Linux-Advocacy Digest #248, Volume #34 Sun, 6 May 01 09:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Nomen Nescio)
Re: where's the linux performance? (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: A Windows enthusiasts take on Mundie's speech (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: A Windows enthusiasts take on Mundie's speech (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux disgusts me (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Gay germs? (Nomen Nescio)
Re: IBM Linux mainframe to displace NT, Sun, HP boxes at Venezuelan bank (Matthew
Gardiner)
Re: Apple is doing a good thing (Roy Culley)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("billwg")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("JS PL")
Re: To Aaron (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Lee Hollaar)
Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000? (Paul Floyd)
Re: IE ("Michael Pye")
Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing? ("Weevil")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Sun, 6 May 2001 13:10:06 +0200 (CEST)
aaron wrote:
> > John W. Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > :Matt Kennel wrote:
> > :>
> > :> 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.
> > :
> > :Yet another theory:
> > :
> > :The vast majority of human beings are bisexual, with most of them
> > :having a preference for one sex or the other.
>
> If your claim were true, then most bars, at the end of the night,
> would be the majority of men who failed to snag a women to hook
> up with each other and go home.
fucking hardcore
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: where's the linux performance?
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 23:11:24 -0700
> Forte runs on Java itself, so the performance of the JVM determines the
> performance of Forte. The Java engine and JIT compiler on Win* systems
> is actually faster than the Java engine on Linux systems. Maybe it's
> because Sun build a JVM for the Windows platform and didn't build a
> Linux version for the JVM (so it had to be made by a third party).
>
> Furthermore Windows is optimised to run on crappy hardware, while the
> original X-windows software is designed with mainframes in mind. The
> paradigma of X-Windows does not fit the use of a single machine as both
> server (called a client in X-Windows lingo) and desktop system.
>
> Nils
I'll just add my $NZ0.5 ($US0.2) worth. Yes that is correct, however,
these limitations are being addressed in the 4.x series of xfree86,
also, X11 is only a standard, hence, the X-Compliant SGI uses is a
custom one built from the ground up, around the SGI systems to take full
advantage of the hardware. Unfortunately, due to the Intel
fragmentation, there are many different variations of hardware, thus,
there can never be a 1:1 comparision between machines and OS's.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A Windows enthusiasts take on Mundie's speech
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 23:15:03 -0700
Adam Warner wrote:
>
> Paul Thurrott of WinInfo:
>
> http://www.wininformant.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=20985
>
> (when I wrote "'nuff said" the other day it was only because I was just
> posting the URL :-)
is that "Enthusiast" or "Slave"?
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A Windows enthusiasts take on Mundie's speech
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 23:18:54 -0700
Adam Warner wrote:
>
> Paul Thurrott of WinInfo:
>
> http://www.wininformant.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=20985
>
> (when I wrote "'nuff said" the other day it was only because I was just
> posting the URL :-)
Oh, just as a follow up, how can a GPL program fork? when all
modifications must be made public and handed back to the author. The
only time a program can fork is under the BSD license. BSD License, the
license Microsoft loves, because they can steal the code, re-jiggy it,
repackage it, and claim it as their own.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 13:25:48 +0100
>> No. The world is applications I want/need to use and even excluding DAW
>> ones,
> You said recently that apart from your audio apps, you only use **two**
> apps.
Don't be mean. Por flatty can't keep a thought in her head for 5 minutes.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 13:27:17 +0100
>>Consumers want instant gratification and Linux is way out in left field
>>as far as that is concerned.
>
> Which one is it --- superior end result, or instant gratification? I.e.
> LaTeX or WinWord?
Easy: LaTeX wind on both counts. Word can't give instant gratification.
he only instant thing it can give is a living nightmare.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux disgusts me
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 23:28:52 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On 06 May 2001 01:28:44 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
> wrote:
>
> >The other issue is that there are many stable and reliable
> >Linux WM's used every day by many Linux users.
> >
> >ie
> >Fvwm
> >Blackbox
> >IceWm
> >Windowmaker
> >Xfwm
> >
> >--
> >Kind Regards
> >Terry
>
> And then there is 95 percent of the rest of the world that don't.
