Linux-Advocacy Digest #216, Volume #28 Thu, 3 Aug 00 19:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux = Yet Another Unix (Tim Palmer)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Tim Palmer)
Re: Linux can save you money on electricity! (Tim Palmer)
Re: Linux, easy to use? (Tim Palmer)
Re: Linux, easy to use? (Tim Palmer)
Re: How Can I contribute? (Tim Palmer)
maximum (?) linux (Mark S. Bilk)
Re: Linux or Windows 2000 ???? ("sandrews")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Fred Moody and BugTraq: Is Someone Lying About Linux? (Jim Broughton)
Re: Linux, easy to use? (Gary Hallock)
Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR (MK)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Seán Ó Donnchadha)
Re: Linux or Windows 2000 ???? (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: maximum (?) linux (OSguy)
Re: Free WebSphere Homepage Builder 4.0 for Linux (OSguy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.alpha
Subject: Re: Linux = Yet Another Unix
Date: 3 Aug 2000 17:59:54 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 2 Aug 2000 16:16:46 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Tim Palmer wrote:
>[deletia]
>>>> >> Explain to the end-user how to compile/install a framebuffer
>>>> >> SVGA kernel.
>>>> >
>>>> >Why?
>>>>
>>>> Because they half to to make their graffics work.
>>>>
>>>
>>>I have graphics, and I haven't compiled a framebuffer SVGA kernel.
>>
>>You must have one of the holy graffix cards that Lie-nux actulley SUPPORT'S.
>
> The fastest gaming card today is officially and fully supported
> by the chipset vendor: Geforce II.
>
> Contemporary chipsets from the other major vendors are also supported
> including that problem child: ATI.
Only a plobem on Linux. Windows has no prolbem at all with it.
>
> 3dfx has supported Linux in some form or another for over 2 years.
>
> Matrox users are enthusiastic enough to fend for themselves quite
> nicely. John Carmack even lent a hand to their efforts.
So you say. Probly most Matrix users hue triyed Lixnu went back to Win.
>
>[deletia]
>>>> Window's 98.
>>>>
>>>
>>>It's a somewhat improved Windows 95, but it's hardly a revolution.
>>>
>>>Colin Day
>>>
>>
>>It wa a hell of an emprovement over DOS.
>
> An abacus is an improvement over DOS.
An abacus is an immprovement over Lie-nxu.
>
>--
> Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
>
> That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
> |||
> / | \
>
>
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: 3 Aug 2000 18:00:05 -0500
Mark Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm sorry. I evidently had you confused with someone who, before arguing with another
>person, would bother to find out if, in fact, there was an actual disagreement. I
>apologize.
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 07/18/00
>> at 05:18 PM, Mark Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> >BZZZT! Wrong. If you read my messages, you will see that I never said what
>> >you ascribe to me. In fact, I have stated that I agree with government
>> >oversight of business and believe that there are things which government does
>> >best. Your last statement, with the exception of calling me a "jerk," is
>> >something I might have said (although I would have worked on the spelling a
>> >bit).
>>
>> >If you want to argue, find out if you really disagree before you go attacking
>> >people. You come off looking like a jerk, yourself.
>>
>> BZZZT what hell makes you think everyone reads everything you say?
>>
>> BZZZZT you made blanket, black/white statement. If I have it wrong, its not
>> my mis-interpretation, but your lack of clearly stating what you really mean.
>> -- But lets see what you really know. Why don't you give your of the things
>> government has blotched and that business didn't.
>>
>> BZZZZZT I have repetitive motion injuries to both hands that lead errors.
>> Frankly, I didn't the post significant enough to make extra work of it.
>>
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> >> Mark Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> >>
>> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >> >Even a cursory reading of history should convince you otherwise.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> No. A cursory reading results in knee-jerk answers, as you have shown. A
>> >> >> thoughtful, reflective reading leads one to analysis and different answers.
