Linux-Advocacy Digest #322, Volume #29 Tue, 26 Sep 00 20:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Donovan
Rebbechi)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: High level design "chief" seeks "indians" (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: SmartShip needs multiple platforms (Was: Am I the only one that finds this
just a little scary? (Steve Mading)
Re: SmartShip needs multiple platforms (Was: Am I the only one that finds this just
a little scary? (Steve Mading)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Richard)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Aaron Ginn)
Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time? ("Bruce
Malmat")
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:18:35 -0400
On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 03:43:36 GMT, ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joe
>Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > [1] AFDC comprised only 8% of the federal budget, IIRC.
>> >
>>
>> Let's see. 8% of $1.7 trillion is $136 BILLION. Or $500 for every man,
>> woman, and child in the U.S.
>>
>> Not to mention the billions being spent by the states, as well.
>>
>> And the other welfare programs.
>>
>> "Only" 8%, indeed.
>
>What do you pay in taxes? Take 8% of that. Ask yourself if it's worth
>that amount to prevent millions of children from starving to death.
NO...it is NOT.
If the child's own parents have no interest in feeding their own
offspring...why should I?
You see...YOUR method means STEALING MY RESOURCES so that they will
be used for the benefit of the progeny of some lowlife scum sucking
welfare whore and her equally contemptable alcoholic "boyfriends"
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
their behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: 26 Sep 2000 23:32:54 GMT
On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 18:29:41 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>Mike Byrns wrote:
>If Welfare were eliminated....then the only immigrants we would be getting
>would be those who want to work.
I'd say "yes" to reform, but "no" to elimination.
As for immigrants, current policy favours skilled workers -- for example,
a H1B requires a University degree ( in fact a lot of H1B people have a
masters or PhD since they use the education system to get into the
country in the first place ).
The difficult with US immigration policy is that it's difficult to stop
illegals getting in because you've got an exposed border.
>Eliminate welfare, and you won't have any slum & bodega problem.
I don't think eliminating welfare is a cure all. It's not that simple.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:21:06 -0400
JS/PL wrote:
>
> "Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 06:53:20 -0400, JS/PL wrote:
> > >
> > >"Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > >Notice the percentage which is cut as the income gets higher?
> >
> > But the raw $ amount actually scales in the other direction. So more
> > money goes to the high income earner.
> >
> > You don't say anything about how much more money someone who makes a
> million
> > each year would get. My bet is that it's more than any of those other guys
> > would get.
>
> It never ceases to amaze me how people believe that by not taking money away
> from people that those people are GETTING money. If I show up at your door
> and take everything you own and leave you standing with just your underware,
> am I "Giving you a pair of underware"? Tax cuts are not giving anyone
> anything, it's taking less. In the case of the poor, Bushs' plan is to not
> take any federal taxes from the poor.
This is what happens when you come from a viewpoint which dicatates
that ALL money is the rightful property of the bureaucrats, to be
redistributed, willy-nilly, at the whim of politicians.
Fortunately, the American populace is getting fed up with that crap.
>
> >
> > [ snip more about income taxes ]
>
> No - you snipped the part where poor people get a 100% tax cut. Reposted
> below.
>
> Tax Relief for Families of Four
> A family of four making $35,000 will receive a $1,500 tax cut, a 100 percent
> reduction.
> A family of four making $50,000 will receive a $2,000 tax cut, a 50 percent
> reduction.
> A family of four making $75,000 will receive a $2,500 tax cut, a 25 percent
> reduction.
> Tax Relief for Single Parents
> A single mother with one child making $22,000 will receive a $1,000 tax cut,
> a 100 percent reduction.
> A single mother with two children making $32,000 will receive a $1,500 tax
> cut, a 95 percent reduction.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
their behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:22:36 -0400
"Joe R." wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (Donovan Rebbechi) wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 15:34:33 GMT, Joe R. wrote:
> > >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "JS/PL"
> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >That's why the relative numbers are the important part -- not the
> > >dollars.
> > >
> > >I'd venture that the $1500 means more to a $35 K family of 4 than $2500
> > >means to the average $75 K family of 4.
> >
> > Spending cuts also "mean more" to the $35 k family of 4. BTW, that's about
> > $7- a week per family member. Enough for them all to buy a Coke a day.
>
> So we shouldn't give them anything?
>
> >
> > The fact remains that the net effect of Bush's policy ( compared to the
> > status quo ) is a redistribution of resources to the wealthy.
