Linux-Advocacy Digest #588, Volume #30 Fri, 1 Dec 00 10:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("James A. Robertson")
Re: Netscape review. ("Chad Myers")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ("Chad Myers")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ("Chad Myers")
Re: Things I have noticed................ (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "James A. Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 14:11:57 GMT
Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:O3EV5.24844$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >
> > So you are saying that if I write an application that creates a file of an
> > efficient format for my application. The market likes my application and
> a
> > majority buy it. Then a copy cat comes along and creates a similar
> > application, it is my responsibility to make sure he can read my files.
> >
> > Not!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> >
Software is not a 'utility' that everyone needs. Even now, there are
plenty of people in the US who do not work with a PC on a regular basis.
>
> If you were the largest power supplier, would you be able to pick an
> arbitrary voltage to feed so you could be the only source of appliances
> too? Or if you were the largest railroad, could you change the width
> of the tracks so no one else's equipment would work there?
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
James A. Robertson
Technical Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Netscape review.
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 14:02:34 GMT
"spicerun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Chad C. Mulligan" wrote:
>
> > > > Netscape is a multi platform product.
> > >
> > > So is Mozilla and Opera.
> > >
> >
> > So is Internet Explorer.
>
> Please don't insult the Mac people.....I doubt they're thrilled with IE.
Hmm, last I checked, IE 5 for the Mac was WAY better than any other pitiful
attempt at a web browser (e.g. Netscape).
> And the HP-UX version of IE is so dysfunctional it doesn't count as a working
> browser on that platform.
Hmm, I've heard reports to the contrary. MS continues to release it for HPUX
and Solaris, so someone must be downloading it.
> > > > Whistler is a direct competition to both Mac & Linux.
> > >
> > > How is Whistler direct competition to Linux? Linux won't be going
> > bankrupt if
> > > people buy Whistler. There will always be someone using Linux somewhere
> > > because they can!
> > >
> >
> > Only the people buying Linux will be going bankrupt.
>
> You're confused. It's the people buying Whistler that will eventually go
> bankrupt. Something about annual fees and high cost of upgrades (Twice a
> year).
Hmm, perhaps you should check your facts, among other things.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 14:04:31 GMT
"B. P. Uecker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> mark wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >If it had been clear, then I wouldn't have needed clarification.
> >
> >If you want a proper filewall, Debian GNU/Linux is an excellent choice.
> >
> >If you want to grep your logs, grep comes as standard with Debian.
> >
> >With windows, you need to download it. Oh yeah, you need to buy
> >a firewall, as well, I think. This is like buying a car and
> >then having to buy the locks separately. amazing, now that I
> >think about it!
>
> Amazing only to a simpleton, for whom amazement must be an everyday
> occurrence. Because firewalls come in all shapes and sizes and
> degrees of security, it makes no sense to bundle it in with the OS.
> An administrator would rather choose the one that best suits his
> needs.
>
> As for grepping, Windows has a very nice search function built-in
> which eliminates the need for some poncy command-line add-on.
Not to mention that Windows has several cmd-line searching utilities
and you can download several hundred more, I'm sure -- INCLUDING
all the GNU utilities and grep.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 14:07:13 GMT
"B. P. Uecker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tom Wilson wrote in <bJ5U5.201$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >IMHO, they ignore Netware because it routinely kicked NT's ass in the file
> >serving department for years. NT couldn't even come close where stability
> >and uptime were concerned. Netware was always more responsive, too.
>
> Stability? Netware? Ha ha ha!!!
Remember, all Netware could do was server files and print things. It
didn't do much, so stability was never an issue. However, when most people
run NT, they run it as a PDC, with WINS, DNS, DHCP, IIS (HTTP, FTP, SMTP),
Exchange, and several other applications. Load an application on Netware
and watch the abends fly.
Just for a few of you out there who aren't too familiar with Netware...
NetWare 5 was the first NetWare to introduce the concepts of "protected
memory" and "virtual memory". Until then, everything in NetWare 4.xx and
lower ran right there with the OS in the same addressing space. One
buffer overrun, one bad line of code and *poof* bye bye OS.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Things I have noticed................
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 13:49:10 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said James in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 28 Nov 2000 19:45:43 +0200;
>Quite a fair comparison :-) (cannot comment on Mac - very rare around
>here).
>
>So Unix pips WinNT in stability, versatility and scalability.
>
>And Win2k pips all existing Unixes in desktop functionality and usability.
>
>Both are moving ahead to address their respective shortcomings. Unix with
>new desktops like KDE2, and Windows with more stable servers, such as Win2k.
>But for the foreseeable future Unix will continue to be the choice for
>servers, and Windows for the desktop. Amen.
>
Bless us, oh Bill
And these they gifts
Which we are about to receive
>From thy Desktop
For thine is the ease of use
and the click and the mouse
For now and forever
Amen
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
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: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 13:49:13 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 30 Nov 2000
21:17:17 -0600;
>"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >No, it means that Linux users like this don't give a rip about what
>> >consumers want.
>>
>> Unlike monopolies like Microsoft who are beating down the door
>> of the consumer, competing against, err, err, err, well, someone,
>> anyway, to sell their product, against, err, who?
>
>Themselves, actually.
>
>In order to keep their profit margins up, they must often sell new versions
>to their existing customers. In order to do that, they have to give the
>customer something they want. No customer throws away a perfectly good
>product for something that they don't want.
So you buy a whole new OS every two years, because it has a feature you
want? What are you, stupid?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
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: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 13:49:14 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 1 Dec 2000 02:56:54
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[...]
