Linux-Advocacy Digest #397, Volume #34 Thu, 10 May 01 16:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: where's the linux performance? (Greg Copeland)
Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Re: where's the linux performance? (Greg Copeland)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Jeffrey Siegal)
Re: No More Linux! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Microsoft "Windows for Linux" ("Mikkel Elmholdt")
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... (Neil Cerutti)
Re: Linux still not ready for home use. ("Mikkel Elmholdt")
Re: Windos is *unfriendly* (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: The Microsoft PATH. ("Mikkel Elmholdt")
Re: Double whammy cross-platform worm (Nigel Feltham)
Re: Caldera CEO agrees with MS ("Mikkel Elmholdt")
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Homosexuality=suicide ("Mikkel Elmholdt")
Re: VM Ware performance? (Nigel Feltham)
Re: Caldera CEO agrees with MS (.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: where's the linux performance?
From: Greg Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 May 2001 13:48:48 -0500
Actually, that's not true either. Most JVMs that I've seen offer what
is being called green and black(?) threads. One uses the native OS's
thread implementation, while the other uses a user space implementation.
Again, this is an issue of the quality of JVM implementation first and
foremost. Once the implementation, and in fact, the running instance of
the JVM is determined, only then can other factors begin to assert them-
selves.
For the record, in case you don't know, user space threads are not going
to scale nearly as well as a natively threaded implementation, especially
on a highly loaded system.
In a nut shell, if the JVM is crap, it doesn't matter what platform it
sits on. Period. It's like saying that my dog's doo is better than your
dog's doo because my is on my Porche while yours is on a Jag. It doesn't
matter. Dog poo is dog poo. Period.
Greg
p@r <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Greg says...
>
> > I would guess that the OS has little
> >to nothing to do with the performance of a JVM, rather, the bulk of the
> >responsibility squarely falls on the JVM implementor's shoulders.
> >
>
> Pretty much, except when it comes to issues such as threads. The VM
> uses the threading mehanism on the OS. If that is broke the VM will
> not behave well.
>
--
Greg Copeland, Principal Consultant
Copeland Computer Consulting
==================================================
PGP/GPG Key at http://www.keyserver.net
DE5E 6F1D 0B51 6758 A5D7 7DFE D785 A386 BD11 4FCD
==================================================
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 20:50:20 +0100
>> > People who GPL libraries should have their toenails slowly peeled off
>> > with red-hot tongs by a cackling black-hooded torturer in a medaeval
>> > dungeon. Or be forced to use the latest version of VB...
>> > (Bwahahahaha!)
>
> If you are talking about the *latest* version of VB, it's VB.NET, which
> isn't bad at all. Similar to C# in its capabilities.
Well, OK, VB.NET _can_ do anything since it is turing complete but...
some of us don't like BASIC :-)
>> As well as haing to program in VB, they have to write the code in Word.
>
> Been there, done that, not so bad. Try writing a program using edlin.
> Now
> *that* is a challange.
Been there, done that :-)
My old school had a bunch of 8086 (and 80186) RM Nimbus machines with dos
3. I wrote all my DOS batch files in edlin. They also had BBC emulators.
The standard method of programming was to use AU. (AUTO). The closest
analogue to this is typing a program using cat -n
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 18:51:39 GMT
On Thu, 10 May 2001 18:37:59 +0100, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>> >Why aren't you using PAN instead of Agent?
>>
>> Because I use Agent, not PAN. Guffaw.
>
>OK, why are you using a Windows application (which you despise?) instead
>of a Linux equivalent (which you think is wonderful?).
>
>Titter.
You beat me to it :)
flatfish
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 18:51:50 GMT
>>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
Aaron> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
>>
Aaron> chrisv wrote:
>> >>
>> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >> Because stupid bigots like to rationalize their hatred of gays by
>> >> >> blaming them for AIDS.
>> >> >
>> >> >No. I merely refuse to associate with people who are so fucking suicidal.
