Linux-Advocacy Digest #213, Volume #27 Tue, 20 Jun 00 20:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Windows98 ("Robert L.")
Re: Linux is awesome! (Gary Hallock)
Re: I had a reality check today :( ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Can Linux do this? KIOSKS - Lite Linux desktop? Lock-down configs? ("Bravo")
Re: What UNIX is good for. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Processing data is bad! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: So where ARE all of these supposed Linux users? (Peter Wayner)
Re: slashdot is down -again- ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: I had a reality check today :( (Woofbert)
Re: Linux is awesome! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: MacOS X sceptic (Woofbert)
Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE (Woofbert)
Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: 10 things you can do with Windows... (Terry Porter)
Re: I had a reality check today :( ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux is awesome! (Charlie Ebert)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Robert L." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows98
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:08:53 GMT
You are right, i haven't think this way.
And the other big companies ( Maxis, EA, etc..) make program
only for windows, they increase the monopoly of MS.
At least, Maxis give enough info to Loki games, so we be able to
play SimCity 3k on Linux.
I hope other big companies will start thinking about Linux.
"Gary Connors" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit dans le message news:
8iontc$mb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Robert L." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > No, is not acceptable. No, is not good. Yes you are right.
> > But win98 isn't a server or any very critical part of a network.
> > It's only for playing games ( when it don't crash ). Is not to
> > use as a web server.
> >
> > Yes is silly, but windows fan are silly too. I'm not a windows fan
> > ( some people may think so ). But i'm not a windows hater.
> > I just want to play, learn, work, etc.. with my 2 computer.
> > ( win98 = play )
> > ( Linux = learn, work, etc... )
> >
> >
>
> If your TV or Microwave, every 3-4 months, broke, while you were using
> them, and you needed to wait 1 hour (time for reinstall and setting up
> Windows again) before they worked, you would buy a new TV or microwave
> beacuse OBVIOUSLY they are broken. Why would you expect less from your
> PC? The technology exists (both in in written software and academic
> literature) and is easily available to make your Home PC uncrashable.
> Technology exists and is available to make your Home PC needed systemfiles
> uncorruptable. Last but not least, technology exists to make it to where
> installing an application will NOT break the system. The fact MS has a
> monolopy on the Home PC market has stifled these technologies from
> reaching the home user, since there is NO incentive for MS to bring it to
> you. Keep in mind the amount of profit MS makes from MSCE tests/books/
> and certifications, tech support, and selling of upgrades for Windows.
> They have no reason to make a stable OS.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:16:35 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awesome!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Ha ha....
>
> If you only knew...
>
> Ever hear of an IBM 2821?
> IBM 3330?
> IBM 3340?
> IBM 3033?
>
> Look them up and that will give you a slight clue as to how long I
> have been in this (the computer) business.
>
> You most likely weren't even born yet...
3033? You are young. Ever here of an IBM 360 Mod 50? That's what I used
during my first year of college - with wopping 0.5MB of core memory, and
jobs entered from punched cards. I was involved with the design and
testing of the generation of mainframes following the 3033 - the 3081.
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I had a reality check today :(
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:20:33 GMT
If that's the best reply you can muster, you are a moron...
You are an ostrich hiding in the sand and refusing to face the
reality.
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:36:18 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Edited to correct false innuendo and implication of terms.
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Daughter graduating middle school this week and going into high school
>> and I thought a nice desktop computer system would make a worthwhile
>> graduation present.
>>
>> I have ALWAYS built every single one of my systems in the past all the
>> way from DTK motherboard based PC clones up to the Abit based system I
>> have now. Never, ever,ever, bought a pre-load.
>>
>> This time, possibly due to laziness or just a wearing down by all of
>> the glossy advertisements in the Sunday NY Times, I decided to go out
>> and look at all of these "ready made" systems that the typical Joe 18
>> pack will buy.
>>
>> BTW my daughter wants an iMac. Anybody know anything about them?
>>
>> Anyway, I went to CompUSA, Staples, Electronic City and several local
>> places, the kind of places I would avoid like the plague on my quest
>> and here is what I found.
>>
>> 1. LOSE Hardware is EVERYWHERE!!!!!!!
>> Motherboards have built in modems, Ethernet, SoundChips, video
>> and so forth. Much of this is LOSE hardware.
