Linux-Advocacy Digest #961, Volume #32 Wed, 21 Mar 01 04:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Germany Denies Microsoft Ban (Klaus-Georg Adams)
Re: Seeking Comparison of Solaris & Linux (GreyCloud)
Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure (GreyCloud)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Tim Hanson)
Re: the truth about linux (Terry Porter)
Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure (GreyCloud)
Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure (Terry Porter)
Re: Stupid error message (Ray Chason)
Re: GPL Like patents. (Rob S. Wolfram)
Re: Virus plague causes charity to consider Linux (Terry Porter)
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> ("David Brown")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Klaus-Georg Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Germany Denies Microsoft Ban
Date: 21 Mar 2001 08:52:33 +0100
"Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Gee, the Chaos Club? A linux lovers/ms-haters hang out. Uhhuh...real
> objective...
You clearly don't know what you are talking about. The CCC predates MS
and Linux by a safe margin. They are hackers in the best sense of the
word. I'd suggest you go and educate yourself before you make remarks
like that.
--
kga
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Seeking Comparison of Solaris & Linux
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 23:59:19 -0800
Charles Lyttle wrote:
>
> Glenn Catlin wrote:
> >
> > Where I work we use Solaris in production, but we recently bought a Dell
> > host with Red Hat Linux. One of our seasoned Solaris folk quickly
> > turned her nose up after a couple of her first command-lines at the
> > Linux host failed. I want Linux is succeed in my office, but I need a
> > book or something to demonstrate the differences/similarities between
> > the two flavors. Any suggestions? Thanks.
> >
> > - Glenn
> > Philadelphia PA
> > USA
> Different shells? You can configure Linux so it is running the same
> shell as on Solaris. Linux is better on cheap PCs, Solaris on Sun
> hardware. All other things being equal, Solaris is better. But if you
> are in a money crunch, Linux is almost as good and lots cheaper.
>
> --
> Russ Lyttle
> "World Domination through Penguin Power"
> The Universal Automotive Testset Project at
> <http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
Depends on the distro. On Caldera 2.4 sh is linked to bash. Sh doesn't
exist in that distro. If you are using bash and type in sh and then
type unset IFS and it doesn't allow it, then its still bash. It worked
on earlier versions of linux and also on the current version of Solaris
8. (IFS input field separator).
I like both Solaris and Linux.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 00:27:05 -0800
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> GreyCloud wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > >
> > > GreyCloud wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Rex Ballard wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Another poor Wintroll hits the meat-grinder.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jon Johanson wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Electric Ninja" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:Wpht6.28385$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > For getting work done I love Win2000 like a charm
> > > > > > > but I'm scared to death to
> > > > > > > have something like that running one of our aircraft carriers.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why? It works as well as any other server OS...
> > > > >
> > > > > You're kidding, right?
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, Window 2000 really is 3 times more reliable than Windows NT.
> > > > > Windows 2000 is the best Operating system Microsoft has developed to
> > > > > date.
> > > > >
> > > > > Compared to Netware 3.5, Windows 2000 is pretty impressive (even though
> > > > > Windows 2000
> > > > > need 10 times the memory, hard-drive, and CPU speed to do the same job).
> > > > >
> > > > > Compared to AT&T System III, Windows 2000 is also pretty respectable.
> > > > >
> > > > > Compared to any modern version of UNIX (including Linux), Microsoft has
> > > > > a very long
> > > > > way to go...
> > > > >
> > > > > To put it politely, you need lots and lots (about 30) of Windows 2000
> > > > > servers to the
> > > > > work that a single Linux or UNIX machine performs on a regular basis.
> > > > >
> > > > > Microsoft has tried to come up with some cute little benchmarks and
> > > > > tests, which use
> > > > > none of the current 3rd party software, to attempt to prove that
> > > > > DataCenter Edition
> > > > > in the "Standard Configuration", is as reliable as Linux or Solaris.
> > > > >
> > > > > To do the reliability tests, they run all drives in RAID 1, front-end
> > > > > and back-end pairs
> > > > > each being a 4-way SMP server such as a Netfinity. Then they run web
> > > > > server asps connected
> > > > > to SQL Server back-ends. Actually cost of the system - just for the
> > > > > royalties - approaches
> > > > > $1/2 million for the four-by-four (16 processors at $20k each).
