Linux-Advocacy Digest #455
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455, Volume #34 Sat, 12 May 01 17:13:03 EDT Contents: Re: bank switches from using NT 4 (Ed Allen) Re: IE (T. Max Devlin) Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" (T. Max Devlin) Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" (T. Max Devlin) Re: bank switches from using NT 4 (T. Max Devlin) Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (T. Max Devlin) Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (T. Max Devlin) Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (T. Max Devlin) Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (T. Max Devlin) Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (T. Max Devlin) Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (T. Max Devlin) Re: Linux has one chance left. (T. Max Devlin) Re: Linux has one chance left. (T. Max Devlin) Re: Linux has one chance left. (T. Max Devlin) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin) Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Allen) Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 20:00:35 GMT In article , Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >"Greg Cox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >news:MPG.15668febb9c341fa98969a@news... > >> >> I would agree with you if Microsoft deliberately created "those >> circumstances" and did it with the intent to monopolize. I find the >> whole Sherman Act bothersome because it's vague to the point where a >> company can't point to a specific time where its product became a >> monopoly. > >Yes, I think we would all be better off if specific acts were outlawed >whether you had acheived a monopoly or not - things like offering >vastly different pricing to someone who does something to help >you destroy another competitor would float to the top of that list. >Of course ignoring the court order not to bundle IE seems to >be a problem any way you look at it... > Then bank robbers would want an itemized list of the things they cannot do. Have you started on the list of frauds which should be forbidden ? When the details of the crime are subject to change we must have a blanket clause to include at least most of them and then add further clauses as new abuses are dreamed up to be beyond what is forbidden by the current clauses. The Sherman Act has been refined by the courts over the years so that the entire class of activities attempting to keep prices higher than competitive levels or attempting to prevent others, who would lower the prices, from access to the market are what it covers. All such acts require actively attempting to suppress or exclude from the market other companies. If an accident befalls a competitor that is not covered but if you engineered that "accident" then you are guilty but may not be subject to proof in court. If you keep "arranging" things you will eventually leave enough evidence to arouse suspicion and then bits of evidence which demonstrate the pattern of misbehavior may be seen as not so "accidental" after all. MS executives have the criminal attitude that the law as written should not be enforced against *them*. Competing does not include harming anyone, either customers or other companies. MS seems to believe that "The Goal" is to get control of all the money and whatever companies it must bankrupt or customers it must deceive in the pursuit of it are just "sore losers". Conducting business is not warfare. "Collateral damage" and fraud are not "competing hard". -- Microsoft Motto: Illegal we do immediately. Unconstitutional takes a little longer. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Linux -- The Unix defragmentation tool. -- From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft Subject: Re: IE Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 20:10:57 GMT Said Michael Pye in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 11 May 2001 16:44:45 >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote >> You can suggest it all you want, its not going to do any good. ;-) >> >> Or did you mean YOU shouldn't do that? > >Yes. I meant me. Perhaps I have too interesting a conversational style to >port directly to the net... I reply ion the tone of vioce more than anything >to clear up obscurity... Conversation without either timber or voice is not easy, no. I find that always presu
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455, Volume #33Sun, 8 Apr 01 21:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: DVD on Linux? (Black Dragon)
Re: Read this clueless Linux advocates... (Goldhammer)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Robert
Sturgeon)
Re: Read this clueless Linux advocates... ("Chris Z. Wintrowski")
Re: Read this clueless Linux advocates... (Goldhammer)
Re: lack of linux billionaires explained in one easy message (robert@-)
Re: XP = eXPerimental (Charles Lyttle)
Re: Xerox bans XP = eXPerimental beta (Charles Lyttle)
Re: Microsoft should be feared and despised ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: t. max devlin: kook (mlw)
Re: Baseball (".")
Re: XP = eXPerimental (Goldhammer)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (silverback)
Re: t. max devlin: kook ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: lack of linux billionaires explained in one easy message (Becker)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Robert
Sturgeon)
Re: What is 99 percent of copyright law? was Re: Richard Stallman (Jeffrey Siegal)
Re: DVD on Linux? (Nigel Feltham)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Black Dragon)
Subject: Re: DVD on Linux?
Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2001 21:57:39 GMT
On Sun, 8 Apr 2001 19:58:08 - in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> `Andy Walker' said:
: I was trying to find out how to get my DVD to play on Linux the other day
: and found out that there is a reverse engineered decryption package needed
: to do so
[...]
