Linux-Advocacy Digest #55, Volume #34 Mon, 30 Apr 01 12:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Windows is a virus (Brian Langenberger)
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Jon Johansan")
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Chronos Tachyon)
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 (Nomen Nescio)
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 (Nomen Nescio)
bLobbi sanchez: the evil of lesbianism (Nomen Nescio)
Re: there's always a bigger fool (Nomen Nescio)
Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males (Nomen Nescio)
Re: there's always a bigger fool (Zippy)
Re: there's always a bigger fool (Zippy)
Re: Does Linux support "Burn-Proof" CDRW's ("Mart van de Wege")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows is a virus
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 14:58:38 +0000 (UTC)
Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> Windows will make a delightful profit, and they deserve to, until this
:> linux craze can actually copy and paste properly between 2 windows
:> without the poor user wondering what gnome/kde/x/whatever app they
:> happened to install and making a mental note of the kernal version/video
:> card/sound card/printerversion of xyz BEFORE performing the operation.
: FUD. Left button to select, middle to paste, right to do a larger select.
: It has always worked under X.
The "I'm too stupid to paste" post seems to come up almost weekly,
doesn't it? Distros are going to need to start putting
"middle mouse button pastes" in large friendly letters on the
cover of every box pretty soon...
If a bunch of ex-Mac users complained in the Windows groups about
a "lack of a unified 'properties' menu" (conveniently forgetting
that right mouse button), I'm sure they'd get more than a little
sick of it too.
------------------------------
From: "Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: 30 Apr 2001 10:04:04 -0500
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:xR%G6.5138$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:3aec3379$0$41615$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >
> > I have to disagree. How is it possible that a hardware failure unrelated
> to
> > any software should affect the reported reliability of the OS?
>
> Are you saying that you don't think that using hardware like raid
> with hot-spare, auto-rebuild, and hot swap drives and dual power
> supplies should have any effect on the uptime you can claim?
It obviously is part of the figure IF you are calculating this for the
hardware + software. But when speaking of the software alone, it should not.
In these threads I believe I am speaking strictly of Windows 2000's
reliability and in that case I would not include any downtime if, for
example, a hard drive was swapped out with the machine turned off.
>
> > Besides,
> > exactly how long is it that we have to run something before we are
finally
> > allowed to calculate and report it's uptime? I mean, a machine running
30
> > days without reboot has a uptime of 100% for those 30 days. Do we pick
an
> > arbitrary length of time - say, 1 year.
>
> Yes, the value begins to meaningful at about a year, but the statistics
> should
> continue to accumulate for the life of the system, and include all
> recommended
> updates that force downtime.
If an OS is "forced" down by a recommended update I would have to question
that decision. If we are striving to achieve high uptime figures (a weird
thing but some apparentely are focused on this goal) then even recommended
updates should be ignored (i.e., if it ain't broke, don't fix it). If,
however, we have a realistic use for a machine, a real production server,
then I think it's foolish in the extreme not to apply all official patches
(most especially those regarding security) even if they do involve a reboot.
let's be realistic - while it's all fun to say "my machine has been up
continuously longer than yours!" it's meaningless in the production
environment. What good does it do to have a machine up for 8 years if it's
been hacked 11 times that could have been prevented by a single hotfix that
required a reboot?
This obsession with uptimes is silly, I think. I'm more interested in
stablity - meaning; does this machine run for as long as we let it. Do I not
have to worry about it crashing. That's what I care about. I don't care if
someone has the will power to stuff a perfectly good machine into a closet
and ignore it for a few years just to claim it stays up longer than another
one.
Most Unixes I've used have been very reliable and stayed up as long as I
wanted them to. NT4 post-SP4 has proved reliable so long as you were
obsessively careful about installing the right drivers and applications
correctly. W2K has proven to me to be bulletproof. I install it, it detects
plug'n'play stuff and it works. And works and works. Like it's supposed to.
I feel that the debate of Windows reliability has ended with W2K.
------------------------------
From: Chronos Tachyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 15:08:35 GMT
On Mon 30 Apr 2001 06:57, jim wrote:
>> I've noticed on my faster machine (400MHz PII) Linux + XFree86 doesn't
>> play MPG files very well. On Windows 98 SE they work just fine. Overall
>> graphics on thius system performs poorly compared to Windows 98 SE.
>>
>
> Here Here!
>
> MPEGS look like crude flip-frame animated GIFS under Linux - BEOS does a
> far better job. Well ummm Windows - even better. No wonder Bill is rich.
