Linux-Advocacy Digest #785, Volume #33 Sun, 22 Apr 01 17:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: What's the point ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males (enialle)
Re: What's the point ("Edward Rosten")
Re: What's the point ("Edward Rosten")
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Mike")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Nomen Nescio)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (GreyCloud)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Nomen Nescio)
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Mike")
Re: Ctrl-Alt-Windows ("Mike")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Chad Everett)
Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure (Tim Hanson)
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Anne & Lynn Wheeler)
Re: What's the point ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Buy Microsoft stock!!! ("mmnnoo")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("JS PL")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What's the point
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 21:19:45 +0100
> An end user shouldn't need to know any more than "turn on power, when
> pretty interface comes up, use mouse to click on icon for program, or
> click on document to have it open with program." They might _choose_ to
> learn more, and that's great, but if they _have_ to learn more, then we,
> as software developers, whether at the application, UI or OS level, have
> failed, miserably, to produce.
By this stage thay have already had to learn what a button, icon, menu,
dialogue box etc it. That takes a bit of time. It is not intuitive (I
know this having taught several computer illeterates from scratch).
> How long does it take a person to learn how to use a typewriter, in
> order to produce a document? About 10 seconds. How long _should_ it
> take a person to learn how to use a word processor to produce a
> document? About
> 10 seconds.
You must be kidding. How much more functionality does a word processor
have compared to a typewriter?
> Add in another 30 to learn the notion of "save documents in
> a
> folder" and another 30 to learn how to create and rename folders, throw
You are very naïve if you think you can explain the concept of
directories to someone who is unfamiliar with them in 30 seconds.
> in the notion of spell checking and thesaurus and the like, add in the
> idea of how to safely shut down the program and the machine, and the
> total learning time, for someone who has never used a PC before, should
> be about
> 10 minutes, total.
A computer is a very complex device. There is no way you could give
someone even a basic grounding in 10 minutes however good the interface
is.
>> Well, I would hate to know a world where you didn't have to learn a
>> skill to do something.
>
> Pick up a hammer. Learning time: about 2 seconds.
But how long does it take to learn which nails are best to use in certain
circumstances? It takes a while before you stop splitting the wood or
making things that fall apart. Time: much longer than 10 secods for you
to have a useful knowledge.
> Typewriter: about 10
> seconds.
It takes longer than that to fing where the margin and tab stops are.
> Telephone? About 30 seconds, other than for extras.
For someone who has never even seen one before? Yeah, right.
> Using a
> typical PC? Let's not kid ourselves; what _should_ be a 10 minute
> operation can take hours, days, even weeks. That screams bad design and
> development.
No, what it screams is that you are too familiar with computers to
realise what people who have _never_ used one before need to familiarise
themselves with. You are taking far too much for granted.
>> That is they kind of mentality that screw society.
>
> What, making life easier for people? I see. So you don't actually use
> a computer, you do all your calculations on paper, do all your filing in
> a filing cabinet, cook your food over a fire, and so forth? You have
> shunned electricity, gas, automobiles, modern medicine, TVs, bicycles,
> telephones, all those things which make modern living easier?
>
> Of course not; you use technology to make your life easier - as do most
> people. Why, then, would you spurn the notion that the technology can
> be simplified further? Would you argue against a car that can drive
> itself, never having a collision, because it means users don't have to
> learn how to use it? Why, then, be against the simplifiication of the
> computing process?
Simplification does nopt always make life easier. Sometimes taking time
to learn how to use something more complex can save a lot of time in the
long run. I'm glad I learned LaTeX: it has saved me many hours over using
a wordprocessor.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: enialle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 11:42:41 -0700
Reply-To: enialle
On Sun, 22 Apr 2001 10:54:24 -0700, "jet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> jet wrote:
>> >
>> > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > >
>> > > Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > On Sat, 21 Apr 2001 19:58:00 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>> > > > > Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > >> > What does this have to do with Linux advocacy? Is Linux, an
>> > > > >> > Is Lamic womans choice of OS?
>> > > > >>
>> > > > >> No, of course not; they're not allowed to make such choices.
>Linux
>> > for
>> > > > >> women's rights! :)
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Fuck them. They already have too mancy privileges and not enough
>> > > > > responsibilities, you simpering, ass-kissing ninny
>> > > >
>> > > > more anti-freedom rhetoric from anti-freedom Kulkis.
>> > >
>> > > Let's see...
