Linux-Advocacy Digest #278, Volume #31 Fri, 5 Jan 01 20:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Microsoft tentacles squirm deeper into software hosting ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows fails again (Glitch)
Re: Windows fails again (J Sloan)
Re: Windows 2000 (Shane Phelps)
Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why Hatred? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Conclusion (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Need help with NT (J Sloan)
Re: Linux can be made unstable, too. (JM)
Re: Windows fails again (JM)
Re: Would Linux be invented if? (JM)
Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: open source is getting worst with time. ("kiwiunixman")
Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft? (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft tentacles squirm deeper into software hosting
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 00:04:33 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"JSPL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
> Apparently (in hindsight) the book "1984" was pretty much wrong.
<snip>
The whole point of a book like 1984 is to be "wrong" because
it's not merely a prediction but instead a persuasive piece.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 19:23:41 -0500
From: Glitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows fails again
JM wrote:
>
> If anyone was wondering why yesterdays posts came later than usual,
> it's because Windows had to be re-installed AGAIN, thus making me stay
> up till 6am setting it all up again.
>
> Thanks a lot, Microsoft.
i redialed my ISP and during the 'loggin into network' step yahoo
messenger froze, netscape froze, and i tried to End task Messenger but
of course that didnt work and then i got a BSOD and had to reboot as the
keyboard locked up.
All b/c i wanted to redial my isp and get on the Net.
how pathetic.
people pay for this shit? (and no i didnt pay for my copy thank
goodness)
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows fails again
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 00:25:41 GMT
Glitch wrote:
> JM wrote:
> >
> > If anyone was wondering why yesterdays posts came later than usual,
> > it's because Windows had to be re-installed AGAIN, thus making me stay
> > up till 6am setting it all up again.
> >
> > Thanks a lot, Microsoft.
>
> i redialed my ISP and during the 'loggin into network' step yahoo
> messenger froze, netscape froze, and i tried to End task Messenger but
> of course that didnt work and then i got a BSOD and had to reboot as the
> keyboard locked up.
>
> All b/c i wanted to redial my isp and get on the Net.
>
> how pathetic.
> people pay for this shit? (and no i didnt pay for my copy thank
> goodness)
hmm, have you guys considered trying Linux instead?
I'm quite happy with it -
jjs
------------------------------
From: Shane Phelps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 11:30:41 +1100
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[ snip ]
> > was no Word for Windows 5.0; it skipped from 2.0 to 6.0, in order to
> > match WordPerfect's version numbering. They then abandoned that, and
> > went to the Office numbering, with 97, 98, and 2000.
>
> They skipped to 6 because Excel was at version 5 before, that's why Access
> also went to 6. They wanted common numberings for all apps in the suite.
>
Word was at version 5 on the Mac, as was Excel. They actually went
to the Mac sequence. Ahh, those were the days.....
I didn't pay much attention to Powerpoint or Access, though
>From memory, the x86 Word numbering sequence went up to Word 5 on DOS,
Word for Windows 1 & 2, then 6. The Mac numbering started around Word
3, whereas Excel started at 1.0 on the Mac, because Excel was a Mac
product. The success of Excel on the Mac was probably one of the
reasons for persisting with Windows, since 1 & 2 were so limited.
Does anybody remember when MS used to bundle Windows with Excel?
[ snip ]
... not that any of this has much relevance to cola, really :-)
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 00:25:00 GMT
Said Todd in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 3 Jan 2001 18:07:24 +0800;
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:92tuuv$vkf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <92tmli$ojd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> hackerbabe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > A quote from http://microsoft.aynrand.org/hate.html, referring to why
>> > Microsoft has been persecuted in the anti-trust trial:
>> >
>> > "There is only one fundamental reason why great businessmen [like Bill
>> > Gates]
>>
>> ...or Al Capone, or Manuel Noriega, or John Gotti...
>>
>> > or great companies [like Microsoft]
>>
>> ... or the Mafia, or the Medellin cartel, or the Hell's Angels...
>>
>> > are hated, and it has
>> > nothing to do with so-called monopolies. [Microsoft is] hated . . .
>> > because [it is] good, that is, smarter, more visionary, more creative,
>> > more tenacious, more action-focused, more ambitious, and more
>> > successful than everyone else.
>>
>> Bullshit. It's because they fucking broke the law.
>
>Nope... appeals *will* overturn the verdict. MS did not break the law.
