Linux-Advocacy Digest #404, Volume #32 Thu, 22 Feb 01 13:13:02 EST
Contents:
Printing! (sandrews)
Re: State of linux distros ("Mike")
Re: Check out this Windows bug (pip)
Re: Amusing Aaron Kulkis Anagrams ("Mike")
Re: Linux web pads?
Re: Amusing Aaron Kulkis Anagrams (meow)
Re: Microsoft says Linux threatens innovation (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Microsoft says Linux threatens innovation (T. Max Devlin)
Re: What do I do with a Windows partition? ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Linux web pads? (Matthias Warkus)
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] (Peter da Silva)
Re: State of linux distros (Charlie Ebert)
Re: State of linux distros (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Help with display properties
Re: Incredible developments in Italy regarding business software ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Microsoft dying, was Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: sandrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Printing!
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 12:05:41 -0500
Does anyone know how to print RFC`s (the text ones) so they are properly
formatted on the printed page? I had some notes somewhaer but I can't
find them and I'm too lazy to look it up ;).
--
Proud to be.......100% micro$oft FREE... yipee!
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: State of linux distros
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:18:17 GMT
"dev null" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9737j1$b6h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Culled somewhere off of www.devx.com this a.m.
>
> ... In other words, most Linux distributions, even the ones whose
> market share is growing each year, are concluding that they can't make
money
> selling Linux.....
>
> --------------------------------------------
> Wow, get that! Companies sprouting up like weeds, trying to turn a profit
on
> a free product by adding value only. --dubious value at that. And there
is
> only SO much value one can add to a linux distro or the penquinistas start
> braying like donkeys in heat. See Corel for what can happen when they
think
> you have 'window-fied' linux!
>
> I'm STILL wondering how they ever thought that they COULD be viable.
> dot com madness, something like mad-cow disease I think.
And yet, Red Hat appears to be consolidating its leadership position, and
was (until the recent slowdown) on track to become profitable next year.
They are selling exactly that "dubious value" you refer to.
But it appears that they are the only Linux distribution vendor who has a
viable chance of long term survival and reasonable financial success at this
point. The problem for Red Hat is that this places them one notch below
Microsoft in the open source bible. Corporations might like them, but
they'll be trashed on cola in proportion to their success - especially since
that success will be viewed as coming at the expense of other distributions,
and because as Red Hat becomes the de facto Linux standard, their decisions
about what to put in their distribution will directly affect the success of
open source projects.
-- Mike --
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Check out this Windows bug
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:21:03 +0000
Adam Warner wrote:
>
> Hi pip,
>
> > I don't wish to discourage your attempts at discrediting windows,
> > but is this "bug" not absolutely pointless?
>
> No way. I find it rather disconcerting that I could not copy files that had
> been generated by Eudora. The copy operation stopped half way through and it
> took me quite a while to discover what had gone wrong.
Quite so. It was also a non-obious probelm which didn't help I am sure.
> Frankly I consider a copy operation that cannot copy legitimate files to
> another directory on a hard disk in certain cirumstances is a rather serious
> design flaw.
It sure is!
>I am pleased that there is a way to disable this from
> occurring. I also stated how the copy operation could have been implemented
> to stop this bug from arising. You will see from the KB article that
> Microsoft said this could lead to data loss because what were two separate
> files can lead to one overwriting the other (OR a copy operating ending
> prematurely could lead to an incomplete backup).
Yes.
> I value my honour and I would never state that I came across the bug in a
> real-world situation if I did not.
No, I didn't think that you would - my gripe is that this file
system problem, although very annoying, is an old bug caused by the
same old design flaws that you mention.
> Here's is a partial directory listing of where the bug arose, in the
> "attach" subdirectory of Eudora:
>
> D:\ADAM\Eudora\attach>dir 1998*.* /b
> 1998FE~1.GIF
> 1998FE~11.GIF
> 1998FE~2.GIF
> 1998FE~21.GIF
> 1998FE~31.GIF
> 1998FE~41.GIF
> 1998NE~1.DOC
> 1998RE~1.XLS
> 1998RE~2.XLS
>
> The GIF files are scans of 1998 University fee levels. The XL/DOC files are
> returns to education calculations.
>
> > This is not even a real bug - as you _really_ have to go
> > out of your way to mess things up.
>
> I didn't go out of my way. It found me.
Yes, true - but only because of the brain dead way Eudora handles
this. This "bug" could easily be solved programatically: even though
I know that this is window's fault.
