Linux-Advocacy Digest #237, Volume #35 Thu, 14 Jun 01 16:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: netscape 6.1 - anyone? (.)
Re: IBM Goes Gay (.)
Re: IBM Goes Gay (.)
Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed ("Stuart Fox")
Re: IBM Goes Gay (.)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (drsquare)
Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed (drsquare)
Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed (drsquare)
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (drsquare)
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (drsquare)
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (drsquare)
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (drsquare)
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (drsquare)
Re: Getting used to Linux (drsquare)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (drsquare)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (drsquare)
Re: Windows makes good coasters ("Stuart Fox")
Re: Linux Advocacy - Wintroll Mission ("Stuart Fox")
Re: Windows makes good coasters
Re: the world thinks there is only windows. yahoo sucks. (Zsolt)
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (Sky King)
Re: Why should an OS cost money? ("Stuart Fox")
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft ("Stuart Fox")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: netscape 6.1 - anyone?
Date: 14 Jun 2001 19:42:53 GMT
dw133 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello, I'm back :)
> spicerun wrote:
>>=20
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Burkhard W=F6lfe=
l"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>=20
>> > Did anyone of you try out ns6.1 preview yet?
>>=20
>> Why? Mozilla-0.9.1 works better....and I'm confident enough to say tha=
t
>> even before even seeing ns6.1...... if ns6.0 was any indication (The mo=
zilla
>> version out then was even better than ns6.0 when it was released).
> It really pisses me off when people who obviously haven't got two clues
> to rub together talk about something they know nothing about.=20=20
Me too.
> In short:
> a) NS 6.1 beta1 is based on Mozilla 0.9.1, so how can 0.9.1 work any
> better?
Apparantly you've never had anything to do with software development. Som=
ehow
they *still* managed to introduce the bus-error-bug that does NOT exist in
0.9.1 and hasnt since sometimes in the mid-7s.
> b) NS 6.1 final could well end up being based on Mozilla 1.0
Still containing the bus-error-bug and a host of others, I suspect.
> c) If Netscape die, Mozilla probably will too (Netscape make up 90%+ of
> the work on Mozilla)
Wrong. There are half a dozen netscape developers that AOL didnt fire.
There are hundreds of mozilla developers.
Dipshit.
=====.
--=20
"George Dubya Bush---the best presidency money can buy"
---obviously some Godless commie heathen faggot bastard
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: IBM Goes Gay
Date: 14 Jun 2001 19:45:51 GMT
Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <9g9o70$q0o$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> Richard Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>> Hating the english isnt racism, its nationalism.
>>
>>> Don't be stupid! Of course it's racism - what made you think that it
>>> isn't?
>>
>> Ah, yet another .uk address that doesnt know the difference between
>> nationality and race.
>>
>> How surprising.
> there is little, bordering on no difference between the 2. Different
> nationalities have different customs, etc. Where do you draw the line
> between different races and different nationalities? Please don't be as
> small minded as claiming skin colour is a suitabl difference.
It is a suitable difference to anyone who has had more than two weeks of
human biology education. There are many races: negroid, caucasoid, etc,
etc.
All of britian is natively caucazoid. I have no problem with caucasians.
Only part of britian is english. I hate them all.
Most of africa is natively negroid. Only part of africa is nigerian, and
they tend to bother me too.
=====.
--
"George Dubya Bush---the best presidency money can buy"
---obviously some Godless commie heathen faggot bastard
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: IBM Goes Gay
Date: 14 Jun 2001 19:46:24 GMT
drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 14 Jun 2001 07:12:57 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)) wrote:
>>Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> Hating the english isnt racism, its nationalism.
>>
>>> Hating someone based on a steroetype of their race is racism.
>>
>>So "english" is a race now?
> Erm, yes.
>>You fucking moron. I'll bet youre engilsh.
>>
>>I dont hate *caucasians*, you ignorant swine. I hate people from
>>england, no matter what fucking color they are, bitch.
> Therefore you are a racist. Goodbye: *plonk*
Took long enough.
=====.