>
On my 300MHz K6-2 (just about due to get replaced and start playing musical
computers) with a Voodoo3, MPEGv1 plays perfectly. The CPU load is about
60% for a roughly 400x300 video clip (35% to decode, 25% for X to display).
Poor video performance is not an issue with the underlying OS, it's an
issue with the video drivers.
--
Chronos Tachyon
Guardian of Eristic Paraphernalia
Gatekeeper of the Region of Thud
[Reply instructions: My real domain is "echo <address> | cut -d. -f6,7"]
------------------------------
From: Nomen Nescio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Crossposted-To: soc.singles,soc.support.fat-acceptance,alt.fan.jackie-tokeman
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 17:10:05 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine) minced:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Nomen Nescio
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on Thu, 26 Apr 2001 15:00:05 +0200 (CEST)
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine) wrote:
> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Nomen Nescio
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote
> >> on Fri, 20 Apr 2001 16:20:06 +0200 (CEST)
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey) eeped:
> >> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nomen Nescio
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> clacked:
> >> >> >> <snype>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > because it would cost them more than they paid for thier
> >> >> >> > machine in the first place
> >> >> >> > ya retard
> >> >> >> > jackie 'anakin' tokeman
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than
> >> >> >> > ruin, more even than death
> >> >> >> > - bertrand russell
> >> >> >> Upgrading a kernel. Well, I have SUSE Linux, I goto the suse
> >> >> >> ftp site, download the latest rpm kernel, drop into super user
> >> >> >> mode, then rpm -Uvh kernel.rpm and voila, reboot, and I have a
> >> >> >> new kernel. Is it that hard, no, so stop spreading FUD on
> >> >> >> issues you have no experience.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >why look, it's another lying sack of shit unix headcase! he snips the
> >> >> >context and then accuses me of ignorance! way to go fuckhead. if you
> >> >> >ever wonder why linux has gone nowhere with endusers reread yourself.
> >> >>
> >> >> We should just count ourselves lucky we don't have you as an advocate...
> >> >
> >> >i don't do advocacy dimwit
> >> >
> >> >> you're getting far too wound up for usenet, it's not that
> >> >> important, take a few valium and relax. It'll all seem
> >> >> better in the morning.
> >> >
> >> >you write like a homosexual
> >>
> >> And how would you know?
> >
> >your excessive interest in my bum.
>
> Please indicate exactly where I have expressed any interest at all
> in your posterior. Message-ID's preferred.
>
> >plus linux is well known to be extremely gay.
>
> As opposed to Win2k, I suppose. Well, you're entitled to your opinion,
> but I for one find it not all that useful (how is a software product
> "gay" or "straight"?) Perhaps if you can clarify this puzzlement?
> After all, both have GUIs, both have scrollbars, both have word
> processors, both can do networking, both have a dedicated user base
> (Windows has a much larger total user base, of course), and both can
> be used to promulgate one's business.
>
> What, precisely, does Windows have that Linux does not, apart from
> market acceptance (which can be a killer -- look at the Amiga, for
> example)?
>
> Personally, I find Linux more useful at home. I find Win2k more
> useful at work, but that's mostly because everyone else uses it there.
>
> >
> >> For the record: my understanding is that homosexuals are more intelligent
> >> and more sensitive than average.
> >
> >what a givaway!
>
> You're saying that my sensitivity and intelligence imply that I'm gay?
>
> If so, your logic needs a lot of work. It would be similar to my
> concluding that one is a drunkard simply by observing that s/he has
> a red nose (severe allergy sufferers might also have a red nose).
> Or that one has a car simply because one has a keyring.
>
> You're going to have to do better than that.
you still can't have my bum.
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
From: Nomen Nescio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Crossposted-To: soc.singles,soc.support.fat-acceptance,alt.fan.jackie-tokeman
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 17:10:04 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine) wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Edward Rosten
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on Tue, 24 Apr 2001 12:26:23 +0100
> <9c3gqr$bkd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>> >> You don't see the millions of hohosexuals who aren't that
> >>> >> politically
> >> ^^^^
> >>> >> activated.
> >>> >
> >>> > redirect to: soc.support.fat-acceptance
> >>> > jackie 'anakin' tokeman
> >>>
> >>> What have politically inactive homosexuals got to do with fat
> >>> acceptance?
> >>
> >> You mistakenly mentioned people with a cream-filled, chocolate-covered
> >> cake fetish.
> >
> >
> >I make silly mistakes on the keyboard when I get tired and dring too much
> ^
> >coffee. My coordination goes *way* off.
>
> Case in point. :-) :-) :-)
>
> Well, it could be worse, someone could have accused you of
> being a thespian. :-) Or maybe a masticator. :-)
>
> (Who's Jackie Tokeman, anyway?)
from the alt.fan.jackie-tokeman faq v3263827:
1a. Who is Jackie the Tokeman?
