Linux-Advocacy Digest #999, Volume #31 Tue, 6 Feb 01 01:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (J Sloan)
Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy! (mlw)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (J Sloan)
Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING (wobegon)
Re: Linux is awful ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (Peter Seebach)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 05:05:47 GMT
G3 wrote:
> in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], J Sloan at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on
> 2/5/01 2:48 AM:
>
> >> I wouldn't know. It takes so long to do something with linux shitty
> >> interface I can't accurately compare their complexity in terms of upkeep.
> >
> > Sounds like you are completely unfamiliar with Linux.
> > Those who have learned it find it much easier to keep
> > up to date than other Unices, or even windows.
>
> Up to date? I'm just talking about navigating something that default
> installs with 3 separate interfaces! pick one dammit.
You can pick one, and forget the others.
> And the other prob
> is none of them are good at everything, they are all ok for one thing and
> shitty for everything else. The thing makes as much sense as a goat with
> duck feet. Maybe 10 year veterans find it easy to use but 60 year olds
> using windows ain't gonna.
I dunno, I prefer my Helix gnome desktop to anything
I've seen from microsoft - and I see windows nt and
win 2k every day.
> Not really. I already have Photoshop, and Word, and Explorer (my key apps)
> on both Mac OS and Windows. UNIX is a useless paperweight for me.
Sorry to hear that, Unix makes a lot of sense to me - in
fact, apple finally got it and that's why MacOS X is Unix too.
> I'll keep my mac and telnet to unix-based servers on an as needed basis
> thanks.
Yes, I used to do that - I was seeing the power of
Unix through a tiny peephole - then I found I could
have the whole enchilada right on my desktop.
> Not only does it have better apps then either Linux or Winblows, Its at
> least as Stable as NT, and I don't have to worry about going through arcane
> text based config files if something goes wrong.
I like having the text files - you can use the GUI tools
if you want, but you can also manipulate the text files
directly if you know what you're doing. That's why I
like Unix, there is a lot of flexibility in how you choose
to get something done. I guess that's why I like perl
too, it's the essense of Unix distilled into a language.
jjs
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lookout! The winvocates have a new FUD strategy!
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 00:09:03 -0500
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Translation: Pete didn't allocate enough swap space for what he's
> > trying to do.
> >
> > Conclusion: Yet another deliberate sabotage by Pete Goodwin.
>
> What? Linux cannot grow its swap space beyond what is allocated? What a
> limitation!
Swap is a funny thing. You are replacing "fast" ram with slow disk.
There are two schools on swap, one says you allocate swap up-front and keep
track of it as if it were like ram. The other says it is an expandable
resource.
Both sides have points of efficiency and flexibility. I *like* the idea of a
fixed size swap partition and was disappointed when Windows 95 abandoned using
a preallocated swap file.
A fixed size swap will almost always be faster than an expandable one.
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 05:07:17 GMT
G3 wrote:
> iLOL you do realize Avie Tevanian, the guy who wrote Mach (as in the
> microkernal) is the head of the OS division yes?
Yes, well mach is an interesting topic, but it's never
proven to be very speedy in real world measurements.
jjs
------------------------------
From: wobegon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2001 21:18:35 -0800
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> Arthur Gravity wrote:
> >
> > And MS also runs Hotmail on FreeBSD because NT can't handle that much
> > traffic.
> >
> > MS Windows is a poorly implemented rip off of MacOS and Unix anyway. And
> > everybody knows that Steve Jobs and the Apple designers stole the GUI from
> > Xerox's PARC.
>
> Wrong. Apple didnt steal anything.
>
> Xerox leadership bought PARC, but never took the time do find out and
> understand what the people at PARC were doing.
>
> Then, Xerox stopped funding them adequately.
>
> Morale plummeted.
>
> Apple was hiring, with Jobs saying "show me something revolutionary"
>
> A-ha...a new HOME.
>
> So the PARC empoloyees packed up their brains and moved down the
> street to Apple.
>
> No theft about it, unless you call "giving respect and support to
> under-appreciated geniuses" to be theft.
I think this is a slightly skewed version of history.
Xerox funded PARC, Xerox paid for PARC and funded PARC right from the start,
Xerox did not buy PARC,Xerox funded PARC becuase, some within Xerox knew that
eventualy the desktop computer "might" become a reality and that might mean
Xerox would lose control of the copier & document processing market.