> > > What _is_ true is that
> > it caused because of a brain dead compatibility scheme.
>
> The implementation appears to be wrong.
yes - _very_ wrong.
> > Talking about _that_ may be a good way to show how Linux
> > does not panda to marketing men.
> >
> > In other words: this is lame, sorry.
>
> When was the last time a Unix box couldn't copy a directory fill of
> legitimate files? This is high stakes stuff. This behaviour will be in
> Enterprise-class servers (where processes are automated and you don't have
> the luxury of analysing a Windows Explorer pop-up box).
I agree - but the design flaw has always been there.
> I'm sorry you found it lame. But I'm pleased you think I'm a real nice guy
> :-)
well of course you are a nice guy! While this is an unusual
situation I am sure that it is no less annoying for you. Good luck!
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Amusing Aaron Kulkis Anagrams
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:23:04 GMT
"meow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Aaron Kulis = ...
Of course, your anagrams would more effective if you could spell Aaron's
name correctly...
... or should I say, "you're anagrams"? Charles?
-- Mike --
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux web pads?
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:25:37 -0000
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:31:23 -0100, Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "The Ghost
>In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[deletia]
>>
>
>My idea was more that the pad would be an X-terminal, with a wireless
>network link, so the server (the desktop) would have to run some kind of
>X-server software. Linux obviously is the first O/S that came to my mind,
The proper terminology for such a thing is Xclient. The "server"
machine in this arrangement would not need to even have a video
card.
[deletia]
--
In general, Microsoft is in a position of EXTREME conflict of
interest being both primary supplier and primary competitor.
Their actions must be considered in that light. How some people
refuse to acknowledge this is confounding.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: meow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Amusing Aaron Kulkis Anagrams
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:28:32 GMT
In article <YVbl6.2213$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> "meow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Aaron Kulis = ...
>
> Of course, your anagrams would more effective if you could spell Aaron's
> name correctly...
>
> ... or should I say, "you're anagrams"? Charles?
>
> -- Mike --
>
>
>
>
>
well i spelt it right in the topic at least :P
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft says Linux threatens innovation
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:34:01 GMT
Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 21 Feb 2001
>"Ed Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> A monopoly never "gives" anything away. You pay for it by losing
>> >> the innovations which would have come from their target and by
>never
>> >> seeing a hint of newer ideas which would have when others used
>those
>> >> new technologies in ways that the monopolists technologies could
>not
>> >> be coerced into.
>> >
>> >This statement doesn't parse. It seems like you might be trying to say
>that
>> >MS prevents people from using technology. That is simply false, or else
>> >Linux would not exist at all, nor would OS's like BeOS or MacOS X.
>> >
>> It does parse for people who are not in denial about the desktop
>> monopoly and M$ abuse of it.
>>
>> By strangling startup technologies Microsoft making us all pay more
>> than the newer offering would have cost. They recoup the cost of
>> their FUD and buying technologies so the project can be canceled by
>> charging higher prices for all their software.
>
>This ignores the fact that MS's software has gone down in price when you
>factor in inflation, and the amount of software you get per dollar.
No, it doesn't, though your statement does ignore the fact that it has
not gone down in price at all, nor kept up with the competition in terms
of the amount of functionality included with the distribution.
>Further, you negelected to mention why OS's like BeOS and MacOS X exist if
>this were the case.
There is no need to, though it might have been a decent troll guard to
point out that if the OS is not sufficiently substitutable for Windows,
MS has little reason or leverage to "strangle" it.
>> New technologies can do things that the older technologies could not
>> or they would not be new. So by denying all of us the chance to see
>> if those new technologies are useful for each of us Microsoft is
>> denying us that value. A cost may come from denial of convenience
>> or efficiency instead of your wallet.
>
>Tell me, if you're running a business. Say you're selling lemonade. And
>someone comes along and tells the world they have a new kind of lemonade
>that is specifically designed to put you out of business. Would you not
>take that as an act of war?
No, I'd take that as an act of competition, and resolve to improve my
business's efficiency. I'd also probably take them to court under
anti-trust law, were the lemonade "specifically designed to put me out
of business". Netscape, by the way, would have been entirely immune to
such charges, since your point is entirely rhetorical.
>The problem is that most of these companies come in like gang busters and
>arrogantly proclaim the death of MS with their products, which can do only
>one thing. Piss off the giant and get you stomped on.