>>
>> 2. The included printer is usually some POS LOSE printer. Same for
>> scanner and USB devices are sometimes included as well.
>>
>> 3. The operating system is always LOSE 98SE and no credit is given for
>> not getting it.
>>
>> 4. Internet bundles (you are hostage to Compu$erve for 3 years) are
>> typically used to lower price.
>>
>> 5. You get a bunch of low priced software and nothing of real
>> substance. The exception was MS Works which is pretty decent.
>>
>> The iMac is starting to look better all the time :)
>>
>> Anyway, my point is that this is the typical way that a user buys a
>> computer. They are not like you and me who build our own, they walk
>> into a chain store and buy what seems, to them, to be the best value.
>>
>> My question is, how is Linux going to realistically overcome this?
>
>Destruction of "per CPU" licensing schemes is the first step.
>
>>
>> Looking at the specs for Compaq, HP, Sony VIAO and others, absolutely
>> NONE of these would run Linux and support all the I/O devices the
>> person paid for.
>>
>> This IS the computer hardware market, like it or not. And I for one
>> DON't like it.
>>
>> Comments?
------------------------------
From: "Bravo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Can Linux do this? KIOSKS - Lite Linux desktop? Lock-down configs?
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 02:48:51 +0200
Try this site for starters. It worked great for me. This puts Linux and X
together in about 8M of HD space.
http://www.linux-embedded.com/
For Netscape usage and info about running other console or X programs, check
out this page.
http://linux-embedded.ctw.net/
I've been using this configuration with a 90 Mhz pc w/16M ram and it works
fine for me. The system boots in less than 30 seconds and goes straight to
Netscape without a root or user login. This can be modified to suit your
needs though. The configuration can run over a network (connected to DSL,
Cable, T1...) or directly by dialup. The latter page describes a program
called IntraLaunch which does a great job of launching Linux apps from
within the browser.
My "internet only" box has been set up for cd audio, internet browsing,
email, mp3 audio, internet audio/video, all accessible from the Netscape
interface using plugins and xplaycd.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: What UNIX is good for.
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:23:06 GMT
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:40:34 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>The last thing I want to do when editing is remove my fingers from the
>keyboard.
And exactly the reason why you will go the way of the dinosaur...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Processing data is bad!
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:23:33 GMT
Yea but Windows GUI looks and works well.
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:43:05 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> There is a reason why the rest of the world has moved mostly to GUI.
>
>Unix has had a GUI since, oh... 1983 or so... that makes 17 years.
>
>By comparison..windows is.. what... 10 years old?
------------------------------
From: Peter Wayner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: So where ARE all of these supposed Linux users?
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:23:51 GMT
> >And what about the embedded market? Tivo runs Linux. I'm sure there
> >are others out there. I saw an X-windows cursor on a Netscape terminal
> >on the NJ turnpike. The cursor was the only way I knew that they
> >had Linux underneith. The machine only let you touch the browser.
>
> By this logic, QNX is the most widely used operating system on earth. What
> makes you so sure that Netscape machine is Linux? Did Linux kill all the
> other OS'es which run X overnight? Have you ever heard of an operating
> system known as "Unix"?
Fair enough. They might have put a Solaris box with 16 SPARC chips in there.
Maybe it's a SCO box. But I think the odds point toward Linux. You're right.
I don't know. But I know how I would bet.
--
-=-=-=-
Peter Wayner-- Turn to http://wwww.wayner.org/books/ffa/
for info on _Free for All_, a book about the open source/free
software movement. It will be published in July by HarperBusiness.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: slashdot is down -again-
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:24:19 GMT
It runs Linsux or some deviant version of such (FreeBSD)
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:46:53 -0300, "Francis Van Aeken"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Of all the sites I frequent, Slashdot is the only one that is regularly down.
>
>Why is that?
>
>Francis.
>
>
------------------------------
From: Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I had a reality check today :(
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:29:13 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Daughter graduating middle school this week and going into high
> school and I thought a nice desktop computer system would make a
> worthwhile graduation present.
>
> I have ALWAYS built every single one of my systems in the past all
> the way from DTK motherboard based PC clones up to the Abit based
> system I have now. Never, ever,ever, bought a pre-load.