Which part of "it is a felony to restrain trade, monopolize, or attempt
to monopolize" escapes you, Todd?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 00:27:44 GMT
Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 04 Jan 2001
01:11:13 GMT;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[snip]
>> You fucking dumbass. MS did NOT appeal the verdict.
>> They appealed the SENTANCE.
>>
>> They're guilty as sin, and they know it.
>> They're just pissed that the judge handed down punishment which
>> will actually put a stop the the criminal activity.
>>
>> > MS did not break the law.
>>
>> That strange...by failing to appeal the finding of guilt,
>> MS's lawyers admit that, in fact, MS DID BREAK THE LAW.
>> ( 60 counts, no less!)
>
>Thanks for pointing that out. Again. The fact that MSFT apologists seem
>to be completely unaware of this just totally bumfuzzles my brain.
I'm afraid I must put the brakes to this particular bit of
over-enthusiasm. I'm not sure what Aaron is talking about; MS did
appeal the verdict, and there were only four counts in the conviction
under appeal, not 60. Microsoft was even acquitted on one of them.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 00:31:48 GMT
Said Pete Goodwin in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 5 Jan 2001 07:56:24
>T. Max Devlin wrote:
>
>> >I see, so I have to work in the LCD do I?
>>
>> Yes.
>
>That's what lost us the argument, when I was working on a large project
>back in Digital. People didn't want the crude "lowest common denominator"
>style GUI's. They wanted a native GUI. Windows was it.
Real technologists recognize that development is an issue of
engineering, not simply matching the vague and often meaningless "wants"
of the end users. "People" don't even know what a "native GUI" is, or
whether it is at all important. You are just apologizing for the fact
that they *needed* their app to support the monopoly crapware desktops
they had no choice but to adopt if they wanted to benefit from the PC
hardware platform, due to Microsoft's illegal activities.
>> >WIN32 isn't always changing. It's being extended.
>>
>> You said it was always changing. You were right. As for being
>> 'extended', that's the monopoly integrating away competition.
>
>So you say. Some extensions are not, as you put it, "the monopoly
>integrating away comptetion".
It would be impossible to objectively judge which are or which aren't.
It is hard enough to read intent into source code, as they say; it is
entirely impossible to conclusively discern it from an API
specification. Which means we are forced to conclude that they are
*all* "the monopoly integrating away competition", since it becomes
impossible to determine which are and which are not, and it is a known
fact that some are.
>> Under the heels of a monopoly which has stymied any innovation they
>> can't profiteer on, wondering why every version is more worthless than
>> the one before it.
>
>Well, I'm sorry you feel that way.
Save your passive-aggressive lack of a position for someone who buys
into it. I'm sorry it *is* that way; what possible use could I have for
your sympathies? This is not a personal issue we're addressing, but
illegal activity which drastically impacts the most important market to
arise in the last fifty years.
[...]
>> >Are you really so paranoid as to believe that I, someone who actually
>> >likes Windows, that I might lie about what I'm running?
>> >
>> >If that is the case, then I can only pity you.
>>
>> His point was that you seemed bemused why cross-platform development
>> would be a good idea, when you obviously use both Windows and Linux. If
>> you are actually ignorant about the value of cross-platform development,
>> when you use more than one platform yourself, then I think your pity is
>> mis-directed, or possibly simply a rhetorical fabrication made by
>> someone too dim-witted to understand their own circumstances.
>
>I think you're reading a little too much into this statement.
That's because you are passive aggressive, and find this comment to be a
simple way to impugn the validity of my statement, and his,
simultaneously, without the bother of having to refute either in even a
small way.
>I think he
>was saying he didn't believe I'm running KDE2 on Linux. That's what I
>responded to.
I think you're merely trying to restrict your response to this
interpretation, as a transparent pretense for failing to address his
obvious concern. He was apparently questioning whether you were running
KDE in order to suggest your credibility was tenuous, not because he is
incapable of reading headers, whether that is the case or not.
>You, on the other hand, are selectively picking up on
>something else better to demonstrate your point, but a little off context
>to the thread.
Yes; I've shifted the thread from hatred and fear of Linux, to the
passive-aggressive behavior of certain Microsoft apologists.
