Linux-Advocacy Digest #468, Volume #28 Fri, 18 Aug 00 02:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Joseph)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("JS/PL")
Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company (Joseph)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Stephen S. Edwards II)
Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous Wintrolls
and Authentic Linvocates)
Re: Fragmentation of Linux Community? Yeah, right! (Mark S. Bilk)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Pat McCann)
Re: Fragmentation of Linux Community? Yeah, right! (Mark S. Bilk)
She/he/it is back! was (Re: Windows has made me stupid !!! Thanks, Bill. (Windows
is worst than Crack-Cocaine))
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Pat McCann)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 22:05:25 -0700
From: Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
JS/PL wrote:
> "rj friedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Wed, 16 Aug 2000 17:10:17 "Christopher Smith"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > Too bad for all of you. In a democracy not everybody likes
> > every law - but they still have to abide by them - like it
> > or not. MS broke the law; they got caught; the United States
> > of America took them to court; the United Statesa of America
> > proved they were guilty. Whether or not *you* like the law
> > has nothing to do with it. Live with it.
>
> Depends upon the interpretation of the law. To me a drunk driver who kills a
> family has commited murder and IS a mass murderer. yet in the eyes of the
> law he/she has merely commited accidental manslaughter. To the DOJ and
> their collusive judge, Microsoft is a monopoly, yet to consumers Microsoft
> is just_another_choice.
You assume you can speak for consumers. You cannot. We speak via our legal
representatives - the DOJ.
The market is distorted by monopoly power thus the market does not speak for
consumers - it is manipulated and distorted so badly that it needs to be fixed
by splitting MS.
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Fri, 18 Aug 2000 00:52:12 -0400
Reply-To: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Or do research.
>
> There's a lot of good work that doesn't fall under communism - human sprit
and
> curiosity - working towards a common good. You know, stuff they teach in
> church.
Building and selling an operating system as a publicly traded company
doesn't fall under the category of charity work....giving away billions and
billions and billions of dollars does though. Now lets see...who might I be
talking about? Ohh..and you can keep your church, I've got no use for them.
> Ironic that the internet wasn't a for profit project.
Well, it seems that the internet has turned into a for profit project, which
even in my opinion is somewhat sickening. Every Tom Dick and Harry wants to
"Make a million" on every dumbfuck idea imaginable. I design websites for
companies and get way too many idiots thinking they'll put up a website and
retire from this newfound "brilliant" idea.
>
> JS/PL wrote:
>
> > "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > In other words, your company won't make a product if it can make a
> > > profit on it; it has to be able to profiteer (restrict access to it in
> > > order to charge exorbitant profits) or it isn't worth the investment.
> > > This is the standard mode of business today, and rather than being
> > > responsible for the wonders of the modern world, it merely takes
> > > advantage of it, and purports to take responsibility for it.
> >
> > Marx would be proud of the above thesis. Here's an idea...move to Cuba,
they
> > look like they are thriving on the philosophy above....join the big
party in
> > the streets down south Max.
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 22:09:52 -0700
From: Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company
Joe Ragosta wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joseph
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > OS X is "OS ten" It's a minor change in name relative to the BSD roots
> > of the
> > OS.
>
> I've wondered about that. They basically did three things by choosing OS
> X:
>
> 1. Created a nomenclature which is going to be mispronounced. Regularly.
>
Yes. MS X-box and OS X.
>
> 2. Made it look like OS X is only a one step change from Mac OS 9.x.
>
yes. But remember that Transitions are BAD. Make it look minor when it is
major.
>
> 3. Made it effectively impossible to continue to improve Mac OS 9.x if
> they choose to do so.
No
I see the Mac OS Classic.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen S. Edwards II)
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: 18 Aug 2000 05:18:42 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joseph) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Christopher Smith wrote:
>
>> "Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
8<SNIP>8
>> > Then let me be clear - your opinion has NO weight. why? You don't
>> > like
>> the
>> > laws and you ignore the principles on which we establish facts and
>> > truth. Fine. Okay.