> > > > >
> > > > > To do the performance tests, they run the drives in RAID 0, with larger
> > > > > tables split across
> > > > > multiple servers, and strong effinity. It's fast, but unreliable. And
> > > > > the costs assume
> > > > > less than $50,000 per year for staffing and support of all servers and
> > > > > users.
> > > > >
> > > > > I've read the "Fast Facts" pages, they come up every time a company
> > > > > studies the choice between
> > > > > Linux, Unix (Solaris, AIX, HP_UX, or BSD).
> > > > >
> > > > > My all-time favorite is the one where a lab attempts to "Prove" that
> > > > > Windows NT will have
> > > > > a lower TCO because you will need Solaris AND Netware servers (since
> > > > > this guy never heard of
> > > > > SAMBA), and you will need only 3 servers per 1,000 users. He also gave
> > > > > a minimum price of $25,000 for the Solaris box compared to $2,000 for
> > > > > NT.
> > > > >
> > > > > The Iloveyou virus alone caused nearly $2.6 billion in damages, and the
> > > > > breaching strategy
> > > > > was copied from Melissa, a virus that Microsoft had supposedly "cured".
> > > > > Other viruses
> > > > > weren't as widely distributed, but they corrupted hard drives, wiped out
> > > > > critical files,
> > > > > and pushed confidential information (cookies, passwords, e-mail) through
> > > > > corporate fire-walls.
> > > > >
> > > > > Reality and real-world performance have consistently shown that even
> > > > > Linux 2.2.17 can
> > > > > run circles around Windows NT and Windows 2000 when it comes to the
> > > > > overall combination
> > > > > of performance, stability, security, ROI, TCO, and ROE.
> > > > >
> > > > > Within the UNIX world, Linux on Intel is usually considered the lower
> > > > > end of the
> > > > > spectrum of UNIX systems (even though Linux clusters now compete
> > > > > favorably with the
> > > > > largest and fastest clusters and mainframes).
> > > > >
> > > > > Both Sun and IBM are now offering their RISC versions of UNIX on servers
> > > > > costing under $1000.
> > > > > Linux 2.4.1 kernel supports nearly all of the features of the biggest
> > > > > supercomputers, and
> > > > > is now available on everything from Pentiums to Z-900 supercomputers.
> > > > >
> > > > > With Linux/UNIX, the standards are published, and supported by Open
> > > > > Source software.
> > > > >
> > > > > With Windows NT/2000 the standards are proproprietary, closed,
> > > > > incompatible with existing
> > > > > infrastructure, and create security exposures that are well-known by
> > > > > many and can be exploited
> > > > > by middle-school kids.
> > > > >
> > > > > Linux has a number of engineering advantages, most of which are
> > > > > available in open source,
> > > > > which Microsoft is unable to exploit because they bet the entire company
> > > > > that UNIX wasn't
> > > > > going to ever be a viable platform.
> > > > >
> > > > > Perhaps SCO will let them start marketing UNIX again :-).
> > > > >
> > > > > Linux - 100 million and counting.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Rex Ballard
> > > > > It Architect
> > > > > http://www.open4success.com
> > > >
> > > > Out of curiosity, does IBM produce RISC based desktop models around the
> > > > $1k range?
> > >
> > > What's the price range for Power PC's these days?
> > >
> >
> > If your suggesting Apple iMac its not for me. I was thinking more along
> > the lines of the RS/6000 series. I think Power PC cpus are joint IBM
> > and Motorola venture. I was hoping that IBM would compete against Sun
> > in the Unix arena at the $1k mark.
> >
>
> Oh, god...no, you do NOT want an RS-6000.
>
> RS/6000....on your Desktop? Where ya gonna put the monitor?
>
> (RS/6000's consume a 2 foot x 3 foot patch of floorspace.)
Haha... Well, in that case its not priced at $1k then.
Reminds me of one guy that found a VAX 6000 for $500 at e-bay. He was
trying to figure out a way to convince his wife that it would look nice
next to the refrigerator. But he couldn't get access to three phase
power. :-))
>
> > > Aaron R. Kulkis
> > > Unix Systems Engineer
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
>
> K: Truth in advertising:
> Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
> Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
> Special Interest Sierra Club,
> Anarchist Members of the ACLU
> Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
> The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
> Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
>
> J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
> The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
> also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
>
> I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
> challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
> between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
> Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
>
> H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
> premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
> you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
> you are lazy, stupid people"
>
> G: Knackos...you're a retard.
