Linux-Advocacy Digest #615, Volume #28 Thu, 24 Aug 00 12:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux programmers dont live on this planet! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Gregory L. Hansen)
Re: Just converted (Tim Kelley)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("Christopher Smith")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (david
raoul derbes)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Joe
Ragosta)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Joe Ragosta)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: refrigerator using Linux? ("Stuart Fox")
Re: refrigerator using Linux? ("Stuart Fox")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Joe Ragosta)
Re: When it's time to not be nice... (was Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic
Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux growth stagnating)
("sandrews")
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating ("sandrews")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Marty)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux programmers dont live on this planet!
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 10:19:44 -0400
DES wrote:
>
> I am an average guy who also got fed up with MS and decided to give Linux a
> try. Being an average guy I guessed I would need help so paid Red Hat for
> their 6.2 Delux version which came with telephone help for 30 days. Yes I
> did RTFM and you know what I found!!! A whole new bloody language!!! For
> those of you new to Linux; "Image" now means "copy", "Server" now means
What is the definition of "image" in Bill-Gates land?
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory L. Hansen)
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: 24 Aug 2000 14:30:08 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <8o35t7$dc7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ZnU
>> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> >> Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > Of *course* the absolute dollar amounts saved by the wealthy are
>> >> > higher,
>> >> > but that's only because they're paying a hell of a lot more in
>> >> > absolute
>> >> > terms in the first place.
>> >>
>> >> But they can afford a hell of a lot more in absolute terms. The rich
>> >> are
>> >> doing quite well in this country. They don't need any tax breaks. I
>> >> won't support a tax break that gives 60% of the money to the top 5% of
>> >> the population. Especially not if the guy proposing it claims it
>> >
>> >Of course, you neglect to mention that that 5% of the population is
>> >paying 90% of the taxes.
>>
>> Doesn't that 5% also control more than 90% of the wealth?
>
>
>Probably.
>
>But the point is that even with the Bush tax cuts, they're still paying
>a vastly higher percentage of their income in taxes than the poor or
>middle class.
And I've seen it said that if you're making more than a million dollars a
year and you're paying income taxes, you need to hire a new accountant.
At any rate, once people start making more than about ten times what I've
ever made, it's hard for me to feel sympathetic about their tax burden.
--
"What are the possibilities of small but movable machines? They may or
may not be useful, but they surely would be fun to make."
-- Richard P. Feynman, 1959
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Just converted
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 09:33:52 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > While the Windows 9x TCP/IP stack is a poor performer, it has no
> problems
> > with 1Mb/s. My old cable modem under 98 routinely pushed 1.5-3Mb's
> without
> > blinking an eye. Internally, I've gotten as much as 50Mb/s on a 100bT
> > network. (I'm not bragging about anything here, these are poor
> numbers, but
> > nowhere near as poor as you claim).
> >
> > There must be some other issue here if this is true.
> >
>
> No other issues - Linux performs better on networks right through the
> bank. I have plenty examples on site.
>
> >
> > The only reason why this might be true is if you are using some kind
> of
> > firewall that is sensitive to Windows generated packets.
> >
> >
>
> You will be amazed at the speed difference in dial-up access between
> Windows and Linux boxes. The past weekend a budy and me tried it out -
> a Windows 98 box with 550MHz AMD and 128MB RAM vs a Linux box with
> 400MHz AMD and 64MB RAM. We first connected with the Windows machine
> and checked how long it took to download the Norton Antivirus Update
> Files (each about 2.5MB). We then did exactly the same on the Linux
> box. In both instances we used the command line FTP applications. Linux
> performed very roughly 166% faster.
I've never noticed a difference myself (in speed) ... I think
there are so many factors at play here that you really can't make
a meaningful comparison; you need a more controlled environment
for that.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[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: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 00:50:07 +1000
"Marty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Christopher Smith wrote:
> >
> > "Marty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Christopher Smith wrote:
> > *sigh*
> >
> > I meant compelling alternatives for the majority. Obviously if you're
> > involved in something like DTP then, say, MacOS has been a compelling
> > alternative for years (indeed, it would be the paltform for which there
> > haven't been any compelling alternatives).
>
> Well now I ask you to indulge me once more and consider which "majority",
> keeping in mind the multitude of corporate users, etc., and not just
> implicitly limiting your scope to the home user crowd.
