Linux-Advocacy Digest #286, Volume #34 Mon, 7 May 01 08:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT (SoneoneElse)
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: the Boom, Boom department (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Linux books (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Linus responds... ("David Coto")
Re: Linus responds... ("David Coto")
Re: Shared library hell (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Linux disgusts me (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Tom Wilson")
Re: IE ("Michael Pye")
Cold feet or Reality Check? ("Tom Wilson")
Now push hard ("David Coto")
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Linux Advocacy (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Windows makes good coasters (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP (Johan Kullstam)
Re: Now push hard (pip)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("JS PL")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Mon, 07 May 2001 06:51:56 -0400
billwg wrote:
>
> Sort of. Microsoft lost the patent infringement case to Stac because the
> compression algorithm was judged to be an enforcable patent. Stac lost the
> reverse engineering suit because the Microsoft license Stac agreed to denied
> that right. So the parties were at an impasse. Microsoft had to license
> the Stac algorithm because a jillion copies of DOS 6.x were on the street
> and were using it and would have to be recalled. Stac had to settle because
> they could not use the system file interfaces to connect their Stacker
> product to DOS either. Both were effectively out of business until they
> could compromise.
>
Stac didnot settle. They won their case. You forget the part that M$
STOLE Stacs IP and leveraged their ownership of DOS to load the
compression algorithm in a more effective area. Stac reverse engineered
becasue M$ would give up the info. Now, which is more evil?
> Microsoft paid some big chunk of money up front and agreed to a payment
> schedule in exchange for allowing Stac to use the system interfaces and for
> a license to use the Stacker algorithm in DOS. Part of that was in the form
> of a purchase of Stac stock.
>
> Microsoft quickly changed to their own algorithm, too.
>
> "Steve Sheldon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9d4mhc$hvu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Stac may have a case; I've heard conflicting reports.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Stac won its lawsuit.
> >
> > My understanding is Microsoft countersued, and they settled out of court.
> >
> >
> >
> >
--
Rick
------------------------------
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: Mon, 07 May 2001 06:55:36 -0400
JS PL wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > > > > Then I suggest you are being sloppy with your accusations; you
> > > > > know full well that MS never excluded anyone. At their *worst*
> > > > > they want you to sell *their* product, whatever else you may sell.
> > > >
> > > > Then why were their OEM-licenses dependant upon NOT selling any
> > > > other vendor's OS?
> > >
> > > They weren't.
> > >
> > > Remember, not everything Max says is true. :D
> >
> > Then, try expalain what a per-processor license is.
>
> The per processor license simply required the OEM to pay a royalty to
> Microsoft for each computer it manufactured containing a particular
> microprocessor type during the term of the agreement. The minimum commitment
> provision allowed the OEM to receive a volume discount by committing to ship
> a designated number of computers. These agreements had obvious benefits for
> both the OEM and Microsoft. Microsoft did not, however, require any OEM to
> enter into a per processor license in order for the OEM to license Microsoft
> 's operating systems products. Rather, it was one of several licensing
> options made available to each OEM, and it was selected only by those OEMs
> that found it to be to their economic advantage. Indeed, the majority of
> Microsoft's license agreements for its operating systems were not per
> processor agreements.
AND... Microsft set the pricing so that it was almost impossible ot NOT
use per-processor licensing. And since vendors were already paying for
M$' OS, if they loaded another one, they ( and the customer) paid for
another license. And befor you start braying about percentages of
vendors, go do some researc of vendors and find out waht the percentage
of -shipping computers- they covered.
--
Rick
------------------------------
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: Mon, 07 May 2001 06:57:36 -0400
Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > 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.
>
> Or write for it because its' still very profitable to do so.
Yes, writing for Windows is very profitable, unless your product
threatens Microsoft.
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: SomeoneElse (SoneoneElse)
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 10:58:58 GMT
Reply-To: Truthteller
On Sun, 06 May 2001 20:21:32 GMT, T. Max Devlin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Atkinson, Tony Williams,
>>and Craig Whittenburg. The OMG was not even founded until 1989, and didn't
>>issue its first spec until 1991.
>
>For certain definitions of the term "existed" maybe. COM didn't exist
>until it was implemented (1990, with LOTS of flaws), if you're going to
>compare it to the OMG implementations of CORBA; the engineering leading
>up to these developments were also years in the making. I recall I
>first heard of CORBA in the late 1990, in fact, though I may be
>misremembering, as I haven't any way to fix the date I was reading the
>article. It seemed to be more well developed even at that time than
>Microsoft's COM. Then again, whether Microsoft's COM was developed, or
>whether it just grew on the monopoly like moss grows on a rock, is
>somewhat debatable.
>
>--
It just more funkenbush.
