Linux-Advocacy Digest #692, Volume #34 Tue, 22 May 01 10:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: RIP the Linux desktop (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Intermediate user who left Windows for Linux ("Edward Rosten")
Re: I have a soft spot now and then :) ("Edward Rosten")
Re: The nature of competition ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Dell Meets Estimates ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Who to install a .gz.tar file? (James Knott)
Microsoft to Linux ("David Kistner")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Eric Remy)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Eric Remy)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Solaris 8 vs 7/2.x.... ("Donal K. Fellows")
Re: Microsoft Common Language Runtime give Windows Big Advantage ("Donal K. Fellows")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Eric Remy)
Re: Microsoft to Linux (Greg Copeland)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Dan Pidcock)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: RIP the Linux desktop
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 13:10:02 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > That's what I thought. Why bother when Windows is already there? Ack!
>
> Well yeah, I suppose Windows is better for a desktop system aimed at the
> end user. However, Linux and the other free unices offer, firstly, and
> alternative to Windows. This is ignoring the desktop. Maybe certain
> users don't care about what their desktop looks like? There's a
> psychology involved here, because most Windows users have been
> conditioned to believe that Windows is the ideal desktop, and that we
> really need all those gadgets and conveniences. Unix is more terse, and
> is founded on the belief that the quality and underlying infrastructure
> are what's important. I've been using unix for 8 years, so my mind is
> conditioned to the unix philosophy. I personally don't really find
> Windows ME, for example, ia any better, easier, and convenient to use
> than FreeBSD running XFree86 and Window Maker. Is there any reason to
> prefer Windows over the latter setup I just described? No. Our
> subconscious minds are programmed by our environment, and if your
> environment consists of using Windows every day, you have this image of
> what the ideal desktop should be.
Also with the Windows desktop comes the philosophy of "ease of use", or
"make it easier for the user to use". When I was back at Digital, one of
the things we tried to do was to make it a no-brainer installing the
database software - companies like Oracle and Informix made their
installation quite complex, requiring a heavy manual to understand the
whole process. We were pulling in the opposite direction.
It did feel like UNIX vendors wanted to offer everything, whilst we
wanted to hide things to make life "easier". And to reduce our support
calls, an important consideration!
> What exactly is a "desktop", anyways? For me a desktop is the machine I
> have sitting on my desk, churning out work. I find unix to be an
> adequate desktop, because, I dunno, I can get all my work done with just
> FreeBSD and Window Maker. Isn't that what counts? Windows and unix are
> simply founded on differing cultures and philosophies. They are both
> the way they are because of a certain mindset, which led to a differing
> philosophy between the two.
It's the GUI desktop metaphor, the WIMP, not quite what I think you are
referring to.
> Therefore, Linux (or FreeBSD, or any other unix) can't be losing on the
> desktop, because there really isn't any objective definition of what a
> desktop is. It's 100% subjective, so which one is "winning" or "losing"
> depends on your personal concept of a desktop. The fact is that Windows
> is turning over users to BSD and Linux, not the other way around, so it
> is really Windows that is losing on the desktop. If people are leaving
> Windows for unix systems, they must have the concept in their minds that
> unix is a better desktop than Windows.
In terms of "ease of use" and the GUI desktop metaphor, I think you can
say that Linux is losing, because it's not really there yet.
> But, if your definition of "desktop" is a Windows-alike, you're still
> wrong, because KDE and GNOME are becoming more accessible to those
> people who have a desktop concept in their minds similar to Windows.
"Are becoming" is the key phrase - they aren't quite there yet.
> So, it all depends on what particular concept of "desktop" has been
> programmed into your subconscious by your environment, beliefs, and
> philosphies.
I think your desktop is trying to include something that is just a
general thing. I think "desktop" in this case _is_ the GUI WIMP thing.
--
---
Pete Goodwin
All your no fly zone are belong to us
My opinions are my own
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Intermediate user who left Windows for Linux
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:18:13 +0100
>> Well off to learn something called the command line :-)
>>
>
> you don't neeed the command line for the most part
You don't /need/ it, but it is so powerful that it is well worth
learning.
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I have a soft spot now and then :)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:25:32 +0100
>>Yeah! You've got your old sig back :-)
>>
>>-Ed
>
> I like your Psycho Rat one better :)
Have you tried printing it yet?
Put
%!PS-Adobe-2.0
as the first line, then print it on your nearest PS printer, or using
Ghostscript.
-Ed
> flatfish++++
> "Why do they call it a flatfish?"