--
"George Dubya Bush---the best presidency money can buy"
---obviously some Godless commie heathen faggot bastard
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 07:46:11 +1200
"Rex Ballard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> It's very hard to count Linux boxes because many of these utility
> boxes are
> created from the workstations and servers that couldn't be upgraded to
> Windows
> NT or Windows 2000, or just couldn't handle the memory hungry
> applications.
> On an Win2K server, 8 gig of RAM and 200 Gigs of hard drive is
> minimal. On a
> Linux server, a gig is huge, and 20 gigs is more than enough for many
> of the
> jobs described above. Gartner wouldn't even try to count these.
Pardon? 8 GB of RAM is minimal? I don't think so. As usual Rex, you
stretch the bounds of credibility. Lets use your examples:
DNS Server - 128 MB
routers - 256MB
Firewalls - anywhere from 128MB - 1GB
EMail Servers - anywhere from 256MB up, usually about 1GB for 1000 users,
and that's a full messaging server, not just a SMTP server.
News Servers - same as email, usually about 256 though, with lots of disk
Portal Servers - anywhere from 256 MB
File Servers - 128MB up, the more memory, the bigger the file system cache
Print Servers - 128 MB
Database Servers - anywhere from 256MB up to as many GB as you can fit in
the machine
Thanks for your time, hope that helps
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: IBM Goes Gay
Date: 14 Jun 2001 19:48:37 GMT
Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <9g9o5p$q0o$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>> Didn't you call someone a limey in a recent post? I suppose that's
>>>>>>> not as bad as being a homophobe, although I'm not sure why.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I might have. I hate the english.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----.
>>>>
>>>>> Racism is comtemptible.
>>>>
>>>> Hating the english isnt racism, its nationalism.
>>
>>> Hating someone based on a steroetype of their race is racism.
>>
>> So "english" is a race now?
> Yes.
> Like most other countries, we have a different set of scoial rituals
> which make us differnent from the people next door. There seems to be an
> opinion that Englishism is a passive state and anyone else with a
> different race makes their racial considerations more important. This I
> disagree with since I think my racial considerations are just as
> improtant as the next mans.
You are an idiot. This is exactly why I despise the english.
> If you visit England,
I lived there for some time.
> you will see there are differnt social norms
> compared to the US, Scontlan Wales and Ireland. We also speak a slightle
> different dialect of english.
You speak hugely varying dialects of english by the goddamned furlong.
> You are probably one of those people who thinks that you have to be from
> "elsewhere" to have a race.
No, I understand the biological definition of 'race'. Not your fake, made
up, nationalistic version.
>> You fucking moron. I'll bet youre engilsh.
> No and yes, in that order.
>
Obvious.
>> I dont hate *caucasians*, you ignorant swine. I hate people from
>> england, no matter what fucking color they are, bitch.
>
>^^^^^^^^
> You do a goot "Ali G" impersonation :-)
>
> I wasn't accusing you of hating non caucasians. I was accusing you of
> being racist for hating the English. There is a difference. There are
> planty of non caucasian Englishmen.
Yes, and I hate them all too. Thats why I pointed out the difference.
=====.
--
"George Dubya Bush---the best presidency money can buy"
---obviously some Godless commie heathen faggot bastard
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:54:34 +0100
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 12:05:32 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("JS \\ PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >I knew you were lying. But I also know your still lying. That's pretty
>sad.
>> >Saying you have a SMALLER system than you actually have. Pathetic.
>>
>> You'd prefer it if I said I had a BIGGER system than I actually had?
>> Wouldn't that be even MORE pathetic?
>
>I'd prefer that you didn't lie. Now go to your room.
What the hell are you on?
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:54:40 +0100
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001 18:52:30 -0700, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Paolo Ciambotti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <9g6ckl$aao$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Unknown"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I've just kill filed him, no because I disagree, but because I don't
>> won't to hear about is childish antics.
>>
>> Matthew Gardiner
>
>That's too bad; I think you'll miss out on a lot of fun.
