Linux-Advocacy Digest #943, Volume #34 Sun, 3 Jun 01 21:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts getting
good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!) ("Patrick Ford")
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft ("Bill Reid")
Re: What does Linux need for the desktop? (drsquare)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (drsquare)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (drsquare)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (drsquare)
Re: Argh - Ballmer ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Argh - Ballmer ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Argh - Ballmer ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Argh - Ballmer ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! ("JS
\\ PL")
Re: What Microsoft's CEO should do (pip)
Re: Argh - Ballmer ("Bill Sharrock")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Patrick Ford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts
getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!)
Date: 4 Jun 2001 12:16:01 +1200
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> I guess you expect everyone in the world to know your quaint little
> slang (which sounds retarded).
You Seppos have been doing that for many years. Why is it suddenly
offensive to have thrown back at you what you have regarded as normal
all your life?
> Stephen was merely educating our blinded Brit that not everyone
> lives in Britain.
There was no Brit, blinded or otherwise involved. I live as far from
Britain as it is possible to get. You really have no idea of the world
outside your village have you?
--
--
My domain contains .co, not .com as appears in the header.
Patrick Ford Auckland, Aotearoa (New Zealand)
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 19:18:02 -0500
"Marc Schlensog" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> ---[snippage]---
>
> > This is a big problem with Linux. Many cards use a common chipset,
which
> > is fine if Linux can detect it, but if it can't, you may not know what
> > chipset it's using, and the companies web site usually doesn't say.
>
> You are able to take the card out of your case and look at the chip and
> write down what's written on there? Yes? Are you?
Most of them hide what's on the chip with a sticker or some such, some even
go so far as to remove the printing or to print on top of it with their own
logo's. If you remove the sticker, you violate your waranty.
> SHIT, ERIK, YOU MAKE ME FUCKING PUKE!!! YOU'RE A TYPICAL WINDOG-DUMBASS
WHO DOESN'T KNOW SHIT ABOUT HIS SYSTEM, JFC!!!!
I've been building systems for the last 15 years, I damn well know what's in
my system.
------------------------------
From: "Bill Reid" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 00:19:00 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> David Fox wrote:
> >
> > For example, there is a
> > lot of handholding when it comes to typesetting chinese characters in
> > LaTeX.
>
> Once you learn how to do this, exactly how many times will you need
> to re-learn it.
>
EXACTLY...that's why I've resisted Adobe crapware all these
years and still use 'pic'. Last year I drew a four-box block diagram
using 'pic'; I mean, that's ALL I did last year, but the diagram looks
great except the lines don't connect to three of the four boxes, so
I've got my 2001 all mapped out...
---
William Ernest Reid
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What does Linux need for the desktop?
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 01:29:55 +0100
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001 22:44:06 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Marc Schlensog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>drsquare wrote:
>> And a non-shit GUI. You need to go delving into configuration files
>> just to stop it scrolling around everywhere when you move the mouse to
>> the side of the screen.
>When was the last time you were using X? Back in fvwm times? Did you ever
Today actually.
>try KDE2? Or GNOME? First of all, they look much more lovely than Windog
>will probably ever do. Secondly, they aren't that much harder to use.
I tried downloading GNOME, but there were about 50-100 different
dependencies I needed as well, and I just couldn't be bothered.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 01:29:57 +0100
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001 17:40:48 +0000, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karel Jansens)) wrote:
>On Sun, 03 Jun 2001 14:54:53 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>I probably could if I had a better newsreader, but downloading one
>>would cut into my bandwidth which I prefer to save for porn.
>>
>I remember a thread, a long time ago in a newsgroup far away, where some
>winvocate boasted about the superiority of Forte Agent's killfile. If you
>look at the far right of your newsreader's window, you will probably find
>the word "help" printed there. Position your mouse pointer (the arrowy
>thingie on your screen that moves around) over it and click on your left
>mouse button. Let us know what happens then and we will continue from there.
Forte Agent's killfile is crap.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 01:30:01 +0100
On 3 Jun 2001 21:09:49 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)) wrote:
>drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It is not possible.
