Linux-Advocacy Digest #236, Volume #31 Thu, 4 Jan 01 06:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft? (Jacques Guy)
Re: Big government and big business: why not fear both - www.ezboard.com (David
Steinberg)
Re: Could only... (Jacques Guy)
Re: Why NT? (Donn Miller)
Re: Why NT? (Donn Miller)
Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge (J Sloan)
Re: Why Hatred? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why Hatred? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why NT? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why Hatred? (Nick Condon)
Re: Why Hatred? (Nick Condon)
Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft? ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Could only... ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Question with Security on Linux/Unix versus Windows NT/2000 ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Newbie: "Linux has come so far only to seem so far away" ("Flacco")
Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft? (Nick Condon)
Re: Uptimes ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft? (Nick Condon)
Re: Why Hatred? ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Uptimes ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Big government and big business: why not fear both - www.ezboard.com ("David
Brown")
Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 08:06:47 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft?
Perry Pip wrote:
> Heh...talk about corporate shills. Look at their cultural diversity page:
> http://multiculturalism.aynrand.org/
This is great! Especially:
http://multiculturalism.aynrand.org/columbus.html
I particularly liked:
> The inhabitants were primarily hunter-gatherers,
> wandering across the land, living from hand-to-mouth
> and from day-to-day.
Wow! just like the peasants in medieval Europe, except
that they were not allowed to wander about.
> There was virtually no change, no growth for
> thousands of years. With rare exception, life
> was nasty, brutish, and short: there was
> no wheel, no written language
Except for the Aztecs, the Olmecs, the Mayans, and
the Incas.
> no division of labor
Except for the Aztecs, the Olmecs, the Mayas, the
Incas, and likely many other societies destroyed
by the Spaniards and their followers.
> little agriculture and scant permanent settlement;
> but there were endless, bloody wars.
Wow! The 100-year war between France and England,
the religious wars, the Crusades, and, closer to
us, ever heard of WWI and WWII, and the American
Civil War and the Napoleonic wars etc., etc.,
etc. and the Balkans, the genocides in Yugoslavia
just a few years ago.
What a filthy, miserable, hate-mongering crapule
this Michael S. Berliner, Ph.D., is.
> And their environment page:
> http://environmentalism.aynrand.org/
is a bit sparse, but not bad either:
> As a doctrine - an "ism" - it is fundamentally
> an attack on the ideals of Western civilization.
Like "capitalism" and "individualism" eh?
I thought I'd scraped the bottom of the barrel
with the scientologists and the rabid creationist
mobs, but this lot gets the Golden Oscar!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg)
Crossposted-To: alt.fan.bill-gates,alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.microsoft.sucks
Subject: Re: Big government and big business: why not fear both - www.ezboard.com
Date: 4 Jan 2001 08:07:41 GMT
Joseph T. Adams ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Or they might simply be misinformed.
: Remember that most folks outside the industry know very little about
: Mafia$oft other than what it wants them to believe. It is one of
: history's largest purveyors of propaganda, and has made very effective
: use of the media to divert attention away from court cases where the
: details of its crimes were essentially made public.
I agree. Just look at the web site referred to in the first article in
this thread; it's a beautiful example of Microsoft propaganda. It's
organized to look like several submissions on different (though
related) topics, while in fact, each article does nothing but repeat the
same lie: that Microsoft is only being prosecuted for being successful.
To support this claim, these articles would need to show that the actual
charges against Microsoft are untrue, but it never even approaches
them. It simply states the well-known fact that Microsoft is successful.
Since the average person doesn't really know how Microsoft conducts its
business, doesn't understand the effects of Microsoft's behaviour on the
rest of the industry, isn't aware of the alternatives that Microsoft
managed to kill, he is none the wiser. He does, however, know that
Microsoft is successful, and so he is to believe the lie that Microsoft is
only being prosecuted for being successful.
--
David Steinberg
Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 08:17:19 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Could only...
Charlie Ebert wrote:
> If the government doesn't trust it's citizens to carry their own
> arms then what kind of government do you have?
Do you know that in New South Wales (Australia), it is technically
illegal to carry a Swiss knife? "Technically" because really the
police is not so stupid as to enforce such a cretinous law. I look
forward to the day when some politician thinks it a good idea to
have fingernails pulled out at birth. And teeth too. They can do
a lot of damage, you know.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 03:21:02 -0500
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why NT?