>> > >
>> > > What do you call a system where
>> > >
>> > > Class A has many burdensome restrictions and many responsibilities
>> > > bot Class B, and NO privileges,
>> > >
>> > > while Class B has unlimited freedoms, no restrictions and zero
>> > > responsibilites to Class A
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > That is called FEUDALISM, is it not?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Now...look at the society which feminism has made for us.
>> > >
>> > > Class A above is defined as "men"
>> > > Class B above is defined as "women"
>> > >
>> >
>> > In your little fantasy world. I have unlimited freedoms and no
>restrictions?
>> > I can ignore all traffic laws? Too bad the cop that pulled me over
>didn't
>>
>> "Booo hoooo hoooo, sob sob, my father (or husband) will kill me if I
>> get a ticket, boo hoooo hoooo"
>
>I was just pointing out that you are a liar and/or moron when you claim that
>women have no restrictions.
>
>> "aw, poor little dearie...here's a warning"
>
>And a ticket.
>
Hey Jet! How's life been treating you! When are we going out to the
poetry slam?
achk don't let these losers guys get to ya. In soc.single only a few
misogynists are left and their female head up the butts cohorts.
soc.singles a dying newsgroup may it rest in a post pile.
"We will run amok together, and then,
when we get tired, he will walk amok."
--Jimmy Bond, Casino Royale
http://member.newsguy.com/~whatever/
[live cam if I am feeling alive]
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What's the point
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 21:31:34 +0100
>> No way. Take somebody who've never used a typewriter before, sit them
>> down in front of one and ask them to type you up some mailing labels.
>> See if they figure it out in ten seconds.
>
> Note I said "a document". Mailing labels require some fancier layout
> controlling. Fine, call it a half hour? You think they could learn
That's slightly longer than 10 seconds. I would also contend that it
would take longer than that to get used to all the controls, (such as end
of margin override, etc), erasing (those cool Tippex squares),
emphasising and so on. I don't think you'd be enough of an expert to use
one for doing anything more than a really small document in 30 minutes.
(I assume we're talking about mechanical typewriters here)
> Linux system administration in a half hour? Or a half a week, even?
You don't need to know any (not counting basic file manipulation), since
even mounting and unmounting is automatic these days.
>> Probably one of the main reasons computers invaded the business world
>> was their advantage over typewriters. If typewriters were so easy,
>> nobody would need a word processor.
>
> Typewriters don't store files. They can't be used to search for things.
> They don't have spell-checkers, etc, built in. Computers are much more
> useful, yes - and none of this, yet, shows any requirement that the user
> learn a damned thing about managing the machine.
I don't believe you need to. Thousands of people in offices use them
every day without having to worry about any details of the machine. The
home user is different since the home user may need to fix their own
machine, which does require some knowledge.
> And how much more useful still, a combination oven and fridge, with
> built in computer control, which could simply be told "I need veal
> cordon bleu, for six, with tarragon peas, roast new potatoes, and a
> cherry pie for dessert, dinner to be ready at 7PM, dessert to be ready
> at 8PM" and let the machines figure it out - right down to the point of
> noting "Whoops, your cheese has spoiled and you're out of peas; shall I
> place an order for these items for you?"
What do you if the machine does not know the recipie?
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What's the point
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 21:33:25 +0100
>>> Note I said "a document". Mailing labels require some fancier layout
>>> controlling. Fine, call it a half hour? You think they could learn
>>> Linux system administration in a half hour? Or a half a week, even?
>>
>> Do you think they could learn W2K system administration in a week?
>
> Nope - nor should you have to. I'm not saying that W2K, or any flavour
> of Windows, has achieved perfection in user experience. However, W2K
> and WinME _in general_ seem to be easier for John Q. Public to get up
> and running, so while they're far from perfect, they're at least better.
John Q public never gets WinME up and running. It's there when they buy
the computer.
> Linux may _stay_ up and running better... but that assumes you can get
> it there in the first place, and it's nowhere near as friendly for
> installing and subsequently using software.
Linux has been easier to install than windows since RH5.2
>>> And how much more useful still, a combination oven and fridge, with
>>> built in computer control, which could simply be told "I need veal
>>> cordon bleu, for six, with tarragon peas, roast new potatoes, and a
>>> cherry pie for dessert, dinner to be ready at 7PM, dessert to be ready
>>> at 8PM" and let the machines figure it out - right down to the point
>>> of noting "Whoops, your cheese has spoiled and you're out of peas;
>>> shall I place an order for these items for you?"