After PARC showed Xerox what they built, Xerox management desided that what
they made would have been retailed at such a tremendous cost that no home owner
could afford it, and most corporations could not justify the expence.So Xerox
abandoned all work on the PARC project.
Xerox, aranged Apple to see the PARC project results.After Apple purchased
stock from Xerox.
The Parc people , Against thier will showed Apple what they were working on.
If it had been up to most of the members of PARC, Apple wouldn't have been
allowed to see anything.Most PARC project people wanted to either start thier
own company or keep hamering Xerox to "see the light".
Bottom line is that Xerox owned all the results of the PARC research, and sold
( via stock purchase ) most of it to Apple, to recoop development costs.
PARC developers didn't want to work with Apple,some thought Steve Jobs was
greedy, some thought Steve Jobs would fuck it up.
Very few PARC employees actually moved to Apple,most refused to work there.
The result is/was the macintosh, which is why most of us on earth run mostly
Windows or Linux or FreeBSD or BeOS or or or ect...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: 6 Feb 2001 05:20:29 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> You are an idiot who can't even read your own messages.
Which you cannot seem to come up with when asked.
> Back in the bozo bin with you because it's obvious you are drinking
> again.
Ah, and here it is, class:
Prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that claire is a lying
sack of shit, and he'll killfile you.
Thats very nice.
=====.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Seebach)
Date: 06 Feb 2001 05:21:35 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>12x ATAPI CD-ROM not detected???
>I'm not buying THAT load of horse-shit either,
Then you're forgetting one of the most common PC Unix problems; most
Unix-like systems politely ignore incorrectly jumpered drives - say, a
slave device on a channel with no master device.
>How exactly did you get the install-CD going if the CD-ROM wasn't recognized?
Uhm. The BIOS finds the CD, boots from the El Torito floppy image, and then
that image loads a kernel which doesn't probe the CD? This can't happen
to various users of various OS's more than a few thousand times a week.
Linux may not be as bad as that guy thought it was, but you sure aren't
impressing anyone by "debunking" a story which is fairly common and
well-understood.
-s
--
Copyright 2001, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
C/Unix wizard, Pro-commerce radical, Spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon!
Consulting & Computers: http://www.plethora.net/
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 00:31:46 -0500
Jason Weingard wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > Some guy who doesn't want his name associated with his line of bullshit
> wrote:
>
> Check the name now. I put my name up.
> > >
> > >
> <snip>
> > >
> > > As I said, I've been working with Microsoft products since very
> > > early in the days of MS-DOS. I used to attend my training IN Redmond.
> >
> > Translation: "I have been thoroughly brainwashed for about 15 years now"
> >
>
> Just like every Unixhead I've ever known, brainwashed into thinking
> that their particular 'flavor' is superiour. If it's not AIX, then it's
> Solaris or HP-UX or BSD. Heck, I know some who still swear by SCO-Unix.
Here's a short list of the various flavors I've worked on....
Most of my computing life, I've used SEVERAL different flavors
in one day.
4.2, 4.3, and 4.4 BSD (Univ. of California, Berkeley)
AIX (IBM)
Dynix/ptx (Sequent)
HP-UX (HP)
IRIX (SGI)
SunOS & Solaris* (Sun)
SVR3, SVR4 (AT&T)
SVR3, SVR4 (SCO)
UT/X (Gould)
Version 7 (AT&T)
Xenix (SCO);
Unlike you, I have VERY BROAD experience with various OS's.
Including..
Apple ][, ][+, //e
Commodore 64
VM/CMS (IBM 370)
RSTS (PDP-11)
PROCSY (CDC 6600 and 6700)
all that in ADDITION to all of Microsoft's shoddy offerings.
>
> I used to be a DEC-VMS head, then I wised up and saw the
> direction the industry was headed. I started with Netware, and
> I cursed 4.x with every other one. I cursed NT 3.1, and 3.51 but I got
> them stable and running by sticking with it and actually *learning*
> something about the OS.
If you haven't figured out that NT is a pile of shit, then you
didn't learn much.
