Linux-Advocacy Digest #630, Volume #29 Fri, 13 Oct 00 05:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Shit-loving Drestin Lack-of-facts. ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: The Power of the Future! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Legal issues - Re: Linux DVD player! (Stuart Fox)
Re: Anybody want to test a widget? (2:1)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: End-User Alternative to Windows (2:1)
Re: What I would like to see in an OS: (2:1)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (=?Windows-1252?Q?Paul_'Z'_Ewande=A9?=)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (=?Windows-1252?Q?Paul_'Z'_Ewande=A9?=)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Shit-loving Drestin Lack-of-facts.
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 03:45:38 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> On 10/12/00, 4:37:19 PM, "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote regarding Re: The Power of the Future!:
>
> > "joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Drestin Black wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >
> > > > You are the fool and idiot. You cannot prove anything whatsoever.
> Prove
> > > > their attempt to migrate at any time. Prove their attempt to migrate
> and
> > > > failure at any time. W2K obviously can handle the load because the
> same
> > > > number of servers that ran hotmail under BSD are now running a larger
> > load
> > > > under W2K (same hardware, better results). And, look for Slowaris to
> be
> > > > replaced at hotmail before years end...
> > > >
> > > > I can prove that BSD was replaced by W2K successfully at Hotmail -
> what
> > can
> > > > you prove other than your often repeated .sig (and I quote):
> > >
> > > Oh Please. You could NOT prove what you claim. If you could you
> wouldn't
> > be
> > > doing it on USENET.
>
> > Yes I can and why wouldn't I. Everyone knows that hotmail.com is now
> running
> > all their front end web servers on W2K and IIS - check netcraft - go
> ahead,
> > hit it 1000 times in a row. you won't find anything but w2k - the
> proof is
> > right there for EVERYONE to see.
>
> Pardon me? Front end web servers is NOT hotmail.
> Netcraft isn't going to prove the migration.
>
> MS would not let a kook like you near any corporate site and give
> details on the usenet.
>
> > >
> > > And What about realiability? MS advocates always pretend Windows is
> as
> > > relaible as say an OS like BSD.
>
> > what about reliablity? we don't have to pretend it's being proven as
> we
> > write. There is all of hotmail.com, not a single interruption of
> service
> > (unlike before)
>
> That's not how professionals describe OS reliability. One can use
> redundancy to stop an interruption of service due to an PC class OS
> crashing. Reliability isn't redundancy.
>
> > whatsoever since it's migration. Now that I'm past the
> > problems I had with the first generation of NVIDIA beta drivers for
> W2K I
> > have never had a crash or reboot to deal with.
>
> What does one guys story about a video driver mean to an enterprise
> when they talk about stability? NOTHING.
>
> > None. Period. No one using
> > W2K has to pretend - but unix types who can't or won't change and
> can't or
> > won't accept the fact that W2K is not NT3.5 just will never admit the
> > truth... sigh... it's sad...
>
> I'm not a UNIX type - I wouldn't confuse criticism of Windows with
> being pro UNIX - some of MS's harshest critics rely on Windows -
> that's why they're critical. See the problem for MS is the advocates
> and little guys living in the MS-NT ecology so overstate windows that
> MS's customers are growing impatient. I bet most of the CIO's who
> like windows want the childish hype to stop as much as I do.
>
> So. Yeah, W2K isn't NT 3.5. Not being NT 3,5 doesn't mean W2K is a
> reliable and proven OS. In fact, the comment shows me how little you
> care about reliability.
All that little Drestin Shit cares about is playing chearleader for
Gates, in hopes that he'll get to suck on Bill's shitstained underwear
before it goes to the cleaners.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
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
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
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
her 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.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 03:48:51 -0400
Mike Byrns wrote:
>
> Drestin Black wrote:
>
> > "Mike Byrns" <"mike.byrns"@technologist,.com> wrote in message
> > news:5azE5.125728$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > <snip well written reply>
> >
> > > My position exactly!!! Keep it up but realize that to beat the opponent
> > you
> > > must ARGUE better not only have the best position. Many campaigns have
> > been
> > > lost by better opponents with lesser debate skills.
> > >
> >
> > Thank you for your time and reply Mike. I have taken your comments to heart.
>
> Thanks Drestin and I hope ther are no hard feelings. You are obviously just as
> much an experienced professional as I am. Maybe moreso. I just want to make
> sure the Dolly's in the crowd get rebutted. PS how much you wanna bet s/he's an
> out of work Linux admin?
