Linux-Advocacy Digest #299, Volume #33 Tue, 3 Apr 01 00:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Communism (Marada C. Shradrakaii)
Re: Things Linux can't do! (Chad Everett)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: AMD is to Intel as "What OS" is to Windows? (John Lockwood)
Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Windows "speed" ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: What is user friendly? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Communism ("billh")
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("Roger Perkins")
Re: Hey, JS PL was Re: Microsoft abandoning USB? ("JS PL")
Re: Communism ("billh")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marada C. Shradrakaii)
Date: 03 Apr 2001 03:07:34 GMT
Subject: Re: Communism
>Go to Russia, and you'll see all kinds of artificial scarcities....and
>they've existed there for DECADES UPON DECADES.
Hasn't it already been established that the USSR did a very poor job of
implementing communist theory? In addition, don't they have some
disadgantadges that exacerbate any scarcity. Transport across an enormous
continent will almost certainly create a bottleneck and some local scarcity,
and some resource abundance is locked away in the permafrost where it's overly
expensive or impractical to retrieve.
--
Marada Coeurfuege Shra'drakaii
Colony name not needed in address.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2 Apr 2001 22:07:25 -0500
On Tue, 03 Apr 2001 03:47:34 +0100, Toby A Inkster Esq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In our last episode, Andy Walker wrote:
>
>:Linux can't crash at random every five minutes.
>
>It can is you write your own "crash daemon" and run it under root.
>
main()
{
while( 1 )
fork();
}
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 23:14:53 -0400
Alex Chaihorsky wrote:
>
> Erb,
>
> You have to be honest. We know you have problems with honesty.
> But "Is" is "Is".
> In the middle of the discussion you suddenly remembered that the original
> meaning of Liberalism, which has nothing to do with contemporary Liberalism.
> Smart move. But may be it is me, who is dishonest here? let the readers
> decide.
> As you know, words, do not really mean anything on its own. Like many words
> that describe groups and events on the political landscape, "Liberalism"
> means different things at different times.
> Liberalism in its original 18th century British form sought individual
> liberties and was opposed to the growing power of the governments. The
> American Constitution is the crescendo of Western Liberalism ideology.
> Contemporary liberalism has nothing to do with it. Actually, it is almost
> the exact opposite: - a collectivist ideology. But do not take my word for
> it.
> The Encyclopedia Britannica (1998 edition) defines the relation between the
> two the best:
> "The expansion of government power and responsibility sought by liberals
> today is clearly opposed to the contraction of government power and
> responsibility sought by liberals yesterday."
> Please, everyone, re-read this passage again! Da ist der Hund begraben!
>
> Two most famous founders of liberalism, John Locke (1632-1704), the
> philosopher of individual liberty and Adam Smith (1723?-1790), the author of
> classical liberal laissez-faire economic theory are spinning in their graves
> "listening" to what became of their ideology today.
> In modern time, it was Margaret Thatcher, who represented classic liberalism
> most eloquently. She, President Ronald Reagan and to some extent Secretary
> General Gorbachev, were the most recent champions of the liberal cause in
> its original form. I bow in deep respect to these noble giants of
> liberalism, to who we owe our recent victories over the monster of the world
> Communism.
> That has nothing to do with socialists and communists that have stolen the
> word (as they always do, because they have to distance themselves from the
> horrors of their original ideology).
> So, Dana is right, and if you claim that Liberal Democracy definition today
> has retain the meaning of Liberalism of the 18th century, you have to become
> small government, no free lunch, individualist, which you are obviously NOT.
>
> But we would like you to be that. What would it take for you to abandon
> your socialist agenda? Yet another tens of millions of tortured and killed
> by Communist NKVD-KGB? More artificial hunger like in 1920-ies in Ukraine
> that caused the biggest outbreak of documented cannibalism known to men?More
> dead bodies than you already had in Cambodia?
