Linux-Advocacy Digest #162, Volume #32 Tue, 13 Feb 01 00:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux Threat: non-existant (J Sloan)
I just realized why Google bought Deja.com (Leeb)
Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux (Bloody Viking)
Re: Interesting article ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Interesting article ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux Threat: non-existant (J Sloan)
Re: I just realized why Google bought Deja.com ("Mikal 606")
Re: Good article (J Sloan)
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Tom Wilson")
Re: NTFS Limitations ("Tom Wilson")
Re: La-Z-Boy and the Decline of Western Civilisation ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (J Sloan)
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux (Bloody Viking)
Re: Linux Threat: non-existant (Nic Bellamy)
Re: SGI XFS Installation Update ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Linux Threat: non-existant (Nic Bellamy)
Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux (Bloody Viking)
Re: Linux Threat: non-existant ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Interesting article ("Mike Byrns")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Threat: non-existant
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 04:08:39 GMT
Chad Myers wrote:
> "Salvador Peralta" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > The majority of Linux users surveyed also cited four nines availability
> > with Linux, or less than one hour of unexpected downtime per year."
Yes, this accords perfectly with my experience -
My current mail servers have been up since last June,
when I updated the kernel - prior to that they had been
up since October 1999.
One 100% Linux based ISP I worked for moved the server
room down the block, but before the move, ruptime showed
all the boxes had been up for some hundreds of days, the
longest one over 400 days.
This is in sharp contrast to the legacy windows pc servers
of my present employer, (thankfully I don't do windows) which
still require frequent therapeutic reboots.
> And Linux users (Penguinistas) have never been known to exaggerate or
> lie to further their cause. Basically the claim of stability is just
> that, a claim. IDC has not cited conclusive proof that there is, in fact,
> "four nines" availability with Linux. Hearsay, really.
Of course Chad doesn't want to hear it - he's in denial.
> Yes, there is a question. If I switched to Linux right now, I would
> see an instant 100% drop in productivity. Why?
It would be too easy to insult you here, but I won't sink
to your level, sir.
> Why else, then? Because there are no good development IDEs
> on Linux. I use Visual J++ on Windows to develop java, and then
> compile the Sun JDK 1.3 compiler to get 100% pure java classes. The
> VJ++ IDE is awesome though because of pop-up method/field lists, the
> pop-up function references with javadoc comments included, among
> many other features. The only closest editor that's this good is
> JEdit that I've found at least. EMacs has too steep a learning curve
> and I'd be fighting my editor, which I don't want to do. I want
> my editor to work for me, not the other way around.
There are a number of excellent Java IDEs for Linux -
IBM visual age, Borland Jbuilder, etc, so please don't
try that lame excuse.
> > Compared to what I have now, my windows pc was a toy.
>
> Well, then you really don't know what you're talking about. You're
> a Unix guy who doesn't have a clue about Windows and feels the need
> to bash it unfairly to hide his own ignorance.
You lose again, because all of these "Unix guys" are very
very familiar with windows.
jjs
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leeb)
Crossposted-To: alt.religion.kibology,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: I just realized why Google bought Deja.com
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 00:18:56 GMT
You know, I betcha the fine folks at Google are going to grep Usenet
posts for URLs and use them as pointers to stuff on the Web.
Too wild.
leeb
--
Leeb * Keeper of the Great Renaming FAQ
Http://www.mindspring.com/~bumgarls/ "{My parents} embarrassed
the hell out of me, and I swore I would grow up to be normal.
But what's written in one's DNA cannot be denied. Thirty years later,
I am a 46-year-old Jewish bisexual priestess of eco-feminist
witchcraft." --Washington Post
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Subject: Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux
Date: 13 Feb 2001 04:11:50 GMT
Mike Martinet ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I believe the sentiment (if not actually the article itself) is
: expressed in "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" an updated version of which
: was just this week referenced on 'Wired'
: http://wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,41726,00.html
As the cathedral demands an increasing tithe, the bazaar is getting less like
an Arab flea market.
--
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 04:15:11 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said Mike Byrns in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 12 Feb 2001 08:08:10
> [...]
>>Perhaps they, not you, define legality? I don't think that the USGov is
>>"scared" in any way. Triffled yes.
>
>Parsing error:Microsoft is the scared one.
>
Excuse my butting in here but what is "Triffled" ?
--
How much do we need to pay you to screw Netscape?
- BILL GATES, to AOL in a 1996 meeting
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 04:15:12 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, 12 Feb 2001 05:21:41 GMT, "Mike Byrns"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Dave Martel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2001 23:11:39 GMT, "Mike Byrns"
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Linux implementations
>>> >are by definition "amateur" as they are done as a pastime rather than as
>>a
>>> >profession.
