Linux-Advocacy Digest #349, Volume #34 Wed, 9 May 01 02:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS (GreyCloud)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (GreyCloud)
Re: the Boom, Boom department (GreyCloud)
Re: the Boom, Boom department (GreyCloud)
Re: the Boom, Boom department (GreyCloud)
Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Microsoft's move away from perpetual licensing proves that the (GreyCloud)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: ChromeLinuxT/ WebServer (GreyCloud)
Re: ChromeLinuxT/ WebServer (GreyCloud)
Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Casio brings Windows/Linux laptop to U.S. (jtnews)
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Les Mikesell")
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Double whammy cross-platform worm ("Jan Johanson")
Re: Why does Flatfoot feel so threatened? (Ray Chason)
Re: Windows makes good coasters ("Jan Johanson")
Re: Windows makes good coasters ("Jan Johanson")
Re: Windows makes good coasters ("Jan Johanson")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 21:00:47 -0700
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> GreyCloud wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > >
> > > GreyCloud wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dave Martel wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On 06 May 2001 01:07:58 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >Why not, 62 apps! :-
> > > > >
> > > > > Geez, no wonder MS is getting so worried. Their timing was WAY off on
> > > > > this one. It's far, far too late to stop the open-source movement.
> > > > >
> > > > > I've got this mental image of BG tied across the tracks desperately
> > > > > reciting his anti-linux mantra while a trainload of penguins bears
> > > > > down on him. Heh heh!
> > > >
> > > > I was hoping someday that the official linux mascot would be the
> > > > Seagull.
> > > > Visualize this: BG running hard for cover as a flock of Seagulls go on
> > > > a straffing run!
> > >
> > > Gould already did that with a flying dinosaur with IBM and DEC sales droids
> > > running for cover.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > V
> > >
> > > --
> > > Aaron R. Kulkis
> > > Unix Systems Engineer
> > > DNRC Minister of all I survey
> > > ICQ # 3056642
> > >
> >
> > Hehehe... Worked on the waterfront on swingshift... one night someone
> > yelled out "RUN!".. looked up and there were hundreds of seagulls
> > coming. Got into a bus stop and all you could hear was the constant
> > splattering of seagull shit.
> >
> > The reason I used the seagull is that they fly free. Another, is that
> > seagulls make a lot of racket and shit all over the place and is
> > protected by the government.
> >
>
> Beach pigeons are protected by the government???????
>
> What are we coming to?
>
> --
> 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.
Oh yeah! A shipyard worker back about 20 years ago fed a seagull part
of his sandwich spiked with chewing tobacco. The bird got real sick.
Someone saw this and reported it and the guy was fined $500. Another
pair went to the ocean on a survival hike ... got hungry and killed a
seagull. The park ranger seemed to have his radar horns up and jumped
all over them for killing the seagull... told them it was against the
federal laws to kill one. The only reason he didn't fine them was that
these two jokers actually ate the seagull... guys claimed that seagulls
don't taste good.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 21:08:35 -0700
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Dave Martel wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 08 May 2001 01:54:12 GMT, "Chad Myers"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >This is a common problem. I find many MS bashers like to bash
> > > >MS and all Windows because of the poor experience they've had with
> > > >Win9x.
> > >
> > > Plus all the MS operating systems that preceeded it, each of which I
> > > paid good money for only to find it was yet another poorly-designed
> > > piece of junk.
> > >
> > > >They seem to feel that Win2K is the same thing somehow. They've
> > > >obviously never used it and so they can't talk about it.
> > > >
> > > >You really should try Win2K. Microsoft got it right this time.
> >
> > Not quite, but they're making progress.
> >
> > > Sorry, 18 years of dealing with Microsoft has left a bad taste in my
> > > mouth. And my butt hurts.
> >
> > And Win2K still has some problems holding over from its legacy
> > application control model. It is still possible for one
> > app to lock up the system, although at least Win2K will eventually
> > respond enough to let you kill the offending app.
