Linux-Advocacy Digest #467, Volume #34 Sun, 13 May 01 00:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("JS PL")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: linux too slow to emulate Microsoft ("Doug Ransom")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("JS PL")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("JS PL")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Ayende Rahien")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Sat, 12 May 2001 23:16:32 -0400
"Roy Culley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "JS PL" <hi everybody!> writes:
> >
> > "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >
> >> >> I think you're just steam-rolling towards the destination you've
> > already
> >> >> picked out. There is plenty of evidence just like the letter Rick
> >> >> showed. The point is, such evidence is non-compelling, in a legal
> >> >> sense; Microsoft can't be convicted for simply choosing not to sell
> >> >> Windows without DOS. Anti-trust doesn't work like that. It is the
> >> >> monopolization, not the strategies used to monopolize, which are
> >> >> illegal.
> >
> >
> > "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."
>
> Can't speak for yourself sunshine?
>
> > Alan Greenspan
>
> Greenspan who? :-)
Shouldn't that be "Alan who?"
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <Don'[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: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:19:36 +0200
"Clark Safford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> > I wasn't talking about edlin here. No one would use it if you had
something
> > better avialable.
>
> I know. I was drawing an analogy. There has to be a distinction drawn
between
> what has traditionaly been considered applications (where third-party
companies
> have the ability to compete) and what is now considered an integral part
of the
> OS. Otherwise, third-party software companies get pissed and call their
> congressmen.
Okay, I would certainly think that integrating MS-SQL Server into the OS
would be over doing it.
However, what they do enter are things that users consider needed, that they
*shouldn't* have to purchase also.
> > Wordproccessor, I agree, and it have, pretty basic one, though.
> > Database? Does the average user need this?
> > Don't know where you are getting at, but you get a database with
Windows, if
> > you know how to set ODBC correctly.
>
> I'm asking why MS should have to stop at browsers. I'd also like to ask
why
> they only seem to integrate things when they're having difficulty gaining
> market share.
See above.
I don't think that this is so.
Zip file browsing, they didn't have such a product.
CD-Burning, likewise.
I think that those are things that the users need, now, in some cases, they
do push an application that they already has.
I consider it ok, it's not an application that they sold before, after all.
So it's not as if they are cutting prices, beside, it is good for the
consumer.
Because people *won't* use this application if it's not better then the
competition, if it's just as good or worse, then they'll just get the
application they used before.
See NS3 vs IE3 (about equal quality), only when IE4 was clearly superior to
NS4 (especially the buggy beta verison) people start to move to it in
droves.
> > Spreadsheet is not something that your average user need.
>
> Let's replace that cute little calculator with Excel. Or would that
impact
> MS's revenue stream?
It probably would.
And don't forget that most people don't *need* excel.
> > Because today, it's pretty much an essencial need to have a browser, so
yes,
> > I think that it's a logical extention of the OS.
>
> I guess it is if you want to surf the net. Surfing your computer could be
done
> in other ways.
KDE & GNOME does it the same way that MS does.
How come with them it's okay but MS it isn't?
> > As for using another browser, nothing prevents that from anyone.
Including
> > registering it as the defualt browser/emailer/news reader/whatever you
want.
> > You can't uninstall it, it is used as the file browser, GNOME does it,
as
> > well as KDE, I believe. Nobody sees something wrong *there*, do they?
>
> Those are two choices. Where are the choices w/ MS? There used to be
choice.
> Third-party filemanagers were a dime a dozen. They're all gone now, and
I
> think that's a shame. Those companies investers probably do, too.
No, you don't *need* them, because MS gives you a good file manager.
However, if you still like a 3rd party file manager...
http://z-soft.com/
http://www.charm.net/~mchaney/smartfile/
http://www.ghisler.com/
http://www.winability.com/fmutils/
http://www.softseek.com/Utilities/File_Management/File_Managers/Review_46674
_index.html
http://www.twcny.rr.com/technofile/texts/tec020898.html
> > There *is* a theoretical way you can possibly do this, replace IE with
> > something else that implements the same interface.
> > However, this require either:
> > A> Major amount of hacking, including doing several stuff that has red,
> > huge, blinking, bleeding, screeming No! on them.