> I remember how "Comrade Pol Pot" was marching down the hall of the Palace of
> Communism in Moscow during XXIV World Communist Congress. How General
> Secretary Of the Communist Party of USA - Guss Hall (we called him "Gas
> Hall") was standing next to him, apploading. Cambodia was in the middle of
> the its carnage at the time, but American Communists an Socialist were
> there, in Moscow, applauding the butcher.
> You hope that we forgot. No, Erb. Americans forgot, kind souls that they
> are, we didn't.
Erb can't forget what he has studiously avoided learning in the first place.
>
> Alex Chaihorsky
> Reno, NV
>
> "Scott Erb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >
> > Dana wrote:
> > >
> > > No Erb, you are the one that is wrong. We are a constitutional republic.
> We
> > > are not a liberal democracy, that form of socialism
> >
> > No, you're wrong. Liberal Democracy means a Democratic Republic based
> > on liberal principles. Ideological liberalism is a belief in limited
> > government and a claim that humans have the inherent right of life,
> > liberty and property, based on the work of among others, John Locke.
> > Liberalism is an ideological opponent of socialism.
> >
> > Classical liberalism saw a very, very limited government (Milton
> > Friedman considers himself a classical liberal), "new" liberalism
> > associated with developments in Britain and thinkers like John Stuart
> > Mill argues that to have real liberty and equal opportunity the state
> > must institute some kind of social welfare programs. Both are at base
> > ideologically liberal, socialism is something else.
> >
> > > is found in Europe in
> > > countries like Germany. And our federalism is not Germany's >federalism.
> >
> > Germany in some ways has a stronger federalism than ours, their states
> > choose who serves in their upper house, much like the US Senate was
> > chosen before direct popular vote to the Senate was ratified.
> >
> > Dana, your ignorance of the basics here shows that perhaps you need to
> > do some reading on this. I'll later on post a set of books you could
> > start with; at this point, you are in over your head.
--
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.
------------------------------
From: John Lockwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: AMD is to Intel as "What OS" is to Windows?
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 20:27:52 -0700
>Any implementation of the "Win32" [sic -- LOSE32] API is inherently unstable
>due to poor design.
Incorrect. I coded to Win32 for many years, and though complex and at
times obtuse, it actually was quite stable.
Regards,
John
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 23:18:13 -0400
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Karel Jansens
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on Mon, 02 Apr 2001 18:15:34 +0000
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >Chad Myers wrote:
> >>
> >
> >>
> >> PocketPC, OTOH, seems to have Internet pervasive just like Windows
> >> where every app uses a common Internet access method and many apps
> >> are integrated with Internet Explorer.
> >>
> >This is so funny. "Internet pervasive just like Windows", the operating
> >system that had to have a TCP/IP stack bolted onto it, because Bill
> >Gates thought the Internet was a hype and everybody was going MSN
> >anyway?
>
> Unix also had TCP/IP bolted onto it. However, the bolts in this
> case are now countersunk, :-) and in any event that was 15-20
> years ago.
The difference is...
In Unix, TCP/IP (and other networking protocols) were bolted onto
flanges which existed precisely for the purpose of adding new tools.
In contrast, the Microsoft TCP/IP stuff is bolted on in more
of a "Dr. Mengele takes a programming course" sort of method.
>
> Linux, of course, isn't Unix (though I'd be hard pressed to tell
> the difference!) and TCP/IP was more or less a given.
> Mind you, it might have been "bolted on" as well, as a driver
> add-on, early in its development, but it works as well
> as straight Unix in that regard.
>
> [rest snipped]
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
> EAC code #191 56d:07h:17m actually running Linux.
> This space for rent.
--
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.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows "speed"
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2001 05:09:51 +0200
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:NOay6.243$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > *cough* ActiveX delete NT's kernel via unprivilege's user's account
> > *cough*.
> > http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/1999/35/ns-9701.html
>
> Oh dear oh dear. A bug in IE allows deletion of the KERNEL from a WEB
PAGE.
>
> I'm going to repeat that, because I think it may not have the necessary
> impact the first time around.
>
> A BUG in IE (a browser, an application) allows deletion of the KERNEL (the
> most essential part of the operating system) from a WEB PAGE (a document).
