Linux-Advocacy Digest #430
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430, Volume #34 Fri, 11 May 01 17:13:10 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Double whammy cross-platform worm (Greg Copeland)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (jim dutton)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: No More Linux! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: To Erik: What is Wordperfect missing? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: The Microsoft PATH. ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: Caldera CEO agrees with MS ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: No More Linux! (Craig Kelley)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: 11 May 2001 19:37:28 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Burkhard Wölfel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
>> If the overwhelming majority of men were truly bisexual, as you claim,
>> then why what reason would that be?
>>
>
>Read any Kinsey report
Kinsey was into urethral insertion. Perhaps he really wanted to make
people think the average weirdness is higher than expected ;-)
--
Roberto Alsina
--
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 21:38:08 +0100
In article , "Chronos Tachyon"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu 10 May 2001 02:27, Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> [Snip]
>>
>> Probably most of all applications. Back then there was a relatively
>> small instruction set and not many resources. That said, you could do
>> all the intXX stuff from C and QuickBasic (I don't think Qbasic shipped
>> with this functionality). I did quite a lot of mouse stuff from int 31
>> (? its been a long time) from the QuickBasic int() and int86()
>> functions.
>>
> [Snip]
>
> I'm pretty sure you could do inline machine code even in QBasic. You
> stuffed your opcodes into a string, then did some sort of unusual
> syntactic incantation on it (something along the lines of "CALL
> ABSOLUTE OFFSET$(code$)", although it's been far too many years for me
> to believe that I got that right on the first try).
You could, but it really sucked.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
--
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Double whammy cross-platform worm
From: Greg Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 11 May 2001 14:38:02 -0500
Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Personally, I didn't really see how the argument relating to intergrated
> browser as anti-competitive. Question, what about KDE? GNOME? Netscape
> is a shit browser, thats why it lost to IE, and still, after 2 years, it
> still sucks like a vacuum. As for the comment regarding the OS, yes,
> there are some irregularities, however, besides that, Netscape had no
> one to blame except themselves, for producing such shoddy products.
Except, when Netscape went free, IE sucked even worse than Netscape did.
That doesn't make Netscape good, it just means that IE sucked *MUCH* worse
than did Netscape at the time.
Think of it this way. Let's say that Microsoft was only an application
company and that someone else was developing the OS. Do you think there
would of been a snowball change in hell that IE would of been allowed to
be integrated. No! It was junk. On the odd chance that it were allowed,
there is no way it would of been allowed to b
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430, Volume #33Sat, 7 Apr 01 10:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Microsoft should be feared and despised (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: lack of linux billionaires explained in one easy message (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin (Goldhammer)
Re: Microsoft should be feared and despised (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin (Goldhammer)
Re: IA32, was an advocacy rant (Paul Repacholi)
Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin (Goldhammer)
õÓÔÁÎÏ×ËÁ Linux ("TV")
Re: Galeon, Galeon, rah, rah, rah (was: Too expensive, too invasive) (Matthias
Warkus)
Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure (Goldhammer)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: NT is stagnant while Linux explodes ("WGAF")
Re: Chimp in TV program downloads Linux to talk (Charles Lyttle)
Re: NT is stagnant while Linux explodes (Johan Kullstam)
Re: lack of linux billionaires explained in one easy message ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft should be feared and despised
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 21:24:04 +1200
And you can download it for free!
Matthew Gardiner
JS PL wrote:
> "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > hmm 2 days and yet no reply. I guess "JS PL" has realised how stupid
> his/her
> > comments were, and has now set off to make up a new alias. Sounds very
> > familiar to Claire Lynn/Flatfish/Jeff (care to add more).
> >
> > Matthew Gardiner
> >
> > Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> >
> > > I'm still trying to understand the connection "JS PL" and "Peter Ammon"
> are
> > > trying to make. Microsoft are giving away a product for free, plan and
> > > simple. I simply pointed out that it was the was the case, and that I
> felt
> > > that it was double standards on Microsofts part. Even if you could run
> in on
> > > the desktop version of Windows, would anyone seriously consider it? I
> have
> > > actually set it up to stream a piece of media accross my lan at home, so
> it
> > > is possible to do it on Windows 2000 Pro.
