Linux-Advocacy Digest #998, Volume #32 Thu, 22 Mar 01 01:13:07 EST
Contents:
Re: What is user friendly? ("Quantum Leaper")
Re: What is user friendly? (".")
Re: What is user friendly? (".")
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software ("Les Mikesell")
Re: What is user friendly? (".")
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Kulkis not Chad, Gates (was Re Unix/Linux Professionalism) (Brent R)
Re: What is user friendly? ("green")
Re: so can Windows do this ? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Quantum Leaps in stupidity! (Barry Manilow)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Re: What is user friendly? (".")
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software ("Les Mikesell")
Re: What is user friendly? ("Public " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Quantum Leaper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 05:10:55 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Quantum Leaper wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Quantum Leaper wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Quantum Leaper wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > Shades wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> >
> > > > So far most systems I have seen have alot of proprietary formats,
the
> > Amiga
> > > > had the most standardized formats. Every format is proprietary
until
> > > > someone copies it and use it in there programs. Star Office had no
> > problem
> > >
> > > Nope. It's a propreitary file format if the company which created it
> > > refuses to publish it's specifications and internal structure.
> > >
> > > LOTS of companies import/export Word document files...but it's STILL
> > > a proprietary format.
> > >
> > MS have published it specs on MSDN. I remember someone else posting a
link
> > to it a couple of months ago. (might not have been in advocacy though)
> >
> > >
> > > > loading the word files, I had, currently I am not using Star
Office.
> > > >
> > > > > Users who complain about the high cost of switching away from
> > Microsoft
> > > > > have nobody but their own POOR judgement to blame.
> > > > >
> > > > True, but when I asked a friend what he wanted as an OS on his new
> > > > computer, a crashy Win98SE or a stable Linux. He asked me how many
> > games
> > > > could run on Linux other than Id software, he then picked Win98SE.
I
> > know
> > > > people who pick Windows over other OSs, simple because they can get
the
> > > > software they want off the shelf. Linux has a real or imagery
shortage
> > of
> > > > quaility Games and Education titles, atleast thats what I hear from
> > friends
> > > > who have thought about switching.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Poor judgement is it's own reward.
> > >
> > Not poor judgement, he likes to play games on his spare time. Linux
DOES
> > NOT meet those requirements for my friend. What games titles does Linux
> > have, other than Id software?
>
> http://www.lokigames.com/
>
18 or so games, with 8 coming soon. ONE game on the list I play, UT. I
have almost a dozen games installed currently.
> >
> > >
> > > > > And then they foolishly trust that SAME poor judgement which tells
> > > > > them to continue suffering the thrice-yearly bloodletting from
> > > > > Microsoft rather than bite the bullet and free themselves from
> > > > > Redmond's biggest drug pusher once and for all.
> > > > >
> > > > I find interesting most of my friends don't have nearly 1/2 as many
> > problems
> > > > as the Linux users had with Windows and that includes some people
who
> > can
> > > > barely use a computer. BTW if any of them have the smallest
problem,
> > they
> > > > call me.
> > >
> > > Being too stupid to notice that your computer is malfunctioning is
> > > NOT a virtue.
> >
> > I believe the only one 'being to stupid' is you.... As long a the
computer
> > does what the users wants, its not malfunctioning atleast by most of my
> > friends standards.
>
> So, all of those times Windows crashes...that's because the user
> WANTS it to crash....
>
> I suggest you go back and take a few more hits off that bong...
> if you get too wasted to type then you'll stop embarrassing yourself.
>
What crashes, haven't a had a BSOD in months and the last one was because
of a bad floppy. Lockup are few and far between other than the ones
related to my HD, last one was because my DVD player (linux ever get one?)
and Bandai titles. Creative crapware strikes again, it either lockup up
the computer or the DVD player abends (most of the time) the titles work
just fine with Win2K DVDplay.
Whats you definition of a working computer?
------------------------------
From: "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 17:15:25 +1200
> type command.com >> lpt1
redirected stdout, this is the only thing that works more than half the time
> format c: << yes.txt
redirects stdin, but chokes too many programs. One could blame each
individual app designer for not being aware of the stdin,out and err, or one
could blame MS for not designing it correctly in the first place.
