Linux-Advocacy Digest #8, Volume #35 Wed, 6 Jun 01 12:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Chicken and egg problem (Gerald Meazell)
Re: Best Distribution? (pip)
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (Peter da Silva)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (quux111)
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts getting
good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!) (Nick Condon)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! (Jesse F.
Hughes)
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts getting
good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!) (Stephen Edwards)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the (Nick Condon)
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts getting
good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!) (Stephen Edwards)
Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?) (Stephen Edwards)
Re: Compiling Knews was: Linux beats Win2K (again) (flatfish+++)
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts getting
good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!) (Stephen Edwards)
Re: Compiling Knews was: Linux beats Win2K (again) (flatfish+++)
Re: Compiling Knews was: Linux beats Win2K (again) (flatfish+++)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (flatfish+++)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Chad Myers")
Re: Argh - Ballmer ("Mike")
Re: What does Linux need for the desktop? (Dan Pidcock)
Re: Best Distribution? (flatfish+++)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! ("JS
\\ PL")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gerald Meazell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Chicken and egg problem
Date: 6 Jun 2001 06:22:59 -0700
"Mark Weaver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<uN7T6.13114$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> But your assertion is FALSE. The 1.x releases of OS/2 *didn't* offer good
> backward compatibility. They ran *no* Windows apps and ran DOS apps in a
> very limited, buggy 'compatibility box'. Furthermore, because of changes in
> the API porting of Windows APPS to OS/2 PM was non-trivial. Eventually IBM
> offered a 32-bit version of OS/2 that was good a running DOS apps in
> separate VMs and was adequate at running 16-bit windows apps, but it still
> offered no simple way to port/convert windows apps to native OS/2 PM apps.
The article explains that Win 1.x and 2.x had the same problem which
was solved by Win 3.x. This, the article explains, is why millions
flocked to Win 3.x, the good backward compatibility. So MS is allowed
to get it wrong in the first two versions but IBM is required to do it
right the first time?
As for the porting issue, you're absolutely right. That, and many
other issues doomed OS/2 from the start. My point is that the
article's premise of "good backward compatibility = market success" is
simply not true. If it were, OS/2 would have succeeded. The first
post in this thread was posted by one of COLA's resident Windows
advocates, ostensibly to demonstrate why Linux will fail to take over
the desktop market. I brought OS/2 into the discussion to refute the
argument made by the original poster. Since then, I've seen a lot of
reasons why OS/2 failed but nobody has told me I missed the point of
the article.
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Best Distribution?
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 14:40:12 +0100
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "drsquare"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 05 Jun 2001 21:05:24 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> > ("Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> >
> >>> drsquare wrote:
> >>>> >If you have your whole email address at some point, some automated
> >>>> >software will pick it up and start spamming you. That's why there's
> >>>> >lots of wired variations, such as mine,below.
> >>>>
> >>>> >(u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
> >>>>
> >>>> So this translates to u98ej r@**************ecs.ox.ac.uk ?
> >>>
> >>> Well that's one to the spammers then. I am sure Edward will thank you
> >>> for that!
> >
> >>GAK!
> >>
> >>I wouldn't have noticed if you didn't point it out :-)
> >
> > Never mind, I bet the spam bots will never pick up any addresses like
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED], or even [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> You really are a wanker.
I think that that is a understatement of an order of magnitude.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter da Silva)
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: 6 Jun 2001 13:02:56 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Larry Elmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How? Don't they pay M$ per copy they ship? If they don't ship it, they
> dont have to pay M$ for it. (I know that wasn't always the case, but
> that was then and this is now)
Then they get the cost of the OS back. If they really do have the option.
> > Oh, Microsoft doesn't let you do that? Well, isn't that the point?
> Umm, didn't Microsoft get nailed in the courts and have to stop that
> practice some years ago, _before_ the "big" antitrust case?
Technically, yes. In practice, the situation is not much changed.
Have you tried getting a rebate for the copy of Windows you didn't use? Some
people have managed it. It's no easier than removing a welded-on outboard
without damaging it.
> If my analogy was bad, this one is at least as bad -- if it's so easy
> for the manufacturer/dealer to erase Windows, why can't you just erase
> it and install BeOS/Linux/FreeBSD/Solaris/etc. and have the "motor" you
> want?
Sure, you can get a welding torch and cut the motor off. You still don't
get to buy it without the motor.
> It's not like Windows is "welded on", is it? Nor are you forced to
> dual-boot. And you could theoretically sell your copy of Windows as long
> as all traces of it were erased off your machine, right?
