Linux-Advocacy Digest #768, Volume #34 Fri, 25 May 01 12:13:14 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Eric Remy)
Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! ("Ayende
Rahien")
Re: Time to bitc__ again (Chad Everett)
Re: In AD 2001... (rich)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Eric Remy)
Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly
Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" (Charles Lyttle)
Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly (flatfish)
Back up in Linux ("Jerry Wong")
Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly ("Investigator")
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! ("Chad Myers")
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! (T. Max
Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Eric Remy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 10:15:40 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>The conclusion that GreyCloud claimed that the difference between light
>speed at various frequencies in a vacuum *is* immense (12%) was a
>fallacy. It was an inaccurate extraction of what he actually said.
No Max, it wasn't. This is *exactly* what he claimed.
For example, here's
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>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??
Now, last I checked Voyager is in a pretty good vacuum. GreyCloud
doesn't think that you can detect the hour+ differences between .88c and
c on a round trip message to Voyager.
--
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: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature"
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 16:19:07 +0100
>>> If you take a random number, then modify it, it's no longer random.
>>> If
>>
>>That is not true. I can take a random number and multiple it by two, the
>>result still being random.
>
> But with different characteristics.
True, but still random.
> Take two random numbers which are both uniformly distributed from
> 0 to 1 and add them together. One gets a "tent"-distributed random
> number, which starts at 0, peaks at 1, and ends at 2.
> Take two uniformly-distributed random numbers from 0 to 1 and multiply
> them together -- one would probably get a weird-looking thing. I'd have
> to work out what it looks like, but it would still be random -- just not
> uniformly-distributed.
>
> And then there's the bell curve... :-)
>
> This is admittedly leading to an interesting, if slightly goofy,
> utility, just to check my statements... :-)
Here's a couple of programs that I had hanging around:
##############################################################
### random.awk
### Generate 100,000 random numbers
BEGIN{
srand()
for(i=0;i<100000;i++){
#Gaussian:
#num = ((-2*log(rand()))^(.5))*cos(2*rand()*3.141592)
num=rand()*rand()
printf("%.10f\n", num)
}
exit
}
#################################################################
#################################################################
#### histogram.awk
#### plot a histogram of the incomoing (sorted) data. Scale to
#### 100,000 numbers
NF{
if(start==0)
start=$1
i++
if(i == 1000){
width = $1-start
mid = width / 2 + start
height = i/(width*100000)
if(bars=0){
printf("%f\t0\n", start)
printf("%f\t%f\n", start, height)
printf("%f\t%f\n", $1, height)
printf("%f\t0\n", $1)
}
else
printf("%f\t%f\n",mid, height)
start=$1
i=0
}
}
#####################################################################
Use them in the style:
$ awk -f random.awk | sort -n | awk -f histogram.awk > foo
$ gnuplot
gnuplot> plot "foo"
The histogram program can plot bars (good for if there a few bars) or it
can jion up the points in the middle of each bar with a line (better for
plotting distributions). It also creates fixed area bars.
I know this wasn't the most efficient program, but it was the quickest to
write.
You might als want to look at:
http://www.npac.syr.edu/users/gcf/CPS713STAT/node216.html
-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 pop 240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 17:11:14 +0200
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9elom5$hj1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > I haven't had much luck with Mozilla builds in general =(
>
> Try some of the recent ones. Its beginning ot be a decent speed, now.
> Almost OK on a P133.
The problem with Mozilla is that it's quite easy to crash it.
I don't really use Mozilla that much, although I'll admit that I like the
display (partially) now that Mozilla does better than IE's display when
you've it all approach.
However, there wasn't a single time when I used Mozilla that I didn't manage
to crash the browser within less several minutes, usually twenty minutes
suffice to that.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 17:23:20 +0200
"Zsolt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Fri, 25 May 2001 02:50:39 GMT
presented us with the wisdom:
> >
> > Linux will ALWAYS be behind in drivers because the manufacturers write
> > for the OS that makes money for them first and then, and that is still
> > a maybe, they MIGHT get around to writing a Linux version.
> >
> Oh, I'm so glad to read this!
> Would you care to explain that to my Samsung ML-4600 laser printer,
please!?