>> >> >> -- Is government perfect? No. People aren't either and certainly not people
>> >> >> driven only by the profit motive -- which you are suggesting would do a better
>> >> >> job on everything if left alone.
>> >>
>> >> >Try the cursory reading, at the least, and come back prepared to discuss the
>> >> >issue.
>> >>
>> >> You're being a jerk. You know there are problems best solved by government,
>> >> and some best solved by business -- and some, that businees won't even work on
>> >> with government handouts -- Yet you want to paint the issues in black and
>> >> white. Are you on the far-right?
>> >>
>>
>> >Mark Kelley
>> >Agriculture Information Systems
>> >Purdue University
>>
>> --
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
>--
>Mark Kelley
>Agriculture Information Systems
>Purdue University
>
>
Are you rellated to the FUCKING COMMY Tim Kelley?
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux can save you money on electricity!
Date: 3 Aug 2000 18:00:15 -0500
Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Because it gets there wokr done. VI just doesant due the job.
>Which job?
>
>Say I want to ask you what do you mean by a post like this. Why should
>I use MSOffice for this job over vi?
The rite tool for this would be WordPad. VI is to hard to use.
>Say I want to write a miniature Pascal interpeter for a term project.
>Why should I use MSOffice for this job over, say, Emacs?
EMACS are fucked up.
>
>>>But there are no dumb UNIX commands.
>> Yes their is. Their all dum.
>May I ask what's your criteria? How do you tell a dumb command from a smart
>one?
"find / -name sumthing | sed 'sumthing' | sumthing | sumthing" is dum.
Clicking on FastFind is smart.
>
>>>Or fails to work through the GUI.
>> UNIX just fales to work. The user has too due al the work.
>Can you give us an example?
You half to type "make kernalconfig".
>
>>>Some people just run their computers as servers that don't require
>>>a user interface at all.
>Well, a computer doesn't necessary to be a pure server in order to not
>to need a user interface.
>
>--
>Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>A bore is someone who persists in holding his own views after we have
>enlightened him with ours.
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: 3 Aug 2000 18:00:25 -0500
Ciaran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) wrote:
>>On 2 Aug 2000 16:15:45 -0500, Tim Palmer wrote:
>>>Slava Pestov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>>I don't have to ty[e anything on Linux, either. In fact, I
>can't
>>>>remember the last time I ty[ed anything, on any OS.
>>>
>>>Lier. You tipe every time you log in.
>>
>>No, he doesn't "tipe". He doesn't "ty[e" either. BTW, what is a
>>"lier" ?
>
>lier \Li"er\ (l[imac]"[~e]r), n. [From Lie. ] One who lies down;
>one who rests or remains, as in concealment.
>
>There were liers in ambush against him. --Josh. viii. 14.
lier \ly-er\ m. a iddiot that tells lies all the time.
There were a bunch of Lienux lier on The Internet.
>
>Cheers,
>Ciaran
>
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>
>Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
>Up to 100 minutes free!
>http://www.keen.com
>
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: 3 Aug 2000 18:00:35 -0500
Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tim Palmer wrote:
>
>>
>> Windo's has a few legasy DOS programms, but noboddy ever uses them. Its' not like
>UNIX whear peopole still half to rite shell script workarounds and eddit config fials
>all the time because THEAR IS NO OTHER WAY.
>
>Lier! (just in case you didn't catch this Timmy, I just poked fun at your inability
>to spell).
...and spelled inabillitty rong in the process.
>Linux gives you the choice of a GUI or editing config files.
Lie-nux gives you the choice of a fucked-up GUI with a DOS box on top or edditing
config file.
>
>Gary
>
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How Can I contribute?
Date: 3 Aug 2000 18:00:45 -0500
V'rgo Vardja <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tim Palmer wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Hello,
>>>
>>>I am working for a company which already have open sourced device
>>>drivers and applications for linux. We have certain kerna patches
>>>and device driver enhancements that we like to contribute to Linux
>>>community in general. Who should we contact? Thanks for any
>>>pointers!
