Linux-Advocacy Digest #955, Volume #32 Wed, 21 Mar 01 00:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: What Linux MUST DO! - Comments anyone? (Scott Gardner)
Re: Unix/Linux Professionalism (T. Max Devlin)
Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure (Scott Gardner)
Re: Unix/Linux Professionalism (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software ("Les Mikesell")
Re: uh oh, redhat is gonna do it (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Germany Denies Microsoft Ban (Charles Lyttle)
Re: Yet more XBox bogification... (ZnU)
Re: GPL Like patents. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Germany Denies Microsoft Ban (Charles Lyttle)
Re: Selling to the masses (Michael Vester)
Re: uh oh, redhat is gonna do it (Steve Chaney)
Re: Linux @ $19.95 per month ("Interconnect")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Gardner)
Subject: Re: What Linux MUST DO! - Comments anyone?
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 04:06:19 GMT
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001 19:28:49 -0500, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Scott Gardner wrote:
>>
>> On 19 Mar 2001 09:42:58 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick
>> Condon) wrote:
>>
>> >Eugenio Mastroviti wrote:
>> >>Nick Condon wrote:
>> >>> Bringing up a Linux installation is *easier* than doing it in Windows.
>> >>
>> >>This is simply not true. Again, it is from my and your point of view (a
>> >>*really working* Win installation is not simply harder, it's
>> >>impossible...). It is not from Joe User's point of view.
>> >
>> >The only people who install operating systems are people who build their
>> >own PCs and corporate techies. Everyone else gets a PC with an OS already
>> >on it, so Joe User is irrelevant to this discussion.
>>
>> <<SNIP>>
>>
>> >Nick
>>
>> True, but if Linux is going to gain a large foothold in the desktop
>> market, it's going to be these "Joe User"s that make the difference.
>
>Wrong.
>
>Joe User will use whatever the fuck management puts on his desktop.
>
>end of story.
>
>--
We may be using different definitions for "Joe User" (a problem that
has been addressed elsewhere in this group), but my post was talking
about the *consumer* desktop environment, which I believed I stated
later in my post. Sorry for my lack of clarity.
Scott
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix/Linux Professionalism
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 04:16:25 GMT
Said Shades in alt.destroy.microsoft on Tue, 20 Mar 2001 15:06:20 -0500;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Shades in alt.destroy.microsoft on Tue, 20 Mar 2001 14:16:07 -0500;
>
>> No, the difference is whether you are *being* professional. We call
>> whatever that looks like "acting" professional, but as you have so well
>> illustrated, it is something you can't actually fake. Those of us who
>> are professionals do not get all self-concious and defensive because
>> some lame-ass like yourself threatens to expose our opinions. Christ,
>> you think we're just *playing* at this?
>
>No... professionalism is where you state your case and respond properly to
>different opionions.
Note the phrase "on Usenet" does not appear in your definition.
>Saying "fuck you" and "die off cretin" isn't.
Sure it is, if in your professional opinion, someone should fuck off or
is a cretin. We're technologists, man, not nuns. And believe it or
not, none of us are paid to post to Usenet (AFAIK). The dubious theory
that some of the wintrolls are is, I believe, and ingenuous
interpretation of the action of certain "sock puppets", who merely have
a vested interests in convincing people to quietly remain victims of the
monopoly.
>I am
>sure you tell the CEO of a company that and get away with it just fine
>right?
If I couldn't, I wouldn't do it. Doh!
And, yes, I've told a CEO of a company that anyone who gets themselves
entrenched into the monopoly is, to quote, "a nimrod". And I got away
with it, so to speak, because he paid me to provide my professional
opinion, of which this was merely a small portion.
>In the end I was making a point that there is a perception about
>Unix/Linux people, whether true or not and that changing that perception may
>help you in the long run win clients over.
Your point is that you would rather give advice to people who don't want
it than simply keep your stupid yap shut when you don't know what you're
talking about, I think.
>Large organizations do not like
>to have people they perceive as "loose cannons" and I was attempting to make
>that point.
I know. That's what I said. You're trying to shame everyone by calling
them unprofessional, because you got your little trolling ass spanked
being a smart-ass.
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Gardner)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 04:25:38 GMT
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001 00:49:22 GMT, "Chad Myers"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <3ab61681$0$44575$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jon Johanson"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> <snip some some stuff>
>> >
>> > At least they can hit something - unlike the rest of the world's
>> > military.
>> >
>> >
>> Hmm,
>>
>> One example: the Dutch Royal Marine Corps. One of the toughest bunch of
>> bastards you've ever seen. Served with distinction in Cambodia, Beirut
>> and Bosnia (after our braindead politicians realized that that is no
>> place for lightly armed, unsupported troops).