>
> F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
>
> E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
> her behavior improves.
>
> D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> ...despite (C) above.
>
> C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
>
> B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
> method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
> direction that she doesn't like.
>
> A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
--
V
------------------------------
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: misc.int-property,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 08:29:34 GMT
JD wrote:
>
> "Tim Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > JD wrote:
> > >
> > > "Tim Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > JD wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > Said JD in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 14 Mar 2001 21:54:19 -0500;
> > > > > > >Jumping in:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'll estimate that the number of people who don't understand the
> > > > > > > side-effect of GPL are similar (within a few percent, highly
>correlated)
> > > > > > > to those who think that the GPL is a license of free software.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And I'd estimate that the number of people who claim GPL isn't "free
> > > > > > software" are similar to those who want to charge money for licenses of
> > > > > > work based on free software.
> > > > > >
> > > > > That is strictly not true, because most people who really don't like the GPL,
> > > >
> > > > Oh they don't, do they? Specifically what class of people did you count
> > > > in your "most" qualifier? What methodology did you use in counting
> > > > them, and where is your research published and peer reviewed? You _do_
> > > > have some basis for this statement, beyond your own previous rhetoric,
> > > > don't you?
> > > >
> > > Okay, your right... People just don't like the GPL because it is a bad license
>then? :-).
> >
> > We haven't figured out that people don't like the GPL yet, beyond your
> > repeated insistance that they don't. Which people, specifically?
> >
> All you have to do is look and listen. The information is freely available, and
> probably not under the GPL.
I have looked and listened and don't see a groundswell of opposition
that you apparently do. Where is it, or is it made of straw?
> I can enumerate names, but it is your problem that your circle of friends is so
> very small.
What do you know about my circle of friends?
> I happen to have friends that both like the GPL and don't like the
> GPL. Guess what? The number who really embrace the GPL are a similar proportion
> to the trekkers (very small, usually misfits.)
I see, so you're relying on the anecdotes of a circle of your friends.
I finally have my answer. In addition, you make yet another unsupported
assertion, that those "who really embrace the GPL" are "misfits."
Sewage.
> There are some indiivuals who would use
> the GPL in appropriate circumstances (for a non-trekker, I mean GPLer -- seldom), but
> they certainly don't 'live' the GPL, like most GPLers do.
>
> John
--
There was a young poet named Dan,
Whose poetry never would scan.
When told this was so,
He said, "Yes, I know.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: the truth about linux
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 21 Mar 2001 08:26:45 GMT
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001 03:09:22 GMT, Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>J Sloan wrote:
>>
>> "Public " wrote:
>>
>> > Here are some humorous snippets from a site located at
>http://members.aol.com/erichuf/Linux.html
>> >
>> > Finally! somebody willing to tell the truth!
>>
>> Nah, just another silly troll....
>>
>> jjs
>
>And this, Young Jedi, is why you fail. Instead of responding to the
>points the article makes, you simply dismiss it and the reader.
>
>Linux will never take off
So says a obviously Windows impaired oracle of wisdom!
> unless it's community of advocates (not
>developers, the developers seem pretty nice) is willing to take some
>(much-needed) criticism.
Bullshit.
> They need to be:
>
>1) less arrogant
Get Stuffed.
>2) less condescending
There there,have a nice lie down Wintroll, watch that blood pressure.
>3) less insecure
God I hope Windows doesn't take over my Linux box!
>4) more open-minded
If only I could embrace your Wintroll drivel ..
>5) mindful of why Microsoft SUCCEEDS and why they FAIL
The court said Windows succeeds due to criminal preditory business
practices.
>
>In general, I find the Linux community so darn obnoxious and unlikable
>(ie. Kulkis), or just plain religious like zealotrous (ie. Charlie
>Ebert) at times it actually serves as a deterrant to me using the OS.
I for one hope you never use Linux, I think your bitching would drive
me crazy.
>
>Is this flaimbait? Probably, but the truth is the truth.
Yes this is flamebait, 1= 1.
>
>--
>Happy Trails!