The one who will bring balance to the force.
4i. How can he be stopped?
Why wants to know?
19. Incept date?
2015.
$&*(). What is his goal in life?
It's freedom baby yeah!
n23: What do all those cryptic little phrases mean?
that wood bee telling
23. What is the origin of Jackie the Tokeman?
Jackie researchers are divided:
.a: See Appendix 2187b.
.o: The details of my life are quite inconsequential.
My father was a relentlessly self-improving boulangerie owner from Belgium
with low-grade narcolepsy and a penchant for buggery. My mother was a 15
year old French prostitute named Chloe with webbed feet. My father would
womanize, he would drink, he would make outrageous claims, like he
invented the question mark. Sometimes, he would accuse chestnuts of being
lazy - the sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the
insane lament. My childhood was typical: summers in Rangoon, luge lessons.
In the spring, we'd make meat helmets. When I was insolent, I was placed
in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds. Pretty standard, really. At the age
of 12 I recieved my first scribe. At the age of 14 a Zoroastrian named
Vilma ritualisticly shaved my testicles. There really is nothing like a
shorn scrotum. It's breathtaking, I suggest you try it.
7: there is no origin #7
Tokeman 3:16: I am that I am.
.555: I created myself. I cannot be unmade.
.9.9: he is the lizard king he can do anything
.v: His mother was a jackal and his father smelt of elderberries. By the
age of five Jackie had decided that he wanted to be a celebrity. But by
the age of seven he had decided that he wanted to rule the world.
1.1.d: Shell Beach
.h2mo4: abiogenesis
hth
2.o
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
From: Nomen Nescio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 17:20:10 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray Fischer) wrote:
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Clue for the clueless.
> >
> >Homosexuality is a defect,
>
> Says who?
it's evolution baby
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
From: Nomen Nescio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 17:30:09 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian gayboy) wrote:
> In article <9cjq3d$g95$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >>> >> Jackie thinks he's got "victims". Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha!
> >>> >
> >>> >are you sure you want to play a game?
> >>>
> >>> Are you sure you want to get your ass spanked?
> >>
> >> did linux reinforce your homosexual bumlooker nature or were you like
> >> this already?
> >> jackie 'anakin' tokeman
> >>
> >> men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
> >> more even than death
> >> - bertrand russell
> >>
> >>
> >
> >so homosexual is supposed to be some kind of an insult?and will you at last
> >stop with this idiocy?
> >and as for you jackie-what-ever... i looked at all of your posts...
> >it is clear to me now... you have the IQ of a peenut..
> >its a pity...you could make a good homosexual
> >( you can insult me as you want ... i wont even try to answer.. wont fall
> >to your level again)
>
> Just ignore him, after reading a few posts I'm guessing he's a virgin whose
> worried about being "converted" before he can sleep with a woman.
who is more likely to be a total failure with women?:
a. a drug dealer
b. a dumb jock
c. a jerk
d. a criminal
e. a computer nerd
best,
jackie 'anakin' tokeman, m.d.
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
From: Nomen Nescio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: bLobbi sanchez: the evil of lesbianism
Crossposted-To: soc.singles,soc.support.fat-acceptance,alt.fan.jackie-tokeman,alt.snuh
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 17:30:07 +0200 (CEST)
fat smelly hairy lesbian cunt:
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2001 21:00:42 -0700, Brock Hannibal
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Lady Veteran wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 29 Apr 2001 19:32:24 -0700, Brock Hannibal
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Sun, 29 Apr 2001, Rauni wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I have more important concerns in my life that getting a fuck!
> >> >
> >> >So I suppose a blow job is out of the question?
> >>
> >> Are you selling? I guess you lost your job, hmmmm?
> >
> >Whatsa matter, no one want you?
>
> I can tell you that I do not have to pay for it
why, if that is the case, have you been celibate for years?
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
From: Nomen Nescio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: there's always a bigger fool
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,soc.singles
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 17:30:12 +0200 (CEST)
t. max fagass:
> Said Zippy in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 30 Apr 2001 05:42:20 GMT;
> >this is a matter of opinion and speculation, not what anybody "knows about
> >computing." if you think splitting up microsoft is going to harm them, or
> >end their predominance in the computer world, YOU haven't learned anything
> >about monopolies.
>
> Your ignorance is almost preposterous, I'm afraid. If there is
> something you don't understand about how the split will restore
> competition, I'll be happy to explain it to you, but you have to ask
> questions, so I know where you're getting hung up. I would suggest that
> its likely to be this idea of "end their predominance of the computer
> world". It is the free market competition that will result from the
> remedy, not the remedy itself, which is going to take care of that.