It can be more than adequately proven that Windows enjoys a monopoly,
and that it is very problematic, much more so than the potential
alternatives. I go further, of course, and presume that the only reason
it hasn't been replaced by something else is the monopoly it enjoys,
since that is the nature of competitive markets; those who don't like
one product from one producer can always find at least a partial
substitute which enables them to avoid it. The monopoly is not a result
of Windows being acceptable to the market (or all competitors being
unacceptable); free markets don't work that way. Windows' being
considered acceptable, by those too ignorant to know any better, is a
result of the purposeful exclusion of potential alternatives from the
market by Microsoft: monopolization. That's why I call it "monopoly
crapware", and deny any assumptions which Microsoft apologists wish to
make about how it "must not be as bad as I claim, or it wouldn't be so
widely used." If it weren't so widely used (enjoy a monopoly), it
couldn't possibly be as bad as it is, and as I claim. It would not be
competitive, if it really sucked as much as I say; that's the claim of
the apologists. But the simple fact is that there is no way of knowing
(and, more importantly, no reason to believe) that if there were
alternatives widely available to the market (possibly even going so far
as to support Win32), anybody would consider this stuff to be of
acceptable quality.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Conclusion
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 00:31:49 GMT
Said Ayende Rahien in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 5 Jan 2001 21:41:21
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Ayende Rahien in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 4 Jan 2001 15:32:43
>> [...]
>> >> >You do realize that <non windows>+IIS is the *only* thing we can
>identify as
>> >> >wrong, do you?
>> >>
>> >> I suspect this was a typo, correct? What else have you "identified as
>> >> wrong", and what bearing does it have on the discussion about whether
>> >> their uptime numbers are accurate?
>> >
>> >No, this is meant to say that we can verify over the Internet very few
>of
>> >Netcraft results without being aware of the exact configuration of a
>site.
>>
>> So use a sight that you know, or can determine in some way outside of
>> the Netcraft mechanism, the configuration of, or admit that you have no
>> data at all that even brings into question the accuracy of the uptime
>> statistics reported by Netcraft.
>
>I don't administer any computer on the Internet at the moment, high
>bandwidth is *very* costly around here.
>It's much cheaper to host a site on an ISP servers than buy the high
>bandwidth that you need for a site.
>Hell, even hosting a site on a dedicated server is probably cheaper than the
>bandwidth.
I was aware of all that, Ayende, quite definitely. I'm not really
interested in the *reasons* you cannot provide any facts to indicate
that Netcraft's numbers are not entirely accurate; I was merely pointing
out that this is the case, and that an argument from ignorance is
insufficient.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 00:31:51 GMT
Said hackerbabe in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 02 Jan 2001 23:02:14
>A quote from http://microsoft.aynrand.org/hate.html, referring to why
>Microsoft has been persecuted in the anti-trust trial:
>
>"There is only one fundamental reason why great businessmen [like Bill
>Gates] or great companies [like Microsoft] are hated, and it has
>nothing to do with so-called monopolies. [Microsoft is] hated . . .
>because [it is] good, that is, smarter, more visionary, more creative,
>more tenacious, more action-focused, more ambitious, and more
>successful than everyone else.
>
>Haters of the good [competing OSes and browsers] do not want the less
>able to be raised up to the level of the great producers (which is
>impossible); they want the great producers to be brought down. They
>want to use government coercion to cripple the greatest minds so that
>lesser minds will not feel inferior."
>--------
>Is there any truth to this accusation of envy, or are there other
>reasons people dislike Microsoft?
No, there is no truth to this accusation of "envy". It is the
"so-called monopoly", entirely, despite the followers of Ayn Rand's
claims the contrary.
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 00:32:27 GMT
Said Charlie Ebert in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 04 Jan 2001
[...]
>I end up having to explain this to WINTROL'S EITHER ON OR OFF COLA!
Well, you wouldn't "end up having to explain" it, if you didn't make it
up to begin with.
>Microsoft HAS BEEN CONVICTED. Their TRIAL IS OVER.
>
>What Microsoft is trying to do is just what ARK is saying here,
>they are appealing their sentence. They are not asking for a
>re-trial but rather they are appealing their sentence.
I think you're confusing understanding legal procedures for having
watched LA Law. They are appealing both the verdict and the remedy.
>And because people are confused as to whether or not this is
>a re-trial, many people believe the charges will be reversed.
>If it WERE a re-trial this might actually happen with luck.
You are correct; this is not a re-trial. But that's because its an
appeal, not a trial at all.
>But since it is NOT a re-trial then Microsoft is actually going
>to get split up. And this is why you've seen all those newstories
>from various editors and other authors about the impact of the
>MICROSOFT BREAKUP as it's impending.
