Linux-Advocacy Digest #410, Volume #30 Sat, 25 Nov 00 11:13:09 EST
Contents:
Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job? (mark)
Re: Corel To Dump Linux? (mlw)
does anyone care if linux does not become ultra-popular? (Disco Stu)
Re: Linux=Stink*Stank*Stunk (mlw)
Re: KDE2 ("James")
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! ("Chad Myers")
Re: Corel To Dump Linux? (mark)
Re: KDE2 (mark)
Re: Linux=Stink*Stank*Stunk (mark)
Re: Linux=Stink*Stank*Stunk (mark)
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (mlw)
Re: Linux for nitwits (mark)
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! (mark)
Re: Linux is crap (mark)
Re: Joe Linux Advocate of the week! (mark)
Re: LINUX USED BY THE NEW ZEALAND ARMY FOR ARMED FORCES SIMULATION: (mark)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job?
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 14:44:11 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Glitch wrote:
>this must explain why microsofties are so uptight and crabby. THeir
>programs are always crashing and they get behind on their work which
>makes their stress level rise and they begin to sweat and get snappy
>when the deadline rolls around :) That would be called being in tune
>with your OS. The OS makes you that way. Cause and effect I guess. Good
>relationship, lol
Sort of feng shui ...
Maybe I should go and check my horrorscope as well.
Mark.
>
>Donn Miller wrote:
>>
>> "Colin R. Day" wrote:
>>
>> > Hey, is anyone asking you to teach MS Office? The person in charge
>> > of the business department (not my department) wants me to teach
>> > an introductory computer class (read: MS Office). To be fair, he does
>> > need another section, but I already have more classes than I can teach.
>>
>> Not yet. I suppose I wouldn't mind teaching something like that. BUT,
>> I'd have to take time away from my other projects to learn something
>> proprietary like Office, which I'd hate, no doubt.
>>
>> But the biggest #1 reason I'd hate teaching Office is that I don't
>> really get into word processors. :-( I try to use strictly LaTeX and
>> HTML for all my documents. Also, I'm kind of concerned, because I don't
>> have any MS software installed on my machine. It's Microsoft-free, you
>> see! Well, that doesn't bother me so much, but I'd hate to teach Office
>> mainly because I don't feel spiritually "in tune" with it. In order to
>> generate good vibes, I'd have to be teaching software that I use on a
>> regular basis. Therefore, using any MS products on the job sort of
>> messes up my anti-MS vibes, you see. You have to be spiritually in tune
>> with the software you use.
>>
>> Although I use FreeBSD exclusively on my machines at home, I still feel
>> some of that "karmic coupling" between me and Linux on the job. So, in
>> order to maximize my "in tuneness", I feel I MUST use some unix variant
>> on the job. In fact, that was the source of this rant... I'm getting
>> rubbed the wrong way by the jobs that require the use of MS software.
>> I'm afraid to take those jobs, because my vibes would be all screwed up.
>>
>> When I'm running FreeBSD, I feel like I am one, spiritually, with the
>> kernel. You must be in tune with the software you use! You must be in
>> tune with the kernel. If not, bad things can happen. (I think I owe
>> Ghandi, Timothy Leary, or somebody else $1 for this.)
>>
>> Think Kernighan, Ritchie, or Thompson worry about vibes? I wonder if
>> any of these 3 have to use Windows software, and what they think?
>> Again, it's all about the vibes. :-|
>>
>> Now repeat after me: Ohhhhhhhhmmmmmmmm!
>>
>> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
>> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
>> -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Corel To Dump Linux?
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 09:55:09 -0500
MH wrote:
>
> "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:%_HT5.2668$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > < snip >
> >
> > > I have yet to see one product, ever, made by Corel that was any good.
> > > The fact that Corel is dropping Linux after an investment by Microsoft,
> > > is, however, interesting.
>
> Really? Here we go again. I suppose the millions of Word Perfect users are
> ALL idiots, aren't they? Of course. You say it's crap, it must be crap.
