Linux-Advocacy Digest #574, Volume #26 Thu, 18 May 00 04:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (Michael Hofmann)
Re: Things Linux can't do! ("Evan DiBiase")
Re: Things Linux can't do! (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software (Adams Klaus-Georg)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software (Jim)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux ("Richard Gill")
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (Koos Pol)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (eyez)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (eyez)
Re: Top 10 Reasons to use Linux (Rob S. Wolfram)
Re: Microsoft finally gets the idea... almost (Rob S. Wolfram)
RE: Question ("Raul Valero")
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software (nohow)
RE: Your office and Linux. ("Raul Valero")
Re: Things Linux can't do! (Perry Pip)
RE: Bill is a weenie ("Raul Valero")
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software ("Erik Funkenbusch")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Hofmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 07:29:50 +0200
Foogar wrote:
>
> Something like an app that would randomly crash?
No need to develop it. Some of us got it running every day: Netscape.
------------------------------
From: "Evan DiBiase" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 02:19:12 -0400
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I don't know where they are developing this crap BUT, seems like
> everytime I call them on a WEB page,,, they read it,,, then they
> change their approach to something different.
What? I don't seem to recall you ever pointing me to a web page. Of course,
if you want to show me the post where you did, I'd be happy to read the page
and tell you what I think.
> If you ask me, I think these two are independants.
What? Political Independants? What are you talking about here?
-Evan
Very, very awake... which is a bad thing when one needs to get up in 3
hours.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Date: 18 May 2000 01:13:36 -0500
In article <8fvqq8$ij5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Yes, I was going to point this out too. Someone whose last
>> contact with Linux was an old Slackware or RedHat 4.1 would
>> be shocked to see a Mandrake 7.0 install.
>
>My last experience of a Mandrake 7.0 install was uncomfortable. They really
>need to work on their package selection UI.
I've been pretty happy with what happens with just the 'everything'
choice. The reason I like bundled distributions is that someone
has put a lot of work into pre-selecting what should be in it.
>> By contrast, installing
>> Win NT is still just as bad because the distribution hasn't
>> changed, the CD still doesn't boot, and you need a bigger service
>> pack add-on now.
>
>Er, NT CDs have been bootable since at *least* NT 4.0.
Oops, that's right. I was thinking of the last time I set up
an NT box which was to make a dual-boot 95/NT configuration
out of one that came pre-loaded with 95 OSR2. NT isn't
compatible with FAT32 so I had to delete the loaded 95
reformat to FAT16. It was the 95 CD that not only didn't
boot but didn't have a handy DOS with CD driver floppy
either. It was a very cumbersome set of steps to get this
configuration loaded with probably 20 reboots by the time I
got the service packs, IE updates, Netscape, and office
installed, but booting the NT CD wasn't the problem.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Adams Klaus-Georg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
Date: 18 May 2000 08:10:16 +0200
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Adams Klaus-Georg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > [...]
> > >
> > > Name a single non-consumable product that you can jump to a competor
> without
> > > a significant cost.
> >
> > You can exchange any NFS Server for any other for starters. Same with
> > SMTP Servers, same with DNS Servers. And until recently, any Kerberos
> > server.
>
> We're talking about complete products here. Such as moving from one OS to
> another OS.
The complete product when talking about NFS servers would be a
fileserver. I really don't see what problem you have with this
definition. And btw, I meant moving from one Server OS to another.
If you see today that your NFS server running under Linux Intel does
not have adequate performance, you go buy a Solaris|AIX|SGI|OS/390... box,
copy the files from the Linux server to the new box, switch DNS
entries and you're done. Granted you have to buy the big server, but
this is not significant cost. Significant cost is if you have to
change all of your 15000 clients.
The exact same thing applies to your SMTP, DNS, HTTP and Kerberos
servers. The brand of the OS which runs the thing is not
important. Standard compliance is.
--
MfG, Klaus-Georg Adams
------------------------------
From: Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
Date: 18 May 2000 02:36:09 EDT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Adams Klaus-Georg
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Adams Klaus-Georg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > Name a single non-consumable product that you can jump to a
> > > > competor
> > without
> > > > a significant cost.
> > >
> > > You can exchange any NFS Server for any other for starters. Same with
> > > SMTP Servers, same with DNS Servers. And until recently, any Kerberos
> > > server.
> >
> > We're talking about complete products here. Such as moving from one OS
> > to
> > another OS.
>
> The complete product when talking about NFS servers would be a
> fileserver. I really don't see what problem you have with this
> definition. And btw, I meant moving from one Server OS to another.
