Linux-Advocacy Digest #435, Volume #34 Fri, 11 May 01 21:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: The Microsoft PATH. (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Terry Porter)
Re: Microsoft's move away from perpetual licensing proves that the (GreyCloud)
Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux still not ready for home use. (Bloody Viking)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Terry Porter)
Examples of Linux and Open Source in community development and public sector
projects? ("Todd, Graham")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Paul Colquhoun)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Linux Users...Why? (Terry Porter)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux still not ready for home use. (Bloody Viking)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Ray Fischer)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (mlw)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Double whammy cross-platform worm (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Microsoft PATH.
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 16:49:35 -0700
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > We are tho,... (ashamed) we could do magnitudes better than this.
> > > > The original Amiga was developed by the orignial team from Atari.
> > >
> > > Not true. The Amiga was developed by a group of people, only one or two
> of
> > > them was from Atari (Well, Jay Minor created the chips for Atari, don't
> know
> > > if he actually worked for them), while others worked for HP and other
> > > companies.
> > >
> > > > Their mobo design was very advanced for the price compared to the
> Intel
> > > > boxes of that day. If Amiga had better management we would be seeing
> > > > something equivalent to an SGI box or better. But, such that it is...
> > >
> > > It also had many limitations, for instance, serial ports were very
> > > unreliable do to their low priority over other things like the video
> > > display. This made it difficult to do reliable MIDI without an add-on
> > > serial card.
> >
> > I always reset the priority on these items.
>
> And just exactly how did you do this? You ripped the paula chip apart and
> rewired it's microcircuits? The interrupt controller is a part of the
> custom chipset, and not something you can change.
You're starting to sound dumber every post. This part is utter bullshit
from your perspective. All interrupt controllers can be reprogrammed or
have priorities changed.
Especially the Amigas chipset.
>
> Therefore, you are lying.
No, not lying... you can set the various process priorities in the
startup script that the amiga used during that time.
I don't think you even had an Amiga... you've only shown that you've
read the PC tabloids and believed in their BS.
>
> > Actually, I've never seen
> > better animation better than the Amiga in its days. I have read from
> > various magazines of that era, that the Atari team (originals) were very
> > much involved in the hardware side...
>
> Only Jay Minor worked for Atari, and even then I think he simply contracted
> and was not an employee.
>
> > the OS was a Cambridge University design.
>
> No, it wasn't. It was designed by R.J Mical and Carl Sassenrath primarily.
That's not what is in the OS developers book. It began as a university
project.
>
> > A very compact OS! The best I've ever seen to fit in under 1
> > Mb of ram.
>
> It was indeed very good, but it also lacked many very important features,
> like Virtual memory, Memory protection, and isolated process space.
That is why I bought the A3000. It had a hardware memory management
unit.
Remember it was the Amiga OS vs DOS at that time.
>
> > The serial port I've never used... as a matter of use, the internet
> > wasn't there for the average user to use modems then. I never used a
> > modem for it then... at the time I was more interested in the CPU
> > architecture to program.
>
> Apart from what you could find at your local Amiga shop, about the only way
> to find software was to get a modem and call BBS's. I'd say you are an
> exception, almost all Amiga owners I knew had modems.
>
> > The graphics were great during that time as
> > well as it could do the best animation of its time. The basic
> > interpreter from Microsoft was better than the interpreter for Intel.
>
> You're not aware that Microsoft wrote the Basic interpreter for it?
Whats the matter, can't you read?? I just said it was a better
interpreter than the same one that they wrote for the intel platforms.
>
> > Amigas' problems were from management! They should have stayed with
> > what they could do best. The developers of the Amiga may have well been
> > from other companies, but Atari sticks out far more in my mind than the
> > rest.
>
> Atari had nothing to do with the Amiga, other than loaning them money. When
> the time came to collect on the loan, Jack Tramiel was going to absorb the
> Amiga but Commodore bailed them out, saving them from being owned by Atari.
No... wrong again. A lot of the original Atari developers (Hardware)
went over to the original Amiga... later Commodore bought out Amiga.
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 11 May 2001 23:40:20 GMT
On Fri, 11 May 2001 21:44:18 GMT,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Terry Porter wrote:
>
>>> If they're bad mouthing Windows and praising Linux, then why are they
>>> still using Windows? That sounds to me like hypocracy.
>>
>> It's not tho.
