Linux-Advocacy Digest #923, Volume #34 Sun, 3 Jun 01 00:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Very interesting cracker article, and XP warning. ("Stuart Fox")
Re: Argh - Ballmer ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Ballmer tells another bald-headed lie. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Argh - Ballmer (Dave Martel)
Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!! ("Stuart Fox")
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (Terry Porter)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (Terry Porter)
Re: Ballmer tells another bald-headed lie. (Rick)
Re: Argh - Ballmer (Rick)
Re: Argh - Ballmer (Rick)
Re: Is Open Source for You? (Terry Porter)
Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?) (Terry Porter)
Re: Is Open Source for You? (Terry Porter)
Re: Very interesting cracker article, and XP warning. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Argh - Ballmer ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Linux is shit (Terry Porter)
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (Paul Repacholi)
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft ("Stuart Fox")
Re: Linux is shit (Michael Vester)
Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!! (Terry Porter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Very interesting cracker article, and XP warning.
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 15:07:25 +1200
"Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Hi all, here is the url to an eye opening article about
> cracker DOS attacks, how they are orchestrated, and by whom.
>
> An extract:-
> Nothing more than the whim of a 13-year
> old hacker is required to knock any user,
> site, or server right off the Internet.
>
> I believe you will be as fascinated and concerned as I am by
> the findings of my post-attack forensic analysis, and
> the results of my subsequent infiltration into the networks
> and technologies being used by some of the Internet's
> most active hackers.
>
> If the attacking machines had been running Windows
> 2000 or the home-targeted version of Windows XP, as
> they certainly will be next year, we would have been
> utterly defenseless and simply forced off the Internet.
> This is what anyone on the Internet can soon expect.
>
> http://grc.com/dos/grcdos.htm
>
If I read this correctly, this guy is complaining because Microsoft is
making their TCP/IP stack fully sockets standards compliant? Correct me if
I'm wrong, but isn't one of the accusations commonly levelled at MS that
they don't comply with standards? So now, they're damned if they do, damned
if they don't.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Argh - Ballmer
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 06:03:00 +0200
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > How, then, can the FSF claim that a program that link to a DLL must be
GPLed
> > as well?
>
> Its their license. They, well Stallman, wrote it.
>
> > And what would be GPL stance about COM objects?
>
> read the references I already gave you. You'll find the license and
> various FAQs.
The GPL claim that it doesn't cover usage.
The only way you can use DLL & COM is if you link/call them.
According to this http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl-faq.html#MereAggregation
If the DLL/COM are GPL, you must use it as GPL as well.
I just find that this is contradiction.
It also seems that if you use out of process COM you are not required to use
the GPL.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ballmer tells another bald-headed lie.
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 06:06:51 +0200
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > No, you can't, at most, you can charge for transfer fees.
> >
> Yes, you can:
> <http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney>
Okay, you are getting confused here.
Yes, you are allowed to sell GPL software.
But you are also forced to make the software avialable at no charge to
anyone who ask for it.
They didn't put that in the FAQ, but it's in the license.
Notice that it doesn't limit who can demand the the source & binaries.
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under
Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1
and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
a.. a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2
above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
b.. b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years,
to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically
performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the
corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1
and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
c.. c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to
distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for
noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object
code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b
above.)
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 06:07:40 +0200
"Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 2 Jun 2001 05:29:08 +0200, Ayende Rahien <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > "Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >> If I wanted to, I could design and build a specialised Linux
> >> gaming touchpad, modify the Linux code to handle it, and play to my
hearts
> >> content.
> >>
> >> Ms users on the other hand have to wait till Ms makes it possible to
> >> purchase something like this.
> >
> > No, they would have to wait until you release a driver for windows.
> >
> >
> Then they would be waiting a long time ....
>
> However some Windows user might do it as I'd probably
> release it under the GPL.
Regardless, it wouldn't require changes in Windows, as it's built to be able
to accept alternative means of input.
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Argh - Ballmer
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 20:55:38 -0600
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001 05:24:26 +0200, "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Therefor, if BSD shipped GPL applications with their distribution, they
>would have to make the whole thing GPL.
Beg to disagree. FreeBSD comes with almost as many GPL'd applications
as Slackware. The commercial version of SuSE linux ships with both
proprietary and GPL'd applications.
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!!