> > >
> > > Also, the follow up articles. So, if a piece of software is written for
> > > more than one platform, and it is given away, it is evil, however, if it
> has
> > > been written for only one OS, and that OS just so happened to be written
> by
> > > Microsoft, then it is perfectly acceptable? thats the logic our good
> friends
> > > "JS PL" and Peter Ammon" subscribe to.
>
> Is there something in here that deserves a follow up? The steaming media
> server costs about $1000.00. You can call it free till your blue in the
> face. It's $1000 because you only get it with Windows2000 Server and up.
--
Disclaimer:
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
If you do not like it go: [rm -rf /home/luser] and
have a nice day :)
--
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: lack of linux billionaires explained in one easy message
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 22:01:13 +1200
Dave Martel wrote:
> On Sat, 07 Apr 2001 03:45:47 GMT, "WGAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >You'd have hard time naming some commercial
> >grade application for Linux. Even if you do, they won't be free.
>
> TCLPro, Corel PhotoPaint, WordPerfect, Snif+, not to mention the usual
> apps like GIMP and XEmacs. There's bunches more but it's been a long
> day.
Sorry, for a win-advocate (such as WGAF), unless Microsoft produces an
application for Linux, then everything else that runs on it must be
sub-standard!
Matthew Gardiner
--
Disclaimer:
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
If you do not like it go: [rm -rf /home/luser] and
have a nice day :)
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Goldhammer)
Subject: Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2001 10:02:58 GMT
On 7 Apr 2001 06:52:00 GMT, Bloody Viking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Slackware is my favourite distro.
Same here. Slack is the no-bullshit
distro.
>If what you mean by "BSD style init" the
>setup to install process, I like that method
>better than, say, Red Hat.
He probably means BSD style init scripts,
as opposed to System V style.
>If I was going to switch f
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430, Volume #32 Fri, 23 Feb 01 12:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: The Windows guy. ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Does anyone know how much computer power we have/ ("Mike")
Kulkis the newbie, its official! (woof)
Re: Is innovation a blessing? (was Interesting article) ("Edward Rosten")
Competition: How many punches could Kulkis take? (woof)
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] (Klaus-Georg
Adams)
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] ("Seán Ó
Donnchadha")
Re: Linux Threat: non-existant
Kulkis haters club seeking new members (woof)
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] (Peter da Silva)
Kulis revelation! (woof)
Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux ("Edward Rosten")
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Re: Linux Threat: non-existant ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: How Microsoft Crushes the Hearts of Trolls. (Matthias Warkus)
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] (Peter da Silva)
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 16:20:55 +
>>>>pipes can solve that problem if multitasking is used. They can not if
>>>>single tasking is used. Therefore single tasking pipes have only a
>>>>subset of the functionality of mltitasking. Therefore in order to
>>>>solve all computations that pipes are able to solve, multitasking is
>>>>required.
>>>
>>> This does not imply that pipes require multitasking. It merely shows
>>> that a pipe with multitasking has more functionality than a pipe
>>> without
>>> multitasking.
>>> If you're using shell syntax and sending the input of
>>> one
>>> job to the output of another as a definition, then even dos pipes
>>> satisfy the definition.
A point I missed earlier. Using shell syntax as a definition, DOS does
not provide pipes since I came up with an example which does not work
under that definition since the output of one job is never passed to the
input of the next in that case.
>>[in th context of shell piping]
>>
>>No it doesn't because the emulation of pipes proveides a subset of the
>>functionality,
>> so they are not pipes. You could say a 286 was a pentium
>>because it provides a subset of the functionality, but that is false. So
>>it is false that DOS pipes are UNIX pipes. Since what UNIX has is pipes,
>>what dos has can not be pipes.
>
> Nonsense.
OK. I'll concede, it was a poor argument. I suppose that I should think
before I post more often :-)
I believe what you're saying is that if C is a subset of A and B is a
subset of A then C may or may not be a subset of B. Do I take this
correctly?
>>> Since you haven't bothered to quote a definition, one can only
>>> conclude that you're making one up, and then using that to conclude
>>> that dos does not "have real pipes". That's an entirely circular
>>> argument, because you've chosen an arbitrary definition of a "pipe".
>>
>>
>>I'm using the definition of how data is piped between applications using
>>shell syntax.