>
>Occasionally the wife and I will watch a couple of minutes of Jerry
>Springer (that's all we can stand) on the telly, and we always end up
>rejoicing in how uncomplicated our lives are, and how lucky we are to have
>found each other. I guess it's more or less the same reason my killfile
>is empty. If I killfiled Aaron, then I'd have to put Edwards in there too
>to even things out, and maybe next would come Johansen, then Charlie for
>balance, and in a matter of weeks COLA would be empty as far as PAN is
>concerned. I'd certainly have to killfile Flatfish somewhere along the
>way, but I've only got a thirty gig harddrive... all those aliases!
This morning, when downloading posts for this group, it said there
were about 300. After killfile's came into effect, there were just
over a hundred, which tells you something about how pointless most of
the posts are in here.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:54:48 +0100
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 16:06:28 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"Matthew Gardiner (BOFH)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Why the hell have you done that?
>> >
>>
>> I need something as a very low benchmark, "hell, at least I am not a
>> total dick like Aaron". I just like seeing how his crap is either
>> ignored or flamed. None of his posts address the issues, hence, he is
>> kind of like a politian.
>
>But killfiling Aaron increase the STN ratio by 25% if not more in the
>*whole* newsgroup.
I find that killfiling him gets rid of 2/3 of the pointless posts.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:54:53 +0100
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 14:28:08 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Burkhard Wölfel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>Sky King wrote:
>> Except we "right wing nuts" have the stats to back us up. Do you?
>> sky
>
>I don't see any. I see a figure in Mr. Kulekiss's two postings which he
>claims to be one of an organisation he trusts.
>
>some funny stuff on statistics:
>
> ``I gather, young man, that you wish to be a Member of
> Parliament. The first lesson that you must learn is,
>when I call
> for statistics about the rate of infant mortality, what
<snip>
I think you need to sort out your wrapping.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:54:59 +0100
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 14:47:02 +0200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Burkhard Wölfel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>> - center for disease control, 1999
>
>7th time w/out reference to the actual publication
>
>How does Mr. Kulekiss's sex life look like if this is his method of
>getting care attention in this NGs? Does he like being laughed at while
>he ... anything?
I think I killfiled Kuntis after the 6-7th posting. I'm not wasting
bandwidth and time reading the same post over and over again, esp.
without anything to prove its validity.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:55:06 +0100
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 09:04:11 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Sky King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>> > - center for disease control, 1999
>> >
>> > --
>> > Aaron R. Kulkis
>>
>> Once again, without more information, these numbers are useless.
>>
>What info you looking for? I will find it and post IT. sky
He's looking for something providing the validity/relevance of those
statistics
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:55:13 +0100
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 09:11:32 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Sky King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>> >> Stats? I haven't seen you provide or refer to a single statistic.
>> >>
>> >There is a chart here. You can see that hets are far behind homosexuals
>> >in the spread of aids. http://www.righto.com/java/statsgraph.html
>> > sky
>>
>> I don't consider a site called "righto.com" a reliable source.
>>
>Yeah you and your ilk don't consider any info reliable unless
>it supports your agenda. I bet you didn't even go to the site.
>It has nothing at all to do with the right wing etc. It
>just posted FACTS. You can get the same info from gay and lesbian
>sites. sky
OK then, I'll go to the site, and assess its validity.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:55:19 +0100
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 09:11:32 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Sky King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>> >> Stats? I haven't seen you provide or refer to a single statistic.
>> >>
>> >There is a chart here. You can see that hets are far behind homosexuals
>> >in the spread of aids. http://www.righto.com/java/statsgraph.html
>> > sky
>>
>> I don't consider a site called "righto.com" a reliable source.
>>
>Yeah you and your ilk don't consider any info reliable unless
>it supports your agenda. I bet you didn't even go to the site.
>It has nothing at all to do with the right wing etc. It
>just posted FACTS. You can get the same info from gay and lesbian
>sites. sky
OK, a few points about the site:
1) It only mentions being about cases in the US. The US is but a small
percentage (~4%) of the world. Testing 4% of people will not give an
accurate result.
2) It only mentions cases of AIDS, not instances of HIV. There are
probably many more with HIV who have not developed AIDS yet.
3) The date only seems to go up to 1997, and is therefore obsolete.
4) It does not mention how the statistics were obtained.