>
> If you don't understand why, it is certainly because you do not quite
> understand what "free market competition" means.
free market competition means that microsoft should be able to sign any
contracts they want, including contracts preventing those they deal with
from selling or promoting competing systems.
hth
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
From: Nomen Nescio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Feminism ==> subjugation of males
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 17:30:15 +0200 (CEST)
"Paul Dossett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Thu, 26 Apr 2001 10:22:12 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > >Roberto Alsina wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, 26 Apr 2001 10:03:18 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > >> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Thu, 26 Apr 2001 09:37:22 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> >> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 23:04:51 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> >> >> >Roberto Alsina wrote:
> > >> >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> >> On Wed, 25 Apr 2001 14:34:44 GMT, chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > >> >> >> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina) wrote:
> > >> >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >> >>>It can be dangrous for women to walk alone.
> > >> >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >> >>So, women should be forbidden from doing anything that's
> dangerous?
> > >> >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >> >What a jerk. Are you just a troll now? We know you're not
> that
> > >> >> >> >> >stupid...
> > >> >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> >> In the part you snipped, I introduced the stuff about women
> and walking
> > >> >> >> >> alone by saying "Aaron believes women are better off when they
> are NOT
> > >> >> >> >> ALLOWED to walk alone".
> > >> >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> >> >No reasonable person can leap from "women should have the
> CHOICE of
> > >> >> >> >> >carrying a gun for personal protection" to "women should be
> forbidden
> > >> >> >> >> >from doing anything that's dangerous".
> > >> >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> >> Actually, it goes exactly the other way around. Aaron is pro
> forbidding
> > >> >> >> >> women the right to walk alone, because they would be in
> danger.
> > >> >> >> >
> > >> >> >> >I never ADVOCATED such a thing.
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> You said women are better off in Saudi Arabia, where they are
> forbidden
> > >> >> >> from leaving the house unaccompanied.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >From a quality of life standpoint, they are MUCH better off.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >I did not say that it was better in every single respect, I said
> > >> >> >that AS A WHOLE, they have a better life.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Well, the incredible oppression and lack of freedom apparently
> > >> >> are unimportant to you.
> > >> >> Perhaps you would be better off in prison. You can't go out,
> > >> >> unless you are escorted, but you get three meals a day, and
> > >> >> you meet people.
> > >> >
> > >> >Thank you for admitting that sacrificing one's freedom is the greatest
> loss.
> > >>
> > >> Well, thank you for accepting that you have two faces.
> > >
> > >Awwwwwwww, did you get sucked in by my little ploy?
> >
> > So you don't really believe women are better off in Saudi Arabia?
> > Yet you said so in two dozen posts. Liar.
> >
> > >> You feel sacrificing freedom is the greatest loss if it's your freedom,
> > >> yet you say Arabian women are better off sacrificing theirs.
> > >
> > >No, I believe no such thing. But it was fun to get you to admit
> > >that there is NO justification for sacrificing freedom one's freedom.
> >
> > Actually, you have not achieved such a thing. For example, I believe
> > the freedom of thieves should be sacrificed until they abandon their
> > thieving ways.
> >
> > >> It's kinda like when you advocate killing those who tax you to
> > >> feed childreni (they "enslave you!), but not who tax you to sustain
> > >> the army.
> > >
> > >Oppressive taxation IS slavery, your moron.
> >
> > Then you advocate the disbanding of the US army, right?.
> >
> > >> You are a fully fledged hypocrite.
> > >
> > >You're just upset because I showed that either
> > >
> > >a) you are more interested in contradicting anything I say rather than
> truth,
> > >OR
> > >b) that sacrificing one's freedom is not worth *ANY* percieved benefit.
> >
> > Or c) You are a very confused person busy building strawmen.
> >
> > >> >So, now, your reasons for arguing that Americans should sacrifice
> > >> >their freedom is, what again, exactly?
> > >>
> > >> I don't consider all freedoms equally important. But just for
> > >> kicks, what freedom do you imagine I am asking you to sacrifice?
> >
> > Notice how here I give you a clear explanation of why what I said
> > doesn't mean what you believe it means. I suppose you got too excited
> > and overlooked it.
> >
> > >> >> >> > I merely noted that the women who
> > >> >> >> >live in one of the societies where that is the custom, have a
> much
> > >> >> >> >*BETTER* life than what Feminism has given American women.