>
> If your definition of pipes refers to UNIX shell pipes, case your
> definition is entirely circular. Obviously, a DOS pipe is not a UNIX
> pipe.
Under the definition:
A (shell) pipe takes the output of one process and puts it in to the
input of another process.
DOS does not have shell pipes, since its pipes do not always do this.
Since shell pipes are the only kind of pipe that DOS makes an attempt at,
it does not have pipes under this definition.
> However, it's important to be clear that when you say that "DOS doesn't
> have real pipes", you are referring to your own arbitrary nonstandard
> definition, and not the definition used by people who know what they're
> talking about.
Any definition of pipes is arbitrary.
>>> It's a small subset of the functionality offered by pipes.
>>
>>So? Under this small subset of functionality, I have shown that what DOS
>
> The problem is that you are confusing the UNIX implementation of pipes
> with what pipes are. In particular, you would need to include
> asynchronous processing in the definition of pipe.
Nope. If you look at the definition above, using single tasking,
sometimes pipes will fail, so they don't fit the definition. Multitasking
does not need to be explicit in the
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430, Volume #31 Sat, 13 Jan 01 02:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Why Hatred? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: A salutary lesson about open source (Bones)
Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel (Bones)
Re: A salutary lesson about open source (Response and More information on the
Security Hole) ("Adam Warner")
Re: You and Microsoft... (Gary Hallock)
Re: Why does Win2k always fail in running time? (Bones)
Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel (J Sloan)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (J Sloan)
Re: The real truth about NT (J Sloan)
Re: Ethernet efficiency (was Re: Ms employees begging for food) (Bones)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (J Sloan)
Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel (J Sloan)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (J Sloan)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (J Sloan)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (J Sloan)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (J Sloan)
Re: TCO challenge: [was Linux 2.4 Major Advance] (J Sloan)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (J Sloan)
Re: Could only... (Jim Richardson)
Re: KDE Hell (Jim Richardson)
Re: Linux *has* the EDGE! (Jim Richardson)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 04:02:25 GMT
> > > MODULE HELLOWORLD;
> > > FROM InOut IMPORT WriteLn,WriteString,WriteInt;
> >
> > Note that with some compilers you had to write
> > FROM InOut IMPORT WRITELN,WRITESTRING,WRITEINT;
> >
> > It was perhaps the only language where HELLOWORLD
> > was not portable...
Tom Wilson:
> I recall reading that somewhere. The above syntax works with
> Logitech's compiler
Possible... At least on the Mac at the University there was
2 courses using 2 compilers and 2 different casings...
Modula-2 wasn't an innovative extension to Pascal - apparently
Mr Wirth did exhaust his creative energy with Pascal.
Fortunately others did the real further steps, e.g. Borland folks
(although in a short-life, one-way commercial manner) and
the Ada (83 and 95) teams with a rich ISO standard.
___
Gautier -- http://www.diax.ch/users/gdm/gsoft.htm
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bones)
Subject: Re: A salutary lesson about open source
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 04:16:13 GMT
> In article <3a5f5f0c$0$45783$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Conrad Rutherford wrote:
> What good is there to have a 100% secret backdoor? If no one knows it's
> there, it's not useful eh? Just like the Interbase thingy, it wasn't a
> security threat UNTIL the open source folks published the backdoor. Since
> then there has been a HUGE upswing in port scans for the port Interbase
> exposes - gee, great.
Uh oh, I see where this is headed...
Open Source == Automatic Security Exploits
Go and read http://community.borland.com/article/0,1410,26611,00.html to get
Borland's side of the story.
So...
I don't know about anyone else here, but if I was taking a crack at some
lesser-known database box that happened to be accessible to me via a
network, I wouldn't just scan a couple of ports and split, I would run the
range from 1 to 64K (probably not all at once). How could a backdoor which
has something listening on a TCP port *not* be discovered?
> Guess we'll force people to patch it by making it accessible to every
> script kiddie out there.
Open Source "forcing patches" on people... heh heh, that's funny.
Who is out there connecting database servers directly to the Internet?
Answer: Mindless Purchasing Automatons who have total trust in the retail
hype and no concept of system security. The assume "they wouldn't be selling
the product if it wasn't secure right?" Wrong. Borland's engineers back me
up on this one:
"Like the original security scheme [Interbase Security] replaced, it was not
designed for wide open Internet database access..."
