Linux-Advocacy Digest #570, Volume #32 Thu, 1 Mar 01 00:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: My long signature - Oops! (Michael Vester)
Re: Forbes.com: Microsoft's security secret (Michael Vester)
Re: Off topic but do u fancy a game of chess? (Michael Vester)
Re: KDE or DOJ ? ("Gary Hallock")
Re: URGENT MESSAGE TO CHAD'S EMPLOYER Was: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) (Michael Vester)
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) (J Sloan)
Re: Mircosoft Tax (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: The Windows guy. (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Mircosoft Tax (Brent Pathakis)
Re: The Windows guy. (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Mircosoft Tax (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: A question for a user who wants to jump the M$ ship ("Bill Shine")
Re: why open source software is better (Bob Hauck)
Re: The Windows guy. (Bob Hauck)
Re: M$ doing it again! (Bob Hauck)
Re: URGENT MESSAGE TO CHAD'S EMPLOYER Was: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) (Bob Hauck)
Re: A question for a user who wants to jump the M$ ship (Bob Hauck)
Re: The Windows guy. (Marten Kemp)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: My long signature - Oops!
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 20:51:32 -0700
Woof wrote:
>
> Seems like many of you are taking this seriously for some reason.
> It was just one of my many examples of my twisted humour
> I was just teasing Aaron over his long sig in this one thats all
> Anyone with half a brain can see its a fake i didnt try very hard to
> fake it at all
>
> Woof da dog
If you are trying to be clever, please try harder. I
appreciate your name change.
--
Michael Vester
A credible Linux advocate
"The avalanche has started, it is
too late for the pebbles to vote"
Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Forbes.com: Microsoft's security secret
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 20:45:52 -0700
Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>
> http://www.forbes.com/1999/06/18/mu5.html
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> Name: mu5.html
> mu5.html Type: Hypertext Markup Language (text/html)
> Encoding: 7bit
Works perfectly under Netscape. Finding bad PR about Microsoft
is like shooting fish in a barrel. Come on all you losedos
advocates, lets see sum links to non-Microsoft web sites that
have some good news.
--
Michael Vester
A credible Linux advocate
"The avalanche has started, it is
too late for the pebbles to vote"
Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Off topic but do u fancy a game of chess?
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 20:56:03 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Woof wrote:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > > Aaron Kulkis wrote:
> > I see in your sig that you are a member of a chessclub
> > If you fancy a game sometime let me know and we can arrange to play on
> > Icc or somewhere
> > Ill warn you though ive never lost a game
> > I shall look forward to eating all your pieces
> >
> <snip>
> do you want black or white?
>
> Best thing is just to mail me. I'm always ready to play!
> --
> http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club
Post the results.
--
Michael Vester
A credible Linux advocate
"The avalanche has started, it is
too late for the pebbles to vote"
Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
------------------------------
From: "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE or DOJ ?
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 23:10:59 +0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bob Hauck"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is this one of those things, like your criticism of OS/2, whereby one
> system having features or options that another doesn't is a strike
> against the first on the grounds of it being "too complicated"?
>
No, this is Erik just blowing smoke. KDE 2.1 has been out for only 2
days. There is no way he has even tried it, let alone extensively.
Gary
------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: URGENT MESSAGE TO CHAD'S EMPLOYER Was: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 21:00:21 -0700
Ed wrote:
>
> > I thank God every day that I don't have to use that box as my desktop
> > because the state of Unix and Linux is so poor, I would have to shoot
> > myself if I did.
>
> Please, whoever employs Chad, remove his windows machine this instant and
> make him use Solaris/CDE.
>
> -Ed
>
> --
> | u98ejr
> | @
> Share, and enjoy. | eng.ox
> | .ac.uk
Give Chad a nice 3270 terminal. A nice pretty green screen.
No nasty mice to clutter up the desk.
--
Michael Vester
A credible Linux advocate
"The avalanche has started, it is
too late for the pebbles to vote"
Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 04:25:47 GMT
Bloody Viking wrote:
> . ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> : Unscheduled downtime... I doubt there are many NT machines out there
> : that don't need their 'maintenance reboot'.
