Linux-Advocacy Digest #197, Volume #35 Wed, 13 Jun 01 17:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (GreyCloud)
Re: Here's a switch for a change (GreyCloud)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (Colin Day)
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? (GreyCloud)
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft ("Bill Todd")
Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags (GreyCloud)
Re: Redhat video problems. (GreyCloud)
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff? (GreyCloud)
Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff? (GreyCloud)
Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff? (GreyCloud)
Re: Will MS get away with this one? (Form@C)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 13:31:51 -0700
Maynard Handley wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Well, it does :-) and in this particular respect, a great deal
> > more than other alternatives.
> >
> > Per user pref files tend to be unlimited. I can't think of a
> > single application that I use that is constrained by system-wide
> > preferences. My per-user preferences define my environment.
> > How else could a multi-user system operate?
> >
> > What about the apps? For the most part they're available in
> > source, and can be compiled or installed from scratch with
> > essentially no effort or cost. For the ones that aren't
> > available that way, the old versions will still work unless I've
> > changed to a machine with a different processor architecture.
> > In that case I have to get a replacement or I'm short of luck.
> > How else could the applications behave? Even Windows is
> > famously backwards-compatible for applications.
> >
> > Drivers and system-wide configuration are an issue of bringing
> > the new machine up in the first place, and are essentially
> > orthogonal to the issue of moving your user environment around
> > with you.
> >
> > So what _was_ the question?
>
> Oh give me a fucking break. This is why adults consider the Linux crowd to
> be a bunch of amateurs.
And you consider yourself an Adult.... tell that to IBM that is taking
Linux very seriously.
IBM took Microsoft seriously once too.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Here's a switch for a change
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 13:39:49 -0700
This is off topic for this thread.... I went to ms website for the VC6.0
downloads...
I can't do it because its HUGE... 175Mb of downloads??? Over a 28.8K
modem line??
Looks like I go to Metrowerks to get a compiler that works right.
------------------------------
From: Colin Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 12:47:32 -0400
Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> > Look up some Argentinian history, and you may be enlightened. :-)
> > Specifically, Juan and Evita Peron. Juan's rise to power
> > was a long and complicated one, and his supporters were,
> > for some reason, known as Peronistas.
> >
> > Or maybe it was his government "hatchet men", who liked to
> > "disappear" people [*]. In any event, a fair number of
> > two-syllable words are amenable to this treatment: penguins
> > among them. Since the Linux logo is a happy sitting penguin,
> > well ... :-)
> >
> > Not that it's a horribly logical usage, mind you.
> >
> > Of course, what's sauce for the goose might be sauce for the gander;
> > one might coin the term "Micronista". The only problem with that
> > term is that certain elements in Micronesia might object. :-)
> >
> > Unfortunately, "Gates" is not bisyllabic. "BillGateista" sounds funny.
> > "Ballmerista" might be a possibility, but less understandable.
> >
> > [*] No, "disappear" is not normally a transitive verb. :-)
>
> I thought it was from the Nicaraguan Sandanistas (sp?).
Sandinistas. Named after Sandino.
Actually the "ista" is just the Spanish analog of English "ist".
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 13:42:33 -0700
Ed Allen wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Chad Myers wrote:
> >>
> >> I know you penguinistas will stoop to the lowest levels, but flat out
> >> lying is quite rediculous. Are you guys that sad that you must
> >> make lies up just to defend your poor choice in OS?
> >
> >No different than you Windanistas coming in here and whining your big
> >ass off.
> >
> Since Chad is a staunch defender of the current power structure I
> do not think that the "anista" flavor of a revolutionary should
> apply to sock puppets like him.
>
> He has enough trouble with coherent thoughts to assure us that
> revolutionary ones are beyond him.
>
> His main technique seems to be to keep repeating the same set of
> outrageous claims until his "opponent" killfiles him and then he
> gets to be the "victor". The ones, like you, who have not killfiled
> him are "pending victories".
>
> This unbroken string of "victories", with occasional reinforcements
> by newbies recognizing that he is just a sock puppet and killfiling
> him, is what keeps him posting to a Linux advocacy group with some
> cross-posts to COMNA, like this thread, to remind his betters that
> he is "putting on a good show".
>
> So I think you should reserve Windanistas for higher caliber
> individuals.