How many times does this have to happen before IT folk figure out that they
can't trust a company's assessment of the security of their own product?
They *must* aggressively protect their service-boxen. Audit audit audit, log
everything and backup often.
Bones
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bones)
Subject: Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2001 04:16:14 GMT
> In article , Pete Goodwin wrote:
> I just rebuilt my 166MHz server with a 30GByte ATA66 drive and an ATA100
> controller. I reinstalled Linux Mandrake 7.2...
Why are you re-installing the operating system after adding a hard disk?
Where did you pick this bad habit up?
I'm on my 4th incarnation of my main system since I installed Slackware 3
f
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430, Volume #30 Sun, 26 Nov 00 04:13:12 EST
Contents:
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (mark)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (mark)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (mark)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (mark)
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Insite into Linux Kernel 2.4 (Matthew Soltysiak)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Response to: MS Office sucks? So why is anyone using it? (mark)
Re: The Sixth Sense (mark)
Re: The Sixth Sense (mark)
From: "Tom Wilson" <[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 08:09:07 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8votua$573vs$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <8vmmm0$53o3k$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien
wrote:
> > >
> > >"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> In article <8vlnrb$4tvic$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien
> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >"Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >> >news:w_rT5.14$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> >
> > >> >Talking about the registery.
> > >> >
> > >> >>. I think MS could have done
> > >> >> a far better job by taking the dedicated partition approach. It'd
be
> a
> > >lot
> > >> >> safer kept from the OS's file system.
> > >> >
> > >> >You are probably correct, the problem is that it's *much* more
> convenient
> > >> >and easier to handle files than partitions.
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> Convenient for whom?
> > >
> > >Practically everybody.
> > >Tools to handle files are easier to write than for partitions.
> > >And it's easier to do backup from/to files.
> > >
> >
> > Are you perhaps missing the key point here, that you store files
> > on partitions?
>
> So?
> What are you trying to say?
> That you store the files in partitions?
> But you don't *hadnle* partitions yourself, most of the time.
Nor would you as an applications developer dealing with registry entries
stored in a dedicated partition. You'd access the registry in the same
manner you do now - using API calls. This argument is getting a bit
silly
--
Tom Wilson
A Computer Programmer who wishes he'd chosen another vocation.
--
From: "Tom Wilson" <[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 08:09:08 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8vp2pl$3prmn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Therefore your claim that partition handling is a problem for
> > storing registry information in a separate partition is
> > specious.
> >
> >
> > That's what I was saying. Hope that clarifies for you.
>
> What exactly is it that you are propusing?
> Another partition with a FS on it, or a raw partition?
> I think we were talking about different things here.
I was thinking a raw partition. Much the same thing as Linux's swap
partition.
--
Tom Wilson
A Computer Programmer who wishes he'd chosen another vocation.
--
From: "Tom Wilson" <[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 08:12:07 GMT
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tom Wilson wrote:
> >
> > I cede that such corruption is rare. My point is that it indeed can
happen.
> >
> > Incidents referred to:
> > ==
> > Machine #1: 1996
> > Compaq Proliant
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430, Volume #29Tue, 3 Oct 00 18:13:09 EDT
Contents:
Slackware Install was Re: Why I hate Windows... (D. Spider)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Linux and Free Internet? ("Mike")
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: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (WickedDyno)
From: D. Spider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Slackware Install was Re: Why I hate Windows...
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 17:03:02 -0400
It appears that on Tue, 03 Oct 2000 19:29:37 +0900, in
comp.os.linux.advocacy "Osugi Sakae" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>In article <8r6a8p$l95$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Todd"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> One of the most expensive parts of 98 is that it needs to run on a
>> myriad of hardware systems... and install flawlessly with plug and play
>> ability.
>>
>> If you didn't have to worry about this (the hardware was known), then
>> the price would be far lower.
>>
>> Linux is a good example of this. The base OS may be OK, but it has
>> lousy hardware support, horrible installation and setup, it is
>> non-intuitive in almost every step of the installation process, and very
>> user-unfriendly. Now I'm not saying that Linux sucks, but merely that it
>> is very hard to get it set up and working. 98 is vastly superior in
>> this regard.
