Linux-Advocacy Digest #475, Volume #34 Sun, 13 May 01 12:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux Users...Why? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
MS POLL! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
Re: Win 9x is horrid (Donn Miller)
Re: Win 9x is horrid (Donn Miller)
Re: Announcing COLA's first annual Troll Pagent! (Dave Martel)
Re: Announcing COLA's first annual Troll Pagent! (Bob Hauck)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Anecdote: MS' grip loosening ("John Reese")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("JS PL")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux Users...Why?
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 16:20:14 +0100
> My reason for switching is more ideological, as my WinME runs well, but does
> crash every few
> days still.
>
> What are your reasons?
I was in my final year at Uni. At the end of that year, my access to
the Solaris machines in our physics department was going to end. I
couldn't do without UNIX or similar. So here I am
--
http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: MS POLL!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 15:29:01 GMT
I've decided to start another POLL!
An important POLL!
If you work in a shop which is practically 100% Microsoft
and your running IIS I want your input.
How many times have you heard this from your systems administrator,
management, and other WINTROLLS -
When I love you hit town and wiped out your network did you hear from
everybody, "DAMN KIDS".
When the worm wiped out your IIS web servers did you hear "DAMN KIDS".
Have you heard, the only reason we are having problem in this shop is
we are connected to the internet? Especially if your an E-business
MS shop!
"DAMN KIDS". "DAMN KIDS" are stopping our business plans.
We have this large group of very intelligence CEO magazine reading
group of adults here and "DAMN KIDS" are simply disarming them and
screwing up your E-business. Your MS E-business is a failure because
your connected to the internet and as long as your connected to the internet
you have a security risk and you just have to "ACCEPT IT".
Imagine that! And I've heard these same arguements from over a dozen
professionals at my place of employment! People with over 10 years experience
in the DP arena and they are ALL telling me that it's KIDS WHO ARE DESTROYING
THEIR COMPANIES OBJECTIVES. THEY ADMIT THEY ARE BEING STEERED AROUND BY
KIDS! OR THEY INCREDIBLY SAY THAT THEIR E-BUSINESS SYSTEM IS A FAILURE BECAUSE
IT'S CONNECTED TO THE INTERNET!
I wonder what is going thru our owners and our Presidents minds?
I really have to wonder?
They heard the same excuses and they just stand there.
We're we sprayed by DDT as kids? Did we just loose all our braincells here?
Did you just spend $12 million dollars on a super IIS web cluster for our
business and get told that KIDS are stopping us from running it! That
Kids appearently have more intelligence than our MS bound management and
administration team?
Dear Mr President,
Buddy, you are really one fucked and clueless dude aren't you?
How did you ever get to be president anyway? Did you repeat what the
managers said to the stock holders? Are they in the same boat your in?
You know I get mad at my kids when they do stupid things. Over ironing
clothes and burning them, leaving the lights and T.V. on overnight,
forgetting to turn the water off in the shower, arguing with us over simple
things like dumping the trash or doing the dishes, doing the dishes properly,
cleaning their rooms properly, helping with house chores, not making long
distance calls to Hawaii.
Well, I'm shocked to say this but the people I work for appearently have
little more intelligence than my kids. They are on the same level as my
kids. They've just all told me that they are helpless from having big
butch the bully steal their candy. And the President and appearently
the stock holders bought into that notion and I guess they are going to
accept it as their corporate theme song!
And all the fucking blockheads had to do to avoid being put on the same
level as kids was to install Linux servers. It would have even cost
less.
How incredible.
So let's hear it folks. What are your stories.
Do you have big GWOWN UP'S being knocked over by KIDS in your company?
Do these big GWOWN UP'S have decaded of experience? Do they read CEO
magazine?
You know, I wonder if I could fuck the president out of $12 million bucks
and take the under the counter commissions on it {probably} then tell
him KIDS destroyed the system and then KEEP MY JOB!
Truely the management and administration these days are worse than cattle,
they are sheep.
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 17:28:11 +0200
> JS PL wrote:
> >
> > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > JS PL wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Max thinks - Microsoft was supposed to create Windows to be
> > > > compatible with DR DOS. He probably goes further into fantasyland to
> > > > think Microsoft Inc. was supposed provide support for every Tom,
> > > > Dick and DOS lookalike that came along.
