Linux-Advocacy Digest #203
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203, Volume #35 Wed, 13 Jun 01 19:13:04 EDT Contents: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags (Edward Rosten) Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Re: Here's a switch for a change (GreyCloud) Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?) (Mark) Re: Dennis Ritchie -- He Created Unix, But Now Uses Microsoft Windows (GreyCloud) Re: What Microsoft's CEO should do (Mark) Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed (GreyCloud) Re: Desktop Linux (Colin Day) Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals (Sky King) Re: Microsoft Security Bulletin MS01-032 : SQL Query Method Enables (GreyCloud) Re: Windows makes good coasters (Mark) Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (Edward Rosten) Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linuxstarts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!) (Mark) Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux startsgetting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!) (Mark) Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Edward Rosten) Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (Stephen Fuld) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are no threat to heterosexuals Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2001 23:33:33 +0100 Aaron R. Kulkis wrote: Jet wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Aaron R. Kulkis wrote: mlw 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 Normally I would not even touch such a string of posts. What two adults do in privacy is no ones business. Who gives a flying fl^%k what two people do together? Seriously what does it matter? When two adults spread communicable diseases like Hepatitis and Tuberculosis, it is a matter of PUBLIC HEALTH and is EVERYBODY's business. EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT THE FUCK SEXUALITY HAS TO DO WITH T.B.? AND I WANT TO SEE A CAUSAL CORRELATION HERE. Let me explain something to you. Aaron is what I call a bitter boy. I believe bitter boys are that way because they can't get laid. (Aaron had to buy a mail order bride.) Really? Who did I pay? Was it an auction, like in the old slave days? Or was she stored in a warehouse? What kind of package was she delivered in? Were there any lavatory facilities inside the package, or are you alleging that the US Post Office made some woman sit in her own waste for several weeks? Be precise jet...because accuracy counts. It also seems they tend to hate people they view as getting sex when they are not, such as gay men and blacks. I like SANE people. Most black people I know are sane (unlike you). Gays are suicidal, which is not sane. Look how irrational he is! He wants to make what gays do everybody's business because of AIDS, but doesn't seem to care about diseases spread mainly by heterosexual contact. which DEADLY, INCURABLE diseases are spread by heterosexual contact? Well AIDS is a good start... -- http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club -- From: Edward Rosten [EMAIL PROTECTED] Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy Subject: Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 00:30:52 +0100 It is in some ways. Print is much easier to read than a computer screen due having a much higher resoulution and contrast. Also, the print quailty from an expensive book is liable to be much higher than the print quality you could get out of any printer you are likely to be able to afford / have room for. How right you are! I used up four black print cartridges to print out the Solaris 8 System Administration Manuals. My cost was about $150. Each was about 700 pages and there were three manuals. Plus
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203, Volume #34Sat, 5 May 01 01:13:04 EDT Contents: Re: Linux has one chance left. (Gary Hallock) Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie (Rik van Riel) Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie (Craig Kelley) Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie (Craig Kelley) Re: IE (T. Max Devlin) Re: Bill Hudson admits that he, Dave Casey, V-man and Redc1c4 are liars. (T. Max Devlin) Re: Just how commercially viable is OSS?... (Was Re: Interesting MS (Aaron R. Kulkis) Re: Why is Microsoft opening more Windows source code? (Craig Kelley) Re: Apple is doing a good thing (.) Re: Linus responds... (tx.rd@) Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie (David Steinberg) Re: Apple is doing a good thing (Erik Funkenbusch) From: Gary Hallock [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left. Date: Fri, 04 May 2001 23:33:15 + In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So did I get your shared library question somewhat correct? Only somewhat. See my reply. And you never mentioned what bad things would happen (or more accurately, what good things will not happen) if you try what you suggested with C++ code. And as for my real name, you are correct. IMHO only an idiot would use her real name in a advocacy group. Only a moron would brag about his accomplishments and then refuse to provide any evidence. Gary -- From: Rik van Riel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie Date: Sat, 5 May 2001 00:17:38 -0300 Ketil Z Malde wrote: I must admit I don't see why there's so much commotion over this. Mundie says Microsoft won't survive by publishing its source