>
> This time, possibly due to laziness or just a wearing down by all of
> the glossy advertisements in the Sunday NY Times, I decided to go out
> and look at all of these "ready made" systems that the typical Joe 18
> pack will buy.
>
> BTW my daughter wants an iMac. Anybody know anything about them?
>
> Anyway, I went to CompUSA, Staples, Electronic City and several local
> places, the kind of places I would avoid like the plague on my quest
> and here is what I found.
>
> 1. Win Hardware is EVERYWHERE!!!!!!!
> Motherboards have built in modems, Ethernet, SoundChips, video
> and so forth. Much of this is Win hardware.
>
> 2. The included printer is usually some POS Win printer. Same for
> scanner and USB devices are sometimes included as well.
>
> 3. The operating system is always Win 98SE and no credit is given for
> not getting it.
>
> 4. Internet bundles (you are hostage to Compu$erve for 3 years) are
> typically used to lower price.
>
> 5. You get a bunch of low priced software and nothing of real
> substance. The exception was MS Works which is pretty decent.
>
>
> The iMac is starting to look better all the time :)
>
> Anyway, my point is that this is the typical way that a user buys a
> computer. They are not like you and me who build our own, they walk
> into a chain store and buy what seems, to them, to be the best value.
>
> My question is, how is Linux going to realistically overcome this?
>
> Looking at the specs for Compaq, HP, Sony VIAO and others, absolutely
> NONE of these would run Linux and support all the I/O devices the
> person paid for.
>
> This IS the computer hardware market, like it or not. And I for one
> DON't like it.
>
> Comments?
>
>
>
Hello! It's about time the Linux world recognized that not everyone
likes to buy computer kits and put them together. Some people like to
buy computers and use them. (Bear with me ... I'm a Maccie who finds
himself strangely attracted to investigating Linux. My Yellow Dog and a
big ol' hard drive are in the mail.)
1. What to get your daughter? I'd recommend the iMac. It's what she
wants, and it's a kickass machine for the artistically inclined. (Please
forgive my stereotypical presumptions.)
2. What to do about the wide variety of hardware and bundled software?
This is hard ... Do you really *want* Linux to take over Windows'
position? Then you have to make something better than Windows ... which
means that it works with all the existing hardware and software, right,
the first time, without any problems. (Never mind all the stuff about
how Linux is technically or politically better than Windoze ... Maccies
have been saying that about the Mac for years and it hasn't worked.
Much.)
>From this perspective, Linux will have an easier time taking over
Windoze than Mac: Windoze systems are brittle, and people expect them to
be flaky. Mac systems are well-integrated and things work. Badly
designed software just doesn't make it in the Mac market. People will
not want to take a giant leap backwards in user-friendliness, usability,
reliability, and servicibility. Linux needs to become *consistent* if it
wants to take over Windows. And so far, that it ain't.
--
Woofbert <woofbert at infernosoft dot com>
Datadroid
Infernosoft: Putting the No in Innovation.
http://www.infernosoft.com/woofbert/index.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux is awesome!
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:33:34 GMT
But I wasn't addressing you, your credentials speak for themself :)
As a matter of fact the farthest I go back is the 168 (370).
The 3081 was a pretty solid machine except for power and the cylic
monitor getting screwed up now and then.
The 3084 (2 3081's put together in either si mode or pp mode) was
another story. A disaster to say the least. The PGIO bus was 8 bytes
wide as well as the diagnostic channel( SVC, or service channel) that
provided input to the service terminal making diagnostics and pulling
of AQE error log's painfully slow.
BTW what was a default PRAI code, meaning the service processor
microcode was operating correctly?
I'll fill in the first 2 digits for you 17_ _
...
simon
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:16:35 -0400, Gary Hallock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Ha ha....
>>
>> If you only knew...
>>
>> Ever hear of an IBM 2821?
>> IBM 3330?
>> IBM 3340?
>> IBM 3033?
>>
>> Look them up and that will give you a slight clue as to how long I
>> have been in this (the computer) business.
>>
>> You most likely weren't even born yet...
>
>3033? You are young. Ever here of an IBM 360 Mod 50? That's what I used
>during my first year of college - with wopping 0.5MB of core memory, and
>jobs entered from punched cards. I was involved with the design and
>testing of the generation of mainframes following the 3033 - the 3081.