Note there's still no way to redirect stderr, which breaks a lot of "stdout
redirection", ie if the program writes to stderr, the text doesn't get
redirected to the file.
------------------------------
From: "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 17:17:49 +1200
> Since the "." is a delimiter for the file extension, it would be a little
> hard and confusing to implement.
> You linux advocates are the ones that say MS has a confusing system, and
> now you want to make it even more confusing?
Unix uses . in filenames, yet has no difficulty with the wildcard/regexp
side.
Also, for the record, Aaron is quite right about dos 6.22 and earlier, they
did not expand *IN* to anything except *
I *think* this was also the case for DOS 7, but can't be sure. DOS 7.1
definitely does expand *IN* correctly.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 05:32:14 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 21 Mar 2001
> 15:11:33 -0300;
> >T. Max Devlin wrote:
> >
> >> Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 20 Mar 2001
> >>>I have never written proprietary or closed source software. I have
never
> >>>tried to incorporate GPLd code into such software. I have probably
> >>>released more free software than 95% of the people here. I dislike the
GPL
> >>>because of not one but both reasons JD gave.
> >>
> >> And all of that "free software" you've released, unless it is GPL, can
> >> be incorporated into proprietary, closed source software.
> >
> >That is a feature. My free software is free.
>
> A "feature" for developers, maybe. Its useless as a "feature" to
> consumers, in fact it makes it anything BUT free, as far as they are
> concerned. Something can't be free when it is associated with such a
> liability.
Why do you keep making up this nonsense? It is indeed a feature
that every vendor has the opportunity to include BSD tcp in
any product they want without having to pass the cost of
redevelopment on to customers, or like Microsoft and Linux
pass on years worth of re-invented bugs that affect everyone
until they finally get it right. There is no downside to having
well tested code in commercial products. What liability do
you see from someone being able to plug in (say) a Sun
workstation on your network and have it interoperate correctly
with everything else?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 17:32:37 +1200
> What crashes, haven't a had a BSOD in months and the last one was because
> of a bad floppy.
JESUS CHRIST MAN!
Listen to what you just said!
A *BAD FLOPPY* crashed your system.
Now I'm not sure whether you meant to say a bad floppy disk or a bad floppy
drive, but:
(a) Bad floppy.
No operating system should fail due to bad media, unless that bad media
happens to hold critical OS data. What if someone sent you an upgrade disk
that got messed up in the mail... would you expect your server to crash
simply because it couldn't read a floppy disk?
(b) Bad drive.
Unless there's something seriously wrong with the hardware that can't be
detected without locking up the machine, the OS should never die due to a
lost floppy drive either. If 2k is smart enough to stop using the network
card when it's unplugged, why shouldn't it be able to disable access to the
floppy drive?
> Whats you definition of a working computer?
One that stays up until there's a 'MAJOR PROBLEM'. I'd also venture: one
that can continue to operate during a problem, for the purpose of fixing the
problem.
No OS is magic and able to handle all known hardware problems, but holy
shit.
------------------------------
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: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 05:45:52 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Les Mikesell in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 20 Mar 2001 06:09:16
> [...]
> >You are reading that backwards. It doesn't say anything about
> >causing software to be shared. It talks about restrictions on
> >how it can be shared, and if it isn't 100% GPL'd then it can't
> >be shared at all, and no user is going to get it.
>
> And you are putting that backwards. If it can't be shared at all, then
> it can't be "partially" shared. That's not a restriction on "how" it
> can be shared, but merely whether it can be shared.
Yes, that is the same thing I said. The GPL prohibits sharing
in many cases.
> And GPL software can
> *always* be shared.
Not if any of the many restrictions apply.
> It cannot be combined with things that aren't GPL:
> WE KNOW THAT AND WE DON'T FIND IT ABHORENT NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES YOU
> PRETEND IT'S A PROBLEM. Its only a problem for developers who don't
> like the GPL, and that's FINE by those who do like the GPL. It makes
> the *other* software less shareable, not the GPL software.