under GPL (and equally BSD or any other free license). So, what else is new? Okay, so he's trying to slant it so that the whole sharing thing becomes anti-commercial, anti-capitalist and un-american. *Shrug*. Lots of big corporations think otherwise. Mundy Freedom just isn't the American Way(tm) -- Rik -- Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose... http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ Send all your spam to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (spam digging piggy) -- From: Craig Kelley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie Date: 04 May 2001 21:58:11 -0600 Erik Funkenbusch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Craig Kelley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Erik Funkenbusch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Adam Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... http://www2.usermagnet.com/cox/index.html 'nuff said. Not really. I think Alan made a critical error in mentioning the internet. The Internet was funded by the government, and all of it's development and code was made available as either public domain or business friendly licensing (such as the BSDL). But imagine what it would look like if Microsoft developed it (or any other commercial softare company). You don't need to imagine; just remember the old MSN that Microsoft used before they went to TCP/IP. It was horrible. You, and most other people are confusing GPL and Open Source. Mundies comments are particularly against the GPL, not Open Source. While MS made comments about Open Source having a difficult business model to sustain, its primary beef was with the GPL. Notice that they are only questioning the business model of Open Source, but are attacking the GPL's effect on business directly. Don't make the mistake of trying to claim MS is against Open Source. They could care less if someone gives their code away. What they care about is that the GPL prevents businesses from taking advantage of code paid for by taxpayer dollars. No, I'm not confusing anything. You're trying to back-peddle on your claim that proprietary intellectual property was the *real* motivating force behind the internet. I agree 100% with your statements above, but that is not what I was addressing. In fact, most of the Internet pioneers only did so because they could make money off selling their proprietary implemenations (DEC, Sun, IBM, etc..). If the original Internet code had been released GPL, we'd probably all be running DECNET or something similar today. What's your reasoning behind this? The only internet I remember is the one where everyone was trying to be BSD-compatible in their TCP stack. The original internet wasn't even developed on Unix. My point is that, if the government had released the original DARPANET code under a license like the GPL, companies like DEC, IBM, and Sun would have never adopted it. Code != Protocol Many (all?) TCP/IP stacks were developed to be BSD-compliant. The internet wasn't developed on UNIX, but UNIX made it what it is today
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203, Volume #33 Fri, 30 Mar 01 23:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux needs a standard, user proof distro ("green")
Re: Linux needs a standard, user proof distro ("green")
Re: Stress Co-operation, not Hateful Competition (Wodger)
Re: ATTN: Outlook Express Users and Virus's (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Fun With Parallel Ports. (Bloody Viking)
Re: Earn some money with Linux ("Benjamin Lvovsky")
Re: Communism (redc1c4)
Re: Why does Open Source exist, and what way is it developing? (Jasper)
Re: My take on GPLed code as free software (was: Richard Stallman (Austin Ziegler)
Re: ATA standards ("Paolo Ciambotti")
LINUX informational page (MerefBast)
Re: Earn some money with Linux (Wodger)
Re: All your PCI slot are belong to Microsoft. ("Paolo Ciambotti")
Re: MS patents ones and zeros... (GreyCloud)
Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure ("Chad Myers")
Re: Earn some money with Linux (GreyCloud)
Re: German armed forces ban MS software gloat! (Michael Vester)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (David Kankiewicz)
Re: Microsoft has gone insane (Carbon)
From: "green" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux needs a standard, user proof distro
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 12:13:27 +1000
Ok thanks.
"Matthew Gardiner" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Sorry, I don't have any stats on me, however, when I was running KDE 1.1.2
and
Xfree86 3.3.6, it was very slow, graphics was crappy. However, when I
upgraded
the x server and kde, it was more responsive, stable and the graphics was
clearer and smooth.
Matthew Gardiner
green wrote:
- A GUI that's feels lighter and faster.
Well, as long as you have the latest version (Xfree 4.03) installed,
both
GUI's are very light. The first version of KDE was mega bloated,
slow,
and
used a tonne of memory, however, it has gradually matured into a
pretty
good desktop. Also, depending upon what distro you choose,
have you got any figures relating to kde 1.2.x and 2.x relating to
memory
usage, hard disk usage.
not because I don't beleve you. I just weighing up wether to upgrade or
not.
space and memory is limited and kde 1 and 2 may not exist together as
they
require diffrent versions of qt and the versions don't overlap. So it
would
be one way.
