
starts.
> And Microsoft is trash-talking Linux big time."
>
> ...
>
> "The company is convinced that it will win its lawsuit on appeal, and if
the
> Linux movement hopes to be more than just the latest in a long list of
> competitors that have been run over by the Redmond giant, it needs to come
> up with a better response than its peers from the past did."
>
>
> Paul Thurrott's Wininfo is an authoritative source for Windows news.
Having
> followed his reporting for a long while, Paul Thurrott provides fair
> Windows-centric reporting (he also manages to come up with a number of
> exclusives).
>
> Regards,
> Adam
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 02:11:19 GMT
"Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:95cmpo$rj6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> : news:95781i$rus$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> :>
> :> Ad Hominem fallacy: the above rant has nothing to do whatsoever
> :> with the point I brought up - that the Mindcraft study was funded
> :> *BY* one of the parties it was judging, and thus it does you no
> :> good to defend it by saying, "But all other studies are funded by
> :> others too."
>
> : So basically, you're attempting to take on the entire scientific
> : community and the basis for every reasearch study going on in the
> : western world, just because you can't accept that Linux just doesn't
> : perform as well as other OSen?
>
> No, liar. Read my post.
Um, I did. You're basically saying that simply because Party A funds
Party B's research, that somehow the results are ALWAYS going to be
tainted, when this obviously isn't the case as it goes on every day
in our world and the results are purely objective and reviewed and
approved by other objective researchers.
Basically, you're full of shit and you don't know what you're talking
about, you have no argument and you're grasping at straws and it's
really sad.
-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: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 02:12:49 GMT
"David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:95bv3o$3ga$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Chad Myers wrote in message <0Wde6.602$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >
>
> >No, quotas have been around for NT for years.
> >Save the lies.
>
> I am curious about the disk quotas on NT - we have NT 4.0 Server at the
> office, and I can find no mention of disk quotas anywhere in the help files,
> or in any of the administrative tools. In fact, the only mention I find of
> the word "quota" is that in order to use the SU program (a utility to let
> you change to another user in a command box - it is very limited, but
> nonetheless essential for administrating NT - why you have to buy it as part
> of the NT Resource kit is beyond me), a user has to have the "Increase
> Quotas" account priviledge.
There are very good 3rd party implementations of Quotas. He never said that
they had to be built into the OS, he just said NT 4.0 doesn't have quotas,
which is a lie. Win2K has them built in, that's the only difference.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Storm Linux & Applixware
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 02:29:40 GMT
Mine was made in Canada.
On Thu, 01 Feb 2001 18:30:56 -0500, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> I owned a Caddy, not the Chevette.
>
>Did you know that Cadillac's Clark Street Assembly plant had the
>lowest quality rating throughout all of GM?
>
>Apparently, squishbrain here has an affinity for low quality products.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
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: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 02:21:14 GMT
"David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:95bv3o$3ga$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> 1. Why is windows nt the most vulnerable web server platform?
> >
> >Because, like any other OS, the administrators are not properly
> >trained to use the security implementation. When set up and configured
> >properly NT is rock solid. Of course, like any other OS, there are
> >the occasional buffer overflows and such (Linux is no stranger to this),
> >but in general, when you lock down the permissions, it's nearly impossible
> >for someone to crack it over the internet.
>
> I thought windows was supposed to be the ultimate in ease-of-use. But
> apparently configuring NT properly (and especially keeping up with all those
> pesky service packs) is so difficult that a range of MS subsiduaries (or the
> 3rd parties they hire to do their web hosting) around the world cannot cope
> with it. Defacing Microsoft websites seems to be a popular hobby.
Ah yes, the typical round-a-bout argument. Attack NT admins because they're
stupid, then when we say NT gets hacked alot because there lots of stupid
NT admins out there, attack NT, then attack .... and it goes on an on.
