Linux-Advocacy Digest #120, Volume #34 Wed, 2 May 01 13:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (John Jensen)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... ("pookoopookoo")
Re: IE ("Michael Pye")
Re: My Favorite Linux APP!! ("pookoopookoo")
Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor ("Nils O. Selåsdal")
Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000? (Bill Vermillion)
Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000? (Bill Vermillion)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Ian Davey)
A patchy patch for Microsofts already patched-up Outlook (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Bernd Paysan)
How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000? (Rich Teer)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Nomen Nescio)
Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000? (Matt McLeod)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("JS PL")
Re: Bill Hudson admits that he, Dave Casey, V-man and Redc1c4 ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Jensen <[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: 2 May 2001 15:52:03 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: John Jensen wrote:
: > Even a year ago, when I called Compaq to ask about my server, they were
: > very helpful, very knowledgable, and very comfortable helping me get Linux
: > running. I was expecting a bit of a break in the conversation when I
: > mentioned Linux, but they were happy to help (even though the server I had
: > was not on the 'Supported' list). They gave me an updated RAID driver and
: > I was off and running. I haven't had any platform problems since.
: That's not pre-loaded.
: Hope that helps.
I think we *all* have that figure out.
: > If Compaq doesn't want to do the install themselves, it doesn't bother me.
: > I can download the ISO myself.
: Suppose you're ordering 500 for a business?
If I was setting up 500 boxes, I think I might learn how to make my own
setup cd, with the configuration I wanted pre-configured. That might beat
going back and reconfiguring 500 boxes set up Compaq's way.
Hope that helps.
John
--
33° 47' 38N 117° 54' 51W
------------------------------
From: "pookoopookoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 11:44:25 -0400
> What is wrong with Corel Draw? and Corel Photopaint? and Corel
Wordperfect?
> which I use. I have downloaded, optimised and compiled the latest version
> of Wine, and it has greatly increased the speed of my Corel applications.
> Maybe you should give them a try? or do you have something against
Canadian
> produced software?
>
> Matthew Gardiner
Hehe, I AM canadian.
I just don't like to run performance intensive software under emulation,
which is how Corel has managed to put CorelDraw on Linux. BTW, Corel draw is
my favorite Graphic design app. I already own 9, is there a way I can just
download the binaries for the Linux version or do I absolutely have to pay
twice? I'd love to try it.
------------------------------
From: "Michael Pye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: IE
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 16:35:20 +0100
"Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> Honestly, Max, if the web were split into two entities, one providing
> web pages simple and sober (such as could be easily viewed with NN 3)
> with a lot of useful information, no fancy ads, no first grade graphic
> art student exploits, and a second one only providing commercial stuff
> (i.e. advertisement) stuffed with fancy graphics requiring 5 minutes to
> load a page, only supported by the latest newest
> browser/OS/platform/broadband connection combination, do you believe
> that the latter would survive longtime? The crap survives only because
> it's riding on an useful web, and exploiting it.
> (Well, maybe I didn't take into account porno sites, which, according
> some analyst are the only profitable commercial activities on the web).
And even they are often only profitable because they can rip people off
hugely once they have a credit card number and most are too embarrassed to
report it...
MP
------------------------------
From: "pookoopookoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: My Favorite Linux APP!!
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 11:46:13 -0400
> I got a car for $1. I drove it for 4 years.
> Even had working air conditioning.
What you paid for the slim jim doesn't count.
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Nils O. Selåsdal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Nils O. Selåsdal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.shareware.programmer,comp.editors,comp.lang.java.help,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.java.softwaretools,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 17:49:17 +0200
"Nick Lockyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9cp672$hs0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> ultra edit version 8 for Windows
> How about kdevelop, part of the KDE. It is a compete
> editor/compiler/linker/debugger all in one!
Unfortunatly it doesnt work wery well...
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 14:40:44 GMT
In article <9ckrqo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Ivo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9c44vf$79v$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> What Can I say after all those discussions:
>> Use MS Windows & Word AND OF course
>> enjoy the ALL 65000 viruses (Probably more).
>I think VI and all the useless other editors ...
When you need an 'editor' vi is pretty good. But no end-user
should ever have to use an 'editor' when they need a
word-processor.
They perform two different tasks. And a word-processor usually
make a pretty poor editor.
Think of the editors as the air-driven tools your mechanic is using
when he repairs your car. Not to productive in a home environment
where a single adjustable wrench often works well. One of those
would surely slow down a competent mechanic.
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 14:43:32 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Scott Nolan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>pookoopookoo wrote:
>> No matter how powerful it is, all it does is edit text. That's
>> not what the average user wants. They want nice printed output,
>> with reasonable color correction and WYSIWYG formatting. Maybe a
>> few nice templates. Most important is a nice GUI and WYSIWIG.