>
>If by "lousy hardware support", you mean "less supported hardware than
>win98", I can't really argue. Comparisons to windows hardware support
>aside, linux does support a fair range of hardware - I have never had any
>problems, and in one case, an unsupported video card worked better with
>linux than it did under windows, where it was officially supported. (this
>was a Matrox g400 32meg with the official drivers, about eight months to a
>year ago).
>
>And unless you are talking about debian or slackware, you are totally and
>100% wrong about linux installs. (I've heard debian and slackware are not
>very newbie-friendly, but have never used them so might be wrong).
I haven't installed Debian yet, I hear it's actually a pretty nice
installer, as long as you have a basic clue what you are doing, but
with a rough edge or two. Slackware installation is wonderful IMOP, it
isn't an X install and there is this whole segment of folks that think
anything that runs in text mode is automatically "hard" and
"unfriendly" which I think is total nonsense. If you have ever done a
pre-Win95 DOS install, it's quite comparable. The bootdisk gives you a
root prompt and about half a page of instructions... cfdisk if you
need to, then type setup to begin installation - it's a text mode GUI,
go through each section in turn, fill out the options you desire, and
it goes.
#
My email address is posted for purposes of private
correspondence only. Consent is expressly NOT given
to receive advertisements, or bulk mailings of any
kind.
#
--
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 17:54:17 -0300
El mar, 03 oct 2000, Richard escribió:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> El mar, 03 oct 2000, Richard escribió:
>> >What *probably* happens?
>>
>> If I know anything about the academic mind.
>>
>> >Go ahead, condemn something without knowing the first thing about it
>>
>> I know academics.
>
>So do I. I also think it likely that my judgement of academics is
>quite a bit harsher than yours. About the only field I don't have
>anything against is astronomy, astrophysics and cosmology.
Well, I am not about to replace my judgement with yours, so I will stick to my
opinion.
>> >Great, now you've never heard of retrodictions before!
>>
>> I did. It's just crap. Retrodictions have zero scientific value.
>
>Then neither do predictions.
Predicting what you don't know is the single most important measure of
science's value.
>> Nonsense. Predictions are guessing what will happen, not what happened.
>> Predicting the past is trivial: you just keep fudging your guesses until you
>> hit a right one, then you stop.
>
>And you think that predicting the future is any different?!
Indeed. Because your rules for predict
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430, Volume #28 Wed, 16 Aug 00 03:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: The dusty Linux shelves at CompUSA ("kosh")
Re: The dusty Linux shelves at CompUSA (lilo)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: The dusty Linux shelves at CompUSA ("Rich C")
Notes From The Cathedral #2 ("Brian Kirkby")
Re: The dusty Linux shelves at CompUSA (Michael Vester)
Re: Microsoft MCSE ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous Wintrolls
and Authentic Linvocates) ("Erik Funkenbusch")
From: "kosh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The dusty Linux shelves at CompUSA
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2000 21:52:58 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> A couple of weeks ago I did a little experiment at one of the NYC
> CompUSA stores, I counted the Linux boxes on the shelves and marked each
> one with a fluorescent high lighter to track them.
>
> In 4.5 weeks a grand total of 3 Linux boxes have been sold. This
> includes, RH, SuSE, Corel, Mandrake and the associated "Power Packs".
>
> Pretty dismal if you ask me.
>
> Three boxes in 4.5 weeks?
>
>
> I'll bet they sell 200 times that of PowderPuff Girls (a kids game for
> Windows) I saw 3 people on line buying that game the day I was
> there.
>
> I know all the LinoNuts will say everyone is spending hours ftp'ing the
> CD or buying the stripped $1.99 Cheapgarbage version. Or buying one CD
> and sharing it amongst 200 friends (do Linux users even have friends?)
>
> I don't believe it...
>
> What I DO believe is that Linux is a dismal failure in the eyes of the
> desktop user. It is dying a slow and miserable death
>
> Server yes. Geek backroom? Yes.
>
> Desktop?
>
> Forget it...In fact it already HAS been forgotten before it has even
> started.
>
> Windows is / has steam rolled Linsux right into the trash can where it
> belongs.
>
> Windows 98ME will slam the lid on Linsux once and for all.