>
> --
> Microsoft is trying to add to the list of biggest lies of all time:
> "Hi. I'm from Microsoft and I am here to protect you from the threat of
> the GPL."
Hehehehe.... Ok. For his calibre... it'll be Billy-Butt-Crust!
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Bill Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 16:50:16 -0400
"Maynard Handley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <x9EV6.79268$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Stephen Fuld" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > Wait a minute here. Let's take a step back. In response to Maynard's
> > original question, I pointed out that there are several third party
packages
> > that purport to do pretty much exactly what he wants. They do this by
> > "cloning the disk" across any one of several interfaces, after a floppy
or a
> > CD is booted into the new (presumably blank) machine. Yes, you may have
to
> > fiddle with the drivers for some non standard peripherals, but for the
most
> > part, it is supposed to be painless. In Maynard's original post, he
talked
> > about his e-mail environment and, if both systems use standard control
> > modems, this should work easily. Then someone asked if I had actually
done
> > this. I haven't, but someone else said they have and it worked pretty
well.
> > We then got off into a whole bunch of Linux stuff and other packages
that
> > don't work and other even less related things, but I believe that
Maynard's
> > original request was answered affirmativly, even if the answer was
buried in
> > other rants :-(.
>
> I still don't see how cloning the disk solves my problem.
> I don't want an IDENTICAL copy of machine A on machine B. After all,
> machine A is running an OS from 2 yrs ago on a CPU from 4 yrs ago. I want
> a "conceptually" identical copy, but with the OS and hardware targetted
> bits replaced. This means doing the right thing with all the pre-loaded
> apps along with shared material like fonts and DLLs plus, of course, the
> registry.
Perhaps you missed the post where I explained that the way to accomplish
this (with the caveat that there may be some manual tweaking required in
*some* cases, though in many there won't be) is then to perform an *upgrade*
installation of your new OS version on the new hardware after moving over
the cloned original system.
Microsoft certainly attempts to make this easy, and in at least many cases
succeeds.
- bill
>
> Perhaps you felt it was implied that I could use this cloning tool to
> shift stuff from say a Win98 box to a Win XP box, but to me it is not at
> all implied that this would actually work satisfactorily.
>
> Maynard
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 13:46:54 -0700
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "drsquare"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 13 Jun 2001 00:12:05 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> > (Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> >
> >>Jon Johansan wrote:
> >>>
> >>> lesse... $1000 for hard copy of Encyclopedia that is never updated and
> >>> contains no "live" data or links.
> >>> $damn-near-free for CD ROM Encyclopedia that is live and can be
> >>> updated
> >>> and contains more diverse types of information?
> >>>
> >>> there is a decision to be made here?
> >>
> >>No. The hard copy is far superior, if you can afford it.
> >
> > No, it's not.
>
> It is in some ways. Print is much easier to read than a
> computer screen due having a much higher resoulution and contrast. Also,
> the print quailty from an expensive book is liable to be much higher than
> the print quality you could get out of any printer you are likely to be
> able to afford / have room for.
>
How right you are! I used up four black print cartridges to print out
the Solaris 8 System Administration Manuals. My cost was about $150.
Each was about 700 pages and there were three manuals. Plus I had to
buy the large D ring notebooks to make the pages last. I think I'd
rather have paid the money for the manuals.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Redhat video problems.
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 13:49:52 -0700
flatfish+++ wrote:
>
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 15:57:02 -0700, GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >I wonder what ever happened to using ctrl-alt-+ or - to change the
> >screen resolutions on the fly??
>
> That's assuming X is installed properly to begin with.
>
> Hitting those keys when all that is displayed is a bright white screen
> does nothing.
>
> flatfish+++
> "Why do they call it a flatfish?"
My old copy of slackware 3.5 allowed for many different resolutions and
worked nice.
The later versions of Linux seem to have omitted this feature.
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 16:51:28 -0400
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Sky King"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> >> On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 21:52:43 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> >> ("Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> >>
> >> >Ed Cogburn wrote:
> >>
> >> >> > In North America, it seems more homosexuals get it. Whether the
> >> >> > gap will close or not is another issue.
> >> >>
> >> >> Last I heard its progress through the gay community has slowed, but
> >> >> its advancing among the heterosexual youth,
> >> >
> >> >That's a rumor being spread by.... homosexual activists
> >>
> >> The same way all your rumour are spread by paranoid right-wing nuts
> >> like yourself.