>>>
>>> Then what's it say about MS's so-called "professional" programmers,
>>> that these "amateur" linux programmers stole 30% of MS's Server
>>> market? <chortle!>
>>
>>First of all it "says" nothing because it's patently untrue.
>
>Rubbish. I got the number from your own source (IDC).
>
He seems to be selective about what numbers he will accept from IDC.
>>There are two
>>server markets -- WWW and LAN/Applications. January 2001 Netcraft report
>>says
>
>That's it, keep subdividing the issue until you can find some sliver
>where MS actually shows some growth.
>
The Sock Puppets do that every time M$ hands them a new press
release.
I do not know yet if mike.byrns is one or not but he does show
tendencies.
>>This is particularly interesting since web serving was a completely UNIX
>>market in the beginning. Microsoft was a latecomer to the party.
>>Microsoft's only been playing the web game in earnest since IIS3.0
>>introduced ASP in late 1997. See
>>http://windowsitlibrary.com/Content/435/11/1.html. So if you really want to
>>talk about who stole who's market I think you need to do your history
>>homework :-)
>
>"Of course the increase was dramatic: It's easy to make big gains when
>you're starting from scratch." ;->
>
Mike does it disturb you when your own mantra comes back to bite you ?
>>If you dig a little deeper into the Netcraft site you'll find that most of
>>the big names are running Apache on Solaris or IIS on NT/2000. As a
>>platform/server combo Windows beats the pants off Apache on Linux.
>
>Actually I never noticed any Netcraft breakdowns by operating system,
>though I can't imagine why they wouldn't have one. Do you have a URL?
>
They sell reports like that for hefty change. Its how they support
themselves.
Mike has good connections it seems.
Of course he knows we have no chance to check whatever he says but
remember how he quotes IDC selectively and ignores the number he
doesn't like.
>>On the LAN/Applications server front the truth is even more in contrast to
>>your statements. NT usage has increased pretty steadily since it's
>>introduction. Linux' gains have come principally at the expense of Netware
>>and commercial Unices.
>
>It doesn't matter where the gains came from, that's still market share
>that "written-by-amateurs" linux took and Microsoft didn't.
>
Good point Dave although I still think he is making that part about
only being from Unix and Novell up.
>>"First up is Linux, which International Data Corporation (IDC) says captured
>>24 percent of the server market in 1999, a dramatic increase over the
>>previous year. Of course the increase was dramatic: It's easy to make big
>>gains when you're starting from scratch. Linux advocates note that the
>>market share for NT remained steady at 38 percent last year, the first time
>>its share didn't rise. But does that figure really represent a loss for
>>Windows, or does it simply indicate market maturation?
>
>The server market wasn't "mature" if there was room for a competing OS
>to expand to 24% while NT just sat there and stagnated for two years.
>
>>What Linux backers won't tell
>>you is that IDC, which produced these figures, believes that Windows 2000
>>(the next version of NT), not Linux, will dominate the server market by
>>2003.
>
>Heck, NT dominated in 1999 (NT 38%, Linux 25%, Netware 19%, Unix 15%).
>2003 is still too close for _any_ OS to overcome that kind of
>head-start combined with MS's marketing clout. Try looking a little
>farther down the road, say about 2005-2008.
>
That is not what the CEO of IBM said they told him:
According to IDC, Linux is he fastest growing operating system at 28
percent; Windows is at 21.4 percent. Linux will have 38 percent of the
market by the year 2004 -- and will be the largest operating system in
the server environment that year. And that is one of the reasons why
IBM got behind Linux: these adoption rates were so impressive. They are
a phenomenally powerful statement. It's growth is huge. Its momentum is
building. Its like the Internet: it is moving that fast.
Sam Palmisano IBM president and CEO at LinuxWorld 2001
http://www.ibm.com/news/2001/02/conference_trans.phtml
See what I mean about mike.byrns spouting numbers that do not seem to
come from where he claims ?
--
How much do we need to pay you to screw Netscape?
- BILL GATES, to AOL in a 1996 meeting
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Threat: non-existant
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 04:15:49 GMT
Boris Dynin wrote:
> I'm a developer. Never used Linux in my life (and not going to). I got Sun
> workstation on my desk (and 5 NT/W2k PCs). I'm tremendously more productive
> on Windows than on Sun. MS development tools are the best of breed in my
> opinion (I'm talking about Visual Studio 6); I'm a C++ programmer. Visual
> C++ IDE is light years ahead of vi, emacs, gdb. As for Unix utilities: awk,
> perl, etc. - there are Windows versions which I use all the time (awk).