>> >In logic or sophistry, 2 wrongs can make a right.
>>
>> Oh? Does that mean that two rights make a wrong?
>
>In some languages, two negatives makes positive, in others, three negatives
>makes negative, but in no language two positives makes negative.
>YEAH RIGHT!
<*grin*>
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
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: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 13:49:16 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 1 Dec 2000 02:34:22
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 30 Nov 2000 13:18:40
>> >"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
>> >> If anything the GNU/GPL will force the developers
>> >> at comming up with NEW material. Not the
>> >> same old crap, over and over again.
>> >
>> >And what would pay the bills while they are at it.
>>
>> You seem to be under the delusion that programmers are authors in the
>> modern software industry. They do work for hire. Trying to worry them
>> about Open Source making them poor isn't going to really work very well.
>> The stockholders and executives, however, are scared shitless by the
>> idea.
>
>At some point, someone has to pay the bills.
>Exchange programmers for who-ever-pays-the-bill and you see the point.
Of course, but do you? Do you see the point of what your doing is
demagoguery and fear-mongering?
Horton hears a Who, my friend. Nothing to be worried about. Times
change. Bills get paid.
>GNU or GPL is a good thing when you make an in-house application which you
>don't intend to sell, and release the code for the general public to
>improve.
So feel free. Its a good thing for anything anybody *else* feels like
using it for, too. Let them worry about their own bills. Something
tells me your concern is a bit disingenuous.
>I vagually recall something about about this for both MySQL & Apache.
>
>> >You can sell GNU software, but the problem with it, that if you intend to
>> >make *profit* from GNU software, you don't make it from selling it.
>>
>> Actually, that's the solution. The problem is that with copyright
>> wrapped in a trade secret, you can make money just *owning* it, without
>> ever selling anything at all.
>
>Please repeat that, I don't think I understand what you are saying here.
>If you can, would you provide an example of what you mean?
I'm sorry to say, you'll have to point to which part you didn't
understand. Re-typing it wouldn't help, after all.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
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: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 13:49:18 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Curtis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 30 Nov 2000 17:21:31 -0500;
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
>| >That is not good if you make a general purpose software.
>|
>| You seem to forget that the purpose of a free market is to ensure
>| efficient production and distribution of commodities (products and
>| services). Why do you assume that it is profitable to make general
>| purpose software, seeing as how much of it is already available?
>
>Have you asked yourself why there is so much available.
Yea, because its infinitely replicatable.
>Duh, because it's profitable for many. If the market gets saturated then
>that's another issue.
No, its the same issue. Modern software is generally crap, hardly
improved at all in some regards, and substantially less operationally
functional in others, than ten or more years ago. Because wrapping
copyright in a trade-secret is way *too* profitable; its profiteering.
Its making access to computer data hostage to paying exorbitant profits
for goods which are only scarce because the aren't ever being sold, but
only leased. It encourages software that engenders lock-in, rather than
interoperability and efficient data manipulation, that has fancy
features that sound neat, whether they work very well or not, which has
a thousand excuses for failing but little chance of proving robust or,
heaven forbid, efficient.
Thank god its soon going to stop. Another thirty years, and we'd have
been paying rent on our shoes to Bill Gates.
>| >Especially if it's widely spread.
>| >Take linux, frex, I didn't pay anything for my dist, and I've several, I
>| >didn't pay for support, but I get it nonetheless, from newsgroup, email
>| >lists, IRC, friends, and so on.
>|
>| And so I must presume that you didn't actually cost the producer any
>| money. So why precisely should they have a claim to make money on the
>| transaction? And why do you assume that they would need to?
>
>I have lived a life of earning what one receives.
Sounds like a matter of faith, to me.
>A lot of effort was
>put into making Linux what it is. Everyone using it should contribute to
>the effort. Either cash or kind. If, in a system, there's opportunity
>for people to just be parasites and go along for the ride, that's a
>system that will not thrive as well as one in which everyone gives their
>due contribution.
What good is it to be so magnanimous that you give away your efforts,
but consider any who cannot match your contribution to be parasites?
>| Consider that your argument, that software won't be produced if you
>| can't directly sell licenses to it at a profit, is counter to the fact
>| that for years, you could get "free" television programming, at least in
>| the US.
>
>Television programming is not free. It's a business.
Its free to me. I plug in the TV, wiggle around the ol' rabbit ears,
and, viola, pictures moving and talking.
>It's a massive
>advertisement. Advertising is what pays for television broadcasting and
>the broadcasters WANT you to watch. That's how their advertising becomes
>valuable and they can then charge for it. I don't see the connection
>with this and OSS.
The only point was that it is a different business model; indeed,
television is something that comes in on a cable, now, and you pay for
service monthly for a various packages of channels. So that's two
business models, advertising based and monthly service based, just
within TV. Perhaps the change might be considered inverse but analogous
with OSS. I figure the hardware manufacturers and service providers
will pay programmers directly. Perhaps large-scale subscription
services will marshal the forces of collaboration; software-of-the-month
clubs.
>| Nowadays, people find it more convenient to pay for
>| distribution, and even production, directly. But that's entertainment,
>| without much functional value. Software is quite the alternate case.
>
>How so?
Well, software has functional value. That is, in fact, what software
is. As an abstract, it is nothing but functional value; add it to a
computer, and it increases its functional value. But in any real
examination, it is bits and bytes. There is never a "literary
understanding", which all entertainment, fine arts, or other copyrighted
works possess. At least not in the routine use of software.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
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
******************************