Remember what CORBA stands for?
Common ORB Architecture.
CORBA is not a technology, it is a specification for ORBs.
So that they can:
* Have a common interface. Making code more portable across ORBs.
* Interoperate. So if you have one orb on one machine, it can talk to
a different orb on a different machine ( or even the same machine ).
Before CORBA was even concieved, ORB technology was fairly well
developed.
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 23:01:08 -0700
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> >>>> 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. Poor flatty can't keep a thought in her head for 5
> >> minutes.
> > ^^^ its
>
> About the only thing she has stuck to for any length of time is the claim
> that she is female :-)
>
> >> -Ed
> > But Ed, I was being kind to SquishedBlowfish !
>
> dopefish, more like :)
Is flatfish female? I would have assumed that flatfish was a 14 year old
male with an extremely large chip on his sholder.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the Boom, Boom department
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 23:08:05 -0700
Darren Wyn Rees wrote:
>
> Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.os.linux.advocacy :
>
> >First of all, what is the "boom, boom department?".
>
> I thought everybody boom, boomed.
>
> >Second of all, I agree to a certain extent on the stupidity some distro's have of
> >including thousands of apps/games that are just re-interations of the
> >same thing.
>
> Hear, hear. Perhaps if the distro makers decided to showcase a couple
> of good games, instead of throwing in all the available chaff, one
> might be less unforgiving.
>
> >I've finally hung up my SuSE parade gear, and I have moved
> >back to Corel Linux, yes, I know, people will go, "it is not as flexible
> >as <distro>", however, for my purposes, it works fine a dandy, I also
> >have found I have less problems using Corel software (surprise,
> >surprise), such as Wordperfect and Corel Draw, the added benefit is that
> >it is debian based which gives me access to 1000's of useful, and no-so
> >useful files.
>
> Of all the popular distributions, SuSE is the worst afflicted
> as far as the 'let's package the kitchen sink with this distro'
> disease is concerned.
>
> >As for the comment regarding Linux games from Loki, I take issue with
> >that, I have used both Simcity 3000 and Civilisation Call to Power, and
> >they are right on par with their Windows counterpart.
>
> My opinion is that Loki's CTP is absolutely awful.
>
> >Conclusion from previous poster: A whining Wintrol with a hypothetical
> >senario based on an issue he has with Windows
>
> Linux distributions include games of a quality and fashion that hark
> back to personal computing from the mid eighties.
>
> It's a fact.
>
> Linux is not yet a credible games platform.
Not yet, however, OpenGL and OpenAL are both taking shape quickly.
Also, if you were playing these games with Xfree86 3.3.6, then yes, it
would be shit house, however, 4.03 is a milestone in terms of
performance etc when playing games.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux books
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 23:12:43 -0700
Terry Porter wrote:
>
> On Sun, 06 May 2001 22:54:48 -0700,
> Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> The How-To's are more than enough to keep you busy for several months
> >> or until you vomit, whichever comes first.
> >>
> >> flatfish
> >>
> > Remember Flatfish, you read the printouts, not eat them.
> HAHAHAHAHAH LOL!!!!!!
Remember Terry, Flatfish is "special", its not his fault that he is
"different"
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "David Coto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linus responds...
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 20:46:07 +0200
> This is not about IPR or freedom of thought or free source code or the
> discovery of the electron, or any of that.
That's the crucial point exactly, if Microsoft would have discovered the
electron, perhaps only Microsoft could install your electric supply.
------------------------------
From: "David Coto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linus responds...
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 20:49:06 +0200
> The point is for the end user, they do not care how something was build
> not how it works nor if it open source or closed source.
> The end users just care for one thing: Does it work for me? does it
> do the job I want? is it easy to use?
We're all end users, and I like to think that people do know how to thing
and that we are far more complex than a magnetic toy, we are able to think
in terms of more than "is it easy to use" or "does it work for me" ... we
are
even able to think about ethics or morality, or even can we dare to think
by ourselves instead of following a company thoughts if they can be so
called.
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Shared library hell
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 23:15:11 -0700
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> Perry Pip wrote:
>
> >>> And where is the functionality of LD_PRELOAD and LD_LIBRARY_PATH under
> >>> windows?? Those in a wrapper script will fix any linking problem.
> >>
> >> Simple. You put the DLL in the application directory.
> >> Hey presto, it loads.
> >
> > So then if you have multiple applications you end up with multiple
> > instances of the dll all over the place, completely defeating the
> > purpose of a shared library.
>
> Which is precisely what happens due to the problems I pointed out in my
> original post.
>
> --
> Pete
Pete, remember the Amiga libraries, located in the director lib, they
were small, logically named, such as fonts.library, which handled fonts
for example. No library problems what so ever. Maybe Microsoft should
incorporate this "revolutionary" way of thinking into their next OS?