>
> Just like animals and people need to sleep, the natural "maintenance reboot".
> At least nature provided for Defrag during down time in the form of dreams.
>
> The funny part is how animals, like NT machines, go haywire and eventually die
> when not allowed the "maintenance reboot". As far as my Linux box, the only
> downtime it ever expierences is when I issue the command to wrap up to either
> use 95 briefly or mess with hardware. Linux NEVER crashes unless you really
> fuck up.
Hey, I like that last sentence, can I use it in my .sig?
jjs
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: 1 Mar 2001 04:29:23 GMT
On Thu, 01 Mar 2001 00:43:46 GMT, Bob Hauck wrote:
>lOn 28 Feb 2001 03:19:11 GMT, Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Tue, 27 Feb 2001 19:12:09 GMT, Bob Hauck wrote:
>> In other businesses, the market leader does not make their prices
>> cheaper just because they can afford to.
>
>Right, they make them cheaper because there is competition. It is the
>presence of competitors in the market that drives the price toward the
>cost of production.
But if they can use a price that is fairly competitive and still make
a profit, why further reduce the price ? Microsoft's OEM licenses are
already priced competitively.
Linux box sets are in the same price ballpark. Considering that the
software in the typical Linux distribution is free, the distributors
would appear to have a big advantage over MS.
>> They price their products in such a way that the prices are reasonably
>> competitive (eg: $50- for an OEM license)
>
>Who, exactly, is Microsoft's competition for that OEM license? They do,
Linux distributions, and other OS licenses go for around the same price.
>in fact, have reasons to keep the price "reasonable", primarily to not
>create incentives for competitors to get into the OS business. That
>"reasonable" price might be considerably higher than it would be if
>there were competitors.
Baseless conjecture.
>I'm not clear on why you think it is fair to compare the OEM price of
>Windows with the retail price of a game. They are different products
>that have different economics and are sold in different ways.
I'm not. I'm pointing out that leaders in a market are not obliged to
cut prices just because they're succesful. In a capitalist economy,
succesful companies are supposed to make profit.
>Do you happen to know what percentage of their revenue is from that?
>How much do they charge for it?
No, I don't. What I do know is that Id are vastly more succesful than
other game software companies, which, by the argument put forth by the
Linux zealots, obliges them to reduce their prices.
> If you want to make a comparison
>between id and MS, then I would think you'd want to compare the price of
>this game engine to the OEM price of Windows,
I don't want to do this. The correct comparison is between Id and a random
game software company.
> rather than comparing the
>retail price of a game to the OEM price of Windows.
I don't appear to have explained this very well.
I am *not* comparing the price of a game with Windows.
What I am doing is pointing out that game companies don't lower their
prices just because they're doing well. And they're not obliged to
do so.
>I don't whine about the price of Windows, as I don't buy it. I do
>observe that the retail price has been quite constant in spite of the
>volume being much higher now than five or ten years ago. I can also
My point is, so what ? The fact that they are succesful does not in any
way oblige them to reduce their prices.
>observe that Windows seems to be a higher percentage of the system cost
>than it used to be.
I think this is a very hard claim to support. It's certainly true if you
compare todays budget system with yesterday's top of the line, but barring
this sort of blatant intellectual dishonesty, it's not really true. Was
Windows OEM really much less than $50- five years back ?
> And I can observe that these don't seem to be quite
>consistent with a competitive free market model, as the profit margins
>MS makes imply that they are selling their product for far more than the
>cost of production.
This could mean a lot of things. It could mean, for example, that they are
able to produce the same value at a lower cost of production. The fact that
there are winners and losers is not inconsistent with a "competitive free
market model".
>One could make a case that Windows is reasonably priced by some critera,
>which is apparently what you are doing, but how do you decide what's
>"reasonable" other thay via subjective things such as "I don't mind
>paying that much".
Compare it with the price of other operating systems. It's in the same
ballpark.
> I think a case can be made that it could potentially
>be cheaper if there were actual competition.
