Linux-Advocacy Digest #913, Volume #34 Sat, 2 Jun 01 15:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft ("Bill Todd")
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (Michael Vester)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (drsquare)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (drsquare)
Re: SourceForge hacked! (drsquare)
Re: A Newbie Linux User Asks: (drsquare)
Re: Rather humorous posting on news.com commentry forum: (drsquare)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (drsquare)
Re: RIP the Linux desktop (drsquare)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 13:54:00 -0400
Daniel Johnson wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [snip]
> > > He seems to have a problem with people
> > > *licensing* software for profit; he favors
> > > that *other* business models.
> >
> > YOU said he had a problem with business. Now you are changing you
> > stance. Pick a place and stay there.
>
> A problem with "the business"; the business of
> selling licenses for the use of software, in particular.
>
If stallman has no problem with selling software, how can he have a
proplem with the business of selling software, since selling software is
business?
> I didn't mean to suggest that he had a problem
> with selling hot-dogs as a business.
>
> [snip]
> > > > So its OK with you to steal GPL code, but not m$ code?
> > >
> > > Now, now, I'm not suggesting that. It is just
> > > as naughty to abscond with one as the other;
> > > in both cases it violates the license agreement.
> >
> > Yes, you did. You used the word crib.
>
> I said crib the license agreement, not crib
> the code.
>
Yeah. right. Im sure you were talking about stealing the license as
opposed to stealing the code. How do you steal the license? And yes, I
just re-read you exact words. It doesnt track with the further
conversation.
> [snip]
> > > Maybe. I think maybe the EU is missing a lot,
> > > too, if they did that. Contrary to what you may
> > > have heard, Europe is not still trapped in
> > > the 1940s; that continent is also home to
> > > major commercial software developers.
> >
> > S what? So is the US and we have 23 differnet Open Source Licenses.
>
> But we don't have the federal government
> cautioning US business to avoid proprietary
> software.
>
Its getting close. The Fed is looking more and more into Free and/or
Open Software.
> > > For the EU to condemn proprietary
> > > software is quite bizzare, actually.
> >
> > Why? It may free them from the m$ tyranny.
>
> If they wanted to settle for a weaker product
> just because it is European, they could
> do that without slamming the many proprietary
> European software firms.
>
Are you dissing Mandrake, SuSU or something else?
> [snip]
> > > Don't know much about software
> > > development, do you?
> >
> > Answer the question. And BTW, software is rarely "finished".
>
> Software gets finished all the time.
>
They why is it revised - and answer the question.
> > > The difference between "finished" and
> > > "unfinished" isn't what's left out- it is
> > > commonplace to leave features off in order
> > > to get a product out the door.
> >
> > So, answer the question instead of trying to again sqirm your way out.
> > You said it was unfinshed. What's missing?
>
> It doesn't matter what's missing.
>
So, you CANT answer the question. You dont know whats missing, or if it
really matters. You yourself have stated that software is often shipped
without certain features. How is that unfinished, except that Open/Free
developers may be more honest about it?
> > > The difference is QA.
> >
> > yeah. Right. You are certainly not going to compare the testing of
> > open/free software with m$ software and tell us that m$ is better at it,
> > are you?
>
> Yes.
>
Bullshit.
> At least, sometimes they are. MS Office is stabler
> than StarOffice. So it happened at least once that
> MS was better at it.
>
1. - the correct usage should more stable.
2. - How can SO on *nix be less stable than Office?
> [snip]
> > > I've been drawing a disctiong here
> > > between Unix on the one hand and all
> > > the credible desktop OSes on the other.
> >
> > No, you've been dissing The various *nix's.
>
> That too. :D
>
Look, its the grinning idiot.
> [snip]
> > > No. Developers choose GNOME or KDE,
> > > and users get whatever the developers chose.
> >
> > User choose whatever environment they want to use. KDE, GNOME, neither,
> > their libs, something else... The developers chosse to write for one of
> > several environments, the USER CHOOSE the environment(s) they want to
> > use.
>
> I'm so glad that you finally admit that users can
> chose whether or not to run Windows or
> whatever ...
>
I did no such thing. Therefore what you said is a lie, which makes you a
liar. I was talking abnout *nix users, which says nothing about how
micro$oft has obtained ot mantained it's shrinking monopoly.