: As this law doesn't exist in the UK, does anyone know where I can get the
: necessary files?
Download it from a Internet DNS server near you with this script:
=
#! /bin/sh
for DVDs in Linux screw the MPAA and ; do dig $DVDs.z.zoy.org ; done | \
perl -ne 's/\.//g; print pack("H224",$1) if(/^x([^z]*)/)' | gunzip
===
--
Black Dragon
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Goldhammer)
Subject: Re: Read this clueless Linux advocates...
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2001 22:07:25 GMT
On Sun, 08 Apr 2001 21:55:50 GMT, Chris Z. Wintrowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Goldhammer wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 08 Apr 2001 14:37:23 GMT, WGAF <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >Luckily for Linux, there are people who
>> >can see behind the hype.
>> >
>> >http://hotwired.lycos.com/webmonkey/01/12/index3a.html
>>
>> This article presents the usual incorrect
>> picture of the OSS movement as somesort of
>> 'corporation' or 'business' whose goal is
>> to compete in the marketplace:
>
>Whilst you are partly correct, let me remind you that there are
>companies out there that are totally based on the OSS movement.
>Does RedHat ring a bell? What about Ximian? Eazel?
Yes, these are, as you say, based on the OSS movement,
in some sense at least. But these companies, although
"based" in some sense on the OSS movement, are not
*the OSS movement*. Greenspan is talking about the
competitive survival *the OSS movement*, not just
companies "based on the OSS movement":
"You may even think the open-source movement can
survive on its own..."
>Whilst I agree that the possible failings of any OSS-based company or
>community is by no means going to spell the end of the OSS movement, it
>*is* necessary for these OSS-based companies or communities to "stay
>competitive" if they ever hope to succeed.
Sure. Companies need to stay competitive in order
to succeed. Why does "the open source movement"
"need to stay competitive" in order to "succeed"?
--
Don't think you are. Know you are.
--
From: Robert Sturgeon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2001 15:18:59 -0700
On Sun, 08 Apr 2001 17:29:39 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (silverback) wrote:
(snips)
>>Yeah, it's right-wing socialism, characterized by vertical integration
>>of the industrial sector.
>
>there is no such thing as right wing socialism dumb fuck
What then do you suppose Nazi means?
(rest snipped)
--
Robert Sturgeon-
Proud member of The Vast Rightwing Conspiracy.
http://www.vistech.net/users/rsturge/
--
From: "Chris Z. Wintrowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Read this clueless Linux advocates...
Date: Sun, 08 Apr 2001 22:26:42 GMT
Goldhammer wrote:
>
> On Sun, 8 Apr 2001 14:13:02 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"Goldhamme
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455, Volume #32 Sat, 24 Feb 01 20:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Does anyone know how much computer power we have/ (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Does anyone know how much computer power we have/ (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Kulis revelation! (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Kulis revelation! (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: [OT] .sig (was: Something Seemingly Simple.) (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Something Seemingly Simple. (Aaron Kulkis)
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does anyone know how much computer power we have/
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 19:58:49 -0500
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> In article <978e26$v59$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>What's next? More transistors. More power. More speed. At this year's
> >>ISSCC, Patrick Gelsinger predicted that the processor of 2010 will
> >>contain 1B transistors, run at 20-30GHz, and perform over 1T operations
> >>per second (it will also consume in excess of 10kW of power).
> >
> > That last part makes me doubt his predictions. I simply cannot see much
> > of a market for processors that require industrial power to be connected
> > to the back of the machine At least not a mass-market.
>
> I can. Starting from the home computers of the early 80's, the amount of
> power required has steadily increased. Bear in mind, thet the faster you
> want to switch a silicon junctio, the more power you need to switch it.
>
Particularly for CMOS.
> -Ed
>
> --
> | u98ejr
> | @
> Share, and enjoy. | eng.ox
> | .ac.uk
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: "meow" is yet another anonymous coward who does nothing
but write stupid nonsense about his intellectual superiors.
