Linux-Advocacy Digest #952, Volume #34 Mon, 4 Jun 01 06:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
(drsquare)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
(drsquare)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (drsquare)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (drsquare)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (drsquare)
Re: The _one_ thing that pisses me off about Linux (GreyCloud)
Re: Very interesting cracker article, and XP warning. (GreyCloud)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (Terry Porter)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (Terry Porter)
Re: Chicken and egg problem (Terry Porter)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Karel Jansens)
Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!! (Karel Jansens)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (Karel Jansens)
Re: Chicken and egg problem (GreyCloud)
Re: UI Importance ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?) (Shane Phelps)
Re: Why should an OS cost money? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: drsquare <[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: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 09:57:33 +0100
On 3 Jun 2001 21:50:09 -0500, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"Charles Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Jan Johanson wrote:
>> In fact, I know of
>> one location where having them will get you escorted directly to the
>> door. Someone else will clean out your desk for you. I've often wondered
>> about security that takes that attitude toward one product but still
>> lets Outlook run on the same machines.
>
>Why these places don't simply patch Outlook to the current version is what I
>don't understand. They can't do without Outlook cause there isn't another
>app that comes close to it in functionality and integration. But to continue
>to blame Outlook for stupid users mistakes is childish. ESPECIALLY when
>Outlook can be patched (OL2002 comes this way) to prevent ANY executable
>attachment from being received it's hard to continue to fault Outlook.
I can fault it: it's a big pile of shite. Give me mutt anyday. Loads
in milliseconds, unlike that chunky beast Outlook. And it's faster and
easier to use.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[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: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 09:57:33 +0100
On Sun, 03 Jun 2001 20:45:12 -0700, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(The Queen of Cans and Jars <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>Bryan C wrote:
>>
> I wonder what kind of hardware requirements are
>> necessary to successfully support this feature if nothing is being
>> saved to non-volatile memory as you suggest.
>Reportedly, the hardware requirements for XP, at least in terms of
>memory, are double those of Win 2K. I assume the HD and CPU
>requirements are also doubled.
Well, it looks like 98 is the last windows version I'm using.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 09:57:34 +0100
On Mon, 04 Jun 2001 03:31:55 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine))
wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, GreyCloud
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> Matthew Gardiner
>>
>>Power Plants?? We can't because all the environmentalists won't allow
>>it. They don't like logging either. Sure hope they don't miss their
>>toilet paper.
>
>Would hand-pumped bidets work? :-)
You can use those mini hosepipe things those arabs use.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 09:57:35 +0100
On 4 Jun 2001 04:07:38 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)) wrote:
>drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 3 Jun 2001 21:11:55 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>> ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)) wrote:
>> 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.
>
>I see. 25 posts per day to this newsgroup alone using Agent, and you hardly
>use it.
>
>My god man. And you somehow remember to breathe.
I'd hardly call 25 a lot. It's like max 30 minutes a day.
>>>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.
>
>I use them both actually, and have for some time. I know exactly what the
>pros and cons of each are. You obviously ahve *never* used the GIMP, or
>are irretrievably stupid. Either way, your opinion on this and all other
>matters is worthless.
I have used it. However, as the right mouse button brings up a menu
instead of the background color, it was useless to me.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,comp.os.
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 09:57:35 +0100
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 16:28:25 +1000, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >The de-facto Photoshop alternative for Linux would be GIMP. Most
>> >distros seem to come with it.
>>
>> But it's nowhere near as good as PSP
>
>Well it depends on what you want it to do isn't it?
>I know you can't do screen capture with PSP but with GIMP it's a piece of
>cake.
Erm, actually with PSP you can.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The _one_ thing that pisses me off about Linux
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 01:52:41 -0700
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> >>> whole story of CPU porting problems, but then I know sod-all about the
> >>> problems of different size integers from platform to platform.
> >>
> >>Assembler is by no means the only problem.
> >>
> >>There are a whole host of problems, such as making false assumptions
> >>about the sizeof an integer and char.
> >>
> >>sizeof(char)==1 by definition
> >>
> >>and CHAR_BITS >= 8
> >>
> >>and CHAR_MAX <=SHORT_MAX <=INT_MAX <=LONG_MAX <=LONG_LONG_MAX (now in
> >>C99)
> >>
> >>however, it is possible to have a stadards conforming compiler, where
> >>sizeof(long long)==1 (CRAY had one, for instance and many DSP processors
> >>have them as well).
