Linux-Advocacy Digest #339, Volume #35 Sun, 17 Jun 01 16:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" (Peter Hayes)
Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags (Charlie Ebert)
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" (Rick)
Re: Is Linux for me? (Nigel Feltham)
Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags (Peter Hayes)
Re: PC power switch wont shut down Windows (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (Bob Hauck)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (Bob Hauck)
Re: The Win/userbase! (Bob Hauck)
Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell" (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Windows makes good coasters ("Stuart Fox")
Re: Windows makes good coasters ("Nik Simpson")
Re: Is Linux for me? ("Edward Rosten")
Re: PC power switch wont shut down Windows (LShaping)
Re: Windows makes good coasters ("Stuart Fox")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 01:02:33 -0400
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> GreyCloud wrote:
> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >>
> >> Rick wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > "You've got MALE.. sex organs!" wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Translation:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > AARON is a closet homosexual, which is why he makes such a big deal
> >> > > > about trying to distance himself from it.
> >> > >
> >> > > Oh yes, the old fag "anyone who opposes us is secretly one of us" routine.
> >> > >
> >> > > There's a reason nobody ever believes that, fag..
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Perhaps this is why he never gets any sex.
> >> > >
> >> > > I do...with WOMEN.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Women. Thats plural. Thats multiple sexual partners. Well, did you know
> >> > your risk of contracting HIV is increasing exponentially?
> >>
> >> only if the women are putting sand or other abrasives in their vaginas.
> >> --
> >
> >Gives a whole new meaning to pound sand. :-)
>
> As one of my former - 55 year old lady bosses used to tell me,
> @!#$!@ can just pound salt! It's salt not sand....
I guess she was never in the military.
"pound sand" is military slang.
>
> --
> Charlie
> -------
--
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: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 20:36:01 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 17 Jun 2001 09:19:02 -0500, Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > >It's *my* computer.
> >
> > No, it's not *your* computer we're talking about. It's the millions of
> > users who will be viewing sites intercepted and distorted by MS for
> > their own gain.
>
> It *is* my computer I'm talking about. This is an option that *I*
> turned on. It doesn't affect *anyone else's* computer!
But it affects the content of web pages in a manner not under the control of
the page author, and this is morally and legally wrong.
Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 19:38:46 GMT
In article <3b2cfe05$0$2478$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jon Johansan wrote:
>
>"Dave Martel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On 15 Jun 2001 14:04:09 -0500, "Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >I gave some examples. Tell me ANYTHING about a printed copy that is
>better
>> >than the electronic version.
>>
>> You don't need electricity to read it.
>
>Amazing! Remember when someone said: "Who needs lightbulbs when you've got
>torches, don't need no stinking wires!"
>
What you meant to say was who needs painted lighbulbs which
go round and round in swirls and hang down from the ceiling in
such a manner as to break every time somebody get's up to fart.
A lightbulb which uses 4 times the power to produced 1/40th the light.
Yes, who needs such a lightbulb when we have one which has
been working for us just fine. And more effecient also.
Then there is the economic concerns about your lightbulb.
Our 30 year old lightbulb is free and it works better for you.
Your's costs $580 for the full install.
Further, your lightbulb can be accessed by the neighbors as they
keep turning the light out on your when you least want that.
>How about, "You gotta put gas in it? Can it just pull up to a field and eat
>some grass?"
>
>Who needs a new OS when we've got a 30 year old one that works like it did
>30 years ago!
>
You need it.
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 15:40:41 -0400
Dan wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In article <9ggl7t$7qd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ayende Rahien"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > To be fair, that's not a user thing but a web page author thing. But
> > > > it's still amazing to me that someone would believe that web page
> > > > deisgners would want to have features only visible to a small fraction
> > > > of their site's visitors.
> > >
> > > You aren't familiar with the history of web-trends, are you?
> >
> > I am familiar with them, yes. I was even flamed once for having added
> > *pictures* to my web site.
> >
> > This particular feature depends on Microsoft supplying certain files.
