Linux-Advocacy Digest #228, Volume #34 Sat, 5 May 01 20:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Linux books ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Paul Repacholi)
Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing? (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing? (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing? (GreyCloud)
MS Must be getting really desperate (kosh)
MS pushing retailers to hide Linux?
Re: Linux books ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Linux has one chance left......... ("Gary Hallock")
Re: Article: AOL in cahoots with Compaq, HP to derail WinXP, .NET? (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux books ("Tom Wilson")
Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Linux disgusts me (GreyCloud)
Re: MS pushing retailers to hide Linux? (kosh)
Re: Linux disgusts me (GreyCloud)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 02:00:52 +0200
"Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <9_XI6.22452$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > An exploit is an exploit. Someone that allows security to lapse in one
> > area over the other is simply shifting priorities. This shows that Red
> > Hat and Linux in general tend to be more focused on remote exploits, to
> > the detriment of local exploits. Which means, that all it it takes is
> > to get a local account, any local account to gain root access.
> >
> > A common technique some people use is to set up a web site you must
> > create an account for. Often, people will create the same account and
> > password they use on their local machine. Suddenly, you have an account
> > and password for the machine they logged in from, you gain root. Not a
> > big deal.
> >
> >
> I get your point. I am just getting into stuff like this, but is this not
> a problem with UNIX standard security? Ie, the common problem that even
> on a well protected machine, all it takes is one bug to give someone root
> privileges and all hell breaks loose?
> Of course when I say local exploit, I mean someone actually sitting down
> at the machine to be exploited. For obvious reasons, it is very hard to
> *totally* lock down a machine this way, as giving someone physical access
> already implies some level of trust, whereas of course anyone accessing
the
> machine over a network is not to be trusted by default.
> I might be very naive here, so please correct me if necessary.
If you've access to a machine, you can hack it, period.
Usually the easiest way is to take another HD and install the same OS on it,
thus you gain root privileges, allowing you to access anything on the HD,
the rest is just a matter of importing stuff, which can be difficult, but
much easier than if you'd to break through the security.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 23:01:47 GMT
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:bzXI6.22443$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Ian Pulsford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Craig Kelley wrote:
> > >
> > > Many (all?) TCP/IP stacks were developed to be BSD-compliant. The
> > > internet wasn't developed on UNIX, but UNIX made it what it is today
> > > (you're splitting hairs). Any way you look at it, Microsoft would
> > > have done everything *worse* than it is now (see SMB, ntrpc, ActiveX
> > > -- all communication technologies specifically designed to make people
> > > dependent on Windows).
> > >
> >
> > Doesn't matter M$ wasn't in the networking game at that stage anyway and
> > now it lags with ipv6 implementation too. Recent Unixes have it built
> > in, Windows 2000 and NT have 'developer' add-ons. That'll be fun, as
> > the internet migrates to ipv6, watching M$ catch up.
>
> As the internet migrates to ipv6? You haven't any idea how long that is
> going to take, do you? It would not surprise me if in 10 years, the
> internet were still primarily ipv4. You're only going to see ipv6
adoption
> in local private wide area networks for the foreseeable future.
With the way the internet grows it will HAVE to be much sooner then 10
years. We're not going to have the luxury of putting the transition off.
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux books
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 01:01:23 +0200
In article <9d1p1p$rhs$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hello Advocates.
>
> A friend of mine has asked me for reccomendations (etc) for books on
> Linux. I've never really bothered with books much, so I thought I'd ask
> you guys what you found the best.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> -Ed
>
> PS To the wintrolls, I'm really not interested in what you have to say
> about windows, this is about Linux only.
>
Ed,
I'd recommend 'Running Linux' by Welsh, Dahlheimer and Kaufman, published
by O'Reilly. It is a little out of date, but it focuses on the underlying
concepts in an accessible manner, so it should be easily adapted to more
modern distributions.
HTH,
Mart
--
Gimme back my steel, gimme back my nerve
Gimme back my youth for the dead man's curve
For that icy feel when you start to swerve
John Hiatt - What Do We Do Now
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object,alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
From: Paul Repacholi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 06 May 2001 06:43:06 +0800
Anne & Lynn Wheeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Glenn C. Everhart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > DECnet has some interesting features: needs no ARP, has link level
> > access passwords. The file copy has an end to end CRC (which saved
> > the company I worked for a few times; memory problems in routers
> > were shown up by it). It supports a distributed file system and
> > has done so since the late 70s at least. The major problem with
> > Phase IV was that its addresses were too short; you had only 16
> > bits for node address (broken into 64 areas of 1024 addresses
> > each). The USG insistence that it would deep-six TCP/IP and force
> > a move to OSI caused DECnet phase IV to be started maybe 1985 (or
> > even earlier) as an OSI implementation but it wasn't finished for
> > something like 10 years as it became clear to everyone that tcp/ip
> > was not going away anytime soon.