>>
>> If you think my opinion has no weight because I disagree with the law,
>> then I can't think why you are worth discussing anything with at all.
>
>Oh no. It's not me.
>
>Let me be clear - Your opinion has no weight because it has no weight.
>What you think about the Law has no impact on the law. NONE.
Yes, I'm afraid that it is you. You yourself stated, that
the reason why Christopher's opinion has no weight, was that
because he "doesn't like the laws (ie: disagrees with the laws),
and that because he ignores the principles (ie: sees no value
in the principles) on which we establish facts and truth."
The above was _YOUR_ reasoning as to _WHY_ his opinion
has no weight. In short, you said that his opinion
carries no weight, because he disagrees with the law.
Then you changed your reasoning to say that the reason
why his opinion carries no weight, is simply "because".
You are trying to convolute your argument by changing
wording.
Now, in regards to changing the laws, nobody's opinion
will carry any weight unless it is shared by a large
number of people. But if that's what you meant, you
should have stated so. Christopher isn't making his
opinion out to be anything but his own, AFAICT.
8<SNIP>8
>> > It is very important to understand how extreme and unreasonable one
>> > has to
>> be
>> > to hold your pro MS beliefs.
>>
>> You mistake "not anti-MS beliefs" with "pro MS beliefs". Microsoft
>> are just another company, no worse, better or different to IBM, Apple,
>> Corel etc etc. They're all after the same thing.
>
>That is NOT the argument.
>
>First Pro-Ms is very accurate since your beliefs support MS arguments.
>"Not anti-MS" is a nonsense term.
Just because he agrees with Microsoft does not make
him a Pro-MS person. I have never once seen Christopher
say "I am pro-Microsoft", in any sense of that phrase.
Practically none of us here have any love or hate for
any company or corporation. We simply like WindowsNT.
Does liking WindowsNT mean having to like Microsoft?
No. But I do think it does mean having to like Dave
Cutler... at least a little. :-)
The truth is, you're doing what lawyers do... taking
words, twisting their meaning, and then trying to form
a solid definition of another person's stance based on
those twisted words.
Sorry, Joeseph, but the COMNA inhabitants are too sharp
to fall for that sort of nonsensical babbling. We've
had lots of "lawyer" types for breakfast in this forum.
>You are free to disagree with a monopoly laws but it's a lie to pretend
>that your disagreement means the laws have no relevance on the real
>world. This isn't about a set of for profit companies you choose to
He's speaking from his perception. He's not speaking
on behalf of the entire world.
He's not saying that his opinion means anything to anyone
but himself. He's saying that he sees no logic in blindly
agreeing with the law, simply because it's written down in
some document, AFAICT.
>lump - it is about monopoly power. You have a obligation to be civil
>and accept the anti-trust laws distinguish MS. It isn't honest to
Oh?... He or any of us "must" "accept"? Bullshit. We
don't have to "accept" anything.
I have no duty to accept the laws that are established,
just as I have no duty to agree that Bill Clinton is
a brilliant President, or that the inheritance tax is
an excellent idea.
I have a duty to comply with their stipulations, however,
and also to accept the consequences if I choose not to
do so, until they are either removed, or changed.
Don't confuse "accept" with "comply with". The two terms mean
very different things.
>misrepresent and lump dislike of the MS monopoly power with dislike of
>Apple or IBM.
And why not? Apple is well-known for being incredibly
manipulative and controlling. The only difference
between them and Microsoft is that Microsoft has more
money.
And as for IBM... if you think they were anything but
a monopoly, then you were clearly born sometime after
the early 1990's.
So, according to you, we must all blindly follow what
precedence Reno sets forth. That is a very weak-minded
outlook. I'd rather lick glass off of an alley dumpster
than be that submissive.