Thanks for any pointers. compiling for me is not a option. I don't have
the
space.
--
From: "green" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux needs a standard, user proof distro
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 12:16:49 +1000
I just wish the Mac people would port OSX to the PC and sell the OSX
separately.
In fact, that's my quiestion for the day: why don't they?
because that might invite microsoft to develop windows for the Mac :)
--
From: Wodger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Stress Co-operation, not Hateful Competition
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 12:18:54 +1000
"Adrian Pepper [MFCF]" wrote:
Okay, so I just saw on my boss' screen the picture of a giant Tux
squashing the Microsoft buildings like he was Godzilla.
I thought it looked pretty funny,
But realistically, there is no reason Linux can't and shouldn't be
touted as a complementary aid to Microsoft Windows use, as opposed to a
competive adversary.
I agree absolutely. I run a bunch of servers on my FreeBSD machine and
use windoze as a front end. There are simply many good end-user
applications available for windoze. OTOH I would rather not use it to
run Apache, Squid, PostgreSQL, DNS, SMB, NFS, etc.
--
From: Matthew Gardiner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ATTN: Outlook Express Users and Virus's
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2001 14:16:07 +1200
Use a valid email address to make yourselfa accountable for you posting.
Matthew Gardiner
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 16:59:49 +1200, Matthew Gardiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Very important news regarding outlook express:
http://www.satirewire.com/news/0103/outlook.shtml
Take it to a newsgroup that gives a flying fuck.
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Fun With Parallel Ports.
Date: 31 Mar 2001 02:22:43 GMT
green ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: lost that ability in win 95.
Allegedly, somewhere in a subdir of C:\WINDOWS you can find the QBASIC.EXE but
it's damn near an easter egg hidden in a dir for old DOS stuff.
I have no idea if you can multitask a QBASIC proggie with Winblows 95. I never
tried it. But I do know that you can multitask all you want on Linux, only so
long as you are even minimally creative. At worst, put the proggie on another
virtual terminal.
I only
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203, Volume #32 Thu, 15 Feb 01 04:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Interesting article (J Sloan)
Re: Interesting article ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Answer this if you can... (J Sloan)
Re: The Windows guy. (J Sloan)
Re: This is astonishing (MS/DRM/Hardware Control) ("Tom Wilson")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: This is astonishing (MS/DRM/Hardware Control) ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Windows ME doesn't BSOD on me ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windows XP! Will it really be reliable? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windows XP! Will it really be reliable? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows XP! Will it really be reliable? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windows ME doesn't BSOD on me (Donn Miller)
Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: KULKIS IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ("Edward Rosten")
Re: The Windows guy. (Donn Miller)
Re: The Windows guy. ("Erik Funkenbusch")
From: J Sloan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 07:10:51 GMT
Mike Byrns wrote:
"Charlie Ebert" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
With 250,000 developers working on Linux world wide, it
has become humankinds largest software project ever.
It certaintly has to be within the top 30 projects of
all mankind.
I grow weary of having to ask over and over for a SOURCE for these fantastic
numbers you linux folks seem to pull from thin air.
Sorry to hear of your woes!
Look into it if it's bothering you, and get it cleared up.
jjs
--
From: "Les Mikesell" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 07:13:38 GMT
"Mike Byrns" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:kCAi6.125230$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
"Les Mikesell" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:mY6i6.71632$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Microsoft implementations are done according professional rules as
far
as programmer salaries go, but not as far as good programming
practices
go, therefore they do not deserve the "professional" appellation.
You have no idea what the programming practices are at Microsoft any
you've
never seen the code so you have not grounds to judge.
That's the point. We can tell the code is broken by the fact that the
machines
crash and the event logs fill with nonsense like:
"The World Wide Web Publishing Service terminated unexpectedly.
It has done this 454 time(s). The following corrective action will
be
taken in 6 milliseconds: Restart the service.
Sorry Les. It doesn't ever say that. The IIS error strings are
documented
on MSDN. Go look em up.
It did say exactly that, or as close as I could retype it. The bizarre
event log viewing interface doesn't let you copy and paste and is
basically useless compared to a text file.