>> >>
>> >> Again, the false logic from Kookis. Homosexual != suicidal.
>> >> Homosexuality != unprotected anal sex. Idiot.
>>
Aaron> Does "protection" ever break?
Aaron> a) no
Aaron> B) YES
>>
>> Is there a single documented case of HIV transmission during
>> condom protected sex. No.
Aaron> Mostly because the gays are so promiscous that nobody has ever
Aaron> been able to determine which incident caused the infection.
Nonsense.
Aaron> However, we DO know that
Aaron> A) condoms break
Yes, but rarely.
Aaron> B) the AIDS virus is small enough to get through LATEX (this is
Aaron> why anti-AIDS lubricants were invented)
Never been known to happen, and it has been studied very carefully.
There was a study done with over 200 couples, with one partner
HIV+ and the other HIV-. All couples were instructed to always
use condoms. One group followed that instruction, one sometimes
used condoms, the other never. Not one case of HIV transmission
occured in the 15,000 cases of intercourse in the first group.
This means it is very hard to get HIV when using condoms, even if
one partner is known to have HIV.
Aaron> DOH!
Aaron> The life expectancy of a male homosexual is 20 YEARS SHORTER than
Aaron> that of a male heterosexual.
>> No, this is a falsehood, based on a fraud's lies (Paul Cameron).
Aaron> No...this is a truth from the US Center for Disease Control
Cite please. I do not believe you.
Aaron> What does this tell you?
>> Nothing, as it is false.
Aaron> Wrong again, closet-boy.
Step and cite it.
BTW, I find it amusing that you follow the bigot rule of assuming
everyone that objects to your bigotry is a member of the group
you are bigoted against. Do you also think anyone objecting to
anti-semitism is Jewish?
>> Note that female homosexuals have very low incidence of HIV.
Aaron> Which does nothing to lower my disgust for male homosexual activity.
It does however blow a hole in one of your rationalizations for your
irrational bigotry.
--
Andrew Hall
(Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
------------------------------
Subject: Re: where's the linux performance?
From: Greg Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 May 2001 13:53:20 -0500
Thank you. That was my point exactly. I think both are pretty stable these days,
I'm just betting that the hardware combo for my mail-server, even though they are
all on the compatibility list, just are not ideal for BSD. Does this mean that
I think BSD is junk. No, I just think that BSD needs some work as it pertains
to my particular hardware. I think it's about on par with what Linux and other
UNIXen have to offer. Meaning, all OSs have some hardware which doesn't allow
the OS to put its best foot forward.
I guess we should start here because I feel rather lucky that a flame war didn't
start there. ;p
Greg
GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Greg Copeland wrote:
> >
> > I run BSD on one of my mail servers. This same box run Linux for years without
> > problem. As my mail server, again, running BSD, it seems to crash about twice
> > a month. While I certainly have nothing against any of the BSD's, I for one
> > think that the stability is over rated of BSD. I have no doubts that it still
> > on the same page as Linux, for better or worse.
> >
>
> The only thing I know about BSD is what is provided as compatibility for
> it in Solaris.
> BSD code has been hand-over-hand checked for any errors.
> BSD code for the mail servers may not be hardware tolerant ,.. or some
> hardware related incompatibilities. Seen things like this in windows as
> well... one piece of hardware works great while another gives nothing
> but headaches.
>
>
--
Greg Copeland, Principal Consultant
Copeland Computer Consulting
==================================================
PGP/GPG Key at http://www.keyserver.net
DE5E 6F1D 0B51 6758 A5D7 7DFE D785 A386 BD11 4FCD
==================================================
------------------------------
From: Jeffrey Siegal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 11:53:56 -0700
Les Mikesell wrote:
> > > And maybe MS could add such restrictions, but they might not be
> interested
> > > in forbidding users from writing programs for their own use. Perhaps
> > > it is inappropriate to call that philosophy, but it's close.