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux disgusts me
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 23:19:40 -0700
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 06 May 2001
> [...]
> >When and if, Linux becomes the standard OS (a pipe dream at best), I
> >will use it.
>
> Linux already is the de facto standard OS, as far as I can tell, though
> neither you or I are using it, because of the illegal monopolization.
>
> >Chances are I will be long gone from this earth when that happens
> >though.
>
> You just think that when YOU use it, it becomes the standard. Just like
> Windows. Guffaw.
A concept our dear old friend flatfish still doesnot understand is that
the US is different to other countries. Also, the cost of Microsoft
software is cheaper, per-license in the US, than in New Zealand, another
driving factor for people in New Zealand to move to Linux/Unix.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[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: Mon, 07 May 2001 11:20:30 GMT
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<snip>
> > > MOst people are running Windows becasue of Microsoft' predatory
> > > anti-competitive behavior.
> >
> > Or write for it because its' still very profitable to do so.
>
> Yes, writing for Windows is very profitable, unless your product
> threatens Microsoft.
They do have a nasty habit of "embracing" such products. Very true.
------------------------------
From: "Michael Pye" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: IE
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 12:11:11 +0100
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> I really don't like the sound of that...
Why not exactly? Just saying you don't like it doesn't help much.
> You misunderstand and misrepresent the reality of the VHS/Betamax issue.
Possibly, I wasn't old enough at the time to understand what a video was,
but as far as I have learned, sony produced the technically higher standard
in Betamax, but it lost because the VHS standard became more widely adopted
because of it's wider development backing.
Now yes, there might have been issues with sony wanting to patent the
betamax tapes so other couldn't make them, but then they wouldn't have a
standard would they. AFAIK VHS was created by a group of companies opposed
to sony. Because of their numbers they defeated betamax by all pushing VHS
on their customers. However, as I said, I wasn't really around. Correct me
if I am wrong, because I would be interested.
Of course all most people remember of betamax is very very old tapes on very
old machines in fake wood effects which were used for educational purposes
and the tapes were completely knackered and videoed off the TV anyway. But
it was technically superior and smaller.
MP
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Cold feet or Reality Check?
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 11:25:40 GMT
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/cn/20010505/tc/microsoft_shelves_office_xp_subs
cription_plan_1.html
You be the judge...
------------------------------
From: "David Coto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Now push hard
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 01:17:08 +0200
Well, having used GNU/Linux since Slackware 1.0, I see
happy that in my company (about 500 persons) we are
leaving Windows for the desktop and changing to GNU/Linux,
that was already being used for all serving purposes.
With Microsoft XP age I think a lot of companies are
evaluating the change from Windows ... just push hard now and
make GNU/Linux win NOW !!
By the way, my company is using Starofice for desktop office,
and developing a Java program to substitute gestion one.
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 23:29:31 -0700
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> > She likes CDE under Sun better, but first she wants to try
> > Linux on her own machine. Half the things she wants to do is a PITA
>
> You can get CDE for Linux now, free of charge, IIRC.
>
> -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
You can buy it through the same company that sells xing, I think its
around $30, however, there is a freebie version called xfce which is a
very good take-off of CDE for Linux, and it is extremely stable.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Advocacy
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 23:34:14 -0700
>
> Trolling I see. What's the matter, invest too heavily in MS stock?
> Divest young man.
Just a small warning to the newbie investor, invest into old economy
stocks such as General Electric, Coca Cola and Pepsi. They are
reliable, long term investments into companies that actually make
money. To e-commerce wankers out there, the aim of a business is to
make as much money as possible, and clearly, that has been left out of
the puzzle with this big dot-con hype.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 07:45:40 -0400
James Philips wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >It's quite obvious that your experience is rather deficient.
>
> Thanks for reminding me why I avoid this newsgroup, I had almost forgotten
> how much I hate the attitude of the fanatical Linux advocates who post
> here.
Well, it's very obvious that your experience doesn't include any
up-to-date Linux systems...
Because the same pointy-clicky interface is there for users..
and then you've got the Unix core system, which is MUCH more consistant
than Windows (with it's dozens of "exceptions and exceptions to the
exceptions" to every rule).
>
> Maybe Linux would be a more successful and easy to use OS if so many fans
> weren't in denial about it's flaws.
Basing your argument on some release from 1994 doesn't get you any credibility.
>
> James
--
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.
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 23:49:08 -0700
John Travis wrote:
>
> And Steve Sheldon spoke unto us...:
> >I have had coasters due to bad media. Bought a package of 50 Sony discs
> >they worked fine, bought another package 50% of them coastered, bought
> >another package they worked fine. Even tried burning at single speed, and
> >those suckers coastered... pretty sure it was the media.
