Linux-Advocacy Digest #893, Volume #33 Tue, 24 Apr 01 23:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (Charles Lyttle)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux is for the lazy ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Picture of a studly guy (Brent R)
Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product (A transfinite number of monkeys)
Re: Winvocates confuse me - d'oh! ("Chad Myers")
Re: Intel versus Sparc ("Chad Myers")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Society")
Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product (Craig Kelley)
Re: MIcrosoft: Words, denial and WTF! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product (Craig Kelley)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Charles Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 02:10:26 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Charles Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > "Charles Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Mind you, I can't vouch for the accuracy of that report. But is was
> > > > offered as proof that the crash wasn't the fault of the OS. "It was a
> > > > misbehaving application that caused the OS to crash." The Navy had to
> > > > clear the OS or justify to congress why it insisted on MS when most
> > > > contractors were saying it couldn't (or shouldn't) be done. The
> > > > contractor had to clear the OS because he promised that it could be
> > > > done. But he was late, and the Navy had to either cancel a test at a
> > > > loss of millions, or go to test with a beta version. So the vendor
> says
> > > > "we were only a little late, if they had just waited a few more days".
> > >
> > > This is all completely untrue.
> > >
> > > Read all the info collected by Jerry Pournelle on the issue
> > > http://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/Yorktown.html
> > >
> > > The contractor in question also stated specifically that the navy had
> gone
> > > against their recomendation of installing newer software that didn't
> have
> > > the problem PRIOR to the event.
> > > http://www.sciam.com/1998/1198issue/1198techbus2.html
> > >
> > > "... the fault was with certain applications that were developed by CAE
> > > Electronics in Leesburg, Va. As Harvey McKelvey, former director of navy
> > > programs for CAE, admits, "If you want to put a stick in anybody's eye,
> it
> > > should be in ours." But McKelvey adds that the crash would not have
> happened
> > > if the navy had been using a production version of the CAE software,
> which
> > > he asserts has safeguards to prevent the type of failure that occurred.
> "
> > >
> > > You should also read the original article which is the source of all
> this:
> > > http://www.usni.org/Proceedings/digiorgio.htm
> > >
> > > Notice that in an article of great length, only 2 paragraphs are devoted
> to
> > > NT, and none of the say the OS crashed.
> > >
> > > Further, the same author that wrote the gcn article (which quotes from
> the
> > > usni article) also clarifies his statements in a followup article:
> > > http://www.gcn.com/archives/gcn/1998/november9/6.htm
>
> > That last one is even worse than my story. A divide by zero in the
> > controller for a fuel valve caused the entire LAN to go down crashing 27
> > remotes?
>
> The navy uses different terminology than the rest of the industry. To them,
> the "LAN" is their networked application, not the OS or hardware it's
> running upon. When the database contained invalid data, the applications
> running on the remotes all crashed as well, thus causing a Local Area
> Network failure.
>
> > Industry (mostly) fixed that problem 30 years ago. For what its
> > worth, I had an NT machine I was working with bring down an entire LAN
> > of over 1000 machines. It was called the "ping of death". Some
> > applications could cause the NT software to start issuing network pings
> > at high speed. These faults often also caused a BSOD, but not always.
>
> Ping of death was a specific type of exploit that needed special, invalidly
> formed packets to work. There was no way to cause normal applications to
> generate POD packets.
>
> Unix also suffered from this bug.
This was caused by my desktop issuing several thousand pings per second.
No one else could get on the LAN. Every now and then someone could slip
in between pings, but not often. The system was transmitting properly
formated packets, just lots of them. And ignoring everyone else.
--
Russ Lyttle
"World Domination through Penguin Power"
The Universal Automotive Testset Project at
<http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 03:12:16 +0100
>>> I don't know about other people, but the repulsive feelings I have
>>> about it are pratty damned instinctual...
>>>
>>> The first time I ever heard of it, (mentioned in a medical textbook)
>>> my thought was, OH, GROSS!...
>>
>>And your point is?
>>
>>-Ed
> homosexuality is not genetic, it is a choice.
Doesn't seem like Aaron has much choice in the matter. He's hetrosexual
and there's bugger all he can do about it. I am exactly the same. I have
no choice in the matter.
> The feelings we have about it are for self-preservation of our species,
> and they are right.
Right for what?
-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: Linux is for the lazy
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 03:14:36 +0100
> What is your point??
That linux makes stuff very easy with an absolute minimum of work.