> >
> > I don't see a difference here. FSF is not interested in forbidding
> > users from writing programs for their own use.
>
> There is no evidence one way or another for that.
I believe there is strong evidence, given the FSF's position on privacy
issues and how that relates to software.
> As the GPL states,
> its scope doesn't and can't cover that case. However, the FSF has
> been interested in making it difficult for other free software to be
> developed, as in the RIPEM case.
Distributed, not developed.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: No More Linux!
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 18:54:48 GMT
On 10 May 2001 11:34:59 -0600, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thu, 10 May 2001 02:56:40 +0700, "Dave Martel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > >I decided to become a FreeBSD snob instead. <g>
>> >
>> > Talk to me I'm listening :)
>> >
>> > What will FreeBSD do for me (as a desktop non programmer user) that
>> > Linux can't?
>>
>> What would it do for you? Make you go to comp.os.freeBSD.advocacy ? :)
>> (if there is one)
>
>Oh lets! :)
>
>I'll burn the discs for you flatfish+-=++, and even send a nice
>introductory message to the FreeBSD advocacy groups ahead of time!
It's nice to know I am loved....
flatfish
------------------------------
From: "Mikkel Elmholdt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.emulators.ms-windows.wine
Subject: Re: Microsoft "Windows for Linux"
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 20:59:15 +0200
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Why not just release the Office version for Linux they almost certainly
has
> > created somewhere deep inside the Redmond compound? (just as it was
rumoured
> > that they had ported several programs to OS/2 but held it back due to
> > marketing policies).
> >
> > Mikkel
> What's wrong with Corel Wordperfect Suite 2000 for Linux? I'm running it
> on a PIII w/ Kernel 2.4.4 and it is 99% close to native app speed.
>
> Erik, if you are reading, what has MS Office got that Wordperfect Suite
> hasn't? I've got Wordperfect, Quattro Pro, Presentations, Corel Central
> and Paradox, all the features or MS Office and more.
>
> Matthew Gardiner
Always been a bit suspicious towards inter-suite file format conversions
(seen it fail too many times). And I have generally detested WP since their
fatal version 6.0 for Windows (what a piece of crap - that thing alone made
me switch to Word 6.0). But it seems that you have a good experience here
with WP file conversions from Office? Does that also aply to Office 2000
formats?
Mikkel
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 18:08:16 +0200
In article <9dedic$l3k$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> "Isaac" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Wed, 09 May 2001 23:25:58 -0700, Jeffrey Siegal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> >The only thing that prevents FSF from relying on the same kinds of use
>> >restrictions to do what it wants to do with GPL is that the FSF is
>> >philosophically opposed to use restrictions, but Microsoft certainly
>> >isn't.
>>
>> Also as has been pointed out, a newly added clause would not retroactively
>> protect already released GPL'd code.
>
> Well, a lot of programs are released under "GPL #.# and/or later version"
> So it might be possible.
You'll always be able to select the original version, so any subsequent
modifications to the GPL are not applicable. Only the programs under
GPL v3 would be affected.
>
>> And maybe MS could add such restrictions, but they might not be interested
>> in forbidding users from writing programs for their own use. Perhaps
>> it is inappropriate to call that philosophy, but it's close.
>
> They most certainly wouldn't care to do that.
> MS consider the developers' pleasure with their platforms a Very Important
> Issue.
As long as said developer is prepared to pay big bucks for
that pleasure.
> See VB.NET forced backward compatability for an example.
I've been confronted with VB2/3 <-> VB5 porting problems,
so excuse my deep-rooted scepticism.
--
Stefaan
--
How's it supposed to get the respect of management if you've got just
one guy working on the project? It's much more impressive to have a
battery of programmers slaving away. -- Jeffrey Hobbs (comp.lang.tcl)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Cerutti)
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Date: 10 May 2001 19:02:09 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pete Goodwin posted:
>Yes but you're not giving any good reasons as to _why_ DirectX
>sucks. I might just as well say "Linux sucks".
