Linux-Advocacy Digest #607, Volume #34 Fri, 18 May 01 20:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux Mandrake Sucks!!!! (kosh)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (GreyCloud)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Roberto Alsina)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (GreyCloud)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Roberto Alsina)
Re: To Erik: What is Wordperfect missing? (GreyCloud)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 (T. Max Devlin)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: kosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Mandrake Sucks!!!!
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 17:04:10 -0600
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wendy wrote:
> I tried to install Mandrake 8.0 on my Athlon based system and it
> virtually destroyed all of my data.
>
> It overwrote my Bootmagic bootloader with some "grubby" thing and
> rendered my win 2000 partition useless.
>
> I lugged the entire system to CompUSA where I bought it and they got
> it back for me thank goodness without any data loss.
>
> They also told me that they get many customers in there who try to
> install Linux and it trashes their systems....
>
>
> What a piece of crap this Linux garbage is...
>
> And before you tell me everything I have done wrong I told Linux to
> install on the Linux drive, not the mbr. It still put that grubby
> thing in there.
>
> Good name for a linux program..
>
>
> wendy
>
Abject stupidity does make it hard to install an OS I do agree with that. I
have watched many people install mandrake who have never used linux before
and even managed to get it to boot their w2k systems without problems by
just reading the instructions it had as they went. When they had a question
they did the intelligent thing and instead of blindly clicking they
lookated at the help that is part of the mandrake installer.
Compusa here sells a lot of linux cds and gets very few returned with any
problems. Next time learn a little before doing something. I have seen
people with your level of knowledge do just as much damage to a system
using w2k.
------------------------------
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, 18 May 2001 16:10:31 -0700
Daniel Johnson wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > > > Thats total bullshit. People buy Windows machines because..."everyone
> > > > else has them"
> > >
> > > You are very sure of that. But I don't believe it;
> >
> > Of cpourse not. You are the one that reads quotes from m$ execs and then
> > says... aw, that's not what they meant. You cant seem to see anything
> > but your point of view.
>
> I usually say: "That's not what they said", actually.
>
> > > I think the conventional wisdom still applies:
> > > it's the apps users care about.
> >
> > And what do these apps run on? window$. By micro$oft - who stole the
> > marketplace.
>
> You are very good at typing "stole". You get
> a lot of practice. :D
>
> But the reason Windows is so successful is because
> the apps run on it.
>
> [snip]
> > > Well, I'm a wintroll. But the users buying
> > > Windows computers are being completely
> > > rational.
> >
> > Yeah. They buy what everyone else has.
>
> ... for good and sensible reasons! :D
>
> [snip]
> > > > No, its because m$ stole the marketplace.
> > >
> > > Developers don't need to care much about
> > > that.
> >
> > Well genius, why do you think there's not much app development going on
> > for Commodre 64/128, Apple II, Tandy Color Computer, Atari ST, etc?
>
> Well, The first 5 machines listed there are 8-bit
> computers- first generation PCs, and they really
> really really suck hard compared to even the
> original IBM PC.
>
> Really. The IBM PC won because it wasn't
> just better than its competitors at the time,
> it was a *lot* better.
>
I think it won just because of three letters on the box "IBM".
Business listens when they see those letters.
IBM legitimized the PC industry.
> The Atari ST is the only 16 bit machine
> you have there, and of course it came
> after the PC. (The older 8-bit Ataris
> were the Atari 400 and the Atari 800).
>
> It failed because it was too little, too late-
> and even more because Atari showed
> little commitment to it. Besides, it was
> a rather me-too-ish sort of computer. Why
> bother with it in the face of the Macintosh,
> the PC AT or the Amiga?
>
> > Becasue no one buys the apps. Developers develop for the primary market
> > place. Which is micro$oft - who stole the market.
>
> You wouldn't buy the apps either if you had
> ever used them. Those computers can't support
> halfway decent apps.
>
> Not even as well as DOS did. They made
> DOS look really good, actually.
>
> On those old 8-bit machines, you pretty much
> had to develop anything significant in assembly;
> high-level languages would produce code that
> was just too big or just too slow (usually both).
>
> And assembly on a 6502 or a Z80 is not
> exactly a fun thing. 8 bit registers really,
> really bite. You pretty much always need
> bigger numbers than that, so you wind up
> having to play with carry bits and string
> arithmeitc operations together and...
>
> ... well, better you should use an abacus.
>
> > > Consider how long it took game developers
> > > to get with Microsoft's program. They stuck
> > > to DOS because they could make better games
> > > that way, and they knew perfectly well
> > > that the users would follow.
> >
> > but they ... stuck... with ...micro$oft.
>
> DOS, not necessarily MS-DOS.
>
> MS wanted everyone to move to Windows,
> but the mere prevelance of Windows didn't
> do it- it didn't make game developers
> switch.
