Linux-Advocacy Digest #135, Volume #34 Wed, 2 May 01 21:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Matt Kennel)
Major Microsoft FUD tomorrow!! (Tim Hanson)
Re: Women's rights and responsibilities. ("Richard J. Donovan")
Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux (Terry Porter)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Matt Kennel)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Seán Ó Donnchadha")
Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux (Terry Porter)
Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux (Terry Porter)
Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux (Terry Porter)
Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux (Terry Porter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Kennel)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 00:07:43 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: mbkennel@<REMOVE THE BAD DOMAIN>yahoo.spam-B-gone.com
On Wed, 02 May 2001 12:42:40 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:
:So, to summarize, you believe that homosexual attraction is genetically
:determined.
The twin and brother studies seem to indicate that it is
:In other words, it is a birth defect, just like congenital mental retardation.
Or being black or lithuanian.
Its persistence in humans despite an obvious sexual reproductive
advantage implies to me that the most likely genetics is that it is an
unintended consequence of a combination of genes that are otherwise
selected for.
:Aaron R. Kulkis
--
* Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
*
* "To chill, or to pop a cap in my dome, whoomp! there it is."
* Hamlet, Fresh Prince of Denmark.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 May 2001 17:20:21 -0700
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Major Microsoft FUD tomorrow!!
This came from http://lwn.net/daily/esr-eye-on-the-pea.php3
From: "Eric S. Raymond" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Breaking story: Beware the Microsoft shell game
Date: Wed, 2 May 2001 17:40:03 -0400
A few hours ago, a friendly journalist tipped me that Craig Mundie of
Microsoft is going to make a major speech in New York tomorrow attacking
open-source software -- specifically, attacking the GNU General Public
License. This speech is probably intended to define Microsoft's party
line
on open source, and to shift the terms of the debate over it to one that
Microsoft thinks it can win.
I haven't seen the speech; the friendly journalist told me it was
embargoed. But I'm expecting it to be a masterpiece of FUD. You
watch; it's going to be a studied and ingenious attempt to create
fear, uncertainty, and doubt in the minds of software users and the
public -- and to obscure Microsoft's underlying motives by cloaking
them in affected concern for the public welfare.
This is a heads-up to journalists, industry observers, and the public
-- as you listen to that speech tomorrow, don't get taken in by
Mundie's shell game. Keep your eye on the pea. As the perceptive
gentlemen of "The Economist" observed earlier this week [1]
Microsoft's real agenda will be to preserve its monopoly, whatever the
cost to software developers and the public.
So I can predict with fair confidence some of the things you're going
to hear -- perhaps not as explicit statements that can be refuted, but
as hints and allegations, a studied and careful attempt to disinform
without telling explicit lies.
First off, expect Mr. Mundie to try to blur the distinctions between
open-source development, use of the GPL, wholesale copyright-law
violations like Napster, and outright software piracy. These are four
different phenomena; a lot of open-source software doesn't use the
GPL, most open-source developers are supportive of
intellectual-property rights including copyright, and the open-source
community as a whole has historically taken a definite stance against
software piracy. We only give away our own work, not other peoples'.
Nevertheless, expect Mr. Mundie to lump all these phenomena togetber
and hint darkly that Linux is the spearhead of a conspiracy to destroy
trillions of dollars in intellectual-property assets. He probably
won't come right out and accuse us of being Communists; that trial
balloon popped when Jim Allchin floated it a few weeks ago with his
"un-American" crack and got laughed out of town. But he'll let the
implication hang there and hope it sticks.
What he'll hope you don't notice is that the "assets" he's mainly
interested in protecting are Microsoft's -- and not just the $26
billion it has in the bank, but the far more important asset of over 90%
desktop market share and tight control of its customer base through
proprietary lock-ins.
