Linux-Advocacy Digest #50, Volume #35 Fri, 8 Jun 01 10:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (drsquare)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: UI Importance (drsquare)
Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!! (drsquare)
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts getting
good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!) (drsquare)
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (drsquare)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("JS \\ PL")
Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?) (drsquare)
Re: Why homosexuals are a threat to heterosexuals (drsquare)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (drsquare)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (drsquare)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (drsquare)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (drsquare)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (drsquare)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (drsquare)
Re: Best Distribution? (drsquare)
Re: Argh - Ballmer ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: UI Importance ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (chrisv)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:40 +0100
On Fri, 8 Jun 2001 03:15:43 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("JS \\ PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Hard drive space for bloatware: $150
>> RAM for crapware: $200
>> CPU for the next version: $290
>>
>> Monopoly crapware: Priceless.
>
>Oh... looks like it's time to head on over to pricewatch dot com.
>
>Hard drive space for bloatware:
>Well there an 80gb HD for 208.00 what's that work out to..... $2.60 to store
>Windows XP.
I don't know where the fuck you're getting those figures from. I'd
like you to tell me somewhere that sells a harddisk for $2.60 that
would be capable of using XP on. When you include programs etc, you're
more than likely to have to spend at least £50 on a new harddisk.
>RAM 128mb for $21.00 (my god it's getting cheap) But most people already
>have at least 64mb if they are currently running Win98. So I'll just order
>64mb from Connect Computers for a whole - $9.00
>
>I'm up to $11.60
Again, I don't know where you're getting your prices from. 128MB of
RAM is more likely to cost at least £50.
I'm up to $100.
>Now I need a MONSTER, state of the art, 233mhz processor (actually I'm
>currently running XP beta on a 233 w/ 60mb EDO RAM and it runs fine)
>
>Looks like a place called Kahlon will sell me a 233 for $27.00 (that hurts)
And it will run like a dead whale at that speed. I think you're more
likely to need a 500Mhz, which of course will require a new
motherboard. So that's what, another £200?
>I'm almost out $40.00 upgrading my system to accomodate Windows XP!
>
>DAMN YOU MICROSOFT!! DAMN YOUUUUUUUU!!!!!!
Yeah, £300, plus the cost of the OS on top of that. Not QUITE as cheap
as you make it out to be.
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 16:01:41 +0200
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
In article <3b20d83a$0$94306$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad Myers"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:3b204db4$0$214$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> "Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > On Wed, 06 Jun 2001 00:36:03 GMT, Christopher L. Estep
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > >Star Office? (Max, it's available for Windows (and it's still free),
>> > >but can't compare feature-wise to Office 97, let alone either 2000
>> > >*or* the just-released XP.)
>> >
>> > Name a feature that it lacks compared to Office 97.
>>
>> Can you embed a spreadsheet application within a word processing
>> document all within a slide show presentation? Clicking on any section
>> allows full power editing of that item within the native app.
>
> Hell, that's not just O97, that's Windows in general =)
>
> -c
>
>
Sorry, but StarOffice *can* do that. I just tried it a few weeks ago in
response to that same argument from Erik Funkenbusch. Nice try though.
Mart
--
Gimme back my steel, gimme back my nerve
Gimme back my youth for the dead man's curve
For that icy feel when you start to swerve
John Hiatt - What Do We Do Now
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:42 +0100
On 8 Jun 2001 03:09:33 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)) wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>And are they up to the standards of Windows documentation?
>
>> Actually, I don't see the point in porting any shells to windows.
>> Windows is a GUI orientated OS, and there's not a lot you can do from
>> the command line apart from launching things and basic file
>> manipulation.
>
>Neat. You dont know a damn thing about windows either.
You wish.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:42 +0100
On 8 Jun 2001 03:10:49 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)) wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Something to deal sensibly with command line options since mv has
>>>different options to rm.
>>>
>>>Also, mabey something to keep track of where files came from.