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
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: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does anyone know how much computer power we have/
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 19:59:58 -0500
Peter Hayes wrote:
>
> On Sat, 24 Feb 2001 15:48:43 +, "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In article <978e26$v59$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
> >
> > > "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >>What's next? More transistors. More power. More speed. At this year's
> > >>ISSCC, Patrick Gelsinger predicted that the processor of 2010 will
> > >>contain 1B transistors, run at 20-30GHz, and perform over 1T operations
> > >>per second (it will also consume in excess of 10kW of power).
> > >
> > > That last part makes me doubt his predictions. I simply cannot see much
> > > of a market for processors that require industrial power to be connected
> > > to the back of the machine At lea
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455, Volume #31 Sun, 14 Jan 01 15:13:03 EST
Contents:
The Server Saga (Pete Goodwin)
Re: OS-X GUI on Linux? ("Mike")
Re: Windows 2000 ("Les Mikesell")
Re: One case where Linux has the edge (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is easier to install than windows
Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is easier to install than windows
Re: Linux is easier to install than windows
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: The Server Saga
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 20:02:09 +
I have two PC's. One is a 400MHz P-II with 128 MBytes of RAM, and is dual
bootable between Windows 98 SE and Linux Mandrake 7.2
The second PC is a 166MHz P-I with 32 MByte of RAM. I wanted this one to be
a file server. It originally had 2x2GBytes of IDE, plus 3GBytes of SCSI
disk space. 7 GBytes on a file server is a bit low, so I ordered a 30GByte
drive.
I had to also order a new EIDE controller (as the PC only has IDE), and
ordered a CDRW as well, as the backup device. Why a CD writer? Why not a
tape drive? Well, tapes can only be read on the one machine; CDROMs can be
read anywhere since they are now so popular. CDROMs are random access
whilst tapes are serial. Tapes can have much larger capacity, and can be
reused, whilst CDR can't be (although CDRW can).
This is for home backups, so I don't need the tape drive. CDROMs are easier
to use, and they're cheap and permanent.
Did I check any of these things would be supported by Linux? No, I didn't.
As it turned out, they all work fine with Linux...
Now, onto the new setup.
I put the new drive onto the new ATA100 bus along with the CDRW drive.
Unfortunately there are no MSDOS drivers for the CDRW in this
configuration. Linux can boot and read this setup, so I tried to use it,
through several installations:
First Installation
==
TCP/IP was broken. Everything was correct but I could not ping my other
machine, and likewise from the other machine. I could write a CDR OK.
Second Installation
===
TCP/IP was working, however, Linuxconf could not configure my system for
me, so I was unable to get TELNETD, NFSD or SMBD working. I could run SMB
directly with /etc/rc.d/init.d/smb start but not at boot up. TELNETD
appeared not be installed.
Third Installation
==
I deliberately installed KDE/GNOME so I could run linuxconf on X. TCP/IP
was working but a previously working script for Samba is now broken. NFS
still dead and no TELNET - despite the fact I made sure it was ticked when
I installed everything.
Fourth Installation
===
I read all the documentation on the Promise ULTRA100 controller and
realised it did not support the generic ATAPI CDROM driver for MSDOS. So, I
have a catch-22 for Windows. I can run a CDROM with Windows, but not with
MSDOS. So, I can't install Windows.
I put my old CDROM back in alongside the new drive and that gave me a CDROM
with MSDOS. Bizarre. Linux could see both new drives (named them /dev/hde
and /dev/hdg). Promise don't supply a driver for MSDOS that gets access for
a CDROM.
Once Windows boots up, it starts with the C: in MSDOS compatability mode. I
installed the Promise drivers and the drive went to 32 bit mode, and the
CDRW appeared. Hmmm... Linux installed these without blinking.
Writing a CD worked fine with Windows Millenium, no suprise there.
The only snag with this setup is the lack of remote access to the PC. I
have to access the desktop to do anything. Remote file access is possible,
but I can reboot or run the CD burner remotely. I can live with that for
now.
Conclusions
===
Linux Mandrake is a very nice package for someone who doesn't want to get
into the bowels of UNIX style configuration... but falls apart if you want
to do something other than install everything. I don't really see the point
in installing a GUI on a machine that'll be used as a file server. I'd
rather log into it remotely, rather than locally - hence the interest in
Linux. However, Linux Mandrake made it difficult to install consistantly,
something I'd noticed before.
Now, I can see the reactions of people already:
(i) This is a typical Windows luser who couldn't find his ass in an ass
kicking contest. He should stick to Windows.
