Linux-Advocacy Digest #859, Volume #34 Wed, 30 May 01 18:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Re: sorry NT... ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (Donn Miller)
Re: What does XP stands for ??? ("Edward Rosten")
Re: A Newbie Linux User Asks: ("Edward Rosten")
Re: What is the licence aggreement for REDHAD professional server? ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: aaron kulkis steals his brother ian turdboy's crack pipe ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Light waves beat radio waves?? (was Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)) (The Ghost In
The Machine)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ("Edward Rosten")
Re: IBM to let Linux fans use mainframe--for free (Karel Jansens)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 16:12:04 -0500
"Anonymous" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> The effect of share dilution through
> the effect of exercisable stock options
> is well documented in the SEC filings.
>
> There's really nothing really "fraudulent"
> about it. It's pretty much standard practice
> with all companies.
>
> Companies usually do stock buybacks to offset
> the dilutive effect of incentive stock options.
Indeed. In fact, the recent stock market slump allowed MS to buy back stock
at a profit (at much lower rates than they optioned and sold the stock to
their employees in the first place)
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 16:15:13 -0500
"Morten Bjoernsvik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> But back to Rocket Rick:
> He got a lot of whiz around the farenheit agreement, which actually
> meant
> SGI giving up all its intellectual property in hardware graphics to get
> a uniform openGL api. DirectX started as a rip off of openGL. and like
> everything M$ puts their hands on they introduce incompatibilities and
> propiretary functionality.
Uhh.. not true. As usual, people like you confuse DirectX with Direct3D.
DirectX includes a ton of stuff not related to 3D at all.
Direct3D was bought by MS, and was not created as an OpenGL ripoff (in fact,
they are nothing alike).
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 16:19:07 -0500
"Ray Chason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message
> That said, I think the release of Windows XP will be the biggest flop
> since Bob. It won't be the end of Microsoft, not by a long shot, but
> Microsoft is setting up itself the bomb. The hype coming from
> Microsoft and its various mouthpieces is that XP is the greatest
> thing since W95, yet I have seen nothing concrete that would make me
> want to upgrade.
That depends on your perspective. Are you telling me that having a consumer
OS based on NT isn't a huge upgrade for people coming from the Win9x line?
Linux users are always bitching about Win9x's stability and how they prefer
Linux because of it, now you're going to say that this stability isn't worth
upgrading?
> Win95 was a quantum leap over Win 3.1. Win98 wasn't such a big deal,
> but if you were stuck with Win95A then Win98 at least offered FAT32.
> WinXP seems to offer nothing but fluff and spyware, and require scads
> of hardware upgrades for the privilege. I for one will stick with
> Win98 First Edition. And Linux, of course, long live the Penguin.
Consumer XP will not require huge amounts of upgrades. It will likely
require 32MB (64 to be useable) just like 98, and it will run fine on a P133
and up.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 21:25:08 GMT
On Wed, 30 May 2001 16:19:07 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Ray Chason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
>message
>
>> That said, I think the release of Windows XP will be the biggest flop
>> since Bob. It won't be the end of Microsoft, not by a long shot, but
>> Microsoft is setting up itself the bomb. The hype coming from
>> Microsoft and its various mouthpieces is that XP is the greatest
>> thing since W95, yet I have seen nothing concrete that would make me
>> want to upgrade.
>
>That depends on your perspective. Are you telling me that having a consumer
>OS based on NT isn't a huge upgrade for people coming from the Win9x line?
Uh sure. It's technology is only 20 years old instead of 40.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: sorry NT...
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 16:29:20 -0500
This article was posted and commented on in here almost 3 weeks ago. You're
behind the times.
Several people in the industry stated specifically that Linux was not
replacing NT, but was supplementing it, mostly in render farms.
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9evbhp$7o1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> But youve been replaced, yet again.