>>
>> Sounds good to me, but how do I prevent my kid from ordering dinner for
>> his sixteen friends while I'm gone?
>
> Parental controls, maybe, like you might have on assorted channels on
> your TV?
Sorry, but if you live in the US you have to be over 18 to eat chicken
soup.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 19:40:38 GMT
First, there's this:
"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> > When I was in consulting, several banks in our town converted from a
> > Unix/Novell/OS2 solution to a stratight NT solution. Later, when Win2K
came out,
> > they migrated to that to make their already functional solution even
that
> > much better.
...
> > It just makes the most sense.
...
And notably this:
> An article that claims someone is moving to an MS solution is less
valuable
> than one which claims they are dropping the MS solution. The logic is that
one
> is based on an estimate, and the other is based on experience.
And then, there's this:
"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Jon Johansan wrote:
> >
> > "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:9btjqu$h5d$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
...
> > > The article claims a few other companies have already gone to W2DC and
> > have
> > > good success... did you read the article?
> > >
> > > -Todd
> >
> > Of course he didn't - he's a blind zealot
>
> Ahh yes, if one can't win an argument by fact or knowledge, the idiot
resorts
> to insulting the opponent.
I'm confused. Who's insulting who here? Who's the idiot? Isn't the pot
calling the kettle black???
-- Mike --
------------------------------
From: Nomen Nescio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Crossposted-To: soc.singles,alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 21:40:19 +0200 (CEST)
Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Chad Everett wrote:
> >
> > Trouble is homosexuals are a politically vocal group who want to shove
> > their sexuality down the throats of everybody else...
>
> Talk about ill-chosen metaphores...
after all, by definition they're only interested in doing that to half
the population
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 12:46:06 -0700
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
> <snype>
> > > > The point of telling them about homosexuality isn't to make converts,
> > >
> > > Actually, it is. At least according to groups like NAMBLA, which
> > > has a vested interest in gaining converts.
> >
> > Thats one group (NAMBLA) is where I draw the line. Thats one sick
> > bunch.
> What has a group of sick weirdos have to do with legal sexual relations
> between two people of the same sex?
>
> Matthew Gardiner
> --
> I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
>
> If you don't like it, you can go [# rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
>
> Running SuSE Linux 7.1
>
> The best of German engineering, now in software form
Because they think that your young lad is fair game and also think that
it should be made legal.
--
V
------------------------------
From: Nomen Nescio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Crossposted-To: soc.singles,alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 21:50:27 +0200 (CEST)
CareBear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Boy, I love this discussion. It must be one of the funniest I've ever
> witnessed:). God praise Nomen Nescio for advocating His two best
> creations, the hate of homosexuals and Windows in such a delightful way!
> (Yes, I'm atheist, and yes, that was sarcasm.)
hate of homosexuals existed long before i ever started posting
as for windows, well
i've said too much already
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 19:53:48 GMT
"Dave Martel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On 22 Apr 2001 12:56:03 -0500, "Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >However, product activation in XP is ONLY an issue with those that intend
to
> >bootleg it. It is of NO issue whatsoever to those that purchase
legitimate
> >copies.
>
> It's an issue to those who don't want to encourage other software
> vendors to start down down this path. Can you imagine having to go
> through the registration procedure with every commercial application
> on your system, every time you upgrade your hardware?
Ummm, yes, in fact, I can, and so can many of the other folks here. Before
the floating license became ubiquitous around here, swapping a node was a
nightmare of licensing hassles, all involving separate vendors. Even though
we are a fairly large company, the cost to switch licenses across nodes was
never cheap (typically, it was around $500, but sometimes it was up to
$2000). It even got to the point that the entire switch was handled
electronically, and we were still charged for node switches.
Worse, we were also charged according to the processing power of our
machines. Get an engineer a new, faster machine, and it could double the
license cost (that may still happen - I haven't kept track of how the
floating licenses work).
-- Mike --
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Ctrl-Alt-Windows
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 20:03:17 GMT
"Brian Langenberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9bpgtu$6k$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Roy Culley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : PC keyboards are crap full stop. Here I am typing on my Sun type-5
> : keyboard on a PC running linux. A mate built the adapter and it
> : works like a dream. Sun keyboards are second to none IMHO simply
> : because they have that wonderful keypad on the left.