>
>> This may be off topic, but one things the Windows command line has
>> over the Linux one is that in Windows you can do something like "ren
>> *.aaa *.bbb", which you can't do in Linux, unless you wrote a script
>> or something.
>
>Yes, actually you can, and theres a dozen different ways to do it
>IN EACH SHELL.
>
>It is becoming plain that you simply dont know anything about computers
>in general, let alone operating systems, let along linux.
OK then, please explain how it can be done.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:44 +0100
On Fri, 8 Jun 2001 06:05:02 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >And yes, you can launch GUI applications fromt he CLI, you can give them
>> >parameters.
>> >You can also do it from the run menu.
>>
>> But they are CLIs, and we are discussing launching things from a GUI.
>
>So? That is why you've the run menu.
>
>And the most common case is to work on the CLI *from withint the GUI*.
You've completely lost the plot.
>> >The most common case is shortcuts, though.
>>
>> You could do that, but it's a bit of an arse to create/edit a shortcut
>> just to change a bit of a parameter.
>
>I usually create a couple of shortcuts, or menu items (easier).
>Right click on a .Doc file, you see the open, print, etc? That is done by
>setting command line parameters for each command.
Suppose I wanted to set a -r parameter to a command. How would I go
about doing that? Take your time.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:45 +0100
On Fri, 8 Jun 2001 20:42:20 +1200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >Give me an example of how it's crippled?
>>
>> No korne, bourne, OR c shell syntax support.
>
>So it sucks because it isn't Unix?
No, it sucks because it doesn't have korn, bourne or c shell syntax
support.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:46 +0100
On Fri, 8 Jun 2001 06:07:03 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >Not for Windows.
>> >You'll find that the terminology and the language of Windows'
>documentation
>> >is different from other OS'.
>> >Folder vs Directory, frex.
>> >
>> >And are they up to the standards of Windows documentation?
>>
>> Actually, I don't see the point in porting any shells to windows.
>> Windows is a GUI orientated OS, and there's not a lot you can do from
>> the command line apart from launching things and basic file
>> manipulation.
>
>You can do a lot from the CLI.
>You just nead to delve into it and learn.
Edit the registry? Install/remove windows components? Even some things
you can do with the CLI you can't do without the GUI loaded as well.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:47 +0100
On Fri, 8 Jun 2001 20:29:45 +1200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Thu, 7 Jun 2001 21:15:30 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>> >
>> >And are they up to the standards of Windows documentation?
>>
>> Actually, I don't see the point in porting any shells to windows.
>> Windows is a GUI orientated OS, and there's not a lot you can do from
>> the command line apart from launching things and basic file
>> manipulation.
>
>Have you actually used Windows? You can do practically anything from the
>command line.
No, you can't. And yes, I have actually used Windows. In fact, I'm
using it right now.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!!
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:47 +0100
On 8 Jun 2001 03:12:42 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)) wrote:
>drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thu, 7 Jun 2001 22:08:42 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>> (Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
>>>drsquare wrote:
>
>>>>>I like beer but for some strange reason I get a bad headache and feel sick
>>>>>after just 1 pint so I only drink spirits - I can drink at least 10
>>>>>vodka&cokes in one evening with no problems.
>>>>
>>>> You're probably just gay or something.
>>>
>>>I think it's more to do with the quality of lager in pubs around here - I
>
>> Lager? I thought you were talking about BEER, not that watery piss!
>
>What do you prefer?
BITTER.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[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: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:48 +0100
On Fri, 08 Jun 2001 04:05:14 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>Said drsquare in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 07 Jun 2001 12:52:06
>>>Remember that, when the Chinese police
>>>are knocking at your door, and intend to
>>>take you away for questioning.
>>>
>>>Again, spoken like a true communist.
>>
>>You really are paranoid and fucked up.
>
>Why? Because he actually feels that democracy and freedom are better
>than oppression of the individual and communism?
No, because he feels that a negative view on patriotism equates to a
positive view on communism. And secondly because he has an irrational
paranoia of communism.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: European arrogance and ignorance...