>
>There is nothing which will change this.
While this may be the case, it isn't your presumptions which make it so.
The reason the verdicts will not be overturned nor the remedy over-ruled
is because it is legally sound, not because it is not within the
capabilities of the justices hearing the appeal to do so.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Need help with NT
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 00:40:54 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> Not even. I spent 3 days trying to get a 6.2 based firewall to work.
> Finally I ended wiping it and installing FreeBSD. I later learned there was
> some kind of bug in 6.2 in regards to two network cards in the same machine.
That's BS, I'm running firewalls on Red Hat 6.2 machines in
3 or 4 shops - and there are no bugs, no problems - your
"problem reports" are all very vague and suspicious sounding,
and now I am beginning to understand what Erik Funkenbusch
is all about -
Although I agree that FreeBSD is solid, I have a hard time
making any sense of your continuing bizzare woes with Linux...
jjs
------------------------------
From: JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux can be made unstable, too.
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 00:43:33 +0000
On Fri, 5 Jan 2001 23:45:43 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Peter Köhlmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>JM wrote:
>> >
>> >Clue for the clueless: If you value your data, you *WILL* have the power
>> >for this system running off of a battery backup arrangement.
>> But how much would that cost?
>not that much. I have a UPS running at home (2 computers + telephone system
>connected to it, 1000 Watts power for about half an hour) and it costs
>about 400 Dollars. I do not think that this is much, even if i live in
>germany which has a very stable power grid
400 Dollars is a LOT if the power hardly ever goes out.
------------------------------
From: JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows fails again
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 00:43:35 +0000
On Fri, 5 Jan 2001 21:29:30 -0000, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>JM wrote in message ...
>>If anyone was wondering why yesterdays posts came later than usual,
>>it's because Windows had to be re-installed AGAIN, thus making me stay
>>up till 6am setting it all up again.
>>
>>Thanks a lot, Microsoft.
>Try installing linux as a dualboot system so at least you will have a way to
>post
>between windows reinstalls.
Unfortuanetly I don't have a copy of Linux. I had to perform a quick
format and reinstall, immediately configuring the modem and Agent so I
could jump right back into Usenet merely HOURS later....
------------------------------
From: JM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Would Linux be invented if?
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 00:43:36 +0000
On Fri, 5 Jan 2001 23:51:39 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Peter Köhlmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>JM wrote:
>> You can't beat free speech, can you?
>We were the ones who first elected Hitler and then followed him into a
>nightmare. So the founders of the german democracy declared it illegal to
>say that concentration camps did not exist or if they did, that jews
>weren't murderd there in masses.
>It is NOT forbidden to be a nazi in germany, not at all. And they can spew
>their propaganda like they want. But is forbidden to lie about the third
>reich. I think that is a BIG difference!
Lying about certain things is illegal? That's one of the biggest
infringements on free speech I've ever heard.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 00:41:48 GMT
Said Todd in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 5 Jan 2001 15:12:49 +0800;
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Todd wrote:
>> >
[...]
>> > Nope... appeals *will* overturn the verdict.
>>
>> You fucking dumbass.
>
>Are all Linux users like this?
NO! Aaron is a special case, though it is true that there are some
people who are like this in any arbitrary group.
>> MS did NOT appeal the verdict.
>> They appealed the SENTANCE.
>>
>> They're guilty as sin, and they know it.
>
>Not unless they are *proven* guilty - and the appeals court will have their
>say.
Excuse me, but whether they are "proven" guilty does not actually
determine whether they *are* guilty, merely whether they are known by
others to be guilty. Microsoft does, in fact, recognize their guilt, as
evidenced by their internal communications and their behavior.
>> They're just pissed that the judge handed down punishment which
>> will actually put a stop the the criminal activity.
>
>Not yet - appeals will overturn the 'sentence'.
Why do you think they will do this?
>Yes MS is a monopoly on the desktop...
>
>However, you need to be able to prove that MS used its monopoly to stuff out
>competition *and* prove that it harmed consumes.
No, you only need to prove they are monopolizing. The Sherman Act
states it is a felony to monopolize, or the attempt to monopolize.
There's nothing about "unless you don't "use your monopoly". The
existence of a monopoly harms consumers, irrevocably and unavoidably,
because it maintains prices above competitive levels and excludes
alternatives from the market. (This is a bit of a tautology, since the
definition of monopolization is "having the power to control prices or
exclude competition".)