>
> If they say Windows is crap and still use it, then it's hypocracy (sp?).
No it isn't.
>
>> Some people have to use Windos, they don't want to, but for
>> whatever reason, they must. The bulk of Linux advocates,
>> fall into this category, in my observation.
>
> Like Charlie, who maintains NT servers but badmouths them at every
> opportunity.
He uses it, he knows its faults.
> When asked why he doesn't leave and get a job in Linux, no
> answer.
This is another thread, and has many possible answers.
>
>> This places them in a ideal position to be critical of
>> the thinks that they don't like about Windos.
>
> Excuses! Excuses!
Hahahah!
>
>> It's interesting how either camp (Windos or Linux) jump
>> to claims of hypocracy or Trollism, when their OS is under
>> attack.
>
> I get called "shithead" or "troll" the moment I criticise Linux.
Notif your critisism is well thought thru and correct!
> It appears
> to me Linux has become a sacred cow.
All OS's are sacred cows.
>
>> Naturally, informed and intelligent critisism of Linux, by
>> Linux advocates is welcome here also.
>
> But be ready to be called names and such!
Try critisising Windows in a Windows advocacy group Pete,
use Linux to post with, let us know how you go?
>
>> I suppose if I posted to a Windows advocacy group
>> (something i've never done btw), then I'd be a
>> Linuxtroll, especially if I used Windows to post
>> anti Windows stuff.
>>
>> On the other hand, if I used Windows to post
>> pro Linux stuff on COLA, and anti Windows stuff
>> on COLA, then I'd simply be a Linux advocate.
>
> Huh?
What part dont you follow ?
>
>> I fail to see how anyone can accuse Max of being
>> a hypocrit.
>
> I just did.
And I fail to see how you can do so.
>
> --
> Pete
>
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft's move away from perpetual licensing proves that the
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 16:51:04 -0700
Flacco wrote:
>
> > Even British Columbia is making cooing
> > sounds to Gates to move Microsoft up there if the DOJ gets its ways.
>
> But, gee, wouldn't that be "unamerican?"
Hahahah!!! Gee... I think it would be at that. :-)
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 17:01:59 -0700
Ketil Z Malde wrote:
>
> GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > > The difference is that contributing back to BSD-licensed software
> > > depends on the good will and generosity of the company that uses this
> > > software. With GPL, its no longer voluntary - if you ship, you have
> > > to share.
>
> > Tell that to Cygnus. I spent $150 for GNU Pro Tool kit and very little
> > was mentioned of the GPL. No source, just a copyright notice.
>
> If Cygnus is breaking the GPL, I suggest you talk to FSF and RMS - he
> might want to sue them, at least he has indicated so in the past. It
> would be very interesting to get a legal affirmation/denial of the
> validity of the GPL.
>
> -kzm
> --
> If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
That's what I was always waiting to see. So far I haven't seen any
lawsuits over the GPL that I'm aware of.
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Subject: Re: Linux still not ready for home use.
Date: 12 May 2001 00:04:32 GMT
Chaparral ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: We can all say what we want about how Windows sucks and that Linux is the
: end-all-be-all, but after trying almost every Linux version to date, the
: bottom line folks is that Mr Gates has made operating a home computer easy
: enough for my great uncle to run. The Penguin still doesnt come close!
[about servers snipped]
To a huge extent yes you are right. Depends on the home user though. Some
Linux fans DO use it at home, and I'm one of them. I admit that for MOST home
users, Linux doesn't work out. I'm willing to mess with it to make it work,
but not most home users. The reinstall CD that comes with computers makes
things "easy" to fix problems when apps fuck up each others' .DLL files.
Why does _this_ home user use Linux? Check it out:
1: You can use old equipment, which can be cheap.
2: Once configured, it runs!
3: I don't need the latest office app, a thing that kills Linux on the normal
desktop.
4: If I want to code a specialty programme, the compiler comes as standard
equipment, not a costly add-on. Great way to learn C!
5: It's freeware in every sense of the word. No copyright bullshit.
6: You CAN find wierd apps that others have coded.
7: Sure don't have to worry about a landlord snooping on my computer. Besides
the password thing, he wouldn't know what to do!
8: You can customise it all you want.
9: By not needing the fastest damn CPU, it actually saves energy!
10: You don't have to upgrade every 18 months.
