Linux-Advocacy Digest #291, Volume #34 Mon, 7 May 01 10:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Jan Johanson")
Re: Microsoft standards... (was Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product) ("Jan
Johanson")
Re: Microsoft standards... (was Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product) ("Jan
Johanson")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: the Boom, Boom department ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Cold feet or Reality Check? ("Tom Wilson")
Re: the Boom, Boom department (Richard Thrippleton)
Re: To Aaron ("Mikkel Elmholdt")
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000? (Logan Shaw)
Re: WinTrolls and advocates are the ones who are geeks! (chrisv)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Roberto Alsina)
Re: To Aaron (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Tom Wilson")
Re: the Boom, Boom department (Matthew Gardiner)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: 7 May 2001 08:09:03 -0500
"Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:R5JI6.251$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:3af18b76$0$37328$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:zySH6.6169$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > Just from the commercial side of things, I don't see XP taking off for
> > quite
> > > a while. So many of these shops have just now upgraded to W2K. I think
> MS
> > > would have been better served to have given W2K a miss and just waited
> > until
> > > XP was done. The whole thing is more than a little strange when you
> > consider
> > > their past marketing efforts. It just doesn't make sense.
> >
> > Imagine this:
> > XP is the achievement of a single code base. One set of drivers, you do
> not
> > need to maintaine different drivers for W9x and ME and W2K. There is
only
> > one set of updates. Only one GUI to learn. One way to do things. It's
the
> > termination of a KNOWN ugly line of code. It's the end of ANYTHING
> remotely
> > to do with DOS (other than emulation for backwards compatibility).
>
> And this has to support thousands of legacy apps for years to come. Jon,
> this is the new generation's version of MS-DOS legacy support. Their
> terminating one ugly line of code is certaily no guarantee that it won't
be
> replaced by a new ugly line. After ages of mucking around in MFC and WTL,
> I've seen that they have a staggering propensity to write ugly code. As
far
> as the end of MS-DOS, good riddance. I'll certainly have to say that.
> Outside of certain embedded applications, I have absolutely no use for it.
> Even those applications are better served with Linux. Particularly when a
> networked link to the outside world is needed.
>
> > XP is a godsend for tech support. No longer having to ask: what version
of
> > windows are you running? and then having to fork your knowledgebase and
> > script based on that.
> >
> > I don't see XP as a wait for it or think about it upgrade, I see XP as a
> > must have upgrade. Give me a shop running W2K servers and W2K/XP
desktops
> > and I'll show you one that has cut tech support by half just from
> > eliminating support for old crap.
>
> Another pipe dream. Folks will be running the "Old Crap" for years to
come.
> It has taken how long to finally kill off an OS that was little more than
a
> single tasking shell to the system BIOS? And how much more popular and
> entrenched is the Windows 95/98 line in comparison? NT, I expect to see
> running in some shops when I become a grandfather.
>
> Better be patient enough to wait another 15 years for its' elimination.
It took less than 5 years for DOS to become obsolete, not sold not
supported - eliminated.
It will take less than 5 years to dump Win9x. It won't be sold or supported,
no new drivers, no new applications. Every new PC sold will come with XP,
upgrades are dirt cheap - why would Win9x stay alive?
Sure I've seen the occasional box running DOS in a closet with a unix print
server client running on it here and there but... that hardly means MS-DOS
is alive and well.
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft standards... (was Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product)
Date: 7 May 2001 08:14:06 -0500
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9d5si0$4je$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Yes, I know this. It is not as convenient as just dragging the window
> >> to a new size and it doesn't really do the same thing either. Making
> >> it smaller just adds scroll bars, IIRC, but doesn't change the actual
> >> size that apps think they are working with. An xterm notifies the app
> >> running in it of the new size.
> >
> > Hmm, I just took my mouse dragged my cmd window to be the size of my
> > screen and ran edit.com in there. Now edit didn't like the size and
> > decided to change it to an 80x50 window, but that's still larger than
> > the default
> > 80x25.
>
> DOS (ie what the whol;e text based stuff in NT is loosely based on) was
> able to work with 80x25, 80x43 and 80x50. Pretty much nothing was able to
> work with anything else. Try getting it to work with 81x26.
Considering that ALL DOS applications written are written with the knowledge
of these fixed screen sizes and therefore written specifically for these
sizes - what value is there to 81x26?
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft standards... (was Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product)
Date: 7 May 2001 08:15:09 -0500
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9d4olm$2op$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:M4lJ6.8393$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> > > A> I don't like string handling in C any better than the next guy.
> > > B> Even if I would write it, it wouldn't be GPL.