>
> That is not what is called lock up.
> Lock up is when you *can't* kill the offending app.
> Unless you spesifically limited the amount of resources the application can
> take beforehand, that is possible in any OS.
Unless you're using VMS that is. On every vms account creation default
limits are applied.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the Boom, Boom department
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 21:12:57 -0700
Darren Wyn Rees wrote:
>
> GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote :
>
> >Then why has Sony adopted Linux for their Playstation 2??
>
> <Netiquette>
>
> First, would you mind trimming your responses and investing
> a few nanoseconds of time as a courtesy to this newsgroup ?
>
> Thank you.
>
> </Netiquette minor flamage;>
>
> I'm fairly confident Sony has adopted Linux because Linux
> is a quality Operating System; however I don't see Sony Linux
> available from my regular suppliers of Linux distributions,
> and it still does not detract from the fact that Linux distributions
> are generally weak in the boom, boom department.
>
> --
> "S+M is outta the question, have you got a better suggestion
> I'm fed up of waving my right hand" - rat salad www.ratsalad.co.uk
You're in a linux advocacy group... what netiquette you'll find here is
rare.
I don't trim here to keep the context.
The so-called boom-boom dept. will keep increasing as more people hop
on.
Remember when IBM first produced the PC? People back then asked
"Where's the software?"
I knew very well that the software will eventually roll. You have to
recognize a good thing when you see it.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the Boom, Boom department
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 21:15:08 -0700
> Can we please stick to the facts at hand : Linux is not a gaming OS.
Using your own logic: neither is windows.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the Boom, Boom department
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 21:19:19 -0700
> So you remain under the illusion that Linux is a gamer's OS ?
Nope. Never had the urge to play games under Linux or Solaris.
I have seen commercial grade games for sale for linux os in several
stores here.
But I don't buy them for linux and I don't buy games for windows either.
If you really have to play games your best bet is to buy a game console.
Its cheaper.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature"
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 23:15:25 -0500
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said GreyCloud in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 07 May 2001 20:25:59
> [...]
> >Lets put it this way... if Eric used a 4-bit key and did everything he
> >says he would do, NSA would have it deciphered in less than a minute.
>
> The NSA? Sure, 'less than a minute' is accurate, but 'a few
> milliseconds' is more precise.
Sure. If you are so confident, i'll give you an encoded bit of data. I'll
give you a week to figure out what it is. It uses a 1 bit key, and the keys
value is 1.
The encoded data is (just the one line, not including carriage return):
2jhGjyD<qYwDgilj0sohkVuAy.
Hell, I'll even give you hints when you need them. Here's the first, it's
plain text words, but the values are not in ASCII.
So, show me how simple it is to crack. Hell, after a week, I'll even tell
you what the clear text is, and let's see if you can figure out a way to
recreate a second encoded text that is encoded using the exact same
algorithm. I'll bet you can't.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft's move away from perpetual licensing proves that the
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 21:23:58 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On 08 May 2001 15:10:21 -0600, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >
> >> Knowing how Microsoft thinks, and taking that into account, I suspect
> >> they are testing the waters to see how they can conjure up a way to
> >> "semi-open source" their products, have Open Source programming
> >> community maintain and upgrade the code, and of course have Microsoft
> >> some how, some way make all of the money off the entire operation with
> >> the programmers getting nothing.
> >>
> >> Just a thought......
> >
> >Perhaps they suddenly remembered why DOS was so popular (open
> >development, open hardware); and they kinda want to go back to their
> >cash cow, know it's futile, but think they can FUD their way out of a
> >hairy situation (again).
>
> We have debated long enough for you to know that I am certainly no MS
> fan..
> They have something up their sleeve...You watch and see :)
>
> Flatfish
:-) I don't think its the Ace of Spades tho.
I'm starting to read some rather scary stories on the net about XP and
licensing issues.