5) It does not mention any independent bodies who verified the data.
6) The data was collected by a body from a predominantly homophobic
country, therefore making the statistics next to useless.
I'd like to see your replies to the above points.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Getting used to Linux
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:55:24 +0100
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 15:14:24 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>drsquare wrote:
>> And especially as Icewm is the ONE TRUE WINDOW MANAGER.
>
>No. That honour belongs to RTL.
You DO realise that you are condemned to burning in hell for
blaspheming against the great Ic*wm?
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:55:26 +0100
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 13:48:36 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
([EMAIL PROTECTED] ()) wrote:
>On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 00:33:01 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>I was talking about a situation where the modem drivers are NOT THERE.
>>>
>>>If you're not using a winmodem (ie: brain dead piece of crap), they use the
>>>hayes command set.
>>>
>>>Otherwise you should get a modem where the designers aren't in bed with
>>>microsoft.
>>
>>Which is yet more money.
>
>Some of us have the means to acquire $30.
And some of us have better things to spend £30 on than things that
shouldn't have to be done in the first place.
------------------------------
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: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:55:29 +0100
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 13:28:58 -0500, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(SSunbird <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>mike wrote:
>
>> >huh. five letters. i wonder.
>> I'm guessing frans.
>
>it did say polygamous and not polyamorous.
What's the difference?
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 07:49:43 +1200
"Mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >There's nothing there about getting it working properly. It was working
> >properly, it was just fucking slow with X. Of course, XF86Config didn't
> >actually work, so I had to adjust the config file myself, but yes, it
worked
> >properly, slowly.
>
> I've never had a problem with that arrangement. Obviously a 486 with 16M
> of ram will be a little slower than a PIII with 512M of ram, but then,
> even a Windows advocate would be aware of that?
Haha. Yes, of course it was always going to be slow, but it was slower than
Windows 95 on the same box, which was not what I was lead to belive.
>
> I've managed to get usable xterms with twm and Xfree 3 running on a 386
> machine. It's not really quick, but it does work.
>
Yes, it was like wading through treacle. I like my GUI to be a bit
snappier.
>
> >>
> >> >Are you saying I shouldn't use X, even though it's flexibility and
> >> >customisability and usuability make it far superior to Windows?
(sarcasm)
> >>
> >> No, I'm saying you should use bash.
> >
> >That's fine for me, I work with computers for a living, I can figure it
out.
> >Not so good for ordinary Joe User though
> >
> >
>
> Why not?
Joe User had enough trouble using DOS, bash is more complicated
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Advocacy - Wintroll Mission
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 07:50:51 +1200
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Vo7W6.14929$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> It's not so much that he's unintelligent as he's thick headed and will not
> change any belief he has no matter what the evidence. For example, his
> belief that HP has been shipping HP9000's with the Itanium for over a
year.
>
Would that be the special OEM RISC based Itanium? ;)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 19:56:29 GMT
On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:55:26 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 13:48:36 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED] ()) wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 00:33:01 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>>>I was talking about a situation where the modem drivers are NOT THERE.
>>>>
>>>>If you're not using a winmodem (ie: brain dead piece of crap), they use the
>>>>hayes command set.
>>>>
>>>>Otherwise you should get a modem where the designers aren't in bed with
>>>>microsoft.
>>>
>>>Which is yet more money.
>>
>>Some of us have the means to acquire $30.
>
>And some of us have better things to spend £30 on than things that
>shouldn't have to be done in the first place.
and would rather whine and bitch, valueing one's time at $2/hr.
------------------------------
From: Zsolt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the world thinks there is only windows. yahoo sucks.
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 19:56:35 GMT
top@pp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 14 Jun 2001 00:12:49 -0700 presented us with the
wisdom:
>
> Lets all write to yahoo and complain. I am just had it with
> sites like yahoo that only supports windows.
>
> click on this site and you'll get an error that it is only supported
> on windoz.
Nope.
I just clicked on the link, running Mandrake 7.2, reading this with KNode,
so it brings up Konqueror as a browser and that has no problem whatsoever.
I see all the adds, forms etc. the links work also - didn't get any error message...
What browser did you try to use ?
