Linux-Advocacy Digest #306, Volume #31 Sat, 6 Jan 01 19:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Why Advocacy? (Andres Soolo)
Re: Need help with NT (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Red Hat dead/dying? (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Microsoft is 20-years BEHIND other OS vendors (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Microsoft is 20-years BEHIND other OS vendors ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows 2000 ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windows fails again ("kiwiunixman")
Re: Linux vs Microsoft ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux now or Linux(TM) tomorrow ("Adam Warner")
Re: Sucking Linux 2.0.4!!! (sfcybear)
Re: Looking for medical clinic software (michael james obrien)
Re: Looking for medical clinic software (michael james obrien)
Re: Why Hatred? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Big government and big business: why not fear both - www.ezboard.com ("Nigel
Feltham")
Re: Sucking Linux 2.0.4!!! ("Adam Warner")
Re: Microsoft is 20-years BEHIND other OS vendors (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Windows 2000 (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Why Hatred? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows fails again (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux now or Linux(TM) tomorrow (sfcybear)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
Date: 6 Jan 2001 23:09:37 GMT
J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Drive letters are a microsoft pee cee feature,
Don't give them too much credit for it.
CP/M had drive letters first.
> as well - but you never have to "change drives" as in dos
> and windows, you just cd to the desired location in the
> directory structure.
I'm quite disturbed about "cd a:\foo" not changing my current
directory to a:\foo .
--
Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Maternity pay? Now every Tom, Dick and Harry will get pregnant.
-- Malcolm Smith
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Need help with NT
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 00:08:06 +0100
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> I couldn't search the newsgroups because the network adapters weren't
> working.
>
What, network adapters weren't working?
Under NT? or even W2K????
Well, that really is grave. You've got my whole sympathy.
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: Red Hat dead/dying?
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 00:10:41 +0100
kiwiunixman wrote:
> I guess the quote:
>
> London attributed the layoffs to redundancies created by acquisitions, and
> said the move has nothing to do with any troubles at Red Hat (RHAT). "This
> is not a material event, so to speak," she said, noting that the layoffs
> will affect "only 2 percent of 550 people."
>
> hmm, typical wintrol anecdotal stories regarding how Linux is failings. I
> have said it once, and I will say it again, the future is in selling
> services, NOT software, hence, the reason why Redhat is developing a
> consulting wing to handle installation and integration of Linux. If you
> look at the big players, esp. IBM, most of there revenue is derived from
> consulting/selling solutions based around there software, ie. creating the
> ultimate integrated solution.
>
> kiwiunixman
>
> "James Hutchins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > http://www.wired.com/news/linux/0,1411,40513,00.html
>
>
Yeah, like SuSE in germany. They do not make their money out of selling the
CD's (although it helps, I guess), but by selling service.
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft is 20-years BEHIND other OS vendors
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 00:14:00 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Jan 2001 23:49:15 +0100, Peter K�hlmann
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> And Linux has only recently been able to automate the connection
> >> process so the user doesn't have to screw with ppp-options files, chat
> >> scripts and so for. MS was a little slow out of the gate, but
> >
> >flathead, you should at least TRY to get your facts right. My Linux -
> >machine which connects the complete network to the internet did this
> >several years ago without any intervention from a user. And far easier to
> >setup compared to a windows-machine (with firewall etc).
> >Just try to look to have an IQ above 60
>
> I'm talking about having it set up during install time, like Mandrake
> and SuSE currently do and they have NOT been doing it for years. Sure
> you could use WVDial or something like that, but as far as being
Strange, I've NEVER really used something else than SuSE. I tried a Corel
version out of curiosity on a laptop (worked VERY well, by the way), but on
my everyday systems just SuSE is installed. Try better next time, flathead !
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Microsoft is 20-years BEHIND other OS vendors
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 23:17:19 GMT
On Sun, 7 Jan 2001 00:14:00 +0100, Peter K�hlmann
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 6 Jan 2001 23:49:15 +0100, Peter K�hlmann
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> And Linux has only recently been able to automate the connection
>> >> process so the user doesn't have to screw with ppp-options files, chat
>> >> scripts and so for. MS was a little slow out of the gate, but
>> >
>> >flathead, you should at least TRY to get your facts right. My Linux -
>> >machine which connects the complete network to the internet did this
>> >several years ago without any intervention from a user. And far easier to
>> >setup compared to a windows-machine (with firewall etc).