> >
> > C> command.com sucks. cmd.exe is much better.
>
> Agreed!
>
> > (not to mention that Bash isn't really superior to cmd.exe except in
> > scripting, but then, WSH seems better at that)
>
> WSH is just one step below programming, if at all.
> But people call what perl does scripting.
> Oh, well.
Actually - WSH IS programming. You can write more than just simple command
line scripts in WSH.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 09:17:07 -0400
Rick wrote:
>
> Tom Wilson wrote:
> >
> > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > JS PL wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Said "JS PL" <hi everybody!> in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 5 May
> > > > > >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > >> Said JS PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 4 May 2001
> > 12:34:15 -0400;
> > > > > >> [...]
> > > > > >> >I don't care what the problem is. I prefer an OS that works well
> > > > without
> > > > > >all
> > > > > >> >the hours of configuration.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I prefer an OS that works consistently without all the hours of
> > > > > >> reconfiguration.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >So do I, that's probably why I mainly use WINNT. And I assume it's
> > why
> > > > you
> > > > > >ONLY use Win95. Because only a complete ass would use an OS that they
> > > > > >*don't* prefer.
> > > > >
> > > > > No, NT is just as bad. Worse, in some ways.
> > > >
> > > > Sure it is, that's why everyone is running one or the other, and 3/1000
> > are
> > > > running Linux.
> > >
> > > MOst people are running Windows becasue of Microsoft' predatory
> > > anti-competitive behavior.
> >
> > Or write for it because its' still very profitable to do so.
>
> Yes, writing for Windows is very profitable, unless your product
> threatens Microsoft.
....until Microsoft decides that YOU are too profitable, and releases
it's own version of your product.
> --
> Rick
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the Boom, Boom department
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 09:20:03 -0400
Darren Wyn Rees wrote:
>
> It is disappointing looking at the games installed with
> most of the current Linux distributions.
>
> Many of the games look, feel, and sound like some of the rubbish
> that was available ... err... over fifteen years ago for the
> old Sinclair Spectrum.
>
> Some of the material is so appalling, it reminds me of ZX81 games.
>
> Why ship silly old stocking-filler games with Linux ? Why not
> concentrate on creating a quality OS, instead of throwing in
> everything and the kitchen sink with a distribution ?
>
> I bought Loki's Civ for Linux over a year ago, and I've never bought
> a Linux game since it was so utterly awful.
I downloaded the RailRoad Tycoon II Demo, and it was indistinguishable
from the LoseDOS version (other than the Linux system being more stable
at both the application AND system level).
>
> Linux just doesn't do anything for me in the boom, boom department.
>
> --
> "S+M is outta the question, have you got a better suggestion
> I'm fed up of waving my right hand" - rat salad www.ratsalad.co.uk
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Cold feet or Reality Check?
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 13:21:16 GMT
"Mikkel Elmholdt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9d65pg$2sca$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:UCvJ6.7172$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
>
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/cn/20010505/tc/microsoft_shelves_office_xp_subs
> > cription_plan_1.html
> >
> > You be the judge...
>
> Naaaaa ... as far as I can see, there's no talk about removing the
"feature"
> about having to register your copy of XP over the Internet (that would
have
> been nice). This subscription stuff is IMO a minor thing, compared to
that.
> Some Open Source companies. like Red Hat (i.e. Red Hat Network), are also
> doing something along the same lines (or talking about doing it).
It just shows, to me anyway, that they're at least aware of the grumbling
going on over it. At any rate, they're not quite so cock-sure about the
direction they were heading. Maybe they won't make the mistake all those
companies did where DIVX was concerned and push the idea to the marketplace
and just expect the consumer to fall in line - Only to lose millions and
millions when the consumers turned out to be smarter than they anticipated.
Anyway, we've already been down the subscription-based software model road.
Years ago, in fact. Most UNIX-based accounting systems were sold and
supported (I should say leased) along those lines. It died when the PC boom
hit and folks got the same functionality with networked PC's running DOS and
off-the-shelf applications for a hell of a lot less.
I don't think even the new distributed software technologies will be enough
to make it appealing to consumers again. Besides, the office suite matured
ages ago, there's not much they can do to make it a big seller again, aside
from forcing obsolescence.
> Much more "interesting" is the apparent plan to refuse Office 95 owners an
> upgrade. (Take that, you cheap SOBs ...)
Its' just like I said earlier. People still use the stuff because, aside
from bells and whistles (and Microsoft Bob disguised as a paper clip),
nothing else has been added. The product has matured. Clever marketing only
goes so far and only works on the "Keep Up With The Joneses" crowd.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Thrippleton)
Subject: Re: the Boom, Boom department
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 14:06:30 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>> >> Linux is not yet a credible games platform.
