Linux-Advocacy Digest #33, Volume #35 Thu, 7 Jun 01 17:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: XP - what's for me? (Peter Hayes)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (Bob Hauck)
Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Silly Gnome DNS lookups (Nigel Feltham)
Re: Windows advocate of the year. (Bob Hauck)
Re: Win 9x is horrid (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Windows advocate of the year. (Michael Vester)
Re: Laugh, it's hilarious. ("Robo210")
Re: Windows XP Ushers in New Era of Communications ("Christopher L. Estep")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Richard Fisher)
Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!! (Nigel Feltham)
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (Rick)
Re: MS at it again (Shane Phelps)
Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (pip)
Re: The Return of Microsoft (Peter Hayes)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (Richard Fisher)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: XP - what's for me?
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 20:58:33 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 6 Jun 2001 03:22:18 -0500, "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > The largest thing inside MS's XP is it's software
> > piracy prevention, detection and reporting features.
>
> As per charlies typical tricks, he doesn't clarify what he means by "XP".
> Is it Windows XP? Office XP?
Doesn't really matter, XP in all it's manifestations equates to spyware.
> > Your paying $300 + dollars for an upgrade so that
> > MS can spy on you. Sell your name on a list of
> > software pirates to be prosecuted by attorneys.
> > Interfere in your everyday privacy.
>
> He says this without even understanding that XP's activation doesn't require
> a name to be used at all.
As soon as you go on the net and start registering with Microsoft, they'll
know that "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> has machine xyz123 with
configuration abc456. That's you ID'd whenever you use that machine on the
net.
And when IE7 comes out with the new XP APIs that are needed to visit 99% of
sites, (for an "even more satisfying Web experience") that's you (and the
rest of the computer/internet using world) hooked. No IE7? No browsing. And
of course your digital DNA follows you from site to site.
AThen there's the MS/AOL XP deal (?) which'll ensure vast sales of XP to the
lemmings, should it happen. If it doesn't, something else will take its
place.
No thanks, I'd rather go without.
<snip carping>
> > Should it be legal for MS to force all users
> > of Windows to submit to inhouse spying even
> > if it is in their EULA and they agreed?
>
> Nobody is spied upon. The question is irrelevant because it's not true.
Don't you recall the recent discussion in this very forum about the c'bit
article which pointed out that the authentication procedure involved far
more data transmitted to Microsoft than was necessary merely to send a hash
number describing your machine?
<...>
The move to outlaw Microsoft OS's and products from commercial and
governmental organisations is well under way.
"Hackers" acquiring Microsoft source code, NSA keys found in Microsoft
products, and now XP's requirement to report home is only part of a mounting
litany of flaws in Microsoft products which will eventually see the
company's demise.
Shame really, Win2k isn't bad, at least it hasn't crashed on me yet, unlike
that monstrosity, "ME". XP is probably better (it should be considering the
hardware requirements), but Microsoft's business ethics let it down.
> > Do you believe foreign powers such as China
> > will eventually outlaw all Mircrosoft
> > products from their country to prevent
> > the US and Microsoft from dominating
> > the internet and making the world
> > an American's only club?
>
> It wouldn't be much of an internet if each country cuts themselves off from
> the rest of the world, now would it?
The only country to be ostracised will be the US of A as a result of their
love affair with Microsoft. Everyone else can carry on as normal.
Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 20:13:03 GMT
On Thu, 07 Jun 2001 20:02:44 GMT, Christopher L. Estep
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Also, merely enabling CD-R/RW support in Linux requires making changes to
> your kernel. I know of *no* distribrution that enables SCSI emulation
> (which all Linux CD-R/RW programs require) by default.
Caldera has it all set up to work via a loadable module. I use scsi
emulation to run my IDE tape drive. I did not have to recompile my
kernel to do so.
The only reason there is no DVD support on Linux is that nobody is
selling it, nothing to do with the OS itself. It is apparently
impossible to make an open-source player without getting sued.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 20:14:06 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, drsquare
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 25 May 2001 20:56:53 +0100
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Fri, 25 May 2001 05:05:13 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> (Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
>>Ayende Rahien wrote:
>>
>>> Windows does it via RPC and it's called Terminal Services, which
>>> is a little like X.
(Pedant point: the X Windows Protocol does not use RPC.)
>
>>XFree86 runs on Windows as well:
>>
>>http://xfree86.cygwin.com/.
>
>Oh, on CYGWIN. And that works REALLY well and installs PERFECTLY
>doesn't it?