>> >Just try to look to have an IQ above 60
>>
>> I'm talking about having it set up during install time, like Mandrake
>> and SuSE currently do and they have NOT been doing it for years. Sure
>> you could use WVDial or something like that, but as far as being
>
>Strange, I've NEVER really used something else than SuSE. I tried a Corel
>version out of curiosity on a laptop (worked VERY well, by the way), but on
>my everyday systems just SuSE is installed. Try better next time, flathead !
You seem to have a lot of trouble sticking to the topic......
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000
Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 13:04:35 -0600
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> So in order to avoid having to even bother writing an export filter for
> Word95, MS figured they could just use RTF, and save the files with .doc
> extensions to minimize the questions from the mass user base. A typical
> cost cutting process, and not at all a matter of trying purposefully to
> screw anyone or force them to upgrade.
>
> That scenario is quite possible, and I guess you've stumbled onto a
> reasonable justification which does not require malice. Merely the fact
> that monopolies are not controlled by a requirement to be competitive,
> so brain-dead, unacceptable, counter-productive, moronic ideas like this
> end up being forced down the throat of millions of consumers. No
> competitive organization would fail to see how stupid this is, and how
> adversely it will affect their customer-base. Microsoft, though; it
> doesn't have to care, because its an illegal monopoly. (Which means
> that the 'purposeful theory' is still not excluded by reason, anyway.)
It's also the most likely scenario. Attributing to malice, that which can
adequately be explained by other means is a sign of a paranoid personality.
You anti-microsoft zealots put MS so high on a pedestal. They are
omnipotent and carefully craft these huge conspiracies which they pull of
flawlessly year after year. In your rush to decry them, you are willing to
latch onto any feeble rumor and present it as fact (for instance, the
neverending stories of how NT contains DEC source code line for line, how
Hotmail was converted to NT right away and it crashed, how MS uses secret
API's in their apps to make them work better than their competition, and a
ton of others).
Fact is, MS got lucky in a few key areas, and their competition failed to
compete.
------------------------------
From: "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows fails again
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 23:22:50 GMT
Bullshit! I have never had that problem, even with the free ISPs in New
Zealand. This so-called "un-friendly" Linux clap-trap that gets spread is
bullshit. Yes, it is true that some ISPs dont support (in terms of
techsupport) Linux users, however, they still can use the service provided
by the ISP.
And if he were using the same ISP as you (att net), then all he would simply
have to do is select PAP/CHAP from the kppp selection (in the config
dialogue box).
kiwiunixman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 06 Jan 2001 01:31:33 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >What version, Windows 286?
> >
> >
> >JM wrote:
>
> ROTFLMAO!
>
> Actually about 6 months ago there was a post in the Linux setup groups
> that described this one chap's 6 month "love affair" with Linux trying
> to connect to the internet. Seemed his ISP was not Linux friendly (and
> which one is?) and he wouldn't give up. Imagine paying for 6 months of
> access and not being able to use it?
>
> Damm these LinoScrews are a stupid lot....
>
>
> Flatfish
> Why do they call it a flatfish?
> Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux vs Microsoft
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 23:25:21 GMT
You may want to review your history on Linux
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > I don't see Windows 2000 (nor NT) listed on your resume. Therefore you
> > have no experience on any enterprise class software from Microsoft and
> > are unable to have a credible first hand opinion regarding such. I
> > understand your frustration with Microsoft's consumer level operating
> > systems, especially if you are attempting to run third party enterprise
> > class software on a consumer level operating system.
>
> Translation: In 20 years of doing business, Microsoft is just now
> reaching the stability that Linux had in less than one year.
>
> Ooooooooooooh, call me unimpressed.
>
> --
> 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: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux now or Linux(TM) tomorrow
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 12:29:34 +1200
Hi jacob3223,
Firstly Linux is already a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds.
> I am concerned with the growing number of linux distrobutions
> unavailable or extrememly inconveniant to users with a less then dsl
> service
Use Debian then. It's not even a commercial distribution.