It's keeping me a long ways away from MS and also any new computer
purchases.
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[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: Tue, 8 May 2001 23:21:35 -0500
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9d9v6d$1sn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:iCZJ6.164$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:9d9jho$87a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >> You can access the device independent printer layer in Linux using
> > > >> (f)printfs. In windows, you have to use the GDI to get to the
device
> > > >> independent printer layer.
> > > >
> > > > Okay, haven't thought about that one. You can do the same on
Windows,
> I
> > > > believe, can't you?
> > >
> > > I don't think so. I thought you needed GDI calls.
> >
> > Only if you want to use the GDI's layout. You can send data out the
prn:
> > device all you want.
>
> That would be device-dependent, though.
> GDI isn't, which is why it's better to use it instead of going directly to
> the printer.
No. Accessing the printer by opening /dev/lpt1 is not device independant.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[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: Tue, 8 May 2001 23:23:04 -0500
"Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Tue, 8 May 2001 16:25:52 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >
> >Workplace OS was an actual product. I talked to the lead Workplace OS
> >developer at Comdex in 1993. He assured me it was a cool product, and
would
> >include such things as "personality modules" to allow it to run multiple
> >OS's simultaneously, among other things.
>
> What happened?
IBM canned it, same reason they canned OS/2 PPC.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ChromeLinuxT/ WebServer
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 21:39:15 -0700
Harison Phinizy wrote:
>
> If something is made for Linux doesn't it fall under the GPL... Therefore,
> it must be made available for free (at least the source) then how does this
> software avoid doing such?
>
> Just curious...
I purchased GNU Pro Tool Kit for $150 with the Source Code browser for
Linux.
Source was not included.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ChromeLinuxT/ WebServer
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 21:41:06 -0700
kosh wrote:
>
> Look at http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html it is a pretty simple license
> to read.
>
> It makes no such requirement about software. I can write software for linux
> and release it under any license I want. However if I use gpl code to write
> my software then I have to gpl my work or ask the author for some special
> deal. Using GPL tools has no affect on the license of the stuff you make.
>
> Harison Phinizy wrote:
>
> > If something is made for Linux doesn't it fall under the GPL... Therefore,
> > it must be made available for free (at least the source) then how does
> > this software avoid doing such?
> >
> > Just curious...
> >
> >
> >
It's as I thought. Sun releases a lot of GPLed code with source for
free or pay a small fee for the media. I have Sun libraries and GPL
libraries and both mix well.
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 23:38:09 -0500
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 7 May 2001
> > > [...]
> > > >COM existed before SOM as well.
> > > >
> > > >SOM was first introduced with OS/2 2.0, which came out in early 1992,
> > just
> > > >weeks before COM was officially launched in Windows 3.1. They were
> > > >contemporaries, created independantly at about the same time.
> > >
> > > Which is it? First you say that COM 'existed before SOM', and then
you
> > > say they were 'created at about the same time'. What besides the
donuts
> > > at the sock puppet briefings leads you to believe that MS didn't do
what
> > > they typically do, and just "steal IBM's ideas", implementing their
own
> > > technology more as vaporware than anything else, to scare off the
> > > competition? You know, like the way they stole pen computing from Go?
> >
> > I can no longer find the reference, but the basic workings of COM were
> > developed in 1988, however, they didn't at the time know what to do with
it.
> > In 1990, when they began work on Windows 3.1, that work was put to use
to
> > make OLE 2. In other words, COM existed before OLE 2, it had to, since
OLE
> > was based on COM.
>
> Why did they develop COM if they didn't know what to do with it??
> I have the Windows Software Development kit and docs. Copyrighted
> 1987-1992.
> No where do I find any mention of COM.
As I said, it was released until they released OLE 2 in 1992 (the same time
IBM released SOM).