>
> If you see today that your NFS server running under Linux Intel does
> not have adequate performance, you go buy a Solaris|AIX|SGI|OS/390...
> box,
> copy the files from the Linux server to the new box, switch DNS
> entries and you're done. Granted you have to buy the big server, but
> this is not significant cost. Significant cost is if you have to
> change all of your 15000 clients.
>
> The exact same thing applies to your SMTP, DNS, HTTP and Kerberos
> servers. The brand of the OS which runs the thing is not
> important. Standard compliance is.
Maybe Eric wants us to _accept_ that changing all of your 15000 clients
is good for America? (You know, what's good for M$ is good...)
--
Jim Naylor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Richard Gill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 08:10:25 +0200
No, too difficult !!
He and the university team would have to work 3 years at least to randomly
crash like Windows !
They should rewrite completly the kernel, what a stuff !!!!
:-)))
Foogar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit dans le message :
8fub69$71d$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Something like an app that would randomly crash? Windows could be
replaced
> by that!
>
> --
> ========================================
>
> to reply via email, send to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Mongoose" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> | I was thinking, maybe not just servers and stuff, but an application
> | that windows users have but linux doesn't. Something that would give
> | windows users more of an incentive to move to linux, or help them
> | migrate to linux.
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
Date: 18 May 2000 01:35:28 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> So what is the problem with doing this in the KDE desktop?
>
>KDE isn't free.
For sufficiently bizarre definitions of free.
>And GNOME is nowhere near fully-developed.
There is gnorpm which seems roughly the same as kpackage, but the KDE
filemanager starts kpackage in install mode when you click on
a *.rpm file. Gnorpm has an install mode but doesn't seem to
take filenames on the command line.
>Perhaps. I've never actively administered a RedHat system. Are all
>of RH's configuration tools proprietary or non-free?
I've seen the claim that they are all GPL'd. Didn't matter that
much to me - the iso is available for download so they are at
least free in the usual sense.
>If they were open source and portable between distros, I'd
>think they'd show up in Debian. (After all, Bonobo and friends have.)
I haven't touched Debian since my first experience with dselect in
1996 or so. I'm sure it has improved since then but I couldn't
deal with their attitude about how much better dpkg/dselect was
(when it didn't even work on a lot of systems) compared to rpm.
I'd be very surprised if that attitude every goes away to a
point where they would share rpm tools with RedHat.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Koos Pol)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
Date: 18 May 2000 06:20:59 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 17 May 2000 14:39:01 GMT, martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|
| How about an easy-to-use text editor ? (console, not GUI please :) ?
| One without a million complex commands, but with ability to select
| text with shift+arrow keys, like most dos/windows/os2-based editors
| do, F2 to save a file instead of Ctrl-x + Ctrl-s or something and
| those other features that are standard on other operating systems.
|
| Basically, a simple editor that doesn't need a 300-page tutorial.
| I can't find any of those in linux. Not for console anyway.
|
|
| --
| Martin
Oh yes you can! Try FTE. It does exactly all what you requested :-)
http://fte.sourceforge.net/
And it runs on Unix, Windows, OS/2,...
Koos Pol
======================================================================
S.C. Pol - Systems Administrator - Compuware Europe B.V. - Amsterdam
T:+31 20 3116122 F:+31 20 3116200 E:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Check my email address when you hit "Reply".
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (eyez)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 06:53:16 GMT
quoting <Leslie Mikesell>:
>I haven't touched Debian since my first experience with dselect in
>1996 or so. I'm sure it has improved since then but I couldn't
>deal with their attitude about how much better dpkg/dselect was
>(when it didn't even work on a lot of systems) compared to rpm.
>I'd be very surprised if that attitude every goes away to a
>point where they would share rpm tools with RedHat.
>From my experience with debian, dpkg/dselect/apt *IS* better than rpm.
The biggest problem with rpm's on debian is that the dependency databases
for rpm as compared to the dpkg/apt ones are completely incompatible.
however, debian's distributions do currently contain the 'rpm' program as
well as 'alien', so you can convert an rpm to a .deb... debian has strived
to make the dpkg system work completely, in such a way that debian's
children (stormlinux, corel, libranet, et cetera) are all fully compatible
with debian. Any of these systems could be updated to debian with little
effort through the apt-system, and That would work reversely. Also, apt
could check each of the mirror sites for each of these distributions, and
update packages from all of them just as effortlessly. (Don't argue with me, I
had a concurrent debian-Woody/StormLinux-Rain system for a while). That's a
level of consistency that RedHat with it's SuSE/Mandrake/Caldera spawns can't
compete.