(ii) This guy is an idiot (a stronger version of this: "This guy is a
shithead Wintroll").
(iii) This guy has been so brainwashed by Microsoft that he can't do
anything without a Wizard.
(iv) This guy is making all this up. He's a marketing drone being paid by
Microsoft to spread FUD about Linux, in an effort to prevent Micro
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455, Volume #30 Sun, 26 Nov 00 21:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Response to: MS Office sucks? So why is anyone using it? (kiwiunixman)
Re: Whistler review. (Tom Elam)
Re: C++ -- Our Industry... (Charlie Ebert)
Re: C++ -- Our Industry... (mlw)
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 18:52:51 -0600
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 24 Nov 2000
>
>[...]
> >To the average user, the GUI *IS* a core process,
>
> Who the hell cares? The "average users" opinion on what is or is not a
> core process is rather entirely meaningless, in terms of what is a core
> process.
And thus, we define the whole reason that Linux will likely never displace
Windows or even MacOS in the desktop marketplace.
> >And corrupted file systems don't usually happen with NTFS since it's
> >journaled. And I have never experienced a corrupted registry except when
> >the hard disk developed bad spots.
>
> No, you've never known that it was a corrupted registry that caused your
> system to fail. But since you're not even willing to admit your system
> has ever failed, and expect us to believe that somewhere, somehow,
> monopoly crapware is the height of robust and reliable technology, just
> because we can't prove your system has ever failed, I guess that's
> rather impossible to discuss.
I never said my systems have never failed. In fact, I stated quite
specifically in the text you quoted that they have failed. Note the "except
when the hard disk developed bad spots". I've had all kinds of problems
with Windows, just never a registry corruption, and i've supported a lot of
computers in my day.
--
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 19:14:20 -0600
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 25 Nov 2000 20:46:57
>[...]
> >User & Admin mistakes, faulty programs, ignorance, power failures, hard
> >drive failures... the list is endless.
>
> Precisely. Any rational and reasonable person, when presented with a
> system in which the list of problem causes is endless, recognize that
> the system is a piece of crap.
Ahh.. then that explains why I had so much trouble with Manrake 7.2 on this
older P200.
I couldn't get the video to come up with the correct drivers (Hercules
Dynamite 128/Video or the tseng ET6000 driver). It just gave a very cryptic
message about my settings and said "try some different settings". When I
tried the SVGA driver, it at least gave me video, but it was corrupted.
This same system worked fine with Mandrake 7.1 (the difference being XFree86
4.0.1 in 7.2 and 3.3.x in 7.1). I guess that means Linux and Xfree86 are a
piece of crap.
(Note: I don't believe that, since I understand that bugs happen. Max,
however, does not.)
> >It takes a *lot* to corrupt the registery, usually a hard drive failure.
>
> Only for the single specific instances of "corruption" which you are
> trying to limit the discussion to. The fact is, the list of problems
> with the registry is, as you have already indicated, endless. The files
> might not get corrupted often, according to your criteria, but the
> database which the files contain is, in many respects, the cause of many
> Windows problems, which are indeed routine and frequent in many
> implementations.
This is no different than if you enter bad values into a configuration file.
Someone has to edit it and change them.
> >Currupting the data *inside* the registry is another matter, and can
cause
> >system instability, just like putting invalid data in the files in the
/etc
> >dir.
>
> And thus we come full circle to the point Mark was making, and you were
> furiously trying to avoid. Windows system instability is routine,
> regardless o
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455, Volume #29Wed, 4 Oct 00 18:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Photoshop for Linux (Karen Rosin)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: SE is simply unstable!!! ("George")
Re: Linux and Free Internet? ("Mike")
Re: SE is simply unstable!!! ("George")
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: Unix rules in Redmond (Michael Marion)
Re: Unix rules in Redmond (Michael Marion)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto
Alsina)
Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2000 00:24:14 +0200
From: Karen Rosin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Photoshop for Linux
"David M. Cook" wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Oct 2000 20:41:11 +0200, Bartek Kostrzewa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Why doesn't Adobe port Photoshop to Linux?
>
> Well, if they did sensible things, they wouldn't be Adobe, now would they.
>
> Dave Cook
They are to busy fighting with Macromedia...