> .. but what I'm trying to tell you is that their
> choice is usually determined by the apps they
> want to run.
>
> This applies to KDE vs GNOME as much
> as Windows vs Linux.
>
What? what choice of a window manager and/or windowing envirnment do you
have on window$?
> > > On other OSes, you can get 3rd party
> > > widget sets and substitute them for all
> > > applications. Not on Unix.
> >
> > No? You sure?
>
> Yes, I am sure.
>
I think you think you are, but you arent, really.
> [snip]
> > > No. Explorer is more than just a file manager; it is
> > > more like OS/2s WPS than the Mac's Finder.
> > >
> > > But even having *just* a file manager is an
> > > improvement over Linux, if it has an API that
> > > can be relied upon.
> >
> > You can rely on midnight commander, konquorer, xfm, gmc.. they are all
> > reliable.
>
> I don't mean stable. I mean that its existance
> may be relied upon; even if a Windows user
> chooses StarOffice, Windows Explorer
> is still available for other apps.
>
I dont know of a distro that doesnt include mc. GNOME always includes
gmc (for now) and KDE always includes Knoquorer. If a user chooses SO,
the others are there.
> [snip]
> > > Sure. If developers would settle on just one of
> > > those the situation would improve some.
> >
> > They do usually settle on one.
>
> And if you are using the other, you are out
> of luck.
>
What? If you settle on windpw$ you are out of luck if a BeOS app comes
out too.
> > You just cant get out of your little
> > window$ world. You have window$. I have *nix and a plethora of
> > environments. I cna choose one, or use many. You cant.
>
> You sure about that? Programs ported from Unix-
> like StarOffice- do exist, and I can get the Unix
> "experience" from them, if I want it-
You can get a SO ported experience. You can get a more of "Unix" if you
use X and GTK on windows, though.
> or I can do better.
No, you cant, you're still stuck with window$.
>
> [snip]
> > > Other developers can make products that work
> > > on Windows- work better than StarOffice does,
> > > anyway.
> >
> > So what? you started this by dissing *nix. I dont give a flying f**k
> > about window$. I dont care how SO works on window$. Dont care. Dont
> > care. It works fine in *nix... as its users will generally tell you. As
> > people point out weakness or preferences for change, openoffice.org
> > and/or Sun makes changes.
>
> It sounds to me like it "works fine" in that it runs,
> but is just as flawed as its Windows port- indeed,
Then you need to listen better.
> perhaps it is more flawed, since it has no OLE on
> Unix.
>
But you said bonobo was only a chromosome in difference... then it MUST
be at least as good as OLE, maybe better... Oh, I see... its not
micro$oft, so it just cant be better.
> > You dont like the system? Fine dont use it. But before you continue your
> > littel pro-m$ diatribe get a new midset that allows non-window$ system
> > to work differnet than window$.
>
> Oh, I accept that they do. But I feel at liberty to
> say when they work *worse* than Windows.
>
All you done is praine window$ and diss EVERYTHING else.
> [snip]
> > > > 2. If it is so close, as you say... wouldnt that imply some sort of
> > > > patent or copyright infrinement?
> > >
> > > I don't know. Ask Microsoft's lawyers. Certainly
> > > Apple has sued over much less.
> >
> > We're not discussing Apple. Apple never came into this.
>
> Well, I'm just saying that I suspect a case
> *could* be made for infringement of something,
> given sufficiently energetic lawyers.
>
We're not discussing Apple. Apple never came into this. You are avoiding
questions again.
> You did ask about that.
>
I asked a question in reference to m$. You didnt answer, again.
> > You are avoiding
> > questions again. If you dont that "Bonobo is so close to OLE, it takes a
> > chromosone count to tell the difference" then dont ssy it is so close.
>
> I do say it is that close. Get used to it. :D
>
If it is so close, as you say... wouldnt that imply some sort of patent
or copyright infrinement?
> [snip]
> > > If it wasn't, it was second rate at the time
> > > it was released.
> >
> > Its not second rate now, how could it be then?
>
> It is now second rate; it's a cut behind
> MS Office.
>
No, its not.
> Hey, at least it's not third rate. :D
... like you and micro$oft?
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 13:58:03 -0400
Daniel Johnson wrote:
>
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > > He seems to have a problem with people
> > > *licensing* software for profit; he favors
> > > that *other* business models.
