Linux-Advocacy Digest #266, Volume #31 Fri, 5 Jan 01 10:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Big government and big business: why not fear both - www.ezboard.com ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes (Jure Sah)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("Chad Myers")
Re: Big government and big business: why not fear both - www.ezboard.com ("Aaron R.
Kulkis")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (chrisv)
Re: Red Hat dead/dying? (John Hasler)
Re: Predictions (featuring Drestin Black) ("Jan Johanson")
Re: Predictions (featuring Drestin Black) ("Jan Johanson")
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? (Kobus)
Re: Predictions (featuring Drestin Black) ("Jan Johanson")
Re: Big government and big business: why not fear both - www.ezboard.com ("David
Brown")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 09:09:52 -0500
Giuliano Colla wrote:
>
> LShaping wrote:
> >
> > I would comment, but seeing that the message was posted to pro and
> > anti Microsoft discussion groups, the post is obviously a troll.
> > LShaping
>
> You may get your T-shirt at:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/freedomtoinnovate/
>
> (If you don't fear the ridicule, of course)
About the Freedom to Innovate Network
We formed the Freedom to Innovate Network
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
(FIN) as a response to the overwhelming
amount of correspondence we received from
around the U.S. and overseas regarding the
trial with the Department of Justice and other
public policy issues. The FIN is a non-partisan,
^^^^^^^^^^^^
grassroots network of citizens and businesses
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This must be some new, Mafiasoft definition of "grassroots"
who have a stake in the success of Microsoft
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
[Translation: They are have much to lose, financially, if Mafiasoft
is no longer allowed to engage in criminal behavior.
and the high-tech industry. The FIN will help you stay up to date
on critical developments in public policy. Sign up for a free
e-newsletter, tell us your thoughts, take action and stay
informed.
It's how you can make a difference!
How about I make a difference with the use of the USS Missouri's 16-inch
guns unleashed upon Redmond, Washington?
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Jure Sah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.microsoft.sucks
Subject: Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 14:51:38 +0100
Peter Hayes wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Jan 2001 14:23:31 +0100, Jure Sah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Peter Hayes wrote:
> > > I have a machine with 'ME on it that won't complete the boot process until
> > > I hit the eject button on the CD drive. No CD needed, just eject the tray
> > > and push it back. Maybe not exactly a "crash" but the next best thing....
> >
> > WTF of a kind of a computer do you have?!
>
> A Gateway Solo 9100 266 MMX, about 3 years old. Works fine apart from that
> small quirk.
Right, I can't ask you that... What about this: What's your CD drive and
who wired your computer?
--
Don't feel bad about asking/telling me anything, I will always gladly
reply.
For those interested in a theory of how to make AI:
HTTP://WWW.GeoCities.COM/GTSC4/mind2.html (updated: 01.02.01)
4E6F746369656420746865204845582D41534349493F
GTSC4 -- If nobody else wants to do it, why shouldn't we?(TM)
HTTP://WWW.GeoCities.COM/GTSC4/
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 14:05:18 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 05 Jan 2001 03:11:59
> >"Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> On Thu, 04 Jan 2001 01:40:40 GMT, T. Max Devlin wrote:
> >> >Said chrisv in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 03 Jan 2001 16:53:53 GMT;
> >> >>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >>No, what well-known fact. Sheesh.
> >> >
> >> >This is what people learn these days, huh? Bunch of soft-headed
> >> >ignoramuses. The Supreme Court Decided, and that means the Democrats
> >> >were wrong, huh? Get the fuck out of my newsgroup.
> >>
> >> I think the fact that the vote was not unanimous and the fact that
> >> the Florida court even bothered to listen to the arguments put forth
> >> by the democrats in the first place implies that they at least had
> >> a reasonable case, and were probably justified in pursuing it.
> >
> >I agree, that Democrats had a fairly reasonable case, but, given the
> >laws which were so plainly clear in this case, they had no hope of
> >winning. The Democrats should work in the legislature to change the
> >laws if they disagree with them, not get the FL Supreme Court to
> >change them on the fly (which violates the Constitution, by the way).
>
> I guess some people will never get it. You even present your
> inconsistent logic out in the open for all to see. Was the case "fairly
> reasonable" or did it have "no hope of winning"? I'd hate to think that
> if I had a fairly reasonable case, I would be counseled that I had no
> hope of winning, and should attempt to change the law, rather than
> exercise my rights in court.
