Linux-Advocacy Digest #509, Volume #29 Sat, 7 Oct 00 22:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Everything's an object in OOPLs (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for?
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Secure Trusted Linux (lyttlec)
Re: SE is simply unstable!!! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for? ("Chad Myers")
Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for? ("Chad Myers")
Do all Debian users have such bad attitudes? ("Jason A. Smith")
Re: The Power of the Future! ("Drestin Black")
Re: Unix rules in Redmond ("Drestin Black")
Re: Unix rules in Redmond ("Drestin Black")
Re: Unix rules in Redmond ("Drestin Black")
Re: Unix rules in Redmond ("Drestin Black")
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? ("Drestin Black")
Re: Unix rules in Redmond ("Drestin Black")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Everything's an object in OOPLs
Date: 7 Oct 2000 23:39:34 GMT
On Sat, 07 Oct 2000 19:38:58 GMT, Richard wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>Alan Kay summarized five basic characteristics of Smalltalk [...]
>These characteristics represent a pure approach to object-oriented programming:
Yes, I agree with this. Note the use of the word "pure".
And I'd agree if you said that C++ was not a "pure object oriented programming
language". Clearly, it isn't.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 16:54:15 -0700
"mike burrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:y%MD5.31474$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.lang.c Mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Wine runs Office? Wow, what a claim.
>
> > A quick trip to the wine database shows that there isn't much that
really
> > runs under Wine. The highest rating for Office 97 is 3. This rating is
> > described as "3 -- Sufficient functionality for noncritical work.
Occasional
> > crashes okay, as are weird setup problems, required patches, or missing
> > major functionality. Alpha quality." Other reviews gave it even lower
marks.
> > The highest review given to Word 2000 is 1: "1 -- Loads without
crashing.
> > Good enough for a screenshot." And the highest review of Office 2000
rates
> > it 0: "0 -- Totally nonfunctional. Crashes on load."
>
> you have, of course, conveniently ignored that the most recent review of
> Microsoft Word is from six months ago with a comment saying "maybe in 3
> months it works".
>
> of course everybody knows that Wine doesn't run Office well, but lying
> (albeit by omission) doesn't help anybody.
Heck, I'd settle for notepad running correctly. The last review they have
for a Windows notepad is 1997;
"it crashes trying to do PageSetupDlgA and FindTextA, from Page Setup,
Printing and Searching. Does the other features ok tho, like loading,
saving, etc. "
Simon
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 17:03:34 -0700
"mike burrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:y%MD5.31474$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.lang.c Mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Wine runs Office? Wow, what a claim.
>
> > A quick trip to the wine database shows that there isn't much that
really
> > runs under Wine. The highest rating for Office 97 is 3. This rating is
> > described as "3 -- Sufficient functionality for noncritical work.
Occasional
> > crashes okay, as are weird setup problems, required patches, or missing
> > major functionality. Alpha quality." Other reviews gave it even lower
marks.
> > The highest review given to Word 2000 is 1: "1 -- Loads without
crashing.
> > Good enough for a screenshot." And the highest review of Office 2000
rates
> > it 0: "0 -- Totally nonfunctional. Crashes on load."
>
> you have, of course, conveniently ignored that the most recent review of
> Microsoft Word is from six months ago with a comment saying "maybe in 3
> months it works".
>
> of course everybody knows that Wine doesn't run Office well, but lying
> (albeit by omission) doesn't help anybody.
Sorry... correction: latest review of Notepad (1999-08-15) says:
http://www.winehq.com/Apps/details.cgi?id=1803
"Works except find/find next."
THe problem being that people submit sporadic reports like these and don't
test the app in question thoroughly.
Anyway... come on... Notepad is about the simplest application short of
Hello World that you can write. If this isn't working fine, there's no hope.
Simon
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 00:14:49 GMT
On Sun, 08 Oct 2000 11:04:54 +1300, Gardiner Family
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Professional level Digital Audio recording and restoration done under
>> Win98se which despite all it's technical on paper design flaws (most
>> of which are real), has been absolutley flawless for me. Each version
>> has improved the stability and features, at least for what I use.