>
> http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2761566,00.html
>
>
> --
> "George Dubya Bush---the best presidency money can buy"
>
> ---obviously some Godless commie heathen faggot bastard
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 17:30:05 -0400
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Stuart Fox wrote:
> Which is one of the differences. Windows makes it easy for people to do
> things. *nix makes it easy for people not to do things. It also means that
> to use *nix effectively one has to have a higher degree of technical savvy -
> which also accounts for the reason that *nix based desktops are only really
> popular amongst the tech savvy and scientists, and the reason that Windows
> based desktops are so popular.
Right, and it's easy for me to do things with *nix, because I've been
familiar with and using it for many years. For me, I like the unix API
better for developing software. I find the Win API very cumbersome,
which brings about an intersting duality: Windows is easy to use, hard
to program. *nix is hard to use, but easier to develop for. I prefer
to use the same development environment on both: gcc, XEmacs, and Vim
for both. I also use Cygwin, which means I can still use the *nix API
on Windows. But, I try to use the Win API and bypass the Cygwin layer
whenever I can for speed and efficiency reasons.
====== 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: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What does XP stands for ???
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 23:30:53 +0100
>>I've seen some rather good, although 'unofficial' explanations about the
>>XP abbreviation in Windows XP. Let's try to collect them in this
>>thread.
> Formerly Urine.
ROFL!!
-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: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A Newbie Linux User Asks:
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 23:36:21 +0100
>>I believe you missed the point. When ever anyone points out that Aaron
>>is anti-social and rude, he always says its OK because its a free
>>country and he is (in essense) free to be an arsehole.
>
> This would never happen under the Nazis.
Are you trying to end the thread?
-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: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What is the licence aggreement for REDHAD professional server?
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 23:38:21 +0100
> : I love this Linux user attitude that things should be *free*... hehe.
>
> Well, zero is a real number, so it's not any less capitalistic to charge
> $0 than it is to charge $200 for a piece of software. Many things can be
> gotten for $0 (or less) in our society. Air is one of them. Another is
> chairs
> (in my neighborhood).
Chairs?
how so?
-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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 21:39:38 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Wed, 30 May 2001 19:48:58 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>> >Hahaha... Win98 is far inferior to linux. Linux won't BSOD you to death
>> >like Win98 can.
>>
>> That is one measure of superiority. (It happens to be one I approve of.)
>> However, it is possible that Linux may not be superior in all metrics.
>
>Windows maybe, but Windows 2000?
Depends on the metrics. I now have Win2k on my work system. So far,
I'm not impressed, although it is an improvement in reliability.
But it's still Windows -- and I just installed SP2. Why would I
have to patch Windows if it's "ultra-reliable to the point of 99.999%
uptime"? :-)
And cmd.exe *still* doesn't like "cd \\domain\host\dir". Even after SP2.
Unix has never had a problem with this sort of thing, although the
implementation is slightly different (/net, /nfs, /auto, or /home
might be used as mountpoints in an automounter, the rough equivalent
of SMB/UNC.)
>
>> - portability to other processor platforms such as Sparc,
>> m68k, ARM, Itanium, Alpha, or the mighty S/390. NT might do some
>> of them, with a lot of work. (Whatever happened to HAL?)
>
>And how many of them are likely to be affordable on the mass market
>(except m68k)?
True. Of course, that is a submetric; not everyone purchases
hardware on the mass market. Many big businesses need bigger iron,
from multiprocessor Sun hosts to very large IBM mainframes that can
throw out terabytes of data in seconds. At least, such would be
my guess; compared to that, a PC, with its dinky single ~100 Mhz data
buss, would look like a sick tricycle. But even a sick tricycle
beats crawling.... :-)
Other businesses use Unix workstations -- which may now be a dying market.
But it's not dead yet -- and Linux just might give it a shot in the
arm, with a ready-made, inexpenive, Unix-compatible solution.
Hardware is no longer an issue.
>
>> - easy portability to other operating systems such as HP-UX, Solaris,
>> AIX, Tru64, or SCO Unix. Parts of NT can be ported -- Solaris got
>> to enjoy the benefits (?) of IE for awhile -- but it's apparently
>> not all that easy a task.
>
>As above.