--
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 21:32:42 GMT
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> El mié, 04 oct 2000, Richard escribió:
> >Wrong, moron. If anything, I'm saying that only people who build their own
> >homes know good design.
>
> I am pretty sure some good architects live in houses built by others.
I am pretty sure that most architects suck and that your standard of "good"
vis-a-vis architecture also sucks.
> >Wrong, imbecile. People who know pure OO languages well almost always know
> >crappy procedural languages like C++ and Java. You couldn't find an example
> >of the reverse if I gave you a century.
>
> Your logic skills are pathetic.
Why the astronomical density of your idiocy doesn't crush you into a black
hole is beyond me. Only cretins who can't ever work rigorously feel the
need to be pedantic at irrelevant times.
> There is no need, since you already gave me one. You see: if the person who
> knows pure OO languages always knows C++ and Java, then he is an example of a
> person who knows C++ and Java and knows pure OO languages.
>
> Now give me the century.
I have a vat of formaldehyde that will do nicely
--
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 21:43:15 GMT
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> El mié, 04 oct 2000, Richard escribió:
> >No, cretin. Psychopathy is a property of BEINGS, not humans. Aliens
> >could easily be psychopaths.
>
> Assuming they exist, the definition of human would probably extend to include
> them.
In that case, I demand that you formally and rigorously define 'human'
and explain why it includes or excludes 1) human psychopaths, 2) AI,
and 3( corporations.
And btw, you're a fucking cretin to not define human as homosapiens.
> >> >Consciousness is irrelevant. He *has* lost (some of) his rights
> >>
> >> Such as?
> >
> >The ability to piss when he wants to.
>
> Not in the corporation I work for.
And this is even remotely relevant because . ?
> >The Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not perfect and this can be judged
> >because human rights are *NOT* made in such declarations, they're only DECLARED.
>
> Sure. The UN, however, only declares rights they deem existing, one would
The UN is not an expert on moral philosophy!
> assume. So, they would disagree with you about there not being a right to
> religion.
I don't give a shit, and nobody who knows anything about morality gives
a shit either. And the mere statement of the theorem I gave would be
sufficient for anyone who knows anything about moral philosophy to be
able to construct the proof of it on their own.
> Again, not *all* their stock. You see, if a corporation announced a plan to buy
> back all the stock, the natural price point for stock would be exactly the
> fraction of the assets of the corporation (I'm guessing, but it sounds natural).
And of course, this is completely irrelevant since this situation never
needs to come to pass in
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455, Volume #28 Thu, 17 Aug 00 14:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Will MS kill off Compaq and Gateway? (jlsue)
Re: Fragmentation of Linux Community? Yeah, right! (KDE RULES) ("Ingemar Lundin")
Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous
Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates) ("Stuart Fox")
Re: Gnome or KDE (Jim Richardson)
Info needed (Hector Vega)
Re: Rock and a hard place. (Binh Ngo)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("JS/PL")
Re: It's official, Microsoft porting applications to Linux ("Nigel Feltham")
Decent Linux CDR software wanted. ("Nigel Feltham")
Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous Windtrolls
and Authentic Linvocates) ("Christopher Smith")
Re: Email spamming to the readers of these NG's
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
saysLinux growth stagnating
Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous Wintrolls
and Authentic Linvocates)
Re: I'm out of here. Best wishes to all of you!
Re: It's official, Microsoft porting applications to Linux
Re: Why Does Microsoft Assume That They Know What I Want? ("Nigel Feltham")
Re: being a nice guy is not self-interest (Richard)
Re: being a nice guy is not self-interest (Richard)
From: jlsue <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.arch,comp.sys.intel,comp.os.windows.advocacy,comp.os.mac.advocacy,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: Will MS kill off Compaq and Gateway?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:12:17 GMT
On Mon, 14 Aug 2000 19:05:34 -0400, junekis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Here's a little speculation for you conspiracy buffs:
>
>Microsoft has been heard saying for the last couple of years that they
>are
>having trouble coming up with upgrades to Windows that are compelling
>enough
>to cause people to upgrade - so to protect their revenues, they may have
>to come
>up with a version that is "rented" instead of purchased - you will write
>a monthly
>check for, say, $30 to microsoft every month as your "software bill".
>
> [snip...]