>> And this is only a small example, I think a lot of Europeans can think 2
>> or 3 more for their own homelands.
>> Please refrain from making unsupported and unsupportable claims, you'll
>> only make yourself look foolish.
>
>But, when it comes down to it, when something needs to get done in the
>world, only the Americans can seem to get it done.
>
>-c
Well, size does have a lot to do with it. The Isrealis have some fine
fighter pilots, by anyone's standards. Even the Croatian pilots can
fly the hell out of their old MiG-21's, but could either of these
forces pull off a large campaign on the scale that the US has done in
the past? Probably not. Along the same lines, think of the Navy
SEALS. Very capable warriors, but could you win an entire war using
SEALS alone? Again, probably not. The US gets tasked for a lot of
assignments because we have the technology and sheer manpower, along
with the skills, to get the job done.
Scott
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix/Linux Professionalism
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 04:28:04 GMT
Said Shades in alt.destroy.microsoft on Tue, 20 Mar 2001 14:57:48 -0500;
[...]
>I have only had a similar problem to the one you mentioned and that was with
>Compaq 3000's running with redundant ethernet cards that were TI based.
>They would occasionally do a fail over and hang or blue screen the whole OS.
>Compaq blamed it all on MS and after some time Compaq admitted it was the TI
>based ethernet cards. They had really flaky problems sometimes with the
>3000's and Compaq sort of admitted that we should use the Intel based cards.
>It had to do with the hardware not supporting IRQ sharing (or something
>along those lines). After they were all swapped out everything work great.
Guffaw. Yea, sure, its not Window's fault at all when it proves to be a
pathetically fragile OS; must be a hardware problem.
>Besides that particular episode I have not had anything really close to the
>problem you mention.
Your experience is obviously severely limited.
>> When I put on Linux and the same machines, and actually start pulling the
>> ethernet cable during file copies...and show that the machine handles it
>> with no lockups, These NT goons start insulting my me, my family, etc.,
>> etc and become those wackos you talk about.
>
>That is bizarre and it sounds like a more fundamental problem than the OS.
ITYM "a fundamental problem with the OS." Windows has tons of 'em.
>I have had NT3.51, 4.0 and W2K on my laptop and run multiple servers with it
>and I have no such problem whatsoever and never did. Even worse is how
>those people reacted.
Pretty typical for windroids, I'm afraid.
[...]
>I was speaking from many of the corporate environments I have been in where
>for example Windows NT was being looked at replacing other types of servers.
>I have seen wacky things on both ends but not like what you are saying from
>MS people.
Guffaw. I have had experience in about two dozen corporate environments
in the last two years alone. I have yet to see one MS advocate who
wasn't a putz. Most staff know precisely how bad NT is, and would only
ever dream of using it (or W2K) to replace *anything* (accept, of
course, a WinDOS machine) because they had to. And that happens a lot,
of course, what with MS constantly making deals to force large
corporations into using Windows when its frankly a stupid move. But MS
has them by the balls, of course. Its a monopoly.
[...]
>Hmm.. well you can think what you want but I didn't say anything that was
>detrimental towards Linux/Unix at all. Pretend for a moment that I was a
>customer with a big budget and I had some concern regarding using Linux
>because some MS sales rep said they were untrustworthy people(not too far
>off base from reality from what a sales rep would say).
I don't know anyone in IT who wouldn't break out laughing at such a
silly thing. Perhaps we'd lose the sale, but, well, there is some merit
to the idea that to chase after clueless customers is to shoot yourself
in the foot.
>I go to a couple
>of places and see what people are like and I get some negative reactions.
Why on earth would you get negative reactions? Linux people are always
very helpful and cooperative, from what I hear, and I've never seen any
evidence at all to the contrary. Of course, if you post to Usenet,
you're probably going to get flamed somewhere along the lines; that's
the nature of the beast.
But hanging around after you got flamed talking about how
"unprofessional" everyone was and how they failed to be a shining beacon
for the clueless and didn't overthrow the monopoly themselves, well....
>So I point out that there is a perception, real or not, that Linux/Unix
>people tend to be un-professional.[...]
Yup; they're a bunch of fucking cowboys, didn't you know?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 04:28:32 GMT
"Rob S. Wolfram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >3) If you want to place the restrictions of the GPL on your code, that's
> >great and it is your choice -- but don't call it free. It ain't.
>
> Then neither is BSDLed software. It has license restrictions too.