If all you want to develop is pc software, that's fine -
There are those with much higher ambitions.
jjs
------------------------------
From: "Mikal 606" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.religion.kibology,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: I just realized why Google bought Deja.com
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 23:14:58 -0500
"Leeb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> You know, I betcha the fine folks at Google are going to grep Usenet
> posts for URLs and use them as pointers to stuff on the Web.
>
> Too wild.
>
> leeb
>
Well ``leeb", if that IS your real name, allow me to label that one steaming
hunk of rancid balogona.
You see, it is that like all entranced entities, Google must be searching
for the ``end point", said end point being the beginning from the actual
starting point that hasnt happened yet.
And then pressing the little buBOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMM
HTH,HAND,IYKWIM,AITYD!
> --
> Leeb * Keeper of the Great Renaming FAQ
> Http://www.mindspring.com/~bumgarls/ "{My parents} embarrassed
> the hell out of me, and I swore I would grow up to be normal.
> But what's written in one's DNA cannot be denied. Thirty years later,
> I am a 46-year-old Jewish bisexual priestess of eco-feminist
> witchcraft." --Washington Post
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Good article
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 04:18:51 GMT
David Brown wrote:
> It's just temporary - I run NT workstation for my main work, so I had to
> prototype on that, and the only other machine lying around that was free for
> a demo server runs Win98 (it has a couple of programs on it that won't run
> under NT). In other words, the OS was already choosen, but I could pick the
> server apps of my choice. Later, when I have time, I will install Linux on
> some machine around here and move the system over to that - I will certainly
> do that before going live. Part of the choice of server apps was to make it
> easy to move OS's at a later date - all three (Apache, Php and mySql) are
> strongly cross-platform tools.
Ah, very clever -
We have a recent Linux convert here who is running
essbase on some 8 way nt servers. It has become
clear to him how well those boxes would run Linux,
and since essbase now runs on Linux, the migration
plans are beginning in earnest...
jjs
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[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: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 04:20:15 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Tom Wilson in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 12 Feb 2001 09:59:33
> [T. Max:]
> >> They're sock puppets. They've made their money in the MS world, and
are
> >> terrified they would be incapable of doing so in a non-MS world.
Plus,
> >> their money is still tied to MS, generally, which re-enforces their
> >> fear. Like Gates and Palmer, they watch their stock value shrink, and
> >> they think of Linux, and they'll say or try to believe anything to
avoid
> >> confronting the reality that Windows is doomed.
> >
> >I make money off of them too by developing software and I certainly
don't
> >have any sympathy for developers worried about their next paycheck if
> >Windows development should dry up in the future. If you can't adapt -
Find
> >a new line of work. As for stockholders losing money - That kind of goes
> >with the territory. If THEY can't adapt, there's always a bridge or
> >skyscraper.
>
> The world does not consist solely of developers and stockholders, but
> your point is not lost. Still, its not really relevant, either;
> developers would not make very good sock puppets to begin with.
You'd be surprised. There are a lot of them out there who know nothing but
VB and have good cause to be worried. Again, I don't have a lot of sympathy
since, in life, limiting yourself in such a way turns you into a dependent
parasite. When the host dies, you're chances of joining it are good and all
hosts die, eventually.
>
> They make their money by selling out to MS; that cash is going to dry up
> if MS is not allowed to monopolize, and it has nothing to do with
> technology.
Again, I'm totally without sympathy...
Those who don't hedge bets soon wear barrels.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 04:20:16 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Tom Wilson in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 12 Feb 2001 06:49:19
> [...]
> >True to some extent. What I'd like to see implemented is the same system
> >also managing, reliably, transaction services across divergent platforms
> >and make such interoperability seamless. An adhered to, yet extensible,
> >platform-encompassing API being the glue that holds it all together.
>
> Congratulations. You've just re-invented middleware. ;-)
I want middlewear that WORKS, Max... :)
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: La-Z-Boy and the Decline of Western Civilisation
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 04:20:17 GMT
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:969f2s$pj2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I'd hate to see what would happen if someone hacked into the chair and
> gained full controll.
>
Pray for KY Jelly....<g>
This thread is getting very silly....
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 04:22:04 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> I have hear a box in my hand of RedHat 7.0 Deluxe it does not have
> kernel 2.4, but says its "2.4 ready". It does have XFree86 4.0.1. I
> haven't opened the box yet, so I don't know if its got ReiserFS, but I
> kind of doubt it.
Nope, RH 7 has no resierfs and no lvm.