Happy endless upgrades, happy reinstalls, happy virii !
>
>-Brent
>
>http://rotten168.home.att.net
Terry
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 00:31:54 -0800
Michael Vester wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > Jan Johanson, the Microsoft-paid shill lied:
> > >
> > > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Jan Johanson wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > Jon Johanson wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > > Andy Walker wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "Blue Screen of Death" has a whole new meaning.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Fortunately that's not an issue with any properly configured system,
> > > > > > > especially not a W2K system hardened for military use - silly boy...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Look who is being silly. According to Microsoft's sponsored tests,
> > > by
> > > > > > NSTL, Windows 2000 has a MTTF of 2839. That's 118 days. So, just
> > > before
> > > > > > they enter battle, they should reboot. Or they should never be out at
> > > > > > sea for more than three months. Give me a break.
> > > > >
> > > > > that's for a release candidate version of the OS using drivers made
> > > before
> > > > > the product was finalized. The final version of the product, updated to
> > > > > service pack 1 and using WHQL drivers doesn't crash. We've never seen a
> > > blue
> > > > > screen. I personally consider it bullshit created by unix losers envious
> > > of
> > > > > how easily windows smokes unix's CLI butt
> > > >
> > > > Ahh, yes, here we go again. "This version (service pack) of [NT, 2K,
> > > Windows,
> > > > etc.] is stable, unlike the previous version."
> > >
> > > Not at all true. What's so unusual about requiring a final release version
> > > of some product? Are you that used to running beta software that you prefer
> > > it over fleeting releases before more point betas are released?
> >
> > Same song, different day.
> >
> > How many YEARS have we been hearing this same song?
> >
> > When is Microsoft actually going to DELIVER on a single one of their promises?
> >
> > They *STILL* haven't figured out how to make a multi-user system.
> >
> > Fuck, I wrote a multi-user, multi-tasking operating system in FOUR WEEKS
> > BY MYSELF on a primitive 8-bit Motorola 6809.
>
> I don't believe they have been able to build a multi-tasking OS. DesqView
> running on dos could format a disk and do something else much better than
> any losedos OS. At best, I would call losedos a task switcher.
> >
> > Are you saying with all of those BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN ANNUAL REVENUE
> > that this is faaaaaaaaar too difficult a task for the boys in Redmond?
> >
> Those billions are going to satisfy the greediest people that ever lived.
> With open source, Microsoft does not even have to code anymore. Just
> incorporate open source into their products with lots of NOP's. When
> upgrades are necessary to increase cash flow, delete NOP's and
> re-release. Marketing is everything.
>
> > Or are they sandbagging the hardware by DELIBERATELY keeping
> > technology away from you that would allow you to get more work
> > done with less equipment.
> >
> I always suspected a strong relationship between Microsoft and Intel. Why
> would you need a bigger cpu unless you have a bigger os. A great setup for
> both companies.
>
I hear you on that one. With the power getting tight and the P4's
dissipating 54Watts, I think Intel is going to have to go back to the
drawing board.
> > >
> > > Go post this stuff to a thread
> > > > where people will believe it. (hint, that's not here.)
> > >
> > > No, it's in technical forums where real people use it all the time and know
> > > what I'm talking about.
> > >
> > > >A good number of the
> > > > machines in the study were the released version.
> > >
> > > Wrong.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > I don't think anyone care's what you "personally consider."
> > >
> > > Only those that use it daily nod their head knowing I'm right.
> >
> > You are a shithead.
> >
> > --
> > Aaron R. Kulkis
> > Unix Systems Engineer
> > DNRC Minister of all I survey
> > ICQ # 3056642
> >
>
> --
> 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
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 21 Mar 2001 08:31:04 GMT
On 19 Mar 2001 08:27:07 -0600, Jon Johanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Electric Ninja" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:Wpht6.28385$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> For getting work done I love Win2000 like a charm but I'm scared to death
>to
>> have something like that running one of our aircraft carriers.
>
>Why? It works as well as any other server OS...
>
>
I vote for Jon Johanson as "The Most Clueless Wintroll, 2001" anyone second
my vote ?
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Stupid error message
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 08:35:16 -0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Cerutti) wrote:
> The name specified is not recognized as an
> internal or external command, operable program or batch file.