>
> Game developers were like other developers-
> they switched when switching would allow
> them to produce a more competitive product,
> and only then.
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: 18 May 2001 23:23:00 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 18 May 2001 15:46:45 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Is sterility a defect
>a) no
>B) YES
It depends. On you, I'd say it would be pretty much a feature.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 16:24:59 -0700
Donn Miller wrote:
>
> "T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> > Well, since you mention it, Bush Jr's plan includes the capitalization
> > (or, rather, free public money to the fascist billionaires) for nuclear
> > power plants, which is a good thing.
>
> Screw that. I think the future belongs to solar and wind-powered
> electricity. I mean, I don't see enough of a devotion to solar energy.
> There's a lot of sunshine going to waste during the summer months,
> because people just take refuge in their AC-cooled homes and offices.
>
> -----= 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! =-----
There are more esoteric ways to generate power and in a small amount of
space.
But the easiest one was Teslas' method that dupont shot down a long time
ago.
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: 18 May 2001 23:26:10 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 18 May 2001 16:37:08 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>>
>> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >jet wrote:
>> >> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> > Ray Fischer wrote:
>>
>> >> > > http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pubs/faq/faq21.htm
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Can I get HIV from having vaginal sex?
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Yes, it is possible to become infected with HIV through vaginal
>> >> > > intercourse. In fact, it is the most common way the virus is
>> >> > > transmitted in much of the world. HIV can be found in the blood,
>> >> > > semen, pre-seminal fluid, or vaginal fluid of a person infected
>> >> > > with the virus. The lining of the vagina can tear and possibly
>> >> > > allow HIV to enter the body. Direct absorption of HIV through
>> >> > > the mucous membranes that line the vagina also is a possibility.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > The male may be at less risk for HIV transmission than the female
>> >> > > through vaginal intercourse. However, HIV can enter the body of the
>> >> > > male through his urethra (the opening at the tip of the penis) or
>> >> > > through small cuts or open sores on the penis.
>> >> >
>> >> > Blood pressure prevents this.
>> >>
>> >> Blood comes out of the urethra?
>> >
>> >No..it keeps the urethra tightly closed until forced open by exiting semen.
>>
>> I think I've discovered the problem.
>>
>> Kulkis doesn't actually have a penis or he's never had and erection or
>> ejaculation. He hasn't a clue.
>
>you're obviously unaware of the fact that the urethra is COLLAPSED
>unless forced open.
Kulkis, are you perhaps impotent?
If you are not, then, trust me, your urethra opens.
And if you believe you can "pull it out" before it does, there is
abundant evidence of how that doesn't work: millions of babies
conceived when the male thought he had pulled out.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: 18 May 2001 23:27:14 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 18 May 2001 16:38:54 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>>
>> Rich Soyack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >"Ray Fischer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>
>> >> >> > and I haven't had a blood transfusion since
>> >> >> >1973 (if at all -- appendix operation)...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> But those $10 hookers...
>> >> >
>> >> >False premise #1: that I use hookers
>> >> >False premise #2: that men can get AIDS from women in normal vaginal sex.
>> >>
>> >> That's how it spreads in most of the world, dimwit. Through
>> >> heterosexual intercourse.
>> >
>> >But the most common vector is not vaginal sex but anal sex,
>>
>> Wrong. AIDS worldwide is usually spread by vaginal sex.
>
>You keep telling yourself that, heterophobe.
>
>for MEN, it only goes through male/male anal sex, and IV drug use.
How about male/woman anal sex? I know you probably never got laid,
so you never heard of it, but it does exist.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To Erik: What is Wordperfect missing?
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 16:27:26 -0700
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > "Roy Culley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > > "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > > In article <9dtp1l$eeb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Todd"
> > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >>> >
> > > > >>> > What part of "Importing is not Embedding" don't you undersrtand?
> > > > >> Embedding
> > > > >>> > is Embedding the entire original document *IN IT'S ORIGINAL
> FORM*
> > > > >>> > within another document, then maintaining that that embedded
> > > document
> > > > >>> > *WITH
> > > > >> IT'S
> > > > >>> > ORIGINAL PROGRAM* without exporting it first.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Commonly called, "insert"
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Your just pretending not to understand. If you really don't
> understand
> > > > >> the power of COM, please get a clue.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Linux *CAN NOT* "embed" documents... this is TOTALLY different than
> > > > >> importing data or whatever you call it.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> You look silly trying to imply Linux can do this when it can NOT
> and
> > > > >> Windows CAN. Now what part of this don't you understand ?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -Todd
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> Matthew Gardiner
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > > Yep,
> > > > >
> > > > > Did it yesterday with StarOffice 5.2. Created a spreadsheet, saved
> it,
> > > > > *embedded* it in a text document, double-click, and *voila* StarCalc
> > > lets
> > > > > me edit the spreadsheet in place.