"Stomping" is illegal, you see, for giants or anybody else (though for
anybody else but giants, it merely decreases your ability to compete).
And corporations, not being human beings, don't get "pissed off",
either, though megalomaniacs and robber barons like Gates and Balmer, of
course, do, because they're immature personalities.
>These companies are
>not benevolantly donating their technology to the world, to run alongside
>MS. They are out for blood and looking to replace them.
That's MS's fault, Erik. Just because MS had a monopoly to defend
doesn't mean they were right to defend it.
>Every person and company has a right to defend themselves from extinction.
No, sorry; companies do not have such abstract rights. Nor do
corporations, which is what I think you meant.
>> You have said that you disapprove of some of their actions, why are
>> they disagreeable to you ?
>
>Disapprove and Disagree are two different things. But still, why I disagree
>is specific to each instance. However, most of it can be summed up with "MS
>will push the envelope as far as it can, regardless of whether it needs to
>or not".
If it does things it doesn't need to, then it should lose money; that's
how the free market is supposed to provide efficiencies in production.
Of course, all bets are off when there's no free market.
> MS would have been just as successful without restrictive OEM
>agreements.
Nice fabrication contrary to the facts. The legal thinking, in keeping
with something called the Rule of Reason, is to question precisely why,
then, MS insisted on such restrictions, which clearly decreased the
attractiveness of their product to the OEMs (though not enough to make
OEMs choose an alternative, again proving Microsoft's monopoly power).
>IE would have won on it's merits, without ISP agreements.
Then why did MS spend millions to secure such agreements?
>They react to every situation as a life or death threat, and that isn't
>always necessary. Sometimes it is, but not always.
And when it isn't, its criminal behavior, Erik. There is no 'life or
death'. There is competing, and there is monopolizing. If the only way
MS can 'stay alive' is to monopolize, then they are a criminal
organization. QED.
>> >> Erik wake up. You have been victimized by a criminal organization
>> >> which provided you with some glitzy toys to distract you.
>> >
>> >I've not been victimized by anyone but Red Hat and Mandrake for taking my
>> >money for products that don't work at all.
>> >
>> Are you denying that Microsoft has a monopoly ? Or that monopolies
>> do not charge higher prices than competitors do ?
>
>Apples and Oranges.
Is that a yes or a no, Erik?
>OS/2 has always been more expensive than Windows.
>MacOS is more expensive than windows (they charge $99 for an upgrade, while
>MS charges $89), Netware is more expensive than NT. Solaris, until recently
>was much more expensive than NT, and still is for high end systems.
>
>The only "competitors" that charge less are Be and Linux. Be offers a
>fraction of the functionality of Windows, so that's understandable. Linux
>is an enigma. Please back up this claim.
What claim? That Windows is priced above competitive levels is a fact,
not a claim. It doesn't have anything to do with the snow-storm you
throw up whenever the subject appears, though. If you could buy Windows
from either MS or, say, TMax Software Inc., then would MS still be able
to charge the same for their Windows, presuming mine was a suitable
alternative that supported Win32 sufficiently to erase the application
barrier?
The answer is "no"; TMax Windows would drastically lower the amount that
MS could charge, as any other _competition_ (note the lack of quotes)
would. This is called 'competitive pricing', and its something MS will
avoid at all costs, including engaging in illegal activity.
>> How does paying more not harm you ? Do you enjoy sending money to
>> Redmond in return for no improvement ?
>
>I see plenty of improvement.
Then you're a putz.
[...]
>> The drama was an attempt to shock you out of your denial. Obviously
>> it did not work. I'll try to think of something else.
>
>Perhaps you should start by evaluating your own base assumptions. Windows
>is *NOT* more expensive than most of it's competitors.
Windows is astronomically more expensive than all of its competitors.
If it weren't, they wouldn't need to maintain a monopoly in order to
keep people buying it.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft says Linux threatens innovation
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:38:29 GMT
Said Marada C. Shradrakaii in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 20 Feb 2001
02:43:09 GMT;
>>And what's to stop the free product from being "really good" as well?
>>
>
>If the free product is "really good", the competition has to be "better than
>really good". And so on. If users can get X (the variable, not the window
>system) for free, you have to provide > X to free banknotes from users'
>wallets.