>
> Considering that you keep making things up (such as education spending
> being reduced), you're hardly a reliable source.
>
> How about some evidence?
>
> And how do you call it a redistribution to the wealthy when the lower
> middle class families will be paying 50-100% less than they currently
> are paying, while the cut for the wealthy is a much smaller percentage?
Because that's how Donovan defined "to" in his own private dictionary.
The fact that this same meaning is defined as "from" in every other
dictionary means nothing to Donovan.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: 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: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
their behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 23:40:41 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Most of what consitutes Unix software these days doesn't
> really depend on Unix-isms. This is certainly true of the
> sort of software you would seem to be interested in.
Unless, of course, one considers C/C++ to be a Unix-ism.
What kind of software do I seem to be interested in?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: High level design "chief" seeks "indians"
Date: 26 Sep 2000 23:45:23 GMT
On Tue, 26 Sep 2000 22:41:25 GMT, R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Actually, this isn't too far off from how Linux got started. Richard
>Stallman, and about 10 others (including me) were musing on a usenet
>group, much like this one, about how a UNIX system for under $1000
>including hardware would have an incredible impact on the worlds
>economy. None of us had any time, but this kid in finland put his
>little 10,000 line "Operating system" into Richard's TSX-11 Archive
>and asked if this might be what we were looking for.
Yes, but did he do it because of you ? Or did he start before ?
In any case, this example doesn't really relate to what I was discussing,
because Linus was allowed to be his own boss. It wasn't like you guys
were playing chief, and he was being your indian.
[ diversionary stuff snipped ]
The examples you give of programmers responding to user demands are different
from what I am talking about. The programmers respond to user demands, but
they don't take orders from their users. And they certainly don't accept
a "chief" who doesn't prove his worthiness.
In fact I don't think anyone takes orders ( unless they're being paid ).
People implement the features they want to implement. If a user has a
suggestion, and the developer hears the suggestion and decides he wants to
implement it, then he does so. But the users can't order the developers to do
anything. In fact I doubt that even Linus can order the kernel developers to do
anything. Likewise, the KDE approach has been to offer an API and let
the developers write whatever apps they like for it.
Open source projects get done by doers, not talkers.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: SmartShip needs multiple platforms (Was: Am I the only one that finds
this just a little scary?
Date: 26 Sep 2000 23:42:29 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Steve Mading wrote:
:> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> : Steve Mading wrote:
:> :>
:> :> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Tony Tribelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:> :>
:> :> : I'm not arguing whether various apps are bloated and buggy, some are. I'm
:> :> : not arguing about the politics around Microsoft, MS does act like a bully at
:> :> : times. I merely argue that WinNT itself is not a crappy OS. Feel free to
:> :> : offer some reasons why WinNT is crappy in your opinion, something other than
:> :> : it's not Unix please.
:> :>
:> :> But the things that suck about it ARE side-effects of the fact that
:> :> it's not UNIX. You can't really separate the two - gui is not remotable
:> :> without third-party add-ons,
:>
:> : What's that have to do with the quality of the OS? That's a feature --
:> : gravy. And it's in Whistler so people will have it early next year.
:>
:> I suppose it depends on if you want to call the GUI part of the OS or
:> not. In UNIX it's a seperate application, But how functional is Windows
:> without Explorer and the GDI up?
: Very functional. All services run just fine. I typically run my RAM-challenged NT
: boxen this way. If I want a GUI I just type Explorer<enter>.
How good is the support for running *everything* you need without the GUI,
in other words making all the setting changes, configuring all the software,
etc... It's pretty much standard practice in UNIX to have both a gui
and a tui way to do every important server task.
:> :> does not let you use devices like a
:> :> sequential file,
:>
:> : What are you talking about? Windows can write to sequential files.
:> : Explain.
:>
:> Perhaps I was confusing with the phrase "like a sequential
:> file", which I now realize has two ways to interpet it. The way
:> you took it isn't the way I meant it. Let me rephrase it:
:> "Does not let you use devices as if they were sequential files."
:> In other words, In UNIX, programs that are designed to write to
:> a sequential file will also be able to write to many devices, since
:> in UNIX almost all devices have a sequential file interface on
:> top of them.
: You're talking about pipes then and Windows has them in spades. >,< and | work just
: fine, thank you. Even in the GUI!
That's nice. But I'm not talking about the pipes themselves. I'm
talking about what's at the end of the pipes - the device drivers
that pretend to be files and convert, for example, strings of bytes
into buffered sector writes on a disk drive.