-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: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Picture of a studly guy
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 02:14:47 GMT
Donn Miller wrote:
>
> http://www.charlespetzold.com/bio/index.html
>
> LOL! Did you see the Windows tattoo? Damn, now I'm scared. Someone
> please hide me. Also, I'll bet Kulkis has one of those tattoos as a
> sort of camouflage. You know, if he had a Penguin tattooed on his arm,
> he probably would be attacked by a gang of rabid Winvocates.
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
His book on Win32 is excellent. Some of us are forced to use Win32
(nasty nasty stuff) so his book was a real help.
And yes, I do really hope that that is a temporary tattoo. If not,
that's scary.
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 03:16:53 +0100
>> > It can be dangrous for women to walk alone. Women walking alone
>> > armed with guns can defend themselves. People like you would like to
>> > rob women of their ability to defend themselves. People like you
>> > would like to see women walk alone with no practical way to protect
>> > themselves.
>>
>> Round where I live, it is far mor common for men walking on their own
>> to be attacked than women bceause men are seen as `fair game'.
>
> Which is why, where women are concerned Saudi society is actually MUCH
> more kind to women then American society.
What has that got to do with the south western suburbs of London (ie
where I live for half the year)? I don't follow your point very well.
-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: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:18:16 -0400
Daniel Johnson wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > JS PL wrote:
> [snip]
> > The users did not "choose" Microsoft OS's. That choice was made when IBM
> > chose MS-DOS, and Microsoft railroaded per-processor licenses, which
> > were also tied to things like Word.
>
> Actually, IBM offered three OSes originally: MS-DOS, CP/M,
> and one other- I think it was Xenix or something like that.
>
MS_DOS was low cost and the others were artificially high.
> MS-DOS was the early favorite because it worked, it was cheap
> in both money and memory, and most importantly, it was
> available immediately.
>
> It was also so trivial that it bought Microsoft
> very little. It was Windows that put MS where
> they are now- but that is another story.
>
It was having DOS chosen by IBM and the later per processor licenses
that did it.
> [snip]
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (A transfinite number of monkeys)
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 02:19:01 GMT
On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 16:18:17 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: This is patently wrong. You can assign rights to do this in the local
: policy editor. Just go to Administrative Tools in control panel, open Local
: Security Settings, then Local Policies, User Rights. Double click on "Load
: and Unload device drivers" and click "Add" and choose the users or groups
: you want to be able to burn CD's.
So, in order to let ordinary users burn CD's, I have to give them
rights to completely kill the operating system by adding and removing
device drivers?!?!? Hmm, I'll take "chmod 666 /dev/scd0" or whatever
device the CD-R is setup as any time.
: > See how easy Windows 2K is to use for users?
:
: That's why it it's called "professional". That's also why Whistler personal
: will be simplified for these tasks.
Any "Professional" that thinks giving permission to load and unload device
drivers to ordinary users is a Good Thing deserves a spot in the unemployment
line, or maybe should pump gas instead.
--
Jason Costomiris <>< | Technologist, geek, human.
jcostom {at} jasons {dot} org | http://www.jasons.org/
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
My account, My opinions.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Winvocates confuse me - d'oh!
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 02:15:05 GMT
"Donn Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [x-posted to COMNA to generate flame wa-, I mean discussion.]
>
> Please forgive me for acting like Aaron Kulkis and quoting the entire
> message, but they haven't seen the entire thread yet... (All I need now
> is a 12GB sig file.)
>
> Karel Jansens wrote:
> >
> > Brent R wrote:
> > >
> > > Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Karel Jansens wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Previously the winvocate mantra was: "Windows is soooo good, why would
I
> > > > > not pay for it?"
> > > > >
> > > > > ... which made kinda sense; after all, they already _had_ paid for it,
> > > > > so why not rationalise your faux pas.
> > > > >
> > > > > In the past two or three days I've come at least twice across posts
> > > > > which essentially say: "OK, so Windows is too expensive, let's pirate
> > > > > the crap out of it. It's okay, because the corporate sharks pay for us
> > > > > pirates anyway".
> > > > >
> > > > > ... which is weird. Has Windows suddenly become less than worth its
> > > > > price? Has Microsoft decided to take out some precious features so
that
> > > > > suddenly Windows has become less valuable?
> > > > >
> > > > > Or is this how winvocates perceive free software?
