Linux-Advocacy Digest #643, Volume #29 Fri, 13 Oct 00 22:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: David T. Johnson lies again (Marty)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: David T. Johnson lies again (Marty)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: David T. Johnson lies again (Marty)
Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux (Bob Hauck)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 21:36:51 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Weevil in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[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.
>>
>
>The parenthetical phrase referred to increasing profits, which again, is not
>a bad thing. To avoid confusion, I probably should have phrased it like
>this: "...to increase profits (not a bad thing in itself, of course) and to
>stifle competition." My only defense is that I write this stuff on the fly
>and spend little time editing.
No apology necessary; I can see how I misread it. Actually, a simple
comma after 'competition' probably would have made it less ambiguous. I
wouldn't, of course, argue that increasing profits is a bad thing in
itself; that *is* what they're supposed to do. They're just not allowed
to restrain trade or monopolize (stifle competition) in order to do it,
obviously. But you know that, so sorry for prattling on.
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
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 21:37:48 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> 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.
>
>Which apps are those, Max? You declined to mention any.
No, I didn't 'decline' to mention any until someone asked. I didn't
mention any, because I'm not interested in wasting time arguing with
people who are stupid enough to pretend that there are no such things.
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
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: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: David T. Johnson lies again
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 01:37:28 GMT
"David T. Johnson" wrote:
>
> You continue to repeat the same arguments
How ironic. This is your third use of this opening sentence.
> which futilely attempt to characterize my replies to your personal
> attacks and name-calling as 'harassment and denigration' of OS/2
> developers.
Incorrect. For the umpteenth time, I have accused you of lying. Nonetheless,
you have harassed and denigrated me by the definitions I have cited in the
phrases I have cited. You have not contested this fact with any evidence or
reasoning. Here's some new ones that just popped up today that seemed
particularly appropriate:
DTJ] I have never met him or spoken with him so I don't know.
DTJ] Is he over 18?
Denigrate: 1,2
DTJ] His comments have convinced me that is pointless to attempt to
DTJ] reason with him.
Denigrate: 1,2
> You have falsely accused me of harassment and denigration of OS/2
> developers.
Incorrect. For the umpteenth time, I have accused you of lying. Nonetheless,
you have harassed and denigrated me by the definitions I have cited in the
phrases I have cited. You have not contested this fact with any evidence or
reasoning.
> For that, you will have to answer.
I already have answered more than was required of me.
> Marty wrote:
> >
> > "David T. Johnson" wrote:
> > >
> > > You continue to repeat the same arguments
> >
> > How ironic.
> >
> > > which futilely attempt to characterize my replys to your personal
> > > attacks and name-calling
> >
> > Which themselves were replies to your personal attacks on others and
> > namecalling of others. How ironic.
> >
> > > as 'harassment and denigration' of OS/2 developers.
> >
> > I am an OS/2 developer and I've pointed out how your comments are both
> > harassment and denigrating. You haven't refuted a single one, I'll add.
> >
> > > You have falsely accused me of harassment and denigration of OS/2
> > > developers.
> >
> > Classic pontification.
> >
> > > For that, you will have to answer.
> >
> > I already have answered as much as I am required. Even moreso perhaps, as I
> > have bothered to post another response to you, which was not required.
> >
> > > Reposting the same arguments in this forum only digs a deeper hole for
> > > you.
> >
> > I've cited my evidence which you haven't been able to refute. Looks like
> > you're the one in the hole.
> >
> > > And you fail to understand the significance of your claim to be an
> > > OS/2 developer.
> >
> > Not at all. I develop software for OS/2. Period.
> >
> > > I am not contesting that you are an OS/2 developer.
> >
> > So why have you yet to establish it, referring to me as an "alleged" developer
> > or some such tone?
> >
> > > Rather, I am pointing to this claim of yours as increasing the damage
> >
> > You're erroneously presupposing some "damage" that can be "increased".
> >
> > > that your false accusation of 'harassment and denigration of OS/2
> > > developers'
> >
> > I've already pointed out why your statement is a lie. If I've got something
> > wrong, feel free to point it out. You haven't done so to date, and instead
> > have preferred to continually pontificate on the matter.
> >
> > > has done by adding undeserved credibility to your false accusation.