:> (Think, like the old DOS "PRN", and "LPT1",
:> and "COM1" filenames, except that the idea exists for a much
:> larger variety of devices - including tape drives, floppy drives,
:> unformatted disks, audio speaker output, etc).
: Same thing for the most part for stream oriented devices.
Really? You can, for example do something like this to play a sound?
C:\> TYPE Sample.wav > [pseudo_sound_card_filename_here]
Or put a PKZIP file you onto a tape like so,
C:\> COPY archive1.zip [tape_drive_psuedo_filename_here]
or, equivilently:
C:\> TYPE archive1.zip > [tape_drive_psuedo_filename_here]
And then later extract it right off the tape like so:
C:\> PKUNZIP [tape_drive_pseudo_filename_here]
(I don't remember if PKUNZIP is the right command or not,
it's been a while since I've used it, but you get the idea.)
The above commands are Windows nomenclature versions of what
I do in UNIX daily. If there was a Windows equivilent that
was just as simple, I'd be happily surprised.
:> One example of
:> the powerful use of this is that I can copy floppies in a format
:> that my computer doesn't even understand, because I can treat the
:> floppy like a low-level string of bytes and just copy everything
:> verbatim, without the OS needing to interpet what it all means.
:> I can use the same software that normally writes tape archives
:> to make an archive file instead - since as far as the program
:> is concerned, there's no difference between the tape device and
:> a file. Yes, these ARE features of the OS, indirectly.
: Yeah, Windows does this too. It's VMS-based remember.
Show me the command. I'd like to be pleasantly surprised here.
:> :> COMMAND.EXE is bad for both scripting and interactive
:> :> use, etc.
:>
:> : There is no COMMAND.EXE, perhaps you're referring to CMD.EXE? But
:>
:> They are the same program. Every NT I've used has had both, but
:> one was just a pseudonym for the other. I don't remember which was
:> the "real" one. It doesn't matter.
: Ahem. Command.com is the DOS interpreter. CMD.EXE is the native Win32 command line
: shell. There's a really, really big difference but they work together seamlessly.
: CMD is evel POSIX compliant.
Okay, *I* hadn't noticed any appreciable difference between them.
I'll take your word for it that they are different, but I've used
both (thinking they were the same) and didn't like either one.
:> : you're not since you're claiming it's poor at scripting and interactive
:> : use, both of which CMD does well.
:>
:> Sure, it looks like that so long as I'm not allowed to compare it
:> to bash, tcsh, or ksh. That was sort of my point. It isn't fair
:> to say, "tell me what's wrong with A, but don't ever refer to B",
:> when B has examples of better ways to do the stuff I don't like in A.
: Given that Windows console apps are written with the same STDIN and STDOUT interfaces
: as UNIX apps it's all up to a choice in command interpreter. There are alternate
: interpreters in Windows too.
Not all text-based apps are "console" apps, though. Does Windows use,
for example, ansii escape codes to do the screen manipulation in
EDIT? I don't think so, but again, I'd like to be pleasantly surprised.
(This is one of the reasons windows telnet servers have to be a bit
more bulky than the UNIX versions - the low-level text-based stuff
in UNIX already does most of what telnet needs, and telnet just
has to dumbly echo everything back and forth on the socket.)
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: SmartShip needs multiple platforms (Was: Am I the only one that finds
this just a little scary?
Date: 26 Sep 2000 23:46:16 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Tony Tribelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: You confuse "what's wrong" with what "you like better". Using your logic a
: WinNT advocate could say Unix sucks because it doesn't have his favorite
: WinNT capabilities. Both you and he are misguided with such statements. For
: an OS to be "crappy" IMHO it needs to fail to meet it's own goals and fail
: to deliver it's own advertised features and capabilities.
I disagree strongly. Here's a degenerate example: What if a
hypothetical OS had as some of it's goals, "This OS doesn't have to
stay up more than 20 minutes at a time without a reboot, and it's
acceptable if it occasionally flips a bit in a file every hour or so."
Even if such an OS met its goals, it would still be crappy, because the
original goals described a crappy system.
------------------------------
From: Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 23:56:27 GMT
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> El mar, 26 sep 2000, Richard escribió:
> >For DOS you should say "That didn't stop IBM!"
>
> What about windows?
Oh, puhleeze, do you seriously need to ask that?
IBM pushed DOS and Microsoft was left with the
resulting monopoly.
> >And so s AtheOS you moron! Are you proposing that
> >Unix dominance would hinder Unix projects?