> there has been some OSI & gosip discussion in the "Pre ARPAnet
> email" thread in alt.folklore.computers
> misc random refs:
> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001e.html#17
> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001e.html#18
> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001e.html#23
> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001e.html#24
> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001e.html#25
> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#xtphsp
>
> and blast from the past
>
> Subject: "DEC details 18-month Phase V plan"
> Source: Network World, 9/17/90, pg 1, Tom Smith
By 90, PhV was many tears down the track.
> Bud Haber, Hughes Aircraft manager of advanced network integration
> o "extreme disappointment" with the 18-month rollout of DECnet Phase V
> o 'I don't know how many more delays we have to go through'
> 'The vendor community really <needs to> get serious about doing what
> needs to be done in opening up their systems'
> 'I have formally requested of DEC over the past 6 to 8 months a
> rollout schedule, and they have stonewalled my request'
>
> Hal Folts, Omnicom president
> o 'All this stuff takes time'
> 'DEC has a comprehensive plan that I'm quite impressed with'
>
> Audrey Augun, DEC open networks systems manager
> o DEC X.25 Access for Ultrix V2.0
> - 'a significant step toward Phase V' Augun
> o most Phase V products will be available in the 1st 9 months
> - X.500 Directory and Virtual Terminal support will be later
> o Phase V will be done in logical segments
> 'We feel it behooves us to make absolutely certain that the transition
> for those people is smooth before we announce the products'
>
> Howard Niden, Price Waterhouse senior manager
> o DECs failed to deliver key components this month as promised
> o 'As late as last October...Digital was saying Phase V was on target
> for September'
>
> Steve Wendler, Gartner Group VP
> o Phase V was a victim of internal problems
> 'I think the project has been mismanaged'
>
> David Judson, Wright Patterson AFB, integration technology div. director
> o the government has already mandated the Gov't OSI Profile
> o 'The GOSIP train left in August, and that was last month'
> 'I'm trying to be compliant'
Another good source is Radia Perlmans book on networking. I suspect it
has been, ah, 'well edited' from what she originally said about some
of the stuff. Also, PhIV was almost done with much larger addresses.
It also had the advantage of routing that works!
--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
Spam-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing?
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 16:05:46 -0700
Mikkel Elmholdt wrote:
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Mikkel Elmholdt wrote:
> > >
> > > "Ian Davey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > In article <9cu8nu$8dv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Mikkel Elmholdt"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >A quick (and non-scientific) overview of this newsgroup reveals that
> the
> > > > >majority of posts are related to anti-Microsoft topics and not to the
> > > > >official topic of the newsgroup, namely advocating the virtues of
> Linux.
> > > >
> > > > I'm sure it would be, if there weren't so many people trolling Windows
> > > > advocacy through here.
> > >
> > > Actually, it seems to me that the number of posts bashing Windows vastly
> > > outnumbers the Linux bashers here. But even so, you do have the right to
> > > ignore such postings.
> > >
> > > > >It's a well-known fact, that if you cannot really come up some good
> > > > >arguments for your case, then you can always fall back on hammering
> on
> > > your
> > > > >opponents weaknesses. Is that the case here? If it is, then I find it
> > > rather
> > > > >lame.
> > > >
> > > > Most of it is in response to said trolling.
> > >
> > > Hmmmm ...... maybe. But if I look at the most recent postings, we have
> > > within 24 hours these:
> > >
> > > "If Windows is supposed to be so "thoroughly" tested..."
> > > "The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT"
> > > "Windows NT: lost in space?"
> > > "Windos is *unfriendly*"
> > >
> > > All MS bashing to boot. I failed to find any initial Linux bashing
> threads
> > > in the same period, however. Totally non-scientific statistics, I know,
> but
> > > still ....
> > >
> > > > >Any damn fool can bash Microsoft ..... but try to put up a
> compelling
> > > case
> > > > >for the use of Linux, would be a more challenging task, at least for
> the
> > > > >majority of posters here.
> > > >
> > > > So, are you going to do some Linux advocacy then?
> > >
> > > No. I don't see myself as a Linux advocate, so why should I advocate
> Linux?