>
> If there's anyone out there who can look me straight in the eye and say
> "Microsoft know what they are doing" without doubling over in fits of
> laughter, I feel I can safely recommend that person for the nutfarm.
> Unless of course MS *DO* know what they are doing, but what they are doing
> is not what they say they're doing. Please write your own conspiracy
theory
> in the space provided:
>
> [ ]
>
> People, when MS integrated the browser and the shell, they fucked things
up.
> They have made a goddamn mess, and I don't think you'll ever see the end
of
> the problems that come from the bad initial design. The browser is now
> running the OS, and you've all seen the stability history of both of those
> products. Now they're arbitrarily combined in ways that I suspect MS
isn't
> even aware of.
>
> If that's not a reason to switch to another platform (and pronto), I don't
> know what is.
Now, why did you have to wait for me to tell you about it?
You *see* what I'm complaining about.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 23:24:47 -0400
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, GreyCloud
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on Sun, 01 Apr 2001 01:56:48 -0800
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> >>
> >> soc.singles removed from followups. (Um....insert your own joke regarding
> >> weird crossposts here, folks. :-) )
> >>
> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Jan Johanson
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote
> >> on 24 Mar 2001 16:13:02 -0600
> >> <3abd1b3f$0$28213$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> >
> >> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >
> >> >> Which gets back to my main point:
> >> >>
> >> >> Mafia$oft sticks you with code compiled for an 80486, and nothing
> >> >> better....even if you're running a Pentium III.
> >> >
> >> >Wrong. There is Pentium specific code in NT as well as Windows 2000. There
> >> >are also processor specific speed ups for the PII and PIII OP sets, as well
> >> >as specific speedups for MMS, SSE and SSEII.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Linux installs an 80386 kernal and apps BUT, it lets you re-make the
> >> >kernal
> >> >> and apps, so that you are using executable code that was optimized for
> >> >> your CPU.
> >> >
> >> >So, can't run linux on a 286 without a recompile eh?
> >>
> >> Can't run Linux on a 286 at all; it requires a flat address space.
> >> At least, last time I checked. :-) Someone might have snuck in some
> >> detection code deep in the kernel, but it would definitely require
> >> a recompile with an intelligent compiler that can translate the
> >> flat address space into segment:paragraph form. (And that's assuming
> >> no code mucks with the translation tables and/or card registers in an
> >> incompatible fashion within the drivers or modules during something
> >> like DMA setup. Oy vey....)
> >>
> >> No, g++ isn't quite that intelligent, at least as far as I've
> >> looked at it. :-)
> >>
> >
> >More intelligent than VC++6.0. I have the MSDN CD-rom set. VC has
> >trouble with multiple inheritance and the MSDN admits it by showing
> >possible work-arounds. g++ seems to handle multiple inheritance quite
> >well. As time goes on g++ will improve.
>
> Which is funny because ATL uses multiple inheritance (and templates)
> pretty heavily. Take a look at VC++ wizard-generated code sometime. :-)
>
> >
> >> Not sure if this is a bug or a feature or merely a reflection of the
> >> sad legacy of backward compatibility we've been saddled with
> >> because of the monopolistic tendencies of the software market -- said
> >> tendencies being created either by ourselves (because we like it that
> >> way?), or by a certain gigantic software vender that even now is still
> >> trying to dominate the market, explaining that it's doing so
> >> "for the sake of the naive user".
> >>
> >> Also, because Intel was first, Motorola second. The 68000 series
> >> was superior in terms of register usage and addressing capability.
> >>
> >
> >Using the "register" specification in a C program is far more useful on
> >processors with orthogonal register usage than on Intel processors.
> >Wish I could afford better, but all I can do now is get used VAXens.
>
> Now there was a nice machine language. None of this weird r/m stuff
> or oddball bitmasking for different ops; one just has a byte opcode
> and a series of operands, which could be immediate, memory, PIC,
> register, offset(register), indexed (which even took into account
> the size of the operand)...compilers would be almost trivial.