>
> Cakewalk (a digital audio/MIDI recording software company) as well as
> the other players in that field are working with Microsoft on the next
> version of Direct-X as well as mp3 technology and several other things I
> can't mention here.
>
> Suffice to say Linux will be put out of it's misery (thank God) very
> soon...
>
> QuickName 10 friends that are not programmers / Geeks that you know
> that are running Linux on their desktop
>
> I can't name 2...
>
>
>
> BTW this CompUSA store has got to be the highest traffic store they
> have... Right in the middle of NYC The "Times Square" of computer
> stores if you will
>
> Linux "The OS that needs CPR right out of the box"
>
>
>
> Claire
>
> "Linux SUcksTry it for yourself www.cheapbytes.com and see"
I see the exact opposite affect here in Boulder. I have talked to the
manager of CompUSA here and they have a problem keeping linux stocked at
times. They finally started ordering larger pallets of it to keep it
stocked. In the CompUSA here Linux is selling really well. Most of the
employees there know at least a little about linux also. It is probably
because of the college here that it sells so well.
It sells differently in different markets because of the type of market
involved. Assuming one market is like all the others is a logical fallacy
and is made all to often in this group. I have personally helped at least
50 people over the last 6 months install and configure linux on their
machines. Most have upgraded to Mandrake 7.1 now and are very
happy with it.
What I don't understand is that since you are so pro-windows why do you
keep posting in this group? If you don't like linux don't use it but it is
highly doubtful anyone in this group takes you seriously anymore.
Have a nice day.
--
From: lilo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The dusty Linux shelves at CompUSA
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 04:08:02 GMT
kosh wrote:
> What I don't understand is that since you are so pro-windows why do you
> keep posting in this group? If you don't like linux don't use it but it is
> highly doubtful anyone in this group takes you seriously anymore.
Maybe he is looking to pump up his deflated stock.:-)
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: 15 Aug 2000 23:29:41 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
T. Max Devlin &l
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430, Volume #27Sun, 2 Jul 00 20:13:06 EDT Contents: Re: Where did all my windows go? (Leslie Mikesell) Re: I hope you trolls are happy... (Pete Goodwin) Re: Where did all my windows go? (Pete Goodwin) Re: Where did all my windows go? (Pete Goodwin) Re: Where did all my windows go? (Pete Goodwin) Re: Linux not ready for primetime!!! ! (Ciaran) Re: Linux not ready for primetime!!! ! (Ciaran) Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Joseph) Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Re: Linux, easy to use? ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Re: Where did all my windows go? (Gary Hallock) Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Joseph) Re: I hope you trolls are happy... (Gary Hallock) Re: I hope you trolls are happy... (abraxas) Re: Where did all my windows go? (abraxas) Re: Where did all my windows go? (abraxas) Re: Linux code going down hill (abraxas) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) Subject: Re: Where did all my windows go? Date: 2 Jul 2000 17:02:19 -0500 In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> you're the one wrongly blaming Linux for KDE problems! I am >>NOT a troll for objecting to your false accusations! You >>however, knowing the difference between KDE and Linux, continue to >>wrongly blame Linux for KDE problems. What should you be called? By >>continuing to make such false claims when you know better, I certainly >>would no call you someone who is interested in the truth! > >I'm not blaming Linux for KDE problems. I'm blaming "Linux" for the >problems that I'm seeing. Do you not understand the difference? Is it >really necessary for me to spell it out every time? I mean "Linux desktop, >as in KDE". Can't you guys figure it out from the context? No, we can't understand why you call a possible bug in kfm either a KDE or Linux problem. We might understand someone doing that as a mistake, but not defending what is such an obvious error after it is pointed out. >As for false accusations, what false accusations? > >My Linux system has done the following: > >(i)Kernel oops on shutdown Smbfs, as I recall - connected to a server that was gone. >(ii) Freeze in postfix on shutdown Again, you mentioned that you had to shut down a server first to generate this problem. Was this NFS with hard mounts (in which case it is supposed to wait for the server to be rebooted), or was it just your DNS server (in which case it would have errored out after a few minutes). How long did you wait for timeouts? Waiting for network operations to complete is *not* a bug. >(iii) All desktop applications disappeared and my only recourse > was to logout. User error - no OS is immune. >I also descovered the following: > >(i)USB ZIP 250 are currently _not_ supported according to the > HOWTO files installed on my system. >(ii) System logs indicate my