>
> Atheos is not even close to UNIX, "you moron".
> It has a totally not-X windowing system, for one thing.
ROTLMAO.
Kurt Skauen's AtheOS is a new, heavily multithreaded operating system,
written from scratch, that supports SMP, TCP/IP, a fast
GUI, and most of the useful POSIX functionality. It is released under
the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
GPL. The project has been running for about 4 years, and has
reached impressive functionality: a working system, and easy
recompilation
^^^^^^^^^^^
of most *nix programs with ./configure; make. While
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
traditional in design, this system has been designed for the desktop,
unlike
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
traditional posixish OSes, and deserves attention.
http://www.tunes.org/Review/OSes.html#atheos
Plan 9 doesn't have X Window. In fact, it doesn't have vi or Emacs
but it's still descended from Unix. Not close enough to Unix to actually
*be* Unix but the similarities in the design are easily visible. I strongly
doubt that AtheOS is even half as different from Unix as Plan 9 is.
> >Venture Capitalists best exemplify corporate principles, better
> >them an additional 2 points) making them clinical psychopaths.
>
> A company can't be a psychopath, but that was a whole thread that
> has just recently ended. Feel free to browse it on dejanews.com.
I only posted half the articles on that thread, thank you very much
for that useless and totally irrelevant tidbit of information!
Anyone who says that corporations cannot "really" be diagnosed as
clinical psychopaths because they're not human is like someone saying
that BSD cannot "really" be Unix because it wasn't made by Bell Labs.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Ginn <[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: 26 Sep 2000 16:23:17 -0700
"JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It never ceases to amaze me how people believe that by not taking money away
> from people that those people are GETTING money. If I show up at your door
> and take everything you own and leave you standing with just your underware,
> am I "Giving you a pair of underware"? Tax cuts are not giving anyone
> anything, it's taking less. In the case of the poor, Bushs' plan is to not
> take any federal taxes from the poor.
It never ceases to amaze me how some people believe that tax cuts
exist in some alternate universe where they don't adversely affect
inflation. Did you ever take a basic course in economics? If so,
then you know that inflation is when there is too much money chasing
too few goods. In other words, your money is worth less than it is if
there is less money floating around in the economy. That's why a tax
cut is a stupid idea when the economy is purring. Guess who inflation
hits the hardest? That's right, those people with the least amount of
money. Suddenly the $10 that single mother needs to buy groceries for
the week isn't worth $10 anymore.
Most conservatives that are always crowing about how the government
needs to let us keep more of our money really don't understand the
impact that more money has on the economy. They just think that
MORE=BETTER. That's not always true.
--
Aaron J. Ginn Motorola SPS
Phone: (480) 814-4463 SemiCustom Solutions
Fax: (480) 814-4058 1300 N. Alma School Rd.
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Chandler, AZ 85226
------------------------------
From: "Bruce Malmat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.windows98
Subject: Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time?
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:59:37 -0400
Axiom: Real operating systems do not lock up all the time.
Fact: Windows locks up all the time.
Conclusion: Windows is not a real operating system.
If you want reliability, you gotta get Unix or Linux. My HP Unix systems,
used in business and manufacturing applications, never hang. The only
downtime is:
1. Drive failure
2. Scheduled maintenance/upgrades
3. FPL powerline maintenance (like the 24-hour repair job scheduled for this
coming Sunday).
Unfortunately, Unix/Linux makes a lousy desktop. If you want fun, you gotta
have Windows.
Tough choices.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Dan Jacobson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8qqv45$89n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Why does Win 98 freeze up all the time?
It's me, they call me the Original Poster, and I'd like to qualify my
question in that whereas I hear tales of the Blue Screen of Death, for me
death is ensured whenever I'm forced to give the three finger salute, and
up comes the box with choices of what to kill, which might be fun to play,
but still one must give the final three finger salute again and reboot
anyway.
I suppose this is some kind of toughness training test to enforce good
file saving habits.
--
www.geocities.com/jidanni E-mail: restore ".com." ¿n¤¦¥§
Tel:+886-4-5854780; starting in year 2001: +886-4-25854780
The Austin Powers of computing
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2000 19:47:24 -0400
Richard wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Most of what consitutes Unix software these days doesn't
> > really depend on Unix-isms. This is certainly true of the
> > sort of software you would seem to be interested in.
>
> Unless, of course, one considers C/C++ to be a Unix-ism.
>
> What kind of software do I seem to be interested in?
Mind reading...
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "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"
I: 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: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
their behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