> Because, it came with a manufacturer-written linux driver, which was
written
> for RedHat 6.x, but works perfectly with Mandrake 7.2 as well. On the
other
> hand, it has Windows 95,, 98 and NT drivers (built by the manufacturer),
> but _NONE_ of them works with Windows 2000 Professional.
Um, read this:
http://www.pcquest.com/content/weeksreview/101230101.asp
"The driver CD has drivers for Windows 9x/NT/2000 and Linux"
Here is a link to the Samsung printers drivers page:
http://www.samsungsupport.com/prt_drv.htm
And here is the link for the Win2000 driver for the printer:
http://www.samsungsupport.com/ftp/ML4600ENG_pcl.exe
Gee, you would think that a Linux user would hear about Google.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.mandrake,linux.redhat
Subject: Re: Time to bitc__ again
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 25 May 2001 08:42:33 -0500
On Fri, 25 May 2001 01:20:40 GMT, daniel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Its time to do this again. Im not receiving enough spam, havent
>alienated enough people who know me, and, well, need to get this off
>my chest.
>
>Im really disappointed with the current sorry state of three of the
>major distributions of Linux.
>
>
> Blatant lies snipped
>
>
You know darn well you didn't do any of these things you've claimed.
I have personally installed SuSE 7.1 on two desktops and RedHat 7.1
on three laptops (toshiba and IBM thinkpads) and have had none of the
problems you claim.
This fact says volumes about you and little about Linux.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (rich)
Subject: Re: In AD 2001...
Date: 25 May 2001 14:25:08 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Also schrieb Osugi Sakae:
>
>You mean you understood Ray's post?
The thing that really tickled my funny bone about Ray's post was that his
ISP was 'smart.net.' LOL
--
OS/X: Because making Unix user-friendly was easier than debugging Windows
------------------------------
From: Eric Remy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 10:34:22 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>Well, let's see. In the post I'm replying to, GreyCloud claims all
>>measurements of c have been done in air.
>>
>>Statement truth: dead wrong.
>
>You wish. It might even be so. But you've provided no more proof than
>he has.
Max, *read* what GreyCloud wrote please. This is what he claimed, and
he's wrong. Evidence? How about every deep space probe ever built?
>>First, Greycloud claims radio waves travel at 0.88c. This is
>>experimentally proven wrong *every* *single* *day*. It's true for
>>certain media, certainly, but has nothing at all to do with c.
>
>My, oh my. Can I even hope to sort out such an ugly, useless mass of
>pointless, conflicted rhetoric?
Max, what's so hard to understand? GreyCloud claims radio travels at
.88c in vacuum. He's wrong. He thinks that the 2 hours time difference
between a .88c and c round trip radio message to Voyager can't be
detected. That's wrong too.
>Actually, I think not.
>
>>Second, the HUP has nothing at all to do with the value of c. c is a
>>fundamental physical constant. We know it to very high precision, and
>>the HUP has *no* effect on this.
>
>Indeed; to claim that we know it to a very high precision, and yet the
>HUP has no effect on this, is to claim that we know how to add two and
>two together, and the fact that we breath air has no effect on this.
>Save for the obvious fact that if the second were not true, the first
>would not be, either. We would know (with *perfect* precision, no less,
>and perfect accuracy, as well) what c is, if not for the unfortunate
>fact that all measurements, true to Heisenburg's principle, are
>uncertain.
No, not at all. It says that the uncertainties in position+momentum are
correlated. If we don't care where the particle is, we can measure it
to any precision in momentum we wish.
There are some practical limitations here, of course. But they aren't
anywhere near big enough to account for 0.88c- we're talking stuff in
the 10th significant figure.
>>And how does this deal with Greycloud's "Radio waves are not light" and
>>"Radio waves travel at .88c" crap?
>
>Waves don't 'travel'; that's the way I explain it. They propagate.
>Likewise, photons don't "travel", either. They stand still in time, and
>the rest of the universe moves relative to them. If you weren't aware
>that different frequencies of electromagnetic radiation travel or
>propagate at different velocities or speeds, AND that light is both wave
>and particle, then you haven't paid the ticket price to enter this
>discussion. That is our starting point; it may be hubris to believe our
>destination terminus will be any different, but it is the premise of
>discussion.
Max, I teach QM. To the best measurements we can make, every photon
travels at c in vacuum, no matter what the wavelength. I invite you to
show me experimental data that says otherwise. *That's* the starting
point.