> > >
> > > NO, but then they should have put code into Windows to specifcally check
> > > if it was running on another DOS, then throw up error messages to scare
> > > off customers.
> >
> > Yes, they should have. If they have no plans on supporting the OS on top of
> > DR DOS they would be derrelict in their duty not to inform the consumer that
> > Windows might not perform as advertised on top of DR DOS. If it was my
> > product I'd just refuse to let it install and not bother with the warning
> > message. It's the same reason you see a lot of disclaimers in products that
> > *can* pair up with others, but shouldn't. The "unleaded fuel only" warning
> > wasn't to put anyone out of business and those cars "can" run on leaded
> > fuel, it just ruins the catalytic converter.
Ahh, but they didn't say "It *may* not work because you're not running
MS-DOS" but "It doesn't work". Anyway, Windows didn't really work as
advertised on top of MS-DOS either, so much for that line of reasoning.
Lars T.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 11:31:41 -0400
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win 9x is horrid
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The quickest way to render a perfectly stable system instable is to
> install RealPlayer.
> That thing is a freaking octopus with tentacles that reach into the
> inner bowels of the registry and dll directory installing crap all
> over the place.
I know! But as klunky as the Linux version is, I don't have near the
number of problems as the Windows version. Like for example, the video
seems a little smoother under the Windows version. But, the Windows
version does things like switch your desktop to a very low (640x480)
resolution in order to run full-screen. Then, it crashes, leaving your
desktop in the low resolution. Real Player then refuses to start after
that, until you reboot.
What a piece of junk! The Linux version doesn't do full screen, which
sucks obviously. But you can still do a double-size followed by a
control+alt+num-pad-plus to switch to a lower resolution manually.
Even worse are the web sites that require the RP plugin! Here, you'd be
surprised, it barfs under Windows, but the plugin actually works under
the Linux version of Communicator. This is amazing, considering the
Linux version of Netscape sucks worse than anything I've seen. Well, at
least Java sucks royally under the Linux version of Netscape. Java
applets seem to go into an infinite loop under Linux Netscape 4.77.
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 11:35:47 -0400
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win 9x is horrid
Charlie Ebert wrote:
> Windows 2000 is actually Windows 3.11 with a slightly improved desktop.
>
> You are correct. Oh, and they added a few other applications....
>
> That's about it.
Well, I wouldn't say that. But, I still maintain that job control sucks
no matter which version of Windows you're using. Unix is much more
finely-grained when it comes to process management and job control.
But, I suppose there is a downside to having this control, because
hackers who break in to a unix box can tell *exactly* what's running by
running top or ps! It's kind of hard to do this on a Windows box, you
have to admit.
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Announcing COLA's first annual Troll Pagent!
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 09:29:54 -0600
On Sun, 13 May 2001 01:51:42 -0000, Ray Chason
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Please submit your votes for:
>>
>>
>>Most Talented Wintroll?
>>
>>Least Talented Wintroll?
>>
>>Most Pitiful Wintroll?
>>
>>Most Likely Wintroll To Be Plonked?
>>
>>Most Likely Wintroll To Be TOS'd?
>>
>>Wintroll Most In Need Of A Good Spanking From His Mommy?
>
>Only Wintrolls? Surely there must be a category for which we could
>nominate Kooklis.
You're welcome to suggest one.
I thought about doing one for the most obnoxious sig line but we might
as well GIVE Kooklis that one. <g>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Announcing COLA's first annual Troll Pagent!
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 15:43:52 GMT
On Sun, 13 May 2001 01:51:42 -0000, Ray Chason
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Only Wintrolls? Surely there must be a category for which we could
> nominate Kooklis.
Kulkis is such a stupendously bad Linvocate that he qualifies as an
honorary Wintroll.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 11:48:26 -0400
JS PL 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:
> > > > >
> > > > > "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?
>
> It doesn't matter if you CAN remove it, or CAN'T remove it. It's a useless
> argument - Microsoft can bundle a ham sandwich with windows if they so
> choose.
Thats not what the consent decree says.
--
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: Sun, 13 May 2001 11:50:38 -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]...
> > >
> > > > 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.