>
> >> It's funny how these Republican zealots accuse the dems of breaking
> >> the law
> >
> >The FL Surpeme Court violated the U.S. Consitution Article 2,
> >the seperation clause (whichever Article that is in, I don't know
> >off the top of my head) and the 14th Amendment. Not to mention
> >they violated the FL Constitution and at least 2 Florida laws
> >approved by the FL Legislature.
>
> No, they didn't. That's pure hyperbole; rampant partisan bullshit. And
> it certainly and strongly support's Donovan's argument. It isn't enough
> that the Democrats were "breaking the law", even, they have to be
> subverting the Constitution and violating the very "rule of law".
> Christ, it gets too thick to wade through.
>
> >> -- I'd argue that it's for the courts to decide how the laws
> >> are meant to be interpreted.
> >
> >Of course. However, in this case, the FL Supreme Court re-wrote
> >the laws, which is clearly unconstitutional. [...]
>
> I haven't the time to waste on such utter gibberish.
Max can BS all he wants, he can call it all BS and gibberish, but
let it be known, Max has not presented one single argument, not
one bit of fact, or one single reason for any of the Democrat
tampering in Florida.
He presents only insults and "no it isn't!" type arguments without
any substance to back them up.
Until he presents even ONE fact supporting his claims, I suggest
you all ignore him.
Max, when you're ready to come back and act like a big boy, let
us known.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 09:20:28 -0500
Giuliano Colla wrote:
>
> LShaping wrote:
> >
> > I would comment, but seeing that the message was posted to pro and
> > anti Microsoft discussion groups, the post is obviously a troll.
> > LShaping
>
> You may get your T-shirt at:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/freedomtoinnovate/
>
> (If you don't fear the ridicule, of course)
I wrote them a letter calling them a bunch of crooks.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 14:22:33 GMT
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> A judicial decision which was overturned.
>>
>>A judicial decision which was HIGHLY questionable and completely without
>>merit.
>
>Once again, engaging in rampant hind-sight to support your attempt to
>use a tautology as an argument from ignorance. A judicial decision
>which was overturned. All else is hyperbole.
Guffaw.
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: Red Hat dead/dying?
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 13:08:09 GMT
> I say this because Berkeley produced a fine unix distribution like this,
> and I don't see why the trend couldn't continue.
Because the US DoD is no longer paying for it.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Predictions (featuring Drestin Black)
Date: 5 Jan 2001 08:24:06 -0600
"Arthur Frain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Conrad Rutherford wrote:
>
> > "Arthur Frain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >> Funny you should mention Drestin and MSFT stock in the
> >> same sentence. Anyone recall Drestin's recommendation
> >> on COMNA (back around Valentine's Day IIRC) to buy
> >> MSFT (at over 100) because MSFT *always* goes up
> >> upon a new OS release - W2K at the time. He sure
> >> got that one right, didn't he? MSFT closed at 58 and
> >> change today - a 40+ % loss.
> >>
> >> Drestin hinself was going to buy 1000 shares. Hope
> >> he did, but I suspect that was more of his usual BS.
> >> It's all on deja if anyone wants to check it out.
> >>
> >> My investment advice would be to buy stocks that
> >> actually increase in value. (And nope, I wouldn't
> >> recommend RHAT or LNUX either)
>
>
> > Gee, so the guy buys 1000 shares of a technology stock that has had a
> > company history long record of increasing and recovering higher than
before
> > after any fall and it hasn't rebounded yet. Is there anyone who
seriously
> > believes MS stock will stay so low (other than penguin lovers and MS
> > haters)? I've watched MS climb and fall but in the long term climb. I
fully
> > expect that it will recover it's value and more.
>
> Aw, c'mon. You can pick almost any stock and
> find it increased in value substantially in the
> last ten years (although I've managed to buy
> some that haven't). The point is Drestin was
> claiming a particular point in time was perfect
> to buy MSFT, when it was obvious to anyone with
> a clue that it was a good time to get out of
> MSFT because it was overvalued, the DOJ suit
> judgement was coming, and there was no eager
> anticipation of W2K by corporate customers.
> Even Ballmer said it was overvalued just a
> few months earlier.
Actually if you guys looked back you'd see that he purchased (if he really
did) the stock at 10 points under where it topped out. What is not to say he
didn't bail at that level? Or perhaps when it fell back to his purchase
price he sold then? Why would you assume because someone bought the stock
high that he just kept holding on as it fell almost 100 points? Tell the
truth: he could have sold when it fell to his purchase level and then
rebought more shares now at a low level expecting it to rise again. Either
way, it's unfair to assume that he bought the stock then just sat there
while it dropped 60% and just ignored it.