> > > > > Bonobo adds the same technology to the Gnome desktop, there are
> > > > > unfortunately not a lot of programs that use it yet. And to make you
> MS
> > > > > advocates happy, Bonobo is inspired by COM, so evidently Microsoft
> *can*
> > > > > come up with good ideas.
> > > >
> > > > Applixware also does this. I have an embedded spreadsheet in a
> graphics
> > > > document. Any changes I make to the screadsheet are reflected in the
> > > > grahpics document.
> > >
> > > That's not embedding. That's linking.
> >
> > How would you know? You don't even have a running Linux system with
> > StarOffice 5.2.
>
> I do have a running Linux system, Mandrake 7.2, but you're right,
> star-office is not installed, neither is X, so it's beside the point.
What type of system do you have? With X and star-office installed you
would see what others have been saying. Try it.
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: 18 May 2001 23:29:13 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 18 May 2001 16:15:10 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Look, if Ricky Martin is gay, he can wipe his dick off and stick it in me
>> anytime.
>
>Ricky Martin wouldn't even touch you with with his dick.
Of course not. He would probably use condoms. Or are you just jealous?
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 23:31:39 GMT
Said GreyCloud in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 17 May 2001 23:56:19
>Michael Vester wrote:
>> GreyCloud wrote:
>> > Jon Johansan wrote:
>> > > "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > > Interconnect wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > [HUGE SNIP]
>> > > > > > This is coming from a person who plays games on the server, ROFL!
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Matthew Gardiner
>> > > > >
>> > > > > What do you expect from a dedicated Windows *professional* :D
>> > > >
>> > > > Of course. Chad Myers is the sort of idiot who would user a server as a
>> > > > workstation as well. On several occasions that was he said thats what
>> > > > he also used the server for.
>> > >
>> > > This cracks me up coming from the linvocates who KEEP talking about linux
>> > > being free and saving money is so important...
>> > >
>> > > Lets park a file/print share server in the closet and let it's CPU and Mem
>> > > usage stay idle for years just cause a server is a server and a workstation
>> > > is where you run things, never the two shall meet. Sheesh... while I don't
>> > > see myself running many games on a server I #1) have no fear of doing it
>> > > cause, it's a computer, it's there to do what you want it to when you want
>> > > it to, it shouldn't be single tasked. #2) would do it just to piss off the
>> > > server elitists who'd cringe at the idea and #3) cause sometimes having a 0
>> > > ping kicks ass! <smile>
>> >
>> > Nothing like having Jon, Chad and Eric in the same ng.... like watching
>> > the three stooges in action!
>
>> Great comedy. The three stooges actually had talent, our 3 ng stooges
>> don't. I keep hoping for a losedos advocate with a bit more intelligence.
>> It seems that the Linux side is heavily favoured when it comes to
>> intelligent advocates.
>
>Of course I could have said they reminded me of "Dopey, Happy, and
>Grumpy".
>
>From my own perspective, coming from a VMS environment and an old VS
>environment, windows was shockingly primitive and deficient.
I don't think it matters what background you came from; unless you're
just generally ignorant of computers, windows IS shockingly primitive
and deficient, for all its 'unique benefits' and bloated features.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 23:31:40 GMT
Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 18 May 2001
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 16 May 2001
>> [...]
>> >In any event, code reviews don't review every line of code,
>>
>> Yes, they do, or they are not code reviews.
>
>Wow, suddenly, reviewing code isn't a code review simply because it doesn't
>review every line in a program. Do you have any idea how long it would take
>to review 35 million lines of code?
Do you have any idea what you're talking about? One has to review all
35 million lines of code in order to figure out which lines need code
review. Get it? A code review reviews the code, or it isn't a code
review.
>> >they review critical parts of code,
>>
>> And how, precisely, do we determine what parts of code are critical
>> without reviewing ALL the code, Erik?
>
>Generally, the developer in charge of the code selects the code for review.
Perhaps you are willing to consider lack of code review to be a code
review, or a bad code review to be a code review, but to me, and the
rest of the world, a code review is a code review. MS obviously doesn't
do them.
We're supposed to somehow believe that they WROTE 35 million lines of
code, but they are somehow incapable of READING 35 million lines of
code.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 23:31:41 GMT
Said Daniel Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 18 May 2001
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >If they did Microsoft would not find Java threatening,
>> >but they do.
>> >
>> >They are afraid they'll lose mindshare among developers;
>>
>> No, they're afraid they'd lose the application barrier among consumers,
>> just as described by Judge Jackson. MS makes more on consumers then
>> they do on developers, Dan. Doh!
>
>Weeeeeell...