I recall a Microsoft New Zealand statement saying they had a flat year,
where as Solnet, SUN's NZ subsidiary had at great year, growing 40% and
acquired a business in the process. That doesn't included the 50 or so
ISP's in New Zealand that use Linux for their proxy servers, web
servers, the large scale deployment of Linux for a hardware company
(approx. 2-3 months ago, Claire placed the normal xenophobic remark),
the NZ Army using it in a combat simulator, the NZ Stock Exchange
incorporating it to handle generic desktop tasks. Oh, and don't waste
your time coming to NZ if all you have is MSCE, because NZ predominantly
runs UNIX and Linux, get used to it FlatFish, it is the standard.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Nomen Nescio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Gay germs?
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 13:40:03 +0200 (CEST)
aaron wrote:
> Either that, or the numbers are cooked.
>
> For example, Kinsey's data on adolescent male homosexual activity
> were based on .... surveys of adult male homosexuals he found in
> gay bars in Indianapolis.
what were you asked?
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IBM Linux mainframe to displace NT, Sun, HP boxes at Venezuelan bank
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 23:41:52 -0700
> The return of the mainframe is one of the reasons that I like UNIX/Linux
> now, although I don't use it as a desktop OS. I work on an old mainframe
> at work (20 years or so), raised floor and all, but some of these newer
> IBM mainframes kick ass! I may not be prejudiced against MS users BUT I
> would say that I am prejudiced against anyone who says that Intel/AMD
> PC's are better than mainframe. Let them work on their little dinky
> glorified consoles, REAL men use mainframes! :^)
>
> Anyone else dig mainframes?
Said it 5 years ago, and I will say it again, NOTHING, I mean, NOTHING
will kill the mainframe, its here to stay. These ankle byters going on
about their nice Windows cluster, when real men use Mainframes with apps
written on consoles using COBOL, YEAH! thats what I call computing.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roy Culley)
Subject: Re: Apple is doing a good thing
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 12:29:30 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <kvXI6.22440$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9d187h$jqo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > That's why 98/ME will be dead this
>> > year, replaced by Windows XP.
>>
>> In exactly the same way they were replaced by Windows 2000.
>
> They weren't intended to be replaced by Windows 2000.
Yes they were. It was late in the day when Microsoft realised they
couldn't do it in a timely manner. Hence WinME to bring in some
income from the gullable why they hacked away at whistler to get it
ready for the desktop.
> MS will stop selling 9x based OS's after XP is released.
Of course they will to force adoption of XP. I think they are in
for a shock similar to the one they got with the poor adoption of
W2K. Things just don't look good for Microsoft do they?
------------------------------
From: "billwg" <[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: Sun, 06 May 2001 11:56:29 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Daniel Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 05 May 2001
> >
> >Saying this doesn't make it so. Until 1995, Microsoft
> >sold a version of Windows separate from DOS.
>
> The question is not whether they sold it (had it available). The
> question is how much people bought it. People weren't buying it, so MS
> forced it on them: this is documented by Microsoft's internal documents.
> Arguing against it just makes you look stupid.
>
This doesn't seem to gibe with the Caldera case theory for one thing. Their
assertion was that Microsoft used Windows to leverage MS-DOS, not vice-versa
as you seem to be saying.
------------------------------
From: "JS PL" <hi everybody!>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 07:59:51 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said "JS PL" <hi everybody!> in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 5 May
> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Said JS PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 4 May 2001 12:34:15 -0400;
> >> [...]
> >> >I don't care what the problem is. I prefer an OS that works well
without
> >all
> >> >the hours of configuration.
> >>
> >> I prefer an OS that works consistently without all the hours of
> >> reconfiguration.
> >
> >So do I, that's probably why I mainly use WINNT. And I assume it's why
you
> >ONLY use Win95. Because only a complete ass would use an OS that they
> >*don't* prefer.
>
> No, NT is just as bad. Worse, in some ways.
Sure it is, that's why everyone is running one or the other, and 3/1000 are
running Linux.
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To Aaron
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 00:20:09 -0700
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Free trade does not require international free trade. Its called "free
> > > trade for US firms within the US", and whether foreign companies get to
> > > participate is entirely up to the US, and whether we think it would
> > > benefit us; it is presumed if allowed that it would benefit the foreign
> > > company, which is why we use tariffs and subsidies rather than simple
> > > regulation. If it is worth their while to overcome this 'uneven playing
> > > field' (actually an even playing field, taking both the international
> > > capital and the international production into account) then they can
> > > benefit from the opportunity of free trade within the U.S.