>
> There was complete orthogonality of 12 of its 16 registers (R0 was
> dedicated to returns, but it could also be used), R12 = FP, R13 = AP,
> R14 = SP, R15 = PC, if memory serves; in a pinch, one could probably
> use AP as a scratch register, too).
Actually, the FP, AP, and SP, were general registers as well, and the
PC was very close to a general register.
All Frame/Heap/Stack operations used the previously described methods
of general register reference, but just specified the appropriate
pointer register, with the appropriate auto-increment/auto-decrement
mode, as needed, etc.
And of course, immediate operands were ACTUALLY [register indirect,
auto-incremented] with the register specified being Prog. Counter.
There were lots of other beautiful things about the VAX assembly
language as well.
Such as assembly language equivalents of practically the entire
library defined in <strings.h>. Unfortunately, it didn't last long
enough for compiler writers to get a clue and realise that
functions like strchr() can be implemented with a single
#asm
compiler directive.
> If one wanted to, one could
> also use the very powerful macro assembler. I forget the specifics
> of floating point (I think there was a separate set of registers for that),
> but it was also well supported, with the usual instructions for
> converting ints to floats/doubles, etc.
>
> Of course, the VAX does disallow certain instruction types; moving
> to an immediate operand or jumping to a register will most likely
> result in an illegal instruction exception of some sort
> (I forget the details, now). :-)
>
> It also had a well-engineered argument/stack frame, which everyone was
> expected to follow (and which was supported by CALLS, CALLG,
> and various PUSHes and POPs).
>
> VMS wasn't too bad, athough it tried to do too much; the one thing
> I miss was the asynchronous service trap, which basically got called
> when I/O completed. It also had some funny notions regarding
> redirect ("ASSIGN SYS$INPUT filename" [*], as opposed to the simple "<").
> But it was robust and well-documented, complete with built-in HELP
> with a tree of topics. It felt like a very very heavy OS at the time,
> but the VAXes I used at my employment had all of 5 and 8 megabytes
> which means that compared to Win2k, it was a virtual featherweight!
>
> Unfortunately, as usual, we got the schlock x86 architecture which
> has got to have the weirdest set of registers I've seen in a micro,
> barring such oddballities as the 6502 (anyone else remember (22,X)
> and (22),Y indirect addressing modes? :-) ).
>
> At least the 386+ is usable now. :-)
>
> [rest snipped]
>
> [*] I might have the arguments reversed. There was also an option on
> the DCL ASSIGN command that could indicate whether the assignment
> was for the duration of the process, or merely for the next image
> (VMS differentiated between the two). However, I forget the
> specific flag.
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
> EAC code #191 56d:08h:46m actually running Linux.
> Microsoft. When it absolutely, positively has to act weird.
--
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.
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 03:25:42 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> Were you a PFC at the time?
PFC! Really big deal. You're hilarious. Stop before you make a COMPLETE
ass of yourself. LOL!!!
.
------------------------------
From: "Roger Perkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 21:25:32 -0700
Oh, I got lil' aaron pegged. And killfield as the idiot he is.
Roger
AIRBORNE!
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Roger Perkins in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 1 Apr 2001 19:26:47
> >Just for fun, can we skip the word games on democracy and republic? The
> >word are normally used interchangeably when discussing our political
system.
> >Only PoliSci geeks worry about the difference between the two. This is
like
> >aaron worrying about communism vs socialism.
>
> I like that; we should consider it a rule for the thread, if we even
> bother continuing. And for the record, it was me that "worried" about
> the distinction between communism and socialism, but only to illustrate
> that Aaron is generally ignorant about what constitutes either.
>
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "JS PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Hey, JS PL was Re: Microsoft abandoning USB?