>
> http://vision.yahoo.com/?id=1457763&aid=5016
>
------------------------------
From: Sky King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 16:00:43 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 09:11:32 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> (Sky King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> >> >> Stats? I haven't seen you provide or refer to a single statistic.
> >> >>
> >> >There is a chart here. You can see that hets are far behind homosexuals
> >> >in the spread of aids. http://www.righto.com/java/statsgraph.html
> >> > sky
> >>
> >> I don't consider a site called "righto.com" a reliable source.
> >>
> >Yeah you and your ilk don't consider any info reliable unless
> >it supports your agenda. I bet you didn't even go to the site.
> >It has nothing at all to do with the right wing etc. It
> >just posted FACTS. You can get the same info from gay and lesbian
> >sites. sky
>
> OK, a few points about the site:
>
> 1) It only mentions being about cases in the US.
I thought we were talking about the developed countries. Sure you
can screw up the numbers if you go to Africa etc. sky
The US is but a small
> percentage (~4%) of the world. Testing 4% of people will not give an
> accurate result.
> 2) It only mentions cases of AIDS, not instances of HIV. There are
> probably many more with HIV who have not developed AIDS yet.
Yep and in the U.S. most would be gay too. sky
> 3) The date only seems to go up to 1997, and is therefore obsolete.
Updated data would be the same only larger numbers. sky
> 4) It does not mention how the statistics were obtained.
> 5) It does not mention any independent bodies who verified the data.
> 6) The data was collected by a body from a predominantly homophobic
> country, therefore making the statistics next to useless.
>
Ah there we have it. All your other reasons do not matter. Just like I
said above. It does not matter who does the statistics if the
statisticians are from the U.S. they are flawed because of homophobic
attitudes. It would not matter how they were obtained etc. sky
It is not a predominantly homophobic country. Gays like to label anyone
that disagrees with their lifestyle or special rights for gays as
being homophobic. They don't fear homosexuals they are simply disgusted
by their lifestyle. Especially men with men. Lesbians are more
tolerated. Besides homosexuals do not tolerate those that disagree with
their lifestyle. sky
> I'd like to see your replies to the above points.
>
You just did. sky
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why should an OS cost money?
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 08:00:45 +1200
"Form@C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> news:9ft0sj$50a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
> <snip>
> > None of them have made any money yet, it's only a matter of time before
> > they go under. Until they come up with a viable business model, they
> <snip>
>
> Ah, but what happens to Linux if they do go under? Suppose *all*
> "commercial" Linux distro companies disappear, what happens? Nothing.
Linux
> carries on being developed just like it did before the distro companies
> turned up. Development of open-source software doesn't depend on anyone
> making money from it - in fact, sometimes people making money appears to
> slow down the development!
What happens? It get's really hard to get a good distribution. Once all
those companies go under, you're back to the bazaar, putting your own LInux
distribution together, something the average consumer has no interest in.
They'll go and use Slowlaris x86, or back to Windows.
Of course, the distribution based business model is so far not proving to be
profitable, so I guess if they did all go under, it might make someone
figure out a real business model based on Linux.
>
> What happens if Microsoft goes bust? Unless a buyer moves in, that is the
> end of Windows, NT etc. simply because the source hasn't been released.
Unlikely. They've got lots of cash and it's still coming in, as opposed to
the Linux companies, which don't, and their cashflow isn't all that great.
>
> (damn - I'm starting to sound like a "Linux Evangelist" now, and I don't
> even use it much!)
I just think they have a fundamental flaw in their business model, it's a
bit like the SouthPark episode with the underpant Gnomes. (Step 1, steal
underwear, Step 2 ??, Step 3 Profit)
I asked one of the UK VA Linux guys why he thought that Linux would make
money, and he could't give me a concrete reason. He just "thought it would"
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 08:01:59 +1200
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Maynard Handley >
> And since HP is using Linux as the basis for their next generation
> of OS's on mainframes, so's IBM, we don't have to debate with them.
>
That's right, they're just going to discard all those years of investment in
HP-UX and jump on the bandwagon. They offer it as an option, I don't see it
being their next generation.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