It installs and works perfectly well, but is extremely limited.
No Win32 program will work with it as it is an X server, and
it opens its own one big window with the characteristic X
background tinythatch-weaving, as opposed to trying to seamlessly
integrating with the GUI. The NT version of Java will scarcely
recognize it, AFAIK. (Now that would be interesting, but that
would make NT Java even bigger than it is now.)
It's useful if other systems are running X clients, such as
Solaris and Linux boxes, and it can run the usual odd assortment
of local X clients, such as oclock. It even has twm -- blecch --
and xterm (which behaves slightly oddly under Win2k, as though
it wanted ANSI.SYS, for some reason.)
I'm an avid user of the X Window System, so I happen to like it.
But it's definitely not for everyone, and certainly not for the
complete NT/Win2k-only Windows novice. The installation alone
takes a little work, mostly ensuring that files are copied to
the right place -- it's not "click, click, click and go".
But the instructions are quite readable.
I'll have to see if I can improve it some; one problem is that
I only have a very old Win95 machine at home and am not sure whether
any code contributions I make will be compatible with their code base.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 38d:08h:00m actually running Linux.
Microsoft. When it absolutely, positively has to act weird.
------------------------------
From: Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Silly Gnome DNS lookups
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 21:41:43 -0400
Mart van de Wege wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Donal K. Fellows"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Richard Thrippleton wrote:
>>> Now it is curious as to _why_ there's a DNS lookup needed.
>>> Anybody
>>> here got any ideas? Suppose you could try looking in the source code.
>>
>> <guessing> Something to do with CORBA?
>>
>> Donal.
> Yep. The process is called gnome-name-server. You can see it advertises
> CORBA services whenever you start up a Gnome app. Check your syslog for
> details.
> However, his system is still misconfigured, as my system doesn't seem to
> do DNS lookups over the internet. My guess is that it indeed has to do
> with a possibly misconfigured /etc/hosts or /etc/resolv.conf
>
One thing to try is running 'netconf', select 'name server specification'
and make sure 'DNS is required for normal operation' is not ticked - this
should give up looking for DNS quicker if not found (and not look for it
when starting a second application).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Windows advocate of the year.
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 20:27:30 GMT
On Thu, 07 Jun 2001 00:36:14 -0600, Robert Morelli
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> People in advocacy groups sometimes mistake mental illness for a
> lack of intelligence. The bizarre behvior of some advocates is very
> clearly a result of psychiatric problems.
Oh, sure, some of them clearly need help. Others just spout nonsense.
I don't think all of the nonsense-spouters are mentally ill, some of
them just don't know what the hell they're talking about.
> Wasn't "Barkto" posting on something like a newsgroup?
Compuserve. That must have been something like eight years ago.
> A couple of years ago, the man who headed the shill division (whatever
> they called it) when Barkto was active gave an interview.
I must have missed that. Is it online?
> One reason I suspect "Funkenbusch" is that the name sounds a little
> contrived in the same way "Barkto" was. Don't you think "Funkenbusch"
> could be a modification of "Fuckin' Bullshit"? Microsoft humor?
Could be. Or it could just be a conspiracy theory of yours. There
doesn't seem to be much evidence either way.
I'm sure Microsoft does do some, "astroturfing". They've been busted at
least once (by the LA Times). OTOH, there isn't any evidence that any
particular poster in COLA is getting paid to be here and I think MS
could spend their astroturf budget more cost-effectively in non-advocacy
groups.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Win 9x is horrid
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 20:30:58 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Charlie Ebert
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sun, 13 May 2001 14:25:25 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Donn Miller wrote:
>>I've had some bad experiences with the latest Real Player on Win ME.
>>True, Real Player is garbage anyways, but still, here goes. Every time
>>I use Real Player on Win ME, it crashes right in the middle of a certain
>>clip. Every time I try to start Real Player after the crash, it fails
>>to start, unless I reboot. If I try to play the same clip, the whole
>>episode repeats itself. Apparently, it manages to violate a certain
>>part of application memory with the crash in the same exact location,
>>and I can't restart RP unless I reboot.
>>
>>I have RP 8 for Linux installed on my FreeBSD box. The thing looks ugly
>>as hell compared to the Windows version, and it won't do full screen.
>>But, hell, the thing is a Linux binary, running on FreeBSD, and not only
>>doesn't the thing crash, but it won't screw up my application memory
>>like it does under Windows.