>
>Gary
------------------------------
From: Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: MacOS X sceptic
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:39:54 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Craig Kelley
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charles Kooy) writes:
>
> [snip about MacOS X using UNIX]
>
> > Also, the fact that it is a Unix won't be obvious to users, unless they
> > particularly want to use horrid things like a command line.
>
> A command line is great! People speak with language as well as
> pictures.
Human scandle with mislepings, malapwopisms, and aDoleSCent
carpalizatian. Stough that in your cumin line.
I used to deal regularly with command-line interfaces (TOPS-10, Vax,
RT-11, CP/M, DOS) and I always had to keep a friggin manual or
cheat-sheet around to help me remember commands and their formats. I was
disdainful of the Mac's icons and windows until I used one for a week
... it was so easy to learn compared to those other systems that I never
wanted to go back.
The main principle behind the Mac, which Windows never got and Linux
needs to learn, is that commands should be consistently discoverable;
the UI should work for different people's styles of interacting with
computers.
Command lines are great for those with strong verbal skills, but they
pretty much suck for everybody else.
> > MacOSX client will be a good thing, once they get a few of the HI things
> > sorted, just like NextStep was. Trust me.
>
> NextStep as a very good initial release; MacOS X will be a
> much-better polished version.
I look forward to it ... even if it means adding yet another hard drive
to my G3.
--
Woofbert <woofbert at infernosoft dot com>
Datadroid
Infernosoft: Putting the No in Innovation.
http://www.infernosoft.com/woofbert/index.html
------------------------------
From: Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:42:53 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Explain the Unix task scheduler.
Hey, where does a Unix newbie find this kind of stuff out? (And don't
send me to no friggin Man pages... ) Got any good books to recommend?
--
Woofbert <woofbert at infernosoft dot com>
Datadroid
Infernosoft: Putting the No in Innovation.
http://www.infernosoft.com/woofbert/index.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Subject: Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 23:41:56 GMT
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:37:51 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Pete Goodwin wrote:
>> No of course not. I only worked on it for about 3 years. Obviously I never
>> learnt UNIX.
>>
>> NOT!
>
>Explain the Unix task scheduler.
Which one?
The task scheduler in something like Version 7 is completely different
from the one in Solaris, which is completely different from the one in
QNX.
The "classic" Unix scheduler in something like Version 7 is extremely
primitive and does nothing more than round robin scheduling, where a
running process is allowed to run for a maximum time interval before
it is interrupted, with some simplistic prioritization kludged in, and a
preference toward scheduling processes which have just woken up from
sleep to speed up interactive apps. Something like Solaris is more
complicated since it has MP support, which often amounts to little more
than adding processor affinity, so processes continue to run on the same
processor so they follow the cache. Something like QNX is a completely
different beast since it has real-time support.
A more interesting exercise would be for YOU to explain the VMS
scheduler, which is much more complex (it has THREE types of jobs:
real-time, batch, and interactive), and actually takes into account which
resources are available and schedules processes accordingly. It is much
more involved than the Unix scheduler. The Windows NT scheduler is
extremely similar to it also.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: 10 things you can do with Windows...
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 21 Jun 2000 08:02:51 +0800
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 11:55:03 -0700, Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Terry Porter wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 00:07:33 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> >#5. Upgrade to the next version!
>> Yes, I *must* upgrade [ allow me to snip: soon Windows may be as good as Linux!]
>
>You might be closer to the truth than you imagine. The other day, at
>the newsagent's, I overheard a conversation between a fellow and
>a child (father and son they must have been). It was about Windows
>2000.
>I gathered the "in" thing for kids was to have the latest, ie Win2000.
>A sort of keep up with the Joneses. Dad, I need 128M of RAM to run
>Win2000! All the other kids at school run Win2000! Dad, I need an
>upgrade! DAAAAD!!! I *must* upgrade!!!!
Sad really, Windows is white goods. Must have the latest model.
My old RedHat4.2 is going well, on a 686/300 ,64 meg, I couldn't want more.
I've been of the endless upgrade waggon, since I dumped Wintrash, in Aug97:)
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 1 week 12 hours 53 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I had a reality check today :(
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 00:08:13 GMT
Great response woofbert!!!