I'm seriously going to try out SuSE 7.1
jjs
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[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: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 04:26:39 GMT
"Aaron Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Tom Wilson wrote:
> >
> > "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Tom Wilson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The very fact that feature is being proposed is enough to conjure
up
> > past
> > > > memories of subscription based software from the early eighties. It
is
> > a
> > > > blatant rip-off and causes your TCO to skyrocket. Actually, i'm
> > surprised
> > > > its' taken this long, with the Internet being what it is now, for
> > someone
> > > > to seriously pursue such a course again. The consumer sector said
no,
> > > > resoundingly, to DIVX and i'm hoping that the commercial sector
takes
> > the
> > > > same tact with this profit mongering.
> > > >
> > > > I've heard some of the jucier technical details of .NET and, as a
> > > > developer, I see the potential. I also see the scenario I just
ranted
> > on.
> > > > We've made the decision not to develop for it and we won't. If it
takes
> > > > off, and I don't see it doing so... One of the alternative OS's
will
> > just
> > > > have to be modified to counter it. Be it Linux or BSD.
> > >
> > > As I understand it, .NET will be accessible to any OS, it's just that
> > > Windows tools will be the first down the pike. Of course, that
> > > common-language substrate will be lowest-common-denominator, and
> > > Microsoft will change it whenever they see fit, giving developers
fits.
> > > It'll be as stable as OLE/COM/COM+/ActiveX/DCOM.....
> >
> > As best I can determine it IS OLE/COM/COM+/ActiveX/DCOM. Nothing new.
Just
> > a label and more promises with that little subscription wrinkle added.
> >
> > With all of the Fear Uncertainty and Doubt talk being bandied about,
I'd go
> > so far as to say MS isn't so much spreading it as feeling it at this
point.
> > Win ME, 2K, Whistler, all released within a short amount of time. Now
we
> > have a conglomeration of existing technologies repackaged as .NET.
Throw in
> > all of the recent Linux trashing and you've got one very concerned
company.
>
>
> When you can't offer a superior product....introduce massive confusion
> into the marketplace.
That confusion is causing them some problems right now...
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2684339,00.html?chkpt=zdhpnew
s01
>
> This was the core of Intel's 386 DX/SX garbage in the late 80's, and now
> Microshaft is doing the same.
This chip is in no way crippled....<g>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Subject: Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux
Date: 13 Feb 2001 04:29:28 GMT
T. Max Devlin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: The fact is, nobody cares. We don't want to do it at all, and see no
: benefit to doing so. Microsoft pretends it is piracy, not the potential
: for recurrent billing, which makes this kind of thing necessary. But
: its a lie, is all. Breaking Microsoft's "you must buy a new copy for
: every computer" trade secret agreement is *not* piracy. Microsoft again
: pretends, as they have always done, and did at the anti-trust trial
: where they were convicted of monopolizing, that they have privileges
: from copyright law which they simply do not have.
I can think of another organisation besides Microsoft that abuses Copyright:
Scientology.
The rantings of MS-Shills(tm) here sound as delusional as Scientologists in
the alt.religion.scientology newsgroup. Kind of telling of the parallels
between the two companies.
--
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
------------------------------
From: Nic Bellamy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Threat: non-existant
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 17:44:50 +1300
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> "Nic Bellamy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > These are the kind of figures that you can't find just by looking at CD
> > sales. Sure, some may get experimented with once and put on the shelf to
> > collect dust, but there are also a lot of people around that install
> > several machines from a single CD.
>
> But you are the exception to the norm. Even if there were a
> thousand people like you, it still so insignificant as to be
> almost not worth talking about. Less than one percent of one percent
> or something like that.
But 250 x 1000 is still 250,000 machines :-)
For every person like me, there are probably 10 or more who install 25,
and maybe a hundred or more who install 2 or 3. The numbers add up...
I really have no idea how many machines out there are running Linux, all
I know is that I'm seeing and installing more and more of it, and our
LUG meetings keep having to move to bigger venues ;-)
Regards,
Nic.
-- Nic Bellamy <nic at asterisk dot co dot nz>
IT Consultant, Asterisk Limited - http://www.asterisk.co.nz/
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SGI XFS Installation Update
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 04:47:21 GMT
"Stuart Krivis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 09 Feb 2001 06:30:25 GMT, J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Stuart Krivis wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 02 Feb 2001 10:43:54 GMT, Adam Warner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >I am pleased to let you know that I have now successfully installed
Linux on
> >> >a boot partition using the SGI XFS pre-release iso.
> >>
> >> I was pleased with XFS. It is RH 7 that I don't like. :-)
> >
> >Interesting - I like Red Hat 7.