>
>Then how is it exactly that I am able to get Agent to not show me YOUR
>posts in THIS thread only, but ALL of your other posts in EVERY other
>thread?
>
>Agent has a fine granularity filtration system built in. Its a little
>off the beaten path as far as configuration goes, but the results are at
>least as good as anything else.
>
>Your problem really is that youre an idiot. You should stay away from
>computers, starting immediately.
Face it, it is NOT POSSIBLE.
>> It's not my fault it doesn't even have any facilities for setting up
>> printers. Linux will never catch up with Windows at this rate. All you
>> have to do in Windows is open Control Panel and give it the drivers
>> disk. On Linux, you....... what?
>
>I can print to both of my printers just fine from my linux box.
Well, that means a lot to me.
>> And everytime you download something, you
>> have to download about 300 dependencies, all of which depend on
>> another 600 packages and so on...
>
>Your numbers seem a little skewed.
Alright, just about 50.
>> And dpkg doesn't even tell you which
>> packages you need, it just spews out countless pages of shite.
>You never read directions, do you.
I've read the man pages and various howto's all the way through, and
still there is no easy way of installing packages. Compare that to
Windows' simple setup.exe type install, no dependencies, nothing, it
just installs, and you don't even have to be root.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 01:30:02 +0100
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001 22:49:20 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Marc Schlensog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>drsquare wrote:
>> Well, out of the thousands of people I know that use mice, none of
>> them have any trouble using mice.
>
>Aww jeez, you just don't get it, do you? Read G. Wayne Hines' posting and
>learn something.
No thanks, I've got better things to do.
>BTW, you're nick isn't s'posed to mean Dr. Squares? What are you Dr. in?
>Ignorance???
If that'll make you happy, then yes.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 01:30:03 +0100
On Sun, 03 Jun 2001 19:43:23 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, drsquare
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Vi is the only program you need to design web sites.
>
>No, vi is the only program *you* need to design web sites. The
>popularity of good web design tools among profesisonal web site
>designers is proof that GUI design tools are worth paying money for.
>
>And what's this vi crap? How DARE you use a screen-oriented text editor?
>If your'e gonna be a REAL he-programmer, you should be using ed. }: )
Actually, when I get the chance I prefer just to hex-edit my files!
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 01:30:04 +0100
On Sun, 03 Jun 2001 20:59:47 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>On Sun, 03 Jun 2001 19:43:23 GMT, Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>No, vi is the only program *you* need to design web sites. The
>>popularity of good web design tools among profesisonal web site
>>designers is proof that GUI design tools are worth paying money for.
>
>I took a course in Aix Sysadmin a couple of years ago and on the day
>the instructor taught vi he brought in a pair of ear muffs because all
>of the beeping (aka frustration's) of newbies trying to use that
>abortion of a program drove him crazy.
>
>Anyone who does anything but churn out code, and that means a
>professional programmer, in vi or Emacs for that matter is nuts.
What the hell are you talking about? Those are the greatest programs
ever written. Apart from X-eyes of course. And sex tetris.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 01:30:07 +0100
On 3 Jun 2001 21:11:55 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)) wrote:
>drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I understand Forte Agent perfectly well.
>
>I understand it better than you, because I figured out filtering inside
>Forte Agent. And I figured it out in under five minutes. How long did
>take you? Whats that? Still figuring it out?
I haven't even started to try and figure it out. Unlike you, I have
better things to do than to work out obscure features of programs I
hardly use.
>>>are loathe to read instructions. The fact is, you have no idea WHAT
>>>the gimp can do, because you are retarded and useless.
>
>> I doubt anyones retardedness is the reason the GIMP isn't as good as
>> Paint shop pro, apart from the GIMP programmers.
>
>Again, you are not aware of what GIMP can actually do, so your opinion
>is utterly worthless.
Again, you are not aware of how GIMP is inferior to PSP, so you
opinion is utterly worthless.
>>>There are those of us out there who hold stations in life in which it is not
>>>wise to crack every single piece of software we want.