> >
> > No, he just wants to make sure that someone who gives their code
> > away doesn't have it stolen from them and then patented, and thus
> > hidden from those whom the original code expected to gain from
> > his donation of code.
>
> Essentially any license will do this much.
>
> The GPL is about preventing that rascal from
> taking his *own* code proprietary; that is what
> other licensing won't do for you.
>
Let me get this straight... you are saying if someone writes some code,
the existance of the GPL would make it impossible to make his/her owwn
code proprietary?
Or are you saying if he/she uses the GPL, they cant...
but then , if they wanted to taked the code proprietary, why use the GPL
in the first place?
> [snip]
> > > On other OSes, you can get 3rd party
> > > widget sets and substitute them for all
> > > applications. Not on Unix.
> >
> > Pure poppycock.
>
> If you know an equivalent to WindowBlinds
> or Kaliadioscope for any Unix (bar NextStep),
> point me to it.
Why bar nextstep? and are you also barring MacOS X, which has been
declared a Unix distro?
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[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: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 17:57:11 GMT
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Daniel Johnson wrote:
[snip]
> It sounds like we need to clear up the meanings of
> "widget set" versus "themes" versus "skins".
> Maybe?
Oy. Tall order. :D
And I'm not sure it matters. In a real sense themes
are skins and skins are widget sets. The differences
are not really worth arguing over.
What I'm trying to get at is a layer deeper. Not the
widget set but the supporting infrastructure.
When you create a button, how do you do it?
On Windows you say this:
HWND hbutton=
CreateWindow(..., "BUTTON", ...);
And it loads the widget by name.
CreateWindow does not know anything
about what a "BUTTON" is- it is mechanism,
rather than policy. But there is a convention-
whatever "BUTTON" is, it will be some sort
of pushbutton, and it will respond to a particular
set of messages and styles.
Think of it this way. When you ask for a
"BUTTON" in windows, you are specifing
a particular policy, but you aren't specifying
the implementation of it.
You are asking for a pushbutton, but you
aren't asking for a particular one.
What Unix apps do is link the policy
to the implementation; you decide you
are going to use the Qt pushbutton, and
you get that pushbutton.
It's possible to implement a layer on top
of X that would provide for this, but
you'd have to convince developers to use it,
and that may be hard- they have already written
a lot of code to the various present-day
implementations. They'd have to port to it.
So I expect that the practical limitations
that Unix has here will remain for some
time, even if the needed infrastructure
materializes tomorow.
------------------------------
From: "Bill Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2001 14:05:56 -0400
"Chris Morgan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
...
> I thought most people only got "restore" cds which put it back how the
> manufacturer set it up (no doubt with special care over their
> particular hardware choices etc). I'm talking about a full install. I
> don't know that many people who have done that out of the people I
> know who use Windows. That could be unusual of course.
The only time this ever happened to me was with the purchase of an IBM
Thinkpad recently. Otherwise, every new (desktop) PC I've ever bought came
with a full (OEM) version of Windows (or DOS, with my first Leading Edge
PC-XT and a used AST 386 I got next) that allowed a full-fledged
installation. Of course, since the Leading Edge and AST they've all (4 more
at present count) been third-tier-manufacturer systems - Dell, Compaq, and
Gateway might do things differently.
- bill
> --
> Chris Morgan <cm at mihalis.net> http://www.mihalis.net
> Temp sig. - Enquire within
------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 11:53:09 -0700
Marc Schlensog wrote:
>
> Terry Porter wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 01 Jun 2001 22:32:41 GMT, KSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > "Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> Ben Franchuk wrote:
> > >
> > >> I find a network card install in Linux quite simple. It has been over 4
> > >> years since I used a dial-up ISP. A Linux install with a network card with
> > >> my ISP requires setting the IP address, gateway and name servers. I never
> > >> experienced a Linux install that did not identify the NIC and load the
> > >> correct drivers.
> > >
> > > Maybe I could get you to install Linux on my computer.
> >
> > Maybe you should state your offer to do so in dollars?
>
He could not afford me. I only do free tech support for family and
friends. If Ben finds Linux to difficult, stay with losedos. Bill Gates
will love you. If any so called computer professionals are still having
problems installing the new Linux distributions, shame on them. It could
not be easier.