> > >
> > > Mikkel
> >
> > Then why are you trolling then??
>
> See reply to similar question.
To put it in a nutshell: I'm removing Win98SE off of a perfectly good HP
Pavillion computer. I'm either going to install RedHat 7.1 or the
latest Suse offering. Why?
Because I see no need to throw out a perfectly good computer that won't
be able run XP from MS. They can keep XP.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing?
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 16:07:00 -0700
Weevil wrote:
>
> Mikkel Elmholdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9cui2m$nib$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Ian Davey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In article <9cu8nu$8dv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Mikkel Elmholdt"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >A quick (and non-scientific) overview of this newsgroup reveals that
> the
> > > >majority of posts are related to anti-Microsoft topics and not to the
> > > >official topic of the newsgroup, namely advocating the virtues of
> Linux.
> > >
> > > I'm sure it would be, if there weren't so many people trolling Windows
> > > advocacy through here.
> >
> > Actually, it seems to me that the number of posts bashing Windows vastly
> > outnumbers the Linux bashers here. But even so, you do have the right to
> > ignore such postings.
> >
> > > >It's a well-known fact, that if you cannot really come up some good
> > > >arguments for your case, then you can always fall back on hammering on
> > your
> > > >opponents weaknesses. Is that the case here? If it is, then I find it
> > rather
> > > >lame.
> > >
> > > Most of it is in response to said trolling.
> >
> > Hmmmm ...... maybe. But if I look at the most recent postings, we have
> > within 24 hours these:
> >
> > "If Windows is supposed to be so "thoroughly" tested..."
> > "The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT"
> > "Windows NT: lost in space?"
> > "Windos is *unfriendly*"
> >
> > All MS bashing to boot. I failed to find any initial Linux bashing threads
> > in the same period, however. Totally non-scientific statistics, I know,
> but
> > still ....
>
> Oh, I see. You're simply lying.
>
> That, or you lurked here for a long time waiting for a 24 hour period in
> which Linux wasn't attacked by one of the many wintrolls in here.
>
> Come to think of it, though, there has never been such a period in my year
> or so of reading COLA. There is ALWAYS some thread with a title like,
> "Another Linux OOPSIE".
>
> So I was right the first time. You're simply lying.
>
> --
> Weevil
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "The obvious mathematical breakthrough [for breaking encryption schemes]
> would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers."
> -- Bill Gates
I think we spend more time wading thru a lot win-trolls to get to linux.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing?
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 16:09:03 -0700
Mikkel Elmholdt wrote:
>
> "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <9cu8nu$8dv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Mikkel Elmholdt"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > A quick (and non-scientific) overview of this newsgroup reveals that the
> > > majority of posts are related to anti-Microsoft topics and not to the
> > > official topic of the newsgroup, namely advocating the virtues of Linux.
> > >
> > > It's a well-known fact, that if you cannot really come up some good
> > > arguments for your case, then you can always fall back on hammering on
> > > your opponents weaknesses. Is that the case here? If it is, then I find
> > > it rather lame.
> > >
> > > Any damn fool can bash Microsoft ..... but try to put up a compelling
> > > case for the use of Linux, would be a more challenging task, at least
> > > for the majority of posters here.
> > >
> > > Mikkel
> > >
> > >
> > Tell me Mikkel,
> >
> > When it is Microsoft and its apologists that persist in bashing Linux
> > (hint: Halloween, Jim Allchin, Craig Mundie; do we see a pattern here?),
> > where in the seven Hells *are* we supposed to defend ourselves? Should we
> > troll comp.os.microsoft-nt.advocacy instead? From the persistent
> > appearance of Wintrolls in this forum, that would be our just revenge.
> > Since most of us keep the MS bashing to cola, I'd say it is a little rich
> > for you to take the high ground.
>
> You could try alt.destroy.microsoft or alt.microsoft.sucks for starters. I
> don't object to a bit of MS bashing now and then (it keeps the blood rolling
> after all), but if it gets to be the primary (if not sole) purpose of this
> group, then I think you could just as well hang out in the groups mentioned
> above. IMO, the best "defense" against the stuff you mention is to explain
> why Linux is good, and not why MS/Windows is bad. Besides, is it really
> necessary to "defend" against the mentioned drivel? Don't you think that
> most people realizes that whatever MS says about Open Source and Linux
> should be taken with a truckload of salt?