> > >
> > > When it comes down to it, if you are unable to say "fuck everyone else"
> > > if it is necessary to avoid "fuck me", then you are simply not being
> > > honest, or reasonable.
> > >
> > > I'm not claiming that every aspect of the U.S. position on tariffs and
> > > subsidies is reasonable, or even honest. I'm merely pointing out that
> > > presuming otherwise is begging the question.
> > Just in the latest study, New Zealand is the third most liberal country,
> > in terms of business policy next to Hong Kong and Singapore. With that
> > outstanding stat, what are US business still picking their asses whilst
> > trying to maintain a presence in one of the over regulated countries in
> > the OECD.
>
> Shipping costs, and tarrifs.
Free trade agree meants with Singapore, Australia, all thirdworld
countries, very soon there will be China and many other asian coutries
added to the free trade list.
As for shipping, that will be off set by the low cost of labour.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lee Hollaar)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: 6 May 2001 12:26:07 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>Said Jay Maynard in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 5 May 2001 15:28:46 GMT;
>>Copyright is the right to prohibit others from making copies (plus some
>>other rights). The existence of profit changes the penalties, but not the
>>fact that it's a violation of law.
>
>There are no penalties, if you'd bother to notice. Copyright violations
>are entirely a civil matter: there is no criminal enforcement of
>copyright. It's not like anti-trust law, either, where they just don't
>often use criminal prosecutions, but the gov't becomes a civil
>complainant. There IS no such thing as a criminal copyright violation.
See 17 USC 506 (Criminal offenses) and 18 USC 2319 (Criminal infringement
of a copyright). I guess TMax didn't "bother to notice" those two sections
in the Copyright Act and criminal code.
For those who don't have a copy of the United States Code, here are the
URLs to the sections on the Copyright Office web site:
http://www.loc.gov/copyright/title17/92chap5.html#506
http://www.loc.gov/copyright/title17/92appvii.html
Note that there is a typo in the Copyright Office version of 17 USC 506(a)(2).
It should read "... during any 180-day period, OF 1 or more copies ..."
See Public Law 105-147, the "No Electronic Theft (NET) Act."
And lest TMax say that those sections pertain to criminal copyright
"infringements," and not criminal copyright "violations," note that
18 USC 2319 starts out "Whoever violates ..."
As I've said before, TMax just makes up this stuff as he goes along, and
doesn't take the time to see what is really in the Copyright Act.
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[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: Mon, 07 May 2001 00:26:56 -0700
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> 4-19-2001
> http://www.redhat.com/support/errata/RHSA-2001-052.html
>
> "A vulnerability in iptables "RELATED" connection tracking has been
> discovered. When using iptables to allow FTP "RELATED" connections
> through the firewall, carefully constructed PORT commands can open
> arbitrary holes in the firewall."
>
> 4-25-2001
> http://www.redhat.com/support/errata/RHSA-2001-059.html
>
> "kdesu created a world-readable temporary file to exchange authentication
> information and delete it shortly after. This can be abused by a local
> user to gain access to the X server and can result in a compromise of the
> account kdesu accesses."
>
> 4-25-2001
> http://www.redhat.com/support/errata/RHSA-2001-058.html
>
> "If any swap files were created during installation of Red Hat Linux 7.1
> (they were created during updates if the user requested it), they were
> world-readable, meaning every user could read data in the swap file(s),
> possibly including passwords."
>
> 4-20-2001
>
> http://www.redhat.com/support/errata/RHSA-2001-053.html
>
> "Previous gftp versions had a problem with format strings allowing malicious
> ftp servers to potentially execute code on the gftp user's system. "
>
> What exactly is your point?
>
That's Redhat, where is Debian? SuSE? Caldera? or are they smart enough
to release patches before the shit hits the fan?
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Floyd)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 12:27:00 GMT
On Sun, 06 May 2001 05:59:36 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said Bill Vermillion in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 5 May 2001
>
>>The Tandy Xenix [they did their own port on the 1.x] was what got
>>me hooked in the Unix world 18 years ago. No one ever considered
>>a Unix system a viable entity on a PC system in those days. It was
>>not until the '386 - where you could forget the 64K paragraph
>>limitations - that made *ix really workable on that architecture.
>
>Was it really and truly just this "64K paragraph limitation"? What is
>that?