>>
>> Contact you're butholl.
>
><sarcasm>
>And the Wintrolls say Linvocates are rude...
></sarcasm>
Ther'e dum. And ther'e hippocrits to. They complane about HTML messagse and them rite
their messages in HTML. I guess only Lie-nux nuts are aloud to post HTML.
>
>--
>ERROR: CPU not detected. Emulating.
> -Win2k
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Subject: maximum (?) linux
Date: 3 Aug 2000 22:02:30 GMT
While several people have pointed out that Maximum Linux
magazine has an unusually high incidence of errors in its
articles, plus some other shortcomings, there are some
good things about it, too:
o A CD with an installable Linux distribution (or a large
amount of other Linux software) in every issue. Linux
Journal and Linux Magazine don't have this; PC-Plus
sometimes does, but it costs twice as much (in the U.S.).
This allows computer owners to try Linux easily, on an
impulse, instead of having to send away for something,
which brings some people into it that wouldn't otherwise
do it.
o An orientation toward beginners. For example, one issue
had a chart of Linux equivalents to DOS/Windows commands.
Although the magazine's critics here in c.o.l.a would
prefer to see more advanced articles, it's possible that
those would actually scare away some beginners who have
never tried Linux and aren't very advanced in Windows,
either.
o Instructions for setting up Linux to work like Windows.
Someone mentioned this as a shortcoming, but it may make
it easier for beginners to get started using the system.
They'll be able to modify the configuration later.
o Widespread distribution of the magazine, e.g., in drug
and grocery stores, which never carry Linux Journal,
Linux Magazine, or PC-Plus.
Maximum Linux may be the way many people learn for the
first time that Linux exists, and there they have a disk
of it that they can install.
o Catchy cover illustrations, including some fierce
penguins!
While the criticisms expressed in this thread should be
heeded by the publisher and staff of Maximum Linux, I'd
hate to see them get discouraged and discontinue it.
As an introductory magazine for beginners, and as a handy
source for some Linux software, the publication is doing
a good job, and performing some unique services.
------------------------------
From: "sandrews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux or Windows 2000 ????
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 18:01:02 -0500
In article <8mcnt6$ego$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> I have heard a lot of things about Linux.
>
> I'm running happily W2K and now I'd like to know a valid reason for
> switching from Windows 2000 to Linux? Why? What advantage does the
> person gain running Linux? Can some of you qeniuses tell me ???
>
> Because Linux is a stable ?? Yes, I believe that, but so is W2K.
>
You see it`s a NO-WIN situation
--
"There's nothing wrong with Windows 2000... that Linux can't fix"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 17:04:24 -0500
On 3 Aug 2000 13:27:11 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>>>>Then why don't we see Linux boxes shooting up in popularity?
>>>>>
>>>>>I guess you aren't looking...
>>>>
>>>>I'm looking at CUSA, BB, and the other local stores where people
>>>>commonly shop. Perhaps you can direct me to someone selling Linux
>>>>boxes there?
>>>
>>>Note that BB does sell an installed Linux embedded in the
>>>Tivo boxes from Phillips and Sony.
>>
>>Note that this isn't a consumer PC; it's a VCR-like recording device
>>with no other functionality.
>
>Yes, but it points out what we've known all along. The user
>interface and office apps are the only weak points. Unix
Gee, is that all? A minor little thing like that? :)
That's the entire problem.
>systems have traditionally had an experienced administrator
>to configure them and set up scripts and menu access for
>the users. Those steps aren't necessary for an appliance
>like the Tivo, but for a normal single-user computer it will
>have to have a canned, fairly inflexible configuration like
>Windows and stock pre-installed apps to work in the mass
>market.
Yes.
>>>>>But so far I don't know if
>>>>>anyone can preload StarOffice. When OpenOffice gets up
>>>>>to speed that will take care of itself. Add a few more
>>>>>pretty fonts and you are all set.