>
> Or, for $60(US), get a nice Sun Type 6 keyboard with USB:
>
> http://store.sun.com/catalog/doc/BrowsePage.jhtml?catid=32807
Have they fixed the abominable repeat rate problems? My Sun Type 6 keyboard
repeats at the generous rate of somewhere around 1.5 characters per second.
If we want them to run fast, we just pound on the key real fast. There
appears to be no way to change it, and the sysadmins have tried everything
they can think of (the files that have to be updated are apparently not user
editable), but nothing makes the repeat rate go any faster. We're thinking
this _is_ the _fast_ setting, and none of us has the patience to try the
_slow_ setting (we're afraid nothing could ever be typed).
Apart from that, the feel is like cold oatmeal. It kind of pushes back, but
it's mostly just mush. That's more a matter of personal preference, but it's
been a long long time since I've used a keyboard that I dislike more than
the Sun.
-- Mike --
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 22 Apr 2001 15:05:53 -0500
On Sun, 22 Apr 2001 23:33:11 +1200, Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Good point. When I was in 7th grade and found out I was gay, it sunk me
>> into the darkest point in my life, and it'd been pretty dark before that
>> because I was one of the picked-on nerds. (Note: I've since graduated from
>> "nerd" to "geek".) Even though I knew that I was certainly not the only
>> gay kid around, I was terrified of the idea of letting anyone find out --
>> let the word get around to the wrong person, and *boom* even more people
>> hate me. Kansas is like that. I was terrified of telling my parents or my
>> sister for much the same reason, although I later found out that my fears
>> there were completely unfounded. It's only because I made a promise to my
>> sister that I didn't commit suicide, and that promise became my lifeline
>> through a lot of tough times in my life. However, I made my way through
>> the bullshit, came out to my family and close friends 4 years later, and am
>> now a happier person for it.
>>
>Its nice to hear a positive story. It is rather unfortunate that as a
>society, there are still so many people with closed minds. If you look
>back into Greek history, and cultures around the world, many of them
>treat homosexuality as a normal thing, aka, just part of mother natures
>work. It is unfortunate that in the nation of the free there is this
>intolerance, mind you, it must have something to do with the origins of
>the US. Compare that to the UK, James I (James IV of Scotland), the
>successor to Elizabeth I, who was bisexual, hence, it is not a new
>phenomena.
>
>Matthew Gardiner
>
Can you explain the treatment given to Turing in the UK then?
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 13:28:17 -0700
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> Tim Hanson wrote:
> >
> > Chad Everett wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, 20 Apr 2001 00:58:52 -0700, GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >webgiant wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> On Mon, 19 Mar 2001 06:11:02 GMT, "Electric Ninja" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> >"Andy Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Jan Johanson wrote in message <3ab419a9$0$48766$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > > >> >> >http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/11929.html
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> >"Lockheed Martin is working on the design of the new US CVN 77 aircraft
> > > >> >> >carrier, and Microsoft Federal Systems is to co-operate in the ship's
> > > >> >> >information technology architecture. This will, we kid you not, be based
> > > >> >on
> > > >> >> >Windows 2000. Microsoft Consulting Services will meanwhile chip in with
> > > >> >> tech
> > > >> >> >support during the ship's software design, development and deployment."
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> >Cause the Navy knows what everyone else already knows, W2K is rock solid
> > > >> >> >enough to trust lives to.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >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.
> > > >>
> > > >> Wasn't that USA-China gaffe over a NAVY spyplane?
> > > >
> > > >After looking at the whole thing... it was a deception. Its a trick..
> > > >We gave China Windows XP!!! ;-)
> > > >
> > >
> > > The Chinese don't want Windows XP, or Windows anything. They are going hog-wild
> > > with Red Flag Linux cause they're tired of being dependent on Windows. Now if
> > > only the US Government would wise up. At least the NSA has the brains to go with
> > > Linux.
> >
> > I don't think that's quite true, although I wish it were. From what
> > I've seen the majority of Chinese computer users love Windows, as long
> > as they can get it free, and 99% get it free. This puts Red Flag Linux
> > in a difficult position of being no more free than Windows and facing an
> > uphill struggle, despite support by the government.
>
> Linux: documented, full source available
> Windows: lots of proprietary-formatted documents.
>
> In the end, Windows will lose...as soon as Gates' activation scheme
> is put into effect (the primary purpose for this is to collect money
> from users in countries, like China and Russia, where there are no
> copyright laws....he doesn't realize that they will turn to another
> OS before sending him one thin dime).