>> >Not yet, however, OpenGL and OpenAL are both taking shape quickly.
>> >Also, if you were playing these games with Xfree86 3.3.6, then yes, it
>> >would be shit house, however, 4.03 is a milestone in terms of
>> >performance etc when playing games.
>> I wish (really, I do). Yes, 4.03 is faster in terms of simple
>> drawing to the screen, but as far as I'm concerned, 3D is a non-possibility;
>> XFree86 doesn't yet support 3D operations with the Mach64 chipset. Any
>> suggestions? Any idea when it'll be supported?
>>
>> Richard
>Ai laddy, the're's ya problem, a shit-house graphics card :( grab a
>cheap TNT 2 card, and watch the penguin fly :)
I'd have done this ages ago, but I have an iMac! A big pretty
gumdrop that's impossible to upgrade!
Richard
------------------------------
From: "Mikkel Elmholdt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To Aaron
Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 15:30:22 +0200
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<snip>
> > China will get hammered by themselves. A totalitarian state simply
> > cannot keep up with a free nation in long-term development. That's been
> > proved on some rather large scales. Even if one out of five humans is
> > in China, not one out of five are communists who want to glorify the
> > state, you see. Humanity is made of individuals; society is an
> > abstraction, not a real thing. Individuals produce more when they're
> > free to produce what they want, and rarely produce less than when told
> > what to produce by someone else.
> Depends, China is in no hurry, Chinese are patiant when it comes to
> changes, when in the west, 10 years is seen as a long time, in China, 10
> years is a blink of an eye.
Hmmmm - China's got a huge population, so there's room for different
expectations about changes. And your're right that the whell of time seem to
turn a bit slower over there. But the students who died in the Tiananmen
Square a decade ago was not so patient, as I recall it .... I believe that
some of the "patience" you mention is due to the memory of that little
episode.
Mikkel
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: 7 May 2001 13:30:51 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 07 May 2001 02:37:20 +0100, Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> There are problems with LGPL code using properity code, but on general,
>> I agree.
>>
>> David: LGPL says: "I gives you this code, and whatever you do with this
>> code, you'll have to show me." GPL says: "I gives you this code, and
>> whatever you do with this code, as well as any *other* code you use, you
>> must show me."
>
>No the GPL says, if you use my code, you must show me exactly what you do
>with it. That "exactly" includes the whole program that you're using it
>in. The LGPL says, if you link to my code, then you're not a derived work.
>
>
>> As was mentioned FSF seem to ignore Sun's violations of a the GPL. But
>> in theory, Sun shouldn't be able to ship *any* GPL software with
>> Solaris, unless it GPL the whole thing. LGPL, I think, have the same
>> problem, I'm not so sure about it.
>
>
>No, that's not true. Sun is quite free to ship GCC and GAWK and whatever
>with solaris. Shipping them in no way makes the kernel a derived work,
>and hence it doesn't fall under the GPL.
Solaris libc is linked to GAWK. Not a matter of derived work, but of what
"all components of GAWK" are, as described in the GPL. The FSF has said
many many times that linking to a GPL library taints the linking program.
And the tainting should be bidirectional (They asked for this in the KDE case).
And the system component clause does not apply.
The only explanation I have seen is "they surely don't mean that".
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: 7 May 2001 13:32:58 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 07 May 2001 14:45:35 +0100, Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If
>> identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and
>> can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in
>> themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those
>> sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you
>> distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on
>> the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this
>> License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire
>> whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.
>
>I think you're getting confused about the definition of the word `work'
>in the license (hell, it's pretty confusing). The whole of solaris is not
>a work based on GCC in any way, so GCC can be GPL'd without having to to
>GPL the solaris kernel.
Yet, when linking FSF-owned GPLd code with the non-GPLd Qt, I was
asked to stop doing it. Why is it different between GAWK and Solaris'
libc? The system component clause doesn't apply.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Logan Shaw)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000?
Date: 7 May 2001 08:36:33 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bill Vermillion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Novell gave the name to xxxx [my mind is going - one of the
>standards organization] but all the code and rights went to SCO.
The Open Group. See http://www.opengroup.org/trademarks.htm .
- Logan
--
my your his her our their _its_
I'm you're he's she's we're they're _it's_
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: WinTrolls and advocates are the ones who are geeks!
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 13:36:53 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Jasper wrote:
>>
>> "Linux users are really cool"??? Give me a break!
>>
>> Rock climbing, skydiving, bushwalking and dirt bikes are cool. Using
>> a computer is just a means to finding the time and money to do these
>> things.