>>
>>Pretty sad when I can run a Linux binary under FreeBSD, and it won't
>>even run under Windows. The moral of the story is: the programs look
>>ugly under FreeBSD and Linux, but at least they work, and they won't
>>fsck up the OS to boot.
>>
>>I could get slightly better performance under Windows, with full-screen
>>capability. None of that matters if you can't keep the app/OS running.
>>It wouldn't be so bad if I could just restart it, but it won't restart,
>>because obviously a part of the app is still lingering in memory, but it
>>isn't showing up when I do control+alt+delete, so I can't kill the app.
>>That brings up another point about Windows' suckiness: the job control
>>is horrid compared to unix systems. I'd be willing to bet that Win NT's
>>or 2000's job control isn't much better than 9X.
>>
>>Don't know 'bout you guys, but I won't be waiting for XP anytime soon.
>>Why wait when a superior OS is already here for free? The only strong
>>point of Windows is application availability, period.
>>
>>
>>-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
>>http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
>>-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
>
>Well,
>
>Windows 2000 is actually Windows 3.11 with a slightly improved desktop.
At the high GUI level, maybe. The kernel has been lifted from NT, and
supports multiuser/multiprocessor/multiprocess. Not that that means
all that much, as the GUI/DLL layer is the usual screwed-up mess,
contributing (IMO) to most of the system instability. Of course,
the dragging in of some of the graphics code into the kernel ring
doesn't help, either -- it's not clear how much that contributes to
various BSODs. Nor is it clear that the "desktop idea" has been
properly implemented to allow multiple users to log into a machine,
each with their own desktop (Linux has no problem with this, although
it's not clear how well the same user can run *two* window managers,
for different X servers).
So a *lot* of work has gone into Win2k, compared to Win3.11.
But one is reminded of George Jetson running on the pet walker;
it really doesn't seem to have advanced from the user's standpoint.
It sure looks nice and glitzy/kitschy, though.
>
>You are correct. Oh, and they added a few other applications....
Well, yeah, Win2k now has a variant of the DisKeeper defragmenter.
You'll pardon me if I don't get all hot and bothered. :-)
(Although it is a reasonably workable defragmenter.)
>
>That's about it.
>
>
>--
>Charlie
>-------
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 38d:09h:32m actually running Linux.
Be paranoid. Everyone else is.
------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows advocate of the year.
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 07:01:07 -0700
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > ><snip>
> > > I have extensively used many OS's.
> > >
> > > Windows
> > > Dos
> > > Amiga
> > > Mac
> > > OS/2
> > > BeOS
> > > QNX
> > > Various flavors of Unix
> > > VMS
> > > AS/400
> > > DOS/VSE
> > > VM
> > > MVS
> >
> > Then how come the Windows advocacy? You seem to have enough experience to
> > determine the difference between good and bad software.
>
> The difference between good and bad is not as black and white as you believe
> it to be.
>
> I have always been the first to admit that Windows isn't perfect, which is
> why I use FreeBSD for my server OS. My advocacy generally surrouds the fact
> that I don't believe it to be as bad as most of you say it is, and in fact
> is not.
>
> I also do not believe that Linux is perfect, and it has a long way to go to
> catch up to Windows in basic useability on the desktop.
Fair enough. Windows is ok on the desktop but I have seen failure after
failure when it comes to servers. W2K finally has features that were
native to Netware 10 years ago. Features like assigning how much disk
space a user can occupy. IIS is about the worst server application I have
ever seen. We host dynamic web sites on IIS and we are lucky to get 1
week of continuous operation. Our Solaris servers are much more heavily
utilized and they simply do not have any unscheduled downtime.
NT/W2K should only run one application per server. You need a separate
computer for file sharing, printing, DHCP, Exchange. Put more than one
application on a server, and you will have problems. Also, NT/W2K servers
should number about 1 for every 20 users. Push this limit and you will
never get uptimes longer than a week. So an office with 100 users should
have at least 5 servers. You can put file, printing, Exchange, DHCP and
RAS on the 5 servers (one app per server). If you add another application
like MS-SQL, you will need another server. You will need a spare server to
restore Exchange if a user has accidentally lost email. Exchange stores
all of its data in one gigantic file. You can't pick bits and pieces off a
tape. You have to run another Exchange server and pull the data out that
way. I learned about that "gotcha" the hard way.
How NT/W2K ever managed to pass its self off as a stable server platform
will continue to baffle me. Are we really that stupid as a species? Is
Microsoft the greatest marketing company ever? Even greater than the
tobacco companies?