> > Who but MS browser users will get them?
>
> Well, since that's the majority of web users................
>
> Dan
So what? Are you advocating just trashing the rights of veryone that
doesnt use micro$oft crapware?
Typical micro$oft shill.
------------------------------
From: Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Is Linux for me?
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 20:56:38 -0400
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Ian Pegel wrote:
>>
>> > > Windows IE is a much better browser.
>>
>> > Crap, its a matterof personal prefference.
>>
>> Spelling apart, you ask anyone who has spent any time developing web
>> pages which is the best web browser! Netscape has to be one of the most
>> useless pieces of software ever made. It's buggy and horrible. I loathe
>> and detest it!
>> You can take a couple of hours to get your pages working in IE and then
>> have to spend a day altering everything to fit in with Navigator's warped
>> view.
>> Having to consider the needs of the Neanderthals who cling to such an
>> outdated program as a petty means of getting back at Bill is like
>> constantly having one hand tied behind ones back.
>
> Not really. I've had the inverse problem of stuff that works sensibly
> under Netscape looking rather screwy under IE.
>
> In any case, you're exaggerating the problem, brahmichari.
>
Unless he's using crappy MS software to create the webpages which often
replace standard ANSI character codes with MS's own codes which screwup on
non-ms browsers. If you write webpages with MS crap it makes them only
viewable on MS crap - if you write them with independent software they work
on all browsers.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 19:41:43 GMT
In article <3b2cfeac$0$2486$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jon Johansan wrote:
>
>"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > You are mistaken and underestimate me if you think I blindly worship MS
>and
>> > think Gates is god - equally wrong if you believe I think Linus is satan
>and
>> > linux is hell. I just call them like I see them, I don't do so blindly.
>>
>> Thank you. I'll bring up a pertinent issue that I find not to my
>> liking:
>> Beta testing by unqualified people.... I have a family friend in Seattle
>> that is beta testing XP. Her only experience with computers is just
>> home use, with no computer education in regards to testing software. I
>> feel that independent testers that are qualified should be doing the
>> testing to find and report legitimate bugs. I do not believe that
>> unqualified people can give a good testing of XP or any other large
>> software package.
>
>We totally agree. What is the value of giving out beta copies to people who
>are not going to actually test and report the results to the propery people?
>They should immediately stop this silly pay $20 to get a test CD stuff - and
>just listen closer to their legit beta testers.
>
>What is as stupid is when little one man web sites get a warez copy of a
>early beta of XP and then feel they are quality to write about it after
>using it for a few hours/days. Even those writing nice things like; "it's
>so much more stable than xxx" - uh, you've used it for a day - how would you
>know??
>
>Stupid
>
What's incredibly stupid is someone who cuts a BETA on an OS which
is now 20 years old, and the fucking thing still doesn't work.
No security.
Price is still too high!
Performance is in the toilet.
The general problem with Microsoft is they can't build on past
sucesses. They can't as if they let the OS continue to grow
based on some design, others would figure it out better than
MS can and write BETTER applications and outsell MS.
So they keep changing the color of their OS, the style of their
OS, how their OS works, how it is called.
And each revision they attempt to do this, they fuck it up
even worse. It's exactly as if they were starting OVER from
20 years ago with the same release, only slightly modified
to throw competitors off their trail.
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 20:40:43 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 17 Jun 2001 14:12:49 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jun 2001 21:35:37 -0700, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> (GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >drsquare wrote:
>
> >> >> And have you ever tried to balance a notebook computer on your lap
> >> >> while sitting on the toilet?
> >> >
> >> >Hehehe... especially if it accidentally falls into the toilet or gets
> >> >wet.
> >> >You can just dry off a book.
> >>
> >> Yeah, but it will be completely fucked, unless it's glossy.
> >
> >So will the lap top... unless everything is sealed to MIL-SPEC.
>
> But then how is the fan going to work?