$50- is already fairly cheap. I think you'd have a hard time making a
case that the sales increase resulting from further reduction in price
would justify the loss of per-sale revenue.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: 1 Mar 2001 04:31:57 GMT
On Thu, 01 Mar 2001 00:30:11 +0000, Edward Rosten wrote:
>> On Wed, 28 Feb 2001 14:37:03 +0000, Edward Rosten wrote:
>>>> The simplest, broadest definition of pipes is that they are an
>>>> inter-process, FIFO communications channel from one processes to
>>>> another, which allows the 2nd process to start producing output before
>>>> the first process terminates.
>>>>
>>>> A single-tasking OS is fundamentally incapable of fulfilling this
>>>> definition properly.
>>>
>>>
>>> A simpler definition is:
>>
>> Yes, it's simpler, but also narrower.
>
>How so?
The set of things that satisfy your definition is a proper subset
of the things that satisfy his.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: Brent Pathakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.linux.sux,alt.os.linux.mandrake,comp.os.linux.misc
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 04:38:18 GMT
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Mar 2001 00:43:46 GMT, Bob Hauck wrote:
> >lOn 28 Feb 2001 03:19:11 GMT, Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>On Tue, 27 Feb 2001 19:12:09 GMT, Bob Hauck wrote:
> >> In other businesses, the market leader does not make their prices
> >> cheaper just because they can afford to.
> >
> >Right, they make them cheaper because there is competition. It is the
> >presence of competitors in the market that drives the price toward the
> >cost of production.
>
> But if they can use a price that is fairly competitive and still make
> a profit, why further reduce the price ? Microsoft's OEM licenses are
> already priced competitively.
>
> Linux box sets are in the same price ballpark. Considering that the
> software in the typical Linux distribution is free, the distributors
> would appear to have a big advantage over MS.
>
> >> They price their products in such a way that the prices are reasonably
> >> competitive (eg: $50- for an OEM license)
> >
> >Who, exactly, is Microsoft's competition for that OEM license? They do,
>
> Linux distributions, and other OS licenses go for around the same price.
>
> >in fact, have reasons to keep the price "reasonable", primarily to not
> >create incentives for competitors to get into the OS business. That
> >"reasonable" price might be considerably higher than it would be if
> >there were competitors.
>
> Baseless conjecture.
>
> >I'm not clear on why you think it is fair to compare the OEM price of
> >Windows with the retail price of a game. They are different products
> >that have different economics and are sold in different ways.
>
> I'm not. I'm pointing out that leaders in a market are not obliged to
> cut prices just because they're succesful. In a capitalist economy,
> succesful companies are supposed to make profit.
>
> >Do you happen to know what percentage of their revenue is from that?
> >How much do they charge for it?
>
> No, I don't. What I do know is that Id are vastly more succesful than
> other game software companies, which, by the argument put forth by the
> Linux zealots, obliges them to reduce their prices.
>
> > If you want to make a comparison
> >between id and MS, then I would think you'd want to compare the price of
> >this game engine to the OEM price of Windows,
>
> I don't want to do this. The correct comparison is between Id and a random
> game software company.
>
> > rather than comparing the
> >retail price of a game to the OEM price of Windows.
>
> I don't appear to have explained this very well.
>
> I am *not* comparing the price of a game with Windows.
>
> What I am doing is pointing out that game companies don't lower their
> prices just because they're doing well. And they're not obliged to
> do so.
>
> >I don't whine about the price of Windows, as I don't buy it. I do
> >observe that the retail price has been quite constant in spite of the
> >volume being much higher now than five or ten years ago. I can also
>
> My point is, so what ? The fact that they are succesful does not in any
> way oblige them to reduce their prices.
>
> >observe that Windows seems to be a higher percentage of the system cost
> >than it used to be.
>
> I think this is a very hard claim to support. It's certainly true if you
> compare todays budget system with yesterday's top of the line, but barring
> this sort of blatant intellectual dishonesty, it's not really true. Was
> Windows OEM really much less than $50- five years back ?
>
> > And I can observe that these don't seem to be quite
> >consistent with a competitive free market model, as the profit margins
> >MS makes imply that they are selling their product for far more than the
> >cost of production.