I've had to install some rpm packages on my debian system before, and it's
not hard to do, but it annoys me just the same that nobody ELSE supports
any package format but rpm.
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Rando Christensen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<perception is reality>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (eyez)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 06:58:42 GMT
quoting <Koos Pol>:
>On Wed, 17 May 2000 14:39:01 GMT, martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>|
>| How about an easy-to-use text editor ? (console, not GUI please :) ?
>| One without a million complex commands, but with ability to select
>| text with shift+arrow keys, like most dos/windows/os2-based editors
>| do, F2 to save a file instead of Ctrl-x + Ctrl-s or something and
>| those other features that are standard on other operating systems.
>|
>| Basically, a simple editor that doesn't need a 300-page tutorial.
>| I can't find any of those in linux. Not for console anyway.
>|
>|
>| --
>| Martin
>
>
>Oh yes you can! Try FTE. It does exactly all what you requested :-)
>http://fte.sourceforge.net/
Fte is truly a Wonderful editor, and by far my favorite for programming use
in linux. (Hey, I never thought i'd say it, but color-coding things CAN
come in handy! ;)
Joking aside, it's a wonderful tool for programming, and plain editing. i
have my VISUAL environment variable set to it, and do much of my editing
with it, Though my quick-n-dirty(TM) edits are done in Vim.
>
>And it runs on Unix, Windows, OS/2,...
>
>Koos Pol
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>S.C. Pol - Systems Administrator - Compuware Europe B.V. - Amsterdam
>T:+31 20 3116122 F:+31 20 3116200 E:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>Check my email address when you hit "Reply".
--
Rando Christensen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<perception is reality>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob S. Wolfram)
Subject: Re: Top 10 Reasons to use Linux
Date: 18 May 2000 06:42:38 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Full Name <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>10. You can't afford a real Unix system such as Solaris.
I can't even afford Windows 3.1. I'm so poor, I'm looking for food in
garbage cans.
>9. You have no friends and no life, so spending all day building
>kernels is actually a step up.
What are friends? Oh, you mean that kid in Kindergarten that came
playing at my home once?
And about recumpiling (courtesy Stoney Edwards) my kernel, my current
record is 20 times a day. Tommorow I'll try to beat it.
>8. The Internet isn't all it's cracked up to be anyway, so who cares
>if I can't connect to my ISP.
Exactly. That's why I keep a DOS system around so I can upload this
message.
>7. You have a weird sexual fetish for pot bellied penguins.
They *are* cute, aren't they?
>6. Your father committed suicide during the 80's stock market crash
>by leaping form the 15'Th story and the mere mention of the word
>"window" causes you to break down and cry.
BOOOOHOOOOHOOO
>5. You secretly hate your friends and family for not recognising your
>obvious genius and recommending Linux to them is your way of
>extracting revenge.
What friends? What family?
>4. You hate yourself and as a child you hated your mother.
But that b17ch placed an @$$hole like me on this world...
>3. Your one and only girlfriend became infatuated with Bill Gates and
>ran away to Redmond.
My girlfriend cannot run away, she's firmly attached to my right hand.
>2. The school bully who gave you a wedgy while you were making eyes at
>the only female computer geek in your class is an avid Windows user.
All school bullies are.
>And the number one reason for using Linux...
>
>1. You actually enjoy having a pineapple shoved up your arse.
But it feels so *GOOD*!
</whateveryouwanthere>
Cheers,
Rob
--
Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP 0x07606049 GPG 0xD61A655D
The Wright Bothers weren't the first to fly. They were just the
first not to crash.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob S. Wolfram)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft finally gets the idea... almost
Date: 18 May 2000 06:28:00 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What *really* strikes me as weird is that allegedly something like
>65% of people opened the attachment. I mean, come on --- you start out
>with a mail with the title "ILOVEYOU". Not "I love you", not
>"I LOVE YOU", but just "ILOVEYOU". Would you *really* expect someone
>who might be in love with you to leave out any whitespace? How long
>have they been using email?
>Then, you look at the mail, and it contains absolutely *nothing* that
>personalizes it. You are not being addressed, heck, AFAIK, the whole
>thing doesn't even refer to one's gender at any time. And at the end,
>it says "please look at this loveletter from me".... Gimme a break!