It has had problems with backward compatibility in the past, most
horribly between version 2 and 3. If your Direct X configuration
gets munged, it means reainstalling Windows. However, I haven't
had this last problem since DX6 and later versions.
I imagine some hardware makers get tired of updating device
drivers for sad old hardware like Diamond Stealth 3D every time a
new version DX comes out, but personally I don't care about them.
>Linux. I use it. It sucks. 'nuf said.
Heh heh. I *does* suck that you use Linux. Just kidding. ;-)
--
Neil Cerutti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
*** You found a dead moose rat and sold the hide for $250. ***
------------------------------
From: "Mikkel Elmholdt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux still not ready for home use.
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 21:09:13 +0200
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Mikkel Elmholdt wrote:
> >
> > I has a *very* disappointing Linux experience today. I had downloaded
and
> > created a 2 CD Redhat 7.1 set, and had set the afternoon aside to what I
> > believed would be some lenghty tinkering and f***** around, not to
mention
> > the all-to-likely eventuality where my (sort of) well-functioning NT
> > partition would vanish into thin air (as happened the last time I tried
> > Mandrake). It is therefore very sad that I have to report that Redhat
> > miserably failed to live up to my expectations.
> >
> > The installation was done in little over an hour, and I did not have any
> > problems at all. Nothing to complain about. Utterly disappointing!
> >
> > In all fairness, the installation took place on my (fairly well-behaved)
> > office PC, and I did not have any of the accessories people typically
> > compain about (scanner, digital camera, Winmodems, Windows-specific
> > printers). And this was not my first Linux installation experience
(actually
> > the third), and I am not exactly a typical non-techie user either ...
> >
> > But to boot up in a nice & clean (and, for a Windows user, sort of
familiar)
> > KDE desktop was a very scary experience indeed. I selected KDE over
GNOME
> > precisely because it reminds me more of ... yes, exactly Windows!
<ducking
> > to avoid flying debris from infuriated KDE Penguinistas>
> >
> > If your normal PC-pusher will pre-install Linux, throw on StarOffice,
setup
> > the Internet thingies right, then the average user (including your
uncle)
> > will IMO use this platform with the same (uneasy :-) ) ease as they
would
> > any Windows PC.
> >
> > Mikkel
>
> Why not try SuSE? I just grabed the CD, threw it in the computer, it
> booted, I selected the packages, rebooted, and everything just works.
> So, I don't know what happened with your computer to cause that much
> grief.
>
> Matthew Gardiner
Eehh Matt - are you joking, or did you not read my post carefully enough? (I
*was* definitely joking).
On a more serious note: I actually intended to use SuSE as people has been
saying nice things about it. But since I was just "playing around on a quiet
afternoon" I wanted a distro with ISO D/L. SuSE did not have that. They has
something called an "FTP Installation", which I was too stupid to figure out
how to use. RedHat had what I wanted, and IMO delivered. If/when I get to
use Linux professionally (which may not be that far in the future), I will
certainly try the SuSE distro.
Mikkel
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windos is *unfriendly*
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 19:14:09 GMT
Weevil wrote:
>> Sounds to me like you're full of it.
>>
>> I've been working on Windows since Windows 3.1 and 95. I've yet to have
>> to reinstall or hack registry settings.
>
> You've just lost all credibility. It is impossible that you've been
> "working on Windows since Windows 3.1 and 95" without ever having had to
> reinstall.
I mean reinstall network drivers.
> I had started to believe you were more or less honest, or at least not
> knowingly dishonest.
I am honest and at least not knowingly dishonest.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 19:17:18 GMT
Neil Cerutti wrote:
> It has had problems with backward compatibility in the past, most
> horribly between version 2 and 3. If your Direct X configuration
> gets munged, it means reainstalling Windows. However, I haven't
> had this last problem since DX6 and later versions.