>
>you can do this on an old atari, amiga, mac any plaform, why windows?
An Atari/Amiga can stream 48 tracks of digital audio at 44.1k?
As for Mac, I should have bought one years ago, but I didn't.
Why Windows?
Applications that's why...
>>
>>
>> I would use Win2k or better still Linux (I could save a fortune using
>> Open Source) but the programs are not there for Linux, and the Win
>> NT/2k programs are actually not as good as their Win98 versions.
>>
>
>What a load of rot, there is tonnes of applications such as StarOffice,
>Netscape, the 1,000s of GNU applications being/have developed, and games
>for Linux, Simcity 3000, Quake, Doom and other verious titles. I think that
>the old wives tale that there is not enough apps or games for linux has run
>its course!
Did I mention any of the above?
The original person asked what I use MY desktop for. I told him what I
use MY desktop for. I made no mention of the applications YOU did. I
was speaking of lack of applications for what "I" do.
Learn to read before you rant.....
>Matt
>
>
>>
>> claire
>>
>> On 06 Oct 2000 10:19:44 -0700, Aaron Ginn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >Okay, here's an opportunity for some real advocacy. The debates about
>> >how Linux or NT/W2K provide a better desktop than the other are
>> >neverending in COLA (I don't read COMNA, so I can't comment there). I
>> >want to hear what you all use your desktop OS of choice for and why it
>> >is a better solution for you than the alternatives. I'll start...
>> >
>> >I do IC CAD design on Solaris at Motorola. Linux provides me with a
>> >free OS and networking tools to allow me to work from home on a cheap
>> >Pentium II. I have a real X-Windows implementation in XFree86 instead
>> >of a slow emulator like Exceed on NT, and I have all the tools at my
>> >disposal to allow me to run and monitor jobs remotely just as I would
>> >if I was in front of my terminal at work. All these tools were
>> >available to me for the cost of the bandwidth used to download my
>> >distro of choice, which is actually nothing since my employer pays
>> >for my cable modem. No Microsoft OS of any variety offers me anything
>> >of similar functionality in terms of ease of use or cost.
>> >
>> >Not that I don't use Windows at all; I have a dual-boot Win98 box. I
>> >actually do most of my browsing under Windows. Linux, OTOH, is what I
>> >use for real work, not play.
>> >
>> >Now it's your turn. What do you use your desktop for, and why does
>> >you OS do the job better than the alternatives?
------------------------------
From: lyttlec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Secure Trusted Linux
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 00:15:08 GMT
Recently we've seen lots of posts about NT getting a "C1" trusted
classification. While this is meaningless, the subject of using Linux in
trusted systems has come up. There is an active Trusted
BSD<http://www.trustedbsd.org/> project, but I haven't found it in any
searches. The OS is only one part of a trusted system and the OS by
itself is not trusted. But the OS can help or hinder building trusted
systems.
I got the following from "Sectets and Lies" by Bruce Schneier :
OS Size System Calls
Unix 1ed 33
Win 3.1 3million
Win Nt 4million
Win95 15million
Win Nt4.0 16.5million 3,433
Windows 98 18million
Linux 2.0 229
Windows 2000 35-60million ?
Schneires point is that the growth in LOC and system calls make it
impossible to have a secure system. There is always the possibility that
a sneak path past security exists. And that possibility increases
exponentialy with LOC and system calls.
I propose a project to create a "Trusted Secure Linux" as follows :
1. Start with a stable current distribution.
2. Do "Glass House Development". Everything on line. Code, meeting
minutes, bug lists, everything. This would be designed to meet the
"verified design" requirements of A1 rating.
2. Trim out all code and system calls not absolutly required. As you can
see a full featured OS can be written with as few as 33 system calls,
and we should have learned a lot in the past 25 years.
3. Support only one file system (which one?)
4. Static compile only using well vetted libraries
5. No loadable modules. Compiled in drivers only
6. Include fine grain file access control.
7. Access and file logging to support DoD 5200.28-STD level B at least.
I'm not talking about a "branch" in Linux. I see this at the beginning
as more of creating a new makefile and thourghly checking the retained
code. Later, the file system support could be added and submitted back
for includion in the Linux code base.