>
>Jackson seems to think that the "application barrier"
>is a matter of compatibility; if that were true it would
>have fallen long ago. Products like WINE and Open32
>would be the threat. Java would of course be
>no threat, since Win32 apps can't run on Java.
Jackson stated clearly what the application barrier is; we have no need
to guess what he "seems to think" unless you'd rather make shit up than
pay attention to facts. Jackson documented the fact that the
application barrier is fiscal; whether compatibility or some other
technical explanation is available is irrelevant.
'Win32' can run on anything that runs Win32; this is software. Getting
hung up on what you call it is a scam, not an efficiency of the market.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 23:31:42 GMT
Said Daniel Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 18 May 2001
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Daniel Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 17 May 2001
>> 14:04:08 GMT;
>> >> Because m$ stole the market.
>> >
>> >That's "earned the market". please. :D
>>
>> No, fuck you, take your please and ram it up your fuck-head ass. Stole
>> the market. Thank you.
>
>Now, now. No need to be uncivilized.
Apparently, you are in error, you slimey dishonest piece of shit.
>[snip]
>> >> m$ didnt win ANY developer's hearts. Developers HATE micro$oft because
>> >> they know if they market something that catches m$'s eye, m$ will take
>> >> it.
>> >
>> >Not at all. Developers just keep on flocking to
>> >Microsoft's banner, when MS is the best solution.
>>
>> When MS is the only solution which can be profitable. "Best" assumes
>> there are feasible alternatives. "Monopoly" assumes there is criminal
>> restraint of trade. Both assumptions are valid.
>
>Hmm. I'm surprised to hear you admit that there
>are feasible alternatives. It smacks of, you know,
Reason. It smacks of reason, not childish word games such as you play,
you pathetic fool.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 23:31:43 GMT
Said Daniel Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 18 May 2001
[...]
>But the reason Windows is so successful is because
>the apps run on it.
The reason apps run on it is not because of success, though, but because
of criminal behavior. Doh!
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 23:31:44 GMT
Said Daniel Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 18 May 2001
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>[snip]
>> >> Thats total bullshit. People buy Windows machines because..."everyone
>> >> else has them"
>> >
>> >You are very sure of that.
>>
>> Indeed, he is, because it is reasonable.
>
>I dunno. Seems like he's insulting the
>intelligence of, well, practically everyone.
BWAH-HA-HA-HA-HA. No, just you Daniel. Just you.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 23:31:45 GMT
Said Bob Hauck in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 18 May 2001 15:24:43
>On Fri, 18 May 2001 05:02:07 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Said Matthew Gardiner in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 17 May 2001
>
>>>What do these hardware companies lose it they opensource their drivers?
>
>>Precisely! You don't even have to bother writing drivers after that;
>>just release the hardware specs, and the open source "community" (i.e.
>>cluefull users) will do all the work for you!
>
>Lots of hardware nowadays uses programmable logic. Often, it is designed so
>that the driver initializes this logic. Companies usually want to keep this
>part private, since they consider it "intellectual property".
They would like to, because it is NOT intellectual property, and they
damn well know it! If it were, they could patent or copyright it, and
use the legal protections available. It isn't intellectual property,
though, so they try to keep it secret.
But I never said that developers didn't have a motivation for trying to
keep their drivers proprietary. I simply pointed out that nobody gives
a fuck what developers want; they are motivated by the money paid by
consumers, not their brains, and there is NO reason any consumer would
prefer proprietary to open. Thus, with a motivation to remain
proprietary (increased control of prices and the ability to maintain
them above competitive levels) and a motivation to support open source
(increased sales), it becomes a simple question of ethics which
motivation is stronger for any individual developer.
Yes, dishonest people like to be able to profiteer on whatever they can
to gain control over the market. But it isn't only "successful"
attempts to monopolize which are illegal, but all attempts to
monopolize.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 23:31:46 GMT
Said Donn Miller in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 18 May 2001 07:25:57
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
>> Well, since you mention it, Bush Jr's plan includes the capitalization
>> (or, rather, free public money to the fascist billionaires) for nuclear
>> power plants, which is a good thing.
>
>Screw that. I think the future belongs to solar and wind-powered
>electricity. I mean, I don't see enough of a devotion to solar energy.
>There's a lot of sunshine going to waste during the summer months,
>because people just take refuge in their AC-cooled homes and offices.
While collecting free energy from the air might seem a smart approach,
to be honest, I don't want to bother with anything that requires
"devotion". All light, all matter, is a potential source of energy; we
are not 'wasting' it when we don't bother to collect it. Solar power is
just not really efficient for our needs.
A resurgence of nuclear power plant construction under Cheyney's
administration might even be worth putting up with George W. "Bush or
Chimp" for four years.
--
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
******************************