>
>Then again, maybe only IBM and Dell will be smart enough to survive a
>great Microsoft Backstabbing!
Well, if Compaq relied solely on the MS/Intel PC business, you may
have a point there. However, since acquiring Tandem and Digital,
Compaq has *much* more to offer, and doesn't have to rest solely on
the MS world of computing.
Not speaking for anyone, certainly not DEC/Compaq
(get rid of the in my address to e-mail)
--
From: "Ingemar Lundin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Fragmentation of Linux Community? Yeah, right! (KDE RULES)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 16:41:51 GMT
KDE has won the "war" long time ago, this is exactly what fragmentation
means in context of the Linux community!
/IL
> "Unix vendors adopt Gnome desktop
--
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous
Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:31:32 +0100
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> No. I have a full understanding of the behavior of the individuals
> listed in my .sig, and how to keep their behavior under control
>
As a Unix Systems Engineer (whatever that is), you should know about
something called a "killfile". Perhaps that's the best
way to "keep their behaviour under control", and avoid pissing off most of
the readers of this ng.
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: Gnome or KDE
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 22:57:31 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 01:58:20 GMT,
Tim Hanson, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>"Donal K. Fellows" wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [...]
>> >>>> You had ones? All we had was zeros.
>> >>> You were lucky.
>> >>> We had to bang two rocks together to get the zeros...
>> >> I had to walk 10 miles, uphill, in the snow just to get the rocks!
>>
>> You young whippersnappers had it easy! We had to quarry the rocks out
>> of the ground at the bottom of a frozen swamp using only our n
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455, Volume #27Tue, 4 Jul 00 15:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: C# is a copy of java (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: So where ARE all of these supposed Linux users? (Daniel Tryba)
Re: Uptime 6 months and counting. ("Rich C")
Re: Linux code going down hill (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Peter Ammon)
Re: Which Linux should I try? (OSguy)
Re: Where did all my windows go? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: LIE-nux is SUPPOST to destroy data (was: Re: This is a Troll, do (Charlie
Ebert)
Re: LIE-nux is SUPPOST to destroy data (was: Re: This is a Troll, do(Charlie
Ebert)
Re: LIE-nux is SUPPOST to destroy data (was: Re: This is a Troll, do (Charlie
Ebert)
Re: Which Linux should I try? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451729 (Charlie Ebert)
Re: WINDOWS! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Which Linux should I try? (Charlie Ebert)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: C# is a copy of java
Date: 4 Jul 2000 13:03:22 -0500
In article <8jsmij$sp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Donal K. Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Besides, is there life without pointers?
>
>Yes, provided you've got references[*] instead. (Refs are like
>pointers, but without the ability to do arithmetic on them. Pointer
>math leads to *pain*...)
You mean you don't like:
char *foo="abcd"; foo[2];
and
"abcd"[2];
and
2["abcd"];
to all mean the same thing?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
From: Daniel Tryba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: So where ARE all of these supposed Linux users?
Date: 4 Jul 2000 18:09:53 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: But how many people are actually USING Linux?
: I have some 15 different distributions/versions on my shelf and use
: none of them.
: Trying Linux and sticking with Linux are two completely different
: things.
I have 3 windowslicense sitting in the attic somewhere.
Buying windows (maybe preinstalled on a new machine) and
sticking to it are 2 completely different things.
--
Daniel Tryba
--
From: "Rich C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Uptime 6 months and counting.
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2000 14:12:35 -0400
"Aaron Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Rich C wrote:
[snip]
> >
> > You said you did destructive stress testing for _what_ company? :o)
>
> All decently-built battery backups have these things called
> circuit breakers.
And the purpose of popping the breaker would be..???
--
Rich C.
"Because light travels faster than sound, many people appear to be
intelligent, until you hear them speak."
--
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux code going down hill
Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2000 18:14:46 GMT
"Joseph T. Adams" wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> : Well, solving technical issues was not really the point of
> : the post. I can trace down and fix the problems easily
> : enough except for the lack of maintaining the man pages.
>
> : The issue is why use an OS without centralizing source
> : control and testing when there are free Unix-compatible
> : implementations available that do have these critical
> : elements?
>
> You might be happier with FreeBSD.
>
> Also, some Linux distributions, such as Debian, pay considerably more
> attention to careful testing than others, particularly those that
> deliberately try to be on the "bleeding edge" such as Mandrake.