There is no such thing.
Hope that helps, 2.0.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
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
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
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
her 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: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 03:53:40 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Darin Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>Zenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>[...]Undocumented DLL's may even be "illegal" to reverse
>engineer (illegal meaning someone with bigger pockets than you will
>sue). Other DLL's may only be provided with copyrighted materials.
>Etcetera.
I don't get the 'other dlls may only be provided with copyrighted
materials' thing. DLLs *are* copyrighted materials. Wrapped in a trade
secret license. They *are*, indeed, not only available for 'reverse
engineering', but shouldn't even need 'clean room' techniques. There
have been a long series of clear legal precedence which allows for
decompiling, and even copying, software code when it is called for in
order to sell a product, whether it competes on, with, or against the
copyrighted code.
>Note that Office 97 actually "upgrades" several DLL's also,
>which is sure to cause headaches.
Churn, buddy. Its all just a matter of churn.
>Win32 is relatively small in a strict sense (the Win32 DLL itself).
>But the "OS" necessary to run common applications is huge. Office is
>a whole OS in itself.
When people refer to Win32 as an API, they are generally, I think,
talking about all of Microsoft's Windows APIs.
>(and of COURSE Notepad is going to give headaches, it's a Win3.1
>application with minimal changes for Win95. It's not the "simplest
>sort of windows app".)
Precisely. Logically, this indicates that Win95+ is effectively less
functional than the earlier product, doesn't it? I honestly believe
that software monopolization seems to work precisely opposite than
software commerce. In encouraging, if not demanding, anti-competitive
activity, the software developer is effectively rewarded for making the
product worse, thus encouraging the locked-in consumer base to buy
whatever version comes next, guaranteeing an income stream. The most
successful monopolists, it might stand to reason, are those that can
most predatorially decrease the value of their software itself in
operation without making continued use even more expensive than complete
abandonment.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 03:59:28 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Weevil in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>Theories? What theories? There are thousands of internal Microsoft emails,
>available *online* (thanks to sunshine laws and a smart judge or two), that
>change it from "conspiracy" to "recorded history". Everything MS does is
>done to stifle competition and increase profits (not a bad thing in itself,
>of course).
Actually, it is a bad thing, and is illegal for that very reason. You
earn profits by engaging in competition, not by stifling it. Unless
you're a criminal monopolist.
>Obfuscating their code, incorrectly and incompletely
>documenting it, etc...they really and truly did these things deliberately,
>to stifle competition, without regard to the debilitating effect it had on
>the product itself (big, slow, buggy as hell, ridiculously complex).
>
>Yes, they really did these things. They discussed this stuff in email all
>the time. You can read it yourself.
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/ms_index.htm
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2000/02/07/schulman.html
http://www.airmissle.com/antiMS/quotes/
http://www.brillscontent.com/features/bill_0998.html
http://www.opensource.org/halloween/
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2633574,00.html
http://www.drdos.com/fullstory/dsprgmnt.html
http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/microsoft-all.html
http://www4.bluemountain.com/home/ImportantNotice.html?020399
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f4400/4469.htm
http://money.york.pa.us/microSOFT_monoPOLY.htm
http://apt.computerwire.com/msoft/mt58-990121.html
http://www.ripon.edu/Faculty/bowenj/antitrust/INTRO.htm
http://www.intrepidsoftware.com/fallacy/toc.htm
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 04:02:16 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >Which of course explains why all my apps inexplicably stop working every
>few
>> >months when they "move the target" and change *all* of the APIs.
>> >
>> >Come on... I mean, heck, WINE should have a good copy of Win3.1 by now at
>> >least. That target stopped moving in 1995. That was 5 years ago.
>>
>> Ha. You forget; MS updates system DLLs with app upgrades; every version
>> of Office and IE have 'moved the target', as well as the 'service packs'
>> and such. You act like Bill Gates didn't actually admit to the scam
>> (internally, at least, but in now-public emails).
>
>Max -- explain why my apps still work?
Why; that would be nothing but an inductive exercise. A deductive
exercise, far more effective, logically, would be for you to explain why
my apps sometimes don't work. It would be, unfortunately, just as
fruitless, in the end, though.
>Explain why apps I bought in 1996
>still work today on a machine in 2000?
They weren't contrary to Microsoft's predatory monopolization,
apparently.