> > > > >
> > > > > It's kinda like certain people (with initials CM) who go around the
> > > > > newsgroups for _years_, touting Windows 9x as God's Gift To the
> > > > > Community, and then suddenly changing their tune to: "Well, Windows 95
> > > > > was crap, obviously; and NT wasn't too good either. But Win2k... now
> > > > > that's the best operating system ever".
> > > > >
> > > > > You gotta laugh, eh?
>
> > > > And of course, as soon as Windows XP is released you will have all the
> > > > winadvocates claim that Win2k, win 9x and win ME are crap, and XP is the
> > > > way of the future. Solaris, from day one, it has just been getting
> > > > better after each release. Linux, same situation. Windows, stuck in the
> > > > same rut for, well, at least 15 years. I see no progress what so ever,
> > > > the only people who are ammused are the end luser, who, like most
> > > > simpletons are ammused by the simplist of items, a bit like how flies
> > > > are attracked to light.
> > > >
> > > > Matthew Gardiner
> > >
> > > Windows has been stuck in the same rut for 15 years? Have you ever used
> > > Windows 3.x or earlier??
> > >
> > > A lot has changed since 15 years ago.
> > >
> >
> > Windows 3.0 was 10 years ago.
> >
> > 3.x at least never pretended to be more than a pretty DOS-shell. Sure,
> > it crashed, but as I ran it in a VDM in OS/2, that never really mattered
> > much; and even under plain old DOS, 3.x would usually leave the
> > underlying OS intact.
>
> Yep, I know what you're sayin'. I remember back in the good 'ol days,
> when you had to boot into DOS first, and type 'win' at the DOS prompt.
> You could put `win' in your autoexec.bat file, and have Windows fire up
> automatically, but back then, DOS and Windows were more separate than
> they are now. I remember Win 3.1 crashing sometimes, and taking me back
> to the DOS prompt. At least I could get back by typing `win' instead of
> rebooting, then. DOS by itself did seem more stable than Windows.
> Why? Because it was a stripped-down CLI-based kernel, much like a unix
> kernel.
>
> Now, I don't think you can even boot into DOS with Windows ME. Wonder
> why? What is the motivation for preventing people from shutting Windows
> down and running DOS by itself? Of course, one could always dual-boot
> with some other version of DOS (perferably Caldera OpenDOS), but
> still...
Well, Win95 was slightly different. It was 32-bit protected and actually
had the beginnings of a "kernel" in that it had a seperate virtual memory
manager (VMM32) and had decent 32-bit process isolation.
You could boot to DOS in Win95 and type Win, but you weren't really running
Windows on DOS at that point, Win95's VMM basically took over. It's similar
to how Novell 3.x and 4.x ran. You could type nwserver (or whatever it was)
from DOS, but you weren't really running NetWare on DOS, you were running
NetWare.
This difference made it slightly difficult to go back and forth between
DOS, Win95, then back to DOS again.
In the end, it just created support nightmares for anyone dealing with
Win9x about which apps could run in the 32-bit protected mode, and which
needed to be in the DOS window, etc.
When Win98 came out, there were still legacy apps which required
DOS mode.
By WinME, there are almost no apps which require this, which allowed MS
to finally get rid of the support nightmare and not require people to
boot to DOS to some things, and boot to WinME to do others.
And I hope you realize that NT/2K are completely different in that
they are fully 32-bit from the get-go. No DOS at all (except as a small
sub-system for compatibility, just like the OS/2 subsystem and POSIX
subsystem).
I had to mention this, because, believe it or not, many Windows-haters
don't realize this and still think that WinNT or 2K are sucky like
Win3.1 or Win95 and seek to insult it at such a level which is, as
I'm sure you agree, really ignorant.
-c
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Intel versus Sparc
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 02:18:05 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9c52c1$lsi$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Chad Myers wrote:
> > >
> > > <Disclaimer: I am not a professional C++ programmer>
> > >
> > > Have you ever used Visual C++? I know you guys hate Microsoft and all,
> but
> > > they have a good debugger that tracks memory overwrites. This is
> probably
> > > a common thing, but if it isn't, it's still pretty cool. It would catch
> > > this kind of stuff in one pass.
> >
> > The Borland debugger caught it perfectly adequately; it just took me
> > awhile to realize just what was happening. Actually, the Visual C++
> > debugger is pretty good. To get as good, or a little better, you
> > have to go to C++ Builder 5 with CodeGuard support compiled in.
> >
> > Visual C++ does have some serious language compliance problems, I feel.
> > But C++ Builder, when you use VCL code, is even worse!!!