> >
> > > I've tried Debian
> > > and Red Hat, neither found my NIC, and I could never get networking to work.
> > > Win2k came up just fine with networking and all.
>
> Hmm, just great. Let me tell you my experience with NICs/SCSI-adaptors.
>
> WinME was the first M$-OS that was able to recognize and install drivers
> for my
> NIC (Realtek8139). They didn't work, nevertheless. Neither Win9x nor
> WinNT or even
> Win2k were able to find this card. But my SuSE Linux 6.0 was able to. I
> booted from
> my SCSI-CD-drive and the module for my SCSI-adaptor and the NIC were
> loaded.
> I also tried to install W9x, WME, WNT and W2K from CD with the same
> SCSI-adaptor
> (oh yeah, it's a SYM53c875). Guess what? WNT/W2K bluescreened and the
> W9x series
> wasn't able to find my CD-drive.
> What chip did the NIC have you were using?
>
> >
> > Then perhaps the $300 you paid for Win2k was worth it ?
>
> What about additional software? Is a Windog system actually worth
> thousands of bucks?
> I don't think so. I'd rather save the money for software and get me a
> nicely equipped
> Alpha.
>
That is a good description of my losedos installs. With PnP turned off,
losedos has fewer problems too. Now, whenever I purchase a new card, the
first thing I do is turn off PnP. PnP, the most useless "innovation" ever
for hardware. A Mr. Clippy! A better solution would be an industry
standard for irq and io default settings.
> >
> > >
> > > KSG
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Kind Regards
> > Terry
> > --
> > **** ****
> > My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
> > 1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
> > Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
When I was a foolish kid, I had a 1971 Kawasaki 500. 0-60 in under 4
seconds. Extremely dangerous. The bike earned the name "murdercycle."
Fortunately, luck was on my side and I am still alive. My current ride is
a 1970 Triumph Trident. Extremely rare and often down for months while I
search for parts. Hence, it is a very safe motorcycle. Even the Hell's
Angels acknowledge that my motorcycle is worthy of their attention. Last
year, I found myself surrounded by a dozen Angels on the highway. They
wanted to admire my bike, and they treated me to coffee and pie in a
nearby diner.
> > Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
> > ** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
>
> Just my 2c...
>
> Marc
>
> --
> They're only trying to make me LOOK paranoid!
--
Michael Vester
A credible Linux advocate
"The avalanche has started, it is
too late for the pebbles to vote"
Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 19:33:14 +0100
On Sat, 02 Jun 2001 14:24:17 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>>>>> I have, you ignored it, and this is what happens.
>>>>>
>>>>> Next time, pay atttention.
>>>>
>>>> Where is this example?
>>>
>>>I love your tactic of simply ignoring every piece of evidence and when
>>>the poster won't post it for the 25th time, you accuse them of lying.
>>>
>>>Now this is a prime example.
>> Will you two just fuck off please, or take it somewhere else?
>piss off.
Fuck off up your own arse.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 19:33:15 +0100
On 2 Jun 2001 15:33:40 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)) wrote:
>drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 02 Jun 2001 02:41:27 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>> Because I've got better things to do than read countless posts between
>> a couple of cunts arguing about some off topic shite.
>Filter it, dipshit. This is usenet, and you have no more a right to
Please explain how I can filter it.
>>>You're a new poster to COLA, Drsquare, why not just get a news
>> New poster? I've been posting here for years.
>Ive been posting here longer,
Wow, I'm impressed.
>and you have proven yourself over and over
>again to be nothing short of entirely retarded.
Oooh, good one. Must've taken you years to think up that one.
>>>reader that has a scorefile and then you can avoid attempting to
>>>be a good thought policeman ?
>> Because then I'd miss other posts.
>Because youre an idiot and you dont know how to killfile properly. "Years"
>my ass.
Sorry, but my newsreader isn't capable enough to filter in such a way.
>>>Goodwin and Rosten, are long term posters, and we are all having
>>>a nice COLA argument over tactics.
>>>
>>>Comments like yours, will just get *you* killfiled.
>> Oh no, that would be a complete DISASTER.
>If you actually knew what a killfile was, id buy that sincerity.
You're right. I really wish I knew what a killfile was. I really do.
Could someone please explain?
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SourceForge hacked!