>
> >
> > > I am probably more intimately familiar with their
> > > products than 90% of the MCSE's out there. Windows is
> > > no more unreliable than Netware or Unix.
> >
> > Then why does Kmart need a staff of 20 highly-trained and Microsoft
> > credentialed Windows specialists just to develop stable desktop
> > configurations made ENTIRELY of business grade software?
> >
>
> Not being familiar with the situation, I don't know. We have a Legal
> database that will only run on Oracle for Netware. Not Oracle for Unix,
> or Oracle for NT. It's all in how the application is written.
Translation: YOUR programmers don't know how to do it differently.
>
> > The fact is, Microsoft's OS model is: as long as every program is
> > *perfectly* well-behaved, things are OK....
> >
> > Of course, if Application #1 and Application #2 have a difference of
> > opinion of which version of a DLL to use, the foundation-level
> > assumption has just been contradicted, and now the whole thing is
> > a pile of shit.
> >
>
> Then your application programmers need to get together and write
> good code.
Uh...dear shit-head: *I* am not in control of what various 3rd-party
software vendors do with the DLL's.
Neither are you, nor is anybody else.
...which is PRECISELY the problem....nitwit.
> >
> > > > >There were problems, true, with early versions, but if
> > > > >you kept up with the updates and Service Packs, you ended up
> > > > >fine.
> > > >
> > > > This doesn't make sense. If you keep up with service packs implies
> > > > that what you had prior to the service pack was not fine.
> > > >
>
> Note, that I said 'You ended up fine', not that you 'started out fine.'
Translation: During all the years until that patch is released,
your system's condition is "not 'fine'"
Thank you for that clarification.
> > >
> > > Gee, why do you patch HP-UX, or AIX, or the AS/400 OS, or
> > > any other? Because none of them are *perfect*, and they all have
> > > problems. I see more Linux/Unix problems being posted than I do
> > > Win2K these days.
> >
> > That's because the Unix/Linux community is more interested in FIXING
> > problems than hiding them.
> >
> > Ever notice who Microsoft *NEVER* admits that a problem exists until
> > a couple hours after they release the patch for it?
> >
> > In other words...when Microsoft denies that a problem exists, they
> > have absolutely ZERO credibility, because all that denial means is:
> > "We haven't written a patch for it yet"
>
> No, it means that, like any company worth it's salt, they don't admit that
> what every Tom, Dick, and Harry says is a 'problem' they announce to
> the world before investigating. During the course of the investigation, if
> it is truly a problem, a 'fix' is created and the official word is given.
The "official admission" that a problem exists on an MS platform
NEVER precedes the release of the patch.
Obviously, there is an internal admission that, indeed, a problem
*DOES* exist while the patch is being written....shit-for-brains.
>
> I apologize for not being clear; I see more bugs being reported by
> every Tom, Dick and Harry in computerland for Unix, Linux, BSD,
> Solaris, etc.--individually--than I do for Windows 2000.
The only thing that isn't clear is your own muddled thinking.
>
> >
> > Conversely, EVERY Unix vendor I know sends out notices INFORMING
> > their customer base of known deficiencies and shortcomings as soon
> > as such information becomes known.
> >
> > >
>
> So, the newspaper should report a fire at address X, when in fact
> there was none? (In case you haven't guessed, I'm using analogy here
I said *KNOWN*, not suspected, you illiterate retard.
> to describe a hypothetical situation. We'll say Microsoft is the
> newspaper, and the fire is the software bug.) I don't think so.
> However, noting that you say the 'vendor' informs the customer
> base 'as soon as such information becomes known', are you implying
> that you receive a notice from your vendor, the same time the deficiency
> is noted on BugTraq? I'm sure there is sufficient lag for the vendor to
> examine the deficiency and determine if it truly exists or not. If it
> exists, then they notify the customer base.
Only if the customer pays M$ gazillions dollars more per year above
and beyond the price of the "simple, intuitive" OS license.
>
> So, Microsoft waits a short period of time, I'd rather be certain, than
> have Chicken Little shouting "The Sky is Falling, The Sky is Falling."