>Looks like they've not "moved the target" much.
Tell that to all the apps that don't still work, and have succumbed to
churn by being marginalized in the market by Microsoft's monopoly.
>Also, Windows 3.1 is STILL stable, and hasn't been updated in YEARS.
Software doesn't actually wear out, Simon. Windows 3.1 is still just as
stable as it was years ago. Which is to say, not very.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 04:04:45 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Stuart Fox in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>Are *you* deliberately dense?
>Integrating Internet explorer != Win32 API.
Says who? Why should we believe them? Is this some pedantic point, or
are you claiming that IE was not combined into Win98? <grin>
>[...]They spend
>> their time destroying any hint of competition and thinking up new
>> justifications for jacking up their prices.
>
>Now you're confusing the Win32API with the Windows 2000 operating system.
Like its any different in that respect than any of the earlier versions?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Legal issues - Re: Linux DVD player!
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 08:02:28 GMT
In article <8s1a31$ebc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8s0kaa$9tq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <8rupti$rmi$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > "Stuart Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > "R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message
> > > news:8rtr5m$1bn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately, the MPAA is doing everything
> > > > they can to prevent this
> > > > thing from coming to market.
> >
> > Here is a bit more information:
> >
> > Visit:
> > http://www.dvdcca.org/
> >
> > http://www.dvdcca.org/dvdcca/data/pres/cptwg_20000615.pdf
> >
> > Not exactly a democratic origanization:
> >
> > The governing board with the authority to enforce all DVD-CSS
licenses
> > and all claims against DVD-CSS infringment is actually the license
> > management corporation (LLC). Not publicly held, not subject to
> > stockholder review.
> >
> > The entire governing body consists of 6 voting members:
> >
> > Two content owners - (MPAA?).
> > Two Software companies (Microsoft and ?).
> > Two from the Consumer electroncs Industry (Sony and ?).
>
> <Snip the rest>
>
> Nowhere on the website, or on any of those links could I find
reference to
> MS being a member. Is there somewhere which actually states the
members?
No reply? I'm going to assume that you made an assumption when you
said MS were one of the software companies involved.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anybody want to test a widget?
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 10:19:36 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I coded a GTK+ help browser widget last night. It's not full-featured
> yet and it hasn't been proven to work on any machine but mine, but if
> you've got nothing to do and a recent distro of Gnome on your machine,
> maybe you'd like to help out? It's tarballed and gzipped and takes up
> about 6.3 KB...
>
> (I ain't posting my email until someone says yes. Last time I did that
> the worms found it and spammed the living hell of me...)
>
> -ws
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
If you post your email on several lines (like in my sig) it seems to be
worm free.
Sorry i can't help, though.
-Ed
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 03:48:15 -0500
"D'Arcy Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:vQxF5.888
> > Not exactly. It means that MS apps would have to test what version (and
> > sometimes what build) they're running on. Then they would have to test
> for
> > the existence (and/or the specific behavior) of the function in
question.
> > If nothing has changed, proceed as before. If the function is gone (or
> > different), work around it. Pretty simple stuff, of course.
>
> Well that would imply that MS had thought out using undocumented apis
> with the mind towards changing them to screw people later... I don't
> know what I think of that idea...
It always amuses me how people can say "MS doesn't know squat about
designing operating systems and everything they create is junk" out of one
side of their mouth, but out of the other side they say "MS uses unfair
tactics, like being prescient enough to know which undocumented API's a
competitor will use in the future, make them attractive to use, then when
they use them, pull the rug out from under them, all while not breaking our
apps".
It's like they can't decide whether MS is incompetant or omnipotent.
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: End-User Alternative to Windows
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 10:22:22 +0100
Larry Ebbitt wrote:
>
> Dustin Puryear wrote:
> >
> >
> > DOS is an operating system. It provides file and memory services, and in general
> > acts as an interface between the system and applications. That's what an OS
> > does. The analogy between LILO and DOS doesn't really hold water.
>
> DOS doesn't really qualify as an OS. It is a set of executive programs.
> There are ACM definitions of Operating Systems that are fairly well
> accepted and DOS falls very short on resource management and scheduling.
The early OSs were a lot less than DOS was. Dos is an old OS. 20 years
ago, that wasw about all the OS you could fit o to one of those
computers, but it was still an OS. Just because it was used long past
it's use-by data, doesn't make it any less of an OS.