> >
> > That would be an awful big char. :-)
>
> Yep. CRAY introduced a 1 byte char later on to save sapce in memory. I
> think a 64 bit char is enough to describe all the alphabets in the
> universe, never mind the world.
>
>
> >>I think quite a few programs assume that CHAR_MAX == 255 and will break
> >>if otherwise.
> >>
> >>
> >>Another problem is the endianness, for instance
> >>
> >>a<<1 is *2 on one platform and /2 on another platform.
> >
> > ??
>
> I have a memory of >> going in different dierctions because of endianess,
> but it is an old (mabey incorrect) memory, and/or compiler.
>
> <snip>
>
> > Some very old machines might do peculiar things with negative numbers
> > and shifting, though, if they use one's complement arithmetic. AFAIK, no
> > modern machine does this, although the MiX emulator (Knuth) uses
> > undefined arithmetic means (presumably at the time of its design, some
> > machines were still using BCD) and therefore a<<1 on MiX will not
> > produce a useful result, arithmetically speaking.
>
> Useless nuggetlet: the 6502 processor can perfrom in both BCD and binary
> mode. I never really found a use for BCD mode.
>
I thought BCD math was primarily aimed at monetary calculations?...
> --
> (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
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Very interesting cracker article, and XP warning.
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 02:02:28 -0700
"Joseph T. Adams" wrote:
>
> Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : 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.
>
> Actually, I don't fault anyone for this fiasco, other than the
> criminals who exploit it for their own purposes.
>
> IPv4 was simply never designed with security in mind.
>
> Nor was it ever anticipated, in anyone's wildest dreams, that it would
> become so popular that we would risk running out of address space.
>
> IPv6 addreses both problems and also offers a reasonable migration
> path for existing IPv4 infrastructure.
>
> We need to begin moving to it.
>
Solaris 8 has the IPv6 included. I've opted out for the time being as I
still need to read the books on IPv6. I did read something about
certain limitations with NFS tho.
> The migration will not happen instantaneously nor will it be
> pain-free. It needs to begin soon, before worldwide use of the
> Internet begins to explode (it's not saturated even in the
> industrialized world, which holds only a minority of the world's
> population and potential Internet users). Otherwise it will be even
> more painful.
>
> Joe
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 04 Jun 2001 09:03:56 GMT
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 09:10:43 +0200, Ayende Rahien <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 08:21:14 +0200, Ayende Rahien <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> > Do you mean GCC?
>>
>> Opps, yes I do mean Gcc.
>
> In this case, there is a whole slew of free compilers for Windows.
This is a good thing, in 1996 when I was using Windows, I don't recall
having a single decent C compiler, and even tried using a freeware
compilier called 'pacific' and man did it suck.
In those days I was just starting to enjoy DJGPP for DOS, which
was Gcc ported to DOS. I did find DJGPP very easy to use.
I think at that point thoughts like this crossed my mind :-
"if DJGPP is so good, and its just GCC ported to Dos, then native
GCC must be pretty good?"
>
>
>> > I use SmartFTP (get it from SmartFTP.com)
>>
>> Eeks thats the one I *don't* like!
>
> Why?
I found it very slow, and it refuses to copy windows drives like c:\
,I just want to drag c:\ onto my Linux FTP server, and SmartFtp
refuses to do it !
I suppose thats asking a bit much, but C:\ is presented just like
any folder under Win98 ?
By now your probably shaking your head, but I just find this app
so tedious, the fonts are all too small in the status window
(easily fixed, but another thing to do) and my wife will not
use it, for some reason. I think she is intimidated by it.
That said, its stable and free, and a big thank you to the author:)
> (I like gathering information about why people don't like programs, help
> preventing doing the same mistakes)
Sadly my reasons are pretty poor, so I'm not of much help here. My wife is
currently using her PC, but I have to do a backup of her data soon, this
will refresh my memory and I'll give you some valid reasons then.
>
>> > They got a little overboard with the visual affects, but it's a very
> good
>> > program nonetheless.
>>
>> Interestingly I just wanted something like the Linux 'gftp' which has less
>> visual effects than SmartFTP, but is so easy to use!