W2K is better than NT. I use W2K everyday, mainly for corporate email and
terminal sessions. It only crashes once or twice a day. Not a BSOD but a
freeze. The OS could not even execute the code that displays the BSOD.
Running Outlook and CRT (Van Dyke) terminal sessions should not cause the
OS to freeze but it does. Of course, my workstation has been reformatted
and reinstalled twice with no improvement. This, of course, was performed
by a qualified MSCE. Now, I just put up with it and take a coffee break
while my computer reboots from a freeze.
My home Linux box is extremely reliable. I admit, the UI is a bit clunky
but I just need email and terminal sessions. Also, my home Linux box is
quite accessible from work without having to purchase and jury rig extra
software to do the job. And speaking of clunky UI's, I have original
release disks (5 1/4") of Windows 1.0. By the time Windows hit 3.1, the UI
was usable. It took Microsoft many years of working on just one UI to get
a workable one. Linux has over a dozen UI's to pick from and they are
making tremendous progress in usability. They don't have a long way to go
before they are superior to Microsoft's UI in every way.
Linux has finally surpassed Windows in ease of installation. All the
installs I have done with SuSE 7.1 have never failed to detect all the
hardware except a USB scanner. After everything is detected , installed
and configured; you reboot. Not the detect hardware, load driver, reboot,
detect hardware, load driver, reboot, detect hardware, load driver,
reboot, detect hardware, load driver, reboot,... Microsoft installation.
--
Michael Vester
A credible Linux advocate
"The avalanche has started, it is
too late for the pebbles to vote"
Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
------------------------------
From: "Robo210" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Laugh, it's hilarious.
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 16:25:29 -0400
Crossposted-To: alt.aol-sucks,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
With how bad AOL is, it should be considered a virus. :-))
Robo210
=====================================================================
"No eye has seen,
no ear has heard,
no mind has conceived
what God has prepared for those who love Him."
=====================================================================
------------------------------
From: "Christopher L. Estep" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows XP Ushers in New Era of Communications
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 20:33:16 GMT
"LShaping" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> It is interesting, but wgaf has no argument so he avoids the subject.
> What flavor of computer aided design is the same as a communications
> program? How about financial analysis? How about word processing?
> Can your braininess see a distinct difference between photo
> production/editing software and a communications program? Computing
> and communications are two distinct programs, clumped together by a
> company which is trashing modular design in order to destroy other
> businesses.
How is the use of broadband for communications a threat to you (unless you
own a lot of stock in long-distance companies or are employed by one)?
Or is that *exactly* why you don't want what Microsoft is doing to succeed?
IP telephony exists. Now. Large corporations have had it for years.
It is being deployed by smaller and smaller businesses every week.
Such programs have been available on the consumer level, but lacked the
throughput to be more than a novelty.
However, with the increase of broadband deployment (xDSL, cable, and two-way
satellite such as StarBand) and faster hardware, it is *desktop deployable*
on average desktops.
And the long-distance companies are rightfully worried.
Low-cost long distance calls are one thing.
*No-cost* long distance calls (with video) are too scary to contemplate.
Christopher L. Estep
------------------------------
From: Richard Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 21:33:56 +0100
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 actually originated on the online game planetarion - one rather
illiterate alliance called 'tpe' had it as their slogan.
------------------------------
From: Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: LINUX PRINTING SUCKS!!!!!!!!
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 22:08:42 -0400
drsquare wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Jun 2001 22:24:42 -0400, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> (Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
>>>>Sadly no, not because there is no Fosters, or because I can't
>>>>afford any Fosters .... I just don't like beer.
>>>
>>> What's there not to like about beer?
>>>
>>
>>I like beer but for some strange reason I get a bad headache and feel sick
>>after just 1 pint so I only drink spirits - I can drink at least 10
>>vodka&cokes in one evening with no problems.
>
> You're probably just gay or something.
>
I think it's more to do with the quality of lager in pubs around here - I
can drink the stuff in cans ok and don't get the same problem with most
bitter type beers either - I prefer spirits though, I tend to change what I
drink regularly, I am on vodka and coke now but have also had nights of
only drinking jack daniels, napoleon brandy, malt whisky or bottles or
vodka or schapps based mixer drinks.
Life gets too boring if you drink the same thing all the time - same with
computers, why stick with one system - as well as windows & linux I also
use emulators for MacOS, Sinclair spectrum, BBC Micro, Amiga, N64, Sega
Megadrive / Genesis and several other computers, consoles & arcade machines.