>So name any word processor that truely gives us WYSIWYG...
Does FrameMaker count?
>None do. All fail kerning 101. Only a few of the page layout
>programs can correctly handle kerning.
And when I first saw FrameMaker running on the [then] new IBM RT
it failed kerning miserably. Just a porting error.
--
Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 03:54:49 +1200
Good, nice you hear you are open to new ideas. When the wine is shipped,
the "emulator" is shit, and it compiled for the lowest possible processor,
hence, it doesn't run Draw the best speed. Once optimised, the level of
speed is on par to the WIndows counterpart.
Matthew Gardiner
pookoopookoo wrote:
>> What is wrong with Corel Draw? and Corel Photopaint? and Corel
> Wordperfect?
>> which I use. I have downloaded, optimised and compiled the latest version
>> of Wine, and it has greatly increased the speed of my Corel applications.
>> Maybe you should give them a try? or do you have something against
> Canadian
>> produced software?
>>
>> Matthew Gardiner
>
> Hehe, I AM canadian.
>
> I just don't like to run performance intensive software under emulation,
> which is how Corel has managed to put CorelDraw on Linux. BTW, Corel draw
> is my favorite Graphic design app. I already own 9, is there a way I can
> just download the binaries for the Linux version or do I absolutely have
> to pay twice? I'd love to try it.
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 15:58:39 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >SO what? A small chance is better than ZERO, is it not? If a person
>> >is gay, then "more gays" is good for that person, _period_.
>>
>> What an absurd statement, you're the one being completely illogical. If a
>> hetrosexual can be "converted" then clearly they already have homosexual
>> leanings.
>
>Proof?
So if I get you right, you can allow yourself to be seduced by someone of the
same sex whilst having no attraction to members of that sex? Do you have
experience of this? Or are you arguing that everyone is bisexual and therefore
homosexuality is just a natural biproduct of this.
>> You can't transform a hetrosexual person into a homosexual (if
> you
>> believe that then perhaps you're unsure of your own leanings, hence the
>> anti-homosexual rantings).
>
>Not according to NAMBLA.
So you agree with NAMBLA? I would have said they had it completely wrong, and
am rather disturbed you keep waving their views around.
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: A patchy patch for Microsofts already patched-up Outlook
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 04:00:00 +1200
After Microsoft release the patch, they felt rather proud of their
achievement, funny enough, the patch is patchy, surprise surprise?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/8/18679.html
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 17:48:23 +0200
From: Bernd Paysan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
peter_douglass wrote:
> I think you are mixing apples and oranges. What do you mean by IP? IP is a
> protocol, whereas ATM is a physical implementation. You can easily put IP
> on your ATM.
ATM is a complete network stack, on the same logical level as TCP/IP
(layer 3). Yes, you can use a network stack as "physical layer" only.
It's a waste of what's in the network stack, and it's complicated,
because instead of just dumping your data on the wire, you must setup a
switched network so that it behaves like a physical interconnect matrix.
--
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
http://www.jwdt.com/~paysan/
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature"
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 04:03:01 +1200
Yes, just when you thought Microsoft security couldn't possibly get any
worse, they pull out this little doosie:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/18664.html
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris
From: Rich Teer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000?
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 16:25:49 GMT
On Wed, 2 May 2001, Kevin Fries wrote:
> Bitch to learm my ass! With little more than a good cheat sheet and 10 minutes
> you can increase your productivity beyond windows notepad! And that is what we
Agreed; I meant a bitch to learn to become wizardly. I'm also talking about the
mental switch required to think "modal". When I say wizardly, I mean knowing
much more than the basic hjkl w b commands. I'm thinking markers, yanking and
putting text in different file buffers, and changing text to some arbitrary
character pattern.
Don't get me wrong; I've been using vi exclusively for around 10 years. I can't
see me changing in the next 10 either...
--
Rich Teer
President,
Rite Online Inc.
Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-online.net
------------------------------
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,soc.support.fat-acceptance
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 18:30:14 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey) wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> >SO what? A small chance is better than ZERO, is it not? If a person
> >> >is gay, then "more gays" is good for that person, _period_.
> >>
> >> What an absurd statement, you're the one being completely illogical. If a
> >> hetrosexual can be "converted" then clearly they already have homosexual
> >> leanings.
> >
> >Proof?
>
> So if I get you right, you can allow yourself to be seduced by someone of the
> same sex whilst having no attraction to members of that sex? Do you have
> experience of this?
he does. it involved a russian paratrooper who went by the name 'irina'
though he also liked to be called mr. frufru.
many hamsters knew what it was to roast in the flames of thier passion
on that day i can tell you.