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 23:28:32 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said JS PL in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 2 Apr 2001 07:54:09 -0400;
> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Said Roger in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 01 Apr 2001 15:50:25 -0500;
> >> >On Sat, 31 Mar 2001 22:27:22 -0500, someone claiming to be JS PL
> >> >wrote:
> >> >>"Roger" <roger@.> wrote in message
> >> >>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >
> >> >>> Off topic for this thread, but Max has claimed at least two
> >> >>> conversations with you re: a problem with IE which was solved by
> >> >>> replacement of a video card. Since he originally claimed it was
me,
> >> >>> in spite of being corrected before (and since it is, after al, Max)
> >> >>> I'm inclined to take his recent version of the fantasy with a huge
> >> >>> grain of salt.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Do you recall the threads he's babbling about?
> >> >
> >> >>I remember having a problem with a bad video driver causing screen
> >freezes a
> >> >>couple years ago, right about the time Win98SE came out. It was a
> >problem
> >> >>with a Viper V550 and WinSE which reared its ugly head most often
while
> >IE
> >> >>was open. Changing the card out fixed the problem.
> >> >
> >> >As I thought: driver, not hardware, and not exclusively IE.
> >>
> >> He replaced the card; claiming now that he did so merely to replace the
> >> driver hardly supports his expertise, I'd say.
> >
> >That's because your not an expert I'd say. Here's what an expert does:
>
> Let me just say here that I'm very pleased you were dumb enough to get
> into this again.
>
> >Sees that there are random screen freezes. Knows from experience that
screen
> >freezing is almost always due to a video card (hardware or driver). Also
> >knows from experience that he's looking at two choices A.) 30 minutes to
3
> >hours of troubleshooting the existing card and driver for a 50% chance of
> >fixing it at all. B.) 10 minutes to replace the card with a known good
card
> >for a 99% chance it will be fixed for good. There might be some people
who
> >choose A but the smart money is on B.
>
> No, an expert asks the first question anyone else would when you first
> notice a problem. You ask yourself "what changed?" This question you
> had answered in your very first post on the subject: you had installed
> IE5. Knowing from experience that these random screen freezes did not
> occur before you installed IE5, and knowing from your observation that
> they did occur after, it is worth considering that installing IE5 may
> have been the problem, had you any expertise in the matter at all. You
> bought a brand new video card, who's drivers obviously did not make
> apparent the bug which nevertheless still exists in IE5 (in reality, we
> know it may not, but only because it is not possible to distinguish
> between IE5 and Windows, once it is installed), and then loudly
> proclaimed your cluelessness on alt.destroy.microsoft.
>
> How on earth can replacing the video card because IE5 screwed up your
> system *possibly* be anything but IE5 being crappy, and you being
> clueless?
>
> >> And, yes, it was
> >> exclusively an IE fault he described; my archives remind me that the
> >> headers from newsgroups could not be seen, though frankly that doesn't
> >> sound like a video problem to me.
> >
> >Considering you have demonstrated absolutely no expertise in hardware
> >troubleshooting I'd say your diagnosis holds no weight.
>
> Thanks again for your time. Hope it helps somebody; its clearly not
> helping you.
Well, your dimness, It happened when I installed Windows SE. not IE5, as I
have said numerous times in the past. I don't even think IE5 beta was out
when the Viper V550 hit the market.
The problem was most apparent in IE. And I have never mentioned "IE5"
dumbass. So "what changed" was the Windows OS.
Ohh...and....
If you'd like to use the flawed logic that it's Windows SE (a newly released
OS at the time) that is broken when it won't run the Viper V550 video card
without sporadic screen freezes, then you can go ahead and use that
reasoning on Linux. Because at the same time in history I was also trying to
get Caldera Open Linux installed and it wouldn't run the video card at all!
BTW, Linux wouldn't run my modem either, or my sound card come to think of
it.
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 03:27:00 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> You mean your lie about how the Germans, Japanese, North Koreans, Chinese,
> Viet Cong, and North Vietnames supposedly *never* shooting at our medics
who
> were wearing Red Cross insignia on their helmets and armbands....
>
> Deny it all you want, you were part of the same "How dare this unknown
person
> intrude on our little coffee clique" feeding frenzy.
LOL!!! Hell, the band ain't even playing yet you continue to dance.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