>
> This could mean a lot of things. It could mean, for example, that they are
> able to produce the same value at a lower cost of production. The fact
> that there are winners and losers is not inconsistent with a "competitive
> free market model".
>
> >One could make a case that Windows is reasonably priced by some critera,
> >which is apparently what you are doing, but how do you decide what's
> >"reasonable" other thay via subjective things such as "I don't mind
> >paying that much".
>
> Compare it with the price of other operating systems. It's in the same
> ballpark.
>
> > I think a case can be made that it could potentially
> >be cheaper if there were actual competition.
>
> $50- is already fairly cheap. I think you'd have a hard time making a
> case that the sales increase resulting from further reduction in price
> would justify the loss of per-sale revenue.
>
----snip----
You're referring to the price of an upgrade...the full version is about
$180. The way most people by OS's is pre-insstalled on a new system.
Bought that way, the price is a higher than than $180, and a lot higher
than the $50 you quoted..
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: 1 Mar 2001 04:38:49 GMT
On Thu, 01 Mar 2001 00:29:36 +0000, Edward Rosten wrote:
>>> A simpler definition is:
>>>
>>> a mechanism which allows the output of one process to be put in to the
>>> input of another process in the order that it (the data) was
>>> outputted.
>>
>> You need to include some sort of reference to the fact that process1 and
>> process2 are running simultaneously (as opposed to sequential
>> execution...i.e. process2 must be able to start executing while process1
>> is still running).
>
>You don't need to specify that process 1 and 2 are concurrent, since it
>can be deduced from the definition.
>
>Under my definition
>
>prog_that_wont_finish | head -3
>
>will run under a multitasking system but not a single tasking system,
>since the output of the first process never goes in to the input of the
>second so under my definition, the single tasking system does not
>implement pipes, therefore a multitasking system is required.
Actually, this does not demonstrate that a multitasking system is required
to satisfy your definition of "pipe". It demonstrates a limitation of
single process systems, and that's about it (unless you specify that your
example must work).
Otherwise, we can invent contrived examples that will fail almost anywhere.
eg:
process_that_reboots_the_system | tail -3
This only works on systems that can save their state to disk. Does this
mean that other systems do not support your definition of pipes ?
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: 1 Mar 2001 04:39:55 GMT
On Thu, 01 Mar 2001 00:13:05 +0000, Edward Rosten wrote:
>>>> So the argument would be that since their engine is widely used, they
>>>> should be able to sell their games for a lower cost.
>>>
>>>But their operating costs are high compared to most other types of
>>>software because there is much less reuse of code, and a very high
>>>proportion of designers as well.
>>
>> But the same is true for other game software companies. Why can't Id
>> sell their games cheaper than *other game companies* who have higher
>> costs (namely they have to license an engine) ?
>
>I guess they like to be rich %-)
>
>Besides, when the market is so volaile, you never know when your next
>product will go belly up and you need a bit of cash to see you through.
One could make exactly the same argument in Microsoft's case. The only
difference is that the volatility window is a little wider.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: "Bill Shine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: A question for a user who wants to jump the M$ ship
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 04:40:34 GMT
"Robert MacGregor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:MPG.150667b84aefd07c9896c6@news...
> I love Linux, I really do, and have used it for years as my li'l home
> web/mail/dhcp/firewall server and have always enjoyed my opportunities
> to administer it (which I always love is practically never).
>
> And I've been going back and forth on switching my desktop to it for
> just as long. Each release of Redhat that I've seen (7.1 is the latest)
> and the strides being made with KDE and all... It gets more and more
> appealing.
>
> My biggest reservations are that I have such an attachment to my windows
> apps.. I've seen some nice apps on Linux, but with all the various
> opensource things out there, a lot of what I have seen has been less
> than impressive to me, a GUI-spoiled brat (hey, I admit it.. and I grew
> up with Macs... but the GUI thing is just as important to me as the
> engineering under the hood.)