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> Donn Miller wrote:
> > So, unfortunately, many non computer-savvy people automatically point to
> > Microsoft as being a great software company, and Bill Gates as being the
> > smart-but-nerdy-looking computer scientist. This is all they know.
>
> Microsoft marketing department has created quite a cult, haven't they...
Actually, it's much more dangerous than a cult. Microsoft has all the
computer illiterate people in the world thinking they're a reputable
software company.
====== 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! ======
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 03:33:43 -0500
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why NT?
Charlie Ebert wrote:
> Well. If you IT department is staffed with fully licensed morons then
> Windows would be an excellent choice.
>
> Another good reason to use Microshaft servers is if you simply don't
> give a FUCK about your company.
>
> There's little talent required to run LoseDos.
Like I said, there are certain people that fall prey to Microsoft
marketing. Then, there are people who think NT is so great just because
its clipboard supports OLE. Well, I contend that OLE is unecessary if
the program in question were able to export its data to a proper text
data file (or bitmap file or ...) to begin with.
====== 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: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 08:37:54 GMT
> > > well stop asserting. easily 60% of the population uses their computers for
> > > 1 of 3 things: web browsing, game playing and entertainment, or multimedia
> > > development.
> >
> > >all 3 are things linux does worst.
I don't know which wintroll wrote this, but it's classic ms
propaganda - "there is no desktop but windows"!
LOL!
I switched from windoze to Linux because I prefer the
Linux environment over windows.
Linux rocks as a gaming platform, especially networked
games, and the growing number of games is encouraging.
I much prefer Linux/Netscape to the pc/ie web browser.
Most vendors preferred netscape as well, but microsoft
did a good job of bullying, threatening and twisting arms
and forced the vendors to screw netscape and preinstall
ms ie instead. we all know what happened to netscape
as a result: a fine and innovative company was ruined.
jjs
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 08:48:41 +0000
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> > Do you include GUI skills as well?
>
> Whiner.
I just LUUUURVE your signal to noise ratio. What did you do to get such a
HIGH level? Eat a few UNIX manuals?
How about answering the question, rather than ducking it?
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 08:49:25 +0000
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> Nobody has ever accused Pete Goodwin of knowing *anything*
Liar.
Two Universities have.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why NT?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 09:01:45 +0000
R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) wrote:
> Perceptions. The corporate executive decision maker who signs the
> checks rarely has "battlefield experience" with UNIX, Linux, or
> even NT servers. His primary knowledge generally consists of
> NT workstation and possibly mainframe or VMS experience.
Back in my Digital days, UNIX was not seen by marketing as an OS of choice,
as most _business_ customers complained it was "hard to use".
> In fact, DEC laid off thousands of VMS people who were left without
> a market. Many simply learned what they could about NT and learned
> to create great powerpoint presentations, word documents, and excel
> spreadsheets. The really slick ones learned Project and Access.
Thousands of VMS people? There weren't that many working at Spitbrook. A
few hundred maybe. The rest of us (the thousands you mention) with VMS
skills moved on - in my case, UNIX and Windows.
As for powerpoint/word/excel etc. yes, I use them, but hardly enough to say
I know them that well.
Your comments come across as insulting propoganda, BTW.
> It didn't matter matter that their databases were twice as big as they
> should be, that their Project plans were nearly always "90% complete
> even when the project was 500% late, and 800% over budget. Even if
> you had to fire half the staff, you could bury the dead bodies and
> celebrate the eventual successful deployment (even if that deployment
> was ultimately to a UNIX system).
The databases we used were Digital's RDB (it was bought by Oracle), Oracle
and Informix, both running on Digital UNIX.
We tried to sell customers a MOTIF style desktop but they were rejected -
why - COST! It was far cheaper to buy a Windows 95 PC and use _that_ as a
front end.
So we rewrote our massive text based front end as a GUI on Windows.
> Hey, if you can get someone else to take the fall for reccomending
> Microsoft Windows for a project over UNIX or Linux, you can look
> good, get promoted, and get free trips to Redmond.
Like I said, our customers did not want to spend money on UNIX. Linux
wasn't good enough then - the GUI wasn't developed enough.
> I have "rescued" a number of managers who were days from the firing
> squad. What's ironic as that one or two UNIX programmers were able
> to do in a few days what an army of Windows "Gurus" had failed to
> do in months. In one case, I was able to implement a project in
> less than a week that had taken an entire organization over 1 year
> to implement unsuccessfully.