>
> Joe
Let me just add to this.
I've used FreeBSD and I think it's just dynamite.
I have nothing to say bad about FreeBSD, in-fact,
believe Debian is going to base a distribution on the
FreeBSD kernel in the near future from what I've heard.
And then there's FreeBSD's kernel being used by the
Mac people in their new OS.
FreeBSD may even be used to replace the Windows
Kernel in the near future.
Or they might use Linux.
I will say that FreeBSD is several times faster than Linux.
But FreeBSD doesn't support the hardware that Linux does.
Let me also say that I've tried FreeBSD against Linux in the past
and FreeBSD walked away from Linux.
But in todays 2.4 kernel environment, the difference between 4.0
BSD and the 2.4 kernel is not as great. Linux is catching up.
Let me also add that I decided to install Mandrake 7.1 on a hard drive
and I'm using it. It has native Reiser support just like Suse.
It has ker
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455, Volume #26 Thu, 11 May 00 11:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Microsoft Office Linux Edition! (Billy Gatos)
Re: Which distribution (Yns)
Re: KDE is better than Gnome (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Linux will remain immune ("Ed Valle")
Re: What have you done? (Steve Harvey)
Re: Window managers (John Culleton)
Re: A pox on the penguin? (Linux Virus Epidemic) (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Programs for Linux (aflinsch)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software (Chris Wenham)
Re: Which distribution (John Culleton)
Re: German Govt says Microsoft a security risk (Salvador Peralta)
Re: Here is the solution ("Chad Myers")
Re: Not so fast... (abraxas)
Re: Which distribution (abraxas)
Re: Not so fast... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Need to make UNIX autoresponder ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
From: Billy Gatos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Office Linux Edition!
Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 10:25:29 -0400
JUST IGNORE MICROSOFT.
AND MAKE OTHER PEOPLE IGNORE MS TOO.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> On 9 May 2000 14:19:49 -0700, david parsons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>If MS created anything on the Linux platform, it would almost be
> >>garaunteed to be of the same buggy nature as most of thier current
> >>Windows software.
> >
> >*snort*
> >
> >You're too young to have seen Microsoft being competitive.
> >They're a hell of a lot bigger, smarter, and scarier than
> >anyone in the Unix world, and when they have to compete
> >they can crank out some pretty fine code.
>
>
> Yeah...
>
> How long did it take them to surpass NS after undermining
> Netscape's availablity to pay for development?
>
> How long did it take them to achieve parity with a competitor
> they couldn't bully out of existence? (intuit)
>
> How long have they been trying to out-Unix Unix?
>
> [deletia]
>
> Color me skeptical.
>
>
--
Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 15:29:30 +0100
From: Yns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: Which distribution
wfpatrick wrote:
>
> "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8d1uq6$g10$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In comp.os.linux.help Yns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > : I am a linux newbie (although I'm not new to unix), can anyone
> > : point me in the right direction ..
> >
> > : Which distribution of linux is considered to be fastest
> > : and robust?
> >
> > Meaningless question.
> >
> > : I'm currently considering RedHat, but I'm told that FreeBSD is
> > : noticably quicker.
> >
> > Quite possibly. But then FreeBSD isn't a linux. Have you considered
> > solaris? Or BeOS?
> >
> > : Also, is it possible to run software downloaded from the GNU website
> > : on the above implementations.
> >
> > Yes, definitely.
> >
> > : Thank you for your time.
> >
> > Instead of putting up with getting stupid answers to an extremely
> > stupid set of questions, why not save yourself the pain and save
> > us our nerves by reading the FAQ for the linux newsgroups and any others
> > that may meet your fancy. You'll find them over on comp.answers. Or at
> > ftp://rtfm.mit.edu. Scan the back articles for the last posting of the
> > FAQ on comp.os.linux.misc, for example!
> >
> > Peter
>
> Peter,
> Instead of putting up with and getting stupid answers from self proclaimed
> Linux gurus
> why don't you just answer the questions or NOT. Preferably NOT in this
> case. If you
> can't help someone, keep your mouth (fingers) silent. Linux is complicated
> enough and
> manuals and FAQs sometimes don't make sense to a newbie. If Linux is to
> become a viable
> friendly OS, the people (and I use that word loosely) that have Linux
> knowledge need to
> become user friendly also. In my perusing of ALL the Linux newsgroups I
> have noticed
> others with your piss poor attitude. (You could have said the same thing
> without belittling
> the person asking the question.) RTFM is NOT a response, it's an insult.
