Linux-Advocacy Digest #21, Volume #35 Thu, 7 Jun 01 06:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: I propose a GPL change... (Ed Allen)
Re: MS at it again (Ed Allen)
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts getting
good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!) (Nick Condon)
Re: What Microsoft's CEO should do (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts getting
good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!) (Nick Condon)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Dan Pidcock)
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts getting
good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!) ("David Brown")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Mafoo")
Re: What Microsoft's CEO should do (pip)
Re: What Microsoft's CEO should do (pip)
Re: What Microsoft's CEO should do (pip)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I propose a GPL change...
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Allen)
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 09:01:03 GMT
In article <79ET6.8765$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> How can Microsoft expect Windows pirates to feel the least
>> bit guilty, when MS are themselves pirates on a mammoth
>> scale?
>
>Patent infringement is not copyright infringement.
>
>
As a sock puppet Erik adheres to the MS view that "Copyright
trumps everything". Including anything mentioned in The Bill
of Rights and all laws such as the Sherman Antitrust Act.
This ignores that a copyright on code you are not allowed to see
makes avoiding infringement much harder but that is OK if MS
ideas are being shielded. It only turns bad when GPL code authors
want the same protection.
Erik, feel free to expand on any of that with appropriate quotes
from microsoft.com
--
Microsoft is trying to add to the list of biggest lies of all time:
"Hi. I'm from Microsoft and I am here to protect you from the threat of
the GPL."
------------------------------
Subject: Re: MS at it again
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Allen)
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 09:01:03 GMT
In article <3fET6.8767$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> Just goes to show ya that MS does steal code after all.
>> And hide it under the proprietary software guise.
>
>Patent infringement is *NOT* copyright infringement. Violating a patent
>doesn't have anything to do with "stealing code".
>
How can a software patent infringement not involve code ?
Erik, you need to think harder before you post.
--
Microsoft is trying to add to the list of biggest lies of all time:
"Hi. I'm from Microsoft and I am here to protect you from the threat of
the GPL."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Condon)
Subject: Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts
getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!)
Date: 7 Jun 2001 09:08:12 GMT
quux111 wrote:
>GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
>> Nick Condon wrote:
>>>
>>> Stephen Edwards wrote:
>>>
>>> >No, I'm a proud Yank. And the very notion that
>>> >a person should not be proud of his or her nation
>>> >is absurd. Everyone should be proud of their
>>> >heritage, and their home.
>>>
>>> Why? It's just where you born. It's not like you achieved anything.
>>> Your parents fucked, and out you popped. It could have been anywhere.
>>> So just keep that image in mind, next time you feel patriotic, just
>>> visualise your father hunched over your mother. Which is all it comes
>>> down to, really.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Nick
>>
>> Harsh , but to the point.
>>
>
>...not. This is exactly the kind of vitriol I try to stay out of, but
>the notion that patriotism is somehow pointless or wrong is repugnant.
>Patriotism (in the best sense) is nothing more than a sense of community
>and common purpose.
What are you, a red? Community and common purpose? Gimme a break.
>Cynics like those who posted above are generally
>malcontents who don't vote (if they live somewhere where people elect
>their leaders) but bitch all the time about how society is going to
>hell.
I think cynicism has bad name, but it's an essential part of the body politic's
immune system. Where I live, we've got a General Election today, and you sound
just like Tony Blair who has complained about voter cynicism and apathy in the
past.
Who minds a bit of healthy scepticism? It keeps democracy healthy. Are
politicians all the same? No but they all look the same. They freely adopt each
others policies, and the old ideological battles of the past are gone.
Voters are entitled to stay home on polling day. Turnout has been in decline in
most democracies for decades. Particular circumstances can make things worse:
Labour voters abstained in droves from the 1998 Welsh Assembly elections after
Mr Blair’s (cynical) attempts to gerrymander an internal leadership contest. In
general, however, falling turnout has bigger causes: weaker loyalty to parties;
less faith in the ability of conventional politics to deliver change; more
interest in promoting special causes, be they greenery or foxhunting, outside
the parliamentary system. Is this 'apathy', or even bad? Not necessarily: Pippa
Norris, of Harvard University, has hailed the rise of a new breed of 'critical
citizens' who feel that existing channels of participation fall short of
democratic ideals and want to reform them.
When Mr Blair makes his big speeches, there usually comes a moment when his
inner eye glimpses the New Jerusalem. His outer eye moistens. His voice
trembles. Is he faking it? It is impossible to say. And it makes no more sense
to accuse him of it than it would to accuse Olivier of faking Hamlet. Actor and
politician deploy the skills their respective crafts require. But voters need
not pretend that they see the New Jerusalem too. Indeed, their duty leans the
other way. Given what they know about the mixed motives of politicians, and
about the unintended consequences of even the best-intentioned of policies,
they would be mad to suspend their disbelief. If this is the counsel of
cynicism, so be it.