> >
> > On what basis do you claim it is "undeserved"? Hard evidence was presented.
> > It was repeated. Though it is understandably very damaging to your position,
> > repetition earns it no more credence than it had the first time it was
> > posted. It was repeated to aid your apparently lacking understanding on the
> > matter and to encourage you to attempt to refute it, since you feel so
> > strongly that it is incorrect. One can lead a horse to water...
> >
> > > I recommend that you confer with competent legal counsel on this
> >
> > Why bother? Are you interested in wasting your funds on unnecessary legal
> > fees?
> >
> > > and refrain from further comments on your false accusation until such
> > > time.
> >
> > I'll say what I choose, when I choose. That's what this country is all
> > about. I told the truth to the best of my knowledge and pointed to facts
> > underlining said truth. You have merely pontificated to the contrary. Looks
> > like I was right about you all along.
> >
> > > Marty wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "David T. Johnson" wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > You repeat your arguments to yourself
> > > >
> > > > Prove it, if you think you can.
> >
> > Note: no response.
> >
> > > > > and incorrectly seem to feel that that gives them weight.
> > > >
> > > > What you perceive that I "seem to feel" is irrelevant. Nonetheless, your
> > > > statement is quite ironic, given that your posting consisted solely of a
> > > > restatement of your arguments with no supporting evidence for your position.
> >
> > Note: no response.
> >
> > > > > You have accused me of harassing and denigrating OS/2 developers.
> > > >
> > > > Incorrect. I have accused you of lying, and rightfully so.
> >
> > Note: no response.
> >
> > > > > That is completely false (and ridiculous as well for reasons you are not
> > > > > yet aware of). Glatt accused me of being on a mission to harass and
> > > > > denigrate OS/2 developers. You have supported his false accusation
> > > >
> > > > Incorrect. More evidence of your reading comprehension problems.
> >
> > Note: no response.
> >
> > > > > by publicly posting that: 1) you consider yourself to be an OS/2
> > > > > developer
> > > >
> > > > I am not alone in that consideration.
> >
> > Note: no response.
> >
> > > > > and 2) My statement denying any harassment and denigration of OS/2
> > > > > developers is false.
> > > >
> > > > I have shown your harassment and denigration of myself by providing a
> > > > definition of each word and applying it to various quotes of yours which were
> > > > addressed to (or should I say "at") me.
> > > >
> > > > ha�rass (hrs, h-rs)
> > > > v. tr. ha�rassed, ha�rass�ing, ha�rass�es.
> > > >
> > > > 1.To irritate or torment persistently.
> > > > 2.To wear out; exhaust.
> > > > 3.To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated attacks or raids.
> > > >
> > > > den�i�grate (dn-grt)
> > > > v. tr. den�i�grat�ed, den�i�grat�ing, den�i�grates.
> > > >
> > > > 1.To attack the character or reputation of; speak ill of; defame.
> > > > 2.To disparage; belittle: The critics have denigrated our efforts.
> > > >
> > > > DTJ] I have only called you a 'liar' and a 'hypocrite.'
> > > >
> > > > Denigrate: 1
> > > >
> > > > DTJ] perhaps you need to reevaluate your surroundings since you fail to
> > > > impress me as being extraordinarily bright, yourself.
> > > >
> > > > Denigrate: 1,2
> > > > Harass: 1,3
> > > >
> > > > DTJ] H-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e.
> > > >
> > > > Denigrate: 1
> > > >
> > > > DTJ] I doubt that your typical comments can be "dumbed" down any further.
> > > >
> > > > Denigrate: 1,2
> > > > Harass: 1,3
> > > >
> > > > DTJ] As for the substance of your comment, it appears to be as garbled
> > > > and confused as Marty's.
> > > >
> > > > Denigrate: 1,2
> > > > Harass: 1,3
> > > >
> > > > DTJ] I am starting to feel like I am being flamed by a gaggle of
> > > > fifth-graders.
> > > >
> > > > Denigrate: 1,2
> > > >
> > > > DTJ] I was pointing to Marty's mental confusion.
> > > >
> > > > Denigrate: 1,2
> > > > Harass: 1,3
> > > >
> > > > DTJ] The entire thrust of your posts over the last week seems to be
> > > > personal attacks. I am losing respect for you.