I'm not the one who is pretending. It is a real problem for the
users who can't obtain the software that the GPL prohibits
sharing freely, and thus end up funding the commercial products that
you seem to dislike. And I dislike them because besides having
to pay extra for someone to re-invent code that someone else has
already given away, they also tend to re-invent all the bugs that
the other work had already resolved.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Kulkis not Chad, Gates (was Re Unix/Linux Professionalism)
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 05:47:07 GMT
Martin Eden wrote:
>
> Here's one for you, kuku :-)
>
> KuKu, I've been checking.
>
> The only unit attached to 3rd Army that even got near Kuwait
> International Airport during the fighting was a detachment from
> the 5th Special Forces Group. I checked, and no one with your
> name came up at the JFKSWC&S. Nor did the Special Forces alumni
> association have any knowledge of you.
>
> Anyway, these teams rarely came under fire, doing their jobs the
> right way, meaning that nobody ever saw them, or even knew they
> were there until something went *boom*, and then it was too late.
>
> I'm filing a FOIA request for the name of the detachment
> commander of the group that was at KIA, so I can contact huim and
> check your story.
>
> After the shooting stopped, the first Army unit to reach KIA was
> from the 1st Cavalry Division. Since you've stated that you
> weren't part of a divisional structure, this can't be you.
> Clean-up troops started arriving a week after the shooting
> ceased.
>
> So, unless you are claiming to be either:
>
> a. A member of the United States Marine Corps
>
> b. A Kuwaiti national, and a member of the 35th Armored Brigade
>
> c. A member of the 5th Special Forces Group, or
>
> d. A citizen of one of the smaller coalition states, serving in
> one of the Joint Command units
>
> you are lying about being in Kuwait and taking fire in combat.
>
>
>http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&th=d8fc37d269e13f2&ic=1&seekd=946156921
Kulkis was a member of an elite group of Windows engineers that went
into Kuwait and installed Windows on the Iraqis computers, and then lied
about being UNIX admin's so the Iraquis wouldn't suspect a thing. He's
obviously still suffering PTSD and doesn't think the war's over.
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
From: "green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 15:55:21 +1000
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:X7gu6.40$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > What crashes, haven't a had a BSOD in months and the last one was
because
> > of a bad floppy.
>
>
> JESUS CHRIST MAN!
>
> Listen to what you just said!
Iv'e had linux do the same. witha cd and a floppy. just not the BSOD part.
just a lock up.
thake floppy out after lock and it don't even care.
>
> A *BAD FLOPPY* crashed your system.
>
> Now I'm not sure whether you meant to say a bad floppy disk or a bad
floppy
> drive, but:
>
> (a) Bad floppy.
>
> No operating system should fail due to bad media, unless that bad media
> happens to hold critical OS data. What if someone sent you an upgrade
disk
> that got messed up in the mail... would you expect your server to crash
> simply because it couldn't read a floppy disk?
>
> (b) Bad drive.
>
> Unless there's something seriously wrong with the hardware that can't be
> detected without locking up the machine, the OS should never die due to a
> lost floppy drive either. If 2k is smart enough to stop using the network
> card when it's unplugged, why shouldn't it be able to disable access to
the
> floppy drive?
>
>
> > Whats you definition of a working computer?
>
> One that stays up until there's a 'MAJOR PROBLEM'. I'd also venture: one
> that can continue to operate during a problem, for the purpose of fixing
the
> problem.
>
> No OS is magic and able to handle all known hardware problems, but holy
> shit.
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: so can Windows do this ?
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 23:56:51 -0600
"Stefan Ohlsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >The AmigaOS wasn't written by a single developer, but rather a number of
> >them. Some parts were even contracted out, such as AmigaDOS (the disk
> >portion). Much of the OS is based on Theos, while the DOS portions are
> >based on BCPL (which technically is a language, but it's rather like UCSD
> >
> That's about right, but I'd like to correct some mixups.
> Everything but the DOS part (essentially only the filing system
> and its access functions and structures) was written from scratch,
> and the DOS was based on TRIPOS (not Theos, whatever that is) and yes
> the DOS was written in BCPL (predecessor to C). In AmigaOS versions 2.0
> and later everything is C.