The majority that has, thus far, determined Windows to be its platform of
choice.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (david raoul derbes)
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:40:52 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Courageous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> A fair number of pretty wealthy Americans pay *no tax whatsoever* in this
>> country. There are all manner of tax shelters and dodges that wealthy
>> people can avail themselves of, ...
>
>You make it sound so easy.
>
>If you truly understand this to be true, you can describe,
>in simple English, the simple accounting to make this happen.
I believe that a little research will reveal those lucky Americans who
have a net wealth of several tens of millions who paid no tax, none,
last year. How they did it I don't know; I am neither an accountant
nor an attorney. People who are in a position to know (Cokie Roberts
on ABC's "Sunday Morning" and Nina Totenberg on NPR) have said over
the years that there are such people (not a hell of a lot, under
a thousand), and I believe them.
Try Nader's web site, or Google.
David Derbes [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
>C//
------------------------------
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, 24 Aug 2000 14:37:15 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-- snip --
> The term "abusive monopoly" is an oxymoron;
Hmm, I think you mean "the term 'abusive monopoly' is redundant."
Kind of like "violent explosion."
Curtis
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:53:17 GMT
In article <Utap5.270$v3.3535@uchinews>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(david raoul derbes) wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Courageous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> A fair number of pretty wealthy Americans pay *no tax whatsoever* in
> >> this
> >> country. There are all manner of tax shelters and dodges that wealthy
> >> people can avail themselves of, ...
> >
> >You make it sound so easy.
> >
> >If you truly understand this to be true, you can describe,
> >in simple English, the simple accounting to make this happen.
>
> I believe that a little research will reveal those lucky Americans who
> have a net wealth of several tens of millions who paid no tax, none,
> last year. How they did it I don't know; I am neither an accountant
> nor an attorney. People who are in a position to know (Cokie Roberts
> on ABC's "Sunday Morning" and Nina Totenberg on NPR) have said over
> the years that there are such people (not a hell of a lot, under
> a thousand), and I believe them.
There are, of course, legitimate reasons why a person could have a net
worth of millions of dollars and have no income.
Many family farmers, for example, will have a huge net worth but little
or no income in a bad year.
>
> Try Nader's web site, or Google.
And there are also a number of people who claim to be poor who file
multiple fraudulent tax returns to get an earned income tax credit--some
of them have received dozens of EIC checks per year for years.
The few people who abuse the system shouldn't be considered as typical.
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:02:38 -0300
"T. Max Devlin" escribi�:
>
> Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"T. Max Devlin" escribi�:
> >>
> >> Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >> >"T. Max Devlin" escribi�:
> >> >>
> >> >> Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >> >> >"T. Max Devlin" escribi�:
> >> >> [...]
> >> >> >> >You see, you still don't understand. the "T" is not a representation
> >> >> >> >of the effects, it's a representation of the bit itself.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> The affects are an abstraction;
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Oh, no. The effects are very concrete. They cause some electrons
> >> >> >to go to one state instead of another.
> >> >>
> >> >> I think you meant "discrete", not "concrete".
> >> >
> >> >I think I meant concrete, as in "not abstract".
> >>
> >> OK, so I tried. You're wrong.
> >
> >Nice argument that one. So, you say the effects of the sticky bit
> >are not concrete?
>
> No, I say (and said, and will continue to say) that the sticky bit is
> not concrete, though its visual display is less abstract than the bit
> itself.
I suppose that when you said
> The affects are an abstraction;
You actually meant something entirely different. What an ass.
> [...more misguided quibbling deleted...]
Hey, you also deleted what I wrote ;-)
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: Joe Ragosta <[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, 24 Aug 2000 14:57:43 GMT
In article <8o3bhg$e2b$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In article <8o35t7$dc7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory L. Hansen) wrote:
> >
> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ZnU
> >> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> >> Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > Of *course* the absolute dollar amounts saved by the wealthy are
> >> >> > higher,
> >> >> > but that's only because they're paying a hell of a lot more in
> >> >> > absolute
> >> >> > terms in the first place.
> >> >>
> >> >> But they can afford a hell of a lot more in absolute terms. The
> >> >> rich
> >> >> are
> >> >> doing quite well in this country. They don't need any tax breaks. I
> >> >> won't support a tax break that gives 60% of the money to the top 5%
> >> >> of
> >> >> the population. Especially not if the guy proposing it claims it
> >> >
> >> >Of course, you neglect to mention that that 5% of the population is
> >> >paying 90% of the taxes.
> >>
> >> Doesn't that 5% also control more than 90% of the wealth?