>
>> Any reasons perhaps?
>
>Yes, business reasons. All of my business software is legit, period.
>
>Makes tax time a bit more lucerative and it keeps adobe off my back.
How are they going to find out anyway?
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Argh - Ballmer
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 19:27:37 -0500
"Flacco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:2VoS6.14445$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > The problem is that it doesn't make it available to be used by the whole
> > community. It only makes it available to be used by GPL'd communities.
>
> It makes it available to anyone. They simply have to use it under the
> GPL.
Re-read what I said. "available to be *USED*" The FreeBSD project cannot
use GPL copyrighted code inside their TCP/IP stack, for instance, because
the code is licensed under a non-GPL'd licence.
> > Because the money used to develop it came from tax dollars, part of
> > which was paid for by the corporation.
>
> ...which is free to use the software under the terms of the GPL, just like
> anyone else.
That's like saying a license which requires you to slaughter innocent
children is free for use by everyone, so long as they slaughter children.
That's not what you claim.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Argh - Ballmer
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 19:32:20 -0500
"Marc Schlensog" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > And proprietary software is just one of them. X, Apache, BSD, and other
> > software are all projects that you close your software from if you use
the
> > GPL.
>
> Huh? WTF are you talking about?
X, Apache, and BSD are incompatible licenses with the GPL. If you include
GPL'd code in an X server which has X licensed code, then you are violating
the GPL and are not allowed to use it. If you include GPL'd code in the
FreeBSD kernel, then again, you are violating the GPL and are not allowed to
use it.
> > And those are only the high propile projects.
>
> Again, what is keeping you from writing proprietary software for Linux?
> What is keeping you from writing GPLed software for Windows?
This has nothing to do with Windows, but with other Free software projects
that are completely incompatible with the GPL, and are not allowed to use
GPL'd code.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Argh - Ballmer
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 19:33:45 -0500
"Marc Schlensog" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> >
> > "Marc Schlensog" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > > So?
> > > > That doesn't affect the original code *at all*.
> > > > *You* can do the same.
> > > > You can even release it under the GPL.
> > >
> > > eeeeeh! WRONG!
> >
> > Show me *one* case where PD code was taken from the PD by actions of
> > someone.
> >
> > > Sure, you can write proprietary code, but you can't release it under
> > > GPL, 'coz if you did, everybody'd be able to use and incorporate it
into
> > his/her
> > > own program.
> >
> > This doesn't make *any* sense.
> > If I wrote code, I can do whatever I want with it, including release it
> > under the GPL, as proprietary, or as both.
> >
> > > You, as the creator of that code should of course _always_
> > > be mentioned, everything else would probably be piracy.
> >
> > Not if I release it as PD.
> >
> > > And even if M$ were to take your code, patent it and make money with
it,
> > > you'd probably have proof, that you had exact code months before,
don't
> > ya?
> >
> > If I release it as PD, I *would* have proof.
> > The GPL doesn't give any furhter protection from people trying to patent
> > my code than PD does.
>
> Hmm... I thought you can't patent code (as mentioned several times)???
>
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Bullshit! Did you ever read the GPL?
> >
> > Several times.
> > The GPL prevent use in non-GPL code-bases.
> > You seem to dislike me mentioning it, but Apache can't use GPL code.
> > How is that not blocking the code from being used?
>
> Can I use M$-licensed code in any opensource program? I don't think so.
> Otherwise WINE wouldn't be alpha anymore.
>
> >
> > > > And proprietary software is just one of them. X, Apache, BSD, and
> > > > other software are all projects that you close your software from if
> > > > you use
> > the
> > > > GPL.
> > >
> > > Huh? WTF are you talking about?
> >
> > They can't use GPL code without changing their license. This goes
against
> > their belief.
>
> Of course they can. They can distribute modules for a certain non-GPL
> proggie under the GPL license, can't they?
No. A module is just a dynamically linked object file, and the GPL
specifically does not allow you to get around the GPL this way.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Argh - Ballmer
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 19:37:12 -0500
"Marc Schlensog" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> >
> > "Marc Schlensog" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > -snip-
> > >
> > > >
> > > > What is a module in this context?