--
Nick
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What Microsoft's CEO should do
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 09:43:42 +0200
>> You're not understanding. It doesn't matter if it ran in ring 0 or not,
>> if the GUI crashes, so does the OS, even if it's not running in ring 0.
>
> No it does not. In Solaris there are the ring levels. To some its
> called Supervisory state. David Cutler got fired over resistance to move
> user into kernel space. If the two were in different rings... no way
> would a crashing GUI crash the kernel space... you're supposed to rely
> on the processor hardware to keep it kosher. Even VMS VAX processors
> did the same thing. I've only seen Xsun crash once and all it did was
> leave you with the console in a corner so that you could restart the X
> server again. The os stays intact.
>
I´m not so sure about the "no way". Depending on the design of the whole
stuff, the kernel could be written so braindead that it would rely on a
working GUI.
But there are differences in the Rings: Ring0 (the kernel-ring) is allowed
to do *anything*, that is, execute every processor - instruction without
any restrictions. Ring3 is not allowed to do certain instructions, for
eample stopping interrupts, doing i/o, stuff like that. It has to rely for
such things on the other rings. The rings 1 and 2 are allowed more than 3,
but less than 0, but are not used often in todays OSs. The idea behind this
stuff is to isolate the code from the machine, so only trusted services are
allowed to do certain things. If you move a lot of graphics-device stuff
into ring0, you must be quite sure that you´ve written good code, otherwise
there will be lots of problems.
Peter
--
The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably
the day they start making vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Condon)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts
getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!)
Date: 7 Jun 2001 09:15:52 GMT
Stephen Edwards wrote:
>Seven rabid koala bears with eucalyptus spittle dribbling from their
>mouths told me that [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Condon) wrote
>in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>Stephen Edwards wrote:
>>
>>>No, I'm a proud Yank. And the very notion that
>>>a person should not be proud of his or her nation
>>>is absurd. Everyone should be proud of their
>>>heritage, and their home.
>>
>>Why? It's just where you born. It's not like you achieved anything. Your
>>parents fucked, and out you popped. It could have been anywhere. So just
>>keep that image in mind, next time you feel patriotic, just visualise
>>your father hunched over your mother. Which is all it comes down to,
>>really.
>
>Remember that, when the Chinese police
>are knocking at your door, and intend to
>take you away for questioning.
>
>Again, spoken like a true communist.
You don't think the Chinese are patriotic? Patriotism is huge over there,
haven't you noticed how easily their national pride is dented? Didn't you
see all that stuff about the spy-plane?
--
Nick
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Pidcock)
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 09:16:31 GMT
On 07 Jun 2001 01:54:12 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
wrote:
>On Thu, 7 Jun 2001 01:18:00 +0200, Ayende Rahien <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> "drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> On 6 Jun 2001 13:02:52 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>>> ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (quux111)) wrote:
>>>
>>> >drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
>>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>>> >
>>> >> On Tue, 5 Jun 2001 15:09:28 +0800, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
>>> >> ("wang yin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>>There is no need to compare Linux with Win2K. Linux's aim should be
>>> >>>beat all Unix!
>>> >>
>>> >> Why would it want to do that?
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >Why, because...
>>> >
>>> >...all your base are belong to us! (Badoom-cha!)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Sorry. I couldn't resist.
>>>
>>> I've heard that before a few times. What does it actually mean?
>>
>> No idea, but it seems to consist a large precentage of /. posts.
>>
>>
>Um I don't know for certain .... but it could refer to that popular
>game Command and Conquer, and what you say after you've anhilated your
>opponent on a network game :)
>
>Not that I'm sure, you understand!
It's a quote from an old Sega Genesis game. There are several bad
translations as well as AYBABTU:
"What you say?"
Can't remember the game name: websearch would show it up.
Dan
remove .hatespam to reply
------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts
getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!)
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 11:16:05 +0200
Stephen Edwards wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Seven rabid koala bears with eucalyptus spittle dribbling from their mouths
>>>
>>>No, I'm a proud Yank. And the very notion that
>>>a person should not be proud of his or her nation
>>>is absurd. Everyone should be proud of their
>>>heritage, and their home.
>>
>>You're right. Everyone should be proud of something which happened by
>>complete chance and they have no control over. Everyone should be
>>proud that by chance they live within a certain set of political
>>boundaries. That makes so much sense.