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Predictions (featuring Drestin Black)
Date: 5 Jan 2001 08:30:06 -0600
"Philip Neves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:u5%06.863081$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Conrad Rutherford wrote:
>
> >
> > "Arthur Frain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Conrad Rutherford wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Truckasaurus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:90rvcr$g4h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > It is time to look at predictions for the year past - 2000:
> > > > > This one's by Drestin Black:
> > > > > "Message-ID: <hrlL3.7102$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > I'll argue with you there. I am willing to take a double or
nothing
> > bet
> > > > > from
> > > > > you, Windows 2000 will sell 2x more copies than the combined sales
> > > > > of Linux
> > > > > in 2000."
> > > > >
> > > > > Sadly enough, I think Dres wins this one. But if you look at it,
> > > > > it's kind of a wussy guess - I mean Win has 90% of the desktop
> > > > > market...
> > > > >
> > > > > 1 Prediction point for Dres, and 100 wuss points in the same
> > direction!
> > > > > Get som hair on your chest Dres, and give us a real prediction!
> > > >
> > > > I don't remember him making a wrong prediction yet - it helps that
he
> > > > probably has enough stock in MS to call Bill's cell phone :) but
fact
> > > > of
> > the
> > > > matter, he told it like it was.
> > > >
> > > > Giving "wuss points" is just sour grapes.
> > >
> > > Funny you should mention Drestin and MSFT stock in the
> > > same sentence. Anyone recall Drestin's recommendation
> > > on COMNA (back around Valentine's Day IIRC) to buy
> > > MSFT (at over 100) because MSFT *always* goes up
> > > upon a new OS release - W2K at the time. He sure
> > > got that one right, didn't he? MSFT closed at 58 and
> > > change today - a 40+ % loss.
> > >
> > > Drestin hinself was going to buy 1000 shares. Hope
> > > he did, but I suspect that was more of his usual BS.
> > > It's all on deja if anyone wants to check it out.
> > >
> > > My investment advice would be to buy stocks that
> > > actually increase in value. (And nope, I wouldn't
> > > recommend RHAT or LNUX either)
> >
> > Gee, so the guy buys 1000 shares of a technology stock that has had a
> > company history long record of increasing and recovering higher than
> > before after any fall and it hasn't rebounded yet. Is there anyone who
> > seriously believes MS stock will stay so low (other than penguin lovers
> > and MS haters)? I've watched MS climb and fall but in the long term
climb.
> > I fully expect that it will recover it's value and more. Besides, it's a
> > HELL of a bargin now at 58. I'd buy more if I had money to spare. He may
> > have recommended buying stock (and been wrong at this time) but who's to
> > say it won't be worth it later and even if it isn't, he didn't make a
> > prediction, just gave a recommendation (he never claims to be a stock
> > broker or expert in that field).
> >
> > Unlike rhat stock which has done nothing but fall, just like all other
> > linux stock, without any signs or hopes of rising again. I mean, how CAN
a
> > company profit when it's product is available for free? I don't laugh as
> > hard at Redhat as I do at it's investors and those pengin lovers that
went
> > crazy to buy the stock - remember those that whinned on-line when they
> > missed their chance to buy the inflated stock and some were able to
after
> > all? I'll bet every single one of them are now feeling pretty stupid.
It's
> > like the for-a-month millionairs that had that redhat stock they
couldn't
> > sell when it was worth 100+ and now it's worth, what, a buck? I dunno...
I
> > wonder if they still think linux is their future? Unless eating dogfood
is
> > your thing, linux ain't the future for people who realize the mechanics
of
> > the world are greased by dollars.
> >
> > If I had 58,000 - I'd buy 1000 shares of MS right now.
> >
> >
> I think that your wrong there bud. First of all think about what you are
> saying. If MS is selling there product and their competitors are giving
> their product away then MS's future is at risk as well. Redhat doesn't
> count on linux alone for their revenues. They are bundling linux with
> Oracle and other products that give there product more value.
>
> Even if Redhat doesn't succeed Linux will always be there not just because
> it is free but because I think there will alway be someone to write the
> code. Everyone in the industry know that the money is in providing
> solutions. Well if you are a solutions provider and you have to compete
> with another solutions provider in the industry that uses windows then you
> are going to have a price advantage over your Microsoft competitor. That
is
> nothing to sneeze at when you are talking about a price difference of
$1500
> for a server edition of NT and a $2 burned copy of linux. Tell me how can
> you ignore that?