Word Perfect was not actually made by Corel. It was bought by Corel from
the last owner. Word Perfect was a good word processor in search of a
company that could do something with it. If I recall, it goes something
like this: MicroPro -> Wordperfect Corp -> Novell -> Corel. (I may have
missed a few owners)
> Ever used Corel Draw? I suppose you helped them write that and it's crap
> too, right?
Actually I have used Corel Draw, and no I had nothing to do with it.
When compared to Micrographics Designer, it was a cheesy toy.
[snip]
>
> Corel Linux did get very good reviews in some PC mags, mainly for ease of
> use.
Nice, all well and good, I still think it is crap. Didn't have all the
features of RedHat and did not install as well. What part of that
observation unreasonable?
> Not only that, they let a stripped down version of WP be DL'd for free.
> I know, F 'em anyway, right? You guys are all heart.
No, it isn't that, I have never liked anything they ever produced. I
have not yet been able to quantify what, exactly, I do not like about
what they make, but every time I use a Corel App, it doesn't ever
function as it appears that it should.
>
> Second, like most Linux VAR's, they were not making money. You folks don't
> tend to purchase software applications, so maybe you can draw us all out
> another one of your 'business' charts and see if you help us figure out the
> "whole profitability thang" would ya?
> Geez!@!
If you would go back and read what I wrote, you would see that I made
the distinction that selling only an OS is seldom profitable. (if at
all) Companies need a broad level of application support and selling
hardware helps a lot. Corel, in particular, has a very weak Linux
offering, one word processor, and some half assed Wine ports to Linux
that don't work.
>
> And quit with the MS conspiracy crap, we've kept the movie rolling, but the
> story is REAL old now.
It isn't crap, it is relevant and important.
>
> MS gobbles up many a failing company. MS's NET initiative has more to do
> with why they picked up corel than anything else. Which you would know if
> you read instead of playing 'experts'
Have you ever read any of the stuff from the DoJ trial? MS only invests
money to buy cooperation (this is the carrot) what isn't ever announced
(except by subpoena) is the "stick." If companies fail to cooperate,
they often find themselves in a legal fight against MS over technology
stolen from them. Think "Stac Electronics."
You could always use the catholic church defense, and saw something
like: today's Microsoft can hardly be held responsible for the actions
of yesterday's Microsoft.
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Disco Stu)
Subject: does anyone care if linux does not become ultra-popular?
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 09:37:28 GMT
hi people,
i have been a linux user for a few years and have had many of the
problems that i have seen on this newsgroup. each time i have gone
back to windows 9x or dual-booted. i have tried mandrake, corel,
red-hat, suse etc. and now after reading and learning about the more
unclear aspects of the linux i have now completely eradicated
microsoft from my machine at home and have used linux only for the
past six months. gone is kde and gnome and in is fvwm (basic) and my
text processor is emacs.
there are quite a few people who have tried the linux and have decided
it is not for them (some who decided on a failed installation). all i
can say is, have a good read of some documentation, look at the
newsgroups for other peoples problems and then proceed with an
install.
my main advice is, do not be too keen to get your graphical user
interface going straight away (kde, gnome etc.) which is where the
vast majority of new users get stuck. get an older distribution like
suse 6.1 or red-hat 5.2, install a basic syatem and play about on the
command line and get a feel for what the base system is like, learn to
read the linux start-up sequence and what hardware it is finding.
think about some of the activities you do in windows such as searching
for files or writing a document or even accessing email. if you can
see solutions to these sort of issues then setting up a GUI will be
easy.
if you are thinking that you haven't got time to do this or you have
too many things that require windows then maybe you have to take a
step back and ask why do you really need linux. i personally wanted
to tax my brain again and get back to the halcyon days when you had to
fight with a machine to get something useful to run (remember the
zx-80 or trs-80?). some of you will get addicted very quickly and
some.....won't
whatever, keep on trying, don't lose too much sleep and keep on
rockin'
disco stu.XXX
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux=Stink*Stank*Stunk
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 10:07:19 -0500
Sir wrote:
>
> The Grinch couldn't have said it better himself. I've spent the last 4 days
> attempting to install Mandrake 7.2 on 3 different systems and have yet to
> find myself successful on any of them.