>>>>
>>>>When ? 2001? 2002? 2003?
>>>
>>>Judging from the plan to have OpenOffice source out by October
>>>I'd guess mid-2001 to have a mainstream-usable package. It
>>>will depend on how much functionality gets lost when the
>>>third-party-licensed parts are removed. Hopefully this
>>>won't be as hard to fix up as Mozilla. Meanwhile StarOffice
>>>works once you get it installed.
>>
>>When do you think Linux will be viable in stores?
>
>As soon as someone comes up with a few canned configurations
>that can be chosen by picking a name and produce a menu
>with all the common applications available. If StarOffice
>can be pre-loaded it could be done now. But, if I were
>building and selling it I would design in the optional
>2nd drive/dual boot with or without VMWare and make it
>clear to the customers that they might need to add that
>component if this is their only computer and they need
>some specialized software not available yet for Linux.
In other words, it's not ready for prime time yet. The number of
normal joe-blows who'd do that probably approaches less than 1% of the
market you're targeting - why save $50 just to have to shell out money
(and time, and complexity) for another hard drive and VMWare and
another OS to boot (costing hundreds more)?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 17:05:43 -0500
On 3 Aug 2000 21:44:21 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
wrote:
>The judge, unlike you, has viewed and considered all of the facts of the
>case. To pretend that you are better informed than the judge is foolish
>and arrogant. You may well disagree with the judge, as may Microsoft's
>lawyers who are also well informed. But it's not as if the judge didn't
>"consider" facts of the case -- or if it is, then Microsoft's defence
>are incompetent, which isn't really the judge's fault.
Wow, I guess you support the OJ Simpson trial too, eh?
(I see your point, but not your logic!)
------------------------------
From: Jim Broughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Fred Moody and BugTraq: Is Someone Lying About Linux?
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 18:12:10 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mikey wrote:
>
> Thus Sprake [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
> >
> > One could also bother to acknowledge the figures for the other
> > Unixen in the comparison.
> >
> > His 'rah rah windows' rant also ignores those numbers.
>
> Having been a Micro-$erf, Fred Moody probably doesn't know beans about
> Unix/Linux (or it's *waaaay* outdated knowledge). Scanning through his
> archives, he *must* be getting some kick-backs for M$ promotion in the
> media.
>
> Notice that he doesn't have an e-mail address listed and they don't have
> a discussion board on the ABC website. This must be so Fred Moody can
> spew horsesh*t without letting anyone prove this Micro-croney wrong.
>
Try [EMAIL PROTECTED] or go back and click on the link to the original
moody
article and click on his name. That is where the link is.
> --
> Since-beer-leekz,
> Mikey
> Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam
> possit materiari?
--
Jim Broughton
(The Amiga OS! Now there was an OS)
If Sense were common everyone would have it!
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 18:23:31 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Tim Palmer wrote:
>
> Lie-nux gives you the choice of a fucked-up GUI with a DOS box on top or edditing
>config file.
>
Really? gnome-linuxconf has no DOS box or xterm in site. It is a gtk based GUI with
full point and click capability. Give it up. You have no idea what you are talking
about. Didn't you learn your lesson when you
claimed that Linux for S/390 required OS/390 and when this idea of yours was shot
down, claimed that Linux for S/390 required VM/ESA? You really have to brush on on
your trolling techniques.
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (MK)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,soc.singles,alt.society.anarchy
Subject: Re: LOREN PETRICH...CLOSET-DICTATOR
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 22:38:41 GMT
On 3 Aug 2000 00:52:43 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) wrote:
>>What's the difference between Microsoft's Extortion and Racketeering,
>>and Government Extortion and Racketeering?
>The government throw you in jail for tax fraud if you don't pay your
>federal tax, but Microsoft can't do anything if you opt out of the
>Microsoft tax ? Subtle difference.