If the tools don't exist on Linux or UNIX, what's the point? Granted, we
have Gnome and KDE _now_ they weren't that good a few years ago.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Nick Condon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 09:11:46 +0000
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> "Nick Condon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > > Any script you can write in Unix can be written for Windows as well.
> >
> > *SNORT*
> > [Damn, now I'm going have to clean coffee off my screen and keyboard]
> >
> > That's good. That's really good. I think you have that sentence in your
> sig. I
> > think you should get a T shirt with it on. In fact I think I'll put it in
> my
> > sig.
>
> If you don't believe it. Name a script in Unix that can't be done on
> Windows.
Let's start with a nice easy one, this script tests whether it is a background
or foreground process and mails it's opinion to 'nick' on the current machine:
#!/bin/sh
if [ -t STDIN ]
then
TYPE=foreground
else
TYPE=background
fi
echo "I'm a $TYPE process" | mail -s "Script Results" nick
------------------------------
From: Nick Condon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 09:27:07 +0000
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> WIN32 isn't always changing. It's being extended.
He also wrote:
> In case you hadn't noticed, Windows API is always changing
So which is it?
An API is an Applications Programming Interface, if you stop to think for one
second before posting you will realise that an interface that is always
changing defeats the entire purpose of defining an interface.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft?
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 09:49:39 GMT
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> >Todd wrote:
> >>
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:92tuuv$vkf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > In article <92tmli$ojd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> > hackerbabe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > > A quote from http://microsoft.aynrand.org/hate.html, referring to
why
> >> > > Microsoft has been persecuted in the anti-trust trial:
<snippage>
> I end up having to explain this to WINTROL'S EITHER ON OR OFF COLA!
>
> Microsoft HAS BEEN CONVICTED. Their TRIAL IS OVER.
>
> What Microsoft is trying to do is just what ARK is saying here,
> they are appealing their sentence. They are not asking for a
> re-trial but rather they are appealing their sentence.
>
> And because people are confused as to whether or not this is
> a re-trial, many people believe the charges will be reversed.
> If it WERE a re-trial this might actually happen with luck.
>
> But since it is NOT a re-trial then Microsoft is actually going
> to get split up. And this is why you've seen all those newstories
> from various editors and other authors about the impact of the
> MICROSOFT BREAKUP as it's impending.
>
> There is nothing which will change this.
>
We're living in a time where blow jobs are not sexual relations and the
definition of *is* is open for debate...
If Microsoft says they aren't guilty...They aren't guilty!
Reality is passe.
Get with the program, Charlie!!! <g>
--
Tom Wilson
In a hot tub with the Sweedish bikini team.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Could only...
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 10:04:34 GMT
"Jacques Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> > If the government doesn't trust it's citizens to carry their own
> > arms then what kind of government do you have?
>
> Do you know that in New South Wales (Australia), it is technically
> illegal to carry a Swiss knife? "Technically" because really the
> police is not so stupid as to enforce such a cretinous law. I look
> forward to the day when some politician thinks it a good idea to
> have fingernails pulled out at birth. And teeth too. They can do
> a lot of damage, you know.
Need to outlaw rocks, too....
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Question with Security on Linux/Unix versus Windows NT/2000
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 04:10:02 -0600
What third party product are you talking about? Windows 2000 Server ships
with Terminal Services in every copy.
Whistler will have Terminal services in all versions (including Personal)
with 2 free connection licenses for maintenance, while you'll still need
server to use more than two connections.
"kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Thank you. Also, if NT was a true multi-user OS why would you need a
> third party tool to make it possible.
>
> kiwiunixman
>
> Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> > "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:92aaqs$f3s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >>> Multi user is when you share the servers/workstation resources
> >>> (CPU/Mem/hdd space) with multiple users. NT has never had multi-user
> >>> support until Citrix released Citrix Winframe, which allows a sort of
> >>> suedo multi-user system possible.
> >>
> >> This statement is blatantly false.
> >
> >
> > But true in a practical sense.
> >
> >
> >> To prove this, fire up rcmd under a different user, and connect to a
> >
> > NT/2000
> >
> >> machine.
> >
> >
> > And try to run all your applications.
> >
> >
> >> Check the 'owner' of the objects, and you will see that they are owned
by
> >> the user that connected with rcmd. When something is executed on the
NT
> >> machine, the process and everything else is owned by the rcmd user.
You
> >
> > can
> >
> >> have different users at the same time, of course, each using their own
> >> resources.