Comments?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.windows98
Subject: Re: SE is simply unstable!!!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 00:16:55 GMT
It is a full system and identical to the full version in every way
except one. Only requirement is that you own a previous version of
Win98. As long as that is satisfied, you can do a scratch install if
you want.
claire
On Sat, 7 Oct 2000 12:13:32 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
wrote:
>On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 15:12:48 GMT,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>
>>Windows ME upgrade (upgrades Win98 to Me) $49.95 in Sundays NY Times.
>>
>>Claire
>>
>>
>>On Mon, 02 Oct 2000 15:02:36 +1000, Chris Sherlock
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>Ummm... I don't know if you've compared the prices of Windows ME against
>>>Mandrake Linux yet, but the prices are *very* different.
>>>
>
>
>How about comparing a full system, not an upgrade.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for?
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 00:30:00 GMT
"2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Aaron Ginn wrote:
>
> > I have a real X-Windows implementation in XFree86 instead
> > of a slow emulator like Exceed on NT,
>
> Point of pedantry, Exceed is not an X emulation, it is an implementation
> of X, though it is a bit slow.
Either way, Win2K Terminal Services beat them both.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for?
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 00:35:04 GMT
"Gardiner Family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Professional level Digital Audio recording and restoration done under
> > Win98se which despite all it's technical on paper design flaws (most
> > of which are real), has been absolutley flawless for me. Each version
> > has improved the stability and features, at least for what I use.
>
> you can do this on an old atari, amiga, mac any plaform, why windows?
Because he'd rather use his computer for other things as well, rather than
buying an aformentioned computer for that sole purpose. The computers you
mentioned would have little or no value except for DA recording to this
person.
> > I would use Win2k or better still Linux (I could save a fortune using
> > Open Source) but the programs are not there for Linux, and the Win
> > NT/2k programs are actually not as good as their Win98 versions.
> >
>
> What a load of rot, there is tonnes of applications such as
> StarOffice,
Trash. Most everyone admits this is a horrible attempt to copy MS Office.
> Netscape,
Also trash. Even the most dihard MS hater will still tell you that
Netscape is a flaming pile of dung.
> the 1,000s of GNU applications being/have developed,
Like 3,652 compilers, 9,522 text editors, 4,517 shells and many
other duplicated applications which don't really amount to much.
Unless you're developing C programs for Unix or Linux itself, there
is very little, if any productivity from Linux as a desktop.
> and games
> for Linux, Simcity 3000, Quake, Doom and other verious titles.
Quake and Doom! Great! If I want 3+ year old games, I'll go get a
Super Nintendo for a couple bucks off Ebay.
> I think that > the old wives tale that there is not enough apps or games for
> linux has run its course!
There are many apps, just none of them worth while. There is no
"killer app" on Linux.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Jason A. Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Do all Debian users have such bad attitudes?
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 00:47:33 GMT
Sorry if the subject sounds like flamebait, but I am getting so tired of
all the RedHat bashing being done by Debian users, especially on slashdot!
So, to all you Debian users out there, can you please explain to me why
you go around spreading FUD about RedHat? Is it because RedHat is a
commercial company? Are there real technical issues that make RedHat the
piece of shit that you all claim it is? Or is it because Debian just
happens attract a lot of these vocal assholes?
I have used both systems and from a user standpoint, they are basically
the same, like they should be since they both share 99% of the same
software. I am sure from an administrators point of view there are
probably some differences, but here I only have experience with RedHat.
In this area, I have never had any problems figuring out RedHat's system
of configuration files in /etc. So what is the big problem with RedHat?
I have even seen comments from Debian users who claim to have little or no
respect for RedHat users? Why are they such assholes? I have never seen
a RedHat user bash a Debian user like this? All these negative comments
do nothing but decrease my respect for Debian and it's users. If you like
one system over another then use it, I don't give a shit. Why do you have
to put others down just because they are using the other system? Grow up
people! It is all Linux!
~Jason
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Date: 7 Oct 2000 20:21:20 -0500
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Is of course Linux.