> >
> >(well, at least after I upgraded to Helix gnome, kde2, and kernel 2.4)
>
> I prefer Debian. RedHat seems to do things their own way. Debian is
closer to the
> other flavors of unix I have run. RH also seemed to need an awful lot of
fixing
> before things worked. It kept thinking that my serial mouse was PS2. And
X was
> broken as installed. Then I ran across a few places where I changed
something and
> RH changed it back.
I noticed similar behavior when using linuxconfig. I'd put in dhcp support
by hand and the next time I ran linuxconfig, it went right behind me and
changed it back to a static address. Re-did my DNS settings as well. I
haven't used the newer versions of linuxconfig and as far as I know, they
may have fixed it. Webmin is a far superior config tool, IMHO...
------------------------------
From: Nic Bellamy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Threat: non-existant
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 17:49:39 +1300
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> So THERE GD "NIC BELLAMY", try to have an independent thought
> Bellamy. That will show yah! GD independent thinkers!
>
> Why, your CD would just fuckin wear out if you had to use it
> 250 times. HA!
Would you mind translating this into english so that I can reply to it?
Regards,
Nic.
-- Nic Bellamy <nic at asterisk dot co dot nz>
IT Consultant, Asterisk Limited - http://www.asterisk.co.nz/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Subject: Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux
Date: 13 Feb 2001 04:53:48 GMT
Pete Goodwin (imekon@$$$REMOVE$$$.freeuk.com) wrote:
: You only need to phone them in if you're not on the Internet. Otherwise you
: can do it that way.
No thanks. I'll just use Slackware. You forget something. Maybe some people
are SICK AND TIRED OF GIVING OUT PERSONAL INFORMATION. I'm one of them. I use
cash as much as possible these days. I use no "preferred customer card". I'm
damn near to the point of using an alias when shopping with fake address when
asked for that information. I no longer answer the phone due to telemarketers,
letting a fax carrier put my number into a killfile list for the scum to
trade. Or, they get a busy signal.
: >Future versions of MS software (upgrades, service packs*, add-ons) will
: >only be available online through .NET. This looks like an attempt by MS
: >to force people to pay for software on a monthly basis - like cable TV.
: Yuk!!!
Now you get the idea. Sucks, doesn't it. It's your choice. Get assimilated by
the borg that sucks your wallet dry like a black hole or pick up that Linux
album and install floppies. Now, go to a computer store to the _Linux_
section and free yourself from the titanium fist of the MS-Borg(tm) v.1.0.
Once monthly payments come about, what's next? Pop-up banner crap as you work?
Pay per save? Where does MS-Greed(tm) end? When Microsoft owns the entire
planet, making it MS-Earth(tm) v.1.0?
: Yeah, you'll need the phone here as you cut yourself off when you changed
: Network card. Can you image how _swamped_ Microsoft's lines will become if
: this ever sees the light of day?
MS could always have a 1-900 line in China. Just call for your launch codes
and you get auto-billed - and the operators make pennies an hour. Maybe
MS-Echelon(tm) will catch that idea... or the server BSODs.
: Hmmm... maybe. Trouble is, people just accept things like this and carry
: on.
Or will shitcan computers en masse, making for lots of computers for us Linux
fans to make into clusters by dumpster diving.
--
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Threat: non-existant
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 04:57:20 GMT
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:huRh6.29592$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<snip>
> Well, then you really don't know what you're talking about. You're
> a Unix guy who doesn't have a clue about Windows and feels the need
> to bash it unfairly to hide his own ignorance.
Chad, when are you going to realize that the majority of posters here
are/were Windows users, admins, and developers.
------------------------------
From: "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 05:02:58 GMT
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
>
> > But it has. It has grabbed a significant amount of server share from
> > Unix. When NT 4.0 was released, NT made up less than 2% of the
> > server market. It now makes up a majority, IIRC. If not, close to it.
>
> You're sadly mistaken - windows nt has gained market share
> solely at the expense of other pc operating systems such as
> netware, OS2 and windows for workgroups.
I say you are wrong. Post proof to disprove me or accept my assertion.
> > There was, is, and always will be a strong Unix contingent just
> > because Unix admins are blockheads and refuse to use whatever's
> > best, only Unix. However, Linux is a suitable alternative, so
> > this is why Unix has made in-roads. It's not unix, but it's
> > close enough and it's a lot cheaper than Solaris or HP-UX.
>
> It's not Unix by a lawyer's definition, but it's Unix by
> a techie definition, to be sure. and it's the fastest
> developing Unix in existence.
"Fastest developing UNIX"? That's an oxymoron. :-)
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