USB scanner is _not_ recoginsed as > a known device. Have you visited the web pages for USB support on these devices? Things usually continue to progress after the snapshot taken for each distribution. >>Yeap, that's about the meaning I intenened for about a person who knows >>the difference betteen KDE and Linux yet blames Linux for a KDE problem! > >Sigh. See above. Yes, and Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Subject: Re: I hope you trolls are happy... From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2000 22:13:13 GMT [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gary Hallock) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >That's simply noy true. Generalizations like that are why you good >flamed sometimes. Try using AIX. In the middle of running a few dozen >processes doing active work pull the power cord and see what happens. >JFS on AIX is very good and makes AIX very stable. And JFS has been >made open source and is currently being ported to Linux. Just one of >many journaled file systems for Linux. Are ext2fs and the bog standard fs's on Linux journaling? Are they resistant to power outages? Pete -- Subject: Re: Where did all my windows go? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2000 22:19:55 GMT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in <8jocf5$ask$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >Yes, YOU SHOULD SPELL IT OUT EVERY TIME because KDE IS NOT LINUX or >"LINUX" period! Ok, I'll treat you as a child then shall I? >And No, we can not figure it out form context because KDE is NOT LINUX >or "LINUX" See above. >The fact that you want to try to confuse the two so that you can blame >
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430, Volume #26Tue, 9 May 00 22:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: This is Bullsh&^%T!!! ("Rich C")
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: This is Bullsh&^%T!!! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: news: Oracle $199 web device, runs on linux, not windows (Christopher Browne)
Re: This is Bullsh&^%T!!! (Christopher Browne)
Re: So what is wrong with X? (Christopher Browne)
Re: This is Bullsh&^%T!!! (mlw)
Re: This is Bullsh&^%T!!! ("Rich C")
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software (Marty)
Re: This is Bullsh&^%T!!! (Perry Pip)
Re: This is Bullsh&^%T!!! (mlw)
Re: Linux will remain immune ("C")
From: "Rich C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: This is Bullsh&^%T!!!
Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 21:36:40 -0400
"Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8f582o$4g4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Rich C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:3915a528@news...
> > "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8f3934$o11$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > No, it probably doesn't. Even in this particular case, all the OS is
> > doing
> > > is fetching and executing another application - the scripting host -
to
> > > execute a script. The script *is* a document.
> >
> > Right. And as I've said in other parts of this thread, and "document"
file
> > should be passed to the registered application, and it should be up to
the
> > application to provide security. Which simply proves how irresponsible
the
> > VB scripting host is. Java doesn't do this type of thing.
>
> Java most certainly would do this sort of thing, executing outside of the
> sandbox (which is what it would be doing).
>
> [snip happens]
>
> > > > The worst that could happen is the associated program won't
recognize
> > the
> > > > file format if there is something wrong with it. Why does it have to
> > warn
> > > me
> > > > about gif and jpeg files, when it's already opened them and shown
them
> > to
> > > me
> > > > in the preview window? It just blurs the line between ordinary
> > attachments
> > > > and dangerous ones.
> > >
> > > Because detecting a "dangerous" attachment is nigh on impossible.
Best
> to
> > > be suspicious of *everything*.
> >
> > ...everything that can be executed, anyway.
>
> Technically .vbs files aren't executed, they're interpreted.
>
> It is not the mailer's responsibility to keep track of every different
> filetype and whether or not a given one is dangerous. I would have though
a
> *nix user would be horrified at the very thought of such a thing.
IF a mailer has the capability to preview (ie, "open") files of a particular
type, then it is more than a simple mailer; in fact it is a SHELL of sorts
(as MS has claimed all along that the browser is a shell which can access
retrieve, and "open" (execute) files from any network source, from the
user's file system to the internet.) And such a program should have the
capability to distinguish a simple data file that it knows how to open and
show to me from a "dangerous" one which it knows nothing about.
>
> > > > Not very well thought out, if you ask me.
> > >
> > > If people read and took heed of warnings, this wouldn't have happened.
> > > Indeed, if this had happened on Unix systems with an attached script
> file
> > > and a bunch of instruction telling the users to save it, set it
> executable
> > > and run it, the exact same dumb users would have done it.
