Here is a direct solution ;-) ;-) ;-)
http://goodbye-microsoft.com/
origin: /.
Peter
=
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mai
On 28/01/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here is a direct solution ;-) ;-) ;-)
http://goodbye-microsoft.com/
origin: /.
Peter
That site downlaods an exe. What is in it? Debian as a windows
executable? Somehow I don't think so.
Dotan Cohen
http://what-is-what.com/what_is/open_offi
El dom, 28-01-2007 a las 17:05 +0200, Dotan Cohen escribió:
> On 28/01/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Here is a direct solution ;-) ;-) ;-)
> >
> >http://goodbye-microsoft.com/
> >
> > origin: /.
> >
> > Peter
> >
>
> That site downlaods an exe. What is in it? Debian as a windows
From the site: "ubuntu.img will be the ubuntu hard drive image. It
will be used as a loopmounted EXT3 filesystem, and will be placed in
the C:\ubuntu directory."
Is that what we've come to? Running a Debian spinoff on NTFS? Amazing indeed.
Dotan Cohen
http://what-is-what.com/what_is/open_offic
>
> Is that what we've come to? Running a Debian spinoff on NTFS? Amazing indeed.
>
Well, it is for those whom are already running WinXP in NTFS...
The bad side for this threat, it will not work for Win98. AFAIK Win98 is
FAT.
> Dotan Cohen
>
> http://what-is-what.com/what_is/open_office.html
>
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Dotan Cohen wrote:
On 28/01/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here is a direct solution ;-) ;-) ;-)
http://goodbye-microsoft.com/
origin: /.
Peter
That site downlaods an exe. What is in it? Debian as a windows
executable? Somehow I don't think so.
Try it and
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Dotan Cohen wrote:
From the site: "ubuntu.img will be the ubuntu hard drive image. It
will be used as a loopmounted EXT3 filesystem, and will be placed in
the C:\ubuntu directory."
Is that what we've come to? Running a Debian spinoff on NTFS? Amazing indeed.
Next thing
On Sun, 2007-01-28 at 17:45 +0200, Julian Daich wrote:
> >
> > Is that what we've come to? Running a Debian spinoff on NTFS? Amazing
> > indeed.
> >
> Well, it is for those whom are already running WinXP in NTFS...
> The bad side for this threat, it will not work for Win98. AFAIK Win98 is
> FAT.
On 28/01/07, Oded Arbel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I haven't tried it myself (no MS-Windows desktop around to try it on),
but I doubt it actually requires NTFS. From reading the info on the
Ubunto version (can't get to the info on the debian version, the site
was /.ed), it simply uses an image fi
On Sunday 28 January 2007 20:33, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> On 28/01/07, Oded Arbel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I haven't tried it myself (no MS-Windows desktop around to try it on),
> > but I doubt it actually requires NTFS. From reading the info on the
> > Ubunto version (can't get to the info on th
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Dotan Cohen wrote:
I know what a loop is, and I know what the mount command does. Please
explain in simple Hebrew what exactly is loopmounting. Oxford knows
not.
Dotan, you don't know what a loop is, since you're asking. Loop mounting
mounts a file as a partition. And Ox
On 28/01/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> I know what a loop is, and I know what the mount command does. Please
> explain in simple Hebrew what exactly is loopmounting. Oxford knows
> not.
Dotan, you don't know what a loop is, since you're asking.
On 1/28/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> Is that what we've come to? Running a Debian spinoff on NTFS? Amazing indeed.
Next thing you'll know will be Linux crashing because of NTFS and users
claiming 'Linux is as unstable as Windows'
To add my $2
El dom, 28-01-2007 a las 23:32 +0200, Beni Cherniavsky escribió:
> To add my $2e-2 to the argument, this is not a big concern. How many
> times have you seen NTFS crash? NTFS is not FAT (*), so windows is
> not really going to ruin the image file (unless the sky falls hard
> upon the partition,
On Sun, 2007-01-28 at 21:04 +0200, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> Loopmounting involves using a file on the filesystem as a virtual disk and
> mounting a filesystem from there. For example I can do:
> There's a similar program for Windows (that requires payment) called Alcohol
> 120%:
There's a free (as
On Sun, 2007-01-28 at 22:27 +0200, Dotan Cohen wrote:
> Thanks Peter. I was able to guess what it was, but I wanted to make
> the point that the OS would still be running on top of NTFS. Oded
> mentioned that it doesn't "require" NTFS. But installing it on NTFS,
> even with a loopmounted ext3 files
On 28/01/07, Beni Cherniavsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 1/28/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 28 Jan 2007, Dotan Cohen wrote:
>
> > Is that what we've come to? Running a Debian spinoff on NTFS? Amazing
indeed.
>
> Next thing you'll know will be Linux crashing because of NTFS
On 29/01/07, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The ext3 file is stored on the NTFS disk. Any time you write to the
ext3 file, you are writing to NTFS. NTFS write support is BAD for
Linux.
Ever heard of ntfs-3g (http://www.ntfs-3g.org/)? Apparently it improved
things enough to be consider
On 29/01/07, Amos Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 29/01/07, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The ext3 file is stored on the NTFS disk. Any time you write to the
> ext3 file, you are writing to NTFS. NTFS write support is BAD for
> Linux.
Ever heard of ntfs-3g ( http://www.ntfs-3g.o
On 29/01/07, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 29/01/07, Amos Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 29/01/07, Dotan Cohen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The ext3 file is stored on the NTFS disk. Any time you write to the
> > ext3 file, you are writing to NTFS. NTFS write support is BAD
On 29/01/07, Amos Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What do they care if Linux NTFS keeps working?
Vender lock-in is Microsoft's number-two business model, right behind
Extend, Embrace, Extinguish. How many people do you know that continue
to use Windows because their old software/ files are
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Dotan Cohen wrote:
The paranoid survive.
Yes, but they feel like they're being watched all the time for some
reason.
McAfree, PartitionMagic and Norton are already in bed with MS. Keeping
big business afloat while drowning the little guy is something that MS
has done
On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 12:28 +0200, Peter wrote:
> For every corporate user there must be 1000 individual users out there.
> Even if only 10% of them are paying promptly they outnumber the
> corporate users 10:1. Making sure that something simple and inexpensive
> will keep the MoshePartitions go
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Oded Arbel wrote:
On Mon, 2007-01-29 at 12:28 +0200, Peter wrote:
For every corporate user there must be 1000 individual users out there.
Even if only 10% of them are paying promptly they outnumber the
corporate users 10:1. Making sure that something simple and inexpensive
24 matches
Mail list logo