Is it possible that there might be effects beyond the 10th decimal
place? Sure: we can't rule that out. But we *can* rule out GreyCloud's
0.88c nonsense.
In some of your other posts you've indicated you know about various
quantum foam theories. These may indeed cause frequency dependent speed
changes of light- we don't know. But it's well below the 10th decimal
place, and at least 9 orders of magnitude smaller than what GreyCloud
thinks.
>>Max, you're looking for something here that just doesn't exist.
>>Greycloud doesn't understand what he's talking about.
>
>The stupidity of such a statement knows no bounds. Of course he
>understands what he's talking about YOU don't understand what he's
>talking about.
I understand perfectly. Find me a piece of experimental evidence that
says radio travels at 0.88c in vacuum and we'll talk.
>>I'm well aware of this. Greycloud is still wrong. He's not even
>>operating on this level: he totally misunderstands what radio waves are
>>and believes that their speed has never been measured in vacuum.
>
>Thus, what he is describing as measuring speed is not what you imagine
>it to be. Are you aware of the fact that, according to the mathematics
>of quantum theory governing photons (which, owing to their relativistic
>velocity, defy precise description, as this discussion illustrates),
>light particles don't travel in straight lines to begin with, but take
>every possible path between any two points? Their very existence, in
>fact, is only really nailed down at the end points where you measure
>them, and saying that they "are", let alone "travel", in the space
>between the points is simply an artifact of our language, built to
>explain the normal world where the probabilities of quantum physics even
>out, and the particles are traveling slow enough relative to each other
>that time/space distortion doesn't become an issue.
Of course I know all this Max. But here's the rub: when I put those
detectors 1 m apart and measure the time it takes the photon to cross in
vacuum, it takes 1/299792458'ths of a second. (Plus or minus a small
amount of error.) Doesn't matter if they're radio, visible or gamma.
That's what were talking about here.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 15:35:07 GMT
On Fri, 25 May 2001 14:08:57 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 May 2001 00:41:29 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>> Compare this to Mandrakes update CD which destroyed a perfectly
>>> working system....
>>>
>>
>>What did you do wrong?
>
>First mistake was opening the mailer the CD came in.
>Second mistake was booting Mandrake 7.2.
>Third mistake was putting the CD in the drive.
>Fourth mistake was su'ing to root.
>Fifth mistake was selecting LiveUpdate.
>Sixth mistake was giving it the ok to trash my system.
First mistake was being a retard.
------------------------------
From: Charles Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature"
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 15:40:53 GMT
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Edward Rosten
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on Sun, 13 May 2001 23:46:14 +0100
> <9dmvak$de5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>> That is not true. If you took 500 cats in boxes and lookes at them all
> >>> at once, n would be dead and 500-n would be alive. You would have no
> >>> way of predicting in an individual case whether the cat would be dead
> >>> or alive, thus the observation does not stop it being random, it merely
> >>> forces it in to a random (but observable) state.
> >>
> >> If you take a random number, then modify it, it's no longer random. If
> >
> >That is not true. I can take a random number and multiple it by two, the
> >result still being random.
>
> But with different characteristics.
>
> Take a random number, uniformly distributed from 0 to 1 [*], and multiply
> by 2. One gets a random number, uniformly distributed from 0 to 2.
>
Notice also that as computers do not generate the entire real number
line, the resulting distribution is less random due to all the mantissas
ending in an even number. Many machines/compilers do not get the "add 1
to the exponent" correct. For some multiplication, rounding/trucation
makes it even worse. So doing any math on a random number can reduce the
"randomness" quiet a bit..
> It gets worse.
>
> Take two random numbers which are both uniformly distributed from
> 0 to 1 and add them together. One gets a "tent"-distributed random
> number, which starts at 0, peaks at 1, and ends at 2.
>
> Take two uniformly-distributed random numbers from 0 to 1 and multiply them
> together -- one would probably get a weird-looking thing. I'd have
> to work out what it looks like, but it would still be random -- just
> not uniformly-distributed.
>
> And then there's the bell curve... :-)
>
> This is admittedly leading to an interesting, if slightly goofy, utility,
> just to check my statements... :-)
>
> [rest snipped]
>
> [*] to be precise, the area under the range (x, x+Dx) would be the
> probability that a random number would fall in that range. This
> means that the area under (-oo,+oo) has to have area 1. For
> a uniformly-distributed random number from 0 to 1, this isn't
> much of an issue as the curve is 1 from [0,1] and 0 everywhere else.