Maybe it's just curiosity. This possibility was mainly caused by the
fact that the difference between code and data has been severly blurred
in the Windows environment. "Open" a .gif file and "open" a .exe file
sound the same to the end user but are fundamentally different.
I think that every part of an email should be considered non-executable
data until the user takes a few concrete and known steps to place part
of the body in another context.
I do not blame the users for spreading the worm. I think the people to
blame are the writers of the worm in the first place, and Microsoft and
some other writers of email clients in the second place.
When I get an email with an attachment, and I'm not too sure beforehand
if the mime-type is known in my mailcap, I just hit enter on the
attachment to see what happens. I can do that because I *know* that my
mailcap doesn't launch executables or interpreters with systemwide
capabilities.
Cheers,
Rob
--
Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP 0x07606049 GPG 0xD61A655D
xenaphobia:
The fear of being beaten to a pulp by a leather-clad,
New Zealand woman.
------------------------------
From: "Raul Valero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Question
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 07:16:31 GMT
> One word: strategy. Well, and another one: greed.
> If M$ sells Linux, they decrease the amount of Windoze and NT copies
> sold, which they certainly wouldn't want to be compensated by good
> Linux sales, as they have all power over their own OS's.
> Moroever, if the users got the taste of how fast Linux is and how
> well it works, they'll sooner or later go to a cheaper alternative
> instead of buying the expensive M$ Linux. M$ would have lost them
> twice: first as Windoze users and second as M$ customers.
> By the way, M$ would be forced to sell Office as a separate product,
> ie. not bundled with the OS (or even exclusively running on let's
> call it "Lindoze"). If M$ Office becomes available for Linux, it's
> going to become even more commonly used.
> It would never be monopolistic (like Windoze), because you can go
> into a store and buy a burned Linux CD (which would certainly be
> compatible with Lindoze) for virtually nothing. There's a huge amount
> of competitors.
Thanks for your opinions. One thing, why should Microsoft be forced
to sell Office apart when Corel includes Corel Office at Corel Linux ?
------------------------------
From: nohow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 00:37:14 -0700
On Wed, 17 May 2000 20:35:41 -0500, "Erik Funkenbusch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > What makes you think Office developers have access to OS code?
>>
>> Because Gates said as much.
>
>No, he didn't. You (and others) interpreted it as such because that's what
>you wanted to hear.
>
>> > > So Microsoft does have an advantage by allowing their application
>> > > group access to the Windows group. That's all were saying here.
>> >
>> > You keep reversing things.
>>
>> You do.
>>
>> You want Microsoft to have zero applicaiton (IE, Word, Excel, etc.)
>> advantage as opposed to their opponents, and yet mourn the notion of
>> the company splitting up. You can't have it both ways: Either they
>> don't use their desktop monopoly to better their applications (and
>> vice-versa), or they *do* and splitting them up would ruin them.
>
>I'm not saying that gates is right in what he says. I am, however pointing
>out that what you claim is not what gates is saying.
>
>It simply is true that lots of Windows' new features were first introduced
>in Office and other apps. It's also true that those implementations in the
>apps are seperate from the OS ones.
Both the OS and Office implementation of OLE were seperate?
>
>> > The Windows group has access to Application source code. MS guards
>> > the Windows source very tightly, they're not going to just let
>> > anyone in the company have access to it.
>>
>> It only takes one person; not the entire team.
>
>Oh, one person gives the entire application team (for Office, that's like
>200 developers) orders of magnitudes of extra leverage. Right.
Yea, like maybe the senior software architects? Or do you think all
the Excel widget makers do their own design? The Office team is a lot
bigger than 200 developers by the way - well at least it was about 6
yrs ago and I doubt that it has shrunk. As to Kerberos why don't you
find out what the other people at IETF and MIT have been saying about
MS's behaviour.
>
>> > If the Apps division had access to Windows source, they wouldn't
>> > need to have a completely seperate implementation in their apps.
>> > (And in reality, I highly doubt that the OS division uses much
>> > source code from the Apps anyways, more than likely that code is
>> > highly application specific. They would need to rewrite it to be
>> > generic for an OS. Basicly the Apps division floats the concept to
>> > users in the office apps, if it gets good feedback, they write
>> > something similar for the OS).
>>
>> And yet, Gates' rational for *not* splitting them up along those lines
>> contradicts what you claim.
>
>No, that's not what he said at all.
Sure it is.
------------------------------
From: "Raul Valero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: RE: Your office and Linux.