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The nature of competition
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:31:33 +0100
>> >> TPC is just a benchmark, not a real world measure. In the real
>> >> world, it is Linux, not Win2K that shows up at the top end of
>> >> acalibility and price/performance.
>> >
>> > Then why aren't we seeing any real world measurements?
>>
>> But we have. Linux is used at the top end of scalibility, where
>> price/performance is really critical, since the costs are so high, ie
>> supercomputers. There are several Linux machines in the top500, there
>> are no Win2K or NT amchines in the top 500. A real supercomputer in
>> real use is the real world. A benchmark setup is not.
>
> My understanding is that all of those "supercomputers" are "in
> development", and not being used in the real world. The ones that are,
> are clusters, not single machines.
No, thewre are some real ones being used now. Check out the list at
www.top500.org
Yes, it is true, the computers are clustered in a tightly coupled network
(by clusetering standards), but it still rates as a supercomputer.
Besides, one measure of scalibility is the ability to cluster. In this
area, Linux thrashes Win2K. If Win2K was so much better, we'd see Win2K
clusters in the top500. We don't; we see Linux ones instead.
>> >> >> Linux has been proven to be more stable.
>> >> >
>> >> > It has? How? I've seen no verifiable studies that show Linux's
>> >> > uptime to be greater than anything else.
>> >>
>> >> 120 day MTTF, *with* nightly reboots.
>> >
>> > Really? There's Linux uptime studies that show this? Or did you
>> > forget the question?
>>
>> Linux's uptime isn't at the top end (Only OS/390 and VM are with a
>> guarnteed uptime of 35 years), but I'd wager that Linux can beat 120
>> days with nightly reboots (ie Win2K's verified MTTF).
>
> Again, how come there are no studies?
Who's going to pay?
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: Dell Meets Estimates
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:34:13 +0100
In article <9ecl8o$71d$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ayende Rahien"
<don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Shun Yan Cheung" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9ebt2t$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <9ebrta$6f6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien
>> <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Once you got to high end, Solaris kicks Linux to the ground without
>> >even trying.
>>
>> To be fair, Solaris is highly optimized for SPARC only. Linux is trying
>> to run on everything on this planet... There is no way Linux can match
>> Solaris on the highend without a major overhaul. But they were designed
>> for different purposes...
>
> He tried to say that Linux can match Solaris on high end, not that Linux
> is more portable.
It nearly matches solaris on the high end. They are both capable of
running supercomputers and large mainframes, though solaris is higher up
than Linux. Linux scales to much, much lower, which makes it scale over a
wider range.
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: James Knott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
linux.redhat.misc,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Who to install a .gz.tar file?
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 12:44:45 GMT
With that new levy, you're allowed to make a personal copy of anything
you can get your hands on. So you could borrow a CD from a friend or
the library etc., and make your own.
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> James Knott wrote:
> >
> > Mladen Gogala wrote:
> > >
> > > Voila! Mkisofs is installed into /usr/local/bin.
> > > Make sure that you do not burn copyrighted music to your CDs as it is
> > > bad for your soul and for the recording industry profits.
> >
> > FWIW, Canadians can now legally copy copyrighted music, for their own
> > use. The copyright owners get reimbersed through a levy the government
> > slapped on blank CDs, audio cassettes etc.
>
> Personal use copies of what you ALREADY OWN is FREE in the United States.
> [that is, if you buy a CD, and make a tape, you are free to do so, as
> long as you're not playing the CD and the tape simultaneously.
>
> Always has been, and always will be
>
> >
> > --
> > Replies sent via e-mail to this address will be promptly ignored.
> > To reply, replace everything to the left of "@" with "james.knott".
> >
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
>
> L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
> can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> K: Truth in advertising:
> Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
> Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
> Special Interest Sierra Club,
> Anarchist Members of the ACLU
> Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
> The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
> Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
>
> J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
> The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
> also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
>
> I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
> challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
> between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
> Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
>
> H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
> premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
> you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
> you are lazy, stupid people"
>
> G: Knackos...you're a retard.
>
> F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
>
> E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
> her behavior improves.
>
> D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> ...despite (C) above.
>
> C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
>
> B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
> method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
> direction that she doesn't like.
>
> A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
--
Replies sent via e-mail to this address will be promptly ignored.
To reply, replace everything to the left of "@" with "james.knott".