It's that lock-in, that control of customers, that is what open source
threatens most. With open source, customers can have real choices;
they don't need to be locked into a perpetually more expensive upgrade
treadmill, they can own and inspect and modify the software they
depend on, they can have real security because they can know exactly
what's
running on their machines.
That choice is the fundamental threat to Microsoft's business model,
and it's the reason they're getting clobbered by Linux in the server
market (every month, more Linux installations come up on web servers
alone than in Microsoft's entire Windows 2000 customer base). So it's
not just individual open-source projects like Linux and Apache
Microsoft has to defeat -- it's the open-source way of thinking about
software.
One way to defeat it is by making people afraid of it -- by conning
potential corporate purchasers into believing that using open-source
software on their machine somehow means the GPL will force them to
publish all their software or business secrets. Craig Mundie will try
very hard to make you believe that. It's not true, but a company that
blatantly falsified videotape evidence in a Federal antitrust trial is
not going to balk at lesser falsehoods.
Another way to defeat open source is to co-opt it. After Craig Mundie
gets through trying to make you fear and distrust open source, he will
tout Microsoft's new so-called openness. He will doubtless talk about
how Microsoft is willing to share source code with large customers and
universities. And he'll talk up the "open" services like SOAP that
are part of Microsoft's .NET plans (about which more later).
What Mr. Mundie will hope you don't notice is that Microsoft wants all
the "sharing" to be in one direction. What they're doing is what we
call "source under glass" -- you can see it, but you can't modify or
reuse it in other programs. They want to be able to get the huge
benefit
of having thousands of outside people review their code without allowing
any of those people to use what they learn on other projects.
We in the open-source community see this for what it is -- a
counterfeit, a trick, a scam. It's aimed at recruiting free labor for
Microsoft without giving the outside contributors any stake in or
control of the results of their effort. In true open source, all
parties are equal. When I give you my software under an open-source
license, you have exactly the same rights as I do. That's what I
trade you in return for your help in testing and improving the
software. That's the voluntary cooperation that built the Internet.
Mr. Mundie also doesn't want you to notice, or remember, Microsoft's
long history of perverting supposedly "open" standards into customer
lock-in devices, by poisoning them with proprietary extensions that
only closed Microsoft software understands. A notorious recent
example is the games Microsoft played with the Kerberos security
protocol. It would take a really cockeyed optimist to believe that
Microsoft doesn't have similar maneuvers planned for once the .NET
protocols get established, if they do.
Finally, Mr. Mundie will doubtless wind up his exhortations with a
paean to the glories of .NET, Microsoft's attempt to turn itself into
the worlds's biggest application software provider. Stripped to its
essence, under this plan you mostly would give up buying software and
instead rent networked services from Microsoft by the month.
There are two things Mr. Mundie hopes you won't notice about *this*.
One is that .NET is born out of fear. Microsoft's strategists aren't
stupid. They can see the trend curves, that falling hardware margins
are spelling the doom of any business model based on expensive
packaged-software licenses. They know the revenues from their
own software business have actually been declining for three quarters
now,
covered only by creative accounting practices for which Microsoft is
under a federal fraud investigation separate from the antitrust trial.
More fundamentally, those strategists have read Clayton Christensen's
"The Innovator's Dilemma"; they can see that open-source software in
general and Linux in particular are an unstoppable technology
disruption that will sooner or later reach the heart of Microsoft's
business -- and that the only way for Microsoft to survive is to dodge
the bullet, to be in a different business before that bullet hits
home. Hence the push to become an ASP.
But the more important thing he hopes you won't notice is that in the
brave new .NET world, you would lose even the meager rights you have
now under Microsoft's End-User License Agreement. You would own
nothing. You would instead become ever more dependent on Microsoft to
provide the basic services that your computer and your business rely
on to function. You would have to absolutely trust Microsoft to
neither deliberately violate your privacy for business advantage nor
to leave your vital data exposed to crackers like those who break into
Microsoft's own servers every few weeks.