It's water cooled now.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: PC power switch wont shut down Windows
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 19:42:32 GMT
In article <3b2d0062$0$2519$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jon Johansan wrote:
>
>"LShaping" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> LShaping <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >"Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>"LShaping" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>
>> >>> My computer's Basic Input/Output Service settings and Windows settings
>> >>> are correct, as always. Microsoft has disabled the power switch in
>> >>> certain circumstances in an effort to cope with Windows technical
>> >>> problems. When I want to turn off my computer, I would like to use my
>> >>> computer's power switch to do so.
>>
>> >>That's not Windows fault, it's to do with the ACPI BIOS I believe.
>>
>> >And what entity dictated that standard?
>>
>> Nevermind. Highly likely that was Microsoft's doing, but it does not
>> matter. Windows could unconditionally send a shut down signal to the
>> mainboard. Instead, Windows polls itself to see if shutting down is
>> OK. I have a macroer running which has something to do with it. The
>> same thing happens when I do Start - Shut Down. Probably has
>> something to do with the macroer's hooks. But the system is
>> controlled by the operating system. Therefore, it is Microsoft's
>> fault. My computer is supposed to shut down when I tell it to. What
>> would you think if you hit the power switch on your TV and for some
>> internal reason, it failed to turn itself off?
>
>
>What would happen? You would have a modern TV. Modern TVs and DVD players
>and Satellite receivers and DVRs like TIVO and UltimateTV don't turn off
>when you press the power switch. They go into standby mode and there isn't a
>damned thing you can do about that. Because that's how the manufacturer
>designed it to operate. Don't like it? Don't buy it and don't use it. But
>shut up with your stupid thread already. You are obviously quite the troll
>but a lame one... Didn't you already post this question before but using a
>different name?
>
That is unless it comes to PC's at your local BEST BUY.
If you don't like it then you can just fuck yourself as you have nowhere
else to turn.
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 19:43:44 GMT
In article <3b2cff00$0$2536$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jon Johansan wrote:
>
>"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On 15 Jun 2001 14:07:08 -0500, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>> ("Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>>
>> >"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> >> >> What if the modem drivers were on the same disk!
>> >> >
>> >> >Hayes Generic Modem - nothing to download.
>> >> >Perhaps, more likely, your modem is already on the list of thousands
>> >> >supported.
>> >>
>> >> Not if it's a winmodem.
>> >
>> >Hmm... if it's a winmodem then it's designed to work with Windows only
>and
>> >it's acknowledged that if you don't have the disk then you are, indeed,
>> >hosed UNLESS it's one of the several most popular brands that have
>drivers
>> >included on the CD already.
>> >
>> >And, tell me, how well does Linux work with a winmodem even with a disk
>> >handy?
>>
>> How well does Windows work with a linuxonlymodem even with a disk
>> handy?
>
>Ask me when there is one...
>
>
Good case in point Jan.
Linux doesn't fuck people by forcing industry idiocy like WIN MODEMS.
The WIN MODEM is a cancer upon your CPU just like the VIRUS SCANNER.
It's just another way to make your world a little cheaper and burden
your CPU with tasks a regular modem would do for your system.
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 19:43:57 GMT
On Sun, 17 Jun 2001 11:11:00 -0700, Stephen S. Edwards II
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Raving bullshit, Chad. Microsoft have shown themselves quite
> > incompetent at dealing with any cross-platform support. The lack of
>
> How exactly? Just because people were not purchasing
> Alpha, PPC, or MIPS boxen to run WindowsNT because
> they were way overpriced, and not significantly any
> more powerful than modern ix86 boxen?
For some things they _are_ significantly more powerful than x86. They
also had better SMP capability for a long while. People _did_ and _do_
buy them, but not with Windows, because Windows on Alpha is still a
32-bit operating system even though the chip is a 64-bit chip. By
going with Windows you give back much of the performance you paid for.
Why would anyone do that?
> There is a "demand" for Alpha systems? From where exactly?