>>
>> It may be a matter of personal preference ?
>
> Probably.
> You *could* use explorer, I suppose.
Erkkkkkk.
> But it isn't really that good as an FTP client.
Will it even upload ?
>
>
> http://download.cnet.com/1,10150,0-10064-106-0-1-1,00.html?filterQuery=true&;
> os=&li=2
> List 48 free FTP clients ( and a word processor, for some reason :-D )
>
> FTP Explorer seems to be good
> http://download.cnet.com/downloads/0-10064-100-869478.html?tag=st.dl.10064-1
> 06-1.lst-1-21.869478
Thanks again Ayende, between Eric F, and yourself you're giving
Windows advocates a good name on COLA :)
--
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: Windows makes good coasters
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 04 Jun 2001 09:05:13 GMT
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 09:31:17 +0200, Ayende Rahien <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
>
> Why would you want to use PSP to do a screen capture? Windows will do it for
> you automatically.
>
>
Which Windows Ayende, I dont recall Win95 having a screen capture ?
--
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: Chicken and egg problem
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 04 Jun 2001 09:08:52 GMT
On Mon, 4 Jun 2001 09:40:05 +0200, Ayende Rahien <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
> "Windows 95? No problem. Nice new 32 bit API, but it still ran old 16 bit
> software perfectly. Microsoft obsessed about this, spending a big chunk of
> change testing every old program they could find with Windows 95. Jon Ross,
> who wrote the original version of SimCity for Windows 3.x, told me that he
> accidentally left a bug in SimCity where he read memory that he had just
> freed. Yep. It worked fine on Windows 3.x, because the memory never went
> anywhere. Here's the amazing part: On beta versions of Windows 95, SimCity
> wasn't working in testing. Microsoft tracked down the bug and *added
> specific code to Windows 95 that looks for SimCity*. If it finds SimCity
> running, it runs the memory allocator in a special mode that doesn't free
> memory right away. That's the kind of obsession with backward compatibility
> that made people willing to upgrade to Windows 95."
>
Gees thats simply amazing, hahah I wish theyd done something for ABC Flowcharter
which simply refused to run under Win95 (it was a Win3.1 app) and I lost all my
flowcharts!
I finally found TCM for Linux, which is pretty good.
>
>
>
--
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] (Karel Jansens)
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 10:37:56 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 04 Jun 2001 01:29:57 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>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.
>
So that's what happens if you click on "help" in Forte Agent's manu bar?
Amazing.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================================================
"Give people jam today and they'll just sit and eat it.
Jam tomorrow, now - that'll keep them going for ever".
(Terry Pratchett - "Hogfather")
==============================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karel Jansens)
Subject: Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!!
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 10:45:10 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 03 Jun 2001 20:45:37 -0000, Ray Chason
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Nothing wrong with lpr, but it is assumed that if I have a printer
>>connected and it works from one program, it should work from all
>>programs installed.
>>
>>This IS the case with Win2k.
>>This is NOT the case with Linux.
>>
>>I had lpr working, and Netscape working (sort of), but I couldn't
>>print from StarOffice (pages of ASCII), nor could I print from
>>Wordperfect.
>
>WordPerfect drags its own set of printer drivers around, perhaps in
>an attempt to make it easier to set up. This approach is locally
>good and globally bad. While it is (or at least it once was) easier
>to set up WordPerfect than to properly configure print filters for
>Linux, setting up WordPerfect sets up only WordPerfect. If you have
>a dozen apps that do this, you have the same sort of chaos that we
>once knew with DOS.
>
>A properly configured Linux print system, OTOH, sets up all apps that
>comply with it, and is no harder to use than Windows.
>
It is possible (and quite easy to do) to set up WordPerfect (up to version 8
at least) with the "passthru Postscript printer", and then it will behave as
any other linux app - as far as printing goes, at least.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================================================
"Give people jam today and they'll just sit and eat it.
Jam tomorrow, now - that'll keep them going for ever".
(Terry Pratchett - "Hogfather")
==============================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karel Jansens)
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 11:06:32 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 04 Jun 2001 01:30:07 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>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.
>
Apparently you do have time enough to whine about posts you do not like in
this group, about how you cannot get linux to set up a printer and about how
you want to be the moderator of an unmoderated group. So those are the
'better things' you have to do?