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:49 +0100
On Fri, 08 Jun 2001 04:05:15 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] () in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 6 Jun 2001
>20:33:04 +0200;
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen Edwards) writes:
>>>
>>> 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.
>>
>>Nationalism and religeous hate have caused more problems on this
>>planet than anything else.
>
>Why confabulate the two? Is it because your point that patriotism is
>bad is so utterly weak that unless you throw religion into the same mold
>you don't have a point, maybe?
Or maybe because they're both equally guilty of causing problems.
>>I'm
>>all for getting away from nationalism.
>
>You'd prefer everyone in the world thought the same way? That's called
>bigotry, to think your way is the only right way. When taken to
>national levels, it generally becomes fascist. Now do you understand
>why Stephen called you a communist?
No, he just doesn't like the idea of communism. Are you saying that
anyone who supports getting away from something is a bigot?
>>As a yank I would keep
>>quiet as your country doesn't have a very good record as far
>>as most of the rest of the world is concerned (other than the
>>despots you have aided in supressing their citizens).
>
>We happen to have one of the best records ever made, dickweed. Sure,
Well, if one of the best records ever includes slavery, religious
opression, racial discrimination and nuclear bombing hundreds of
thousands of innocent women and children, then the rest of the world
must be pretty bad.
>the French and the English (note the order, limey) were instrumental,
Oooh, good one. We're so upset now.
>but then so were the ancient Greeks. The USA pretty much provided the
>template for the modern sensibility of fundamental human rights, though,
>and Americans are and rightly should be very proud of the fact.
Humans rights? Yeah, as long as your white, rich, straight and
Christian. Otherwise, the US of A just doesn't give a fuck about you.
------------------------------
From: "JS \\ PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 10:02:47 -0400
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3o4U6.30692$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "JS \ PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > Hard drive space for bloatware: $150
> > > RAM for crapware: $200
> > > CPU for the next version: $290
> > >
> > > Monopoly crapware: Priceless.
> >
> > Oh... looks like it's time to head on over to pricewatch dot com.
> >
> > Hard drive space for bloatware:
> > Well there an 80gb HD for 208.00 what's that work out to..... $2.60 to
> store
> > Windows XP.
>
> Don't forget the new motherboard with appropriate bios to handle
> this. And about half a day of an experienced technical support
> person's time to get it installed.
>
> > RAM 128mb for $21.00 (my god it's getting cheap) But most people already
> > have at least 64mb if they are currently running Win98. So I'll just
order
> > 64mb from Connect Computers for a whole - $9.00
>
> This assumes you have empty DIMM slots, which isn't likely but
> you can fix it with the new motherboard above.
>
> > I'm up to $11.60
>
> Plus time to order and install.
>
> > Now I need a MONSTER, state of the art, 233mhz processor (actually I'm
> > currently running XP beta on a 233 w/ 60mb EDO RAM and it runs fine)
>
> Ah, so you were intentionally being dishonest about the RAM cost.
Yes I'm being dishonest, RAM cost is actually zero because it runs fine on
my present 60MB.
> Try again with the real cost to add some EDO RAM to that machine
> and tell us how long it takes you to get it working with that 80
> gig drive you mentioned.
No more time than it took to get working with the 8 gb HD it's currently on.
>
> > Looks like a place called Kahlon will sell me a 233 for $27.00 (that
> hurts)
>
> > I'm almost out $40.00 upgrading my system to accomodate Windows XP!
>
> How much would you charge to upgrade an office full of PC's and
> guarantee that they work when you get done? How long will it
> take?
It all depends on how big the job is but I guess if I could get away with it
I would charge about $500 for each unit above what Dell charges me for the
hardware/OS package because any office which needs to upgrade hardware to
install Windows XP is LONG overdue for complete equipment upgrade. It would
take me about 15 minutes per unit (if that). I guess since I'm getting
$500.00 profit I should make it look kind of hard and drawn out so I'll
stretch it out some and try to look perplexed and annoyed at least once or
twice. Maybe shake my head at the monitor few times when I think someone is
looking....