COM was not originally marketed as a stand-alone technology, it was only
marketed as OLE 2. In 1994, they actually formally released COM as a
seperate technology (then called Common Object Model, later changed to
Component Object Model).
------------------------------
From: jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Casio brings Windows/Linux laptop to U.S.
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 04:55:59 GMT
>From CNET!
This is the first time I've seen a major
computer manufacturer actually bundle
Linux along with Windows!
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1006-200-5865626.html?tag=mn_hd
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 05:05:37 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9d8s8i$41$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > > Not really, it's called Linux.
> >
> > Huh? Linux presents the same API as unix has since at least the early
> > 80's and will run most unix programs with just a recompile of the
> > same source code. It is Microsoft that has refused to follow that
> > working standard and given us the never-ending API-of-the-month
> > to follow without ever getting it right - hence the yearly promises
> > that the upcoming 'next' version will finally do what they have been
> > promising for years.
>
> What *have* they been promising for years?
There was the 'better unix than unix' claim that no one took seriously
when they started down the multiuser road, but the real lie has always
been about how the Win32 api was supposed to end the need for
different versions of everything, and how in the next version there
would only be one version...
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 05:14:33 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9d84g5$r4u$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> > DOSEMU is in fact very good at running DOS apps under Linux, although
> > you have to configure it to permit the level of hardware access you
> > need. Commercial DOS-under-unix versions were around long before
> > dos-under-winNT or Win9x existed.
>
> How good? That is the question.
> Again, we are talking about needing 99% success here, and ease of
> configuration.
The question is where to position the tradeoff between a stable
system's need to control access to the hardware and DOS programs'
need to access hardware directly. Win9x doesn't bother trying.
DOSEMU tries but lets you override it with configuration settings.
> Can I run DOS games on Linux? (MK3 is a good example)
Probably, if you give it direct access to at least the video memory.
> That Win9x is nearly compatible with DOS was one of the big selling
points.
> I don't think that you can do that on NT, not to the level that MS needed.
The real problem was that MDOS did not contain usable device drivers
that a real operating system could emulate. Programs were forced to
access hardware directly. Who sold that scheme to us?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Double whammy cross-platform worm
Date: 9 May 2001 00:15:29 -0500
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> A Solaris worm that defaces IIS Web server pages:
>
> http://www.computerworld.com/cwi/story/0,1199,NAV47_STO60354,00.html
To the uneducated blindly hating, lets all read along together eh?
"CERT said the worm enters a Solaris system by using a 2-year-old buffer
overflow vulnerability and then targets IIS-based Web servers via a security
hole that was uncovered seven months ago. Software patches that are supposed
to fix the problems have long been available from both Sun and Microsoft. "
Hmm... so this "new" worm uses a 2 year old Solaris vulnerability combined
with a 7 month old IIS vulnerability both of which have LONG had a complete
fix available for.
So, it's not ANY suprise at all that we also read:
"Denis Zenkin, a spokesman at Moscow-based antivirus software vendor
Kaspersky Lab International Ltd., today said he wasn't aware of any
incidents involving the sadmind/IIS worm. The worm could turn out to be
"merely another entry in CERT's virus encyclopedia," he added. "
And equally it's no surprise that the blindly anti-MS haters simply see MS
mentioned in some shady light and immediate dispatch what little brains they
have left to out mongolia and announce this worm as if it were some sign of
a MS weakness...
weird...
how this is even news suprises me... I would expect The Register to run this
sort of crap...
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why does Flatfoot feel so threatened?
Date: Wed, 09 May 2001 05:15:57 -0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
>I'm all for that and I have absolutely nothing against OpenSource.
>What bothers me is the zealot "Linux is better because........"
>approach.
Yes, the zealots do us no good. Chad Everett: If you're reading this,
and you see yourself in these words, there's a reason for that.
>MS, like Apple made some choices based upon what they believed the
>market wanted. The object was to make the pc easier and more friendly
>to use and appeal to the majority of the user base. Running batch
>files/jobs just isn't something the average person does. In fact most
>typical users don't even multi-task, they task switch.