BTW, I don't consider Apache to be part of Linux any more than IIS is a
part
of Windows. It's another product. Where is your evidence and
documentation
of Windows NT code and failure?
Why do they charge extra for it as a part of win2k server vs. workstation
if it isn't part of the product? Why does a reinstall change core dll's?
Care to calculate how much of the time this box was off the air in the
half
a
day it took to accumulate that many restarts? If we could see the code
we
could tell what was wrong - or maybe fix it. This is a win2k, sp1 box
doing a little bit of xml/xsl processing, by the way, using the stock MS
dll for the job. And, of course the design of WLBS makes connections
keep coming to the box even though the service isn't accepting them.
And you didn't know IIS was having problems because?
I know it is having problems - it doesn't work a lot of the time. What
I don't know is what the problem is, given that it is all a stock
installation, or how to fix it. As you pointed out, there is no useful
documentation about the kind of error that happens in practice.
There are the alerter
and messenger services that must be setup for all production monitoring.
If
you didn't do that then don't complain.
I already know it is broken - why do I need extra things to tell me that?
Now
for something even stranger, installing the updated msxml3.dll in replace
mode seems to ma
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203, Volume #31Tue, 2 Jan 01 22:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: EXCLUSIVE: Hacker Steals Redhat Linux Source Code ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Nobody wants LoseDOS because it destroys hard disks. ("Kyle Jacobs")
Re: EXCLUSIVE: Hacker Steals Redhat Linux Source Code ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Microsoft is 20-years BEHIND other OS vendors ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge (Bob Hauck)
Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge (Bob Hauck)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (Bob Hauck)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (Bob Hauck)
Re: Is Bill Gates MAD?!?!? (Bob Hauck)
Re: linux price? (Bob Hauck)
Re: Linux vs Microsoft (Bob Hauck)
Re: Linux vs Microsoft (Bob Hauck)
Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: EXCLUSIVE: Hacker Steals Redhat Linux Source Code
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 21:27:32 -0500
Martin Eden wrote:
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
Martin Eden wrote:
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
goodbye, moron.
*PLONK*
Translation: Keldon Warlard realizes he's been outsmarted.
By someone who (by his own admission) can't get Windows to start up?
IF Windows crashes on boot up, that's not MY fault,
Considering that I am one of about three million consumers who doesn't have
this problem, I'd say the facts are on my side...I'd offer to help you but
you seem to be posting with it now. Glad you are enjoying the wonderful
world of Microsoft.
moron.
You seem upset 8*) That's good: it means I hit the nail on the head.
The only thing that upsets me is the fact that Windows is a piece of shit.
If that's your idead of good, then you have a real fucking problem.
I'd say you two are in a league of your own 8*)
Windows crappy behavior is universally recognized by all but a few
LYING zealots like yourself.
Wow! A zealot! A liar! Care to back up your random accusations with facts;
Your words speak for themselves.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
--
From: "Kyle Jacobs" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Nobody wants LoseDOS because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 02:29:37 GMT
Really?
Ok, tell my cmd interpreter that I'm lying.
"Aaron R. Kulkis" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Kyle Jacobs wrote:
Typing "help" under the console seems to bring up a list of commands.
liar
Running text mode apps helps too.
"Les Mikesell" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:Orf46.53155$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Where do I find documentation for all the new things that can be
done from the command line? The help system doesn't seem to
know anything about them.
NOTE: adding to the top of a post instead of the bottom leads to
post snipping.
"Kyle Jacobs" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:HXe46.115787$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Windows 2000: Professional w/Telnet service.
NOTE: Post snipping can lead to misinformation.
"Les Mikesell" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:ePe46.53150$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
"Kyle Jacobs" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:OTa46.115564$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Yea, 20 years too late.
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203, Volume #30 Mon, 13 Nov 00 00:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux in Critical Systems? ("Operator Jack")
Re: NT/2000 true multiuser? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: NT/2000 true multiuser? (Gary Hallock)
Re: Journaling FS Question (Was: Re: Of course, there is a down side...) ("Erik
Funkenbusch")
Re: NT/2000 true multiuser? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: NT/2000 true multiuser? (James E. Freedle II)
tv guide (Terry Porter)
Re: Journaling FS Question (Was: Re: Of course, there is a down side...) (spam)
Re: NT/2000 true multiuser? (James E. Freedle II)
Re: OS stability (sfcybear)
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Journaling FS Question (Was: Re: Of course, there is a down side...) (spam)
Re: OS stability (sfcybear)
Re: Disapointed in the election ("Mike")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Goldhammer)
From: "Operator Jack" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux in Critical Systems?