>
> The power of Linux is of course the GNU/GPL.
>
> Does everybody agree that Linux has the best desktop? NO, HELL NO!
why do I think this will be the only thing we agree on?
>
> Is Linux still growing? YES HELL YES!
You missed: Is MS still growing? YES HELL YES!
>
> Are large corporate interests investing in it's growth?
> Only if companies like IBM and HP are large in your opinion? How about
> Corel or
> Borland. You can't expect Microsoft to invest in their own death.
> That's the job
> of the giants and the ghosts.
MS invested in Corel - kept it outta bankruptcy court.
>
> How fast is Microsoft growing on that hill top? 1%.
>
> How fast is Linux growing? 5 - 7 % per year for almost 8 years.
Well, lesse, 5-7% growth (better ask Rex, he'll tell you it's 20% or
something) vs 1%. I think I would rather be part of 1% growth of $19 billion
than 5-7% (or even 20%) of $0. And if yer counting installed seats: 1% of
100,000,000 is still kicking ass over 5-7-20% of a couple hundred thousand
eh? It's got a long way to go and 8 more years won't be enough. It'll be so
fragmented by then it'll just be another *nix variation.
>
> Has Linux encroachment on the commercial Unix market finally stopped.
> Well, Caldera bought SCO. Rumor is Redhat is buing Novel or a chunk of
> Novel?
> So you have the mainframe companies and Sun left. And there still here
> as they
> made hardware to sell.
Who cares...
>
> Does Microsoft make hardware? Hardly, NO. That Microsoft mouse or
> keyboard
> is subcontracted out. They don't make anything but software.
X-box ... but, who cares...
>
> Does Linux like to eat software companies? Why yes. That is the Linux
> monsters
> red meat!
I can't think of any software company "eaten" by linux so this is weird
statement...
>
> What software companies is left for us to eat? Microsoft.
the fly dreams of eating the elephant eh?
>
> Does the Linux monster realize Bill Gates knows this and has been
> mouthing
> off in the press about it? Why yes! That's just like Gravey on your
> Potatoes?
> In fact, I'm developing an extra row of teeth which will be out by
> December,
> maybe first quater next year which are my Microsoft grinding molers and
> fangs!!!!!
umm... there are drugs that can help you, you know...
>
> Won't Microsoft take notice of this and attempt to stop you from eating
> them?
> Microsoft has been pooping on my head since I was a young monster. I
> think
> they will continue to poop until we are eye to eye. Then I think my
> controlled
> growth hormones which have been set at 5 - 7% per year will go wild.
they poop ON your head and you think eventually you'll .. and then... umm,
yer "controlled growht hormones" wil- um... no, stop db, don't even try to
understand this...
>
> It's funny, it takes a human being 20 years to get fully grown and it
> seems
> Linux will be 20 before it's fully grown as an OS in terms of Market
> use.
I give up... yer nutz
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 7 Oct 2000 20:23:11 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8rfm9h$r59$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:8rd6gr$26rc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >> > I'm sorry dude, but sometimes you hear something so silly you
can't
> > stop
> > > >> > from laughing...
> > > >>
> > > >> > I'm sure he'll post the tux results ... it's all they've got...
> > > >>
> > > >> Dont you have something better to do?
> > >
> > > > Yup - it's what I do the rest of the time... right now I'm laughing
at
> > the
> > > > sun rep who tried to sell some 10000s to one of my clients...
> > >
> > > Oh I remember you, youre the one that thinks (incorrectly) that
microsoft
> > > can compete in the heavy-server market. We've all been laughing at
you
> > > for some time.
> >
> > One name: "w2k data center"
>
>
> Yeah, now show us one that actually works.
>
start here butthead
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/guide/datacenter/studies/default.asp
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 7 Oct 2000 20:35:12 -0500
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8rlbgc$ko2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8rfm9h$r59$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> > news:8rd6gr$26rc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >> > I'm sorry dude, but sometimes you hear something so silly you
can't
> > stop
> >> >> > from laughing...
> >> >>
> >> >> > I'm sure he'll post the tux results ... it's all they've got...