>
>> - network-transparent, if slow, graphics (and local X isn't all that
>> slow, nowadays, especially with widely available extensions)
>
>Slow is the right word. X Windows on my system crawls.
Sounds like a personal problem. :-)
>
>> - standard UI (Windows wins, here -- although not by much; one must also
>> note that Motif was here first so Windows may not even have won).
>
>MOTIF is a dinosaur. Clunky antiquated style, as compared to the
>lightweight style of Windows.
Compared to...?
If one wants featherweight, try some tools implemented using curses.
That's about as featherweight as one can get -- although it's not
very graphical. (It's also not trivial to do well.)
One has to also count the widget implementation -- which is distributed
throughout various parts of Windows. That makes Windows fairly heavy,
as one has to include many of the DLLs; Windows becomes *very* heavy
when one wants to display text using IE as an embedded widget/browser.
(Not that Linux is lighter or heavier in that regard, although the
weight is differently distributed. One slightly bodgy method is
to throw the problem at Netscape; another, more elegant method, might
use CORBA.)
I'm not sure what's clunky and antiquated about Motif from the user's
standpoint (if one wants really clunky, try classic Athena -- no
3-d look, scrollbars that were just short of bizarre, and buttons and
toggles that had identical look and feel until one tried to click).
True, Motif doesn't have "moveaway" menu bars -- but if that's someone's
idea of modern, then I'd suggest someone prefers gewgawgery to
just getting the darned thing to work right. :-)
And Motif does provide tear-away menus, if one wants them.
(They're occasionally useful.)
>From the programmer's standpoint, Motif leaves some things to be
desired; Java has a better layout manager, for example, although
XmForm is at least usable (classic Athena's Form widget was horrid;
Motif's XmForm is merely bad). Tcl/TK has a model similar to
Java's, albeit nore limited.
I'm not sure what Windows has, precisely, but from what I've observed
regarding resources, it appears that Windows relies far too heavily
on absolute coordinate positioning, which means that if a font changes
things start to look very weird. It's convenient to set up from
within Visual Studio, but that's about it -- and woe betide the user
who doesn't have the right fonts. Of course, Windows provides lots
of fonts, too....masking the problem.
>
>> - console text throughput (Linux beats NT fairly easily; try moving
>> a fast-scrolling text window in Linux and in NT, or compare the number
>> of lines per minute displayed).
>
>Since Windows does not rely on the console so much, this is hardly a big
>advantage.
An interesting point; however, if I have time, I can also set up a test
case scrolling *raw text*. I suspect Windows won't do horribly well
there, either -- although there are a number of issues that might
be interesting to try, from the rather mundane printf() loop suggested
by another poster thrown at Linux's consoles and WinNT's full-screen
mode (Shift+Alt+KP_ENTER) to something using XCopyArea() on the
X side and the rough equivalent on the Windows side (I'd have to look).
>
>> - control -- Linux wins here in limited areas because NT requires
>> a process to respond to events; if the process hangs, the window "sticks".
>> Win2k is a little better in that regard, allowing a user to kill
>> a hanging process by closing its window.
>
>I'm not quite sure how Linux does the same without a process?
Linux does have a process. It's called the window manager. :-)
That's one reason why Linux windows don't hang if the application
has problems.
It's not often done nowadays (or even back in X's debut), but one can
also write one's own window manager (most, however are highly
customizable). They also tend to be small, which means they stay in
memory -- with one rather annoying exception: HP-UX's window manager
occasionally pauses the entire system while it's doing something.
(Don't ask me what it's doing. It's annoying, that's for sure.)
>
>> - flexibility -- Toss-up, NT has more tools (DLLs) for developers, but
>> Linux has the ability to change look-and-feel (not just color or
>> skin) by changing window managers, from the extremely crude twm to
>> the ultra-sophisticated window managers available for Gnome and KDE,
>> and quite a few in between; there's no shortage of DLLs on Linux,
>> either.
>
>There are Window Managers for Windows, not that I've tried many. Here I
>agree with you in that Linux has more flexible desktop for eye-candy.