--
.-----.
|[_] | Stephen S. Edwards II | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount/
| = :| -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
| -| "Even though you can't see the details, you can sense them.
| | And that is what makes great computer graphics."
|_..._| -- Robert Abel of Abel Image Research
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous
Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 22:11:45 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 17:17:24 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
>
> >Windows is playing catchup with Linux by putting FTP client into the file
> >manager in the form of a patched Windows Explorer as of IE4 when Linux
had
> >it well before.
>
> Are you saying that Windows didn't have any file managers that were
ftp-aware
> before IE ? I'd find that surprising.
That is what was stated by others in this thread.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Fragmentation of Linux Community? Yeah, right!
Date: 18 Aug 2000 05:27:17 GMT
In article <8ni3db$j0s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk) wrote in
><8ngmu2$sv7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>In article <tTMm5.6288$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>The KDE people do not seem to be taking this lying down. There is
>>>probably going to be an all-out war soon. The days of peaceful
>>>cooperation between KDE and GNOME are probably over.
>>Erik Funkenbusch has a long history as a pro-Microsoft
>>anti-Linux propagandist.
>>
>>A KDE programmer at the LinuxWorld Expo told me that the
>>two groups certainly are cooperating, e.g., to insure that
>>the apps of each desktop system will run on the other.
>>This even includes writing wrappers for each other's
>>component facilities (that allow, for example, a live
>>spreadsheet to be embedded in a wordprocessor document).
>>So a Gnome spreadsheet can be part of a KDE document, or
>>vice versa.
>Ah, it's COMNA's favorite conspiracy theorist.
>Tell me Mark, is Erik getting paid more than me?
>Because if he is, then that's the last straw!
It isn't "conspiracy theory" to point out that some people
have been spreading FUD and outright lies against Linux
and in favor of Microsoft in Usenet and elsewhere. These
include both Erik Funkenbusch and Stephen Edwards.
Funkenbusch provided a moment of hilarity when he opined
that Microsoft left its bogus error message in a Windows
beta, warning users not to use DR-DOS because... they just
forgot to remove it! Couldn't have been that they were
spreading lies about a competitor's product in order to
kill it.
And Edwards has crapped up the c.o.l.a newsgroup with many
thousands of nasty, pointless, and in some cases lying
articles against Linux (mostly last year), and has given
as his reason simply that he had nothing better to do with
his time.
The reason I replied here to Funkenbusch, and mentioned that
he's a long-time anti-Linux/pro-Microsoft propagandist, is
that he's spreading lies about the KDE and Gnome development
teams, and this would make people hesitate to use Linux, so
they'd stay with Microsoft.
He's trying to get readers to take his word for what he's
saying, without any evidence whatsoever. I pointed out
that his history shows that he obviously has an axe to
grind (whether Microsoft is paying him or not), and so
his opinion is *not trustworthy*.
Here's a list of most of the anti-Linux propagandists:
Drestin Black, Chad Myers, Erik Funkenbusch, Stephen Edwards,
Chad Mulligan/boobaabaa, Jeff Szarka, Robert Moir, Brent Davies,
Steve Sheldon, Boris, ubercat/Odin, Xerophyte/Kelly_Robinson,
Pete Goodwin, [EMAIL PROTECTED](newsguy.com),
Cuor di Mela, etc.
Plus these names, which are all used by one person!
Steve/Mike/Simon/teknite/keymaster/keys88/"S"/Sponge/Syphon/
"Sewer Rat"/Sarek/steveno/scummer/McSwain/Swango/piddy/
pickle_pete/wazzoo/"leg log"/mike_hunt/Heather/Amy/claire_lynn/
susie_wong/Ishmeal_hafizi/"Saul Goldblatt"/Proculous/
Tiberious/Jerry_Butler/"Tim Palmer"/BklynBoy/bison/Wobbles/
screwbilk/deadpenguin/"%^$&&&&&&&&&&&&@!!!!!!!!!!!!!.com"/
The Cat (hepcat)[EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)/etc.
The rest of Stephen Edwards' article is his usual sneering
crap.