> > >> >> >>
> > >> >> >> Well, make up your mind: do you advocate what you believe is
> worse,
> > >> >> >> or you advocate they should not leave the house alone?
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> >your mental masturbation is unbecoming.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I know you prefer actual masturbation, but you have to wait
> > >> >> until your mom looks the other way.
> > >> >
> > >> >Still raping your daughter, eh Roberto?
> > >>
> > >> What a witless comeback.
> > >
> > >Roberto can dish it out, but can't take it.
> >
> > I have taken barbs from way better polemists. I am just appalled at
> > the poverty of your rethorical weaponry.
> >
> > >Hypocritical fascist asshole.
> >
> > See what I mean? That kind of thing is below a third grader.
> >
> > --
> > Roberto Alsina
>
> Could one of you guys call the other one Hitler so this thread can die?
it's a shame that big daddy roth is dead and godwin hasn't died of aids.
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
why bog why?
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: there's always a bigger fool
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Zippy)
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 15:33:31 GMT
>Your ignorance is almost preposterous, I'm afraid. If there is
>something you don't understand about how the split will restore
>competition, I'll be happy to explain it to you, but you have to ask
>questions, so I know where you're getting hung up. I would suggest that
>its likely to be this idea of "end their predominance of the computer
>world". It is the free market competition that will result from the
>remedy, not the remedy itself, which is going to take care of that.
i don't even think you're actually reading my posts. i specifically stated
that a break up of microsoft would restore competition to the marketplace.
companies which have dealt with a break up in the past (such as at&t) have
found it so profitable that they have often begun to spin companies off on
their own.
microsoft is a relatively young company, and doesn't have the experience or
will to try anything like this. so they are fighting it tooth and nail.
>
>"Spawn of" is not "standard oil", or "at&t". And your last statement is
>entirely wrong, anyway; its only the baby bells, AT&T itself, and Lucent
at&t is still the biggest (although i believe ericsson, which doesn't
compete in the US, is even bigger), and exxon/mobil and chevron are still
the biggest. but the competition they enjoy wouldn't exist if it hadn't
been for the break up.
i'm in favor of strict enforcement of anti-trust legislation, so i
seriously doubt you could shock me by saying anything. but if you want to
continue to believe that splitting up microsoft is going to in some way
harm them, then be my guest.
anti-trust is for the common good, not for vindictive punishment. if any
company enjoys being a stagnant, lazy monopoly, then that company is
clearly sick. the "cure" is a break up. competition is healthy.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: there's always a bigger fool
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Zippy)
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 15:38:56 GMT
>> If you don't understand why, it is certainly because you do not quite
>> understand what "free market competition" means.
>
>free market competition means that microsoft should be able to sign any
>contracts they want, including contracts preventing those they deal with
>from selling or promoting competing systems.
dead wrong. rockefeller's standard oil was indicted and convicted of
exactly this. if any railroad transported oil other than for standard, they
had to pay standard a kick-back. it's illegal.
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux support "Burn-Proof" CDRW's
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 17:46:06 +0200
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mart van de Wege wrote:
>
>> And secondly, apt is not very good at installing individually
>> downloaded packages, it relies on someone else to set up a well
>> integrated archive, so that it can satisfy dependencies. So if your
>> distributor doesn't provide you with that you're SOL. At the moment
>> there are AFAIK 3 major distro's that do this: Progeny, Libranet (both
>> Debian based) and Connectiva (brazilian, Red Hat based). I've heard
>> rumours of Mandrake starting the same. You can of course add third
>> party sources to apt, but this *will* bring down the reliability of the
>> dependency tracking (ask any Debian user about Ximian Gnome)
>
> Interesting - this seems to be a large issue. It seems to me that maybe
> a few heads need to be bashed together to make a single dependency
> archive and install method that works with most popular distributions.
> Also I guess this would mean the distributions agreeing on those little
> details that make life painful.
>
That *is* the primary issue. As I said, apt is not dependent on a single
package format, it works just as well with rpm. Apt got its good
reputation mainly because Debian has a *very* large, well maintained
archive. If the commercial vendors would only follow their example, life
would be much better. Of course if you are on a Red Hat system, you might
want to check out Connectiva, who ported apt to rpm.
Luckily, Progeny is out now, and got some very good reviews, besides
being 100% compatible with Debian it has a very nice installer as well.
If you want to try Debian, you might want to look into that as well.
Sorry that I can't give you any links right now, but I am busy rebuilding
Mozilla and Galeon, so I have no browser ATM.
Mart
--
Write in C, write in C,
Write in C, yeah, write in C.
Only wimps use BASIC, Write in C.
http://www.orca.bc.ca/spamalbum/
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