>
>Is there any other operating system in the world with such a
>stupid and needlessly verbose error message?
OS/2. You get the same error message when you futz up a command
name. Word for word. Right down to the line break after "an."
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob S. Wolfram)
Subject: Re: GPL Like patents.
Date: 21 Mar 2001 07:36:45 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Rob S. Wolfram wrote:
>> True. It was one of RMS' arguments. Personally I would be in favour of
>> drawing the line at static linking. That would make the whole GPL v.s.
>> LGPL and KDE/Qt issues moot. RMS seems against this because it would
>> have less of a forcing (or viral if you wish) effect.
>
>In fact, he opposes this because it would make the GPL the same as the LGPL.
>Anything that you can put in an object file to link statically, you can put
>in a library to dlopen().
I wouldn't mind that because the code of the program itself is then
still seperately distributable and maintainable. But the mere existence
of the LPGL shows that the FSF disagrees with me here. ;-)
>> OTOH, if a judge
>> would rule the GPL as invalid because of this distinction, we end up
>> with lots of legally unusable code.
>
>Actually, the GPL covers that. If a section is invalid, you have to apply
>the others. I suppose that would make things BSD-like.
If that were the case I would have no concern at all. Section 7 of the
GPL tells me another story, though...
>> I have no idea how the Amiga works. Is there no notion of context
>> switching in Linux/Amiga?
>
>I am not quite sure. Let's just say: GPLd TSRs on DOS :-)
Oh my $DEITY, how ugly!
Cheers,
Rob
--
Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OpenPGP key 0xD61A655D
Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
-- Henry Spencer
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Virus plague causes charity to consider Linux
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 21 Mar 2001 08:42:01 GMT
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001 13:14:51 GMT,
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>> > My comment was on your comment "Another one bites the dust!" which seems to
>> > be saying that the switch actually happened.
>>
>> It's a well known fact that keeping your head in the sand is the best way to
>> keep the world from changing around you.
>
>One charity organization out there TALKS about switching
Talk preceeds action.
> (which is really
>a rash move,
Bullshit.
> and it's obvious they don't understand the undertaking of
>switching to Linux
On the other hand, perhaps they do, after seeing how easy it is.
> and the 400% increase in support calls and cost that
>it will cost them, not to mention a worse headache than dealing with
>some harmless "virus") and you guys get all creamed over it, and you
>tell us to get OUR heads out of the sand?
>
>Perhaps you should start right now.
Chad, Chad, Chad, your BS posting quotient is well above average this month
, Bill will be pleased.
400% increase in support calls ........ hahahahahahah!
How about lowering of travel costs due to Linux's remote admin?
Multiuser facility, so the user's pc can be admined whilst the user is still
at the keyboard and the admin person not even in the same area?
What about the inability of a non root Linux user to trash his system (unlike
Windows) ?
Harmless virus ?, whatever your smoking atm Chad, can I have some ?
Your head isn't stuck in nice clean sand Chad, where you are, it's very smelly
and lots of mushrooms grow in it.
>
>-c
>
Terry
------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 09:38:54 +0100
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>"Joseph T. Adams" wrote:
>>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> : Spot the Microsoft-paid plant:
>>
>> : Jan Johanson wrote:
>> : [stuff, not worth quoting, deleted]
>>
>> You're doing *exactly* what he/she/it wants, by posting this same
>> response over and over again.
>>
>> This type of troll works by provoking otherwise sensible people into
>> emitting more noise than signal. No one really takes it seriously.
>> But when someone on the opposing side responds in kind, then people
>> end up not taking the opponent seriously either.
>>
>> Better to just go *plonk* and be done with him.
>>
>> Joe
>
>No..it's best to identify him for what he is, so that those who
>are less knowledgeable don't get fooled.
>
Aaron, you are an irritating fool. From your postings, I know that you are
have extensive knowledge and experience in unix systems, and you frequently
make useful and intelligent remarks. Yet for some reason, you bury these
within such a pile of junk (huge, unsnipped and irrelevant quotations,
followed by your absurd sig), and argue with the maturity of an 8-year old
(I very rarely resort to personal name-calling, but you deserve it). For
the good of everyone else, especially the unix and linux communities that
you seem to be trying to promote, either send your posts to /dev/null, or
learn the rudiments of netiquette.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