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 20:20:53 -0800
"Moderator" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
"S. W. Davison" wrote:
o US DOD weapons or combat support systems
They use Microsoft.
Actually, The US Navy is supposed to be implementing Linux to replace those
NT servers onboard ship that tend to just stop working (and stop the ship as
well).. At least I know there was a vender/consultant eval'ing different
linux's in Feb 2K
o US NASA ground control systems
Pretty sure they run some type of UNIX. Someone told me it was Linux,
but I'm not really sure.
Note that the author of some very popular linux network drivers
worked(works?) at NASA.. remember Beowulf, anyone?
o Medical equipment control
I think it's QNX.
Usually microOS, vxWorks, QNX, DOS, or some application embedded rather than
an OS.. MT/MU OS's not allowed ;)
--
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: NT/2000 true multiuser?
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 22:27:43 -0600
"Craig Kelley" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
"Erik Funkenbusch" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
"Craig Kelley" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Ammendment: It is capable of being a multiuser system, but you
need
to spend a bunch of money on add-on products to run any
off-the-shelf
software; and even then you have to be choosy about which
off-the-shelf software to run (ie, Office97 needs significant
tweaking
before it will run under the Terminal Server and other packages
just
won't work at all [like OmniPage, for instance]).
That's true for NT4 Terminal Server, not for Win2000. I've run
Win2k
WTS,
and have never needed a special version for any software for it. It
all
just works.
Even from an NT4 client? A Macintosh? A Linux machine?
Huh? The kind of client is irrelevant. The Win2k TS client works on
NT4,
9x, 2k, and CE devices. You can use the Citrix client for non-Windows
clients. Yes, that's an extra expense, but then that wasn't what you
originally said.
I said you needed to pay for extra software. How many connections to
you get with the Workstation? Server? I routinely have 5-10 people
logged into my workstation at work just for the fun of it. Can I do
the same with Windows 2000 workstation?
No, you said you needed to pay for "add ons". That's not the same as paying
for a version of the OS that supports what you want.
It costs money.
Indeed it does. But that's irrelevant to whether or not it's a builtin
feature of the OS.
And you still need to be picky about the software.
No, you don't.
I know for a fact that Omnipage Pro doesn't work and that Office 97
requires updates.
Omnipage Pro. You mean, the software that uses a scanner to create text
documents? How exactly are you planning on doing that remotely anyways? Of
course it's not going to work, since you would have to be local to operate
the scanner, and I know of no network scanners.
That's like complaining that CD-Writing software doesn't work (it may or may
not, I don't know). How are you going to put a CD-R in the drive if you're
not in the room?
--
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 23:27:07 -0500
From: Gary Hallock [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: NT/2000 true multiuser?
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
"Les Mikesell" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:GuJP5.19747$[EMAIL PROTECTED].
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203, Volume #29 Tue, 19 Sep 00 08:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT (J.C.)
Re: Never tell me again that Windows is easy to install!!! It's a lie! ("Ingemar
Lundin")
Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451800 (Sandman)
Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools) (Jason Bowen)
Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools) (Jason Bowen)
Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (J.C.)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 19 Sep 2000 21:14:36 +1100
On Tue, 19 Sep 2000 11:46:49 +0200, =?Windows-1252?Q?Paul_'Z'_Ewande=A9?=
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
"J.C." [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit dans le message news:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Windows users who use linux and like the Windows interface == fvwm95
install
Windows users who use linux and _don't_ like the Windows interface == _no_
fvwm install
Could it be any clearer?
Nope, but like many broad statements, it's bound to be false.
I sometimes used FreeBSD, and like the Windows interface and favored
WindowMaker, how do I fit in your little demographics ?