Read up on the 286 and 386 memory architecture. The 286, in protected
mode, can address up to 16M in variable size pages, and the maximum page
size is 64K. The 386 and later use fixed 4K pages, and can address up to
4G (more if 16bit the 16bit selectors are used as well).
A bientot
Paul
--
Paul Floyd http://paulf.free.fr (for what it's worth)
Mail as URL, replace 1st . with @
If more is better, are double standards better than single ones?
------------------------------
From: "Michael Pye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: IE
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 13:31:38 +0100
"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> If I lived a few miles further north, I could get a cable modem and
> have a choice of phone company. But in general, I've found that the
> monopoly telcos in the US are about as responsive as BT is reputed to
> be.
That always seems to be the case with decent access. I cuts off just outside
the area of the people who really want it...
> This is where the dichotomy between what HTML was meant to be and what
> it is being used for comes in. The original idea was that the user was
> in control of presentation.
>
> I know you're talking about CSS, but CSS was an add-on to the original
> idea. Certainly fonts are one of those things where if you use them you
> need to know what the user has. But the HTTP protocol doesn't provide a
> way to get that information because in the original design the page was
> supposed to take what it was given, so to speak.
That's why I think there should be a complete overhaul of HTML and all it's
components and add-ons.
Perhaps such web sites should be written in a different language or subset
of XML, and purely functional pages written in HTML, be we need a new
language because of the many available which would do the job (pdf, doc,
flash etc) none are human readable or as compact as HTML. PDF files are a
ridiculous size for what they are because they record information in TOO
much detail and aren't flexible enough with screen size etc...
> By trying to make the web about presentation, you are fighting against
> fundamental assumptions of the system design. Even with CSS. And the
> thing is, I don't believe that the users really care that much. Some
> do, certainly, but two factors provide evidence that most do not:
>
> 1. The big growth of the web happened prior to CSS and sophisticated
> layout becoming widespread.
>
> 2. Things like Flash and PDF are not particularly popular with users.
That depends. Some people do want to see a good looking web, other don't.
The main reason flash is unpopular at the moment is because the files are
too large and the interpreter too slow. I hate it as well, but eventually,
when everybody has a broadband connection and at minimum a 1GHz processor
(I'm typing on a PR200), then it will become less hated and even appreciated
if used in the correct contexts and it is well designed.
Perhaps the inherent simplicity of HTML is one of it's major downfalls. With
it begin so easy to learn there are far too many poor or simply stupid
designers out there who can still inflict themselves on the world, and even
charge people to inflict their bad design on other people's sites... ;)
> Sure, users will notice if your site is unusually cool in some
> respect. But I don't think that influences their decision whether to
> come back very much.
It depends what type of site you are writing really...
> NS4 is pretty old too. Mozilla branched off, what, three years ago?
That's what annoys me in many ways. After producing something crap, netscape
just sat back for two and a half years and let their previous reputation
spread their piece of shit browser all round the web.
> There has not been much development of NS4 since. Mozilla does do most
> of what you are asking for (Bellsouth's web site even likes it), but
> since IE is bundled with Windows and AOL, not many Windows users are
> going to bother with the download.
Mozilla is great, but it is huge and slow. There really is no need for the
kind of power gobbling stuff that is in both NS6 and Mozilla. Opera is the
only reasonable one for working within a system spec and that costs money,
something a browser can't really afford to do in a market where EVERY
alternative is free...
> All of the newer browsers for non-Windows platforms (Mozilla
> derivatives, Opera, and Konqueror at least) have much better support
> for the features you desire. As people upgrade their systems NS4 will
> fade. I hardly use it any more except for sites that require plugins,
> which are still problematic on other browsers. In another year you
> won't have to worry about NS4 any longer.
What is this Konqueror? I would like to take a look as I still haven't found
an up to date browser I can run on my P200!
> Perhaps, but if your site has useful content then people will come back
> even if it is not flashy. OTOH, if the content is not useful then they
> won't. The web is not like a rack of magazines at the grocery store,
> each shouting "pick me up" to the customers walking by. It is viewed
> that way by lots of people, but I think if you study real users you
> will find that they don't use the web that way. They use it more like
> a library or a catalog and go looking for specific things.
But if we are talking about e-commerce sites here, they have to look and
function better than their competition too. Just like in the real world,
they have an image to project of themselves in order to impress clients.