But the restrictions don't have anything to do with the code or
in what ways you are prohibited from distributing improvements
to it.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,soc.singles,alt.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.redhat,linux.redhat
Subject: Re: uh oh, redhat is gonna do it
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 04:30:36 GMT
Said Steve Chaney in alt.destroy.microsoft on Tue, 20 Mar 2001 20:03:03
GMT;
>On Tue, 20 Mar 2001 19:57:05 GMT, T. Max Devlin
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Said Steve Chaney in alt.destroy.microsoft on Tue, 20 Mar 2001 08:14:31
>>>I didn't know whether or not RedHat would try and boff the linux
>>>community up the back door, but it looks like they will try after all.
>>>
>>>Is RedHat making like a dog taking off at high speed and forgetting it
>>>is chained by the neck, or will it stop here? My bet is they are
>>>taking the first leaps in a quest to turn their version of Linux into
>>>a paid subscription product.
>>
>>An old and rather appropriate idea.
>>
>>>What am I talking about?
>>>http://www.redhat.com/products/network/service_changes.html
>>>(Credits: first seen on slashdot.org:
>>>http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/03/19/156208&mode=thread)
>>>
>>>A few excerpts from the FAQ page:
>>>"On February 26, 2001 Red Hat will be releasing Software Manager, our
>>>new software update management tool. Software Manager will replace the
>>>introductory Red Hat Network trial program, which will be ending that
>>>day."
>>>
>>>"Software Manager is a subscription offering priced at $19.95 per
>>>month for each system."
>> [...]
>>>Can we say manual updates? Well, at least for now, perhaps. But very
>>>soon they are likely to try and find a way to do away with this as
>>>well.
>>
>>You apparently lack the technical ability to understand why this is a
>>stupid statement. Not only is it unlikely, its an incomprehensible
>>idea.
>
>I call your bluff - why do you think it's a stupid idea?
>RedHat can't go far with this because of the GPL their product is
>licensed under.
If you knew the answer, why did you bother asking the question?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 04:31:47 GMT
"Rob S. Wolfram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> This is done by providing the Source code of the software.
> >>
> >Source code distribution isn't required by the GPL... Go ask Cygnus
> >for all of their GPLed source code: they don't have to give it to you.
>
> Should I copy section 3a of the GPL for you or are you willing to read
> it yourself and come back then?
The GPL only requires source distribution to those who obtain binaries.
There are no restrictions on the terms you can place on the binaries,
and no requirement to distribute anything at all.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Charles Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Germany Denies Microsoft Ban
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 04:32:45 GMT
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Jan Johanson wrote:
> > >
> > > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Jan Johanson wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > hahahaha - silly penguinistas - I TOLD you it was a lie... but you
> > > choose to
> > > > > believe your own fud machines... hehe
> > > > >
> > > > > http://www.wirednews.com/news/politics/0%2C1283%2C42502%2C00.html
> > > >
> > > > Did you actually read the article you posted?
> > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > >
> > > > Andy Mueller-Maguhn, a leader of Berlin's Chaos Computer Club and also
> > > Europe's
> > > > representative on the board of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names
> > > and
> > > > Numbers (ICANN), said he believed the German government was probably in
> > > > damage-control mode. In other words: He thinks the report in Der Spiegel
> > > is
> > > > probably accurate.
> > >
> > > Gee, the Chaos Club? A linux lovers/ms-haters hang out. Uhhuh...real
> > > objective...
> >
> > I would say that:
> > Europe's representative on the board of the Internet Corporation for Assigned
> > Names and Numbers (ICANN)
> >
> > Has some clout.
>
> So, suddenly some computer-club dork who happens to have got lucky
> with some lofty, yet weightless title is a cryptography, OS, government
> and military leader who can make expert comments about what the
> German military thinks or doesn't think?
>
> ROFL.
>
You should watch him crack bank accounts during live TV broadcast
sometime. He doesn't know what "got lucky" means. He is one of the best
white hat crackers around.
> > You on the other hand, are quickly proving that you don't.
>
> At least he's not trying to speak for the German military, unlike
> Andy Dorkmeister.
>
If he does, its probably because they said he could.
> -c
--
Russ Lyttle
"World Domination through Penguin Power"
The Universal Automotive Testset Project at
<http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
------------------------------
From: ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Yet more XBox bogification...
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 04:34:26 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Alan Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Edwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Jim Naylor wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Edwin
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> [snip]
> >>
> >> There's no "lying" going on at all. I've seen
> >> protypes from other game companies. This is common practice.
> >> >
> >> > Edwin
> >>
> >> "I have never outrightly lied on this group
> >> in spite of whatever you think to the contrary.