Not without violating the license. The last PCs we bought, the license was
a sticker attached to the case. Even before that, it was labelled "Only for
sale with a new PC". Sometimes you don't even get physical media, you just
get a CD image on the second partition you can burn to a CD if you want.
Microsoft really tries very hard to make sure Windows is as "welded" to the
computer as they can.
--
`-_-' In hoc signo hack, Peter da Silva.
'U` "A well-rounded geek should be able to geek about anything."
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Disclaimer: WWFD?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (quux111)
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: 6 Jun 2001 13:02:52 GMT
drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> On Tue, 5 Jun 2001 15:09:28 +0800, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ("wang yin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
>>There is no need to compare Linux with Win2K. Linux's aim should be
>>beat all Unix!
>
> Why would it want to do that?
>
>
Why, because...
...all your base are belong to us! (Badoom-cha!)
Sorry. I couldn't resist.
quux111
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Condon)
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: 6 Jun 2001 14:32:33 GMT
Rotten168 wrote:
>Edward Rosten wrote:
>>
>> >> > I'm sure the brits will have some concocted story about how they
>> >> > REALLY invented the Internet first and Europe had had the WWW years
>> >> > before the FTP rfc was even submitted.
>>
>> Chad, tell me, do you know the difference between FTP and HTTP? Did you
>> also know that the WWW started in CERN (in europe)?
>>
>>
>> -Ed
>>
>
>Although I like and agree with Chad, it's unfortunate that this thread
>has turned into a "my country is better than yours thread".
>
>Look people, there's almost no state of a human mindset lower than that
>of patriotism, no notion is more pathetic than to be proud of something
>*you were born into*. Drop the patriotism folks.
>
That right. Let's get back to what we should be doing - my OS is better
than yours. I'll go first:
Microsoft ponies take it up the north.
--
Nick
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jesse F. Hughes)
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 14:50:19 GMT
"green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> shit, comparing compiling a kernel to installing windows xp. has it got
> easyer,
> is there a wisard that helps it along in 2.4.4 ?.
>
> more likly the arerage joe/jane computer user will pass it of to some
> relitive or
> friend to do for them. probably happens 80% of the time any way.
>
Who needs to compile a kernel? While the process hasn't gotten any
easier for several years, I'm not sure how much easier it *could*
get. There are simply too many options during a kernel compile to
make the process much more straightforward.
I wouldn't mind more complete documentation for the configuration, of
course. Some of the options are uncommented and others a bit cryptic
for my background.
But, in any case, kernel compiles just aren't that common, thanks to
the kernel modules that come with every distribution. The sysadmin at
my department has never compiled a kernel, although we have a handful
of machines running Linux. Now, I still compile kernels as soon as I
install a distribution, but that's just habit more than need. (I also
tend to upgrade my kernel more often than my distribution.)
--
Jesse Hughes
"[I]f gravel cannot make itself into an animal in a year, how could it
do it in a million years? The animal would be dead before it got
alive." --The Creation Evolution Encyclopedia
------------------------------
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!)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen Edwards)
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 15:14:12 GMT
Seven rabid koala bears with eucalyptus spittle dribbling from their
mouths told me that [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Patrick Ford) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Stephen Edwards wrote:
>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rotten168) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> >Edward Rosten wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >> > I'm sure the brits will have some concocted story about how
>> >> >> > they REALLY invented the Internet first and Europe had had the
>> >> >> > WWW years before the FTP rfc was even submitted.
>> >>
>> >> Chad, tell me, do you know the difference between FTP and HTTP? Did
>> >> you also know that the WWW started in CERN (in europe)?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> -Ed
>> >>
>> >
>> >Although I like and agree with Chad, it's unfortunate that this
>> >thread has turned into a "my country is better than yours thread".
>> >
>> >Look people, there's almost no state of a human mindset lower than
>> >that of patriotism, no notion is more pathetic than to be proud of
>> >something *you were born into*. Drop the patriotism folks.
>> >
>>
>> Spoken like a true communist.
>
>You're weird!
No, I'm a proud Yank. And the very notion that
a person should not be proud of his or her nation
is absurd. Everyone should be proud of their
heritage, and their home.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Condon)
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
Date: 6 Jun 2001 15:22:16 GMT
green wrote:
>
>"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:c6hS6.73034$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> "green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:9fc03t$ahq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > > Chad Myers wrote:
>> > > > >>
>> > > > > But what about the people who don't have two fingers? Or NO
>fingers at
>> > all?