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?)
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:51 +0100
On Fri, 08 Jun 2001 05:23:40 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>Stephen Edwards wrote:
<snip>
>> >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?
>
>
>You are truly an idiot.
It's funny how 99% of your posts consist of quoting a large section of
a previous post and then putting some lame, one-line comment on the
end. I can't remember the last time you've actually contributed
properly to a thread. Apart from the one about queers. Now what does
that tell you...
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are a threat to heterosexuals
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:51 +0100
On Fri, 08 Jun 2001 04:19:30 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>mlw wrote:
>> > Wait until they try to teach "alternate lifestyles" to your children
>> > in school.
>>
>> Fear makes a person small.
>
>We have a special word for people who don't recognize danger............
That must explain why you abhor all kinds of sexual contact, which are
equally capable of spreading diseases.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:52 +0100
On Fri, 08 Jun 2001 04:35:43 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>drsquare wrote:
>> >it's not the defect itself that is the problem, it's the BEHAVIOR
>> >
>> >BEHAVIOR
>> >BEHAVIOR
>> >BEHAVIOR.
>> >
>> >Is any of this getting through to you?
>>
>> The only thing getting through to ME is that you're a completely
>> backwards right-wing nut. You're probably getting pissed off right now
>> that Hague's men are taking a good battering. Oh, wait a minute,
>> you're American aren't you? What's the American equiv. of the Tories?
>There are three types of homosexuals:
>
>a) those who have AIDS
>b) those who will get AIDS
>c) those who will get die before they get a chance to get AIDS.
Wow, I can say EXACTLY the same thing about people from every sexual
preference.
Try again.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:53 +0100
On Fri, 08 Jun 2001 04:37:07 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>drsquare wrote:
>> >> But we apparently can't trust this government agency to report
>> >> transmission methods of AIDS properly.
>> >
>> >And the basis for your claim is.....what, exactly
>>
>> This agency is probably full of conservative rightwing bigots. Like
>> you.
>
>Translation: I, dr.square, have been reduced to ad hominem attacks.
Translation: I, Aaron R. Kulkis, have run out of things to say to try
and back up my extraordinary claims, so I'll try and win some time by
accusing someone of ad hominem attacks.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:54 +0100
On Fri, 08 Jun 2001 08:47:02 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"." wrote:
>> > Translation: I, dr.square, have been reduced to ad hominem attacks.
>>
>> Do you claim to *not* be a conservative right wing bigot?
>
>Simple, I'm a libertarian.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!
>Right wingers, just like left-wingers, are socialists.
That is a generalisation which has no bearing on reality.
>Since libertarianism is fundamentally opposed to ALL forms of socialism,
If so, then libertarianism is pretty fucked up.
>then, for as long as I am a libertarian, I can NOT be a right winger.
Even though most of your views are right wing views.
>QED
>
>game
>set
>match.
Try again Kuntis.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:54 +0100
On Fri, 08 Jun 2001 04:37:55 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>drsquare wrote:
>> >They're ALL disgusting.
>>
>> All?
>
>Ok, I'll give an exemption for worthless people dying in the street.
You are really fucked up in the head.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:55 +0100
On 8 Jun 2001 12:29:59 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)) wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> >They're ALL disgusting.
>>>
>>> All?
>
>> Ok, I'll give an exemption for worthless people dying in the street.
>
>Wow aaron, we get it already. You're not gay.
>
>Though I do suspect that if you really actually werent, you would have
>let the whole thing drop by now.
That's because he IS gay, and he's scared to admit it to himself, so
he's coming up with all this anti-gay shit to try and cover it up.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:56 +0100
On 8 Jun 2001 12:28:59 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)) wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> The only thing getting through to ME is that you're a completely
>>> backwards right-wing nut. You're probably getting pissed off right now
>>> that Hague's men are taking a good battering. Oh, wait a minute,
>>> you're American aren't you? What's the American equiv. of the Tories?