> >
> > Chris
>
> I like VC as a very good text editor, ignoring the language compliance
> (anyone know how VS.NET fares in this matter?), it's a very good tool.
> I just used a program called ObjectAda, which is a VC clone for Ada, it was
> a... learning experiance.
> One thing I hope VS.NET will do well is to be able to add more language to
> it. I *hated* that debugger.
I think VS.NET will be able to run all .NET-based language inside it as
an IDE.
In fact, I thought I saw that ActiveState was working with MS for
Perl.NET IDE integration with VS.NET.
... or maybe that's not what you were talking about. Forgive me if I'm
rambling... wisdom teeth removed... on much pain medication...
-c
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Society" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Society" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 19:28:27 -0700
"Laura M. Hagan" <doesn'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3ae61651$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> nunnayabidniz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > homosexuality is not genetic, it is a choice.
> >
> > The feelings we have about it are for self-preservation
> > of our species, and they are right.
>
> Then why don't we have the same feelings
> about celibacy?
What? That celibacy is somehow perverse and
to be suspicious of celibates? Yah, seems like
"the same feelings" are common toward celibates
and homosexuals -- the men among 'em anyway.
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product
Date: 24 Apr 2001 21:02:50 -0600
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "Loading" drivers means starting and stopping them, not installing them.
> > > The users can only start and stop the drivers that the administrator has
> > > installed, and the admin can deny them access to specific drivers by
> > > disallowing them access in the ACL.
> >
> > Hmmm, I don't see a setting for ACLs on individual drivers here.
> > Please elaborate, because this is the crux of the many complaints.
> > We've known about this problem for at least a few years now, you'd
> > expect a solution to be in place.
>
> right click on the driver file, choose properties, choose security. Click
> "Deny" on the "Read and Execute" checkbox, or click advanced and edit the
> user group and click "Deny" on "Traverse Directory / Execute File" checkbox.
Hmmm, some questions (I honestly want this to work, okay?):
o How does this allow an individual to load the driver on
demand (something that I could setup so that when Omnipage
starts up it does it automatically using cmd.exe or whatever)?
o Where is the device "file"? All I see in the device manager
is a list of names.
o Does execute permission on a file imply that the user
has the right to load a driver? (I hope not)
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MIcrosoft: Words, denial and WTF!
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:03:30 -0500
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> You show your self off as an even bigger idiot. As I remember
> correctly, service packs for Windows 2000 would strictly be
> patches/fixes etc. etc., unlike the NT 4 service packs that included not
> only patches/fixes but new tools as well. This "minor detail" was
> mentioned prior to the release of Windows 2000 when Microsoft change how
> they were going to release patches/fixes.
Yes, indeed. But the term Service Pack is already being used. Why change
it? You'd much rather speculate about consipiracies than consider Occam's
razor.
> As for you Juvenile comment regarding 810 and xfree, support has been in
> Linux since SuSE Linux 7, and might have been also included with
> Mandrake 7.2 as well.
And it's still irrelevant to the point, which is that it has nothing to do
with XFree, unlike you claimed.
> So, before you start swing from the chandlers, double check you
> comments, or else you will nominate yourself as the newsgroup idiot.
What's a chandler?
>
> Matthew Gardiner
>
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > Matthew exposes himself as the idiot he is. In his zeal to "expose" the
> > conspiracy of wording, his ignorance of the words "vulnerability" and
> > "Service" are shown. Never mind the fact that MS uses the term "hot
fix"
> > for interim patches (between service packs).
> >
> > The real reason it's called a "Service pack" is that it often includes
new
> > features, and not just fixes. For instance, One NT4 service pack
included a
> > new form of threading called "Fibers" (similar to Posix threads).
> >
> > All this coming from the guy that thought the i810 GART issues were
simply
> > "fixed" by a new version of XFree. He doesn't even know much about his
OS
> > of choice, how can he be making any credible statements about any other
OS?
> >
> > "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Yes, this is another look at the Microsoft machine and the arrogance
it
> > > displays. First of all, this all MHO, no more, no less, however, most
> > > Linux advocates and ex-windows users probably agree with me.
> > >
> > > Patches, bug fixes, service packs, normal words in the world of
> > > computing, no OS are immune to bugs and problems, however, how one
word
> > > these problems is an interesting topic.