> > > >
> > > > Denigrate: 1,2
> > > >
> > > > ...
> >
> > Note: no response.
------------------------------
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 21:44:45 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Darin Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>Quoting from the MS rebuttal:
>
>> During the betas,
>> we got a few bug reports about Windows not working correctly on some of the
>> MS-DOS imitations. So it seemed like a very small portion of the market
>> might have problems running Win 3.1 on something other than genuine MS-DOS.
>
>So even their rebuttal subtly shoves in fear, uncertainty, and doubt!
>What works with FUD is the market section that isn't so well informed.
>What stick in their mind is merely the suggestion that something other
>than MS-DOS might have incompatibilities. Much later, next time a
>purchase decision comes up, they'll remember reading something,
>somewhere, that there were some problems with non-MSDOS systems
>running Windows.
The bizarre part is that I can't for the life of me figure out where
anyone got the idea that a vendor *isn't* actually *supposed* to try to
make their product compatible with everybody else's, regardless of their
market share.
>It's like news reports that feed on themselves, ie, in the stock
>market and the like.
Did you hear about the teenager who made hundreds of thousands of
dollars by day trading and posting bogus stock news? I read the news
first in USA Today, and then in the Wall Street Journal. It was
hilarious how the WSJ handled it (almost, if I hadn't found it so
distasteful). They practically made the kid into a hero, and said,
IIRC, "if" the SEC presses charges, they weren't sure exactly what they
would say he'd done wrong. (This was three days after he'd been caught,
so chances are they hadn't yet managed to catalog all his crimes.)
[...]
>Of course, the rest of MS's rebuttal is a lot of "if others want to
>horn in on our monopoly, they'd better be prepared to jump through
>extra hoops".
Exactly. Its astounding.
>Still quoting from MS:
>> Microsoft does not test Windows on anything other than Microsoft's MS-DOS.
>> We don't have the development or testing resources, nor do we consider it
>> our job to test Windows on other systems.
So just *what* the fuck is up with that? How could *anybody* be so
moronic as to not recognize this as a monopoly acting
anti-competitively?
--
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: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: David T. Johnson lies again
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 01:40:10 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Marty writes:
>
> >>>> Marty writes [to David T. Johnson]:
>
> >>>>> Do you utilize the same (to quote Joe Malloy) "mythical and ineffective
> >>>>> lawyer" as Tholen?
>
> >>>> My lawyer is neither mythical nor ineffective, Marty, despite what Joe
> >>>> Malloy wants you to think.
>
> >>> Who is your lawyer and what has he done for you?
>
> >> You and Malloy made the claim, Marty, therefore the burden of proof
> >> falls on your shoulders.
>
> > I asked a question.
>
> You made a claim about a "mythical and ineffective lawyer", Marty.
> Substantiate it.
I was quoting Malloy. Would you like me to substantiate his use of the
phrase.
> > I made no claim, Dave.
>
> Incorrect, Marty.
How ironic.
> > You, however, made a claim that he is neither mythical nor ineffective,
>
> A direct reference to your unsubstantiated and erroneous claim, Marty,
Impossible.
> despite the fact that you deny making a claim.
And for good reason.
> > and I was asking for some form of evidence on that matter.
>
> I was asking for some form of evidence that my lawyer is "mythical
> and ineffective", Marty.
Ask Malloy.
------------------------------
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 21:46:18 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> "T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>> > Weevil. He is either dishonest, or just not very bright.
>> >
>>
>> Simon is Dishonest.
I figured, but thought I'd give him the benefit of the doubt.
>And the two of you are raving homophobic criminals, with a history of
>wife-beating, and a sideorder of shit for brains.
Wow. I guess Aaron struck a nerve. So much for the benefit of the
doubt.
--
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: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: David T. Johnson lies again
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 01:42:13 GMT
"David T. Johnson" wrote:
>
> You continue to repeat the same arguments
How ironic. This is your fourth use of this opening sentence.
> which futilely attempt to characterize my replies to your personal
> attacks and name-calling as 'harassment and denigration' of OS/2
> developers.
Incorrect. For the umpteenth time, I have accused you of lying. Nonetheless,
you have harassed and denigrated me by the definitions I have cited in the
phrases I have cited. You have not contested this fact with any evidence or
reasoning. Here's some new ones that just popped up today that seemed
particularly appropriate:
DTJ] I have never met him or spoken with him so I don't know.