>I'm not inviting him to the next Black Helicopter
>Expo in Vegas.
>
>Sorry Erik, but you should have thought twice
>about assuming dictatorship of the secret Mars
>colony before I could. Bastard. :-P
>
>Also Mark, could you please hack into Microsoft's
>secret alien artifacts database for me... I need
>to verify that we are in fact going to institute
>plan alpha-gamma-prime-bata-woogie-boogie-shoobop.
>
>Oh, and Mark... ... ... they're on to you. RUN!@#
>--
>.-----.
>|[_] | Stephen S. Edwards II | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount/
>| = :| -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>| -| "Even though you can't see the details, you can sense them.
>| | And that is what makes great computer graphics."
>|_..._| -- Robert Abel of Abel Image Research
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
From: Pat McCann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 17 Aug 2000 22:42:34 -0700
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Further, in considering whether the previous court, which did not
> consider disassembly to be fair use, had erred, it was noted that they
> had "ignored [the fact that the work was software] entirely". This
> indicates to me that whether the work is software is "cogent", not
> merely "relevant". [;-)]
[;-<] I guess we're going to have to keep seeing that word. Please
tell us what it means and so we can translate.
"This indicates to me that" "whether the work is software"
"is cogent", "not merely relevant".
So you find that "whether the work is software" is "forcibly
convincing", "powerfully persuasive", "weighty", or "potent"?
That's what my dictionaries imply you are saying and it doesn't
make sense. What ARE you saying? Please explain, not complain.
Did you not use
http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=cogent ?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Fragmentation of Linux Community? Yeah, right!
Date: 18 Aug 2000 05:53:37 GMT
In article <yJ2n5.6518$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Tim Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > In your face, Windows advocates! Linux fragmentation my butt!
>>
>> I think its healthy, regardless of all the doom mongers' whining. I'm
>> no KDE fan myself, but I know a lot of Windows users who may not have
>> switched had it not been for it. Maybe the extra pressure from this
>> push toward GNOME will prod KDE into dumping that ridiculous licensing /
>> kickback scheme.
>I don't know about you, but if I'd just spent the last what, 2-3 years
>working my ass off on developing something like KDE and then the majority of
>the Linux/unix community decides to go with a competing effort,
A few large corporations do *not* constitute "the majority
of the Linux/unix community". That community consists of
all the *people* who use Linux -- one person one vote --
and as long as even a few million of us are using KDE, the
KDE development team will rightfully feel that their work
is very much appreciated!
If some corporations put money into Gnome development,
that's fine. It benefits Gnome and its users, and also
helps KDE, which is free to incorporate any of the Gnome
code that's useful. That's the magic of Open Source.
>I'd be
>rather pissed that I had wasted the last 3 years of my life doing virtually
>nothing.
>
>That can't be good for the morale of open source developers.
This is a vicious lie that Funkenbusch is spreading, as part
of his consistent propaganda campaign against Linux, Open
Source, etc., and in favor of Microsoft. Check his previous
posts in DejaNews (when the Power Search starts working
again). Everything he posts reads like it comes straight
from Microsoft.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.windows2000,alt.linux,alt.windows98
Subject: She/he/it is back! was (Re: Windows has made me stupid !!! Thanks, Bill.
(Windows is worst than Crack-Cocaine))
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 22:49:44 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
She/he/it is back!
What a short retirement.
Hello deadpenguin/steve/simon/etc,
You still have not posted and apology and retration of your dishonet and
malicious assult on my credibility. Until you have, your credibility is
zero.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
From: Pat McCann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 17 Aug 2000 23:02:10 -0700
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Quit blowing smoke up my ass.
> Quite blowing smoke up everybody else's ass.
There's something else I don't understand.
Seriously. What's that mean?
Stop lying? Stop hurting me? Stop pleasuring me?
Enquiring minds want to know. (TM)**
** Trademarks belong to trademarks owners.
(Why do we have to explain that?)
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