High-end graphics, large database servers. They get sold a lot into
the very markets MS is trying to penetrate with Datacenter Server. How
many copies of that are they planning to sell? They seem to be willing
to go into small markets if there is a margin to be made. Yeah, they
have to charge more than they do for the Intel version, but it looks as
if the market might support that.
> No, it bombed, because nobody was purchasing Alpha systems,
> you twit.
It bombed because it did not take advantage of the Alpha systems like
OpenVMS and Tru64 Unix and Linux did (and do). If you want to run
Windows, then there is indeed little reason to do so on Alpha hardware,
but that isn't at all the same as Alpha hardware being "overpriced".
> In fact, architectures like MIPS never sold well at all outside
> of SGI's market, simply because MIPS arches have very fscking
> stupid limitations such as limiting applications to only 2GB
> of RAM, and so forth.
There was a 2 GB RAM limit on the original NT, even on Intel. It was
done that way so the kernel could directly map all of RAM into the
kernel's reseved space. This simplified various kernel tasks. Linux
up until recently had the same limitation for the same reason. Now
that RAM is so cheap, this shortcut is not so attractive on 32-bit
systems.
> If it was a lie, then why does WindowsNT v4.0 run on
> MIPS, PPC, and Alpha, as well as ix86?
In 32-bit mode only. People buying those chips don't buy NT because it
does not fully support the hardware. If you're going to pay extra for a
high-powered system, why limit yourself by choosing the broken software?
BTW, the longer they go _without_ an Alpha or PPC port, then harder it
will be to create one in the future. The reason is that without there
being an active port, there is no reason not to put in "x86-ism's" that
cause problems on other platforms. They may try to avoid this, but
without testing on other platforms it it is virtually guaranteed to
happen. So Chad's idea of "any time they want" is quite optimistic to
say the least.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 19:44:00 GMT
On Sun, 17 Jun 2001 07:26:57 +0200, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On PC hardware, if your Video card goes, you can't boot.
That depends on how you define "PC Hardware". There are a lot of PC-104
boards that can boot without a video card. There are some industrial
PC's that can do it as well.
This kind of hardware has a modified BIOS that allows the use of a
serial terminal as a console. Linux also supports this.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: The Win/userbase!
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 19:44:06 GMT
On Sun, 17 Jun 2001 18:28:44 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 00:10:58 +1200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> (Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> >Who runs in root when using UNIX?
>
> Me. Luckily I haven't done TOO much damage yet (apart from delete
> various crucial files in /var)
You will. Count on it.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux inheriting "DLL Hell"
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 19:44:44 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>>
>> And yet, whenever I mention to the penguinistas that
>> Linux's lack of a centralized development model
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>What hell is that object?
>
>--
>"I'll take 'Deceased Rappers' for $200, Alex."
A "centralized development model" refers to a kernel.
Linux has a kernel sir!
GEEZE!
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 07:45:23 +1200
"Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 15 Jun 2001 22:53:56 +1200,
> >
> > Doskey can be loaded.
>
> Only if you have it. Up-arrow command history is standard with bash.
Doskey is standard with the Win9x line. WinNT doesn't need it, it's builtin
to cmd.exe.
>
> >
> >> and command search,
> >
> > What do you mean?
>
> Sorry, I should have said "command history search".
Once you've got Doskey loaded, press F9 to get a list of commands, or F7 if
you know the number of the command. It's not as cool as having a command
history file like in bash, it only retains it for your current session.
>
> Not if your bashrc has your home directory in your search path.
>
> > DOS is stupider than bash, which tends to make it easier to get a
working
> > knowledge faster (less commands to remember)
>
> I dont agree, I think Dos is difficult to use (usefully).
But all Joe User really needs to achieve in a shell is
a) navigate the directory structure
b) create and delete directories & files
c) launch executables
>
> The Linux man page system, or the apropos command will easily
> remind you what commands do.
>
> man bash
Provided you know what command you're looking for?
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Nik Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Nik Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 15:48:06 -0400
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Nik Simpson wrote:
> >
> > "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Nik Simpson wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > Of course not, the graphics card is the thing that's going to
display
> > the
> > > > console and there is no concept of a serial port login, so no
graphics
> > card,
> > > > no boot.