DTJ] Is he over 18?
Denigrate: 1,2
DTJ] His comments have convinced me that is pointless to attempt to
DTJ] reason with him.
Denigrate: 1,2
> You have falsely accused me of harassment and denigration of OS/2
> developers.
Incorrect. For the umpteenth time, I have accused you of lying. Nonetheless,
you have harassed and denigrated me by the definitions I have cited in the
phrases I have cited. You have not contested this fact with any evidence or
reasoning.
> For that, you will have to answer.
I already have answered more than was required of me.
> Marty wrote:
> >
> > "David T. Johnson" wrote:
> > >
> > > Marty wrote:
> > > >
> > > > chrisv wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >Psst... I am an OS/2 developer.
> > > > >
> > > > > It looks to me like you're doing the harassing....
> > > >
> > > > Take another look at where this thread started. Then examine threads with the
> > > > name "Wenham" in the title (or any correspondence between David and Chris
> > > > Wenham).
> > >
> > > You disagree with my opinions about Wenham's comments...
> >
> > I pointed out your hypocrisy on the matter. Are you still unable/unwilling to
> > comprehend this simple point?
> >
> > > > I'm not denying that I am returning the harassment,
> > >
> > > You have not been harassed but you are admitting that you are harassing
> > > me...
> >
> > Bzzt. I already presented the evidence showing your harassment of me. You
> > are once again pontificating on the matter. Here's my evidence again, which
> > you have yet to refute in any form:
> >
> > ha�rass (hrs, h-rs)
> > v. tr. ha�rassed, ha�rass�ing, ha�rass�es.
> >
> > 1.To irritate or torment persistently.
> > 2.To wear out; exhaust.
> > 3.To impede and exhaust (an enemy) by repeated attacks or raids.
> >
> > den�i�grate (dn-grt)
> > v. tr. den�i�grat�ed, den�i�grat�ing, den�i�grates.
> >
> > 1.To attack the character or reputation of; speak ill of; defame.
> > 2.To disparage; belittle: The critics have denigrated our efforts.
> >
> > DTJ] I have only called you a 'liar' and a 'hypocrite.'
> >
> > Denigrate: 1
> >
> > DTJ] perhaps you need to reevaluate your surroundings since you fail to
> > impress me as being extraordinarily bright, yourself.
> >
> > Denigrate: 1,2
> > Harass: 1,3
> >
> > DTJ] H-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e.
> >
> > Denigrate: 1
> >
> > DTJ] I doubt that your typical comments can be "dumbed" down any further.
> >
> > Denigrate: 1,2
> > Harass: 1,3
> >
> > DTJ] As for the substance of your comment, it appears to be as garbled
> > and confused as Marty's.
> >
> > Denigrate: 1,2
> > Harass: 1,3
> >
> > DTJ] I am starting to feel like I am being flamed by a gaggle of
> > fifth-graders.
> >
> > Denigrate: 1,2
> >
> > DTJ] I was pointing to Marty's mental confusion.
> >
> > Denigrate: 1,2
> > Harass: 1,3
> >
> > DTJ] The entire thrust of your posts over the last week seems to be
> > personal attacks. I am losing respect for you.
> >
> > Denigrate: 1,2
> >
> > ...
> >
> > > > but I "didn't start the fire". David feels that he should be able to
> > > > tell us who the good guys and bad guys are and what people should and
> > > > should not say.
> > >
> > > Again, you disagree with my posted opinions about 1) Wenham's pattern of
> > > posts, 2) the ugly Tholen "insanity" thread, and 3) the large number of
> > > off-topic posts.
> >
> > Again you show evidence of a complete failure to comprehend 2 consecutive
> > sentences I've written in our recent exchanges. I stated no opinion on these
> > matters. Rather, I've pointed out the hypocrisy inherent in your opinions.
> >
> > > Rather than "step in" and offer constructive comments with a differing
> > > opinion,
> >
> > Like your constructive comments toward Chris Wenham and Aaron R. Kulkis, for
> > example? Hypocrite.
> >
> > > you have chosen to make continuous personal attacks and name-calling
> >
> > How ironic.