>> > > >
>> > > > Yeah! How can they do a Ctrl-Alt-Del ????
>> > >
>> > > They should use an OS that doesn't require that set of keys for
>rebooting,
>> > > or even better, one that doesn't need rebooting all the time.
>> > >
>> >
>> > or task management to kill malicious tasks.
>>
>> You don't need CAD to log in, nor reboot. Besides, Win2K rarely needs
>rebooted.
>> I haven't rebooted in months at work, and only then because we started
>> a
>new
>> spin-off and I had to wipe my drive as part of the negotiations
>> between the two companies (long story).
>>
>> There are alternative logon methods for Win2K. There are also
>> alternative input methods for everything in Win2K, including task
>> management.
>
>>
>> -c
>>
>> P.S. (like you haven't ever used kill -9)
>>
>
>I wasn't saying i hadn't used kill.
>
>It resets inetd and samba well ;)
>though killall is easyer than
>ps -A
>kill xxx
>
>
>at uni they use alt ctrl del because apparently you can't send it
>remotly. so it's good for security.
Uh-oh. I don't know the technical "howto" details, but I've seen this done.
"Send ctrl alt del" was an option in one of the menus.
--
Nick
------------------------------
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!)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen Edwards)
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 15:25:38 GMT
Seven rabid koala bears with eucalyptus spittle dribbling from their
mouths told me that [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Patrick Ford) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Stephen S. Edwards II wrote:
>
> >
>> Close. Usually a junkie, or a pot-smoker (ie:
>> sitting on the curb of the street)
>>
>> > > basket case
>> >
>> > The state of your ex-school education
>>
>> By what do you mean "ex-school"? Like
>> an alma mater?
>
>"ex" means "out of" the same as "extra" as a prefix.
>THus "ex school education" is education outside what you learn in
>school. Perhaps "street smarts" is a modern synonym .
>
>> If you're making a reference to "crazy",
>> then DING!
>
>I beg to differ. The literal meaning is something so badly injured as
>being beyond taking to hspital on a stretcher--only a basket will be
>suitable to contain the pieces.
That's in your country, Einstein. In the
U.S. "basket case" refers to a person who
is nuts, and has to be hauled away in a
cage, usually in the back of a van. Such
a cage, in mental facility-speak, is often
referred to as a "basket".
Tell me, do you try to be this pompous and
arrogant, or does it just come naturally?
>
>>
>> > > english muffin
>> >
>> > A cross between a bun and a cake
>>
>> BZZZZT!
>>
>> Nope. It's actually a type of bread,
>> which is typically toasted and buttered.
>
>If that is how it is used in USA it's wrong.
Wrong... I see. Tell me, in what English
muffin white paper is the proper use of
such a term defined?
>> But more accurately, it refers to a male who
>> has a "way" with the ladies.
>
>I diagree. It's a man who imagines he has a way with the ladies. It's
>normally a self bestowed honorific, or an insult if bestowed by another.
Again, not in the U.S. it's not. It's usually
meant as a compliment.
>> > > JAP
>> >
>> > Obviously a person of Japan.
>>
>> BZZZT!
>>
>> Jewish American Princess
>>
>> Note, this is not considered a racial slur, but
>> rather a reference to a kind of self-imperialistic
>> attitude in some women.
>
>Hmm I think I maybe did know that once.
Sounds to me like you have a lot of gaps
in your knowledge, Einstein.
>> > > grunge
>> >
>> > Ragged & rough, tending towards unclean
>>
>> BZZZT!
>>
>> Rock/punk based out of Seattle,Washington.
>
>No no no! Grunge is a way of life, and the music is just a tiny part of
>it. It was a style of clothing before it got connected with latter-day
>punk. Grunge occured when torn and dirty clothing and declining punk
>culture became chic uptown.
What? Every single word you just said is complete
bullshit.
I love it. I have some non-U.S. person preaching
to me about U.S. culture. I simply love it. Now
I'm just waiting for this wanker to explain to me
the culture of the Southwest.
Patrick, you are an arrogant wanker, and nothing more.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen Edwards)
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 15:26:44 GMT
Seven rabid koala bears with eucalyptus spittle dribbling from their
mouths told me that hauck[at]codem{dot}com (Bob Hauck) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Mon, 04 Jun 2001 23:43:14 GMT, Stephen Edwards
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Seven rabid koala bears with eucalyptus spittle dribbling from their
>> mouths
>
>> >He claims it periodically. I don't think anyone believes him anymore.
>> >He could have just altered the headers for one post to prove his
>> >point, but nope.