> > >
> > > Lets look at the SUN, a UNIX power house, they refer to Solaris OS
> > > updates and bug fixes, as "patches". Thus telling the public, there
have
> > > been some errors in the Solaris (or what ever) product, and here are
> > > some files to correct the problem, and on top of that, here are some
new
> > > features. Lotus refers to these files as either fixes or patches, thus
> > > going along the same line as SUN for the reasoning, both have taken
> > > responsibility for the errors.
> > >
> > > Now we come to Microsoft, who don't call them "patches" or "fixes",
but
> > > "service packs", thus avoiding the admittance that maybe in one of
their
> > > products there is a bug. Talk to a Microsoft rep. and they prefer to
> > > call it an "update", as if to say to the customer that it enhances the
> > > reliability even more, whilst making sure they don't mention the fact
> > > that they (Microsoft) were too sloppy to ensure that there weren't any
> > > bugs in the original code.
> > >
> > > Security alerts are even more hilarious, they are not referred to as
> > > "security holes" or "bugs", instead they are called "security
> > > vulnerabilities", thus offloading the responsibility for "creating the
> > > hole" on the shoulders of hackers/crackers/script kiddies, instead of
> > > taking the responsibility themselves for the error.
> > >
> > > The arrogance goes further than mear words, it heads into their
> > > advertising, there customer service, the whole company culture that
> > > surrounds Microsoft. You ring up Microsoft because Visual Basic 6
(with
> > > latest service packs) doesn't work with Microsoft Office 2000, the
first
> > > question you get asked it how you are going to pay for the support! I
> > > shelled out $350 fucking dollars, why the hell should I shell out even
> > > more money to line Bill Gates Pockets? I paid for the software, I want
> > > the support that goes with it. Compare that to SUN, I have a copy of
> > > SUN Forte Developer 6, I didn't even have a support contract with SUN
> > > and they still helped me, so it definitely shows where each companies
> > > priorities lye.
> > >
> > > Office XP, yet another over hyped, under performing suite. The people
I
> > > know, who kept with Lotus Smart Suite are quite happy about the fact
> > > that they aren't on the upgrade tread mill, and the cost of it has
> > > stayed constant, and in some cases gone down since the original
> > > purchase. Compare what you get for $NZ300, Lotus Smart Suite,
> > > w/Database, Browser, Wordprocessor, etc etc, compared to Microsoft's
> > > $1300 suite which does the same thing! when are people going to wake
up
> > > to the hype, its a black hole, sucking users in with the promise of
> > > enhanced productivity, however, once sucked in, and have relised that
it
> > > has not delivered, they dare not tell anyone of their stupid decision,
> > > and they stick with Office, even though Corel Wordperfect Suite 2002,
> > > Lotus Smart Suite 2000, or StarOffice could have achieved the same
feats
> > > at 1/10th the price.
> > >
> > > Matthew Gardiner
> > >
> > > --
> > > Disclaimer:
> > >
> > > 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
>
> --
> Disclaimer:
>
> 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
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product
Date: 24 Apr 2001 21:04:55 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett) writes:
> On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 17:18:59 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> On Tue, 24 Apr 2001 04:50:14 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >wrote:
> >> >"Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >> >And how is that any different from opening up Linux to allow normal
> >users
> >> >to
> >> >> >do priviledged activities?
> >> >>
> >> >> What he suggested is patently WRONG:
> >> >>
> >> >> Trouble is what you suggested doesn't work worth beans on W2K Pro.
> >> >> Why don't you actually try it before you suggest it.
> >> >>
> >> >> First: Easy CD Creator and NERO both tell you that only Administrator
> >> >> can write to CDs on Windows 2000 Pro. Whether I've given users
> >> >> permission to load and unload device drivers or not.
> >> >
> >> >Funny, I'm burning a CD as we speak under a non-administrator account
> >using
> >> >the method I mentioned using Nero. I don't have EZCD Creator so I can't
> >> >test that.
> >>
> >> You're lying. I also have NERO 5.0. I tried this yesterday. NERO brings
> >> up a dialog explicitely telling you that only administrators on Windows
> >> 2000 can write to CD/RW drives.
> >
> >How could you be doing this when you haven't done what I suggested. I know
> >you haven't because you had to ask how in another message.
> >
> >Nero only brings up the message when it cannot start the ASPI device.
>
> Please enlighten us and tell us the name and location of the Nero driver
> file upon which you adjusted permissions to allow non-administrators
> to write to CD/RW drives in W2K.
... and how giving execute permission to a file grants any user the
right to load and unload drivers (akin to 'insmod' and 'rmmod' under
Linux).
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