> > B> *Major* redesign of the system. Including almost certainly great loss
of
> > efficency.
>
> Or design an OS that does what OS's do and leave out all those things that
> 'enhance the Windows experience'.
You mean like networking? GUI? browser? email? news reader? word proccessor?
What you seem to want is a kernel plus Win32 on it.
I don't know any user who would buy it.
Just as I don't know any user who would buy a Cd of Linux's kernel.
It's totally useless to the user.
Or could you define "OS that does what OS' do" more clearly?
> > Not to mention that it also require something that implements the whole
of
> > what IE does, to my knowledge, nothing else does it.
>
> Why would anyone bother trying to improve on MS's design? It's not as if
> they'd make any money from their efforts.
It's not as if the people who develop linux makes any money from their
efforts, why would anyone bother trying to improve Linux?
BTW, all the things that MS does, Apple did, and more.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <Don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:20:58 +0200
"pookoopookoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:KLmL6.12534$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Cutting to the chase:
> > IIS5: 8001
> > Tux2: 7500
>
> Hehehe,
>
> 2000 Server: 500$
> Linux: 2$ (for the CD you copy it on)
Hehehe, you can't count.
2000 Server: 3,999$
Linux: 0$ (why burn when you can install from FTP?)
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Doug Ransom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Doug Ransom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: linux too slow to emulate Microsoft
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 20:31:00 -0700
> "Charles Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > COM was a great boon for developers, able to share compiled bits of
code
> > > written in different languages, and allowing apps to communicate with
> each
> > > other easily. On linux, CORBA has barely taken off in the ActiveX
> emulation
> > > project (Gnome) 5 years behind microsoft. On the microsoft platform,
> COM
> > > and ActiveX are being tossed into the legacy bin as the common
language
> > > runtime is being rolled out. The common language runtime (and MSIL
> > > instruction set) is a huge boon for developers and users and an open
> > > standard (ECMA). COM, CORBA, and ActiveX are all junk compared to the
> > > common language runtime. The user experience and developer experience
> will
> > > be so much better with the common language runtime (part of .net on
the
> > > windows platform).
> >
> > Linux developers aren't stupid enough to try to copy COM. At least I
> > hope not.
Well, COM is better than not having shared components. COM adds great value
to the Windows environment. It allows devlopers to build great things. COM
and the fact it is ubiqutious on Windows are what makes Windows worth more
than Linux. I am currently willing to pay nothing for linux and hundreds
for windows 2K. However, Corba & COM are basically the same and both kind
of suck in the same way. The Microsoft Common Language Runtime (or whatever
its ECMA equivelent is) sucks not.
>
> Funny you should say that. Mozilla heavily uses a COM clone they call
XPCOM
> (cross platform COM i guess), and IIRC Bonobo is also based on COM's
design
> as well.
>
> > > Does anyone know of any efforts to support the common language runtime
> on
> > > linux? That would make the platform so much better and development of
> new
> > > stuff much quicker.
> >
> > I did find a couple of sites that I don't think were jokes on the
> > subject. Mostly Linux seems to be leaning toward CORBA-SOM-DSOM.
Comparing CORBA to Microsoft Common Language Runtime is like comparing
MS-DOS to Linux.
CORBA isn't anywhere near as useful.
> > Especially as IBM is putting lots of money into the arena.
>
> Is SOM/DSOM available for Linux?
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
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: Sat, 12 May 2001 23:28:35 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > That is what a lot of people are asking.
>
> So, in your opinion, it's morally correct to force MS to only release
> products with no networking, no GUI, no memory management, no... *anything*.
> Now, just *how* serious are you? Do you really think that it's a position
> that you can hold in court?
What the hell are you talking about?
--
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: Sat, 12 May 2001 23:33:06 -0400
Daniel Johnson wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > > When you want to benefit from the
> > > flexibility of print filters, naturally!
> > >
> > > If you just want prefab stuff, then
> > > it appears drivers will do fine.
> >
> > So, tell me... what attributes of my Epson 740 can I not take advantage
> > of under Linux, that I can under Windows? Obviously you seem to think
> > there are restrictions on its performance under Linux. Please tell me
> > what they are.