> >
> >
> > But the applications - remember the reason you have the computer and
> > OS in the first place - virtually all insist on using only the console
and
> > NT has no concept of sharing that access among multiple users at the
> > same time.
> >
> >
> >> Please brush up on your NT knowledge.
> >
> >
> > He understands the situation. As does Citrix and MS itself since there
> > are extra-cost add-ons to work around this omission.
> >
> > Les Mikesell
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
------------------------------
From: "Flacco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Newbie: "Linux has come so far only to seem so far away"
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 05:01:18 -0500
I'm only a couple months into Linux (or any Unix for that matter), so take
my comments for what they're worth -
> I now have NO idea which is a "good" distribution for me to select
> from. Not on the desktop NOR the server. I was looking for one
> distro/vendor which would satisfy both needs for a Linux newbie who was
> willing to invest the time and effort AND had a business goal in mind.
If you're looking at it with a business goal in mind, I'm surprised you
haven't simply downloaded Redhat Linux and gotten to work. I believe it's
the most prevalent distro both on workstation and server, and has the most
third-party support, should you or a customer need it.
I don't follow your earlier lament that you can't invest the time to
download all the distros and discover the nuances of each. If you're
serious about the platform, download a popular version, install it on a
spare machine, and start playing. You might want to get a tutorial on Linux
(ideally for your particular distro) if you want a firm foundation to build
on. Once you've become familiar with it, if you feel something is lacking
it's a relatively short hop to another distro. And by that time you'd know
enough about it to ask specific questions in the newsgroups.
> And where are the applications?
> Star Office is fine but what about the range of other consumer and
> business applications?
Freely downloadable on the Internet, most of them. Once you learn a bit
about Linux, you should have no trouble picking out the proper applications
to suit your needs.
True, it's a process that takes some time. You will not simply be
"switching OS's" from Windows to Linux. There are a lot of things that are
different, and it's not the radically different things that will frustrate
you. It will be the things that you do without thinking in Windows that
work differently in Linux that will try your patience. But once you become
accustomed to these little differences and perform them as naturally as you
do in Windows, the feeling of frustration dissolves and Linux becomes as
second nature as Windows.
While you're learning, you may find that you like the Linux environment
better than Windows, as I am discovering. I still need Windows for work;
and I'm still learning, so sometimes I screw up a Linux installation and
have to boot into Windows to get on the net and find information. I'll have
Windows installed for the foreseeable future. But lately I find myself in
Windows when I *have* to be in Windows, and the rest of the time I'm in
Linux - learning, exploring, discovering...
On the business side, consider the additional customers that you bring into
your price range by eliminating the cost of the desktop and server operating
systems and office applications. What's the cost of all such software for a
hundred-user office?
I'm not saying Linux acceptance is necessarily there yet, but it's something
to think about. If someone puts out a Linux desktop that closely mirrors
Windows, thus eliminating those small frustrations that become a barrier to
adoption, we might find that the average Windows user's resistance to the
Linux alternative may fade. Hey, it could happen.
> I'm not here to sermonize (sorry), but I am confused as to how
> to continue.
Unless you're really just trying to rationalize your avoidance of Linux to
date, the answer is simple - pick a distro, download it, install it, and
start playing with it! If you don't feel like you're making progress, put
it away for a day or two and jump back into Windows. Return to Linux when
you're up to it again. If you screw something up massively, wipe the disk
and reinstall - no big deal. I've only had to do this once :-)
> Linux is one word, isn't it?
Hey, have I been talking with a troll? :-) Oh well, what I've said applies
anyway.
------------------------------
From: Nick Condon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft?
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 10:14:18 +0000
Perry Pip wrote:
> And to think they pride themselves in being objective. I can only
> wonder if Ayn Rand was really such a bigot or whether this is a bunch
> of people misusing her name.
No, she was a bigot. I knew an Objectivist who insisted I would see the light
if I read Ayn Rand's stuff, so I tried reading "Atlas Unshrugged". When I
said she was a selfish bigot he told me I didn't "get" it.
Chuck Ayn Rand in the bin, read "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance"
instead.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 04:28:02 -0600
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> OK, let me get this straight: Unix is capable of reliably hosting
> muitiple sites, but windows servers should be limited to a single
> site - and why does this appear to you like some kind of moral
> victory for windows? It's clearly a stinging indictment of windows
> poor performance and reliability as a mission critical web server.
Windows most certainly can host multiple sites on the same server. It's just
that most commercial sites are a single site.