You may _claim_ to be a long-term poster in this group under another name,
but you are _behaving_ as an acne-infested fourteen year-old.
I would call you a troll, but that would be an insult to all the honest,
hard-working trolls out there.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================================================
"Give people jam today and they'll just sit and eat it.
Jam tomorrow, now - that'll keep them going for ever".
(Terry Pratchett - "Hogfather")
==============================================================
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Chicken and egg problem
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 02:17:02 -0700
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> http://joel.editthispage.com/stories/storyReader$117
>
> Read it, very good article about how to get people to use new platforms.
>
> I was especially impressed by this:
>
> "Windows 95? No problem. Nice new 32 bit API, but it still ran old 16 bit
> software perfectly. Microsoft obsessed about this, spending a big chunk of
> change testing every old program they could find with Windows 95. Jon Ross,
> who wrote the original version of SimCity for Windows 3.x, told me that he
> accidentally left a bug in SimCity where he read memory that he had just
> freed. Yep. It worked fine on Windows 3.x, because the memory never went
> anywhere. Here's the amazing part: On beta versions of Windows 95, SimCity
> wasn't working in testing. Microsoft tracked down the bug and *added
> specific code to Windows 95 that looks for SimCity*. If it finds SimCity
> running, it runs the memory allocator in a special mode that doesn't free
> memory right away. That's the kind of obsession with backward compatibility
> that made people willing to upgrade to Windows 95."
Well, as I heard one version of which came first... the chicken was in
bed smoking a cigarette with a satisfied look on his face... the egg
rolled over and said "Well that question has been settled".
:-)
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 11:39:22 +0200
"Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <9feqsu$mop$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ayende Rahien"
> <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "Nico Coetzee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> <snip some stuff>
> >> Perhaps it's my ancient box at work then - PII 300 with 64MB RAM
> >> running NT4 WS. Explorer is useless until the coping finishes.
> >
> > What is happening, exactly? Does the coputer stop working? Or does it
> > work, but the copying box don't allow you to use Explorer until it's
> > done?
> >
> > If the latter, than that is a sign of some of the bad UI slips of MS.
> > They shouldn't have used a modal box here. It was present in 95, and
> > fixed in 98. Maybe installing a recent IE would solve it?
> >
> No,
>
> I see the same thing happening at work (also NT4 WS). I don't know a lot
> about the internals of NT, but my guess is Explorer is doing synchronous
> disk IO, thus tying up the computer for every disk operation. Which is a
> major flap by MS, since I think that NT is quite capable of doing
> a-synchronous IO.
Okay, I won't argue here. Since I agree with you here.
FWIW, Win98 and up have fix it.
------------------------------
From: Shane Phelps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?)
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2001 19:57:43 +1100
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
[ snip ]
>
> Actually, there was one thread I'm glad I didn't miss: it was a problem
> with gcc x-posted to comp.lang.c. Aaron got killfiled by all the regular
> posters on there.
>
> -Ed
>
Sounds like Chad on comp.security.ssh :-)
[ sigsnip - and it's not even an annoyingly long one ;-) ]
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why should an OS cost money?
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 05:00:55 -0500
"Nick Condon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> >"Nick Condon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >> >"Nick Condon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >> Tech support does and should cost money, so does media. However,
> >> >> the question is why should an *OS* cost money? You can get an OS
> >> >> without incurring media or tech support costs. They are three
> >> >> seperate things.
> >> >
> >> >In a model where you can download the OS for free and only recieve
> >> >support if you pay per incident or boxed set you get people that buy
> >> >one copy, then install 100, then use the single paid-for copies
> >> >support for the other issues they run into in the other copies.
> >> >People simply aren't honest enough for such a model to work.
> >>
> >> Selling boxed sets is a way of covering the cost of the media. The
> >> retail price of box-plus-manual covers the costs of making them.
> >
> >No, retail boxed sets also include installation support.
>
> Hmm ... knee-jerk responses to key phrases ... no understanding of context
> ... no understanding of argument. Has someone replaced Erik with an Eliza
> program?
>
> Hello, Erik, how are you feeling?
I'm not sure I understand what you are implying. You suggest that the cost
of the boxed set only covers cost of media and manual, which it does not.
All boxed sets I know of also include installation support.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