>>
>> That would have required intelligence in order
>> for him to think of doing that, I suppose.
>
>Someone _challenged_ him to do that. His response was that he wouldn't
>jump on command.
Bob Hauck defending Aaron Kookis... why am
I not surprised?
------------------------------
From: flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Compiling Knews was: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 15:27:44 GMT
On Tue, 05 Jun 2001 22:39:16 +0000, "Gary Hallock"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Yeh, installing stuff on Windows is so easy - until something goes wrong.
>Case in point - I bought a Linksys ethernet card. Installed with no
>problem on Linux. On Windows, I had to use the driver disk that came
>with the card. No problem - or so I thought. But the install failed
The people at Linksys have got some type of a real problem with making
their doc. match their disks.
I had similar problems with their PCI 10/100 card in that the files
were not in the directories that the install program was looking
in.Couple that with some files already being their courtesy of Win98
se and it was a mess. I had to keep browsing the floppy every time it
couldn't find a file until it found it and then move on to the next
file and so forth.
However, under Win2k everything just worked because I didn't need to
use the Linksys disks because Win2k had everything built in.
MAJOR difference in time.
So, I agree with you in this case.
As for Linux it's been a mixed bag. Mandrake found the card no trouble
and even set up ICS all by itself which was great.
SuSE keeps asking me about chipset's. Now what newbie is going to know
what chipset is on the card? The chips on my card don't even have any
markings that would give a clue because they seem to be in house
chips.
Redhat 6.1 also wanted to know about chipsets.
Linksys says they support Linux on the side of the box, but then they
send you to their website to download some ancient driver which didn't
work for me.
I guess it all depends.
flatfish+++
"Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
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!)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen Edwards)
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 15:27:51 GMT
Seven rabid koala bears with eucalyptus spittle dribbling from their
mouths told me that [EMAIL PROTECTED] (drsquare) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On 5 Jun 2001 22:32:53 +1200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ("Patrick Ford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
>>Stephen Edwards wrote:
>
>>> >Look people, there's almost no state of a human mindset lower than
>>> >that of patriotism, no notion is more pathetic than to be proud of
>>> >something *you were born into*. Drop the patriotism folks.
>>> >
>>>
>>> Spoken like a true communist.
>>
>>You're weird!
>
>He sounds like Kulkis is disguise.
It's quite possible. They're both
vastly ignorant, arrogant, and entirely
comtemptible.
------------------------------
From: flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Compiling Knews was: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 15:29:06 GMT
On Wed, 06 Jun 2001 02:48:15 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie
Ebert) wrote:
>And if you think that's a ball of shit, just try de-installing
>WIN card hardware from the registry when you have to switch
>to a new WIN card. WIN cards and WIN hardware are a cancer
>even upon MS OS's.
Got no arguments from me.
Anyone who buys a piece of Win* hardware either doesn't know any
better or is an idiot.
flatfish+++
"Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
From: flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Compiling Knews was: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 15:30:18 GMT
On 06 Jun 2001 04:27:07 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
wrote:
>Oh no please .... Flatty, not the "GoodWin...dows" treatment???
It's true. Linux installs fine with decent hardware and I have said
this many times. Mandrake's update was full of bugs, an exception to
the rule.
The fun with Linux begins after the install.
flatfish+++
"Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
From: flatfish+++ <[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: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 15:32:48 GMT
On Wed, 06 Jun 2001 02:01:26 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(The Ghost In The Machine) wrote:
>One can hope, but I for one wouldn't bet the farm.... :-/
^^^^^
Oh no!!! I can only imagine where this thread is going :)
flatfish+++
"Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 10:34:23 -0500
"Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Christopher L. Estep" wrote:
> > How many UNIX geeks know about SAMBA (a slick little utility that enables
> > UNIX/Linux clients to co-exist in Windows-based networks)? Here's the most
> > telling argument about SAMBA: it's not only included with any decent distro
> > of UNIX/Linux, SAMBA even works against Windows *2000*-based networks.
> > Microsoft could choose to wreck SAMBA, but hasn't (and won't, either).
> >
> They have tried and failed.
When was this?
-c
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Argh - Ballmer
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 15:34:57 GMT
"Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <9ffgvh$cbr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ayende Rahien"
> <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> <snip>
> > Will a COM object fit the bill here?
> > It's certainly a seperated work.
> > And the UI for this COM is a seperate work as well.
> <snip more>
>
> That's just it. If the COM object in question is generic, ie it offers
> services to more than one program, it is not inextricably tied to the one
> program, then it falls under the "separate works" clause.