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt McLeod)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000?
Date: 3 May 2001 02:31:29 +1000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bill Vermillion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Scott Nolan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>So name any word processor that truely gives us WYSIWYG...
>
>Does FrameMaker count?
No, because it's not a word processor. But quite frankly
"word processor" and "truely gives us WYSIWYG" should be
mutually exclusive anyway: a word processor is for processing
words, not for doing pretty layouts.
--
Never count your chickens before they rip your lips off
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[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: Wed, 02 May 2001 16:34:29 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > Once Windows began its mutation into a full blown
> > OS, GEM, well, didn't. It was rapidly left behind.
>
> No such thing happened during GEM's lifespan.
I would say that Windows mutation into a full
blown OS began with Windows/386, which started
to do the virtual-machine thing.
But I should clarify- I do not think GEM failed
because of this. GEM was already failing because
of the other issues I mentioned.
I think that when Windows become OS like is
when GEM could no longer recover from its
mistakes. At that point, it was increasingly
not just a weak product, but the wrong product.
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[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: Wed, 02 May 2001 16:34:30 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > I don't understand, that's for sure. Sure seems like this Compaq
> > testimony backs up what us MS-shills are saying: People aren't
> > being "forced" to accept Windows; companies like Compaq
> > are giving them what they want.
>
> Then how come, if I call up Compaq, and ask for a desktop machine
> with Linux pre-installed, the REFUSE to sell it to me, and when
> it comes to servers, fi I ask for Linux pre-installed, they will
> NOT give me a rebate on the Mafia$oft licenses which I am not
> going to use.
Compaq seems to think that people like you- you know, anti-MS
zealots- are not a big enough a big enough market to be worth servicing.
It's my opinion that Compaq is probably right about that.
But even if they are wrong, their testimony was that they
believed consumers wanted Windows. No?
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[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: Wed, 02 May 2001 16:34:31 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Well, no. Windows 1 and 2 were bundled with Excel and
> > (I think) Word for the PC, but Windows 3 was sold
> > retail, then sold to OEMs.
> >
> > Then it was combined (or bundled, if you like) with
> > DOS, renamed "Windows 95", and becomes more
> > comparable to OS/2 than GEM.
> >
> > MS didn't go for the integration thing until Windows 3
> > was firmly on top. They minized the risk that way.
>
> If it could survive on its onw, yhen why did the MANDATE bundling?
Microsoft was thinking of the future. They don't need
the limitations of being stuck with a DOS codebase;
they would like to be able to do things like switch
processor architectures if needed.
Windows NT was Microsofts answer, but it needed
apps- native apps. Most apps were not being written
for Win32 back in '93.
Windows 95 was ultimately the answer to this
part of the problem. Developers *had* to use
the Win32 API to use its new, spiffy features-
Win16 programs would run, but they would
be second-class citizens.
Microsoft was even less interested in continuing
DOS support than in Win16 support. Users
were now demanding it less than before, and so
Microsoft began to back down on DOS compatibility.
Tellinging, Win95's DOS boxes were *less* compatible
than OS/2 2.0s.
Win95 still could boot into DOS, but MS changed
the user interface so that it looked more like a DOS box
and less like just shutting down windows (which is
still what it was, of course)
The strategy has been working; there are now very
many apps that run on NT. Microsoft even took the
"boot into DOS" feature out of Windows Millenium,
and got away with it.
DOS is, at long last, dead. Microsoft killed it. They
still have to kill Win16 completely, but they are
getting close, or so I think.
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 04:37:11 +1200
>> I've been running it for 4 years, and I have had no problems what so ever
>> with either hardware support, or applications to suite my needs.
>
> Well, Linux really only offers a couple of 'suites', Star Office and
> Applix.
I'm running Wordperfect Suite 2000 w/ an optimised version of wine, it
currently runs as fast as a native Linux app.
>> XP is yet another product produced by the Spin Doctors at Microsoft. The
>> latest reports are that Windows XP will require 64MB of Ram, minimum just
>> to get it up and running, and as most people know, Microsoft is always
> over
>> optimistic, so as a general rule, times the minimum requirement by 2.5,
>
> You could say the same about Linux and BSD. Ever read those requirements?
I've used FreeBSD, Linux and Solaris. All of them run at a reasonable speed
on a generic pentium with 64MB, compared to WIndows 2000 on the same
machine, which is like a slug.
>
>> you will have a reasonable required memory that will run the OS and
>> applications at a reasonable speed. Thats not including the fact that
>> memory is not the only component, many users out their will be required
>> to
>
> Where are those users out 'their'. My lexical parser is seg-faulting
> again.
sorry, I mean, there. As for seg-fault, that caused by the programmer of
the software, not Linux itself.