> >
> > > culminating in a false accusation against me of 'harassment of OS/2
> > > developers.'
> >
> > Incorrect. I claimed that one of your statements is a lie. You still fail to
> > comprehend this fact.
> >
> > > > Unfortunately, he screwed up and started discussions that fell under
> > > > his own "should not say" category, and that's when I stepped in.
> > >
> > > That is your opinion (which I strongly disagree with) and you were and
> > > are free to express it.
> >
> > You were free to express valid reasons for your strong disagreement, but
> > failed to do so.
> >
> > > But you are not free to falsely accuse me of harassment of 'OS/2
> > > developers' or of anyone else.
> >
> > I accused you of lying. And rightfully so. Re-examine the original exchange
> > before you waste any more time.
> >
> > > > He also tends to repeat himself in preference to providing evidence to
> > > > back up anything he says (look for his references to "garbled,
> > > > illogical", etc.), but that's another issue.
> > >
> > > Yes, it is.
> >
> > One which further establishes your hypocrisy and ability to pontificate.
> >
> > > > In short, take another look. Take note of who is providing evidence
> > > > and who is "snipping" the "irrelevant ranting".
> > >
> > > Trimming portions of posts in reply is the privelege of the person
> > > making the reply.
> >
> > So is failure to provide evidence, empty pontifications, and hypocrisy
> > according to your book.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 01:43:44 GMT
On Fri, 13 Oct 2000 22:22:03 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>More recent Kernels of Linux have forwarding turned off by default,
This is a good thing of course.
>therefore you have to run the following command each time you boot to
>enable forwarding
Caldera 2.3 has forwarding as an option in the TCP/IP Options section
of their GUI admin tool (COAS). I'm pretty sure it is in Webmin on the
newer 2.4 version (which also still has COAS). I'd be surprised if RH
didn't have it in Linuxconf somewhere.
BTW, NT has forwarding off by default as well. You at least have to
know what forwarding is and know you need it turned on or you're lost.
Win95 didn't know how to forward at all, while Linux always has.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
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 21:49:26 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Darin Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Hey, why try to actually make your product better than the other guy's if
>> you can just kill the other guy and be done with it?
>
>For a long time, it seem like MS wasn't putting any effort on the
>development end of DOS, and hardly any into the marketting end.
Now, we find out, its because they didn't, according to Bill Gates.
[...]
>Later though, MS tried to do its catchup, about the time that Windows 3
>was coming out. And there was the influential crowd of alternative-DOS
>users out there, and this was what irked MS. It's almost as if they
>hadn't even noticed the decline in that market segment until they started
>ramping up the marketting machine for Windows.
There was no decline in the market segment. Billy the Megalomaniac
figured he could charge an extra $30-$40 dollars if he clear-cut the
after-market crowd, as well as maintaining their pre-load monopoly,
which had already been built to almost present day proportions by
per-processor-licensing lock-in.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 01:48:13 GMT
"D'Arcy Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:tYNF5.1843$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > > 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 ?
>
> Do I beleive that an MS app may have used an undocumented
> API call at one point and then removed that call later? Yes.
> Do I beleive that such an API has been removed from Windows?
> Probably it has.
>
[....]
> > It's false, that's why I don't believe on this changing / removing stuff
> > ridiculous, really.
>
> Depends - need to find an undocumented API in a previous version
> of WIndows and see if that API no longer exsits. A harder one would
> be to see if an undocumented API that exists in two versions of Windows
> works the same way. Finding a now non-existent undocumented API
> should be easy enough for those who actualy care.
How about this scenario: initial versions of MS software used
undocumented API's that were later moved into DLL's that are
supplied by the app(s) that need them? How else do you get
from a situation where IE isn't even included as part of the OS
to one where they can claim it is an essential part? Why else
would MS apps update the system DLL's?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
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 21:58:24 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said D'Arcy Smith in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[...]
>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 think it is an accurate interpretation of the facts:
"I doubt they [Digital Research] will be able to clone Windows. It is
very difficult to do technically, we have made it a moving target and we
have some visual copyright and patent protection. I believe people
underestimate the impact DR-DOS has had on us in terms of pricing."
(Bill Gates, May 18, 1989)
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2000/02/07/schulman.html
--
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! ======
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