> Sure. I am far more interested in the content than in the presentation
> of that content though. I think a lot of the commercial companies who
> have jumped into the web have fundamentally missed the point that it is
> all about the content and only peripherally about the presentation.
Perhaps is was, but things have moved on... I enjoy both parts of the web. I
like the purely functional side when all I want is a piece of information,
but people use the net for other reasons nowadays as well and I would feel
less comfortable buying from a company with a very simple basic site in just
the same way as I would feel uncomfortable having to walk through an alley
and upstairs to reach a little shop on the top floor of an old converted
house...
> Even e-commerce sites are not about flash or presentation. If I go to
> Amazon, I am already sold on buying something, usually something in
> particular. All they have to do is to not put me off in some way, they
> can't make me more likely to buy than I already am. I'm more likely to
> be put off by an overly elaborate site that doesn't work right or is
> slow than by one that has the "wrong" fonts.
Perhaps you are sold on something. But many people aren't as decisive. They
visit to browse the bargains, just as you might do in the high street.
Window shopping requires attractive windows and pretty wares for sale.
Amazon might see you as sold on something, but they also want you to pick up
something else, perhaps to make the P&P worth paying or one of those other
excuses we use on ourselves... That's why there are lists of related goods,
pictures everywhere of things that might interest you. They need to make a
sale the same as physical shops and supermarkets and marketing applies in
the same way.
> It is not fundamentally important that the site look to the user
> exactly as envisioned by the designer. It is important only that it be
> functional and not off-putting. HTML was intended to provide that, not
> precise layout. The add-ons help with layout but do not change the
> fundamental paradigm.
But many people want to provide precise layout and that is why HTML has
become so messed up...
> I was doing some field testing of a new product. Found one bug I have
> to fix, and one unfunded new requirement. I guess that's productive...
>
> I also redid my home page to get rid of the "one big table" 8->. Will
> get that posted soon.
He he. Good on you.
MP
------------------------------
From: "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux advocacy or Windows bashing?
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 12:41:26 GMT
Terry Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 05 May 2001 10:36:09 GMT, Weevil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Mikkel Elmholdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:9cui2m$nib$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > 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".
> Hahahah I also thought this!
>
> >
> > So I was right the first time. You're simply lying.
> Well,... whats a self confessed Windows advocate doing
> on COLA ?
>
They come here not to praise Windows, but to kill Linux. Or at least throw
stones.
Why? Well, if you ignore the possible ulterior motives (they're Microsoft
plants, they invested heavily in MS stock and think they're helping their
portfolios, etc.), there really are no rational reasons for Microsoft users
to do what they do here (and in OS2 groups, Mac groups, and so on).
If it were a normal, natural, human thing to do, you would see Mac users in
doing it in Linux groups, Linux users in OS2 groups, FreeBSD users in MS
groups...you'd see all sorts of bashing of every system by users of every
other system.
But you don't see any of that. All you see is MS users (employees? stock
owners?) invading all other groups and attacking relentlessly, and the
regulars in those groups defending their systems of choice.
The only conclusion that can be drawn from all this is that either the
wintrolls are not normal human beings, or they have ulterior, undisclosed
motives for doing what they do.
Personally, I think there are ulterior motives, but I can't rule out the
possibility that years of using Microsoft products exclusively has in rare
instances produced a subtle alteration in brain chemistry, somehow damaging
the victim's ability to make rational judgments.
--
Weevil
================================================================
"The obvious mathematical breakthrough [for breaking encryption schemes]
would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers."
-- Bill Gates
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 08:47:27 -0400
JS PL wrote:
>
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Said "JS PL" <hi everybody!> in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 5 May
> > >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> Said JS PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 4 May 2001 12:34:15 -0400;
> > >> [...]
> > >> >I don't care what the problem is. I prefer an OS that works well
> without
> > >all
> > >> >the hours of configuration.
> > >>
> > >> I prefer an OS that works consistently without all the hours of
> > >> reconfiguration.
> > >
> > >So do I, that's probably why I mainly use WINNT. And I assume it's why
> you
> > >ONLY use Win95. Because only a complete ass would use an OS that they
> > >*don't* prefer.
> >
> > No, NT is just as bad. Worse, in some ways.
>
> Sure it is, that's why everyone is running one or the other, and 3/1000 are
> running Linux.
MOst people are running Windows becasue of Microsoft' predatory
anti-competitive behavior.
--
Rick
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