>> buy a whole new computer, as most users have purchase proprietry setups,
>> thus, the processor is hard, if not impossible to upgrade for a lay
>> computer user, thus, even more expense. If the only requirement was more
>> memory, then most people will not have an issue, however, when the
>> processor requirements go through the roof, then you have really got to
> ask
>> yourself whether what you are doing is being done in the most efficient
>> manor, and whether the added features are really required/demanded by
> users.
>
> Pure crock and FUD. I ran NT 3.51, NT4, and Win2K on a PPRO 200/512 with
> 128mb's of ram.
> This is old stuff today, but right now I have Whistler on this same
> machine. Blazing fast?
> No. But it's a far sight faster than RedHat\KDE running Star Office on the
> SAME hardware.
> What's your point?
>
> I didn't think so.
You have used one distro, and make a broadsweeping statement that Linux
sucks and it is slow. Obviously you are not one to reason, so I might as
well give up, because obiviously, no matter what solutions I give, you will
never take them onboard.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "JS PL" <the_win98box_in_the_corner>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 12:41:05 -0400
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>JS PL wrote:
>>
>> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> >Daniel Johnson wrote:
>> >>
>> >> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> > Said JS PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 1 May 2001
10:11:32 -0400;
>> >> > >Since 1993, however, Compaq has not consistently loaded any
>> >> > >alternatives to Windows on personal computers it markets to
consumers.
>> >> Our
>> >> > >assessment of consumer preference is that our customers want
Windows
>> to
>> >> be
>> >> > >preinstalled on their computers.
>> >> >
>> >> > I don't think you understand how damning such testimony is to
>> >> > Microsoft's case, JS PL.
>> >>
>> >> I don't understand, that's for sure. Sure seems like this Compaq
>> >> testimony backs up what us MS-shills are saying: People aren't
>> >> being "forced" to accept Windows; companies like Compaq
>> >> are giving them what they want.
>> >
>> >Then how come, if I call up Compaq, and ask for a desktop machine
>> >with Linux pre-installed, the REFUSE to sell it to me, and when
>> >it comes to servers, fi I ask for Linux pre-installed, they will
>> >NOT give me a rebate on the Mafia$oft licenses which I am not
>> >going to use.
>>
>> Because no one has the inherint "right" to buy whatever they want. They
can
>> only buy what someone decides they mght like to sell. It's the same
reason
>> you can't walk into McDonalds and demand a pizza. And the same reason no
>> matter what *don't* get on your Whopper, it costs the same. You don't
get a
>> rebate just because they hold the mayo.
>
>
>I thought you just said that Compaq is selling what people want.
>
>Some people want Linux pre-installed on a desktop machine.
>Why isn't Compaq selling it?
Some people want chocolate covered ants and frog legs, why isn't Mc Donalds
selling it?
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles,soc.men,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Bill Hudson admits that he, Dave Casey, V-man and Redc1c4
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 12:40:27 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Tue, 01 May 2001
> >billh wrote:
> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis
> [...]
> >> Why didn't you answer the question, "war-hero" wannabe? We'll take it this
> >> means that you don't know the answer and will continue to use the wannabe's
> >> "off-the cuff guide'.
> >>
> >> That's your problem, Kulkis, every thing you post about the military is "off
> >> the cuff". It's why you are mostly wrong. Your classics of "class 2 food",
> >
> >I never claimed such. Food is class I.
>
> Wouldn't that be "class 1"?
No. US Army supply classes are in Roman numerals.
>
> >> "strategic road marches",
> >
> >Germans conducted MANY during WW2.
>
> If I understood the official definitions that Bill has provided, these
> would be operational road marches, wouldn't they?
Those who could be stuffed into trains and trucks rode.
Those who couldn't, were marched. Sometimes hundreds of miles.
>
> [...]
> > "C130 a strategic airlift
> >> platform",
> >
> >Can be, yes. C-17's performed strategic lift in the China-Burma-India theater
> >of operations and they have a MUCH shorter range AND smaller payload.
>
> Same abstraction error. The US doesn't use the C130 as a strategic
> platform because they have better alternatives, not just because they're
> "hidebound".
You are making the mistake of assuming that current USAF doctrine
is an absolute which MUST apply to everybody, at all times.
>
> >Your problem, Billy, is that you have not studied history.
>
> His problem is the same as yours: you both assume that if you've studied
> history, it means you understand it.
I understand that cargo planes with MUCH less cargo capacity,
and much shorter range SUCCESSFULLY carried out strategic supply
missions.
Go do some research on the China-Burma-India theater of operations,
and the US aircraft that were "flying the 'Hump'", that is, performing
strategic supply OVER the Himalayas.
>
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
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.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