>It will be very hard to prove since IE is a far better product than Netscape
>(just try to run Netscape under *Linux*, and you will see what I mean).
Now that would be something that's "hard to prove". Hyuck.
>Also, there are better browsers out their than Netscape. Take a look at
>Opera. How did they survive when Netscape didn't? Opera is a better
>product.
Courts do not engage in contemplating whether one product or another is
"better". They do consider whether one product or another is a
potential alternative, a partial or full replacement, or within the
scope of the "relevant market", but they do not second-guess the choice
of products by the consumer or determine whether something is "better"
enough to allow monopolization. Monopolization is illegal, no matter
how good your product is. (Again, a bit of word-play, I must admit; if
the reason you have large market share can be conclusively shown to be
the result of a "superior product", then such large market share is not
evidence of monopolization.)
>> > MS did not break the law.
>>
>> That strange...by failing to appeal the finding of guilt,
>> MS's lawyers admit that, in fact, MS DID BREAK THE LAW.
>> ( 60 counts, no less!)
>
>Heh. Let's wait to see what the appeals court has to say.
>
>We shall see who is right and who is wrong.
Indeed, but some of us have been through this class before, and know the
answers to the test. Unless you can provide some bit of evidence or
reason, not merely naked assertion, that the verdict or remedy will be
overturned, then we must point out there is no need of "wait and see"
back-pedaling. At the risk of being wrong, as always, we have more than
sufficient reason and evidence to show that we are right, and the
Microsoft verdict and remedy will be ratified entirely by the Appellate
Court.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
------------------------------
From: "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: open source is getting worst with time.
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 00:44:45 GMT
Ever seen a game of rugby...no poofy pads and shit! now thats a real mans
sport!
kiwiunixman
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> kiwiunixman wrote:
> >
> > gridiron, that stupid excuse for a sport where by every tackle they have
a 5
> > minute break!
>
> Only on incomplete passes and plays that go out of bounds.
>
> After tackle that stay in bounds, the clock keeps running.
>
>
> >
> > kiwiunixman
> >
> > "JM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > On Thu, 04 Jan 2001 20:49:23 -0500, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> > > ("Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
> > >
> > > >> > What the f*? That's standard American English. And yes, we won
our
> > > >> > revolution, so we're entitled to change the spelling. Or do you
> > expect
> > > >> > us to retain the King's/Queen's English after rejecting the
monarch?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Colin Day
> > > >> hmm, The rest of the world plays Cricket whilst you play Baseball
> > >
> > > >That's odd. Baseball is much more popular than cricket in Japan and
> > > >Laitn America. I don't recall cricket being an Olympic sport.
> > >
> > > And I don't recall cricket players needing giant gloves just to catch
> > > an already over sized ball.
> > >
> > > >> The rest of the world plays Rugby whilst you play Gridiron
> > >
> > > >Probably soccer more than rugby.
> > >
> > > What's gridiron?
> > >
> > > >> And yes I do expect you to retain the kings/queens english! It is
the
> > > >> standard way of spelling words.
> > >
> > > >Don't hold your breath.
> > >
> > > Why not?
>
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
>
>
> 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"
>
> 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
>
> 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....
>
> A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
>
> 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.
>
> C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
>
> D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> ...despite (C) above.
>
> E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
> her behavior improves.
>
> F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
>
> G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 00:46:19 GMT
Said Jacques Guy in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 03 Jan 2001 02:07:26
>hackerbabe wrote:
>>
>> A quote from http://microsoft.aynrand.org/hate.html, referring to why
>> Microsoft has been persecuted in the anti-trust trial:
>
>That is an extraordinary site, well worth visiting, while
>keeping in mind Ayn Rand's quip "Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal",
>seeing that Micorosft has been plundering its shareholders'
>capital to pay its employees in monopoly money.
>In fact, Micorosft is the very antithesis of capitalism,
>unless you mean highway robbery by it. It is difficult,
>given the amount on this site of this garbage (which
>reminds me very of the rhetorics of the USSR press under
>Stalin), it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that
>prof. Locke of the University of Maryland is in receipt
>of juicy "research" grants from Micorosft. Call that
>"research" and you may as well call the kettle white
>and the pot a crock of gold.
That certainly is a load of horse-manure he's got on that site. I think
he's probably just deluded, though. He probably doesn't even make as
much from Microsoft as, say, Erik Funkenbusch does.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