I'll respond below.
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 16:29:13 -0700, Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>Hello! It's about time the Linux world recognized that not everyone
>likes to buy computer kits and put them together. Some people like to
>buy computers and use them. (Bear with me ... I'm a Maccie who finds
>himself strangely attracted to investigating Linux. My Yellow Dog and a
>big ol' hard drive are in the mail.)
Linux has a place in this world, but you are correct. Most people like
to pull it out of the box and plug it in.
>1. What to get your daughter? I'd recommend the iMac. It's what she
>wants, and it's a kickass machine for the artistically inclined. (Please
>forgive my stereotypical presumptions.)
She IS artistic, but highly anti-computer. She would have been better
off born in the 1960's as a flower child.
She likes the concept of the iMac and I feel it might help her enjoy
computers more.
>2. What to do about the wide variety of hardware and bundled software?
>This is hard ... Do you really *want* Linux to take over Windows'
>position? Then you have to make something better than Windows ... which
>means that it works with all the existing hardware and software, right,
>the first time, without any problems. (Never mind all the stuff about
>how Linux is technically or politically better than Windoze ... Maccies
>have been saying that about the Mac for years and it hasn't worked.
>Much.)
That is my main beef with Linux. For the mass market it does
absolutely NOTHING better than Windows. Sure if you're a student
programmer you can be set up with compilers, editors and such for
$1.99. the reality is most home users are not interested in that.
>From this perspective, Linux will have an easier time taking over
>Windoze than Mac: Windoze systems are brittle, and people expect them to
>be flaky.
Very true, and the "what if your Lexus needed a tuneup every week "
argument is a valid one.
Mac systems are well-integrated and things work. Badly
>designed software just doesn't make it in the Mac market. People will
>not want to take a giant leap backwards in user-friendliness, usability,
>reliability, and servicibility. Linux needs to become *consistent* if it
>wants to take over Windows. And so far, that it ain't.
Linux is a hodge podge of hacked together programs. Some are excellent
and some pitiful. There is really no cohesive bond that holds them
together.
Based on your suggestions I am going to investigate the iMac tomorrow.
Thank you..
Simon
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awesome!
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 00:08:44 GMT
Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Ha ha....
> >
> > If you only knew...
> >
> > Ever hear of an IBM 2821?
> > IBM 3330?
> > IBM 3340?
> > IBM 3033?
> >
> > Look them up and that will give you a slight clue as to how long I
> > have been in this (the computer) business.
> >
> > You most likely weren't even born yet...
> >
>
> OK, is this supposed to be proof of how technically superior your
> intelligence is. I can make all the references I want to old obsolete
> machines, but that doesn't prove that I know what I'm talking about
> now. However, when you are paid to troll, I guess you can make any
> connections you want to. After all, your arguments don't have to make
> sense, they just have to be pro-MS, anti-Linux and full of rage.
>
> Rock on dumbass.
Let me help here.
If this guy really knew these machines and he supported NT or anything
from
Microsoft, then he really is some kind of dumbass.
You don't go from machines WITH operating systems to machines WITHOUT
operating system and like it unless you were the keypunch operator.
Charlie
>
> > On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 08:32:56 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >pac4854 wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Don't feed the trolls.
> > >>
> > >> Once his acne goes into remission, and he graduates from high
> > >> school, and he finally gets laid, he'll go away.
> > >>
> > >> Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
> > >> Up to 100 minutes free!
> > >> http://www.keen.com
> > >
> > >Yeah, I know. I was having a really bad day yesterday and venting on
> > >dumbass seemed the best way to relieve some tension. I quite honestly
> > >think that this guy has got to be getting paid for some of this shit.
> > >Have you seen that amount of time he spends posting stuff under his
> > >various names? He has got to either have a full time job in M$ doing
> > >exactly this, or he is a drop out that absolutely refuses to leave the
> > >house and spends all his time on the computer, hoping mommy can afford
> > >to buy his food for him. Of course, I could be wrong, but I have a
> > >feeling I'm not far off. One of those two has to be right. More than
> > >likely the M$ is paying him theory is the correct one. Why else would
> > >he be so incredibly pissed off at the mere existance of something other
> > >than M$?
> > >
> > >Nathaniel Jay Lee
> > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