>
> I'm afraid you don't understand the sorts of
> things programmable print filters can do.
>
> Suppose I want every document printer
> on thus-and-such a printer to be in
> 47 Point Gargamel Extra Smurfy. A print
> filter can edit the incoming data to produce
> such an effect.
>
> To do it with a driver, you have to
> reimplement the whole driver. Windows
> printer drivers do not 'stack'.
>
So, how is this a limitation for Linux and a strength for Windows?
> These are not the kinds of things desktop
> users could manage, even with print filters;
> but there are people who could.
--
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: Sat, 12 May 2001 23:41:42 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > > > It's a good thing as long as it's something that the OS should
> provide.
> > > > > Today, can you really sell an OS without a browser? Can you *find*
> an OS
> > > > > that doesn't come with a browser?
> > > >
> > > > What OS besides Windows ha an "-integrated-" browser?
> > >
> > > KDE? GNOME?
> > > Not an OS, but same principal.
> >
> > KDE and GNOME are not OSs.
> >
> > Konqueror is indeed a file manager/browser, but it is not "integrated"
> > into the OS. It is just another application.
>
> IE isn't integrated into the OS, it's just another application.
> It *is*, however, integrated into the shell, same as Konqueror.
>
Tell Micro$oft it isnt integrated into the OS. They say if you remove it
Windows becomes unuseable. They even presented an unuseable version to
Judge Jackson to prove it.
Now, what "shell" is Konquer integrated into? It seems to be just
another app to me. I can install it, uninstall it, use it in a KDE
session, sue it without a KDE session. How is it not another app?
> > What browser is "integrated" into GNOME?
>
> Nautilous, by RIP Eazel.
Is nautilus actually being shipped in GNOME yet? And how "integrated" is
it? Can you remove it and still have filemanange capabilities? Will the
OS work?
--
Rick
------------------------------
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: Sat, 12 May 2001 23:43:33 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> Sure, sure. If I were half as clueless as you sound, I might be almost
> as clueless as you think I am.
Sooo_then....your clueless no matter what?
------------------------------
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: Sat, 12 May 2001 23:49:40 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Clark Safford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
>
> > > I wasn't talking about edlin here. No one would use it if you had
> something
> > > better avialable.
> >
> > I know. I was drawing an analogy. There has to be a distinction drawn
> between
> > what has traditionaly been considered applications (where third-party
> companies
> > have the ability to compete) and what is now considered an integral part
> of the
> > OS. Otherwise, third-party software companies get pissed and call their
> > congressmen.
>
> Okay, I would certainly think that integrating MS-SQL Server into the OS
> would be over doing it.
> However, what they do enter are things that users consider needed, that they
> *shouldn't* have to purchase also.
>
> > > Wordproccessor, I agree, and it have, pretty basic one, though.
> > > Database? Does the average user need this?
> > > Don't know where you are getting at, but you get a database with
> Windows, if
> > > you know how to set ODBC correctly.
> >
> > I'm asking why MS should have to stop at browsers. I'd also like to ask
> why
> > they only seem to integrate things when they're having difficulty gaining
> > market share.
>
> See above.
> I don't think that this is so.
> Zip file browsing, they didn't have such a product.
> CD-Burning, likewise.
>
> I think that those are things that the users need, now, in some cases, they
> do push an application that they already has.
> I consider it ok, it's not an application that they sold before, after all.
> So it's not as if they are cutting prices, beside, it is good for the
> consumer.
> Because people *won't* use this application if it's not better then the
> competition, if it's just as good or worse, then they'll just get the
> application they used before.
> See NS3 vs IE3 (about equal quality), only when IE4 was clearly superior to
> NS4 (especially the buggy beta verison) people start to move to it in
> droves.
>
> > > Spreadsheet is not something that your average user need.
> >
> > Let's replace that cute little calculator with Excel. Or would that
> impact
> > MS's revenue stream?
>
> It probably would.
> And don't forget that most people don't *need* excel.
>
> > > Because today, it's pretty much an essencial need to have a browser, so
> yes,
> > > I think that it's a logical extention of the OS.
> >
> > I guess it is if you want to surf the net. Surfing your computer could be
> done
> > in other ways.