-Ed
> --
> Larry Ebbitt - Linux + OS/2 - Atlanta
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in an OS:
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 10:29:49 +0100
Mike wrote:
>
> "Matthias Warkus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > It was the Thu, 12 Oct 2000 17:18:54 +1300...
> > ...and Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Both Windows and Linux have great attributes, Linux, opensourced and
> > > very stable. Windows, easy to use and administrate.
> >
> > *WHAT*? Easy to administer? Windows?
> >
> > Windows cannot be administered, at least the consumer Windows can't.
> > All you can do is pray, fix registry corruption and such, and
> > reinstall frequently.
> >
> > mawaa
>
> > This was a public service announcement brought to you by mawa.
>
> Okay, mawa(a), why don't you explain what gnome is doing to make
> administration on Unix less painful than a root canal?
>
> I make this request because I have two Unix machines and three Windows
> machines, and have always found the Windows machines to be vastly easier, in
> comparison, to manage. I should also point out that I don't get paid to
> administer systems - it's something I have to do to get the work I get paid
> to do done.
Linuxconf makes it easy to administer. I put in the NIC (the kernel came
with support compiled in, so I didn't have to worry an=bout kernel
complation), ran linux conf. Entered the DNS, netmask, etc, etc and
saved it. Then I brought up the network card and I was on line. That
was, in fact, easier than in windows where I had to install drivers,
uninstall the protocols I didn't want that it wanted to install.
What bit of linux is harder to configure than windows?
I find windows a pain in the neck, in fact. When it (9x) starts to go
wrong, all hell breaks loose and it gets very horrible. Why did
installing a network card make windows suddenly demand about 60 files
that never existed (in c:\windows\vmm)? A reinstall followed. You call
that easy? Oh, and how many `grammas' know that some problems can be
fixed with judicious use of `extract'?
> In that sense, I'm like your grandmother. I have better things to do than
> administer my system (in fact, anything is something better to do).
>
> What, exactly, are you doing to make my system administer itself?
>
> -- Mike --
-Ed
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: =?Windows-1252?Q?Paul_'Z'_Ewande=A9?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 11:01:53 +0200
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit dans le message news:
rJzF5.673$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
> > Well that would imply that MS had thought out using undocumented apis
> > with the mind towards changing them to screw people later... I don't
> > know what I think of that idea...
I fully know what I think of it. :)
> It always amuses me how people can say "MS doesn't know squat about
> designing operating systems and everything they create is junk" out of one
> side of their mouth, but out of the other side they say "MS uses unfair
> tactics, like being prescient enough to know which undocumented API's a
> competitor will use in the future, make them attractive to use, then when
> they use them, pull the rug out from under them, all while not breaking
our
> apps".
Funny, isn't it ? That's why I say that if they manage to pull that, they
kick some serious ass in the coding department, don't they.
> It's like they can't decide whether MS is incompetant or omnipotent.
That's what happen when one's hell bent on bashing, one throws all
rationality away, uses convoluted and faulty, IMO, logic, and ends up
contradicting himself.
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
From: =?Windows-1252?Q?Paul_'Z'_Ewande=A9?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 11:03:46 +0200
"D'Arcy Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit dans le message news:
CgjF5.119$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Let me get that straight to see if I understood you correctly.
>
> I have absolutly no idea if MS did any of that or not... but your logic
> is faulty:
Hey, it's not my logic, it's Weevil's. I just tried to clarify what he said,
and it amounts to that, IMO.
> > - MS uses undocumented functions to trump competitors.
> > - Smart competitors don't use those undocumented functions.
> > - Not So Smart ones do.
>
> - MS changes their code to not use the undocumented functions
> or to cope with the changes to undocumented functions.
They travel in a Chronogyre to do so ? I ask for entertainment purposes
only. :)
> > - MS gets rid of said undocumented functions.
> > - Not So Smart developers apps break.
> > - MS apps magically _still_ work.
>
> No... MS apps still work because they knew in advance to stop using the
> function, or that the behaviour had changed, or whatever.
Do you *really* believe that ?
What if simply they didn't use undocumented API functions, would be simpler
than the superior and prescient coding skill people would like to attribute
MS.
> Now of course that would mean that older MS software couldn't run
> on newer versions of the OS (assuming it used those changed/removed
> undocumented functions). I have no idea id that is true.
It's false, that's why I don't believe on this changing / removing stuff
ridiculous, really.
> ..darcy
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