> This is however (with my very limited knowledge of COM, ie almost none)
> very hard to determine, so you are right, the grey area becomes very
> large when distributed applications come into view (COM, CORBA, SOAP
> etc). The FSF has already acknowledged that and will try to adress this
> in the GPL v3, AFAIK.
Another question is how existing GPL'd code is handled by a new version of
GPL? Does it automatically update, or does the original author have to
approve the change? It seems like this could become a real mess, with
different software remaining under different versions of GPL.
Does anyone know?
-- Mike --
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Pidcock)
Subject: Re: What does Linux need for the desktop?
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 15:36:56 GMT
On Wed, 06 Jun 2001 11:54:20 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Wed, 06 Jun 2001 01:36:10 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine))
>wrote:
>
>>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, drsquare
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>>>>> That would mean downloading another 100MB+ of files, which I am just not
>>>>> prepared to do.
>>>>
>>>>Go by a CD then. Good software is well worth paying for.
>>>
>>>Where from?
>>
>>Well, you can either go directly to RedHat or to a place such
>>as Cheapbytes (www.cheapbytes.com). They look like they're
>>still around.
>
>Yeah, but they don't take cash.
Get it from a computer fair then
or find a friend with a CD-R drive
or find a friend with a cheque (check?) book
or open a bank account
or just stop moaning
remove .hatespam to reply
------------------------------
From: flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Best Distribution?
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2001 15:39:38 GMT
On 06 Jun 2001 04:25:34 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
wrote:
>Why aren't I in it, I know I've driven you to the point of
>leaving COLA at times ?
You were for a week or so but it had nothing to do with me leaving
COLA.
I gave you a reprieve :)
------------------------------
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: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 11:55:21 -0400
"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> JS \\ PL wrote:
> >
> > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > JS \\ PL wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > On Tue, 5 Jun 2001 01:17:08 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> > > > > ("JS \\ PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >"The Queen of Cans and Jars" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message
> > > > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > >> 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.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I don't think you can even find a new hard drive as small as what
> > Window
> > > > XP
> > > > > >would require (1.5gb). I don't think you can even find a new
> > processor as
> > > > > >small as what Windows XP will require (233mhz). The minimum
> > requirement
> > > > is
> > > > > >basicly an old computer with (maybe) a $30 memory boost.
> > > > >
> > > > > Why the hell does it require 1.5Gb? I can install linux easily in
> > > > > 500Mb on a 100mhz,
> > > >
> > > > Then do it. Due to the fact that no one company has ever and can
never
> > > > possess a monopoly on operating systems your perfectly free to NOT
use
> > > > Windows XP.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Microsoft does, by definition, have a monopoly in the desktop OS
market.
> >
> > They ESPECIALLY don't have a monopoly by definition. There's the
convoluted
> > straw grabbing logic that the DOJ and Jackson has put forth which has
fooled
> > some into believing that they have a monopoly. But (I repeat) they
> > ESPECIALLY don't have a monopoly by definition. As you'll soon see by
the
> > utter reversal by the appeals court.
>
> They DO have a monopoly, by definition. They can control pricing.
Who's pricing are they controlling? Seems to me like operating system prices
are running the whole spectrum of prices. From free to tens of thousands of
dollars.Which companies prices are being controlled by Microsoft?
>They
> can (and have) control entry into the market. They do NOT, by
> definition, have to have a 100% market share.
How is that, which company are they stopping entry into the Market? Here's a
head start
http://dir.yahoo.com/Computers_and_Internet/Software/Operating_Systems/
List which OS's you can't get, and I'll tell you where you can get them.
> You keep bleating that the Jackson decision will be overturned, but you
> and the other "experts" bleated there wouold be a very rapid response
> from the appellate.
That's coming from out of the blue....Who said that there would be a rapid
response? The only thing rapid in this whole case was the mid trial
expansion of charges against Microsoft and the rapidity in which Jackson
denied any motion by Microsoft for more time to prepare for those new
charges.
It hasnt happened. Court watchers from both sides
> have said, you cant make a call on which way the appellate will decide
> based on the questioning of the lawyers.
We can make a call on what the appeals court has ALREADY decided. And since
they have ALREADY decided that bundling the browser into Windows95 is well
within Microsofts right (the original charge against MS), and since we
already know that since the day of that appeals court ruling, Jackson and
the DOJ had to rapidly add new charges MID TRIAL, it's a pretty good guess
what the appeals court will have to say about the whole trial!
Can you say "thrown out"! I knew you could.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