>
>
>> There are three types of homosexuals:
>
>> a) those who have AIDS
>> b) those who will get AIDS
>> c) those who will get die before they get a chance to get AIDS.
>
>Yet something else aaron knows absolutely nothing about.
>
>Tell the class aaron, do you have any actual evidence to back up these
>psychotic claims of yours?
He does, but it's all in his imagination.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Best Distribution?
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 15:07:57 +0100
On Fri, 08 Jun 2001 07:53:40 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>drsquare wrote:
>> >Some people put 3-line perl scripts in their .sig; same issue.
>> >(In some cases with perl, though, it's a munition -- or was; the
>> >3-line perl script is an encryption algorithm in violation
>> >of ITAR or EAR or whatever it is now. Hopefully the Bush
>> >Administration has half a clue, here; Clinton finally got
>> >it after 8 years, but it's distressing it took so long. :-) )
>>
>> In that case, I've got a 3 line perl script I'd like to show to
>> kulkis:
>>
>> while(1) {
>> print "FUCK YOU!!!!!!!!"
>> }
>
>Truth hurts, doesn't it, asshole.
The truth that you are a closet queer?
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Argh - Ballmer
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 17:02:33 +0200
"Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Dan Pidcock"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 08 Jun 2001 06:17:04 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 3 Jun 2001
> >>>"Marc Schlensog" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> [...]
> >>>> 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.
> >>
> >>You are mistaken, Erik. A "module" is the object that is linked *to*.
> >>You can distribute modules for non-GPL programs under the GPL, to your
> >>heart's content.
> >
> > That's as maybe, but can you distribute modules for GPLd programs not
> > under the GPL?
> >
> > Dan
> > remove .hatespam to reply
>
> I already tried to answer that with my post further up the thread. I may
> try to clarify with an example:
> The GIMP is a good graphics manipulation program, especially for
> hobbyists. What is keeping it back for professional use is the lack of
> color correction/separation features. The GIMP developers can't
> incorporate those, as the pertinent algorithms are patented (for example
> Pantone). Nothing prevents a company from developing a color correction
> plugin for the GIMP and sell it, even if they sell it binary only.
> HOWEVER, if this company decides to sell the GIMP along with this plugin,
> and advertises the color correction abilities of their version of the
> GIMP as core functionality, they must GPL their plugin.
> This is exactly the way the GIMP works around the LZW patent. Legally in
> the US the GIMP can't be distributed with GIF manipulation abilities
> under the GPL, as the LZW patent would impose more restrictions on
> redistribution than the GPL, and this is forbidden under the GPL. So the
> GIF plugins are distributed seperately, from a server in Finland.
> Hope this clarifies it a bit,
>
I don't think so.
How does the GIMP handle it's plugins? Do they load to the same memory
space, or are they completely seperate process.
If the former, the GPL FAQ indicate that they must be GPL
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2001 17:03:26 +0200
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:9fq376$1tun$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > "drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > On Thu, 7 Jun 2001 21:15:30 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> > > > >
> > > > >And are they up to the standards of Windows documentation?
> > > >
> > > > Actually, I don't see the point in porting any shells to windows.
> > > > Windows is a GUI orientated OS, and there's not a lot you can do
from
> > > > the command line apart from launching things and basic file
> > > > manipulation.
> > >
> > > Have you actually used Windows? You can do practically anything from
the
> > > command line.
> >
> > Changing drivers would be nice, how do I do it from the CLI?
>
> /sbin/modprobe module1 module2 module3....
Yes, but I was thinking about Windows. :-D
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[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: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 14:05:54 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>There are three types of homosexuals:
>
>a) those who have AIDS
>b) those who will get AIDS
>c) those who will get die before they get a chance to get AIDS.
How profound. "All homosexuals will either get AIDS or won't get
AIDS."
Thanks you, Aaron Kookis, super genius. Not.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