Keep your eye on the pea, gentlemen and ladies. Because that is what
Microsoft is really after -- a fast exit out of the packaged-software
business, a lock on your critical data and network services, and an
indefinite extension of the coercive monopoly position described in
Judge Jackson's findings of fact. Higher prices, fewer choices, worse
lock-in, and Microsoft uber alles for ever and ever, amen.
[1] "A Kinder, Gentler Gorilla?"
<http://www.economist.com/business/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=587172&CFID=59132&CFTOKEN=7621972>
--
<a href="http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/";>Eric S.
Raymond</a>
-
Death is Nature's way of recycling human beings.
______________________________________________________________________
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
------------------------------
From: "Richard J. Donovan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Women's rights and responsibilities.
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 00:34:50 GMT
GreyCloud wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
> >
> > Aaron> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
> > >>
> > >> >> And I was under the impression in the cases of questionable
> > >> >> paternity that a DNA sample could be demanded.
> > >>
> > Aaron> Nope. Paternity is still judged on English common law: whoever
> > Aaron> the mother CLAIMS is the father *IS* the father, until proven
> > Aaron> otherwise.
> > >>
> > >> Can you cite a single state that has a law like this?
> >
> > Aaron> All 50, as they have no statutory law to supercede the common law.
> >
> > You failed to provide a single citation.
> >
> > Aaron> Hope that helps, leftist feeb.
> >
> > Please name a leftist position of mine.
> >
> > Thanks in advance.
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Hall
> > (Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
>
> He doesn't need to. Ever hear of "Common Law Wife"??
> Get used to it.
>
> --
> V
When did these dopes pass the bar? Better stick to flamewars concerning
Linux and Windows.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 03 May 2001 00:47:08 GMT
On Wed, 02 May 2001 21:02:07 GMT,
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Said Terry Porter in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 27 Apr 2001 05:04:58 GMT;
>>Soon I will be converting my Wife's Win98 machine to Linux, however
> saving all
>>her stuff has been painfully difficult.
> [...]
>>nothing - Wordnet
>
> What's this?
This is the README file for WordNet 1.6
1. About WordNet
WordNet is an online lexical reference system. Word forms in WordNet
are represented in their familiar orthography; word meanings are
represented by synonym sets (synset) - lists of synonymous word forms
that are interchangeable in some context. Two kinds of relations are
recognized: lexical and semantic. Lexical relations hold between word
forms; semantic relations hold between word meanings.
To learn more about WordNet, read "Five Papers on WordNet", available
via anonymous FTP and in printed form. A book, "WordNet: An
Electronic Lexical Database", containing an updated version of "Five
Papers on WordNet" and additional papers by WordNet users, will be
available from MIT Press in Spring of 1998.
Information about WordNet, an online interface, and the various
WordNet packages are available from our Web site at
http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/~wn/
>
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Kennel)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Thu, 3 May 2001 00:50:43 +0000 (UTC)
Reply-To: mbkennel@<REMOVE THE BAD DOMAIN>yahoo.spam-B-gone.com
Matt Kennel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:Its persistence in humans despite an obvious sexual reproductive
:advantage
oops, diadvantage
: implies to me that the most likely genetics is that it is an
:unintended consequence of a combination of genes that are otherwise
:selected for.
------------------------------
From: "Seán Ó Donnchadha" <[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, 2 May 2001 20:52:44 -0400
"Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Microsoft doesn't have competitors, only victims and those who are not
> > yet victims. At the time you suggest GEM was a 'real competitor', it
> > classified as the latter. Now it is the former.
>
> I think you are letting your, um, ideology show too much.
> Nobody can possibly take you seriously when you say
> things like that.
>
You amaze me, Daniel. How can you remain calm when dealing with this
lunatic? How can you smile and call "ideology" that which is so obviously a
psychosis?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 03 May 2001 00:53:17 GMT
On Wed, 02 May 2001 22:32:44 GMT,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>> Provided you have a network neighborhood icon on the desktop of the
>> client; if you don't, nothing works.