> >
> >
> >Probably.
> >
> >But the point is that even with the Bush tax cuts, they're still paying
> >a vastly higher percentage of their income in taxes than the poor or
> >middle class.
>
>
> And I've seen it said that if you're making more than a million dollars a
> year and you're paying income taxes, you need to hire a new accountant.
The tax and spend crowd says all sorts of things.
It's very, very rare for someone earning a million dollars to pay little
or no tax.
AMT took care of that.
>
> At any rate, once people start making more than about ten times what I've
> ever made, it's hard for me to feel sympathetic about their tax burden.
So justice only applies to the poor?
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E.
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 12:05:51 -0300
"T. Max Devlin" escribi�:
>
> Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"T. Max Devlin" escribi�:
> [...]
> >Neither are they required to pay TT (not Qt) a licensing fee now in
> >order to benefit from Linux. Max, you have no idea of what you are
> >talking about (again).
>
> And you, Roberto, are still trying to avoid correcting the matter. Are
> you so incapable of grasping abstractions that you cannot substitute
> "QT" for "the commercial entity responsible for QT"?
Are you so incapable of dealing wuith reality that you can't see a
company and a product are not the same thing, and keep on using
the wrong one?
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: refrigerator using Linux?
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 15:52:30 +0100
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> In 1985, posting a 1 Megabyte photograph to USENET would have been
> a GROSS violation of netiquette.
>
> Today, there are newsgroups devoted to same.
Why don't you go post your sig there then?
------------------------------
From: "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: refrigerator using Linux?
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 15:52:53 +0100
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> So does answering trolls who like to spread lies about me.
If they're trolls, why do you bother answering at all?
------------------------------
From: Joe Ragosta <[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, 24 Aug 2000 15:00:13 GMT
In article <8o3bun$l4o$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> -- snip --
>
> > The term "abusive monopoly" is an oxymoron;
>
> Hmm, I think you mean "the term 'abusive monopoly' is redundant."
>
> Kind of like "violent explosion."
>
But he'd still be wrong.
It's entirely possible to have a monopoly which abuses its position.
In fact, in some cases, a monopoly could be good for consumers.
(such as when you have low barriers to entry but large economies of
scale. A monopoly would be able to take advantage of the economies of
scale, but if they raised prices much, someone else could try to enter
the market).
------------------------------
From: "sandrews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: When it's time to not be nice... (was Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and
Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux growth stagnating)
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:03:44 -0500
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Roberto Alsina
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have more sides than the average icosahedron. So do you, probably.
>
What`s a icosahedron ???
------------------------------
From: "sandrews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2000 11:08:58 -0500
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, T. Max Devlin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Said <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribi�:
>>> > Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribi�:
>>> > > > Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>> > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] escribi�:
>>> > > > > > Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> [...]
>>> Occasionally, vulgarity is the appropiate answer. Why should I
>>> restrain my means of expression.
>>
>>Note: dangerious ground, using that argument to defend vulgarity could
>>be setting the foundation to use it to defend the using any insulting
>>expressions here, including racial slurs, religious slurs, and ethnic
>>slurs.
>
> Only if "a racial slur is the appropriate answer", and I can't see that
> happening, honestly. Use of vulgarity is quite appropriate in some
> situations. Racial, religious, or ethnic slurs are not.
>
Yes indeed, as when one hits their finger with a mis-placed hammer blow.
------------------------------
From: Marty <[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, 24 Aug 2000 11:16:15 -0400
Christopher Smith wrote:
>
> "Marty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Christopher Smith wrote:
> > >
> > > "Marty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Christopher Smith wrote:
> > > *sigh*
> > >
> > > I meant compelling alternatives for the majority. Obviously if you're
> > > involved in something like DTP then, say, MacOS has been a compelling
> > > alternative for years (indeed, it would be the paltform for which there
> > > haven't been any compelling alternatives).
> >
> > Well now I ask you to indulge me once more and consider which "majority",
> > keeping in mind the multitude of corporate users, etc., and not just
> > implicitly limiting your scope to the home user crowd.
>
> The majority that has, thus far, determined Windows to be its platform of
> choice.
So, reapplying this context to your original statement, you have just
said that there haven't been any compelling alternatives to Windows for
the majority of users that have determined that Windows is their
platform of choice. That's about as insightful as saying X=X.