> * Rational Rose
Try together control center. It's expensive (around $5000.00 a seat), runs
on any unix
platform (including linux, since it's a 100% java app), and is a much better
product than rose.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: why open source software is better
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 04:43:53 GMT
On 01 Mar 2001 02:31:40 GMT, Peter Seebach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> all I want is something that can import my existing data, reconciles
> okay, and doesn't corrupt data. (The last clause rules out Quicken
> 2001 for Mac,
<http://www.moneydance.com/>
The only bad part is that it is written in Java, so it isn't the fastest
thing in the world. Runs ok on my K6-400 with 96 MB, was a bit sluggish
on the P-120/48 MB laptop.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 04:43:51 GMT
On Thu, 01 Mar 2001 01:04:03 GMT, Marten Kemp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>How does run Linux as a guest of Linux?
VMWare.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: M$ doing it again!
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 04:43:54 GMT
On Wed, 28 Feb 2001 18:49:39 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> If I didn't know what an uid was, much less the difference between a
> 16 bit or 32 bit one, how would I know what that function does?
If you want to program a Unix-like system, you'd better do some reading
before proceeding further then. I suggest Stevens.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: URGENT MESSAGE TO CHAD'S EMPLOYER Was: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 04:44:03 GMT
On Thu, 01 Mar 2001 03:22:40 GMT, Chad Myers
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Ed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:97ja2v$ogg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > I thank God every day that I don't have to use that box as my desktop
>> > because the state of Unix and Linux is so poor, I would have to shoot
>> > myself if I did.
Chad wrote this, not Ed. I guess it is "intelligent debate". Chad
screwed up his Solaris box and uses that to claim that _Linux_ is poor.
>> Please, whoever employs Chad, remove his windows machine this instant and
>> make him use Solaris/CDE.
> Let the record show the kind of immature childish assholes I attempt to
> engage in an intelligent debate with.
LOL! That's a good one! You're really quite the comedian.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: A question for a user who wants to jump the M$ ship
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 04:44:02 GMT
On Thu, 01 Mar 2001 02:45:43 GMT, Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Of course. Who the hell wants to look at plain text all day?
> Especially if you're peering through code or something. That gets hard
> on the eyes.
How can I look at code without looking at text? I write mostly C and
Python these days, and they are both text-based. I look at color-coded
text, just like programmers on other platforms do.
> Blech. I never figured out how to turn .vbs scripts off, I switched to
> the Netscape mailreader first. It's stupid and simple but at least it
> won't make you look like a moron when all your friends and family get
> a copy of the little VB baby (c/o Bill Gates) that you just opened.
I've never got a virus with Pine either. It seems to have all the
features of Netscape's mail reader, but it starts up about ten times
faster. Even supports LDAP and remote address books now.
> IE is the best browser available, you're right. I heard that you can
> get the Solaris port of IE to work on Linux, I gave it a half-assed
> try but wasn't successful.
I suppose that might work with Linux on Sparc. I don't think they made
a port for Solaris x86, did they?
> But yes, all the browsers available for Linux are flawed. Opera
> doesn't support printing yet (!),
Yes it does. Mine doesn't remember the paper size and always defaults
back to A4, but it prints fine. No plugins yet, so no Java. Very fast
to start up, much less memory than Netscape or Mozilla.
> Mozilla is too buggy for me,
0.8 is actually pretty good. Still has troubles with some Flash stuff
though. They fixed a rendering bug I voted for.
>> But then there's ones like Flash and QuarkXpress which I know aren't
>> available for Linux and I need them both desperately!
If he can't live without AppFoo that isn't on Linux, then I guess
there's no point in switching.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: Marten Kemp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 04:54:49 GMT
Bob Hauck wrote:
>
> On Thu, 01 Mar 2001 01:04:03 GMT, Marten Kemp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >How does run Linux as a guest of Linux?
>
> VMWare.
>
> --
> -| Bob Hauck
> -| To Whom You Are Speaking
> -| http://www.haucks.org/
And can one run VMWare as a guest of VMWare? Not to disparage VMWare,
which I feel is quite an accomplishment.
-- Marten Kemp
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