------------------------------
From: "David Kistner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Microsoft to Linux
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 07:57:02 -0500
I have set up a Linux workstation and exploring the possibilities to migrate
from Microsoft to Linux. One issue I'm curious about is that my Microsoft
world is a peer-to-peer network (netbui) where I share folders and devices
across this simple network. I'm running Windows 98 in the Microsoft world
and Redhat Linux 7.0 in the Linux world. I'm not in a position to
immediately convert my legacy systems to Linux. But in the transition time
it would be nice to be able to share folders/devices across both worlds.
1. Is there a way to have my Linux machine share folders and/or devices
with the Microsoft world?
------------------------------
From: Eric Remy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 09:17:02 -0400
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It figures... Eric, get out of your narrow Paradigm! Start doing some
>original thinking for yourself instead of letting a professor tell you
>how to think!
That's funny. I *am* a professor.[1] I teach QM to students.
I do my own thinking. I've measured c by experiment myself- have you?
I've looked fairly hard at the overall structure of physics. It doesn't
explain everything- yet. But it works.
> Crap indeed! Even Gallileo is rolling over in his grave.
Ahh, the classic signs of the crackpot...
>Tell that crap to the NBS!
What's the NBS? (Hint: it hasn't been the NBS for years.) I'll ask
some of my friends who've worked at NIST if they've ever heard of this:
I'm sure they haven't.
Please, a URL or reference to this paper you keep talking about would be
awfully nice.
[1] Truth in lending: for a limited value of professor: I'm not tenure
track.
--
Eric Remy. Chemistry Learning Center Director, Virginia Tech
"I don't like (quantum mechanics), | How many errors can
and I'm sorry I ever had anything | you find in my X-Face?
to do with it."- Erwin Schrodinger |
------------------------------
From: Eric Remy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 09:20:27 -0400
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Been there, done that. Or perhaps you think that the various detectors
>> we've been flying in space for 40 years aren't sensitive to detect
>> single photons?
>>
>> Or that the detectors mounted in ultra-high-vacuum chambers that friends
>> of mine use can't detect single photons?
>So people would be lead to believe about the exact timings of NASA.
>.88c and c aren't that big of a difference between here and voyager.
>And JPL wasn't all that accurate about getting things precisely timed
>either... how many mars probes have we lost now to screw ups??
Once again you are wrong. Voyager 1 radio messages take more than 22
hours round trip, Voyager 2 take +17. The difference between c and .88
c is measured in *hours*. Do you really think a delay of *hours*
wouldn't have been noticed?
Open your eyes, man. You claim I should get out of my paradigm: why,
when mine works and yours is clearly wrong?
--
Eric Remy. Chemistry Learning Center Director, Virginia Tech
"I don't like (quantum mechanics), | How many errors can
and I'm sorry I ever had anything | you find in my X-Face?
to do with it."- Erwin Schrodinger |
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:11:50 +0200
"David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9ed8ue$2k3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> GreyCloud wrote in message
> >It figures... Eric, get out of your narrow Paradigm! Start doing some
> >original thinking for yourself instead of letting a professor tell you
> >how to think! Crap indeed! Even Gallileo is rolling over in his grave.
> >Tell that crap to the NBS!
> >
>
>
> To paraphrase - "why believe what thousands of scientists have proven
again
> and again? Be original - make up your own science as you go along."
>
> One of the American states (Maryland, IIRC) decided that it was too
> complicated for schools to teach about "pi" being 3.14159..., so they
> redeclared pi to be 4 and insisted that this be taught in schools.
> Fortunately, this did not last long. Perhaps GreyCloud is following this
> philosophy.
So *that* is the reason why my computer book talk about making Pi a
constant. "In the case of a change in the value of Pi..." :-D
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 16:16:28 +0200
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Do you ever think that our gov. would tell the world everything? Do you
> trust your Gov. completely? I know they haven't told everything... and
> I end with no more conversation about it. I still rely on a pension
> from them.
Black Helicopters! Black Helicopters!
Now *that* is rich.
GreyCloud, this is an elementry piece of physics, it has been proven right
in so many instances that I can't really count them.
Hell, you can go to most modern physics lab and measure the speed of light,
in air and in vacuum yourself, it's not as if it takes millions to do it.
------------------------------
From: "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris,staroffice.com.support.install.solaris,comp.unix.advocacy,alt.os.unix,alt.unix
Subject: Re: Solaris 8 vs 7/2.x....
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 13:47:13 +0100
Michael Marion wrote:
> "Donal K. Fellows" wrote:
>> Doesn't mean SPIT when the network is saturated, something which happens
>> embarrasingly often despite the distributed nature of our local network
>> (keeping most traffic off most of our internal network links.) But then
>
> Hmm.. sounds like they're fixing the wrong broken part. With switched 100Meg
> to the desktop, and Gig between swtiches and to filers.. NFS is a great
> solution.