--
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 11 May 2001 23:43:08 GMT
On Fri, 11 May 2001 21:50:19 GMT,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> T. Max Devlin wrote:
>
>>>OK, why are you using a Windows application (which you despise?) instead
>>>of a Linux equivalent (which you think is wonderful?).
>>
>> It's more convenient to use Windows than to avoid Windows, and I already
>> paid for it (and Agent) long ago. That doesn't make it reliable or
>> stable.
>
> But if Windows is _so_ bad, why use it at all? If you think it's "monopoly
> crapware" surely you cannot even touch it?
Perhaps Max has logical reasons to use Windowsat the moment?
>
> Either that, or you're a hypocrit.
Nonsense.
>
> --
> Pete
>
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 10:44:44 -0400
From: "Todd, Graham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Examples of Linux and Open Source in community development and public sector
projects?
Hello everyone,
Forgive my intrustion in this group if this posting is inappropriate.
This article is about a potential opportunity for advocacy more than it
is about advocacy itself.
We are a small government program that is collecting information on
innovative uses of information technology in the community development
sector specifically and in the public sector generally: especially in
the context of smaller municipalities.
I am interested in hearing about examples of open source or free
software being deployed in small to medium sized projects in these
areas. There are several examples of this on our site (not all Open
Source by any means) but we need to find more.
Look at:
http://smartcommunities.ic.gc.ca/toolkit/toolkit_e.asp
under "Infrastructure".
There is also an "Inventory" section where we are trying to gather
examples for use by our target audience of community leaders, and small
public sector organisations.
http://smartcommunities.ic.gc.ca/inventory/smartSolutions_e.asp
We are especially interested in the use of these technologies in the
area of service to the public - understood very broadly (anything from
kiosks, FTP sites, documentation libraries, etc. to full blown
interactive applications). Rather than strict implementation details
references to the projects would be more useful (reply by e-mail if you
wish). If any of you are developpers and are willing to refer us to
examples of your work in these areas visit the site for contact details.
There may even be some market development opportunities that will appear
on our site in the future (mostly for local Canadian firms) so if you'd
like to stay informed please subscribe to our mailing list.
CAVEAT:
Since this is an advocacy group I should warn you in advance that the
above referenced site uses ASP for display and runs on NT (mea culpa)
... but hey it is developped using a really cool java servlet framework
that runs on Linux using Apache's java extensions. ;-)
Regards,
--
G. Todd
Project Officer, Industry Canada
Smart Communities/Collectivités ingénieuses
http://smartcommunities.ic.gc.ca/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Colquhoun)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 00:10:02 GMT
On Fri, 11 May 2001 07:57:44 -0400, JS PL <hieverybody!> wrote:
|
|"Paul Colquhoun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
|news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
|> On Fri, 11 May 2001 01:07:57 -0400, JS PL <hieverybody!> wrote:
|> |
|> |"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
|> |
|> |> Suddenly we need to qualify what is "possible" and what is not? Way to
|> |> go metaphysical, dude. Go look up the word "unfalsifiable" in a really
|> |> big dictionary, OK?
|> |
|> |No such word (go figure) it looks like it's just another word you made
|up.
|> |But then it gave me a huge list of suggestions begining in "un". I
|clicked
|> |on "unbalanced" and there was a picture of you. tee hee..
|>
|>
|> http://ucsub.colorado.edu/~earl/phil1400/falsificgroupsSp00.html
|
|Too bad that's not the word in question.
You were questioning the existance of "unfalsifiable" as a word.
That link is a discussion of the word as it is used.
What word *are* you arguing about?
--
Reverend Paul Colquhoun, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Universal Life Church http://andor.dropbear.id.au/~paulcol
-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-
xenaphobia: The fear of being beaten to a pulp by
a leather-clad, New Zealand woman.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <Don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 15:12:31 +0200
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > AIX run on 12 x 600MHz RS64-III
> > Win2K & Linux run 8 x 700MHz Pentium III Xeon
> >
> > Conciderring that I've been told over & over that PPC CPU are twice as
fast
> > as Intel counterparts, I would think that the AIX should've been much
> > faster.
>
> I would expect the 12 x system to handle much larger data loads than the
> 8 x intels.
Yes, then why *didn't* it? Either it was seriously misconfigured, which I
don't belive in, or AIX is horribly inefficent.
Of course, there are inefficencies in SMB enviroments, maybe PPC suffer from
this more than Intel?
Anyone can fill in some details about it?