Whatever you may say about MS, please don't lie that MS has forced
some "tax". If you don't pay tax for e.g. producing/buying/using cigarette
without a tax, you're committing crime that if proven in court will result
in punishing you. If you buy PC without Windows installed or you produce
or sell or buy PC without Windows you 1. do not commit crime 2. do
not HAVE to pay to MS.
The constant repetitions of "MS tax" is just Goebbels-like propaganda by those
who have irrational hate of MS (not: argument against MS based on facts
that may or may not be there). Do you do this?
MK
---
Waiting for "good collective" is like waiting for Godot.
------------------------------
From: Seán Ó Donnchadha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 18:34:16 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) wrote:
>>>
>>>No, you just refused to see it. Two *products* cannot be tied together
>>>in order to restrain trade (kill off the competition). You have to beat
>>>them *competitively*, not by market manipulation.
>>
>>But that's exactly what IE did.
>
>Not really. If they hadn't muscled Netscape out by bundling, Netscape wouldn't
>have gone out of business.
>
Netscape didn't go out of business. They lost market share. The
question is, did they lose it because IE was integrated, or did they
lose it because IE was *BETTER*? Judging by the nearly unanimous
praise for IE from the press at the time, I'd say the latter.
>>
>>by two simultaneous developments (a) it was integrated with the
>>Windows shell, and (b) it won all the reviews. How do we know to which
>>development we should attribute its sudden rise in popularity?
>
>Perhaps the fact that the rise in popularity really was "sudden" ? I mean,
>it's not like everyone just suddenly downloaded IE.
>
Uh, that's *EXACTLY* what happened. Don't you remember? IE was a joke
compared to Navigator at Versions 1 and 2, semi-serious competition at
Version 3, and totally *SUPERIOR* at Version 4. When IE 4.0 came out
to glowing reviews - that's when its popularity exploded.
>>
>>Yeah, right. Try taking the standard shell out of any of the Linux
>>distributions without changing anything else (config files, etc.). See
>>if you have a usable system after that.
>
>Sure you can. Replace bash with any bourne compatible shell.
>
Excuse me, but the Judge didn't say "replace"; he said "remove".
>
>Scripts tend
>to be written for the bourne shell ( which has a bunch of compatible
>implementations ).
>
>Whether you realise it or not, you just squashed your own argument. UNIX
>shells are an example of a product that can be provided by any vendor
>( and not necessarily the OS vendor either ).
>
Again, Judge Jackson didn't tell Microsoft to replace IE with a
compatible alternative. He told them to take IE out and that's it.
Take /bin/*sh out of your typical Unix OS package and you'll end up
with a system that doesn't boot, plain and simple. Go ahead, try it;
then tell me whose argument has just been squashed.
>>
>>That's ridiculous. If their intent was to prevent competition, then
>>why did they bother making IE *BETTER* than Navigator, to the tune of
>>nearly unanimous praise?
>
>Why did Ben Johnson run as fast as he could, even though he cheated ?
>
Was the fact that he finished first sufficient evidence of cheating?
>>
>>I'm saying that although the emails seem damning, a
>>totally different picture of intent emerges when you consider the
>>*OTHER* facts in this case - something that you and the judge refuse
>>to do for some reason.
>
>The judge, unlike you, has viewed and considered all of the facts of the
>case.
>
Give me a break. Judge Jackson understands squat about how the current
design and implementation of IE differs from that before the
integration.
>
>To pretend that you are better informed than the judge is foolish
>and arrogant.
>
When it comes to software design and implementation, I am a million
times better informed. I'm sorry if you find this an arrogant
attitude. I'll reconsider my position when His Honor has spent 14
years developing commercial software.
>
>You may well disagree with the judge, as may Microsoft's
>lawyers who are also well informed. But it's not as if the judge didn't
>"consider" facts of the case -- or if it is, then Microsoft's defence
>are incompetent, which isn't really the judge's fault.
>
What if he was exposed to all the facts, yet chose to ignore the
majority of them? That's what Microsoft is claiming for their appeal.