> > >
> > > What do you mean with "understanding"?
> >
> > A module can mean a lot of thing, it can mean a seperate part of the
> > program, a linux kernel module, apache's module, ISAPI DLLs, COM,
ActiveX.
> > There are a lot of stuff that you use to interupt what a module is.
> > I'm asking what a module mean in this context, so I could form a reply
> > based on the meaning of the word in the correct context.
> >
> >
>
> And still: all those definitions have one thing in common. They are a
> supplement to some given program and may be licensed as well under GPL as
> under any other given license. Just let your heart decide. I don't think
> that the exact definition matters a lot in this context.
However, using those modules in your program is against the GPL unless you
also GPL your program.
------------------------------
From: "JS \\ PL" <[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!
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 20:37:25 -0400
"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 01 Jun 2001 13:21:24 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> (Rotten168 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> >> Considering that X predates the Logitech trackball by a full decade,
> >> I suggest you ask Logitech why they are selling a trackball that is
> >> incompatible with X.
>
> >*sigh* Why not ask X why they're still stuck in 1990? Either way, if
>
> Why should X change just because a few people seem to find it too
> difficult to press the left and right buttons at the same time?
>
> >Linux wants to remain competitive on the desktop it will have to do
> >better than this. I read an article a while back on how each OS should
> >just stick to their respective markets, and we'd all be better. Windows
> >should stick to the desktop (where it does a better job than Linux), and
> >UNIXens should stick to servers, workstations, routers, ... all the
> >industrial-strength stuff.
>
> What, you're saying normal users shouldn't be given the option of a
> stable operating system?
They already DO have that option. It's called Windows2000 and soon to be
Windows XP. Every Linux/Xwindows combination I've ever seen is less stable
than Windows 95. I just had the pleasure of setting a system up yesterday.
The first question the guy asked me today was "How do I recover from a
frozen mouse cursor without just hitting the power switch."
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What Microsoft's CEO should do
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 01:45:59 +0100
daniel wrote:
>
> I have witnessed first hand how many large organizations can operate
> for years with completely skewed thinking in place which can seriously
> block its potential to do better things.
Are not ALL large organisations like this ?
> It seems clear to me that this is going on at Microsoft to a major
> degree with respect to 1) interoperability with other platforms, and
> 2) with respect to the open protocols and standards which enable
> technology to progress and develop around the world.
Well, apparently .NET will support Linux.
> Apparently some parties at the company believe that it helps their
> company to severly limit their products' capacity to interoperate with
> other platforms, such as with Linux. As simple example of this is the
> fact that from a Windows machine you cannot access an ext2 filesystem
> without a 3rd party application like Explore2fs, while with Linux most
> stock kernels are compiled out of the box with FAT and VFAT support
> and go so far as to set up an fstab entry to automatically mount a FAT
> or VFAT filesystem each time the system runs.
Typical M$ users don't want to access ext2 partitions on their local HD.
Those that do know free utilities like Explore2fs.
> Microsoft is being extremely foolish by pretending that what it
> considers as competing platforms don't exist.
Erm. They do! That is why they say the "Linux is our number 1 threat".
>They gain nothing from
> not providing interoperability support and only bolster their
> reputation as being a stodgy, profit-first mentality company that
> wants to force people down a certain path.
It is not in their interests to interoperate. That presents the
opportunity for them to loose users. That is not good.
> Now what if they actually did provide support for the ext2 filesystem?
> Not only would their product be more usable, the company as a whole
> would, if not gain more acceptance, at least receive less criticism
> from the community of users who may use a Microsoft platform in
> addition to other platforms.
Microsoft's back is broad. I don't think that they care. After all X
provides remote display while M$ also relies on third party applications
to fill in this corner. They don't care because they don't have to.
> If I were the president of the company I would have the people
> responsible for this sort of mentality out immediately. To operate as
> a company with such a high degree of market domination from a paranoid
> point of view like this is outrageous.