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- who knows just enough statistics to be dangerous
> EAC code #191 24d:19h:53m actually running Linux.
> I am, you are, he, she, and it is, but they're not.
--
Russ Lyttle
"World Domination through Penguin Power"
The Universal Automotive Testset Project at
<http://home.earthlink.net/~lyttlec>
------------------------------
From: flatfish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 15:41:10 GMT
On Fri, 25 May 2001 15:35:07 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Fri, 25 May 2001 14:08:57 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Fri, 25 May 2001 00:41:29 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> Compare this to Mandrakes update CD which destroyed a perfectly
>>>> working system....
>>>>
>>>
>>>What did you do wrong?
>>
>>First mistake was opening the mailer the CD came in.
>>Second mistake was booting Mandrake 7.2.
>>Third mistake was putting the CD in the drive.
>>Fourth mistake was su'ing to root.
>>Fifth mistake was selecting LiveUpdate.
>>Sixth mistake was giving it the ok to trash my system.
>
>First mistake was being a retard.
Ahh the insults fly when they having nothing to say.
flatfish+++
"Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
From: "Jerry Wong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.windows.x.kde,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: Back up in Linux
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 23:44:10 +0800
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
=======_NextPart_000_0014_01C0E574.9898ED60
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="big5"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I used to backup the windows by Ghost software. In linux, can the =
command "tar" be used like Ghost. I means to backup the whole Linux =
system by tar it and restore it when necessary. I have windows98 and two =
Linux system in my PC (Red Hat 7.0 and Mandrake 8.0), so I can tar one =
of them when running the other.
Is it possible? Please give me some advice.
Thanks.
--=20
http://members.hknet.com/~wong63124
(In Chinese Big 5)
http://members.hknet.com/~wong63124/linux.htm
(In English)
=======_NextPart_000_0014_01C0E574.9898ED60
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="big5"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Dbig5 http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2014.210" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#c0c0c0>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>I used to backup the windows by Ghost software. In =
linux, can=20
the command "tar" be used like Ghost. I means to backup the whole Linux =
system=20
by tar it and restore it when necessary. I have windows98 and two =
Linux=20
system in my PC (Red Hat 7.0 and Mandrake 8.0), so I can tar one of them =
when=20
running the other.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Is it possible? Please give me some =
advice.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>Thanks.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><BR>-- <BR><A=20
href=3D"http://members.hknet.com/~wong63124";>http://members.hknet.com/~wo=
ng63124</A><BR>(In=20
Chinese Big 5)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://members.hknet.com/~wong63124/linux.htm";>http://members.hkn=
et.com/~wong63124/linux.htm</A><BR>(In=20
English)</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
=======_NextPart_000_0014_01C0E574.9898ED60==
------------------------------
From: "Investigator" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 11:54:15 -0400
"flatfish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 25 May 2001 15:35:07 GMT,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 25 May 2001 14:08:57 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >>On Fri, 25 May 2001 00:41:29 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>> Compare this to Mandrakes update CD which destroyed a perfectly
> >>>> working system....
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>What did you do wrong?
> >>
> >>First mistake was opening the mailer the CD came in.
> >>Second mistake was booting Mandrake 7.2.
> >>Third mistake was putting the CD in the drive.
> >>Fourth mistake was su'ing to root.
> >>Fifth mistake was selecting LiveUpdate.
> >>Sixth mistake was giving it the ok to trash my system.
> >
> >First mistake was being a retard.
>
> Ahh the insults fly when they having nothing to say.
>
>
> flatfish+++
> "Why do they call it a flatfish?"
Second mistake was stirring shit amidst a group *full* of experienced
hemorrhoids. <EG>
--
_/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/ _/
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ Woody
_/_/_/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ _/ He, who never tries,
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/_/ never fails.
_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 10:55:11 -0500
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9elom5$hj1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> OTOH, Netscape 4.7x crashes regularly and now, I can't even get it
> >> >> to start up, it just core dumps.
> >> >
> >> > Hmm.. it's rock solid for me.
> >>
> >> Same here.