>
> I've been lucky media wise. I stuck with Imation discs for a long time, just
> becuase they never failed me. The last spindle I bought was a 100 pack of PNY
> 16X 800meg...cost...10 dollars (rebate ;-). Not a coaster in the bunch.
>
> jt
>
> Now if I could just remember to mail in the damn rebate!!!
I personally prefer using BASF branded CDR's, great quality, and have
never had a frisbie before.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 11:48:29 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Johan Kullstam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 6 May 2001
> 13:33:48
> > > > >That is one thing that frighten me about the GPL.
> > > > >There is already GPLed data, what happen when other things start to
> get
> > > GPL?
> >
> > i'm not a lawyer, but GPL has nothing to do with data.
>
> freedb.org, read COPYING
i visited <URL:http://freedb.org/> i could find no link called
"COPYING". nor was the word "copying" to be found anywhere on the
page. please be more specific.
> > > > Then the world becomes a better place.
> > >
> > > Really? Then why don't tell me how happy you would be when the credit
> card
> > > companies would publish *your* credit history, because of GPL?
> >
> > what planet do you live on? they already publish your credit history.
> > afaict it has nothing to do with the GPL.
>
> On the US, maybe, not where *I* live.
do you feel the GPL will change this?
--
J o h a n K u l l s t a m
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Don't Fear the Penguin!
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Now push hard
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 12:54:32 +0100
David Coto wrote:
>
> Well, having used GNU/Linux since Slackware 1.0, I see
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You are either a VERY brave man or one sick bunny! :)
> happy that in my company (about 500 persons) we are
> leaving Windows for the desktop and changing to GNU/Linux,
> that was already being used for all serving purposes.
>
> With Microsoft XP age I think a lot of companies are
> evaluating the change from Windows ... just push hard now and
> make GNU/Linux win NOW !!
May the penguin take hold (and may PAN turn into a useful newsreader so
that I don't use win32 netscape anymore)
> By the way, my company is using Starofice for desktop office,
> and developing a Java program to substitute gestion one.
How are you finding the MS-Conversions in Staroffice? Last time I used
it it still had quite a few errors (some subtle - some not), but I am
sure that this has improved? I am hopping that StarOffice will now
become a really good package now that it has opened up.
...And the use of Java is to be commended.
------------------------------
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: Mon, 7 May 2001 07:55:21 -0400
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> JS PL wrote:
> >
> > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > > > > > Then I suggest you are being sloppy with your accusations; you
> > > > > > know full well that MS never excluded anyone. At their *worst*
> > > > > > they want you to sell *their* product, whatever else you may
sell.
> > > > >
> > > > > Then why were their OEM-licenses dependant upon NOT selling any
> > > > > other vendor's OS?
> > > >
> > > > They weren't.
> > > >
> > > > Remember, not everything Max says is true. :D
> > >
> > > Then, try expalain what a per-processor license is.
> >
> > The per processor license simply required the OEM to pay a royalty to
> > Microsoft for each computer it manufactured containing a particular
> > microprocessor type during the term of the agreement. The minimum
commitment
> > provision allowed the OEM to receive a volume discount by committing to
ship
> > a designated number of computers. These agreements had obvious benefits
for
> > both the OEM and Microsoft. Microsoft did not, however, require any OEM
to
> > enter into a per processor license in order for the OEM to license
Microsoft
> > 's operating systems products. Rather, it was one of several licensing
> > options made available to each OEM, and it was selected only by those
OEMs
> > that found it to be to their economic advantage. Indeed, the majority of
> > Microsoft's license agreements for its operating systems were not per
> > processor agreements.
>
> AND... Microsft set the pricing so that it was almost impossible ot NOT
> use per-processor licensing. And since vendors were already paying for
> M$' OS, if they loaded another one, they ( and the customer) paid for
> another license. And befor you start braying about percentages of
> vendors, go do some researc of vendors and find out waht the percentage
> of -shipping computers- they covered.
Only 62% of total licences were ever sold under this type of licensing at
it's highest point. That doesn't translate into "nearly impossible".
That's LICENCES not VENDORS idiot.
During Microsoft's 1994 fiscal year - the final year in which it offered per
processor licenses - approximately 59% of MS-DOS units licensed by OEM
customers were covered by per processor licenses. In fiscal year 1993,
approximately 62% of MS-DOS units licensed by OEM customers were covered by
per processor licenses. The prior year, Microsoft's 1992 fiscal year,
approximately 51% of MS-DOS units licensed by OEMs were covered by per
processor licenses. Per processor licenses made up 27% in fiscal year 1991,
22% in fiscal year 1990 and smaller percentages in earlier years.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