>>
>> Only a computer geek would ever post something like what is written
>> below.
>>
>
>I'm a Linux user. I'm also an artist, and a war veteran.
>
>Is that cool, or what?
You're a kook who can't trim posts.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: 7 May 2001 13:37:09 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 06 May 2001 18:20:51 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said Les Mikesell in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 06 May 2001 03:10:39
>>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>>> No real-world software has EVER been written to an *API* that doesn't
>>> "exist".
>>
>>Of course it is - and is probably the typical practice for projects small
>>enough to not need a formal spec. You just write the main program
>>using functions/methods that you implement later after seeing exactly
>>what they need to do.
>
>"Implement later" doesn't mean "doesn't exist until later".
"Implement later" means EXACTLY "the implementation doesn't exist
until later".
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To Aaron
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 01:39:59 -0700
> Hmmmm - China's got a huge population, so there's room for different
> expectations about changes. And your're right that the whell of time seem to
> turn a bit slower over there. But the students who died in the Tiananmen
> Square a decade ago was not so patient, as I recall it .... I believe that
> some of the "patience" you mention is due to the memory of that little
> episode.
>
> Mikkel
Also, many people who claim China's anti-democratic clearly have no
understanding of Asian culture, and confuscism. China, for thousands of
years has always been ruled by benevelant leaders, however, a period
from the mid 1800's right up until 1950, China was thrown into chaos and
anarchy. Hence the reason why they have the strong state policy they
have now, to ensure that no instability will occur.
As for the students, the equation is this, you appose the communist
party = you appose the government = enemy of the state = enemy of the
Chinese people. That is thinking held by the Chinese government. The
majority of Chinese get on with life, tend to their fields of rice and
look after some animals. What we do see on television, such as the
Tiananmen square, is only a small minority of people, the majority
couldn't care two-hoots.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 13:40:26 GMT
"Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3af69dcc$0$12274$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<snip>
> > > I don't see XP as a wait for it or think about it upgrade, I see XP as
a
> > > must have upgrade. Give me a shop running W2K servers and W2K/XP
> desktops
> > > and I'll show you one that has cut tech support by half just from
> > > eliminating support for old crap.
> >
> > Another pipe dream. Folks will be running the "Old Crap" for years to
> come.
> > It has taken how long to finally kill off an OS that was little more
than
> a
> > single tasking shell to the system BIOS? And how much more popular and
> > entrenched is the Windows 95/98 line in comparison? NT, I expect to see
> > running in some shops when I become a grandfather.
> >
> > Better be patient enough to wait another 15 years for its' elimination.
>
> It took less than 5 years for DOS to become obsolete, not sold not
> supported - eliminated.
It remained throughout the entire Win9x line of OS's. Infected it, I should
say.
> It will take less than 5 years to dump Win9x. It won't be sold or
supported,
> no new drivers, no new applications. Every new PC sold will come with XP,
> upgrades are dirt cheap - why would Win9x stay alive?
We'll see five years from now if your optimism is warranted....I'm betting
it isn't.
> Sure I've seen the occasional box running DOS in a closet with a unix
print
> server client running on it here and there but... that hardly means MS-DOS
> is alive and well.
Unfortunately I run across those DOS boxes now and again, too. More and
more, though, I see Linux and BSD boxes doing the print and file serving.
Along with the occasional Novel or NT box. Only place I see Windows in
abundance is on the desktops. And, nearly always, its 95 or 98 and running
Office 95 or 98. (Or solitare <g>)
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the Boom, Boom department
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 01:44:50 -0700
Richard Thrippleton wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> >> >> Linux is not yet a credible games platform.
> >> >Not yet, however, OpenGL and OpenAL are both taking shape quickly.
> >> >Also, if you were playing these games with Xfree86 3.3.6, then yes, it
> >> >would be shit house, however, 4.03 is a milestone in terms of
> >> >performance etc when playing games.
> >> I wish (really, I do). Yes, 4.03 is faster in terms of simple
> >> drawing to the screen, but as far as I'm concerned, 3D is a non-possibility;
> >> XFree86 doesn't yet support 3D operations with the Mach64 chipset. Any
> >> suggestions? Any idea when it'll be supported?
> >>
> >> Richard
> >Ai laddy, the're's ya problem, a shit-house graphics card :( grab a
> >cheap TNT 2 card, and watch the penguin fly :)
> I'd have done this ages ago, but I have an iMac! A big pretty
> gumdrop that's impossible to upgrade!
>
> Richard
iMac's are all good, esp. with MacOS X.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