*J.C. shouts at slrn; no, he doesn't want to process anything with metamail*
*cough* *splutter*
You don't -- you're a FBSD user. I mentioned Linux. :-P
Seriously, I didn't say that windows users who use linux (or BSD in your case)
and _do_ like the windows interface _can't_ run WM; the point of my statement
was that you probably wouldn't be inclined _against_ using fvwm95. It just happens
that there is something you like more than the windows interface/fvwm95; WM in
your case.
(Was this not obvious?)
[snip]
--
J.C.
"The free flow of information along data highways being piped into our
homes and offices will permit unimaginable control by a small elite..."
-- 'The Thunder of Justice', pg. 264
--
From: "Ingemar Lundin" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Never tell me again that Windows is easy to install!!! It's a lie!
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 10:22:36 GMT
"Stuart Fox" [EMAIL PROTECTED] skrev i meddelandet
news:8q75ls$e0u$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Win2K took about 30 mins on a P-III 800, 256 MB, with 2 reboots. I guess
if
you can't count past 1, you might lose count...
pure BS Stuart ...Windows 2000 takes at least an hour to install...(1 hour
and 5 minutes to be exact, on my machine, p3 733, 256 MB, geforce gts,
sblive platinum)
/IL
--
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Global warming. (was Public v. Private Schools)
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 07:03:08 -0400
Alan Baker wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jason Bowen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bob Germer wrote:
On 09/18/2000 at 06:38 AM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen) said:
Except I didn't do that. I pointed to some facts and didn't make
claims
as fact. CFC's are man made and the CO2 level is verifiably higher
than
it has been in 600k years.
You claim the CO2 level is higher now that it was 600 years ago based on
experiments on artic ice. You claim that CO2 levels are higher in North
America when the facts prove they are in deficit!
You don't understand what is being discussed. North America as a
continent produces less CO2
than the plant life on it consumes. The rest of the world produces way
more than is consumed.
It is called the addtive property of numbers and perhaps and elementary
algebra class will help
you understand.
here you go Bobby 1st grader
placeoutput-co2used-co2
North america 56
Elsewhere10050
total10556
See how math works North America outputs 5 but uses 6
The rest of the world outpus 100 but use 50.
These aren't real numbers just done for illustration
You claim half of Canada is covered with an ice sheet. Another fiction.
Didn't say that, said in the past in one decade the ice sheet advanced
over it.
You've said this a lot of times now, and my bullshit meter is going wild.
Care to show a reference for this? Frankly, I suspect that you're
talking through your hat and that the rest of your "science" is no
better.
According to the Encylopedi
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203, Volume #28Thu, 3 Aug 00 10:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Is there such a thing as a free lunch? (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Apache wins, once again (sorry dresden) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux, easy to use? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.infosystems.gis,comp.infosystems.www.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Is there such a thing as a free lunch?
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 08:47:05 -0500
Christopher Browne wrote:
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Nathaniel Jay Lee would say:
Christopher Browne wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/
Rules of the Evil Overlord #142. "If I have children and subsequently
grandchildren, I will keep my three-year-old granddaughter near me at
all times. When the hero enters to kill me, I will ask him to first
explain to her why it is necessary to kill her beloved grandpa. When
the hero launches into an explanation of morality way over her head,
that will be her cue to pull the lever and send him into the pit of
crocodiles. After all, small children like crocodiles almost as much
as Evil Overlords and it's important to spend quality time with the
grandkids. http://www.eviloverlord.com/
Dude, I have got to ask:
Where do I get a full list of the "Rules of the Evil Overlord"? I love
every one of them that I've seen so far.
Did you, perchance, consider visiting the URL that I put at the bottom?
It _IS_ a real URL...
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html
Rules of the Evil Overlord #66. "My security keypad will actually be a
fingerprint scanner. Anyone who watches someone press a sequence of
buttons or dusts the pad for fingerprints then subsequently tries to
enter by repeating that sequence will trigger the alarm system."
http://www.eviloverlord.com/
WOOpsie! Brain fart.
Guess that'll teach me to post that late in the day. Sorry 'bout that.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
--
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Apache wins, once again (sorry dresden)
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:49:28 -0400
abraxas wrote:
http://www.securityspace.com/s_survey/data/man.27/weighted.html
Dresden? Any lies youd like to spew? Ridiculous claims youd like
to make?
Oh come on.
Cue Drestin "Daffy" Duck!