> Is this really what Linux is about because I just have a real hard time
> understanding what is so difficult about installing Linux. I have installed
> many windows systems and have never had a problem that wasn't easily
> solved. This Linux crap is a horror story by comparison.
> You can keep your half dead penguins because Linux in it's current state is
> headed down the drain.
> Nobody in their right mind would run this piece of crap especially when
> alternatives exist all of which are better than Linux.
>
> I'm heading to FreeBSD because it can't possibly be any worse than this
> Linux trash.
Well, if you had trouble with Mandrake (and I only know of Mandrake
second hand, I used version 6 and didn't like it) you are going to have
a lot of fun with FreeBSD.
I have installed a lot of operating systems:
Linux (several distributions), FreeBSD (2.x, 3.x, 4.x), QNX, Windows
(1.x,2.x,3.x,9x, NT(3.x4.0), 2K), SCO (UNIX, Xenix), AT&T UNIX, OS/2
(1.x,2.x,Warp), Novell (2.x, 3.x, 4.x), FreeDOS, NetBSD (several
versions/platforms 1.x), ConcurrentDOS, CP/M 86, and some others I don't
remember.
If you are having trouble installing Linux, FreeBSD may not be the best
alternative. I would offer a different linux distribution first.
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: "James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE2
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 17:14:58 +0200
KDE2 represents a significant milestone in the evolution of the Linux
Desktop. This [KDE] team seem to appreciate what a desktop user really
needs: a platform to access powerful, consistent, apps.
IMHO the Gnome team is now in serious catchup mode.
I however look forward to even more improvements in the future ...... KDE3
I'm waiting.
James :-)
"Xavi Solsona" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:xvPT5.300$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> I think this piece of software (KDE2) will help a lot
> to bring several desktop Windows users to GNU/Linux.
> Welcome to new distributions with 2.4 and KDE2 by
> default (I consider GNOME inferior nowadays) will
> be given. Just a little more multimedia/gaming libraries
> and GNU/Linux wouldn't have rival at any fields. At
> server one I think it is the very best.
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux growth rate explosion!
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 15:03:17 GMT
"neJ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sun, 19 Nov 2000 21:43:25 GMT, Tim Tyler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Microsoft don't care two hoots about security - so of course this means
> >nothing to them.
>
> And yet look at the number of security problems in *nix systems -
> those infamous DOS attacks weren't lauched from Windoze platforms, now
> were they??
Nor were the majority of computers that the attacks were launched AGAINST
running Windows.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: Corel To Dump Linux?
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 15:15:17 +0000
In article <8voh73$uo3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, MH wrote:
>
>"Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:%_HT5.2668$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> < snip >
>>
>> > I have yet to see one product, ever, made by Corel that was any good.
>> > The fact that Corel is dropping Linux after an investment by Microsoft,
>> > is, however, interesting.
>
>Really? Here we go again. I suppose the millions of Word Perfect users are
>ALL idiots, aren't they? Of course. You say it's crap, it must be crap.
>Ever used Corel Draw? I suppose you helped them write that and it's crap
>too, right?
>Give us all the line numbers with the GOTO's, please.
>Give it a break. You want crap? Fire up any version of Netscape > 3x
>including the Gecko powered slop released this week. THAT'S CRAP!
Strange rant this. I like Netscape 6 preview 2 - I've been using
it for some time. The Gecko engine renders extremely well.
>
>Corel Linux did get very good reviews in some PC mags, mainly for ease of
>use.
>Not only that, they let a stripped down version of WP be DL'd for free.
>I know, F 'em anyway, right? You guys are all heart.
Very weird rant. Free doesn't make good, necessarily, nor does
it even make open source, so there's no easy way of making it
better for those who might want to. Unless you can afford to
buy the organisation, of course.
>
>Second, like most Linux VAR's, they were not making money. You folks don't
Corel's financial problems significantly predated their dalliance
with Linux.
>tend to purchase software applications, so maybe you can draw us all out
>another one of your 'business' charts and see if you help us figure out the
>"whole profitability thang" would ya?
>Geez!@!
>
>And quit with the MS conspiracy crap, we've kept the movie rolling, but the
>story is REAL old now.