> >
> > Yes, but it would not have done nearly the damage, because such a script
> > would not (unless the user were running as root) have been able to set
> > itself up to automatically start on bootup, or access any central
> "registry"
> > ('cause there is none) or diddle with any system files.
>
> However, it still would have been able to read the user's address list and
> mail itself off to whomever was in it. IOW, it would have been able to do
> the same damaging things.
Oh, so a harmless email would reside in every user's mailbox? Not nearly as
damaging as what happened.
-- Rich C.
"Great minds discuss ideas.
Average minds discuss events.
Small minds discuss people."
--
From: "Erik Funken
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430
Linux-Advocacy Digest #430, Volume #25 Mon, 28 Feb 00 15:13:07 EST
Contents:
Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K (Mig Mig)
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers (Matthias Warkus)
Re: BSOD and Penis Problems (Mark S. Bilk)
Re: Microsoft's New Motto (was: TPC-C Results for W2k!! (void)
Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K ("Drestin Black")
Re: which OS is best? (Logan Joseph Kennelly)
Re: How does the free-OS business model work? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Microsoft's New Motto (was: TPC-C Results for W2k!! (Joe Ragosta)
Re: Microsoft's New Motto (was: TPC-C Results for W2k!! (Joe Ragosta)
Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking? (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Windows 2000: flat sales
Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking? (JEDIDIAH)
Re: How does the free-OS business model work? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Windows 2000: flat sales ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Microsoft's New Motto (was: TPC-C Results for W2k!! (Jason McNorton)
Re: Linux Gets Worldwide Recognition ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: My Windows 2000 experience ("Erik Funkenbusch")
From: Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 20:14:42 +0100
Paul 'Z' Ewande© wrote:
>
> "Mig Mig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message news:
> 896ooe$iae$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Some stuff
>
> > I dont think its a better server as Solaris or FreeBSD.. its simply a
> > better graphical workstation because developement of software happens on
> > Linux... and the best tools for development exist on Linux.
>
> Ah, ok. I was thinking on the server context, since that what's the thread
> was about. :)
Thats true Paul.. but discussions tend to evolve to something else when its
conveniant :-)
> Paul 'Z' Ewande
>
Cheers
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 17:16:20 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Mon, 28 Feb 2000 02:24:50 GMT...
...and [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey there.
>
> I am on a mac; can your gui work on one? And what is it called?
It's GNOME. And since Linux runs on PowerMacs, I think GNOME should,
too.
If GNOME doesn't work for you, you can always try KDE (www.kde.org)
which has about the same scope.
mawa
--
[...] Define two derived classes called man and woman that define
gender specific items. Write pure virtual functions in the base class
for operations that are common to both sexes yet are handled in
different ways by each of them. --Oualline, Practical C++ Programming
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Subject: Re: BSOD and Penis Problems
Date: 28 Feb 2000 19:16:16 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jessica69 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Hello Everyone :)
>
>My friend Kim said only men with small dicks use Windows. Personally,
>I watched in amazement as my boyfriends penis shrunk every time BSOD
>appeared. He was once 9" and now he's 3". I need help fast! Someone
>told me that Linux could reverse the problem. Is this true? What can I
>do?
>
>Thanks in advance
>
>Jessica 69
>http://jessica-69.secret-playmates.com
Yes, Jessica, your boyfriend should have a huge hard di*k --
fast, wide and scsi! Lots of guys get that with Linux!
For a great time, just "log" in and do this:
gawk; talk; date; wine; grep; touch; unzip; touch; gasp; \
finger; gasp; mount; fsck; more; fsck; yes; gasp; umount; \
make clean; make mrproper; sleep
[thanx to Tracy Reed http://www.ultraviolet.org]
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (void)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft's New Motto (was: TPC-C Results for W2k!!
Date: 28 Feb 2000 19:04:48 GMT
On Mon, 28 Feb 2000 12:07:39 -0600, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Except that the consumers didn't want anything other than x86
Or they were persuaded not to want anything other than x86 by the lack
of ported software.
--
Ben
220 go.ahead.make.my.day ESMTP Postfix
--
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 14:26:18 -0500
"5X3" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:89csh3$2e4s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Drive fast? Buddy - you don't know! Take your pick 157 was the best I
did on
> > my FZR-