Why didn't the AIX scale?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux Users...Why?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 11 May 2001 23:47:47 GMT
On Fri, 11 May 2001 02:43:47 -0700, GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I used a VAX and Tektronix dedicated computers and software.
> Also used my common sense and some old fashioned math to figure things
> out.
> But the results of getting it right were rewards enuf!
Amen. I just loved it, manufacturing can be sheer bliss, when everything
is working to plan, and the money is rolling in :)
>
> --
> V
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[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: Fri, 11 May 2001 17:15:53 -0700
Daniel Johnson wrote:
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > A superb job! As I've pointed out earlier, in the DOS days the
> > interrupt routines were just that... interrupts. No where in the IBM
> > technical reference manual are any words "API" found.
>
> Certainly. That particular TLA hadn't been invented yet,
> had it?
>
> It is, I think, still reasonable for us to retroactively dub
> what DOS has as an "API". That is, it is reasonable
> to do so if it would be called one, were it released today.
>
> It will be hard for us to discuss this if we have to avoid
> the use of anachronisitic terminology; the terms change
> so fast.
>
> Consider that what the Macintosh had wasn't called an
> "API" either. They called it a "toolbox" instead.
Sounds good to me... As long as everybody agrees on the new words and
its meanings, I'll accept the API definition. As I've posted elsewhere,
I'm retired so its up to you young bucks to carry the torch.
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Subject: Re: Linux still not ready for home use.
Date: 12 May 2001 00:20:27 GMT
Bobby D. Bryant ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Interesting. I'm running Linux, and there's not a command prompt visible
: anywhere on my screen.
That's no fun! (: I use the command line all the time, and I like it that way.
That illustrates yet another thing about Linux. You can choose. A CLI and GUI
have their places, and neither can do EVERYTHING equally well.
--
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray Fischer)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 00:34:08 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Gay-male sex leads to AIDS...especially when a condom breaks.
No, it doesn't. Sex is how AIDS is transmitted, but sex alone
does not lead to AIDS any more than masturbation leads to hairy
palms.
--
Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] into you -- Nietzsche
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 20:43:54 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Jan Johanson wrote:
> > >
> > > "Donn Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Jan Johanson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Is there really any doubt that W2K rox the house?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, because unix systems stay up longer. Remember the "awesome" MTTF
> > > > that Windows 2000 exhibits? LOL.
> > >
> > > Yes, I do. And W2K stays up every bit as long as unix systems.I know you
> > > won't admit it or can't imagine it but that's your problem not ours.
> > Why does Microsoft rely so heavily on clustering technology? when you
> > can get a big iron like a SunFire w/ 16 x Sparc III CPUS, or an z900
> > mainframe that can stay up for years, requiring little or no
> > maintainance. I would be quite interested in a Windows 2000 Server vs.
> > SUN Sunfire midframe, without clustering technology, and see the uptimes
> > of them.
>
> Can't speak of uptime, because it's usually to expensive (and long) to
> benchmark those.
> But according to TCP.ORG, in the unclustered category, Win2K win on
> price/performance.
> On unclustered/clustered category, Win2K wins *both* price/performance &
> performance.
If I've said it once, I've said it a hundred times.
TPC is not a universal benchmark. People must be paying members to submit
results. Because of this only certain configurations ever get listed, and thus
is not usable as a fair and equal benchmark.
Second, the OS has little to do with TPC results. It is mostly database and
configuration.
TPC results have no place in an OS discussion.
--
I'm not offering myself as an example; every life evolves by its own laws.
========================
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
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: Fri, 11 May 2001 20:41:26 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> > > No, VMWare is my example of loading another OS. What Mac OSX does.
> > > Cgywin or Services for UNIX provides a *copatability layer*, this mean
> that
> > > you don't have another fscking OS beside the one that you already have.
> > >
> >
> > Except that with VMWare is an app that lets you run a second OS UNDER
> > the one you are already running. Just like MacOS X does.
>
> Read carefully, VMware does what Mac OS X does, *bad idea*.
> A better idea, provide compatability layer, like cgywin & Services for Unix.
> Got that?
>
> > > > > > > They should've done something like Linux does with WINE & DOSEMU
> and
> > > NT
> > > > > > Why not? It works. Well.
> > > > >
> > > > > Horribly inefficent!
> > > > > Would you accept a car that double its mile/galon ratio if you have
> two
> > > > > passangers in it?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ... and VMWare is different how?