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux or Windows 2000 ????
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 17:17:50 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I have heard a lot of things about Linux.
>
> I'm running happily W2K and now I'd like to know a valid
> reason for switching from Windows 2000 to Linux? Why?
> What advantage does the person gain running Linux?
> Can some of you qeniuses tell me ???
Sounds like your mind is already made up, but what the hell?
>
> Because Linux is a stable ?? Yes, I believe that, but so is W2K.
Stable is in the eye of the beerholder, er something. W2K is more
stable than 98, Linux is more/as stable as W2k, BSD is more/as stable as
Linux. Blah, blah, blah ad infinity...
>
> It costs less, yes it's true. But I'm only buying W2K once, and am all
> set for at least 5 years if not more.
> Besided, time is money. I will lose more money by screwing around
> with a new system that I don't even know and that may not even support
> the hardware that Windwows does.
It's a matter of whether you want to learn something or not, not whether
you can gain money right off the bat. Maybe if you are thinking of
money, think long term. You would have one more thing to stick in your
resume, and it may be enough to earn you a few more bucks later on. It
worked for me.
>
> What software am I going to run on it ??? All the world class software
> is written for Windows. Hardly anything is ported to Linux.
Bullshit. Not all world class software is written for Windows. Some of
it is, yes, some of it is written for Linux, some of it is written for
BSD, some of it for commercial *nix, some for OS/400. Again, 'world
class' is in the eye of the beholder. Perception is different from
fact. Unless you are trying to use your perception as fact.
>
> I'm a Windows developer, why should I spend 2 years of my life learning
> how to program a new ssytem, that may eventually die anyway ???
This could be countered with the equally open-minded (and equally
eroneous), "Why should I waste my time with Windows when it will be gone
in a couple of years anyway?"
>
> I can create a great application using Visual Basic or Visual C++ in a
> matter of few days. I'm not sure if that's posible in Linux. I haven't
> heard about any Visual development envir. for Linux ...
There's already K-Develop and many other products available right now,
and more coming all the time. Kylix is a big name coming for Delphi
support soon. There's all kinds of options.
>
> The only way they (companies) can defeat Microsoft is with the help of
> mom - Government. That's the only way they can do it, they can't
> succeed on the merit alone. Sun Microsystems goes even so far as to get
> involved European Union. Now that's real abuse of government power.
> Here is the clear indication who is THE LOSER.
Ah, and here we see why you REALLY post to Linux newsgroups. If you
really think you can get a rise out of us so easily, you need to get a
cluestick rammed up....
Anyway, you came and asked questions that you didn't want answers to (as
you answered yourself even within the questions with smart ass
comments). You attack *nix in a *nix oriented group. I hope you don't
expect to have made any new friends. Please, do yourself and the rest
of us a huge favor and don't bother trying Linux. You are obviously
already of the opinion that it sucks, and if you were to try it you
would go out of your way to prove what shit it is.
Having said all of that as if you are a stranger, allow me to add:
DeadPengiun/Steve/Simon/etc. can't you do any better than this? You
should really work on developing better personality differences if you
want to convince us you are different people.
>
> I can't wait to see your replies
You got one. God knows why I responded to you yet again.
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: OSguy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: maximum (?) linux
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 17:19:10 -0500
Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
> They may think they are promoting Linux, but they are really just
> promoting Windows through bad Linux advocacy.
What is the possbility that Linus could sue them for libel? Sounds like they
need something to motivate them to do better, or go away. (I too have seen the
magazine and came away with the conclusion that they were trying to scare people
away from Linux).
------------------------------
From: OSguy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Free WebSphere Homepage Builder 4.0 for Linux
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 17:26:45 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> IBM developerWorks
> allows you to download WebSphere Homepage Builder for Linux for free
> and use it fully for up to 60 days from the time you first install the
> program.
Then it isn't free. It is only a trial or demo version. Free != Demo.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