>
> KDE & GNOME does it the same way that MS does.
> How come with them it's okay but MS it isn't?
>
No, KDE and GNOME DONT do it the same way. KDE and GNOME are competing
Windowing environments. You can use their libs and apps within their
windowing enviroments or outside of them. You can install either, both
or neither. neither of them is an anti-competitve monopoly, or a monoply
of any kind. You can remove the browsers with no ill effect on the OS.
Microsoft is an anti-competive monopoly. They tried selling IE on the
Plus Pack. Didnt work. They tried giving it away. Didnt work. They
"integrated" to drive netscape out of business. That worked.
> > > As for using another browser, nothing prevents that from anyone.
> Including
> > > registering it as the defualt browser/emailer/news reader/whatever you
> want.
> > > You can't uninstall it, it is used as the file browser, GNOME does it,
> as
> > > well as KDE, I believe. Nobody sees something wrong *there*, do they?
> >
> > Those are two choices. Where are the choices w/ MS? There used to be
> choice.
> > Third-party filemanagers were a dime a dozen. They're all gone now, and
> I
> > think that's a shame. Those companies investers probably do, too.
>
> No, you don't *need* them, because MS gives you a good file manager.
> However, if you still like a 3rd party file manager...
>
> http://z-soft.com/
> http://www.charm.net/~mchaney/smartfile/
> http://www.ghisler.com/
> http://www.winability.com/fmutils/
> http://www.softseek.com/Utilities/File_Management/File_Managers/Review_46674
> _index.html
> http://www.twcny.rr.com/technofile/texts/tec020898.html
>
> > > There *is* a theoretical way you can possibly do this, replace IE with
> > > something else that implements the same interface.
> > > However, this require either:
> > > A> Major amount of hacking, including doing several stuff that has red,
> > > huge, blinking, bleeding, screeming No! on them.
> > > B> *Major* redesign of the system. Including almost certainly great loss
> of
> > > efficency.
> >
> > Or design an OS that does what OS's do and leave out all those things that
> > 'enhance the Windows experience'.
>
> You mean like networking? GUI? browser? email? news reader? word proccessor?
> What you seem to want is a kernel plus Win32 on it.
>
> I don't know any user who would buy it.
> Just as I don't know any user who would buy a Cd of Linux's kernel.
>
At least linux gives you a choice of distributions and a choice of what
apps to install.
> It's totally useless to the user.
>
> Or could you define "OS that does what OS' do" more clearly?
>
> > > Not to mention that it also require something that implements the whole
> of
> > > what IE does, to my knowledge, nothing else does it.
> >
> > Why would anyone bother trying to improve on MS's design? It's not as if
> > they'd make any money from their efforts.
>
> It's not as if the people who develop linux makes any money from their
> efforts, why would anyone bother trying to improve Linux?
>
There are people that make money from Linux. BTW, from what I can see,
making money is not the main motivation of Linux programmers and
developers.
> BTW, all the things that MS does, Apple did, and more.
Really? Like what?
--
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: Sat, 12 May 2001 23:51:27 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > > > *Shrug*, Linux's API are open, show me the browser that can compete
> with
> > > IE,
> > > > > please.
> > > >
> > > > Show me one that cant.
> > >
> > > We can *start* with netscape.
> > > But that wasn't the question, is there any browser out there that is as
> good
> > > or better than IE?
> > > Answer this.
> > >
> >
> > Name one that isnt. BTW, for the uncomprehending, you should begetting
> > the message that I dont hink much of IE.
>
> No point of arguing, since you are going in circles.
> I already gave you one that isn't better.
>
No, you didnt.
> > > Who testified and where, and what where the APIs they claimed they had
> no
> > > access to?
> >
> > Search the witness list and testimony, or news accounts.
>
> You are the one making this claim, back it up.
> Name some of those valuable* APIs that MS used in its products that aren't
> open.
>
Do some homework yourself.
> * Valuable meaning that it can't be trivially implemented.
--
Rick
------------------------------
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: Sat, 12 May 2001 23:57:05 -0400
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> JS PL wrote:
> >
> > "Roy Culley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > "JS PL" <the_win98box_in_the_corner> writes:
> > > >
> > > > T. Max Devlin wrote in message
> > > >
> > > > [on the high probability that MS will skate...]