>
> > Now have a nice day, and don't come back until you got something relevant
> > to add to the discussion, instead of inviting even more anti-ms flames
> > with your inflammatory statements (hint: pot, kettle, black).
>
> Damn, you people are thin-skinned, aren't you? Out of God-knows-how-many
> knee-jerk-reflex flame postings I have received, only one (ONE) have
> bothered to post something akin to a Linux advocacy (thanks to Salvador
> Peralta). Get the point by now? With advocacy like this, you are not
> convincing anyone new, you are only preaching to the converted.
>
> Mikkel
If you want to find out what happens here, just stay in for a week or
two.
All you have to do is try the latest version of Linux out and then come
back in with either praises or curses. Do yourself a favor when you
do.... read up on Linux just as you would have to do with Windows.
--
V
------------------------------
From: kosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: MS Must be getting really desperate
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 17:05:36 -0600
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Their paid trolls are getting really desperate. This reminds me of the FUD
campaign against OS/2. You would think we were removing their ability to
choose which os they are using by the way they are attacking linux in this
newsgroup.
Honestly I don't give a damn if a windows user hates linux and doesn't want
to use it however I expect the same courtesy in return. Also I think it is
wrong that when you buy a new computer you end up paying the ms tax wether
you want to or not. Hell most places charge you for windows even if you
don't get windows on that machine because of the damn agreements they have
with ms.
Considering that even the SIIA thinks ms is in the wrong it looks like ms
will be going down but I expect them to spend a lot of time flailing around
before they die.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: MS pushing retailers to hide Linux?
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 23:09:52 GMT
Is Micosoft up to their old tricks again.
I went into a Best Buy store looking to get the new version of Linux.
The last I bought was Red Hat 6.1 and it was displayed prominently in the
"operating systems" section along with Mandrake, TurboLinux, and MacMillian
distros that took up 3 or 4 shelves next to displays of Windows and Mac Os'.
This time the OS section only contained the various Windows operating
systems, and I had to ask a clerk where the Linux products were. She stated
that "we keep them well hidden" and took me to the "computer books" section
where on a single bottom shelf was only the Suse distro for Linux.
I know this type of thing is a common business practice, particularly for
grocery stores, with cereals, canned foods, etc . . . so don't know if this
is necessarily illegal or not, but so MSish.
-Gil
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux books
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 23:10:54 GMT
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9d1p1p$rhs$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hello Advocates.
>
> A friend of mine has asked me for reccomendations (etc) for books on
> Linux. I've never really bothered with books much, so I thought I'd ask
> you guys what you found the best.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> -Ed
>
Anything, and I mean anything, by O'Reily press on the subject is worth the
money. Very well-written and informative books.
------------------------------
From: "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 19:09:20 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Doesn't bother me in the least....
>
> When you go seeking a fair wage for your abilities, which you and I know
> you are NOT getting where you are currently employed, your employer can
> type your name into Google and find the real, or not so real you,
> including the post you might have made after that college drinking
> party.
>
College was a long long time ago in a place far far away. At that time
the microprocessor had just been invented and Billy was nowhere in sight.
I wasn't surfing the web back then.
> BTW the Australian employees got back pay and benefits after you know
> who tried to screw them out of their jobs....
>
> How is "Manpower Associates" and "CDI" doing these days?
>
Who cares?
> Fired workers who get re-hired at half their salaries and poised in
> posistion to take YOUR job....
>
> What fools....
>
> Also the "company" is using vapor profits (declaring benefits as profit)
> and boosting their executive bonus's...
>
> So how was your 3 percent raise?
>
Sorry to disappoint you. but my work on Linux got me a much better raise
than that.
> I can send you the link offline if you wish...
>
> Ya' better start supporting the CWA and a union before it's too late.
>
I hate unions. Just someone else to tell you what to do. Besides there
never was any chance of the unions taking over exempt employees.
> flatfish
>
> P.S. Are YOU getting any of this money?
>
Yep
Gary
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Article: AOL in cahoots with Compaq, HP to derail WinXP, .NET?
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 16:13:22 -0700
Dave Martel wrote:
>
> On Sat, 05 May 2001 15:23:56 +0100, dw133
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Pete Goodwin wrote:
> >
> >> And replace it with what? The AOL desktop?
> >
> >Please don't say that, the thought sends shivers down my spine.
>
> AOL-XP?
HORRORRSSSS!!!
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux books
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 23:15:01 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> The How-To's are more than enough to keep you busy for several months
> or until you vomit, whichever comes first.