No it's not. It's called good business sense. You REALLY don't want to
make it easy for users to interoperate or switch to your competitor's
product if you DON'T have to. Especially if the users then find that the
other product is more reliable and cheaper.
> Let us look at another thing: the DOS shell. The DOS shell is
> basically a nearly useless joke. Why not implement a real shell
> environment such as BASH?
Why not use a BASH port ? Cynus already provides this.
>But I wonder if the people who set policy
> at Microsoft even have the capability to see how the BASH shell is
> such an important part of Linux and why it is so popular.
One of the reasons is that Win32 users don't *need* bash as as many
times you do in Linux. This is a point and click world. Linux is also
heading for a user interface to provide this also (while also retaining
the fine grained lower control), which is yet another reason for M$ NOT
to support interoperability.
>Having a
> full, feature-rich shell environment which underlies the gui and which
> provides full-functionality in every respect such that the gui becomes
> almost secondary (in many instances it is truly secondary) means that
> the core of the OS is solid and robust.
The core of the OS has not, and should not have anything to do with it's
interface utilities in terms of robustness. Here you may insert the
problems of GDI being in kernel space.
The argument about the Kernel should not be confused with the argument
about the "system".
> If I were the president of Microsoft I would be highly interested in
> the Cygwin project and would want to see most of what it does
> implemented natively in Windows and integrated into the shell (or
> replace the DOS shell).
Why - it already exists!
> With respect to open standards and RFCs again the way Microsoft
> operates is a mess. With as much weight as they have why don't they
> realize that operating with a profit-first mentality in a state of
> paranoia they stunt their potential to work in a flourishing
> environment with the developer community of the world and, should they
> choose to contribute (not dictate) to the development of standards
> would gain greater acceptance and realize greater benefit to users
> around the world?
Erm. Look here is a very simple rule :
M$ cares about PROFITS not USERS. Of course it will listen to some
extent to it's users, but only to keep them from the alternatives.
Anything more is a waste of money.
There is a solution : GNU/Linux
> I think what Microsoft is protecting has nothing to do with business
> actually.
Of course it does! M$ only seems to do things because of business
decisions. That is why GNU-Linux is SO important in providing them with
some REAL competition. This will result in an outcome that is better for
ALL users.
>I think that really a large bureaucracy of lazy and inept
> mangement want to cover its ass and protect its way of life.
Sounds like every company I've known. If you know of any other types
then I have my CV ready.
>Silicon
> Valley has witnessed over the years how new and innovative ways of
> thinking and operating can lead to exciting developments and great
> gains in the technological world.
>But young companies that are
> versatile, innovative, and put an emphasis on creativity and reward
> innovators more than policy makers often change.
That is why IBM should have feared M$ and Apple should have done so (but
for other reasons). That is why now M$ should fear the same thing. The
big debate is not won yet. There is another runner. There will be a
force so powerful that it could topple M$ : yes, it's Linux. M$ knows
this. That is why it has altered their stance towards Linux. The guns
are out. The powder is lit.
>Maybe the real war
> that has to be fought at Microsoft is an internal one.
Well, it is well known that M$ has internal tensions. Most employees
probably care more about internal fights, politics and their share
options value than Linux or opensource - in fact I am sure many use it
and respect it.
M$ is not one "evil" company, but MANY separate divisions with their own
internal battles and politics. Some are better than others. Many times
they probably break protocols, not because it is some "evil" plan but
because it makes is easier for them to implement and because they CAN.
What Microsoft's CEO should do IMHO is exactly what he is doing. That
will provide the best returns to it's shareholders. But then again, it
IS a business. Then again, we have a choice - it's up to us.
------------------------------
From: "Bill Sharrock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Argh - Ballmer
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 00:51:53 GMT
In article <F2%R6.16166$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Mike"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
My question is why not? The Bayh-Dole act from 1980 allows for publically
funded research to be patented and was instrumental in allowing the RSA
patent to fall in the hands of one company for the past 17 years. At
least with GPL software I know what I paid for will be disclosed *and*
available for more than one party.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