>Windows XP has added themes, provided you like the old grey style or the
>new colourful style.
Oh goody! Black or candy-apple red! :-) Gosh what a choice....
>
>> - a solid foundation based on standards and a 30-year legacy. Some might
>> reverse this, claiming that Unix is "old technology" -- but then,
>> so is the internal combustion engine, and we're still using it.
>
>An antiquated design that was left behind by more modern OS's since then.
You bit! :-) But what is the "advanced design" that Windows is using?
I'll admit that COM might be more flexible than pipes/sockets/shared memory.
But it's far from clear that it's the best. At a higher level, one
might try to compare ADO with SOAP or RMI. Of course, RMI was a big
part of one of Sun's lawsuits.
>
>> I've probably left out a dozen other metrics -- one might be 3D sound,
>> as Pete G. suggests; since I don't know anything about it (my sound
>> isn't functional because of resource conflicts at this time), I can't
>> intelligently comment further.
>
>Multimedia support - streaming sound and video. On my slow X graphics it
>barely plays them. On Windows no problem at all.
Yes, there is that. Of course, I strongly suspect you are either using
the wrong X server, or have misconfigured it somehow. But without
more details, time, and willingness, I for one can't say.
I certainly can't say I've noticed any performance problems in Linux/X here.
(That doesn't mean they aren't there, of course, or that other people
won't run into them if they are.)
>
>--
>Pete
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 30d:03h:51m actually running Linux.
Microsoft. When it absolutely, positively has to act weird.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: aaron kulkis steals his brother ian turdboy's crack pipe
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 17:43:31 -0400
chrisv wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >chrisv wrote:
> >>
> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >chrisv wrote:
> >> At least if I'm ignorant about something, I don't shoot my mouth off
> >> about it, unlike you, who likes to play "wannabe expert" on every
> >> subject imaginable....
> >
> >Wrong. I claim no expertise in numerous fields.
>
> Okay, change "on every subject imaginable" to "on nearly every subject
> which arises in this newsgroup, and in which most of, you are very
> much out of your depth."
>
> >For example hindi, farsi, chinese, and a multitude of other foreign languages.
>
> Wow, I'm really impressed. I'm surprised that you haven't claimed
> fluency in Chinese, then refused to provide proof (you'd just say
> "jump"), just like many of your other claims.
>
> >Hope that helps.
>
> It didn't. Your anal, literal interpretation of what I wrote just
> made you look like an idiot bent on ignoring my point.
Are you saying that I should interpret your words in some way
other than what you wrote?
Do what you say. Say what you mean. One thing leads to another.
--
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.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 23:44:34 +0100
>> > Someone said I snip inappropriately - yet no proof has been supplied.
>>
>> I said it.
>
> Still no proof I see.
Look at the posst where i accused you of the same thing in the "Oopsie"
thead. if you will follow them through, you will find the examples.
>> > You say proof has already been supplied, so where is it? C'mon show
>> > me
>> > _one_ example.
>>
>> You asked for proof last time (in the "oopsie" thread) and I supplied
>> proof. You ignored it. Since you ignored it last time, why should I
>> bother this time?
>
> You said that as well. I don't recall what you're talking about. Since
Uh, yeah.
> you are unwilling (or just plain unable) then I think I can safely
> conclude that you are LYING.
I have provided you with an example above. I can't be bothered to follow
it through, but it is there if you want it. Last time I spent time
following through on a therad liek this, you ignored it.
Before accusing me of being a liar, you better check that I'm lying (which
I'm not).
Now, I know that you're not going to follow the pointert above. Why not?
Think you'll find something you don't like?
-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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,sci.physics
Subject: Re: Light waves beat radio waves?? (was Re: Linux beats Win2K (again))
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 21:45:50 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Uncle Al
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Wed, 30 May 2001 03:23:10 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>[snip]
>
>> >Radio waves are not the same as light waves.
>
>Gamma rays to military ELF and Project Sanguine, a photon is a photon
>and it travels at lightspeed in a vacuum.