Thank you, someone who at least knows why DirectX sucks! Or did suck.
>>Linux. I use it. It sucks. 'nuf said.
>
> Heh heh. I *does* suck that you use Linux. Just kidding. ;-)
Que?
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: "Mikkel Elmholdt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Microsoft PATH.
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 21:30:47 +0200
"Mad.Scientist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Oy$0f3E2AHA.268@cpmsnbbsa07...
<snip>
> Microsoft calls Linux "un-American". Many people with FUD call Linux a
> communist OS. How wrong these people are!
Agreed.
> Microsoft seems to think that capitalism and Americanism means feeding
your
> fat and greedy ass with dollar bills. However, M$ fails to take into
> account that in repressive systems, the person on top is usually rich.
> Dictators stay in power by making themselves very rich, and keeping
everyone
> else in poverty. History shows that when a middle class gets large
enough,
> a political revolution happens that overthrows the government. Such was
the
> case with the American, French, and Russian Revolutions, as well as many
> others. Recall that the rise of democracy in Europe in the 1800s and
1900s
> was synonymous with the rise in a middle class. This suggests that if the
> middle class in China gets large enough, then a revolution will overthrow
> their communist government. I'm going on a tangent here, so let me get
back
> on the right path. Microsoft's system is reminiscent of a fascist system.
> Microsoft has become the big brother of "1984".
Complete BS. No one has forced individuals or corporations to use MS
products. MS has used dirty (and possible illegal) marketing tactics to a)
persuade prospective buyers that choosing MS products was the way to go, and
b) squeeze competitors out of the market. You may very well (and with good
reason) dislike that, but please don't call it fascist. My country was
occupied by the fascist during 1940-1945. In that period they killed approx.
6 mill. people all over Europe. Don't even try to compare that to MS. That
is as inappropriate as calling Linux a "Communist OS". No one has AFAIK died
as a direct result of MS activities.
> Linux, however, is the system that embraces the true American ideal.
While
> the GPL, with the word "public" in the title, will make people think of
> socialism or communism, the GPL is not this at all. In Open Source,
> everyone owns the software, and not even in a socialist way. In the Open
> Source world, there is no centralization of rule or ownership. So even if
> it was owned by everyone, it would be more free than the communists
> governments of the Soviet Union. This, however, underscores a major fact
> that is ignored. In the Open Source system, you have total ownership of
> your computer. In the Microsoft regime, however, only Microsoft owns the
> software. They own the software on your computer. You are only using it
> under their license. You have no right to alter their software. If there
> is something wrong with it, you have to send a bug report to them, and
pray
> that they fix it. Under Open Source, you have the power. If there is
> something wrong, then YOU can fix the software. If you have a gcc
compiler,
> and you know C and C++, then YOU can fix the problem yourself, or ask
> someone else to help you.
I almost agree with you here. However, GPL and Open Source are 100% not the
same. The GPL contains one crucial "feature", which sets it apart from the
generic Open Source definition, published by the Open Source Initiative
(OSI). That is the "viral" thing, i.e. the little aspect that requires
anyone that uses a GPL'ed component as part of their product to release the
*whole* product under GPL. To me that's not freedom, that's forcing your
hand, and not trusting you to do the right thing. I fully believe in Open
Source, but I do not care for the GPL because of this.
<snip>
Mikkel
------------------------------
From: Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Double whammy cross-platform worm
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 20:44:43 +0100
> This is similar to that Homepage virus that was out today. HELLO! Is
> anyone still stupid enough to open unknow attachments especially those
> that are VBX files? HELLO?! Hasn't everyone updated their outlook to the
> current version which prevents you from executing these VBX files from the
> e-mail with a double click? HELLO... all current versions of Outlook will
> completely block access to a VBX or EXE file, period. Anyone that got hit
> by that virus today is a complete moron and Outlook/MS is certainly not to
> blame.