> > >
> > > How did it work in the days before there were graphics cards?
> > >
> > PCs always had some concept of graphics card, even if it only produced a
> > text display, it was still the "graphics card"
>
> My question did not contain the hidden assumption that the OS
> was running on a PC.
Uh, that wasn't at clear from the original post where you asked:
> >
> > On PC hardware, if your Video card goes, you can't boot.
>
> Not even in console mode?
Seems you need to be a little clearer in your questioning if you don't want
people to make the assumption that you are talking about PC hardware which
seems to be only sane way to interpret your original question.
--
Nik Simpson
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Is Linux for me?
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 21:48:53 +0100
> And you can set up other types as executables. Unlike Linux, this is
> based on file extention, and not first line. Although EXE should've MZ
> (among other stuff) at the beginning of the file. Can't recall why,
> right now.
Not strictly true: under UNIX, the executable flag makes a file
executable.
The first line determines the interpreter. If not present, the default
shell is sued.
-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
------------------------------
From: LShaping <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: PC power switch wont shut down Windows
Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 19:30:39 GMT
"Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"LShaping" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> LShaping <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >"Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>"LShaping" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>
>> >>> My computer's Basic Input/Output Service settings and Windows settings
>> >>> are correct, as always. Microsoft has disabled the power switch in
>> >>> certain circumstances in an effort to cope with Windows technical
>> >>> problems. When I want to turn off my computer, I would like to use my
>> >>> computer's power switch to do so.
>>
>> >>That's not Windows fault, it's to do with the ACPI BIOS I believe.
>>
>> >And what entity dictated that standard?
>>
>> Nevermind. Highly likely that was Microsoft's doing, but it does not
>> matter. Windows could unconditionally send a shut down signal to the
>> mainboard. Instead, Windows polls itself to see if shutting down is
>> OK. I have a macroer running which has something to do with it. The
>> same thing happens when I do Start - Shut Down. Probably has
>> something to do with the macroer's hooks. But the system is
>> controlled by the operating system. Therefore, it is Microsoft's
>> fault. My computer is supposed to shut down when I tell it to. What
>> would you think if you hit the power switch on your TV and for some
>> internal reason, it failed to turn itself off?
>What would happen? You would have a modern TV. Modern TVs and DVD players
>and Satellite receivers and DVRs like TIVO and UltimateTV don't turn off
>when you press the power switch. They go into standby mode and there isn't a
>damned thing you can do about that. Because that's how the manufacturer
>designed it to operate.
That is bullshit from someone who is clueless. In the case I cited,
Windows does not turn off the hard disk, the CPU, or even the monitor.
It does not go into sleep mode. Well, there is one exception.
Millennium does turn off the monitor while I am watching Internet TV.
:o/
Perpetual dysfunctionallity is why I stopped using Windows power
management years ago.
>Don't like it? Don't buy it and don't use it. But shut up with your stupid
>thread already. Didn't you already post this question before but using a
>different name?
I have always posted under the unique handle "LShaping"
<plonk>
Now you may listen but you may not speak.
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2001 07:48:13 +1200
"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sun, 17 Jun 2001 11:35:40 +1200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> >> I don't see how having command history, aliases, decent prompts,
> >> startup scripts etc is LESS convenient.
> >
> >It's less convienient than a GUI,
>
> We were comparing bash to command.com.
In the context of what you said - see below
>
> >which is where this originally started.
> >If you recall, I said that X was slow on a 486 DX2 50, to which you said,
> >why bother using X, use bash, and I said that bash isn't convienient for
Joe
> >User, although I can figure it out.
>
> It's very convenient. Much more convenient than loaded up a GUI, esp.
> for simple things like file manipulation or running services.
Lots of people use Excel for creating and manipulating text lists, are you
suggesting that because gawk, sed & grep are more powerful tools for
processing text lists we should remove Excel and give them those tools
instead.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