And the cycle continues, driving the producers to maximum efficiency of
production. Production not only of product, but of new product
features. Sooner or later, the commercial producer is going to *have*
to offer something that the people who don't need to make a profit can't
provide (or else he's got no reason to expect a profit). If this cycle
drives the commercial competitor out of business, then it can only be
because he could not produce software more efficiently than the free
software community. Which, by the way, might very well be the case.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What do I do with a Windows partition?
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:35:35 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> If he's thinking of switching to Linux permanently I doubt if
> he boots using the loadlin, too much hassle when you can get
> directly into Linux with either lilo or grub and not have to
> worry about DOS at all. Both lilo and grub can easily handle
> Windows partitions, you just leave your Linux boot partition as
> the default.
>
> ian.
>
> \ /
> (@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
> /(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/
> (art)
> | |
Right on the nail Ian. I am not just thinking of switching, I
have switched over entirely.
As I said for my needs I don't *need* Windows: I am not a heavy
gamer, and I like online games much better anyway, and my
workplace is fairly sensible when it comes to formatting
documents; yes they use MS Office, but so far StarOffice is
perfectly capable of reading their stuff and exports quite
nicely back too.
I might just experiment with something else, so the Win
partition is quite probably gonna go. I might just try to put up
an ad for my Windows CD's, see what the software police will do
:-) (nothing much probably).
Mart
--
YahDu (Yet another happy Debian user)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Subject: Re: Linux web pads?
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 22:23:35 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Wed, 21 Feb 2001 22:20:13 -0100...
...and Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> An ASCII-piano can easily be plugged in when needed (just add a PS/2
> >> port for QWERTY's sake <G>); a mouse is IMHO an abysmal replacement for
> >> a decent touch-screen
> >
> > Only when everything on your screen is at least half the size of the
> > average fingertip. Have you ever tried to cut and paste a single word
> > (or, God forbid, a single character) from and into normal-sized text
> > with a touchscreen?
> >
> > When it comes to precision, a touchscreen is the most abysmal mouse
> > replacement there is. (Whereby some people might argue that a mouse is
> > just an abysmal trackball replacement.)
> >
> Use the stylus. Do you use fingerpaint to write a letter?
Can *you* use a stylus anywhere on the screen without cramps and
without your supporting hand pushing on the screen confusing it?
mawa
--
Disclaimer: This posting does not express the corporate opinion of
Evolved Technologies of the Known Universe, Inc., Dyson Spheres,
Habitats, Planetary Construction and Stellar-Scale Weapon Systems, in
any way.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter da Silva)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.security.ssh
Subject: Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ]
Date: 22 Feb 2001 17:42:30 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As I said, sometimes a "fundamental flaw" is much less of a problem than
> a bug, as in this case, where it is extremely difficult to exploit,
> regardless of how "fundamental" it is.
To be precise, a problem that is hard to exploit is better than a problem
that is easy to exploit. Whether it's an implementation bug or a fundamental
design flaw is orthogonal... but if it is fundamental it's much harder to
fix.
--
`-_-' In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva.
'U` "A well-rounded geek should be able to geek about anything."
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Disclaimer: WWFD?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: State of linux distros
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:47:01 GMT
In article <tRbl6.2212$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike wrote:
>"dev null" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9737j1$b6h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Culled somewhere off of www.devx.com this a.m.
>>
>> ... In other words, most Linux distributions, even the ones whose
>> market share is growing each year, are concluding that they can't make
>money
>> selling Linux.....
>>
>> --------------------------------------------
>> Wow, get that! Companies sprouting up like weeds, trying to turn a profit
>on
>> a free product by adding value only. --dubious value at that. And there
>is
>> only SO much value one can add to a linux distro or the penquinistas start
>> braying like donkeys in heat. See Corel for what can happen when they
>think
>> you have 'window-fied' linux!
>>
>> I'm STILL wondering how they ever thought that they COULD be viable.
>> dot com madness, something like mad-cow disease I think.
>
>And yet, Red Hat appears to be consolidating its leadership position, and
>was (until the recent slowdown) on track to become profitable next year.
>They are selling exactly that "dubious value" you refer to.
>
>But it appears that they are the only Linux distribution vendor who has a
>viable chance of long term survival and reasonable financial success at this
>point. The problem for Red Hat is that this places them one notch below
>Microsoft in the open source bible. Corporations might like them, but
>they'll be trashed on cola in proportion to their success - especially since
>that success will be viewed as coming at the expense of other distributions,
>and because as Red Hat becomes the de facto Linux standard, their decisions
>about what to put in their distribution will directly affect the success of
>open source projects.