Yes, thanks for the correction. Got my T* OS's mixed up ;)
And while AmigaDOS 2 was written in C, it's still has to be backwards
compatible with the BCPL implementations so it may as well have been in
BCPL.
> >>As the designers had never used IBM PC's, their minds were never
polluted
> >>with rubbish like MS-DOS and ISA cards hence the fully multi-tasking OS,
> >>true auto-config expansion slots and fully integrated WIMP system.
> >Actually, it was designed to be a video game console, but was converted
to a
> >PC when the market fell out of the game console market in the early 80's.
> >
> At the very start, the idea was to make a really cool gaming machine, and
> the company that lended the team the first money (Atari) after seeing
> a demo of what the chipset could do at a fair had that in mind. (It was
> actually wired up from discrete components and put under a desk with a
> monitor on top!)
The "fair" was the Consumer Electionics Show (CES) in 1984. The computer
was called the Lorraine, and it wasn't a desk, it was an entire tent of
wires and discrete components, 6 feet tall and quite a ways deep.
Additionally, the Amiga was originally funded by a group of doctors, but
Atari gave them the money to finish the product.
> Then came Commodore and paid the debt to Atari releasing the team from
them
> and took it over. They needed an OS for the machine and put some good guys
on
> it (Carl Sassenrath did the kernel (Exec) and messaging systems for
example)
> but there wasn't enough time for them to write the DOS for the first
release
> so C= decided to buy that from Tripos.
Carl Sassenrath and RJ Mical were one of the "first 4" that started the
company in 1982. As a footnote, Carl went on to write the Internet language
Rebol and start a company by the same name.
http://www.rebol.com/
RJ Mical went on to work for 3DO and other companies. Jay Minar died about
10 years ago.
------------------------------
From: Barry Manilow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Quantum Leaps in stupidity!
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 22:06:20 -0800
Quantum (dumbass) Leaper wrote:
> > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Quantum Leaper wrote:
> > > > > Every format is proprietary
> until
> > > > > someone copies it and use it in there programs.
What an utterly stupid statement. Most proprietary formats simply
cannot be copied or back-compiled well. The only formats that are not
proprietary are those that have been open-sourced in some way.
Qauntum Leaper: one stoopid guy.
Star Office had no
> > > problem
> > > >
> > > > Nope. It's a propreitary file format if the company which created it
> > > > refuses to publish it's specifications and internal structure.
Here is Quantum showing off his stupidity again. Little does this
fool realize that Sun has released Star Office code GPL, therefore the
format is obviously no longer proprietary. Duh.
> > > >
> > > > LOTS of companies import/export Word document files...but it's STILL
> > > > a proprietary format.
There is not one 3rd party which can flawlessly import these files
because they are proprietary.
> > > >
> > > MS have published it specs on MSDN. I remember someone else posting a
> link
> > > to it a couple of months ago. (might not have been in advocacy though)
This is utter idiocy. MS has never released the specs to any of its
formats, ever.
> > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > Users who complain about the high cost of switching away from
> > > Microsoft
> > > > > > have nobody but their own POOR judgement to blame.
What high cost? In many cases, all you save is money.
> > > > > >
> > > > > I
> > > know
> > > > > people who pick Windows over other OSs, simple because they can get
> the
> > > > > software they want off the shelf.
Yeh, the criminals sure fixed that up good, huh? :(
> > > > Being too stupid to notice that your computer is malfunctioning is
> > > > NOT a virtue.
You know, this is where MS advocates, from Gates on down, are really
due to be condemned. Their products are usually quite unstable and
error-prone -- this is well-known. Yet from Billy on down, the blame
the poor helpless victim for the failures of the maker. That is
utterly repellant! Windows users, let it be known, if you have a lot
of problems with the OS (and that is most of u) the Win advocates have
nothing but contempt for you. Gall!
> > >
> > > I last one was because my DVD player (linux ever get one?)
They cannot, you fool. The DVD format is a proprietary locked-in
format and the makers have refused to release it to Linux. Hence the
controversy re: the Norweigian kid.
--
Bob
Being flamed? Don't know why? Take the Flame Questionnaire(TM)
today!
Why do you think you are being flamed?
