On Thu, 2003-09-11 at 10:27, Jason Tesser wrote:
> OpenOffice can connect to a database. It nativly supports MySql through the jodbc
> driver.
>
And PostgreSQL.
--
Bill Anderson
RHCE #807302597505773
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
redhat-list mailing list
unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https
On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 09:41:22AM -0400, Anthony E. Greene wrote:
> You obviously know this, but I think it's necessary to mention that there
> is at least one ACL system for Linux.
Yes, and several for Unix. But ACLs don't fill the same bill--they're
not pervasive, even in Unix implementations
On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 09:41:22AM -0400, Anthony E. Greene wrote:
> On 11-Sep-2003/15:54 -0500, Dave Ihnat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 01:58:59PM -0500, B McAndrews wrote:
> >> Could someone staighten me out here. When did Unix based system become
> >> the bastion of se
> On 11-Sep-2003/13:58 -0500, B McAndrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Could someone staighten me out here. When did Unix based system become
>the bastion of security? In a former lifetime, I used to work on
>VAX/VMS for classified (as in military) work. I can't remember the
>issues, but whe
El Sáb 13 Sep 2003 10:41, Anthony E. Greene escribió:
> On 11-Sep-2003/15:54 -0500, Dave Ihnat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> In a former lifetime, I used to work on VAX/VMS for classified (as
> >> in military) work. I can't remember the issues, but when we started
> >> moving off the VAX/VMS
On 11-Sep-2003/15:54 -0500, Dave Ihnat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 01:58:59PM -0500, B McAndrews wrote:
>> Could someone staighten me out here. When did Unix based system become
>> the bastion of security?
>
>Ever since the standard it is compared to is Microsoft...
>
>> I
On 11-Sep-2003/13:58 -0500, B McAndrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Stop. Your response is nothing but pure fanboyism. This type of
>>> advocacy is ignorant and does nothing to advance OSS in the industry.
>>> Allow me to retort:
>>>
>>
> Security MS = bad, linux=good
>
>Could someone staig
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11-Sep-2003/10:57 -0500, Dave Ihnat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 10:08:01AM -0400, Reuben D. Budiardja wrote:
>> If you only need a personal db, then it's really up to you to keep using
>> Access, although there are open sour
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11-Sep-2003/10:08 -0400, "Reuben D. Budiardja" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>If you only need a personal db, then it's really up to you to keep using
>Access, although there are open source solution for something like that
>too (eg. openoffice).
I h
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 11-Sep-2003/07:05 -0500, Jason Tesser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Anyways, my question is could someone send me info links or anything like
>that that could aid me in explaining why Access programming, if that is
>what you call it, and staying depen
What are you going to be using this for? Are you talking about windows vs
linux in a server environment? or desktop? if its desktop, i'd go with
windows. Most people are already familiar with it, and its easy for just
about any level of use to find software for it.
For server ... guess it depen
On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 01:58:59PM -0500, B McAndrews wrote:
> >Stop. Your response is nothing but pure fanboyism. This type of
> >> advocacy is ignorant and does nothing to advance OSS in the industry.
> >> Allow me to retort:
> >>
> >
> >>> > Security MS = bad, linux=good
>
> Could someone sta
On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 01:58:59PM -0500, B McAndrews wrote:
> Could someone staighten me out here. When did Unix based system become
> the bastion of security?
Ever since the standard it is compared to is Microsoft...
> In a former lifetime, I used to work on VAX/VMS for classified (as
> in mi
B McAndrews wrote:
Could someone staighten me out here. When did Unix based system become
the bastion of security? In a former lifetime, I used to work on
VAX/VMS for classified (as in military) work. I can't remember the
issues, but when we started moving off the VAX/VMS over to Unix
works
> All this I understand. Though you can get Apache for Windoze. I agree
with you though.
Okay, how about this: How many Windoze virii/worms/trojans have come out in
the last year? (Hint: Check out http://www.cert.org or
http://www.sans.org ). How much productivity has been lost in just the l
>Stop. Your response is nothing but pure fanboyism. This type of
>> advocacy is ignorant and does nothing to advance OSS in the industry.
>> Allow me to retort:
>>
>
>>> > Security MS = bad, linux=good
Could someone staighten me out here. When did Unix based system become
the bastion of securit
t may only run on Windows
Hope that helps
Wade
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Dave Ihnat
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 11:57 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Should we stay with M$
On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 10:08:01AM -04
If you're looking for stuff to show people who like facts and numbers
more than use cases, and especially if they've been influenced by the
various MS-sponsored "independent" comparisons, then this is far and
away the best site I've found:
http://www.dwheeler.com/oss_fs_why.html
Very crunchy!!
esser
Web/Multimedia Programmer
Northland Baptist Bible College
(715)324-6900 ext. 3055
-Original Message-
From: Martin Moss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2003 9:38 AM
To: Red Hat Mailing List
Subject: Re: Should we stay with M$
Easy Tiger:-)
I know you're
:57 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Should we stay with M$
On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 10:08:01AM -0400, Reuben D. Budiardja wrote:
> If you only need a personal db, then it's really up to you to keep using
> Access, although there are open source solution for something like that
On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 10:08:01AM -0400, Reuben D. Budiardja wrote:
> If you only need a personal db, then it's really up to you to keep using
> Access, although there are open source solution for something like that too
> (eg. openoffice).
Just to clarify--unless something has changed recentl
I'm really not going to get started in this one...well, except:
On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 09:52:04AM -0400, Jason Dixon wrote:
> The one advantage Linux/OSS has over the proprietary market is a
> *proven* track record of fast patching. *This* is where Linux/OSS
> excels.
Well, actually, in your at
Easy Tiger:-)
I know you're not trying to be patronising, its cool, however I do have some
counter points though:-
> Stop. Your response is nothing but pure fanboyism. This type of
> advocacy is ignorant and does nothing to advance OSS in the industry.
> Allow me to retort:
>
> > Security MS =
On Thursday 11 September 2003 08:05 am, Jason Tesser wrote:
> Anyways, my question is could someone send me info links or anything like
> that that could aid me in explaining why Access programming, if that is
> what you call it, and staying dependant to M$ for that matter, would not be
> a good th
On Thu, 2003-09-11 at 08:34, Martin Moss wrote:
> Security MS = bad, linux=good,
> Access is not a Database Server, unlike SQL Server, mysql is.
> All software you could want to use on linux is free, as is Linux, unless you
> wish to purchase a set of CD's. MS is not.
> Apache Vs IIS, no competitio
> staying dependant to M$ for
> that matter, would not be a good thing to persue for our future. We are
> having a tech meeting soon
> where we will be discusing our future direction and I want to go into that
> meeting with information and examples. Thank you
The following website has a lot of
On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 07:05:45 -0500
"Jason Tesser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyways, my question is could someone send me info links or anything like
> that that could aid me in explaining why Access programming, if that is what
> you call it, and staying dependant to M$ for that matter, woul
AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Should we stay with M$
Security MS = bad, linux=good,
Access is not a Database Server, unlike SQL Server, mysql is.
All software you could want to use on linux is free, as is Linux, unless you
wish to purchase a set of CD's. MS is not.
Apache Vs II
Security MS = bad, linux=good,
Access is not a Database Server, unlike SQL Server, mysql is.
All software you could want to use on linux is free, as is Linux, unless you
wish to purchase a set of CD's. MS is not.
Apache Vs IIS, no competition.
Marty
- Original Message -
From: "Jason T
29 matches
Mail list logo