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 07:45:44 GMT
Did you realize how much did it cost the so called 2000 effect ? Well,
that was changing a little programas here and a little there. Do you know
how much would it cost to switch whole programs, data, networks,
employees knowledge, and the so ? I think Microsoft (or the sequels)
will remain for a while. What's more, if it begins making good code, why
can't it survive just like each other software company onthe planet ? In
fact, it starts with some advantages. I agree anyway the fact that it won't
ever be as powerful as it is now. It will be just another software company,
although it is starting TV and hardware markets too ...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Things Linux can't do!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 07:50:13 GMT
On Thu, 18 May 2000 14:34:50 +1000,
Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Perry Pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Thu, 18 May 2000 02:03:23 +1000,
>> Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> http://x46.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=623637730
>> >> http://x46.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=623940112
>> >
>> >I'm afraid I can't see any lies there. Perhaps you'd care to post the
>> >specific parts you're referring to ?
>>
>> I already did at
>>
>> http://x46.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=624137505
>>
>> To which he never responded.
>
>Presumably you refer to the "I have seen a lot of BSODs in my time, and in
>every single
>instance, [...]" quote ?
>
Yes, and then he in a followup he changed his story from "every single
instance" to "most". I guess you didn't finish reading the whole
thing.
>Again, that's hardly an insult.
It was meant to be condecsending. It contributed nothing toward
healthy debate. That's his technique and apparently yours too.
>> Well then show me where I'm prejudiced. Specifically reference some of
>> my posts as your proof.
>
>Sorry, I have neither the time nor inclination to go trawling though Deja to
>find what are essentially petty accusations.
Well then don't make them.
>> Anyone he disagrees with enough he labels a zealot.
>
>Usually they are.
A generalization. It doesn't justify the many cases where he calls people
zealots and he's wrong.
------------------------------
From: "Raul Valero" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: Bill is a weenie
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 08:03:25 GMT
> Come to think of it, can you name ONE way in which Microsoft has made the
> world of computing better?
It has forced a lot of hardware replacement (that's computer industry
money).
Do not bother, you told us thinking of one thing, and this is one thing,
what
remembers me that things often aren't black and white :)
> Which MS contributions are popular now on the web? For example, Sun is
> responsible for Java, which MS didn't create.
Anyway, I do not like Java. And if you think Sun is a better partner than
Microsoft then I think you're wrong.
> Netscape, which, ironically
> lost the browser war to MS
Why ? Copying and immproving is a good thing too, in fact, that's mostly
what humans do since being born. See, hear, think and ... create ;-)
> is responsible for JavaScript, and JavaScript
> is one of the most popular scripting languages for web designers.
Doesn't support it IE ?
> What
> scripting language has MS made popular for building web sites?
Why should it have designed one when Javascript was there and
whole extended ?
If we go with those reasons, what has GNU/Linux created ? More than
other thing, it is just trying to finish a Unix style OS, isn't it ? Would
you
say that GNU/Linux is a bad OS ? Me no.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 03:13:56 -0500
nohow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >I'm not saying that gates is right in what he says. I am, however
pointing
> >out that what you claim is not what gates is saying.
> >
> >It simply is true that lots of Windows' new features were first
introduced
> >in Office and other apps. It's also true that those implementations in
the
> >apps are seperate from the OS ones.
>
> Both the OS and Office implementation of OLE were seperate?
OLE was introduced as part of the OS in 1992, it was NEVER an office only
solution.
> >Oh, one person gives the entire application team (for Office, that's like
> >200 developers) orders of magnitudes of extra leverage. Right.
>
> Yea, like maybe the senior software architects? Or do you think all
> the Excel widget makers do their own design? The Office team is a lot
> bigger than 200 developers by the way - well at least it was about 6
> yrs ago and I doubt that it has shrunk. As to Kerberos why don't you
> find out what the other people at IETF and MIT have been saying about
> MS's behaviour.
I fail to see how access to undocumented API's would help a designer. Those
are coding level issues, in which the actual person writing the code, not
the designer would have to have access.
As far as Kerberos, I know what people are saying about MS's behavior. They
don't think it's right. What they have NOT said is that it violates the
standard, because it doesn't.
> >> And yet, Gates' rational for *not* splitting them up along those lines
> >> contradicts what you claim.
> >
> >No, that's not what he said at all.
>
> Sure it is.
No, it's not. For the n-teenth time. He states that Windows is a better OS
because of the interaction with the Office teams, not that Office is a
better Office suite because of it.
------------------------------
** 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 (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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
******************************