> > >
> > > It isn't, it's my parallel example to what Mac OSX does with OS9.
> > >
> >
> > You said VMWare was a better way to run apps of a differnet OS that the
> > main one you are running. Now you are saying it is the same as MacOS
> > X/Classic, but MacOS X/Classic is inferior.
> > get your story straight.
>
> No, I gave VMWare as an example on the PC of what MacOS X was doing.
> I said it was a *bad* way to do it. Then I gave *other* alternatives.
> WINE on Linux, Cgywin & Services For Unix on Windows.
> Any of the above is *much* more efficent than using VMWare.
> I *never* said that VMWare was a better way.
>
And WINE sucks. Badly. Run some windows apps with it.
> > > And even then, we are talking about general trend in *new* applications
> > > being developped.
> > > What Apple need to do is to discourage any further development on OS9,
> and
> > > porting everything to OSX.
> >
> > They are trying to do that very thing.
>
> Not enough, you will still have plenty of legacy applications that would
> need OS9.
> And you'll have them for *years* to come.
>
And the people that need to run them can run then under OS 9 alone or
Classic.
> > > It's bloody hard to do something like this. And users would *still* want
> to
> > > use old applications.
> >
> > They have a successful track record in difficult switchovers.
>
> If this mean that users can't use their old applications *they won't
> upgrade*, it's that simple.
> And the way they choose to allow this backward compatability is *stupid*.
>
But users CAN use their legacy apps. Thats what Classic is all about.
And vendors are going about either carbonixing or writing Cocoa
versions.
> > > I did some work for an accountant that used an 8 years old DOS program
> to
> > > manage the accounts. He plans to keep using this program more or less
> > > forever, there are plenty of people like him.
> > > You won't see OS9 compatability going away any time soon.
> > >
> > > Check for other OS major upgrades for examples.
> > > Dos -> Windows9x is a good example.
> >
> > A good example of what?
>
> Of backward compatability demands.
DOS --> Windows... good backwards compatibility??
AHAHAHAHAhahahhahhahah
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Double whammy cross-platform worm
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 01:01:20 GMT
Said "JS PL" <hi everybody!> in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 11 May
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Matthew Gardiner in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 10 May 2001
>> >> My only agenda is to live my life happily. All else is just getting
>there...
>> >> I have no need to advance MS nor retard Linux; I just like to talk
>about my
>> >> preferences and correct fud and lies when I hear/read them.
>> >>
>> >> Why DID you post this message to alt.destroy.microsoft if you didn't
>have
>> >> your own anti-MS agenda?\
>> >
>> >I don't have anti-ms agenda. I couldn't care less what Microsoft does.
>> >If they want to try .nyet, they let them, let the market decide whether
>> >it is going to be a failure or success. If people want to use Windows
>> >over Linux, then by all means, go ahead. However, I do get pissed off
>> >when people complain about Windows being unstable or crap, yet unwilling
>> >to move to another OS? haven't these lusers heard of the market place,
>> >when demand goes down, Microsoft will start to re-evaluate and improve
>> >their products, but until then, Microsoft will never get the message,
>> >and why should they? the market place is driven by the demands of the
>> >consumer, and if the consumers don't speak with their wallet, the
>> >companies will think everything is a-ok.
>>
>> Correction: the marketplace is *supposed* to be driven by the demands of
>> the consumer. Which is, of course, why, a hundred years ago, the U.S.
>> Congress passed the Sherman Act, to ensure that this is all that would
>> drive demand, and the desires of the producers (outside desire to
>> compete and profit) are prevented from controlling prices or excluding
>> competition.
>
>"Whatever damage the antitrust laws may have done to our economy, whatever
>distortions of the structure of the nation's capital they may have created,
>these are less disastrous than the fact that the effective purpose, the
>hidden intent, and the actual practice of the antitrust laws in the United
>States have led to the condemnation of the productive and efficient members
>of our society because they are productive and efficient."
>
>Alan Greenspan
So you have no argument? Or are you suggesting Mr. Greenspan is
all-wise and all-knowing?
Mr. Greenspan is mistaken in these sentiments. You can tell him I said
so. There is nothing either productive or efficient about
monopolization, and this is forgetting for the moment that, like any
other criminal activity, the concept of monopolization being performed
by "the productive... members of our society" is frankly ludicrous.
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