NT is _EASIER_, not easy. If you know what you're doing, you can be more
productive faster and get more accomplished faster with NT. That doesn't
mean that a bum could walk in off the street and be a sysadmin with NT
overnight. Unfortunately, this seems to happen. Someone gets a
"MCSE in 20 minutes" book, manages to muddle his way through the tests
and gets hired to administer a .com web site which gets defaced after
the first week.
MS is helping to stave off the growing number of paper MCSE's by
going with adaptive and simulation tests, but they haven't moved
all the tests to that style yet.
As far as defacements, you'll be glad to know that Linux goes neck
and neck with NT/IIS and often outdoes NT by quite a long shot.
Although attrition (not accidentally) groups NT with Win2K which
increases the numbers artificially, Linux still beats everyone.
If you had a breakdown of NT and 2K and Linux, 2K would be the
smallest by far, by a quarter of NT and Linux, I would say.
So, with that, I ask you guys:
1. Why is Linux the most vulnerable web server platform?
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 02:39:28 GMT
"nuxx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:pord6.1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > The mind boggles at this bit of sophistry.
> >
> > Hello? have we heard of Oracle? DB2? Sybase? Informix?
> >
> > In fact, EVERY database that matters has a Linux version.
>
> How many of these enterprise class databases have you deployed in
production
> environments on Linux servers? What sort of systems & how are they
> performing? Seriously, I'm interested in reading some good Linux advocacy
> for once. Or is there anywhere I can find some case studies?
>
> cheers,
> nuxx
Here's one:
http://www.fcw.com/fcw/articles/2000/1204/pol-nasa-12-04-00.asp
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: What do you do if your language of discussion is subverted?
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 02:27:41 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Flacco raised an interesting point a couple of days ago about what
> aspects of open source Microsoft would co-opt.
Microsoft's language spinning is a pretty impressive thing. Notice who
was responsible for making "Innovation" and "TCO" sexy buzzwords within
the Tech Media community. Basically, whenever we restrict a description
of something to one or two words (eg: "free", "open source"), we run
the risk of having it spun back into our face by someone who wants
their definition of the word applied.
> If the term "open source" becomes so subverted that the general public
> perception is that Microsoft's development model can be
> considered "open source," then how can the term even be used in
> discussion without there being confusion?
Unfortunately, this is where a lack of big-time marketing by the Linux
distribution companies can be a problem. Microsoft needs to be
countered on their FUD in the mass media, on a large scale.
Unfortunately again, if one of the big open source icons steps forward
and bashes them for manipulative language use, that person is going to
get ostracized as a kook. We need some big faceless corporations to
help us out!
I was actually giggling with glee when I saw what that guy from Oracle
was trying to do, discrediting MS almost like a political opponent.
Unfortunately (again), with people's attentions most easily grabbed on
a large scale thirty-seconds at a time, all the hair-splitting of a
newsgroup discussion isn't going to fix it. These issues need to be
fought on their ground.
By the way, I didn't see the Superbowl, but I noticed that there
weren't any Linux distro companies in the articles summing up the
commercials for the game. What are they thinking? Is this just not a
good venue for RedHat to market in?
-ws
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Aspects of open-source that MS will co-opt: Predictions?
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 21:42:05 -0500
"Bobby D. Bryant" wrote:
>
> <snip happens>
>
> Of course, as MS's image continues to grow moss, students will become less and
> less interested in marrying the company. Also, students who only want to learn
> one solution presumably aren't among the best and brightest, so it may be that
> MS is locking in the "low end" mindshare, but letting the ones most likely to
> innovate slip through their grasp.
precisely.
>
> Bobby Bryant
> Austin, Texas
--
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]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 02:43:07 GMT
On Thu, 01 Feb 2001 18:44:54 -0500, Aaron Lehmann
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
><snippage>
>> Trivial to a programmer maybe.
>> Non trivial to a musician,
>Why would a musician care about the things you posted?
>You seemed to care about graphics, ergonomics, and visualizations...
>Never once did you mention pushing the "PLAY" button...