> >>
> > Except we "right wing nuts" have the stats to back us up. Do you? sky
>
> Such as the vast majority of AIDS is spread by hetro activity.
>
Wrong.
> -Ed
>
> --
> (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
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: European arrogance and ignorance...
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 20:55:47 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, chrisv
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Wed, 13 Jun 2001 14:00:22 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>The US will never have personal freedom whilst their people are still
>>continuosly brainwashed by Christian ideology.
>
>A. We're not. Most people I know don't go to church.
This proves little, although I'm not sure how to show better
evidence myself. It's clear, though, that the moderates
are running the show -- one hopes they continue to do so.
Of course, there's the issue as to what precisely a moderate is;
the old joke bears repeating:
"There are two parties in the United States.
The Right ..... and the Far Right."
As for continuous brainwashing -- I'd be curious where.
The worst examples of brainwashing I can think of is a
Christmas tree or "Jesus creche" in the town square (or,
in one case, a cross on a mountain which happened to be
on government or park property) and some squabbles about
which of "evilution" versus "cretinism" should be taught
in the (local-government-run-and-funded) public schools.
The "cretinists" want equal time; never mind that creationism
isn't all that scientific. (A debate on this subissue is better
left to talk.origins.) This may indicate that I'm far gone
already, admittedly -- but one of the reasons the Religious
Right hasn't made more headway is because the Founding Fathers
passed Amendment I, which prevents religion from getting to
far into government (they can of course donate to their heart's
content, subject to various campaign financing restrictions).
Mind you, our sex ed could apparently also be improved; there's
more to sex ed than "just say no". But I don't know precisely what
goes on in there -- and some parents apparently think that
bringing up Daughter in abject innocence until she turns 18
would fit the bill. (I doubt it, somehow; at least let her know
which is a "good touch" versus a "bad touch" -- something taught
in kindergarten. The boys might even have to be taught proper
sexual techniques to bring a woman to orgasm, at some point.
Of course, I suspect many of them find out during extracurricular
activities... :-) )
>
>B. Why do you think an ignorant troll like yourself has the wisdom to
>pass this kind of judgement?
Uh, because he thinks he does? There's no requirement for intelligence
on Usenet -- a fact demonstrated repeatedly on many newsgroups. :-/
(A pity, but at least the seasoned veterans thereof can quickly
pick the wheat from the chaff. Borderline wheat, of course, is
a little harder to identify -- but then, it always is.
But yeah, I'd say drsquare seems to have a chip on his shoulder,
judging from his statements. Tone it down, dr; It's only
Usenet.... :-) )
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random grain product here
EAC code #191 44d:10h:47m actually running Linux.
All hail the Invisible Pink Unicorn (pbuh)!
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff?
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 13:54:21 -0700
"Matthew Gardiner (BOFH)" wrote:
>
> Are you sure you're a yankie? you sound a little more enlightended to the
> rest of the world that the typical yankie.
>
> Matthew Gardiner
>
> --
> I am the blue screen of death
> nobody hears your scream's
>
> Sepo is a cockney term for yank,
> however, in New Zealand and Australia
> a yank is a wank, well, same thing ;)
>
> For AOL and earthlink lusers asking stupid questions:
> Seek and ye shall find
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Matthew Gardiner (BOFH)" wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > True enough. Back in the 80's I had three languages installed on a VAX
> > > > and sometimes mixed the three together to get good results. At least
> on
> > > > a VAX I could link these object modules together without any hassles
> or
> > > > tricks.
> > >
> > > Its rather humourous that Microsoft on the other hand saw computing in
> the
> > > 80's non-standardise and evil, TRANSLATION: Bill Gates wasn't screwing
> the
> > > market over and over again.
> > >
> > > The market was not fragmented or any other Microsoft drival relating the
> > > market situation. UNIX was not fragmented, there were only three UNIX's
> for
> > > Intel, SCO UnixWare, *BSD and Solaris, during the 80s. So, this self
> > > proclaimed, "we created the PC revolution" is based on nothing but
> Microsoft
> > > propaganda.