>
> flatfish
Your repartee needs work.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 02:08:31 +0200
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9d20om$sfq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <9_XI6.22452$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > An exploit is an exploit. Someone that allows security to lapse in
one
> > > area over the other is simply shifting priorities. This shows that
Red
> > > Hat and Linux in general tend to be more focused on remote exploits,
to
> > > the detriment of local exploits. Which means, that all it it takes is
> > > to get a local account, any local account to gain root access.
> > >
> > > A common technique some people use is to set up a web site you must
> > > create an account for. Often, people will create the same account and
> > > password they use on their local machine. Suddenly, you have an
account
> > > and password for the machine they logged in from, you gain root. Not
a
> > > big deal.
> > >
> > >
> > I get your point. I am just getting into stuff like this, but is this
not
> > a problem with UNIX standard security? Ie, the common problem that even
> > on a well protected machine, all it takes is one bug to give someone
root
> > privileges and all hell breaks loose?
> > Of course when I say local exploit, I mean someone actually sitting down
> > at the machine to be exploited. For obvious reasons, it is very hard to
> > *totally* lock down a machine this way, as giving someone physical
access
> > already implies some level of trust, whereas of course anyone accessing
> the
> > machine over a network is not to be trusted by default.
> > I might be very naive here, so please correct me if necessary.
>
> If you've access to a machine, you can hack it, period.
> Usually the easiest way is to take another HD and install the same OS on
it,
> thus you gain root privileges, allowing you to access anything on the HD,
That was meant to be, on the machine, not the HD.
> the rest is just a matter of importing stuff, which can be difficult, but
> much easier than if you'd to break through the security.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux disgusts me
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 16:18:49 -0700
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Sat, 5 May 2001 09:04:22 +0000 (UTC), John Smith
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >I installed Redhat 7.1 using the kde desktop.
> > >
> >
> > smart move.
> >
> > >
> > >Microsoft should take pity on you and offer free internships so that you
> can
> > >learn how to do things right the first time.
> > >
> >
> > The entire world knows that any Microsoft x.0 release is buggy crapware.
> > How is Microsoft going to teach anyone to do something right the first
> time?
>
> As if Linux is any better? KDE 2.0 was pretty unstable, and I was told by a
> KDE developer that 2.1 was far and above more stable.
Far more stable than Win98SE.
--
V
------------------------------
From: kosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS pushing retailers to hide Linux?
Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 17:13:56 -0600
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You should see compusa in boulder. They have a LOT of linux stuff.
Everything from the dists to firewalls apps etc. When a new dist version
comes out they usually have several pallettes of it around for the first
two weeks or so. They did this with both Redhat 7.0 and Mandrake 7.2 and
they have a bunch of Suse there also.
Some of the salesmen said they sell a lot of linux there.
The future is certainly looking brighter around here. Of course with both
sun and ibm nearbye it is easier to find a linux or unix job then to find
an ms job.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Is Micosoft up to their old tricks again.
>
> I went into a Best Buy store looking to get the new version of Linux.
>
> The last I bought was Red Hat 6.1 and it was displayed prominently in the
> "operating systems" section along with Mandrake, TurboLinux, and
> MacMillian distros that took up 3 or 4 shelves next to displays of Windows
> and Mac Os'.
>
> This time the OS section only contained the various Windows operating
> systems, and I had to ask a clerk where the Linux products were. She
> stated that "we keep them well hidden" and took me to the "computer books"
> section where on a single bottom shelf was only the Suse distro for Linux.
>
> I know this type of thing is a common business practice, particularly for
> grocery stores, with cereals, canned foods, etc . . . so don't know if
> this is necessarily illegal or not, but so MSish.
>
> -Gil
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux disgusts me
Date: Sat, 05 May 2001 16:20:21 -0700
John Smith wrote:
>
> I installed Redhat 7.1 using the kde desktop.
>
> WTF ? Illegible non anti-aliased fonts that require a magnifying glass to
> read ? WTF ?
>
> And free software / open source developers have the temerity to criticize
> Microsoft. Get fucking real ...
>
> At least Microsoft has developers that understand the rudimentary principles
> of user friendliness. Default fonts of readable size, anti-aliased, ...
>
> Microsoft should take pity on you and offer free internships so that you can
> learn how to do things right the first time.
>
> You bunch of losers,
>
> J
>
> --
> Posted from [196.2.33.11] by way of oe55.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.18.63]
> via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Do yourself a favor... go get some books on linux and read them just
like you did when you got windows.
Windows does not equate to Linux.
--
V
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