No...Microsoft has been known to wait for up to 18 MONTHS, continously
denying the existance of a problem while either frantically trying to
jerry-rig a fix, or callously brushing off customer complaints
(which is it? Who knows? Who cares? The result is the same: DISHONESTY
is the basis of their customer relations)
>
> <snip>
> > > > >The *only* times they have been taken down for the last 3 years is to
> > > > >load Service Packs or Patches, or because of hardware problems.
> <snipped extraneous information>
> > >
> > > I don't get BSOD's on the NT Servers, because I know what I am doing.
> >
> > Translation: "I reboot at 0800, 1200, and 1700 hours every business day."
> >
>
> You'll note that I said they have *only* been taken down for Service Packs,
> patches, or due to hardware failure. I have my equipment tuned and running
> smoothly. But, I have the benefit of experience and real training in the
> products,
> not two weeks in a boot camp, or 2 years in a Tech School with no real world
> experience. I cut my teeth in the Military on DEC equipment, and ran several
> Vax systems at a University for several years.
I spent 4 1/2 years at Purdue learning everything up to and including how
to write operating systems and drivers and design circuitry at every level,
from full motherboards down to specifying the individual doping parameters
of transistors and diodes.
Add ON TOP of that a decade's worth of real-world experience.
>
> <snip>
> > > >
> > >
> > > No, I didn't NT is just as stable as Unix or Netware. In the two years
> since
> > > I joined the firm, they have had 0 BSOD's on their NT servers. I spent a
> lot
> > > of hours early on tweaking and tuning them just right. There is more to
> NT
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > Microsoft claims that this is unnecessary.
> >
>
> I have often heard this, but no one has ever been able to back it up
> with absolute proof.
Are you saying that Microsoft has some other meaning of the word "intuitive"
???
Oh yes...of course...when Microsoft uses a word, it means exactly what
M$ wants it to mean. Anyone foolish enough to think that the words
coming from M$ are being used with their traditional definitions should
be flogged until their skin is hanging shreds.
Or do you see it some other way.
>
> >
> > However, The Unix community has NEVER claimed that administrating
> > computers is a simple task.
> >
>
> And it isn't. We agree here.
Yet Microsoft keeps selling the line that no special training is necessary.
WHY DO YOU SUPPORT A COMPANY WHO'S ENTIRE PUBLIC RELATIONS IS BUILT
UPON LIE AFTER LIE AFTER LIE?
IF your CO kept telling you lies like that, or, used, his own, private
definitions of words, like saying the word "fun" when he meant "8 hours
of barracks details"....how long would you trust the man?
> .
> > >
> > > Not for me it isn't. I've been running it in my test lab at home since
> > > the earliest Beta's. I love it. I can't wait until we migrate.
> >
> > Then why won't you sign your name to your posts?
> > Hmmmmmmm?
> >
>
> I usually don't, in order to avoid getting Unsolicited Mail. But I have
> this time.
Hittind the delete key is sooooooo hard.
>
> > The point is...why do you tolerate such poor reliability?
> >
>
> I have never had to reinstall NT 4.0 to fix a problem. Remove
> and reinstall a previous version of a 3rd party application, or
> an older driver, yes. But never the OS.
>
> > >
> > > Sure you do. We had an MMS software database upgrade that killed one
> > > of our Unix Servers. Everything worked fine on the test server, but when
> we
> > > put it into production, we were sunk. As it turned out, the Unixheads
> had
> > > loaded a recent patch to both servers, but loaded it to the Test server
> > > *after* we had performed the upgrade. In testing, everything was fine.
> We
> > > then upgraded the Production server and everything went south on us. The
> > > vendor hadn't tested the software with the most recent HP-UX patches. In
> > > fact, they were 3 patch levels behind--a fact they neglected to inform
> > > us of.
> >
> > In other words, an outrageous problem which is TYPICAL in MS-land is
> > a noteworthy aberation in the Unix commmunity.
> >
> > Thanks for making our point, mr. too-ashamed-to-sign-my-name.
> >
> > >
> > > It was down for a week, and cost a few hundred K
> > > in idle time across the country.
> >
> > Down for a week?
> >
> > What a load of horse shit.
> >
> > Rolling everything back by recovery from the previous night's backup
> > tapes should take no more than several hours at worst.