Gee - if what you wrote is true - then explain how windows and ALL the other
software you pay for continues to be sold when there are free versions of
just about anything out there?
I mean, free Linux and people are still paying bucho $$$ for Windows that is
supposedly inferior. I dont' see MS sending any MiB to force people to buy
it. People pay $$ for photoshop when there is gimp - maybe gimp just sux in
comparison? Hows that quicktime video looking on Linux anyway? Ooops...
never mind.
I mean, linux has been out there for free for years and still people pay for
their OS and their software... I think something is wrong with your idea
that simply because something is free it will displace that which costs
money. People will pick solutions that work and do for them what they want,
how they want it - obviously the free software doesn't please people or else
they'd be flocking to it. If I wrote my own word processor that was 1/10th
what Word is and gave it away free, should I expect everyone to drop Word
just because it costs $ and mine doesn't? (And if you are paying $1500 for
NT server - you are stupider than even your post makes you sound.)
------------------------------
From: Kobus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2001 15:34:11 +0100
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
> premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
> you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
> you are lazy, stupid people"
>
> I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
> challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
> between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
> Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
>
> J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
> The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
> also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
>
> A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
>
> B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
> method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
> direction that she doesn't like.
>
> C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
>
> D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> ...despite (C) above.
>
> E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
> her behavior improves.
>
> F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
>
> G: Knackos...you're a retard.
??????
Sorry, I lost you on this one.....
What you're trying to tell us is.....
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Predictions (featuring Drestin Black)
Date: 5 Jan 2001 08:37:05 -0600
"Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:925s37$ifl$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Conrad Rutherford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : Gee, so the guy buys 1000 shares of a technology stock that has had a
> : company history long record of increasing and recovering higher than
before
> : after any fall and it hasn't rebounded yet. Is there anyone who
seriously
> : believes MS stock will stay so low (other than penguin lovers and MS
> : haters)?
>
>
> Microsoft has no viable long-term business model other than organized
> crime, and it isn't really all that good even at that.
>
> The markets haven't figured that out yet, but they will.
wow - so "the markets" composed of billions of people and hundreds of
thousands of top professional lawyers and investors and analyists have
simply not "figured that out yet" - they just missed it. Whoops, must be
those really fancy MS marketing tricks eh? Maybe some MS MiB?
Are you actually brain dead enough to imagine that YOU are the psychic
genius that can interpret the MS business model in a way that 1000s of years
of cumulative business knowledge the pro's have can't? You are some braniac
Joseph! Can you focus your mental prowess on some linux companies? Lesse,
try to sell a product that can be had for free hmmmm... and if someone does
buy a copy they pay very very little and probably then share it with 10
others for free. Oh yes, and their "viable long-term business model" is
what? Sell it at a loss and make it up in volume?? (and they can't even do
the volume part).
I guess I didn't know that in America successful capitalism was declared
organized crime. Or is that Joseph stalin speaking?
------------------------------
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: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 15:49:16 +0100
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> >Look to see what UART is listed on the box.
>> >
>> >If there's no UART, then it's a LoseModem.
>> >
>>
>> You really are naive, aren't you? Lots of real and win modems say
>> absolutely nothing on the box. Lots of real and win modems say on the
box
>> that they emulate a 16550 uart, or have a 16550-compatible uart (very,
very
>> few have a real physical 16550 chip these days). There is no
correlation.
>>
>> If the modem is external, and connects to a serial port, then it must be
a
>> real modem.
>
>Yep. Key here being SERIAL PORT.
>
Actually, the key here being "external". If it connects via USB, or the
parallel port (some do - I have one lying around here that is both an ISDN
TA and a modem, and uses the parallel port to get the full ISDN 128 kbaud),
or a network, it will still be a real modem. It may not have drivers for
Linux or OSes other than windoze, but it will still be a real modem.
Obviously if you want to be sure it works under Linux, you are much safer
with a serial port modem, but even if you stick to windoze you are better
with a real modem rather than a winmodem, and a USB modem will often work
very nicely.
>
>> That is the surest way to tell (it is also safer - you can
turn
>> it off, so your computer does not decide by itself that it will ring your
>> ISP without telling you). For internal modems, documentation and
>> information is often very misleading.
>
>I don't trust ANY internal modems any more.
>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