[ ] You continued a long, stupid thread
[ ] You started an off-topic thread
[ ] You posted something totally uninteresting
[ ] People don't like your tone of voice
[ ] Other (describe)
[ ] None of the above
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 00:09:04 +0100
In article <gbau6.6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"JD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> "Jeffrey Siegal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> "John S. Dyson" wrote:
>> > Without informing the recipient of the
>> > license terms, given a copyright, the user has no right to use the code.
>>
>> This is inaccurate. The owner of a copy of code has the right, by law,
>> to use the code.
>>
> With the license, you know that you have gotten a copy of the code legally. Without
> a license, then you don't know if you are allowed.
>
http://cr.yp.to/softwarelaw.html
Remember to tweak your honesty dial, please.
--
Stefaan
--
How's it supposed to get the respect of management if you've got just
one guy working on the project? It's much more impressive to have a
battery of programmers slaving away. -- Jeffrey Hobbs (comp.lang.tcl)
------------------------------
From: "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 18:06:47 +1200
> Iv'e had linux do the same. witha cd and a floppy. just not the BSOD part.
> just a lock up.
>
> thake floppy out after lock and it don't even care.
I've had the machine lock up due to a dodgy cdrom drive combined with a CD
that it couldn't read, but that's a PC hardware issue.
I cannot imagine inserting a floppy or a cd and seeing a kernel panic, it
just doesn't seem feasible.
Do you have any details on what CD it was, and what kind of drive, kernel
version etc? If this happened back in 95 or something, perhaps I could
understand, but not any current linux system.
------------------------------
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: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 06:07:19 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >That is correct. I do not recognize the resemblance because it
> >exists only in your mind.
>
> As do all such properties of the universe we see around us, Les. If you
> can't see it, it must not be there, huh?
Yes, I've always thought that a lot of what I don't see really doesn't
exist.
> >You are really confused. People share software because they want
> >to, not because they are forced to. The GPL cannot force people
> >to share. All it does is restrict what can be shared and how it
> >may be done.
>
> I'm getting sick of your squirming, Les. You're not making any sense at
> all, but simply building yourself a cute little non-falsifiable premise
> so you can declare unilateral victory. Believe me, you could go on like
> this for years and not manage to confuse me.
You seem to have forgotten that the complaint is not about the
authors right or choice about invoking such restrictions, but
about calling the result free when it is not.
> The GPL doesn't restrict
> what can be shared nor how it may be done.
That is the precisely the only thing it does - there are nothing
but restrictions in the GPL.
> It only prevents lack of
> sharing. This is the "restriction" you keep harping about, and it
> frankly isn't a restriction at all.
There is no such requirement at all.
> >What are you talking about? I wanted to give the code away to
> >anyone who wanted it. I said that before and don't understand
> >why you keep ignoring it.
>
> Because it doesn't matter what your intentions were. What about the
> people you gave it away to. Could *they* incorporate in a proprietary
> product and wrap it in a trade secret?
If that helped distribute my work to people who needed it, then that
would be a good thing, and something that should be done with free
code. But they would be unable to prevent access to the 'unwrapped'
original version and the improvements contributed by others.
> >That isn't free software. It is isolated software at best; no software
> >at worst.
>
> If it isolated, so be it. If it is "no software", then there'd be no
> such thing as the GPL. It is certainly free software, however; the only
> kind of 'free' that matters to me. I don't have any problem paying for
> software; I have a major problem paying for a license for software.
There are some kinds of software that can stand alone. Others need
to be modular and linked to all sorts of components. The first type
is not damaged much by the GPL, so some of that exists. The latter
needs a dual license like perl's to be of much use if it is touched by
the GPL at all.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 00:07:12 -0600
From: "Public <Anonymous_Account>" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
On Wed, 21 Mar 2001 21:24:18 -0500, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Any college worth attending has taught unix for over a DECADE.
>
>--
>Aaron R. Kulkis
>Unix Masturbator
>ICQ # 3056642
>
bzzzzz! Wrong again General. You've already told us that you haven't been
educated since 1988 so I am not sure how exactly you're supposed to know
this. Most
---
This message did not originate from the Sender address above.
It was posted with the use of anonymizing software at
http://anon.xg.nu
---
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