It is very interesting that Corel look to abandonding their Linux
work after Microsoft make an investment. It is brutally unlikely
that there is no connection. It strongly suggests that Microsoft
perceived a threat there.
>
>> Considering the "quality" of their Linux port, we owe MS a bit of
>gratitude
>> for this.
>
>MS gobbles up many a failing company. MS's NET initiative has more to do
>with why they picked up corel than anything else. Which you would know if
Indeed - Microsoft are struggling to find _anyone_ who will
support that without them already owning them. I wonder why
that might be.
>you read instead of playing 'experts'
Read what?
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: KDE2
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 15:16:37 +0000
In article <xvPT5.300$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Xavi Solsona wrote:
>
> I think this piece of software (KDE2) will help a lot
>to bring several desktop Windows users to GNU/Linux.
>Welcome to new distributions with 2.4 and KDE2 by
>default (I consider GNOME inferior nowadays) will
>be given. Just a little more multimedia/gaming libraries
>and GNU/Linux wouldn't have rival at any fields. At
>server one I think it is the very best.
>
>
This looks like an attempt to start a Gnome/KDE war in
this NG.
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux=Stink*Stank*Stunk
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 15:21:17 +0000
In article <M4FT5.9337$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Sir wrote:
>The Grinch couldn't have said it better himself. I've spent the last 4 days
>attempting to install Mandrake 7.2 on 3 different systems and have yet to
>find myself successful on any of them.
>Is this really what Linux is about because I just have a real hard time
>understanding what is so difficult about installing Linux. I have installed
>many windows systems and have never had a problem that wasn't easily
>solved. This Linux crap is a horror story by comparison.
>You can keep your half dead penguins because Linux in it's current state is
>headed down the drain.
>Nobody in their right mind would run this piece of crap especially when
>alternatives exist all of which are better than Linux.
>
>I'm heading to FreeBSD because it can't possibly be any worse than this
>Linux trash.
>
>Sir
Wonder how you find the time to spend the whole of 4 days installing
Mandrake on 3 systems?
I'd recommend Debian - it's always installed first-time for me on
virtually everything I've ever tried. The only exception was on
a compaq deskpro 5100 (aka prolinea), there was something unusual
about the pci bios, but kernels later than 2.0.35 seem fine with
that.
If you're struggling to install, you can try any of the newsgroups,
mailing lists or irc channels listed in the many publications,
including those shown in the debian installation instructions,
see www.debian.org.
Posting to an advocacy group will be unlikely to help you.
Not saying what your problems were will result in no help from
anyone - you really do need to say what actually happened, and
there is a risk that the readers might not believe you, and might
instead think that you're astroturfing, ie., spreading lies and
unpleasant rumours which are not based on fact.
Of course, you may have better mileage with a BSD - good luck.
If it works for you, or it doesn't, you might be better placed
saying so in a BSD group?
Happy computing,
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux=Stink*Stank*Stunk
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 15:23:04 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jacques Guy wrote:
>Sir (aka Claire Lynn -- hello sweet tart!) wrote:
>
>[snip]
>
>I fully agree Claire, sweet twat. I once installed Caldera
>and the bloody thing had me play Tetris for a full
>TWENTY MINUTES! I hate playing Tetris! It taxes my
>grey cells! I prefer play wi' de paper clip. Linux
>sux all right, yeah, right on, Twatty Bird.
ah - another personality of steve/keys/jason/cat/claire
etc. I didn't spot that. The overall approach was
familiar, however ;)
Mark
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 10:39:54 -0500
"roger@x" wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, mlw says...
>
> >
> >I can't understand the reason why anyone would use Java.
>
> And I can't understand the reason anyone would use C++.
Then you ought read some more.
>
> >I like C/C++
> >because it can have a close relationship between what is written and
> >what is executed.
>
> so, use assembler then.
Assembler is not portable, C/C++ is. I do use assembler for spot
optimization when needed.
>
> > When writing algorithms that can be important,
>
> really? the best language to write algorithm in is pascal. It is
> not C or C++ or Java actually.
That is subjective.
>
> >
> >Java, on the other hand, is an interpreted language.
>
> who cares how it runs. You need to take the blinders off your eyes.