> >> >>
> >> >> Dont you have something better to do?
> >>
> >> > Yup - it's what I do the rest of the time... right now I'm laughing
at
> > the
> >> > sun rep who tried to sell some 10000s to one of my clients...
> >>
> >> Oh I remember you, youre the one that thinks (incorrectly) that
microsoft
> >> can compete in the heavy-server market. We've all been laughing at you
> >> for some time.
>
> > One name: "w2k data center" - that's all I need say today. It'll speak
for
> > itself in months to come.
>
> Oh yes. The ghostly, non-existant product whos praises youve been singing
> for nearly a year now.
>
> Where is it again?
It's released and in use already.
>
> Can I install it on a 64x64 processor G6 mainframe?
Nope - so?
>
> I said *heavy* server market, dresden. I didnt say "compaqs idea of a
webserver"
> market.
you need heavy to make up for your OS envy eh? pity you... won't you ever
learn that paying more for hardware doesn't make it better or faster? won't
you ever learn that your ancient os and old style hardware approach is dated
and not keeping up? and I never mentioned web servers nor compaq.
small starting point:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/guide/datacenter/studies/default.asp
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 7 Oct 2000 20:37:06 -0500
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8rlb8a$ko2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Drestin Black wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > > Drestin Black wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > what? WHAT?
hahahahhahhhahahahahhhahahahaahhahhahhaahhhahahaahhaha
> >> > > > <breath>
> >> > > > hahahahhhahhahahahahahahaaahahahahahaaahahahhahahhaha
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > > No you know whe he's called Dresting LACK of facts...
> >> >
> >> > "No"? Perhaps you'd like to learn to spell/type before making shit
up
> > eh?
> >>
> >> Drestin Lack of facts.
> >>
> >> Happy now
>
> > I'll be happy when you go away and stop using up bandwidth with that
> > self-mocking .sig of yours (hasn't anyone told you how stupid it makes
you
> > look)?
>
> Actually, a more appropriate term for what his sig uses is "disk space".
Actually, it's both so quite pretending to know something. Given that disk
space is incredibly cheap who cares ... given that bandwidth continues to be
a premium item reducing redudant transmitted data is something...
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 7 Oct 2000 20:37:22 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Drestin Black wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Drestin Black wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > what? WHAT?
hahahahhahhhahahahahhhahahahaahhahhahhaahhhahahaahhaha
> > > > > > <breath>
> > > > > > hahahahhhahhahahahahahahaaahahahahahaaahahahhahahhaha
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > No you know whe he's called Dresting LACK of facts...
> > > >
> > > > "No"? Perhaps you'd like to learn to spell/type before making
shit up
> > eh?
> > >
> > > Drestin Lack of facts.
> > >
> > > Happy now
> >
> > I'll be happy when you go away and stop using up bandwidth with that
> > self-mocking .sig of yours (hasn't anyone told you how stupid it makes
you
> > look)?
>
> Annoys the fuck out of YOU...doesn't it.
me? ha! no, I love showing your posts to people and when they ask "What kind
of moron is this guy" I point to your .sig and say: the kind that uses his
own self-mocking .sig!
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: 7 Oct 2000 20:42:12 -0500
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8rleoh$ko2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > Gee... Thanks Perry - couldn't have put it better myself.
>
> Or as incorrectly. You really need to read an entire thread before
responding.
I did - he was right and you were wrong.
>
> > See abracadabra... you won't even find support from your own NG...
>
> Actually, there was lots of support. If youd read the entire thread you
would
> have realized that.
I did - and you don't have any which is why I wrote it.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 7 Oct 2000 20:45:08 -0500
"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Side note #2: Last time I looked, Drestin's wife wasn't bad looking,
> but she wouldn't excite me too much unless she had a *very* sexy voice.
> However, as long as he loves her, I can't say too much. :-)
I do and she loves me. And she's does but it's the whole package that
excites me.
I don't recall commenting on your wife? Or thinking how that would be
related (or appropriate) to this forum? Care to post some photos of her for
discussion?
Honestly... I think we can discuss and even argue without having to discuss
the appearance of ones wife.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