> > >
> > > For the businesses, there were UNIX mainframes/servers w/ dumb
> terminals,
> > > which did everything desktop did. Small businesses bought shared time on
> > > mainframes, which, compared to now, worked out cheaper. For home use,
> the
> > > two major players were Atari and Amiga, and generally speaking you could
> > > swap files between Atari-Amiga without any problems.
> > >
> > > For Yanks who don't know who Atari or Amiga is, no offence, but
> ignorance is
> > > your nation's past time, and it won't ever change.
> > >
> > > Matthew Gardiner
> > >
> > > --
> > > I am the blue screen of death
> > > nobody hears your scream's
> > >
> > > Sepo is a cockney term for yank,
> > > however, in New Zealand and Australia
> > > a yank is a wank, well, same thing ;)
> >
> > Me yank... I had an Atari and an Amiga... I liked the amiga better.
> >
> > --
> > V
That is because I used to work for the NSA. And later for the Dept. of
the Navy in a civilian capacity. Everytime I travelled out of country I
was briefed by the State dept. on the ways and means of the people.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff?
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 13:55:27 -0700
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Donal K. Fellows"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Edward Rosten wrote:
> >> Bacause every BASIC other than BBC basic is a steaming pile of
> >> ***********.
> >
> > BBC BASIC is a steaming pile too. HTH!
>
> It's the best BASIC there is and it gets in the way least. Besides this
> is a religious issue.
>
> -Ed
>
> --
> (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
Oooopsss!! Don't want to get into these religious wars here.
:-)
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff?
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 13:56:25 -0700
"Donal K. Fellows" wrote:
>
> drsquare wrote:
> > Are you TAKING the piss??? All indents should be like THIS:
> >
> > char *function(char *string) {
> > char *buffer = malloc(strlen(string)*2+1);
> > char *ptr = buffer;
> > char current;
> > do {
> > switch (current = *string) {
> > case '@':
> > case '\'':
> > *ptr++ = '@';
> > default:
> > *ptr++ = *string++;
> > }
> > } while (current);
> > return realloc(buffer, ptr-buffer);
> > }
>
> Either you're Zippy the Clown or you've never tried coding on
> (legal) medication.
>
> Donal.
> --
> "Windows is a car with square wheels (architecture) and a huge engine (hype,
> etc.), capable of of making the car move despite the square wheels. Linux
> is a car with round wheels but a small engine, capable of making the car go
> despite the small engine." -- John Latham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
He may be a dutch tulip, for all I can tell.
--
V
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Will MS get away with this one?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Form@C)
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 20:59:51 GMT
LShaping <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
<snip>
> Yup. Only an deranged zealot would deny that Microsoft has done some
> good. Fortunately, the court case is shedding much needed light on
> Microsoft's business practices.
>
<snip>
I *have* to argue with this...
Before the IBM/Intel/Microsoft triopoly there simply wasn't a standard.
You couldn't write a text file on one machine and expect to read it on one
produced by a different manufacturer.
CP/M helped a lot. It gave a common OS (of sorts) but there wasn't a
standard disk format when it first appeared. Some firms made cash simply by
copying files from one manufacturer's disk format to another (providing
that they were both CP/M files of course).
Microsoft, no matter what their faults, did help to produce a common
software platform that worked on hardware from different manufacturers.
That could only happen because IBM released lots of hardware info. Until
that point *every* hardware manufacturer tried to lock their users into
their way of doing things - you *had* to buy your word processor from your
hardware manufacturer or one of his associated companies.
How can you blame a fledgling software company for trying to start a
business under those conditions? With 20/20 hindsight you can see how
Microsoft's buying of QDOS could be taken as being a bit dodgy, but at the
time QDOS wasn't really worth anything. Bill G was simply astute enough to
see that it could be modified & sold to IBM, who needed an OS badly.
(By the way, there is reason to believe that QDOS wasn't original either.
Similar routine calls appear in CP/M, QDOS and MS-DOS and it is quite
possible that QDOS was actually part of a heavily modified CP/M. Certainly
some CP/M-like calls remained in MS-DOS for many years.)
Sorry, Microsoft *did* some good. They may have a *very* tarnished
reputation now, but that isn't the point of my argument.
[deranged zealot wearing flame-resistant undies...]
--
Mick
Olde Nascom Computers - http://www.mixtel.co.uk
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