> > > >
> > > >>that will make them about as innocent as O.J. Simpson.
> > > >
> > > > Keep practicing statements like this. Your going to need them in a
few
> > short
> > > > days (or weeks) Judgement day is drawing near for Sleepy Jackson.
The
> > big
> > > > slap down is fully cocked and set with a hair trigger. He's looking
up
> > with
> > > > his tail between his legs.
> > > >
> > > > Sleepy is about to feel a boot in his ass from a full panel of his
> > > > superiors.
> > > >
> > > > And Max is going to be doing some major spin control when his life's
> > work on
> > > > usenet turns to vapor in a fleeting instant, one day soon.
> > >
> > > If the US judicial system fails then the EU are just waiting to bring
> > > Microsoft to justice. Microsoft don't have any political clout in the
> > > EU and the penalties will hurt where they hurt most - up to 10% of
> > > gross world wide sales.
> >
> > The US judicial system has already failed, it is now in the "fix" phase.
And
> > who cares about what Europe thinks? Let them eat cake...err...Linux.
>
> You are right about one thing. The US judicial system failed. microsoft
> should have been broken up the first time, instead of being allowed to
> skate with a worthless consent decree.
That would have been on par with the government trampling of the day.
Especially since the DOJ testified that they could find no prosecutable
offenses the first time around. The second time around Microsofts
competitors complained that MS was breaking the consent decree. The appeals
court then ruled that they haven't broken the consent decree. But then I
guess anything is possible from an Attorney General who will happily order
the gassing of children to near death then burn them alive while they lie
curled up and gasping for air.
> As for Linux - at them moent, Microsoft is scared to death of Linux, the
> Open Source movement in general and the GPL in particular.
Microsoft isn't afraid of anyone or anything. Let alone "scared to death" of
Linux. Microsoft welcomes linux to market. The more the merrier.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <Don'[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: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:57:35 +0200
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > *Shrug*, Linux's API are open, show me the browser that can
compete
> > with
> > > > IE,
> > > > > > please.
> > > > >
> > > > > Show me one that cant.
> > > >
> > > > We can *start* with netscape.
> > > > But that wasn't the question, is there any browser out there that is
as
> > good
> > > > or better than IE?
> > > > Answer this.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Name one that isnt. BTW, for the uncomprehending, you should begetting
> > > the message that I dont hink much of IE.
> >
> > No point of arguing, since you are going in circles.
> > I already gave you one that isn't better.
> >
>
> No, you didnt.
Qoute:
> > > > We can *start* with netscape.
Didn't gave you a hint?
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <Don'[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: Sat, 12 May 2001 18:59:24 +0200
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > That is what a lot of people are asking.
> >
> > So, in your opinion, it's morally correct to force MS to only release
> > products with no networking, no GUI, no memory management, no...
*anything*.
> > Now, just *how* serious are you? Do you really think that it's a
position
> > that you can hold in court?
>
> What the hell are you talking about?
I gave a list of integrated things in windows, you said that people wondered
why they weren't split up because of that.
Hence, me asking you if that was your conclustion.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <Don'[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: Sat, 12 May 2001 19:02:34 +0200
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > "Clark Safford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > I guess it is if you want to surf the net. Surfing your computer
could be
> > done
> > > in other ways.
> >
> > KDE & GNOME does it the same way that MS does.
> > How come with them it's okay but MS it isn't?
> >
>
> No, KDE and GNOME DONT do it the same way. KDE and GNOME are competing
> Windowing environments. You can use their libs and apps within their
> windowing enviroments or outside of them. You can install either, both
> or neither. neither of them is an anti-competitve monopoly, or a monoply
> of any kind. You can remove the browsers with no ill effect on the OS.
That isn't even what I'm talking about.
He said that there should be seperated applications for browsing the net and
browsing your computer.
I pointed out two things that does it the same way, and asked about the
reason why this is good for them.
> > BTW, all the things that MS does, Apple did, and more.
>
> Really? Like what?
Including DVD, CD-Burner, Multimedia player, etc with it OS.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