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 15:12:30 +1200
"kosh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9fbnku$42j$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Philip Neves wrote:
>
>
> Try this
> http://www.linuxprinting.org/show_printer.cgi?recnum=464242
>
> In general if you have prnting problems go to linuxprinting.org
>
> That printer is listed as working perfectly so just follow the
instructions
> on that page.
Come on now, the printing system is so broken it requires it's own web site?
You're joking right?
I don't see a www.windowsprinting.org, or a www.macintoshprinting.org.
And they say Linux is ready for home desktop use?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 03 Jun 2001 03:10:39 GMT
On Sat, 02 Jun 2001 11:53:09 -0700, Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
> 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.
I just want EISA cards back, now they were a GOOD idea, imho.
I installed heaps of EISA NIC's and never had a problem.
..........off topic.................................................
> 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."
Hahahah, I have *never* heard that term before, LOL!
Mine was the orange tank, single front disk, I loved that bike!
My current bike does 0-60mph in 3.2 seconds (900Fireblade) but doesnt
seem as manic as the MachIII, to I must admit, it does seem to spend
more time with its front wheel of the ground.
> 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.
Hahaahah!
> 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.
I rekon a pie and coffee sure beats being raped and murdered and having
your bike stolen!
--
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
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
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 23:22:55 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Okay, tell me what is the difference between putting a theme on KDE
> &
> > > using
> > > > > GNOME?
> > > >
> > > > Not sure what you mean. GNOME has themes, too.
> > >
> > > I meant, what is the difference between using a GNOME theme on KDE (a
> theme
> > > that would make KDE look identical to GNOME) and using GNOME.
> > > From the user's perspective.
> >
> > Then you would be using KDE. Im not sure there is a "GNOME" theme,
> > though.
>
> I didn't explain myself very well, let's see if I can get better this time.
>
> Let's say I want to run gnome, some of the applications that I want are
> KDE's ones.
> I don't want this UI inconcistency, so, can I configure KDE to look & behave
> exactly like gnome?
KDE uses it's own window manager, although you can use others, so you
can say there is a fairly definite "KDE" look. Ive had GNOME set up t
use Enlightenment or Sawfish by default in various installations. GNOME
wrks well with several window managers and most for them have themes.
So, you cant really say there is a "GNOME" look. Panel placement and
some pop up windows may be consistent, but I dont know for sure. I use
fvwm2 with both GNOME and KDE libs. If you abhor UI inconsistency, dont
do this.
--
Rick
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 03 Jun 2001 03:15:22 GMT
On Sat, 2 Jun 2001 14:37:47 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Rob Barris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<snip>
>> I'm sure he's referring to Office XP. Pricing was shown on CNBC on
>> 5/31/01 - I thought it was $239 for upgrade, $479 for new.
>
> Ahh.. perhaps. And, as usual, Charlie exagerates to make his point.
>
>
>
Last week I saw an ad in a major newspaper, here in Australia, for
Office XP, and the upgrade was $1100, the non upgrade $1500.
--
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
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ballmer tells another bald-headed lie.
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 23:26:57 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> > > No, you can't, at most, you can charge for transfer fees.
> > >
> > Yes, you can:
> > <http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl-faq.html#DoesTheGPLAllowMoney>
>
> Okay, you are getting confused here.
Im not confused. You said you cant charge for the software... GNU says
you can charge as much as you want, or can get.
> Yes, you are allowed to sell GPL software.
I told you so.
> But you are also forced to make the software avialable at no charge to
> anyone who ask for it.
Thats right. You can put it on ftp or a number of other ways to access
it.
> They didn't put that in the FAQ, but it's in the license.
>
yes, that is int he faq.
> Notice that it doesn't limit who can demand the the source & binaries.
You act as if people can storm your house demanding software. Get a
grip.
> 3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under
> Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1
> and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
>
> a.. a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable
> source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2
> above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
>
> b.. b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years,
> to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically
> performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the
> corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1
> and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
>
> c.. c) Accompany it with the information you received as to the offer to
> distribute corresponding source code. (This alternative is allowed only for
> noncommercial distribution and only if you received the program in object
> code or executable form with such an offer, in accord with Subsection b
> above.)
I know all of that. it doesnt change the fact that you can chagre, in
fact GNU encourages people to sell software.
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Argh - Ballmer
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 23:28:21 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
>
> > > GPL iteself, FSF, etc.