>
>*sigh*
>
>If this is the normal way of U.S. thinking, then I'm
>going to start learning how to speak Chinese, because
>they will kick our asses if we ever go to war.
>
>This spineless attitude of yours is pathetic. I love
>this country, because I live in it, and I've seen how
>great it can be. If I didn't like it here, I'd live
>somewhere else, and likely find admiration in that other
>place.
>
>I don't love the U.S. because "I was born here by chance".
>I love the U.S. because I've seen the alternatives, and
>they suck in comparison.
>
As you have noted here, there is a very big difference between blindly
"loving your country" and rationally supporting its ideals and way of life.
There can be no pride in the sense of personal achievement for being born in
a particular country, but you can well love your country for what it stands
for. It is also quite possible to be without pride or affection for your
country, while still being willing to stand up for it if push comes to
shove. I think a lot of people fall into this category in the US - if China
declares war on the US, they will join up to defend it, but they would not
support another Vietnam-style attempt at forcing American ideas of freedom
on others.
>Being an American is about achieving greatness, on your
>own, like in the old days, when people knew what they
>had.
Modern America is not like the old days. Modern American politics,
economics, business methods, foreign affairs, and national security are
against everything the founding fathers stood for. America was founded on
the ideals of personal freedom, and every person's right to make the best of
what they have. Modern America is far more ruled by greed and economic
power - personal freedom comes far too far down on the list of priorities,
despite all claims otherwise.
>If you think that there's no reason to love the
>US, then I'd suggest that you go and live in China for
>a few years, and then we'll see what you have to say.
>
China and the US are not some sort of black and white opposites, you know.
If you cannot see that each country has some advantages and some
disadvantages compared to the other, then you do not know enough about the
countries to be qualified to discuss them (in the interests of freedom of
speech, you are free to continue unqualified discussion, but people are less
likely to listen to you).
>If you don't understand that, then you are a spineless
>coward.
People will continue to mock you as long as you make this ridiculous
assosiation that those who do not claim pride or love for their country are
cowards.
------------------------------
From: "Mafoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 10:38:38 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
[snip rest of sig]
Yeah, that's all very well, but it is considered polite to have a
reasonably short sig, ie one which is not over a page long.
Please shorten it, or the penguins will get you.
--
Matthew Slowe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What Microsoft's CEO should do
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 11:01:51 +0100
GreyCloud wrote:
>
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > > > Why? What is the reason for this decision?
> > >
> > > Speed.
> >
> > How making the OS crash if the GDI crash (even in it's in user mode) cause
> > speed increase?
>
> By putting the GDI in ring 0 with the kernel. A really bad idea, and
> David Cutler squawked like hell and got fired over it.
Interesting. David Cutler seems like a smart guy (if the stories are
true) - the write code without error kind of guy. Also he was previously
from Digital working on VMS. Why on earth did he sanction this ? Does
anyone know ? I know that his whole attitude was based on making NT
reliable and cutting the historic crap - and making the programmers "eat
their own dog food". What went wrong ?
btw: as an interesting aside - I read that they had some really
difficulties in getting a decent efficient graphics system, and who did
they call ? The great Mike Abrash - and he sorted out their problems in
record time with his unique powerhouse programming and radically
improved the speed of the rendering system.
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What Microsoft's CEO should do
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 11:03:18 +0100
GreyCloud wrote:
>
> I'd highly doubt this very much on your last statement here. That is
> why intel made these processors like this in the first place. That is
> why Linux is quite stable in regards to isolation from the graphics
> interface. I guess Dave Cutler knew what he was talking about when he
> originally wrote NT. (Keep the kernel in ring 0 and the rest in the
> other rings.)
I 100% agree!
The plot thickens - so why did he change ?
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What Microsoft's CEO should do
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 11:09:10 +0100
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9fnaic$2t9b$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > I'd highly doubt this very much on your last statement here. That is
> > > why intel made these processors like this in the first place. That is
> > > why Linux is quite stable in regards to isolation from the graphics
> > > interface. I guess Dave Cutler knew what he was talking about when he
> > > originally wrote NT. (Keep the kernel in ring 0 and the rest in the
> > > other rings.)
> >
> > It's not "my" statement per se, it was written by the authors of Inside
> > Windows 2000.
> >
> > Also, on ring levels, I believe NT only uses 2 of the available ring
> levels.
> > Anyone?
>
> Yes, that's true. The reaons is that many processors only have two levels,
> user and superviser, so NT was designed to conform to only two levels to
> keep driver changes to a minimum on different platforms.
Also Linux only uses 2 ring levels I think. This is quite strange as
originally I would think that Linus would have used EVERY specific
function available. Maybe this was a simplification to get things
working quickly.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