>
> Well, duh!
>
>> The command line ftp does not support recursion, so its rather useless
>> for this kind of thing.
>
> The ZIP it.
Just a work around. I don't want compressed files.
>
>> >Hmmm... not of them, not even KDE or GNOME are as functional as Windows GUI.
>>
>> Depending on how brain-dead your opinion of 'functional' might be.
>
> Better than KDE or GNOME.
How about Xfce, Blackbox, Fvwm, Icewm, etc ?
>
>> Guffaw.
>
> Rasperberry.
>
>> >If konqueror is an example of file manager's it's nothing to write home
>> >about.
>>
>> The same is true of Explorer (either).
>
> Yet explorer is faster than konqueror.
Konqueror is very beta. Howlong has Exploder been out ?
>
>> >> Outhouse - Exmh
>> >
>> >Never heard of Outhouse.
>>
>> Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha.
>
> Rasperberry.
>
>> Everyone else has! :-D
>
> I knew what it meant. Unfortunately, you have no understanding of
> something called "sarcasm".
Then you *had* heard of it. This is a deliberate lie on your part Pete,
tsk, tsk.
>
>> >ICQ on Windows is far, far better than LICQ.
>>
>> [...]
>
> [???]
>
> You put dots meaning what precisely?
>
>> Okay, its obvious how this is going to go. You take all the fun out of
>> ridiculing your ridiculous position when you make it so ridiculous that
>> it ridicules itself.
>
> You're the one guffawing. Nobody else is.
Your're wrong again Pete. <guffaw>
:)
>
> --
> Pete
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 03 May 2001 00:57:38 GMT
On Wed, 02 May 2001 22:28:23 GMT,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>> >"Once you're used to it", a telling phrase. With Word you can just start
>> >typing.
>>
>> Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha. The four years I made my living teaching people to
>> use Word says you're wrong. Way wrong.
>
> "Those who can't, teach"?
"Those who can't use Linux"?
>
> Please explain how I'm wrong? I load word, I start typing. I then print
> it. I don't even need to name it.
>
As previously explained, Lyx also has a default name for your file.
My wife does something similar to your methods when using Word. Her method
only vairies from yours in the areas of *bad language* when Word misbehaves
and lockups of her Windows98 OS.
> --
> Pete
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 03 May 2001 01:00:43 GMT
On Wed, 02 May 2001 21:02:12 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Said Terry Porter in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 30 Apr 2001 21:24:35 GMT;
>>On 30 Apr 2001 14:41:36 GMT, Neil Cerutti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Terry Porter posted:
<snip>
>>It certainly wasnt me, my Wife had that pc with Win98 installed
>>when I met her, and I dont use or maintain Windows pc's these days
>>(including hers), because frankly I cant stand the hoops one must
>>jump thru to do so.
>
> Chances are it just stopped working; this is Win98 we're talking about.
> The proper approach would be to remove and reinstall all the networking
> components in Control Panel--Add/Remove Programs--Windows. If that
> doesn't work, you'd need to re-install Windows, and cross your fingers.
It's a lot easier to just install Linux, nothing is then left to 'chance'.
>
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 03 May 2001 01:04:08 GMT
On Wed, 02 May 2001 22:22:58 GMT,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>> And I pointed out that Lyx also takes the same number of steps (neglecting
>> that you failed to name the file, in your example).
>
> You don't need to name the file, even to print it. If you want to save
> it, then you need a name. Can you not name the file in LyX?
Well of course you can, lyx also supplies a default name if you cant be
bothered thinking o fone yourself.
>
>> I also pointed out that Lyx can be run remotely, using only a couple
>> more steps. By remotely I mean it'l use up cpu on the *remote* linux
>> box.
>
> So what? I want to run Word on my PC, not one round the corner.
^^^^ have I can't on ^^^
>
> --
> Pete
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