> > >
> > > You can't use a GPL code with non-GPL code, you've to GPL the non-GPL
> code
> > > to do so.
> >
> > Actually.. not completely true.
> > From the GNU GPL Faq:
> > If I add a module to a GPL-covered module, do I have to use the GPL as
> > the license for my module?
>
> What is a module in this context?
Read the damn faq.
>
> > The GPL says that the whole combined program has to be released under
> > the GPL. So your module has to be available for use under the GPL.
> >
> > But you can give additional permission for the use of your code. You
> > can, if you wish, release your program under a license which is more lax
> > than the GPL but compatible with the GPL. The license list page gives a
> > partial list of GPL-compatible licenses.
>
> What is compatible with the GPL?
Read teh damn faq.
> That you can turn it to GPL, period.
Dont you ever get tired of being wrong?
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Argh - Ballmer
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 23:30:34 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > > Do you've proof of that?
> > > Seems to me that if this is so, all of BSD would've to be GPLed.
> > >
> >
> > You seem to think that there are only 2 open Source Licenses. There
> > arent. Pay special attention to the LGPL:
>
> I know there is more, and I also know that if you ship GPL app with non-GPL
> app, you must make it GPL.
You are wrong. Read her license and read the FAQs.
> Therefor, if BSD shipped GPL applications with their distribution, they
> would have to make the whole thing GPL.
>
There are GPLed apps shipped with BSD distros. GNOME, GIMP and others.
> > <http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses>
>
> Sorry, being GPL compatible means that you can turn code into GPL code.
>
Wrong again.
> 6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the
> Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original
> licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms
> and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the
> recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. You are not responsible
> for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License.
>
> Basically, if a license is GPL compatible, it must allow to have all the
> restrictions of the GPL, but not any further.
> Basically nulling the other license.
Wrong again.
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Is Open Source for You?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 03 Jun 2001 03:29:14 GMT
On Sat, 02 Jun 2001 02:46:23 GMT, Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I found this article interesting and not at all fanatical:
>
> http://www.sdmagazine.com/articles/2001/0105/0105a/0105a.htm
>
> Here's the teaser lines for it:
>
> Is Open Source for You? May 2001
>
> Apache, Cocoon and Linux aren't just useful programs, they're
> best-of-breed. Some of the more intemperate free software
> boosters, intoxicated by this success, claim that proprietary
> software is obsolete and that it's immoral to keep your
> source code secret. Well, maybe. Part 1 of 2.
>
> by Rick Wayne
>
> Enjoy it!
>
> Chris
I found this part a little confising:-
............
I also have AbiWord and KWord on my personal Linux
workstation, but to write this article, I had to reboot
into Windows and use Word.Heresy? No, utility. For one
thing, AbiWord crashed, and upon restarting, haughtily
informed me that this article was "a bogus document."
(From my editor, that's painful; from some bag of bits,
it's intolerable.) For two more: outlining and word counts,
folks. I need those and the open source alternatives don't
have 'em. So why haven't I put the features I need into
AbiWord or KWord? My only excuse is that to me, the feature
aren't worth the time commitment when alternatives are available.
...............
If this author is so Linux gung ho, how could he miss
Lyx, which will do everything he claimes he needs MS Word to do?
>
> --
> Please enter your Microsoft Client Access Code now,
> or rat on your system administrator
> at http://www.bsa.org/intnatl/report.phtml or
> at http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/reporting/
--
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
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?)
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 03 Jun 2001 03:33:58 GMT
On Sat, 2 Jun 2001 11:38:13 -0700,
Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> "Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>> >
>> > "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > I found this article interesting and not at all fanatical:
>> > >
>> > > http://www.sdmagazine.com/articles/2001/0105/0105a/0105a.htm
>> > >
<snip>
>
> I used to be a GNU/GPL/Linux proponent. I
> was using Linux before it reached v1.x. I
Then you wern't paying attention, when you came to
COLA around 1997, whining like a newbie, who finds
Linux all too hard.
<snip>
--
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
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Is Open Source for You?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 03 Jun 2001 03:30:43 GMT
On Fri, 1 Jun 2001 21:37:49 -0700,
Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> I found this article interesting and not at all fanatical:
>>
>> http://www.sdmagazine.com/articles/2001/0105/0105a/0105a.htm
>>
>> Here's the teaser lines for it:
>>
>> Is Open Source for You? May 2001
>
> If it was, would we be running WindowsNT?