>
>-- Mike --
>
>
>
Somebody had to win. I'm not sorry it was RedHat.
But keep in Mind, that doesn't automatically mean that Debian is dead!
But it might mean that Suse get's bought out, Caldera get's bought out.
Turbo Linux get's bought out.
I view Caldera as a target for Microsoft as they already half way think
like Microsoft.
--
Charlie
**DEBIAN** **GNU**
/ / __ __ __ __ __ __ __
/ /__ / / / \/ / / /_/ / \ \/ /
/_____/ /_/ /_/\__/ /_____/ /_/\_\
http://www.debian.org
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: State of linux distros
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:44:35 GMT
In article <973e90$g75$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "cat wrote:
>
>"Reefer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:nOal6.611$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Yep. I'll just trash my HDDs and install Windows 2000 on my P133.
>> > Oh, yeah and shell out for it as well :-)
>>
>> OR u could try to uppgrade your hardware a little bit perhaps ...this IS
>the
>> year 2001 u know, 'puters are fairly cheap ;-)
>
>That argument will never work here. Even when a 128 sdram stick is < $100.
>You see, MS is in cahoots with the memory manufacturers somehow.
>Buying new hardware is tantamount to giving money to Bill the Borg.
>
>Reality check:
>Take an older box, say a PPRO 200 with 128mb's of ram. Put BugHat 6.2 or 7
>on it.
>Run KDE or Gnome for awhile. Now, put NT 4 on it. -both standard installs,
>with or without networking. Look at the working memory sets of both.
>Ram? Case closed.
>
>
Microsoft is in the business of building furture Linux supercomputers.
--
Charlie
**DEBIAN** **GNU**
/ / __ __ __ __ __ __ __
/ /__ / / / \/ / / /_/ / \ \/ /
/_____/ /_/ /_/\__/ /_____/ /_/\_\
http://www.debian.org
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Help with display properties
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:57:25 -0000
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 12:27:08 GMT, John <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Thanks alot to everybody. I set the resolution according to specs of the
>monitor which is ancient, but I found them on some web site. The screen on
>the 800X600 does not expand to the edges of the monitor, but it is still
>better than it was.
>Thanks again.
xvidtune might also be useful here. It's a utility that allows you
to "tweak" your modelines. The net effect is similar to the size
and position control knobs that exist on newer monitors.
If the screen image is too large but not a virtual one, you can
use xvidtune to make it smaller.
[deletia]
--
The ability to type
./configure
make
make install
does not constitute programming skill. |||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Incredible developments in Italy regarding business software
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:56:41 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Donal K. Fellows"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Adam Warner wrote:
>> Um, it is being reported that this legislation was passed last
>> year: http://lwn.net/2001/features/siae.php3
>>
>> "The Italian Parliament recently approved an amendment to
>> copyright law.
>> The new rules have been in force since September 18, 2000 as
>> law 248/2000. The new mechanism is as yet unclear, but we
>> suspect that it might hinder or even put a stop to the work of
>> anyone producing software or using it in their business."
>
> Is that actually compatible with European Law?
>
> Donal.
AFAIK, this would fall under EU regulations concerning
restriction of trade, especially given the fact that other
member states don't have comparable laws. So yes, any challenge
to this in court *should* lead to this immediately being
invalidated (as laws are subservient to treaty, and EU
regulations are codified mostly in treaties).
However IANAL, although I did take 2 years of law school.
Mart
--
YahDu (Yet another happy Debian user)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft dying, was Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:04:07 -0000
On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 13:56:42 GMT, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Ketil Z Malde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Wishful thinking. Windows XP is HARDLY a featureless upgrade.
>>
>> Yeah, it's a much better telnet than ssh is.
>
>In another thread, I admitted that ssh isn't just a wrapped of
>telnet. So get over it, asshole.
>
>Anyhow, comparing the new features in Windows XP to ssh is
>stupid. SSH provides secure telnet and port forwarding and a couple
>other features. Windows XP is a whole OS which provides hundreds
>of new features.
Like what?
At least encrypted port forwarding can be pointed to as
a concrete example. As of yet, you haven't provided any
to favor "this month's edition of the upgrade treadmill".
[deletia]
--
>> Yes. And the mailer should never hand off directly to a program
>> that allows the content to take control.
>
>Well most mailers can, so I guess they all suck too.
Yup.
Candy from strangers should be treated as such.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