------------------------------
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, 24 Aug 2000 15:25:08 GMT
On Thu, 24 Aug 2000 06:15:38 GMT, ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chad
>> Irby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[deletia]
>> A month or so later, I walked in when our secretary was discussing
>> women's health care with her. She had spent some time in England, and
>> she complained about how some man high-up in the bureacracy set the
>> rules on how often the government-supported health plan would let a
>> woman get some basic exams. It was much less often than the medical
>> community considers adequate, and she spouted off about the evils of
>> government-directed health plans where men make ill-informed decisions
>> about women's health.
>
>Yeah, that's much worse than private health plans where men make very
>well informed decisions about corporate profits, with little regard for
>anyone's health.
However, there remains at least the theoretical possibility
to sue a corporation. No such alternative exists for the
governemnt. Corporations, as large as they are, are simply
easier to bully into behaiving reasonably.
[deletia]
There also exists the small chance that you can simply replace
one private provider with a more suitable one.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
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, 24 Aug 2000 15:26:52 GMT
On Thu, 24 Aug 2000 06:20:58 +1000, Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"ZnU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <8o0tv0$cqq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Christopher Smith"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > "ZnU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > In article <8npmf2$k8t$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Christopher Smith"
>> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > One might note that the two main players in this particular case,
>> > > > Office and IE, *are* superior products, in pretty much everyone's
>> > > > opinion.
>> > >
>> > > Again, that's true _now_. Microsoft has made it unprofitable for
>> > > competitors to bother, so there is no serious competition.
>> >
>> > With Office, it's been true for a very, very long time. Back to the
>> > Windows 3.1 days.
>>
>> Which only serves to demonstrate that Microsoft has a very long history
>> of this sort of thing.
>
>Oh, for fuck's sake, grow up.
>
>Is it _that_ hard to admit, even to yourself, that Office is the most
>popular suite because it is, and has been for a long time, the _best_ suite
Yes it is. Many of us used BETTER products in the days of Win 3.1.
>? Office has been being reviewed and voted as the best office suite pretty
>much since the application category itself was first created.
Most people claiming that also can't support that claim with details.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
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, 24 Aug 2000 15:28:11 GMT
On Thu, 24 Aug 2000 00:57:16 -0400, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"josco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
>> Some facts:
>> The Anti-trust investigation against MS began in 1989.
>
>snippage
>
>Yea that's the time the government crawled up Microsofts ass and spent
>18,000 man hours looking for ANY prosecutable offence and had to stand
There was also management in place at the time that was
determined not to act in anti-trust matters. The
relevant quotes have been posted here several times.
>before a judge and say, "We've found no prosecutable offences your honor". I
>would venture to guess that 1 in 50 large corporations could be so pure.
>
>
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
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, 24 Aug 2000 15:32:47 GMT
On Wed, 23 Aug 2000 23:19:09 -0400, JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Chad Irby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>
>> I think the comments you put in are hilarious, though...
>>
>> Among others, you quote two representatives from Microsoft's home state,
>> like they're unbiased champions of free markets or something.
>>
>> > US Rep. Jennifer Dunn (-WA)
>> >
>> > US Sen. Slade Gorton (R-WA)
>>
>> Yeah, those millions of dollars Microsoft dumped into their election
>> coffers had nothing to do with their public opinions or anything
>
>Ok since you think they're so hilarious here's some more.
>
>"Today may be a good day for the Clinton Administration's Legislation by
>Litigation agenda, but it is a sad day for the American consumer. If the
Anyone who makes a statement such as this clearly has no understanding
of how American Law works or is simply engaging in cheap demagogery.
[deletia]
So a clueless Senator is adding 'ignorant of computing history' to
'willfully ignorant of how common law works'.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
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, 24 Aug 2000 15:34:43 GMT
On Fri, 25 Aug 2000 00:50:07 +1000, Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Marty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Christopher Smith wrote:
>> >
>> > "Marty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > Christopher Smith wrote:
>> > *sigh*
>> >
>> > I meant compelling alternatives for the majority. Obviously if you're
>> > involved in something like DTP then, say, MacOS has been a compelling
>> > alternative for years (indeed, it would be the paltform for which there
>> > haven't been any compelling alternatives).
>>
>> Well now I ask you to indulge me once more and consider which "majority",
>> keeping in mind the multitude of corporate users, etc., and not just
>> implicitly limiting your scope to the home user crowd.
>
>The majority that has, thus far, determined Windows to be its platform of
>choice.
No, the majority that thus far, determined DOS to be it's
platform of choice.
--
Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