>
I hope so. Gates has said (sorry, no link) that he is willing to wait
on China, to get Windows ubiquitous then tighten the screws, like
everywhere else. This implies that product activation will be less than
total in areas where "free as in beer" benefits Microsoft.
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
With Seven Servers In California And Texas - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Reply-To: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 20:41:35 GMT
Toon Moene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The problem with VMS is not that it's VMS - it's that you spoil your
> eyes on the microfiche trying to read the source.
there is the joke/story about MVS from the late '70s where somebody
wanted to get the exact (microfiche) listings that corresponded to the
binaries that they were executing. after the company spent a couple
million looking into the opportunity, they finally concluded that
there was no way of absolutely guarentee'ing that an exact set of
microfiche listings could be created that exactly corresponded to
binaries being execuated.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What's the point
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 23:48:46 +0100
> Linux is simply not true! For example, compare the process of installing
> fonts. Drag and Drop in Windows. Linux? Just how difficult could they
> make it?
Under Linux (I'm talking about RH7.0 w/ GNOME) a double click is
required. That's all.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 16:50:23 -0400
Roberto Alsina wrote:
>
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2001 20:25:39 +0100, Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> > The problem is not that Windows or Office are bad software. They
> >>> > aren't. Windows and Office are both fabulous.
> >>>
> >>> Hahahahah!
> >>>
> >>> Windows and office are _appauling_ products!
> >>>
> >> Of course. That's why so many people buy them, because they want to be
> >> appalled.
> >
> >And 400 years ago, the entire population of the world thought it was
> >flat. Your point again?
>
> 400 years ago, if anyone thought the earth was flat, he was incredibly
> ignorant.
>
> After all, the world had been circunnavigated decades before.
>
> --
> Roberto Alsina
... and that information just flew to how many people? The ananlogy
still works. Add 100 years.
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: "mmnnoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Buy Microsoft stock!!!
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 20:51:50 GMT
In article <mXBE6.75857$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Martigan"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> I am looking for a new computer and found that Dell have a decent price
>> on PIII boxes (Dimension L system). I choosed configuration for
>> hardware, but it showed that the only OS I can get with this
>> configutation is WinME. I don't want WinME - so called DELL and asked
>> if I can get Linux RH instead.
>> "No problem" - answered sell representative, and calculated that that
>> the
>> same configuration with Linux will be about $200 more expensive. He
>> gave me some vague explanation why - but the fact is that if you want
>> to buy Linux from DELL, it is cheaper to pay for Win system and to
>> install Linux by yourself. So Microsoft have a great case - you can buy
>> Linux from DELL.
>>
>> Zalek
>
> Can't you just call Dell up and say you refuse to the license
> agreement
> and installed your own OS and demand a refund since you NEVER used the
> OS to begin wiht?
<snip>
Legally, maybe, for whatever that's worth. Or maybe they would just
have you return the whole computer? It really is a scam. A while ago
I believe MS started harassing companies that sold computers without
Windows on them, arguing that nobody wants a computer without Windows,
so anybody buying one must be planning to install a "pirated" version.
This is just like what the RIAA is trying to pull with napster, trying to
allow swapping of songs only if they are on a list somewhere, with the
presumption that every song is under the control of the RIAA unless
proven otherwise.
------------------------------
From: "JS PL" <hi everybody!>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2001 16:56:39 -0400
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> JS PL virtually setting the US as the defacto standard of what other
> government departments are running as an OS. I personally couldn't care
> less what happens in the US. SO much money is wasted yetit is never seen
> as a big issue, hence, whether the DOJ uses Windows or not issue another
> non-issue. If the DOJ use Linux they would been seen as biased towards
> Linux and alternative OS's, and if they ran Windows, there would be a
> big "Microosft" conspiracy, hence, the DOJ are damed if they do and
> damed if they don't.
The DOJ or any government agent would never load Linux on a PC. That would
ruin their false stance that MS is a monopoly. Even though they could run
it, they won't. What Microsoft should do is offer to buy the new and more
sane panel of judges both knind of OS's on a dual boot machine and see which
one (as consumers) they choose to boot into most often. Load both OS's up
with the exact same applications, Office for windows, Star Office for Linux
as well as a host of other apps which mirror each other in functionality on
each OS. I gurantee the Judges will conclude that Windows is in use by 98%
solely because of quality. And after six months of using their choice I'm
sure they will have chosen to boot into Windows ohh....Id say....98% of the
time!
Microsoft posseses an "advantage" not a "monopoly".
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