> >> Alright I lied. But except in the case of
> >> Macsbug and DONK nobody had me dead to rights.
> >> I lied. So sue me." -- EdWIN Thorne
> >
> >Jim Naylor once again trots out his cut-and-paste creation. He wants
> >to make certain no one will ever mistake him for one who pocesses morals
> >or ethics.
>
> You are so very fortunate that the dejanews archive is unvailable.
>
> It lets you spin out this lie almost as long as you denied that you
> posted as Macsbug and the rest.
I suspect he'll keep lying even after you post the proof. Witness some
of his behavior just today in the "Somebody ought to sue Apple!" thread,
where he accuses of lying about which posts I was responding to even
after I posted article references.
I really don't understand what drives him to do things like this. Does
he see it as some kind of victory when people refuse to debate with him
because he won't acknowledge facts that are sitting under his nose?
--
ALL YOUR UNIX ARE BELONG TO US.
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: GPL Like patents.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 04:35:37 GMT
Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 20 Mar 2001
[...]
>Perhaps you can understand that RMS and I disagree on what "basing" means.
If its that simple, why do you have to keep pretending that his
definition is somehow conflicted in ways that it frankly is not? Why
not just say "I wish that RMS's idea of 'basing' wasn't sufficient to
make the GPL effective." Its a lot more honest.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: Charles Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Germany Denies Microsoft Ban
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 04:37:22 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> =
> Jan Johanson wrote:
> >
> > wrote in message news:...
> > > From: Peter =3D?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=3DF6hlmann?=3D <Peter.Koehlmann@t-on=
line.de>
> > > Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
> > > Subject: Re: Germany Denies Microsoft Ban
> > > Followup-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
> > > Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 10:30:04 +0100
> > > Organization: SMP
> > > Lines: 41
> > > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > References: <3ab6a824$0$28214$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > <tVAt6.2611$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Mime-Version: 1.0
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Diso-8859-1
> > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8Bit
> > > X-Trace: news.t-online.com 985079312 01 26996 b6d70PGSUYICV 010320
> > 09:08:32
> > > X-Complaints-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > User-Agent: KNode/0.4
> > > Xref: newscene.com comp.os.linux.advocacy:461643
> > comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:204674
> > >
> > > Chad Myers wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Andy Mueller-Maguhn, a leader of Berlin's Chaos Computer Club an=
d also
> > > > Europe's
> > > >> representative on the board of the Internet Corporation for Assi=
gned
> > > >> Names and Numbers (ICANN), said he believed the German governmen=
t was
> > > >> probably in damage-control mode. In other words: He thinks the r=
eport
> > > >> in Der Spiegel is probably accurate.
> > > >>
> > > >> "You have to remember we have a new U.S. government to think of =
and
> > > >> it's very sure that no one in the German government wants to hur=
t that
> > > >> new political relationship," said Mueller-Maguhn, an occasional =
adviser
> > > >> to government figures.
> > > >>
> > > >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> > > >
> > > > So who cares what this wacko thinks? Who the hell is he? The lead=
er
> > > > of some computer club? ROFL.
> > > >
> > >
> > > You can=B4t read, Chad, right?
> > > There was also mentioned that he is a member of ICANN and advisor t=
o
> > > government.
> >
> > WOW, ICANN! woooppheeeee!!!! Like that means ANYTHING. NOT!. "Advisor=
" to
> > the government? What does he go, go around saying, "I think we should=
all
> > dye our hair blonde" and people do?
> >
> > > But beeing a member of Chaos Computer Club is even more important,
> > > in my eyes.
> >
> > yea, obviously...
> >
> > > Naturally you don=B4t know what that is and who those guys are, as =
you
> > > have shown.
> >
> > I do - and it impresses me, zero.
> >
> > >
> > > In addition you probably don=B4t know "Der Spiegel", one of the mos=
t
> > > renowned magazines of the world. If they write something, in nearly=
> > > all of the cases it is really good researched. *VERY* rarely they g=
ot
> > > it wrong.
> >
> > Guess what - THEY GOT IT WRONG!
> =
> How much does Bill Gates pay you to write this miserable shit?
> =
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
> =
>>SNIP<<
Try to get JJ into a longer post. So we can do a literary analysis and
discover who/what Jan is. With all the one-liners its going to take a
while.
-- =
Russ Lyttle
"World Domination through Penguin Power"
The Universal Automotive Testset Project at
<http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Selling to the masses
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 14:39:36 -0700
"." wrote:
>
> Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have noticed a definite shift from a technical argument to potty talk.
>
> "potty talk"
>
> Thats a hell of a vocabulary youve got there, tex.