>
> My Lord, you are a dense one, aren't you.
>
> Save this drivel for the COLA camp, please.
>
>
Uberfool has changed his name once again.
--
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
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Very interesting cracker article, and XP warning.
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 06:10:40 +0200
"Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9fc9mo$10l6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> So now, they're damned if they do, damned
> if they don't.
Now? It has always been this way.
Check bundled software arguements.
Argument A: Windows come with very few programs.
Argument B: Windows bundle software an hinder competition.
Those two arguments contradict each other.
But then, doesn't many things do, in *advocacy groups?s
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Argh - Ballmer
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 06:13:57 +0200
"Ray Chason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >No, it is MSīs right to get your money if you want to use their code.
> >If it is a pile of shit (as it is), why would you want to use it?
> >MS code is just a pile of horseshit, GPL is cancer.
> >Even if I like the cancer better in this case, it still is.
>
> If you sell a closed-source product:
>
> * You can't use MS's source code without paying what they ask for
> a license, if they will offer one..
> * You can't use GPL'd source code without paying what the copyright
> holder asks for a different license, if s/he will offer one.
>
> From the POV of a business selling a closed-source product, there is
> little or no difference. Only "non-viral" open source (or "semi-viral"
> such as LGPL, if certain terms are followed) offers such users an
> advantage.
Actually, from the POV of a business, it's much better to license from MS
than use GPL.
I understand that the only thing that prevent someone from licensing from MS
is the price tag ;-D
If they use GPL, their competitors can just take their products, change the
name of the program, and sell that program, at a lower price.
There are other things in the GPL that may cause this, too.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux is shit
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 03 Jun 2001 03:41:38 GMT
On Sun, 03 Jun 2001 01:55:07 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It really is. I'm sticking to windows. You can't even install a
> printer for christs sake.
Don't you mean *you* can't install a printer ?
It's not hard, but of course not all printers work
with Linux, ie Winprinters, which are cheap and nasty
junk, that require the PC CPU to do the things that
any decent printer has an embedded microprocessor
to do.
Personally I use a nice second hand IBM 4029 Postscript
laser printer that cost me $70.
--
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
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
From: Paul Repacholi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 03 Jun 2001 11:36:54 +0800
"Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >> I wonder how many you'd need for 2K
> >
> > >Roughly 250, I believe.
> >
> > Fuck me. It'd be quicker to write the OS yourself.
>
> Really? You must be able to type *really* fast.
Not if reliability was the end point :)
--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
Spam-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 15:46:42 +1200
"Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 2 Jun 2001 14:37:47 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > "Rob Barris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> <snip>
> >> I'm sure he's referring to Office XP. Pricing was shown on CNBC on
> >> 5/31/01 - I thought it was $239 for upgrade, $479 for new.
> >
> > Ahh.. perhaps. And, as usual, Charlie exagerates to make his point.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Last week I saw an ad in a major newspaper, here in Australia, for
> Office XP, and the upgrade was $1100, the non upgrade $1500.
>
Here in New Zealand, it's $1199NZD for the non upgrade, $739NZD for the
upgrade. You aussies are getting stiffed.
------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is shit
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2001 21:17:52 -0700
flatfish+++ wrote:
>
> On Sun, 03 Jun 2001 01:55:07 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >It really is. I'm sticking to windows. You can't even install a
> >printer for christs sake.
>
> It took you 500 posts to figure that out?
>
> flatfish+++
> "Why do they call it a flatfish?"
A classic Flatfish witty remark. You are cute and lovable.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!!
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 03 Jun 2001 03:46:04 GMT
On Sat, 02 Jun 2001 21:33:34 GMT, Philip Neves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Don't get me wrong. I love linux don't want to use anything else. However,
> at least with windows I can get my Epson Stylus Color 777 printer to work.
> Even with window 95. With linux on the otherhand I have to resort to using
> samba to network to another machine with windows on it to get the printer
> to work. And lets not get into print daemons oh god I wish I had a Mac!
Perhaps the Epson Stylus Color 777 is totally different to the original
Epson Stylus Color printer I paid $1180 for back in 1996, because that
printer worked just fine under RedHat4.2 in 1997!
It did however need a d/l version of Ghostscript as that app is not
GPL, but rather, they just give OLD versions away, which the Distos use.
However the new version is free for non profit use.
--
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
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