>
Do you mean the patch that makes Outlook unuseable to anyone who needs to
send or receive several file types - it would certainly piss me off to be
sent an email contining an EXE file I need which takes an hour to download
on my 33.6k modem only to find the sodding email package has lost the file.
A better option is to use a decent email package ( I use KMail) running on
an OS which isn't full of security holes ( I use Linux) and virus-check any
Executeble files before running them ( or run them in a sandbox - using
WINE configured to only access a few easily replaced directories and no
network support is safe enough).
------------------------------
From: "Mikkel Elmholdt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Caldera CEO agrees with MS
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 21:36:25 +0200
"Bob Tennent" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Thu, 10 May 2001 12:19:38 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >http://www.zdnet.com/eweek/stories/general/0,11011,2717264,00.html
> >
> >Ransom Love (his real name, ISYN) says he agrees with MS that the GPL is
not
> >appropriate for Commerical software, and is considering alternate
licenses
> >such as the BSDL.
>
> And what does this have to do with Linux? Does he plan to write a new
operating
> system kernel to replace Linux? If he writes the code, he can choose the
> license. And if he wants to allow Microsoft to grab his code and fork it,
> that's his choice. I'm just glad Linus didn't make the same choice.
>
> Bob T.
Why are you glad about that? Who will it hurt if someone grabs some Open
Source, forks it, and releases it a closed proprietary software? The
original free software would still be out there, as free as ever. So would
Linux be in a different place today if that had happened to it?
Mikkel
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 19:37:53 GMT
"Jeffrey Siegal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Les Mikesell wrote:
> > > > And maybe MS could add such restrictions, but they might not be
> > interested
> > > > in forbidding users from writing programs for their own use.
Perhaps
> > > > it is inappropriate to call that philosophy, but it's close.
> > >
> > > I don't see a difference here. FSF is not interested in forbidding
> > > users from writing programs for their own use.
> >
> > There is no evidence one way or another for that.
>
> I believe there is strong evidence, given the FSF's position on privacy
> issues and how that relates to software.
Yet they go out of their way to prevent you from obtaining third
party non-GPL'd components, whether more or less restricted
than the GPL.
> > As the GPL states,
> > its scope doesn't and can't cover that case. However, the FSF has
> > been interested in making it difficult for other free software to be
> > developed, as in the RIPEM case.
>
> Distributed, not developed.
As mentioned before, that is the only thing they can control and it has
the same result regarding our ability to obtain something. There
is no reason to think they wouldn't be interested in removing even
more of your choices if they had the opportunity.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Mikkel Elmholdt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Homosexuality=suicide
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 21:39:28 +0200
"pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Public " wrote:
> >
> > Anyone who would grab their ankles and let some queer drive their point
home deserves to die.
>
> Look, your first time is always painful. No need to get verbal about it.
That's not the way to talk to a person so clearly filled with self-hatred
and insecurity.
Mikkel
------------------------------
From: Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: VM Ware performance?
Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 21:08:25 +0100
>
> If I had an AMD1.3Ghz processor with 512MB RAM would performance through
> VM Ware be at least equivalent to a 900Mhz processor. (Assuming I assing
> 256MB RAM for VM Ware to run in.)
>
Unfortunately this is not possible - you could try running the game under
the WINE windows emulator though - try looking at www.linuxgames.com to see
if anyone has had success with running your specific game under linux.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Caldera CEO agrees with MS
Date: 10 May 2001 20:01:58 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.zdnet.com/eweek/stories/general/0,11011,2717264,00.html
> Ransom Love (his real name, ISYN) says he agrees with MS that the GPL is not
> appropriate for Commerical software, and is considering alternate licenses
> such as the BSDL.
Yes. The GPL makes it too hard for lazy corporate fatcats to get even fatter.
LETS GET RID OF IT!!!
=====.
--
"George Dubya Bush---the best presidency money can buy"
---obviously some Godless commie heathen faggot bastard
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