>
> The whole points of programming is abstraction, and Java provides
> a better abstration than C++. In this way, Java is a higher level
> to some extent than C++, and so it is better for application
> development.
If you need high performance, why on earth would you use Java?
>
> >
> >From an engineering point of view, interpreted languages have a job, and
> >compiled languages have a job.
>
> Again, you are confused. What difference does it make for you? what difference
> is it if it is compiled or interpreted or whatever? btw, You can compile
> Java to a .exe if you want. So what?
When I write "var++;" I want to know it is equivalent to: "inc var."
When I have to do millions of operations, every last instruction cycle
counts.
BTW: even if Java is compiled to an exe, it is still loading a Java VM.
>
> > Who cares about the language?
>
> You do. You are the one who are complaining that Linux programmers
> do not like C++. Why do you care then?
The argument was what not C++ instead of C.
>
> >C++ is
> >tedious because it has a close relationship between syntax and machine
> >code.
>
> that is why languages that provide higher level abstraction are
> more productive. Becuase programmers spend the time thinking about
> the problem domain, not about the subtle interactions between the
> language and the specific platform.
Often times, and this is the important point which you miss, and I
believe I described, operating systems, drivers, high performance and
low level software, the platform IS part of the problem domain.
>
> Ada for example, is a much higher level language. People who develop
> in Ada are more productive also. The same with Java, the same with
> Delphi.
If that is what you want to program.
>
> >Computer machine code is tedious. Java's tedium is pointless
> >because while it feels like you are coding for a processor, you are
> >actually coding for an interpreter.
>
> Again, you are hung up of some irrelevent aspect. Why I code, I do not
> 'code for a processor'. I develop software that best represent the
> solution for a physical problem. I do not, and should not care, about
> the 'processor'.
When I code, I write things that are high performance or low level. I
can't afford the silliness of interpreted languages. Say you need to
process 5 million records, and analyze them for a particular pattern. If
you only have to do this once, perl would probably be best. If you have
to do this regularly, and on a time schedule, every 1ms is an hour's
worth of processing.
>
> >>
> >> Even C is a better choice than C++.
>
> >
> >And, alas, we are back to this point. If you would go back and read the
> >210+ posts in this thread, you would not post such a ridiculous
> >sentence.
>
> I agree with that statment. Ansi C, is better than C++, becuase it is
> simpler.
C++ can be simpler and easier to use than C, because not only support
every construct the same way as C, it offers more flexibility where you
put variable declarations and stronger type checking.
>
> The simple fact is that C++ use is declining every day. I get calls
> from agents all the time about software projects, and I have not
> seen anyone asking for C++ for a long time. They ask for Java, Perl,
> C (for low level stuff), shell programming. But no C++.
Where do you live? I live in eastern Massachusetts, along the 128 loop,
all companies are looking for are good C++ guys. I have no problem
remaining employed.
>
> C++ is dying, the same as MFC and windows programming is dying. Why?
> Becuase there are better things out there now to use.
Depending on your application. You can not write a driver in Java. You
can't write an OS in Perl. You can't write video processing applications
without the vast majority being done in C/C++ or assembler.
People have been saying that compiled languages are dying for 30 years.
I see no real evidence of this. I do see opportunities in new
application spaces, but what C/C++ has been good for, it is still good
for.
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: Linux for nitwits
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 15:34:19 +0000
In article <gnCT5.24502$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pete Goodwin wrote:
>mark wrote:
>
>> I wouldn't recommend installing Windows to anyone.
>>
>> I would recommend Linux.
>
>Why? Because you've had bad experiences of installing Windows? Because
>you'd like to imply all installations of Windows are going to be bad?
No. Much more simple than that. I don't actually recommend
installing an OS to anyone, ever. If someone is going to, then
I recommend Debian, because I've done it lots of times, and only
ever had 1 problem (with a prolinea which needed a later kernel).
The reason I recommend Linux is around access to source code,
comprehensive documentation, comprehensive assistance available
electronically. I can even telnet into someone's box and help
out remotely.
Debian has thousands of packages - no more downloading of dubious
binaries over modem links, no more shareware packages with maintainers
that disappear into the aether, leaving their often good packages
completely unsupported (along with their customer base).