It's not always possible to be that nice; our networking is complicated
by being split across two buildings, one part of which is only recently
allocated to us (in a cunning "deal" with Engineering...) Plus, file
serving is not the only high-bandwidth application on our network. IIRC
(and not being disparaging in any way) the graphics people love to gobble
lots for their 3D shared environment stuff. <shrugs> I could post a URL
for the latest network architecture map, but it's intranet-only and so
only as much use as a chocolate sun hat in the Mojave...
I'm kind of lucky; my research group's apps mainly just need stupid
amounts of processor and memory resources. I only really need the
network for Dilbert and USENET... :^)
>> we're much bigger than most commercial installations, and the whole
>> institution's networking must be an even bigger nightmare (though I
>> suppose they won't be stuck with grotty old FDDI as a background
>> infrastructure; I've not checked for several months...)
>
> Our environment is pretty ugly too, but when it's planned properly ahead of
> time and implemented properly, it makes a huge difference.
Not my committee, mate! :^)
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- He has the intelligence of a small mollusc and the practical experience of
a split-pea. -- Jerry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Common Language Runtime give Windows Big Advantage
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:09:50 +0100
Bob Hauck wrote:
> Doug Ransom wrote:
>> It would be really cool to get the runtime supported on linux. Even if
>> existing C programs were compiled to this spec it would improve
>> interoperability and performance.
>
> How would it improve performance over native code?
We already have our own CLR. It just happens to be called glibc. HTH!
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- He has the intelligence of a small mollusc and the practical experience of
a split-pea. -- Jerry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: Eric Remy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 09:25:53 -0400
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Ah, but there is the rub... All light speed measurements have so far
>> > been done in AIR!
>> >
>>
>> Well, the National Institute of Standards and Technology seems to have
>> been able to measure the speed of light in a vacuum.
>>
>> http://physics.nist.gov/cgi-bin/cuu/Value?c|search_for=universal_in!
>>
>> Gary
>
>I wonder what the NBS would say? Doesn't say what the setup was. I
>would more fully trust a measurement in outer space at some great
>distances.
A) NBS = NIST
B) Is a distance of ~17 trillion miles through outer space a long enough
distance? That's been done- communication with Voyager 1. Guess what:
radio waves travel at c.
--
Eric Remy. Chemistry Learning Center Director, Virginia Tech
"I don't like (quantum mechanics), | How many errors can
and I'm sorry I ever had anything | you find in my X-Face?
to do with it."- Erwin Schrodinger |
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Microsoft to Linux
From: Greg Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 22 May 2001 08:54:44 -0500
Not sure if you are serious or not, but you can loot at SAMBA and NFS for
Linux/UNIX systems.
Greg
"David Kistner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have set up a Linux workstation and exploring the possibilities to migrate
> from Microsoft to Linux. One issue I'm curious about is that my Microsoft
> world is a peer-to-peer network (netbui) where I share folders and devices
> across this simple network. I'm running Windows 98 in the Microsoft world
> and Redhat Linux 7.0 in the Linux world. I'm not in a position to
> immediately convert my legacy systems to Linux. But in the transition time
> it would be nice to be able to share folders/devices across both worlds.
>
> 1. Is there a way to have my Linux machine share folders and/or devices
> with the Microsoft world?
>
>
>
>
>
--
Greg Copeland, Principal Consultant
Copeland Computer Consulting
==================================================
PGP/GPG Key at http://www.keyserver.net
DE5E 6F1D 0B51 6758 A5D7 7DFE D785 A386 BD11 4FCD
==================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Pidcock)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 14:01:53 GMT
On Tue, 22 May 2001 06:38:17 -0400, Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Daniel Johnson wrote:
>>
>> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Daniel Johnson wrote:
>> [snip]
>> > > That's because the early 8 bit machines-
>> > > even the ones that had rudimentary
>> > > operating systems- were too small for
>> > > meaningful database work.
>> >
>> > No they werent. Unless you can WP, DB, SS meaningless work.
>>
>> You might want to read a little more carefully.
>> I certainly do not call word processing or
>> shreadsheets "meaningful database work";
>
>Why dont you go to an administrative assistant convention and tell them
>they do meaningless work. Or tell an accountant. You really are an
>arrogant self-important SOB.
I know this is .advocacy Rick but just calm down and read what the man
wrote:
"I ... do not call word processing or spreadsheets ... database work"
Dan
remove .hatespam to reply
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