>
> -----.
Just adjusting my vocabulary to the audience's comprehension level. Tex
is not a good nickname for me. I am from Canada. Acceptable names for
Canadians could be hoser or Canuck, eh.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Chaney)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,soc.singles,comp.os.linux.redhat
Subject: Re: uh oh, redhat is gonna do it
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 04:48:04 GMT
On Tue, 20 Mar 2001 22:03:48 +0000 (UTC), Brian Langenberger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Steve Chaney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>:>What this means to us is that we have to ftp our software updates when out
>:>trial RHN subscriptions end.
>
>: My point is they might try and make it so you can't get the software
>: updates via FTP.
>
>RedHat is free to do so, though there is no indication that they will.
>If RedHat decides to distribute their distro and updates only on
>Official RedHat CDs for $10,000 per copy, they're also free to do so.
Yup
>But once someone gets a copy, they can distribute the GPL'ed sources
>(and everything RedHat has done so far is GPL'ed or with an open
> specification) far and wide via non-RedHat channels. Or, people
>can just fork off the existing RedHat distro into BlueHat
Or Mandrake? hehe
>and continue it for free. Or, people could switch to any number
>of other distros entirely.
Welp, that definitely answers my question.
>In short, making Linux expen$ive requires a great deal of effort
>for little gain - since the cost of switching distros is so small.
>The only people who think RedHat's latest pay service is some
>Evil Portent of Doom are the non-Linux users.
I just had questions. You ought to see how much fighting there is over
this on the slashdot forums. I'll never be against RedHat providing
"value added" stuff aka support, for a fee.
-- Steve
===============================
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (remove the "-" to email me)
This site is just TOO COOL for a counter! http://www.self-acceptance.org
"As long as an enemy is judged solely by his
appearance, his victory is assured." - Outer Limits
------------------------------
From: "Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux @ $19.95 per month
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 16:02:06 +1100
Jan Johanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3ab808c9$0$22497$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:998jjs$s8m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > However, if you're a corporation and want some legitimate service, you
> > must
> > > now pay. On the other hand, if you want to keep your systems up to
date,
> > > you must hire a person to monitor the daily patches and keep the
systems
> > > up to date, thus costing you. Either way, it's still a costly
> proposition.
> >
> > You are admitting it yourself. You can CHOOSE to pay for a service. No
one
> > is forcing you to pay RH if your tech staff are better at admin then you
> can
> > run it yourself at NO COST.
> >
> > My company Runs a few RH machines. We have never paid a cent for
> *service*
> > because if you pull your finger out you can quite easily do it yourself.
> >
> > You seem to be under the impression that *companies* need to have the
> latest
> > bleeding edge *update* of *every* single package that is out there.
> >
> > You don't need the latest Kernel.
> > You don't need the latest version of Sendmail or Postfix.
> > You don't need the latest KDE or Gnome.
> > You don't need the latest version of Apache.
> > You don't need the latest version of Tomcat.
> > You don't need the latest version of PostgreSQL or MySql.
> > You don't need all the latest shared object libraries.
> >
> > The point is if your installation is working and secure you don't need
to
> > upgrade just because it's out there.
> >
> > > > E.g. MS model. You must pay us to service your car. Even if you can
do
> > it on
> > > > your own.
> > >
> > > Please show us where you must pay for the Windows Update service.
> > > (Hint: you can't, because you don't)
> >
> > Hmmm whats the difference between an upgrade and an update?
> > Win3.1 --> Win3.11--> Win95 --> Win95B --> Win98 --> Win98B -->
WinME -->
> > Win2K
> >
> > Don't get me started on the Visual Studio series of upgrades just as
bad.
>
> Allow me, jerkola, to quote you back to yourself:
>
> "The point is if your installation is working and secure you don't need to
> upgrade just because it's out there."
>
> IDIOT! No one forces you to upgrade windows either. W3.1 to W95/98/ME
(take
> your pick, either does the same) to NT4/W2K (either is fine, W2K is
better).
>
u R a k33wl d00d
ROFL not!
Before you Winvocates go flying off the handle calling people idiots, where
did I say that MS *forces* you to upgrade? I just showed that there was an
upgrade / update cycle.
Case in point, on my Windows machine at home I run Win98 with Office95. It
WORKS!
The FUNDAMENTAL point is that if you want to *upgrade* with MS products it
cost you $$ with Linux you have the option to pay for a service or get the
same for free. If Windows products were marketed with the same philosophy
then I would be able to download Win2K and Word2k off of the web for free.
Comprendo?
Pretty darn BASIC.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