For instance:
www.troublewithsam.com
www.statictaxi.com
Both run on the same Win2k box.
Having done the same thing with Apache just now on my own site, I can tell
you quite clearly that configuring multiple sites is far easier under IIS.
Just open the properties for the site and fill in the hostname value.
Under Apache it required adding about 8 lines to the httpd.conf file, which
took a bit of experimentation and searching to find what to add (not to
mention restarting the httpd daemons after every change). Total time in
Windows, 3 minutes. Total time in Linux, 2 hours.
> > IIS sites tend to be eCommerce and one site to a domain/location.
>
> Unix sites e.g amazon tend to be huge, fast and always on.
Ahh yes, that's why ebay was down today for hours. The web servers were
working, but no auctions. Clearly their Sun box died again. They claimed
to have switched to a backup server, but it was somehow also effected by the
same failure.
> IIS installations are typically low traffic corporate brochureware
> sites. Check the netcraft secure server stats and you will see
> that windows/IIS is a shrinking minority.
hostnames on IIS are still growing, it's just that hostnames on Unix are
growing faster. And, as Netcraft rightly points out, this is almost
meaningless in such small numbers because companies like namezero allow you
to create a new domain name for each email address you create. And of
course, if you don't put the domain name on an actual server, it just points
to namezero's server which is of course Unix.
I'll bet namezero's single server accounts for 100's of thousands of domain
names. The same is true of register.com and others like that.
------------------------------
From: Nick Condon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft?
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 10:22:46 +0000
Todd wrote:
> > Bullshit. It's because they fucking broke the law.
>
> Nope... appeals *will* overturn the verdict. MS did not break the law.
The Findings of Fact and the Findings of Law will stand, whatever the outcome
of the appeal, whatever happens in sentencing, whatever else happens the legal
record says, for now and forever: "Microsoft broke the fucking law" (or words
to that effect)
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 10:26:17 GMT
"Nick Condon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Pete Goodwin wrote:
> > WIN32 isn't always changing. It's being extended.
>
> He also wrote:
> > In case you hadn't noticed, Windows API is always changing
>
> So which is it?
>
> An API is an Applications Programming Interface, if you stop to think for
one
> second before posting you will realise that an interface that is always
> changing defeats the entire purpose of defining an interface.
I think their purpose is to drive programmers using the WinAPIs to
alcoholism or homicidal rages. Objects capable of blunt trauma, such as
hammers, are kept hidden from us at work...No hooch to be found either.
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 04:31:17 -0600
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > A> An NT server would reboot automatically if BSOD and resume operation
> > within minutes.
> > B> If it doesn't, and you know *nothing* about NT, you turn to
Google.com
>
> Well that's all well and good - but from what I hear, nt
> gets itself into a state where it cannot boot again without
> manual intervention.
Where did you hear that? The only reason that would happen is if the drive
crashed or there was some other hardare failure that prevented booting.
Simply put, if it couldn't reboot without manual intervention, it couldn't
boot in the first place without it. And that is most certainly not the
case.
------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.fan.bill-gates,alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.microsoft.sucks
Subject: Re: Big government and big business: why not fear both - www.ezboard.com
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 11:24:51 +0100
Ayende Rahien wrote in message <92v6t2$gbt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
>>
>> They are responsible for cheapening computer hardware
>> in the form of Win products which are inferior to
>> regular products as they rely on YOUR CPU power to
>> power the peripheral!
>
>They do the same thing, right?
Nop - they seldom work as quickly, and never as reliably, especially when
you are using the CPU power for other purposes (e.g., playing a game over
the internet).
>They cost *much* less.
Peripherals like winmodems cost no more than a few dollars less than real
modems - and that is the end-user price, not the manufacturers price.
>The customer can easily find out why the price differ so much.
No they can't - most users don't know if their modem is real or not.
>So I can buy a cheap, fully functional hardware, or another on much higher
>cost.
>Why would I've to pay for the costly hardware?
>
Choice is good - if customers could choose between cheap and functional
winmodems (for example) or more expensive, but more reliable and flexible
real modems, that would be fine. But customers are forced (through lack of
information and lack of choice) to buy inferior winmodems, with very little
real price difference.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux envy Microsoft?
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 04:37:58 -0600
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> You fucking dumbass. MS did NOT appeal the verdict.
> They appealed the SENTANCE.
No, they appealed the *JUDGEMENT*.
See:
http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/ECF/Microsoft/History/history.asp
They are appealing the entire judgement, including the verdict.
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