> >
> > You guys must be doing something magical. I've installed this box twice
> > now and both times Netscape has deteriorated to the point where it won't
> > work. Usually after 12-14 uses.
>
> This is really odd.
>
> If you delete ~/.netscape, it should restore it, since a user running
> netscape can't alter any of the default configuration stuff. Mabey its
> making you go over quota?
Hmm, this is interesting.
Although, I have tried logging in as a different user and it seems
to have the same problem.
> >> >> Netscape 6 requires practically reinstalling the OS, but it seems to
> >> >> fair a little better. Of course it's a usability and functionality
> >> >> nightmare and the news reader is a complete pile of ****.
> >>
> >> If windows makes you nearly reinstall the OS to put on NS, it myst be
> >> realy shitty.
> >
> > No, I'm talking about Solaris! I had to install over 50 patches which is
> > what I meant by "practically reinstalling the OS".
>
> Odd.
Yes, that's what I thought. I had a basic Solaris 2.7 install. I had
to download about 12 or so patches (required by NS 6) each of which
had a whole collection inside of them.
What I meant about hosing my system is, it seemed like half of the
patches either didn't run or had errors or files were claimed by
other patches.
I'm scared to reboot this thing because I'm pretty sure it won't
come back up.
-c
------------------------------
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, 25 May 2001 16:04:43 GMT
Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 23 May 2001 23:46:14
[...]
>> IE not only freezes constantly to the point of needing to be killed, but it
>> has some actions that are annoying as hell, like not letting one scroll the
>> windows with a find open, and dropping windows underneath others for no
>> apparant reason.
>
>Hmm. Well, I guess this speaks very poorly of solaris that one can get such
>a wide variety of problems with.
Can't be the microsoft, eh, pinhead? Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha.
You're bullshit would be more believable if we weren't all very well
aware that this behavior is endemic to IE ever since IE started screwing
with the code they originally bilked Spyglass to get.
--
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, 25 May 2001 16:04:45 GMT
Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 24 May 2001
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 21 May 2001
>> [...]
>> >> So? The same can be said for Win95 to Win98 to Win98SE to WinMe, and now
>> >> its NT to Win2K to XP.
>> >
>> >Which was exactly my point. Obviously the argument is bogus, since things
>> >develop over time.
>>
>> So why are the kernel versions consistent and numeric, and the MS
>> 'developments' complete repackaging? MS claims that XP (and before that
>> 2K, and before that NT) were "mostly all new code", IIRC. SO which is
>> it, overhaul from the ground up, or 'develop over time'?
>
>MS has not claimed that XP is mostly all new code, nor have they said NT4
>was mostly all new code. Of course NT 3.1 was, and Win2k was a major
>overhaul, but XP is a point release (5.1) and not a major rewrite.
<*Sniff*> <*Sniff*>
What's that smell? It smells like...
Horseshit.
MS touted the "massive overhaul" bullshit for every version of Windows
they've shoveled onto the market. Just because MS redacted their press
doesn't mean they didn't make the claim, Erik.
>> Or was your point that people have to pay for a new version of the
>> kernel when it comes out at a regular interval, but get full upgrades
>> for monopoly crapware for free, once they wait the necessary six to
>> twenty four months (if ever) after the originally scheduled release date
>> MS software tends to require before it is available?
>>
>> Just what is your point, Erik?
>
>My point was to counter the statement that if MS had "got it right" the
>first time, they wouldn't have needed a new version.
Your point was to wave your arms a lot to try to desperately to dissuade
discussion of the fact that Linux follows a rational and valuable method
of advancement and development, and Microsoft plays games with monopoly
crapware in a persistently criminal scam forcing consumers to pay
outrageous prices for shoddy goods.
--
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: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 16:04:46 GMT
Said Jan Johanson in alt.destroy.microsoft on 23 May 2001 23:46:05
>"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9ef6gn$c5e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:3b0b007f$0$56137$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >
>> > "Fred K Ollinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:9eejc5$ctu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > Where do I download a copy of win xp?
>> > >
>> >
>> > Same place you download an easy to install, easy to learn, easy to use
>> copy
>> > of Linux.
>> >
>> > nowhere...
>>
>> http://www.linux-mandrake.com/en/
>>
>> Maybe you should use a search engine next time.
>
>doesn't meet the criteria I gave
Yes it does. ;-)
--
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
******************************