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 19:33:18 +0100
On Sat, 2 Jun 2001 15:48:56 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>mlw wrote:
>Is it possible to do something so that you can only be root if youre
>physiccly attached to the terminal?
Yes
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A Newbie Linux User Asks:
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 19:33:19 +0100
On Sat, 02 Jun 2001 14:38:02 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "drsquare"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>> This would never happen under the Nazis.
>>>>
>>>>>Are you trying to end the thread?
>>>>
>>>> No, why would you think that?
>>
>>>G******s law?
>>
>> Oh fuck off.
>Before you start being rude, tru making sense. I have absoloutely no iead
>what you're going on about.
He's trying to invoke Godwin's law, which only a complete cunt would
do.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Rather humorous posting on news.com commentry forum:
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 19:33:19 +0100
rOn Sat, 02 Jun 2001 14:41:11 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>> Why does everyone always use those horrible plusses in corners? Surely
>> it would look nicer like this:
>>
>> .-----------------.
>> | |
>> | |
>> | |
>> | |
>> '-----------------'
>>
>> Nice smooth corners, not those awful plusses sticking out everywhere.
>In that case, might I suggest:
>
> | |
> `-----------------'
>
>to get matching corners as well.
Nah, the ` makes the whole thing look assymetrical. My version is
obviously FAR superior :->
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 19:33:22 +0100
On 2 Jun 2001 15:35:56 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)) wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Sat, 02 Jun 2001 00:53:18 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>> ("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>>>Sorry, but your fallacious technique of "shifting the burden of proof" will not
>work.
>> Shifting? The burden of proof is one you to start with, as you're the
>> one that made the claim that it isn't spread through heterosexual sex.
>You're both wrong,
Nope. I'm right, Kulkis is wrong.
>because you havent been particular about *which* hepatitis
>you mean. Hepitits *can* be spread through heterosexual sex, under VERY
>certian circumstances, but not all kinds of hepititis, and not all kinds of
>heterosexual sex.
When did I state otherwise?
>>>YOU are the one alleging that hepatitis is spread through heterosexual
>>>sex, therefore, the burden of proof is on you, not me.
>> Hepatitus can be spread through sex, as everyone knows.
>
>Not all of them, and not through all kinds of sex.
>
>You're an idiot.
Well, with a response like that, no wonder you have so much respect
around here.
>> You're stating
>> that it can't be spread through heterosexual sex. It's up to to prove
>> that.
>Its up to you to actually understand what youre talking about.
I understand perfectly what I'm talking about. Unlike YOU.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: RIP the Linux desktop
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 19:33:23 +0100
On Sat, 02 Jun 2001 17:22:28 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jesse F. Hughes)) wrote:
>drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >Consequently, murder/suicide is not a crime. After all, if I kill
>> >myself after offing whoever is annoying me, I will not be convicted.
>> >
>> >Brilliant. No convictions, no crimes.
>> >
>> >I'm not entering the debate here, but that kind of tortured reasoning
>> >deserves comment. Clearly, some *crimes* go unsolved (or unpunished),
>> >but no one has any doubt that a crime has been committed.
>> Well, that's relevant.
>It looks relevant to me. If we look back at the quotes above, we see
>that you were denying that there is a difference between convictions
>and number of crimes reported.
Yet again, you are completely incorrect. I was merely stating you
cannot call someone a criminal unless they have been convicted as
such. You cannot consider a reported crime a crime without a
conviction.
>My response is intended to refute that
>denial. Seems to be relevant to the quotations above.
>
>Perhaps you mean that *your* statement was irrelevant, and hence so
>was my refutation? I don't know if that's what you intended, but
>looks to me like my response must be as relevant as the statement to
>which I was responding here.
>
>Well, no matter.
Stop talking out of your arse, and maybe we'll begin to take you
seriously.
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[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: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 18:30:47 GMT
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Daniel Johnson wrote:
[snip]
> > If you know an equivalent to WindowBlinds
> > or Kaliadioscope for any Unix (bar NextStep),
> > point me to it.
>
> Why bar nextstep? and are you also barring MacOS X, which has been
> declared a Unix distro?
D'oh! And I posted that on c.s.mac.advocacy!
I should have said "MacOS X" of course.
Please don't kill me. :D
The reason I bar it is that it is quite
a different product from the point of
view of both users and developers, of
course.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