It's about FUN, not pushing buttons and that is the difference the
Penguinista's fail to see. It plays just as well as any of the others
out there, it's just more fun to use.
Sure if I'm doing DA work, I'll fire up SoundForge or Wavelab or
something like that. But for just playing a CD or mp3 I like the media
player because it looks nice, it is simple to use and it is FUN
because it is full of eye candy and everything is there right in one
package. I don't have to figure out what's available, what it does and
if I would want to use it.
Are there more sophisticated players out there? Sure there are.
Musicmatch is one of them.
Better burners?
Sure. Wavelab or Nero are both better by far and they cost quite a bit
as well.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 21:43:39 -0500
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: My open-source quote
Dan Hinojosa wrote:
>
> "Open source is like a bicycle without a seat. Sure it works like other
> bicycles, but the comfort using it is not there."
All ya gotta do is get a book on learning Unix. Most unix books are
applicable across all unices, including Linux, FreeBSD, and Solaris.
Even Waldenbooks at the average shopping mall in the US has several
books on learning unix, like Unix for Dummies, Learn Unix in 21 Days,
etc. etc. Learning to use your platform of choice is a desireable
trait. Most people these days expect some developer somewhere to
develop a GUI application for everything they need, when they should be
learning Unix fundamentals. Of course, back when I first learned to use
unix, I was using Ultrix and early versions of SunOS. Can't remember
which version of SunOS it was, but it was the one installed on the IPX.
I had no choice but to get one of those books.
Can't understand your position. I just randomly tried
http://www.unixbooks.com/, and viola, there they were! Unix books are a
dime a dozen these days, so no one should be complaining about the
"comfort level" of Open Source. It's just screaming "I don't want to
educate myself".
Try http://www.unixbooks.com/unixgeneral.htm. There's a ton of them
listed. The very first Unix book I ever bought was
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0078821304/ref=ase_telcomergerrevie/102-5564239-1537722
This book has been in print for years, and it's very applicable to
practically any Unix variant out there. On top of getting a generic
unix book, I'd recommend some on the specific Open Source operating
system out there. For example, for me, there are a ton of books on BSD,
FreeBSD, etc. For Linuxers, there's loads of books as well.
So educate yourself, and find that "comfort level" you seem to be
lacking. If you don't, you will forever be a slave to GUI tools. This
is why so many Windows converts seem to be bitching about "hey, this GUI
tool screwed up my...", or "This GUI tools is great, but it doesn't
do..." or "I really like this GUI tool, but it screwed up my..."
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 02:43:44 GMT
On Thu, 01 Feb 2001 18:42:15 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 1 Feb 2001 16:21:29 -0000, George Richard Russell CS1997
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Since both emacs and vim are available for Windows, how can they be better
>>than themselves?
>
> Bad port.
Of which? XEmacs seems to work just fine for me under NT. I even use
the same .xemacs file I use on Linux. The only Winversion of vi that I
have is pretty old, but seems to work fine too.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.microsoft.sucks
Subject: Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it
does) )
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 02:43:40 GMT
On Thu, 01 Feb 2001 20:31:15 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Microsoft is damned good at abuse. :-)
This is arguments, abuse is three doors down.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 02:43:43 GMT
On Thu, 1 Feb 2001 20:20:09 +0000, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I only did it in response to someone's claim that PFE couldn't handle a <
>100MByte file without barfing.
Is PFE still being developed? I used to like it a lot until they got
XEmacs working decently on Win32.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux headache
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 02:44:17 GMT
On Fri, 02 Feb 2001 00:12:14 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(The Ghost In The Machine) wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
>on Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:16:52 GMT
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>On Wed, 31 Jan 2001 17:22:33 -0500, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>And beating the snot out of Lose2k and LoseME
>>
>>Show me one survey that shows Linux taking over the desktop.
>
>Show us a survey that shows Win2k taking over the server market. :-)
That's not was being discussed,
Stop changing the subject,
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