>
>> I have a dumb question. My understanding is that radio waves,
>> apart from the wavelength (an FM station, for example, has
>> a frequency of 88 to 108 Mhz, which translates into a wavelength
>> of (very roughly) 10 feet, or 3 m; blue light, by contrast, is
>> about 300 nm or so -- 7 orders of magnitude smaller),
>
>Blue cuts off at 400 nm. 300 nm is UV B - germacidal UV.
Ah. Interesting to know.
>
>> or energy,
>> or frequency, are more or less identical to light waves. To suggest that
>> the speed of travel in vacuo is dependent on either energy, frequency,
>> or wavelength (take your pick; they're interdependent) is an
>> interesting one;
>
>It is an uninformed one made ridiculous by trivial observation.
That was admittedly the point I was trying to elicit; however, subsequent
clarification indicates an apples-to-oranges comparison. Briefly,
the light was apparently traveling in air, whereas the radio
waves -- presumably in the GHz range -- were being guided by
a (what else? :-) ) waveguide. Apparently skin effects and/or
eddies slow down the propagation to 88% of c.
>All
>EMF travels at lighspeed in vacuo. If vacuum were a dispersive medium
>for photons we would see chromatic aberration over intergalactic
>distances and chromatic time delays when supernovae popped. We don't
>- neither one. Vacuum isn't a gyrotropic medium for plane-polarized
>EMF, either,
>
>http://pancake.uchicago.edu/~carroll/aniso/
>http://www.cc.rochester.edu/college/rtc/Borge/analysis.html
>http://www.ras.ucalgary.ca/SKA/science/node11.html
>
Thanks for the links. :-)
>nor is there a Faraday effect in vacuum.
>
>[snip]
>
>> So, now my question: what is the relationship between
>> frequency/quantum energy/wavelength and wave speed in vacuo,
>> expressed as a formula?
>
>A photon travels at lightspeed in a vacuum. It's
>energy/frequency/wavelength is irrelevant.
>
>Photon propagation speed through a polarizable medium is in general
>less than lightspeed, being careful to differentiate between group and
>phase velocities,
>
>http://www.netspace.net.au/~gregegan/APPLETS/20/20.html
>
>Anomalous dispersion in non-linear optical media can slow light to
>about 40 mph (Bose-Einstein condensate) or stop it entirely (optically
>pumped cesium vapor)
>
>http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2001/01.24/01-stoplight.html
>
>--
>Uncle Al
>http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
>http://www.ultra.net.au/~wisby/uncleal/
> (Toxic URLs! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
>"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net!
I figured someone in sci.physics would know.... :-)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 30d:12h:34m actually running Linux.
Most likely, no neutrinos were found during this message.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 23:45:58 +0100
>> I did, several times and you ignored it all. I'm not going to try
>> again.
>
> I don't remember them, and I think I would. The fact that you're not
> willing (or unable) to post any examples despite being asked repeatedly
> to produce them tells me you're lying and there are none.
And the fact that I posted them before only for you to ignore them tells
me that you're a common troll.
-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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karel Jansens)
Subject: Re: IBM to let Linux fans use mainframe--for free
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 23:40:46 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 30 May 2001 19:13:43 +0200, Ayende Rahien <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Karel Jansens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
>>
>> An interesting thing I discovered recently when trying out knode: that
>> newsreader has the ability to filter out .sigs, if they comply to the "--
>> preceding" rule. For one reason or another (probably sheer luck), Aaron's
>> .sig complies to knode's requirements, so if anyone would be inclined to
>> read Aaron's posts without the .sig overhead, knode is a good choice.
>>
>
>Um, no, that is not the reason why so many kill-filed him.
>His sig certainly didn't help, but that isn't the reason.
>
>
I really could not be bothered why "so many" killfiled Aaron, I only said
why _I_ did.
Also, IIRC, the original complaint in this thread was a.o. about the length
of Aaron's sig. That is what I replied to.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================================================
Give a man fire and he is warm for a day.
Set him on fire and he is warm for the rest of his life.
==============================================================
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