Debian has never crashed in my experience.
Linux is securable. I've never seen any debian package trying to
'phone home' like netmeeting or IE or similar. My debian
router/firewall gets scanned a couple of times an hour - that
was something completely invisible in the windows world.
One of the major issues in installation is that Linux gets installed
one, whereas Windows seems to get installed lots of times.
Consequently, the installation experience of Windows is a
significant one, for linux, as a 1-off event, it's not. I think
this is one major reason why winvocates get so hung up on it.
There're no viruses. Upgrading to the latest release can be
fully automatic, and is unlikely to require a complete hardware
upgrade at the same time.
Linux shuts down when you tell it to, rather than some minutes,
hours or even days later (or sometimes never, for Win95 and Win98).
If something doesn't work properly, there're bug lists, the
authors of the packages can be contacted, there're developer
mailing lists which can be searched.
To be honest, I think I could write a book on why I would
recommend Linux over Windows.
It is rather more than just the installation experience.
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux growth rate explosion!
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 15:36:39 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, neJ wrote:
>On Sun, 19 Nov 2000 21:43:25 GMT, Tim Tyler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Microsoft don't care two hoots about security - so of course this means
>>nothing to them.
>
>And yet look at the number of security problems in *nix systems -
>those infamous DOS attacks weren't lauched from Windoze platforms, now
>were they??
The number of security problems in *nix systems are few and far
between compared to windows. Attacks are frequently launched from
*nix machines because the of many advantages (better IP stacks,
for example). I have had my router scanned by NT machines, though,
so they're not all done from *nix.
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: Linux is crap
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 15:37:25 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Skully1900 wrote:
>I got sucked in and bought Linux and it sucks. It installed ok with the
>exception of my scanner, camera,printer and soundbored but it still sucks. I
>don't see what the big deal is this this program thant makes my pc a piece of
>junk.. Efne DOS is beetter than this Linux trash.
>
That's okay - you can use DOS or Windows if you want to.
Good luck and happy rebooting.
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: Joe Linux Advocate of the week!
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 15:38:13 +0000
In article <8vogh1$9jn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, MH wrote:
>
>"kiwiunixman" has the honors this week as being fit for linux
>ambassadorship by virture of this fetid little gem of warm & fuzzy linux
>advocacy.
You will be assimilated :)
Mark
>
>> Glitch, what you need to understand is that he (Skully1900) is a Windows
>> simpleton, however, there are the few (like dudeman) who keep themselves
>> open to new ideas. The typical tall story is the complaining that the
>> GUI isn't nice and dandy like Windows, I actually use my computer for
>> programming and other work, whether the icons are pretty, or I can have
>> hundreds of animating icons don't effect my work in the slightest.
>> Skully1900, If you dislike it so much why don't you provide a better
>> solution....oh I'm sorry....your one of those stupid...."I couldn't
>> program if my like depended on it" type. Fuck off Skully1900 and never
>> come back...oh....a quick reminder....at the rate of linux growth, you
>> Skully1900 will be eventually assimilated. If you are (Skully1900)
>> going to make a "contribution" actually elaborate on you experience
>> rather than simply saying it sucks.
>>
>> kiwiunixman
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: LINUX USED BY THE NEW ZEALAND ARMY FOR ARMED FORCES SIMULATION:
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2000 15:42:29 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, kiwiunixman wrote:
>I agree, I was simply using the "LINUX USED BY THE NEW ZEALAND ARMY FOR
>ARMED FORCES SIMULATION" as proof that, yes, Linux can be used for
>serious work...as a side note....the intranet server, in the New Zealand
>Army, also runs Linux. If the US, Russian or UK army used Linux I would
>have stood on my soap box and declared so. Claire Lynns reply was a sad
>attempt to justify her opinion regarding Linux use in the armed forces,
>since she/he could not use a legit rebuttal, she used the xenophobia
>card, commonly used by populist politicians/activists trying to sell
>simplistic answers to complicated problems.
I guess it demonstrates the challenges associated with advocating
windows. These people really should get danger money.
Mark
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