Yes, GUI has its place. I can't imagine a modern word processor
using the console -- how would you display the fonts? And nobody
would batch a word processor in the sense that I have in mind, though
a few do some clever things with the macro features in Office.
But the command line has its place as well; it is anything but
obsolete. Batching can be (and often is) something as simple as
setting up a .BAT file to run several commands in sequence, so you
can switch away and play Minesweeper until it's done. Also, nothing
beats the console for portability; no two GUIs are done nearly the
same way, but a console program can usually port with just a
recompile.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: 9 May 2001 00:17:03 -0500
"Peter Köhlmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Jan Johanson wrote:
>
> > It continues to amaze me that the ONLY people having these sorts of
> > absolute failures under Windows are linux users.
> >
> > Are linux users that univerally inadept at running Windows?
> >
> > I haven't had a bad CD since the last time I had a 2x write speed burner
> > with 256 Kb buffer under Win95.
> >
> > Your system has to be so broken to fail a burn on a current gen burner -
> > AND with the latest Burn-Proof technology people like Lite-on and
> > Plextor use, it's literally impossible to fail the burn. You can pause
> > the entire system with the pause key and the buffer can go to 0% for an
> > hour and then resume and continue burning the CD flawlessly.
> >
> > Of course, I'm sure this support isn't in linux yet...
> >
> > Really people - at least learn how to setup and use an OS before
> > attempting to disparage it.
> >
>
> Jan at his best, dumb and without any clue whatsoever.
> Did you ever think that the overwhelmng majority of these linux-users did
> use windows before they switched or are still using it today in addition
> to linux?
I considered it but you are obviously too dumb and entirely clueless about
what I wrote. Sure these linux users used windows before switching. It's
these same lusers that couldn't make windows work for them that I'm talking
about. I mean, how stupid does one have to be to fail to get Windows running
right? My child runs it, children in 2nd grade install it successfully. My
mother has installed it and used it successfully...
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: 9 May 2001 00:18:03 -0500
"surrender" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:GsDJ6.9808$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <3af6917d$0$12278$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jan Johanson"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote something like:
>
> > It continues to amaze me that the ONLY people having these sorts of
> > absolute failures under Windows are linux users.
> >
> > Are linux users that univerally inadept at running Windows?
> >
> > I haven't had a bad CD since the last time I had a 2x write speed burner
> > with 256 Kb buffer under Win95.
> >
> > Your system has to be so broken to fail a burn on a current gen burner -
> > AND with the latest Burn-Proof technology people like Lite-on and
> > Plextor use, it's literally impossible to fail the burn. You can pause
> > the entire system with the pause key and the buffer can go to 0% for an
> > hour and then resume and continue burning the CD flawlessly.
> >
> > Of course, I'm sure this support isn't in linux yet...
> >
> Wrong!
> We have had this discussion on cola already.
> Purnproof was even available in linux before it was in windows IIRC...
Amazing how that could be possible given that burnproof doesn't require OS
support to operate - I was baiting and I see it worked...
:)
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: 9 May 2001 00:21:02 -0500
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9d88se$b5t$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Your system has to be so broken to fail a burn on a current gen burner -
> > AND with the latest Burn-Proof technology people like Lite-on and
> > Plextor use, it's literally impossible to fail the burn. You can pause
> > the entire system with the pause key and the buffer can go to 0% for an
> > hour and then resume and continue burning the CD flawlessly.
> >
> > Of course, I'm sure this support isn't in linux yet...
>
> But then you're stupid, aren't you.
>
Wow - that was really intelligent and quit an awesome comeback. Did you
consider other classics like: "I know you are but what am I?" and "I'm
rubber and you're glue, anything you say bounces off me and sticks to you"
And you go to university? I pray for our future generations, may they not be
unix-cursed....
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