> Many have RTFM
> and couldn't make sense of it. Linux is NOT user friendly, yet! Maybe
> someday one will not
> have to know hardware specs and how to program
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455
Linux-Advocacy Digest #455, Volume #25Wed, 1 Mar 00 12:13:10 EST
Contents:
JDK1.2.2 performance, Linux -vs- NT (John Harlow)
Re: Microsoft's New Motto (Angelos Karageorgiou)
Re: My Windows 2000 experience (Donn Miller)
Re: My Windows 2000 experience (Seán Ó Donnchadha)
Re: what exactly is Linux advocacy? (John Sanders)
Re: JDK1.2.2 performance, Linux -vs- NT (Mark Hamstra)
Re: Microsoft's New Motto (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Video Conferencing on Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: How does the free-OS business model work? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Microsoft's New Motto ("Neil")
Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking? (Mario Klebsch)
Re: My Windows 2000 experience (5X3)
From: John Harlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: JDK1.2.2 performance, Linux -vs- NT
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 14:15:44 GMT
I'm using the Sun JDK (1.2.2) in two environments. Both environments
run at the same time, on the same system (Dell Latitude, p3-450, 512
mRam.)
The primary environment is RH 6.1 (2.2.14) kernel with XIG commercial X
drivers. The second is NT4SP5 running in a virtual machine (VMWARE 2)
under linux. So it is sharing the memory, processor, X drivers, etc..
as a task under linux.
The curious thing is that the performance of java (running apps) is
significantly better in the Virtual NT session, than it is native to
linux. The obvious conclusion here is that the JDK for NT is more
efficient than the linux release.
My question is whether or not the difference is HotSpot? Does the
latest NT release have it. I know that the linux release does not.
Thanks
John
--
John R. Harlow
United Systems Inc.
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
--
From: Angelos Karageorgiou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft's New Motto
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 16:34:10 +0200
mlw wrote:
>
> I'm not sure what you are talking about, but NT does multitask fairly
> well. One does not need to call wait within a thread for other threads
> to run. Yes, if I bump a thread up to real-time priority and just spin
> in a loop, the thread will get lots of time. If I just start a thread at
> normal priority, it will be just fine.
>
> If you really want to make a claim like this, show us some code that
> demonstrates what you mean. That way we can decide whether or not it is
> a flaw or feature.
Ok I am going to back off of this one, since the code is no longer
availlable to me.
--
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Angelos Karageorgiou - CTO[EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: +30 31 498104
--
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 10:26:03 -0500
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: My Windows 2000 experience
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "5X3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > Sure, ive seen X lock up (especially under MKlinux, DR2) but the
> > system was always recoverable via telnet or ssh.
>
> As they say, your milage may vary :)
>
> I've seen it only twice myself, one right after the other due to a stupid
> setup mistake. But it did. Had to hardware reset. I've read of others having
> the problem.
Well, in Linux, or any other type of unix, such as FreeBSD, you should
set resource usage limits. In FreeBSD, this is done via
/etc/login.conf, or in a file in the user's home directory called
$HOME/.login_conf. Here, you can set limits for CPU time and memory
usage. I think people really need to do this. I don't know how this
is done in Linux. (Linux guys?)
My experience with XFree86 3.3.x is that there's a memory leak in the
X server, the X libs, or one of the X apps (such as Netscape). By
setting resource limits, you can ensure that the system won't be
brought to its knees with excessive swapping. Of course, one possible
thing you may have been experiencing is that X or one of its apps was
sucking tons of CPU time. Therefore, your system might still have
been "up and running", but a lot of CPU and memory may have been
sapped from your system, giving the impression of a "hang". Resource
limitations would help here.
Sometimes, the tty-mode console driver for Linux (OR FreeBSD) can go
dead. So, X is hung, and you have now way of providing input to the
system. at the console. The only way out, usually, is to log into
your machine via a serial port, like with a nullmodem cable, for
example. Then, you can kill the offending process. But, the machine
may be creeping because of the excessive usage.