Every time micro$oft "integrates" a "feature" to force competitors form
the market, people wonder if its time to break up micro$oft.
I think the time is long past.
Happy with the explanation?
--
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: Sun, 13 May 2001 11:54:30 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "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.
No? What about...
> > > KDE & GNOME does it the same way that MS does.
> > > How come with them it's okay but MS it isn't?
MS "integrates" the browser into the OS and states the two cannot be
separated. They even provided a version of Windows to judge Jackson
"proving" the point. GNOME and KDE do NOT do the same thing.
> He said that there should be seperated applications for browsing the net and
> browsing your computer.
separate from the OS.
> I pointed out two things that does it the same way, and asked about the
> reason why this is good for them.
>
It is the same way as M$.
> > > BTW, all the things that MS does, Apple did, and more.
> >
> > Really? Like what?
>
> Including DVD, CD-Burner, Multimedia player, etc with it OS.
None of these are "intefrated" into the OS. I have not heard of a single
news story of a vendor of any of the above types of apps stating they
are threatened.
Have you?
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: "John Reese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anecdote: MS' grip loosening
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 11:07:22 -0500
Mr. Ebert, I think your words are extreme, but I'm in complete agreement
with the spirit of your comments.
I'm in my third IT shop, and at each job I have been ordered to install
software in EXTREME violation of license restrictions. I have objected
each time, and each time I've been told, "We'll do what we want until
we're audited, and then we'll buy what we need," in exactly those words,
as if a software audit were some sort of free consulting service.
I guess what's most irritating about this management lapse not the
arrogance or the stupidity. It's the sense of entitlement that gets me
spinning every time. The 'something for nothing' attitude works only for
people who think the world owes them something - anything -- everything
-- for whatever reason.
Mr. Ebert, you seem to have been in this field for awhile. I'll bet you
remember when M$ was extremely lax about licensing enforcement. That was
when they were trying to run Novell out of business. Novell was
careful about licensing, and the price was high. M$ products were priced
about half Novell's price per seat, and the licensing procedure virtually
begged users to use the software inappropriately. They knew their market;
businessmen with an unwarranted sense of entitlement who didn't care about
basic business operations.
This attitude is also fueling the switch to Linux in a lot of
organizations. Until now, the change has been in the back office,
involving staff who are knowledgeable and responsible for the operation
of essential operations. However, at the enterprise level management must
buy into the idea in a big way, and there the argument MUST be "Linux is
free". I've tried it the other way around and know this for a fact. If
you tell a businessman that Linux is more stable and provides easier
management and hence lower cost of ownership, you'll be out of his office
in a hurry.
So the growing popularity of Linux is no sign that things are getting
better or more rational. If you make the right decision for the wrong
reasons, it's still a wrong decision -- the consequences of bad
management will just be a little slower coming, that's all.
I'd like to conclude by saying that it is no mystery to me why two out of
three businesses fail within the first five years.
John Reese
------------------------------
From: "JS PL" <hi everybody!>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 12:05:53 -0400
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> JS PL 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:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "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?
> >
> > It doesn't matter if you CAN remove it, or CAN'T remove it. It's a
useless
> > argument - Microsoft can bundle a ham sandwich with windows if they so
> > choose.
>
> Thats not what the consent decree says.
SORRY, the consent decree does state that they may integrate anything they
like into Windows.
(E) Microsoft shall not enter into any License Agreement in
which the terms of that agreement are expressly or impliedly
conditioned upon:
(1) the licensing of any other Covered Product, Operating
System Software product or other product (provided, however, that this
provision in and of itself shall not be construed to prohibit
Microsoft from developing integrated products);
AND here's what the appeals court has to say about Jacksons twisted view of
that section of the consent decree.
"We find that the District Court erred procedurally in entering a
preliminary injunction without notice to Microsoft and substantively in its
implicit construction of the consent decree on which the preliminary
injunction rested," the court said.
The ruling sided with Microsoft on several grounds, including that Jackson
failed to give Microsoft adequate notice that such an injunction was under
consideration. It also ruled that the jurist misread a key provision of the
1995 consent decree which lies at the heart of the government's case.
"The preliminary injunction was issued without adequate notice and on an
erroneous reading of section IV (E)(i) of the consent decree," the opinion
states.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