>
> It took them a week to figure out that the HP-UX patch
> was the problem. The trouble was, the Unixheads restored
> the OS, but as soon as the MMS developers loaded the
> application, it took a dump. Since we had about 2000 systems
> out there with the new version of the application--that was
> incompatible with the old version-- we had to watch the
> finger pointing by both sides for a week, until the MMS
> developers finally talked to someone at their home office
> who had experienced this. The Unixheads rolled the servers
> back to the version of the OS *prior* to the patch, the developers
> reloaded the package, then the Unix patch was applied.
>
In other words...the vendor was feeding them false information,
and chaos ensued.
Again, this is a NOTEWORTHY occurance in Unix-land; but not so
in Microsoft-land...because with MS, conflicts like this are
a daily part of life.
> >
> > > We opted to move to a different MMS
> > > vendor at that point, and just completed the implementation last year.
> > > Oh, it is now an Oracle database running on NT. Peoplesoft gives us
> > > problems as well. Bad third party applications exist everywhere.
> >
> > If the machine was down for more than one business day, I would
> > call that deliberate sabotage by the IT staff.
>
> Since none of us had any non-user rights on the Unix box, and
> it in fact resided off-site, none of us could have touched it.
What company is this? I'll make sure to avoid it.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > > >If you keep it clean and neat, you'll be fine.
> > > >
> > > > In other words, if you don't use it for anything you'll be fine.
> > >
> > > No, don't load crapola on it; stay away from the crackware.
> >
> > When why is it such a problem even in companies that use business-grade
> > commercial software?
> >
> > Evidently "crapola" is defined as "anything not written by Microsoft,
> > and even some stuff that is!"
> >
> >
> >
>
> No, 'crapola' is anything not written to the proper programming
> API's from Microsoft. It's the same for Unix software too. We are
> scrapping a Solaris application for running one of our newly acquired
> Wastewater plants due to unreliability. We're moving it to an Open-VMS
> application we run in every other plant that we run.
That is, until Microsoft makes unannounced changes to the API so that
a 3rd-party vendors product will suddenly go in the dumper at the same
time that Microsoft is introducing their own competing package.
>
> My point is simply this: Bad software exists everywhere, and it's not always
> the fault of the OS. I've had bad experiences with software running on
> on every platform I've dealt with, from VMS to NT. Problems are
> everywhere, but pointing fingers and shouting 'You don't play fair' isn't
> the way to handle it.
But ONLY Microsoft has a history of DELIBERATELY sabotaging non-Microsoft
software by changing the API....*unannounced*, no less...sneaking it in
"software upgrades" and other crap.
Bill Gates should be swinging from a tree by piano wire..
--
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.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 00:32:40 -0500
Jason Weingard wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Unknown Poster wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Microsoft is the one who's been in Fed court too many times to
> mention.
> > > >
> > > > I don't think Dell's been ever charged with criminal conduct.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Pish-tosh..It's sour grapes from competitors.
> >
> > 30 States' Attorneys disagree.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > I can't wait until the appeal from Thomas P. Jackson's
> > > court is heard. Microsoft is going to win big here.
> >
> > Microsoft is only appealing the *sentance* ***NOT*** the conviction for
> > illegal, criminal conduct.
> >
> > If Microsoft is innocent, then why are they letting the conviction stand?
> > Hmmmmmmmmmmm?!?!?!?!?!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
>
> I asked my neighbor, the attorney. He replied that in
> it's far easier (and cheaper and faster) to
> appeal the Sentence, rather than the conviction. Businesses
> do not usually appeal sentences because it can drag out
> for years.
And also, because there's no point in appealing when you've
been caught red-handed.
--
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.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2001 00:33:29 -0500
Jason Weingard wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, 04 Feb 2001 23:35:59 GMT, Wayne Fellows wrote:
> > > >Easy: Michael Dell.
> > >
> > > Dell, while not a technical innovator was one of the pioneers of the
> direct
> > > sales approach, and took the fairly radical approach that he didn't hand
> Dells
> > > over to retailers. Not a technical giant perhaps, but certainly a shrewd
> > > businessman.
> >
> > Unlike Gates, at least he's honest.
> >
> >
>
> My Final Thought:
>
> You expect a businessman to be honest?
YES....in fact, I ***DEMAND*** that anybody who does business with
me do it in an honest fashion.
Those who don't....suffer the consequences.
--
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
******************************