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 16:58:44 -0400
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> >
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ray Fischer
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote
> > on Wed, 16 May 2001 22:30:16 GMT
> > <9duuvt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >Robert W Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>And where is your evidence that people have no choice over their homosexual
> > >>behavior?
> > >
> > >Yeah! You could choose to be interested in men so it's obvious that
> > >homosexuals could choose to be interested in women.
> > >
> > >Right?
> >
> > One could mimic such behavior to avoid detection; such has been done
> > in the past, as I understand it -- even to the point of a
> > loveless, or at least sexless, marriage.
> >
> > This no more makes the homosexual a het, anymore than a woolen overcoat
> > makes a wolf a sheep.
>
> What part of "IT's the BEHAVIOR(*)," do you not understand?????
>
> (*) not the desire
>
So, its the anal intercourse you dont like, or only if its between two
men?
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: Shane Phelps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS at it again
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2001 07:04:52 +1100
Ed Allen wrote:
>
> In article <3fET6.8767$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >>
> >> Just goes to show ya that MS does steal code after all.
> >> And hide it under the proprietary software guise.
> >
> >Patent infringement is *NOT* copyright infringement. Violating a patent
> >doesn't have anything to do with "stealing code".
> >
> How can a software patent infringement not involve code ?
>
> Erik, you need to think harder before you post.
>
> --
> Microsoft is trying to add to the list of biggest lies of all time:
> "Hi. I'm from Microsoft and I am here to protect you from the threat of
> the GPL."
I have to agree with Erik on this one. The code doesn't have to be even
remotely similar for patent infringement.
Patents are issued for ideas, copyright is issued for a particular published
expression of an idea.
For example, if the Dyson Sphere and derivitive concepts had been patended
(which is probably no more unlikely than some of the software patents around)
I could still infringe that patent without stealing large chunks of
Larry
Niven's "Ringworld" and infringing his copyright.
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 22:08:25 +0100
Rick wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> > >
> > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ray Fischer
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote
> > > on Wed, 16 May 2001 22:30:16 GMT
> > > <9duuvt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > >Robert W Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >>And where is your evidence that people have no choice over their homosexual
> > > >>behavior?
> > > >
> > > >Yeah! You could choose to be interested in men so it's obvious that
> > > >homosexuals could choose to be interested in women.
> > > >
> > > >Right?
> > >
> > > One could mimic such behavior to avoid detection; such has been done
> > > in the past, as I understand it -- even to the point of a
> > > loveless, or at least sexless, marriage.
> > >
> > > This no more makes the homosexual a het, anymore than a woolen overcoat
> > > makes a wolf a sheep.
> >
> > What part of "IT's the BEHAVIOR(*)," do you not understand?????
> >
> > (*) not the desire
> >
>
> So, its the anal intercourse you dont like, or only if its between two
> men?
Look, sorry Rick but it's all my fault. I said to Aaron "No, I'm just
not into that", but he insisted. No means no Aaron, and I'm sorry that
we had to get the animal protection unit involved. That is the real
reason that Aaron was arrested (not in CompUSA). OK, I know. Maybe
having the goat in the same room was just "asking for it" as he said -
but hell, I like goats. And now what do I see - all this attitude from
him. I just want to say "Look Aaron, you are still a real man in my eyes
- no need for all this mouthing off". I may even call you, but I don't
want your friend involved again. After all these days you have to be
careful. You have had you tests back right Aaron? Good news - phew.
Oh btw Aaron, when I said that I was an "Animal Lover" I think you
misinterpreted what I meant. But the Vet prescribed some cream and we
are assured that the swelling will go down. In any case DrSquare said he
would keep you company, so I don't know where all this attitude is
coming (pardon the pun) from.
And that .sig Aaron - it's *so* just not you. Marvin will fix you up
with a new "style". He is a very nice man. Just our type.
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Return of Microsoft
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 21:57:32 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 07 Jun 2001 06:13:11 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
wrote:
> I actually believe that MS will completely
> dominate the internet to the point that
> NO OTHER OS will be allowed to use it.
Not so much "allowed to" as "able to". XP API's specifically aimed at
"improving your Surfing experience" integrated into every web site and
requiring IE7 to view them will kill any other browser and OS.
Peter
------------------------------
From: Richard Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2001 21:57:12 +0100
>> It wouldn't let you do it.
>> Wouldn't even let you *print* it.
If the PDF can be decoded to be displayed on the screen, then you can do
whatever you want with it. There's no technical reason why you can't
print it or save it or anything. The only thing stopping you doing that
is the pdf reader you are using.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