-yttrx
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "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"
J: Loren's 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
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
--
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:50:38 -0400
Andres Soolo wrote:
Aaron R. Kulkis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My Russian tutor was born in Tashkent, Azerbaizhan, attended
St. Petersburg State University, and stayed there until 1990.
[...]
"Who are these people? Who do they think they are? Nobody ever
heard of them."
It may as well be so. Most people in Russia don't even know anything
about the little nations like Yukagiris, Itelmenis, Maris, Kalmyks,
Bashkirians, Nenetzen--and yet all they do exist. (I'm sorry if I've
mistaken with the spelli
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203
Linux-Advocacy Digest #203, Volume #27 Tue, 20 Jun 00 07:13:03 EDT Contents: Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy? (John Wiltshire) Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy? (John Wiltshire) Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ? (mark) Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy? (JEDIDIAH) Re: Number of Linux Users ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Re: An Example of how not to benchmark ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Re: Number of Linux Users (JEDIDIAH) From: John Wiltshire [EMAIL PROTECTED] Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy Subject: Re: Claims of Windows supporting old applications are reflecting reality or fantasy? Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 10:22:57 GMT On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 23:52:01 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Wiltshire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... On Sun, 18 Jun 2000 09:23:28 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fair enough. Ignore my other reply to Colin then. Done. My impression is that Microsoft really didn't know what the hell it was going to build when it was working on NT, so it covered all bases. Legal bases as well, the varations of the promised user interfaces was a result of the not knowing what would happen in court in their case agains Apple. Makes sense. Some of the comments I have seen in this thread had me thinking that the silly season was here. Like Windows NT could not have had a interface based on Windows 3.x, because Windows 3.x was not yet out the same for the 486 and the devlopment of the 586 (Pentium). As well as the remaining comments against my positions and statements in this thread. Most of my statements in this thread are supported by documents provided by Microsoft itself. Not supported by the information available on-line from their web sites, rather supported by the hardcopy documents supplied by Microsoft at the time of the development of Windows NT. Website documentation can be altered to creativly modify history remove references to promises not delivered, but the hardcopy documentation is as good as being set in stone. A copy of the book "Inside Windows NT" published by Microsoft Press that was provided as a handout during a Microsoft Wndows devlopers seminar. The seminar took place before the release of Windows NT. We were instructed to develop software for Windows NT on Windows 3.1 hosts using the wins32 addon, so that our software could be available when NT is released. How could this be possible if Windows 3.1 was not yet available until aftr Windows NT? The book cites the 80386 and the 80486 as existing platforms. Other hand outs cited the future of Windows with the 586 How if the 486 was not yet out and the 80586 was not yet being planned? I said that the development of NT was started before Windows 3.x was release (read my post again). I have read "Inside Windows NT" (both first and second editions) many times and know what is in there. The facts are: i) NT development was started in 1986/87. ii) Windows 2.x had not been released until November 1987. iii) The 486 was released in 1987, not in widespread use until 88/89. Now, I stated: "As the NT design was started *before* Windows 3.x, it is hard to imagine how a Win3.x shell was going to be part of it.", whereas you stated "There was going the be a Windows 3.x windowing system...". You are clearly wrong. NT 3.1 was released in September 1993. By this time a lot had changed, including Windows 3.1 being released, Win32s being developed and many other things. I've still got the betas of NT3.1 and the original SDK and 32 bit compiler. The book and the handout promise support for ALL windows programs. The book limits the suppor for Dos programs to those that do not need direct hardware access. BUT, a handout that more current that the book, (titled "Providing hardware access to MSDOS programs under VDM") outlined methods that HAD BEEN implemented to permit Dos programs that need direct hardware access to run on Windows NT, providing that it is implemented on computer with the particular hardware actually present. This was supplemental to the virtual hardware access that is provide for some feature today by VDM today. Read the DDK - it is available on the web. It is possible (still) to emulate any hardware you like in the VDM. You just seem to think it is Microsoft's responsibility to do this and not the hardware/application vendors. I see no reason for this. If you'd ever written an NT device driver you would understand the absurdity of VDM programs writing directly to hardware. Also, I'd like you to tell me the page in Helen Custer's book that promises support for ALL windows programs (including those with cu