> also as the following for linux grows will micro$oft or some other
> vested intrest company attempt a grab at the gnu lincense by modifieing
> linux just enough to make it uncompatible with standerd linux and thus
> make the common user more inclined toward there version because of the
> infamy of their name...
Flawed reasoning:
1. Microsoft is not the gatekeeper of Linux.
2. If they modify GNU code they'll have to release the source code of their
modifications or in the least suffer such extremely bad press that they'll
become known as the evil empire and the laughing stock of the world (sic).
3. Many people in the Linux community will look to those with prestige for
advice on how to proceed if a MS distribution of Linux becomes available. If
MS plays fair then they will eventually be embraced.
> linux as we all know is at a less then mature level of development as
> an os(lack of drivers and uncompatability with hardware)
Repeating this doesn't make it true.
> but as it advances how will the other big vested intrests react to it?
> if in 5 years time 50% of the server world and 25% of the standerd user
> world running Linux instead of windows or Unix what will happen?
> will big intrests attempt a squash down on linux before then?
They can't.
> or will one of the major distributers of linux now ie.red hat or
> macmillin sell there intrests to one of them who would be able to make
> linux more compatible and also charge money for this compatability>?
> i mean teh GNU protects the OS but not the applications for it and as
> we have seen before microsoft protects everything
That's why there's a big push to create GNU productivity applications as
well.
> so as we move along in the road linux as an OS where will we be when
> big intests and the powers that be take a serious intrest in takeing
> back what linux stole?
Again they can't. The most they can do is provide essential and valuable
services that free software users cannot access. And they will have to be so
compelling that people will want to stay/switch back to Windows. Who knows
(speculation), free versions of Age of Empires III and Quake 4 funded by
Microsoft that only runs on Windows could be enough :-) And in our
entertainment-centric world this could indeed be enough!
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sucking Linux 2.0.4!!!
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 23:21:19 GMT
Wow, "S" is back!
In article <9386f3$ahs$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
genkai wa doko da <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> linux usings being fagit who don't know real perfesional operatoning
> systim like windows NT!!
>
> fuck off!
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (michael james obrien)
Crossposted-To: alt.uu.comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: Looking for medical clinic software
Date: 6 Jan 2001 23:18:03 GMT
Oh yeah.. you might also want to look at www.freshmeat.net
michael james obrien ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Go to www.sourceforce.net. I just did a cursory search and found freemed
: for medical records.
: Mac ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: : We are considering implementing Linux servers and workstaions in a medical
: : clinic. One requirement for this installation is that the main application
: : software must be Linux native code. What I am looking for is:
: : -o- Practice Management
: : -o- EMR (Electronic Medical Records)
: : Does anyone know of anything?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (michael james obrien)
Crossposted-To: alt.uu.comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: Looking for medical clinic software
Date: 6 Jan 2001 23:15:16 GMT
Go to www.sourceforce.net. I just did a cursory search and found freemed
for medical records.
Mac ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: We are considering implementing Linux servers and workstaions in a medical
: clinic. One requirement for this installation is that the main application
: software must be Linux native code. What I am looking for is:
: -o- Practice Management
: -o- EMR (Electronic Medical Records)
: Does anyone know of anything?
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 23:35:34 +0000
Tom Wilson wrote:
> No...RPG-II and COBOL.
> C and C++ are my primary languages
> PASCAL, ASSEMBLER and PERL round out the top five.
Oops! Misread the context. I can understand why you hate RPG-II and COBOL.
Delphi is Object Pascal. Ever tried Ada, Modula II or Oberon?
> From what little I saw of Delphi, first version, I got a favorable
> impression. Since I'm very proficient in PASCAL, almost no learning curve
> was involved. With it, I wrote a smallish app to custom generate Win95
> boot disks. It took almost no time at all to write.
What amazes me is how some managers believe that Pascal is so different
from C++, that they can't get a programmer to understand it. Yet the two
languages are very close.
Also, Pascal was originally designed as a teaching language - like BASIC -
so maybe that label has stuck. Delphi is Object Pascal, which is way beyond
Pascal.
> "You know it would be great if you could add..." are my least favorite
> words <g>
All products have weaknesses of some kind.
> I've not heard good things about it either. I steered clear.
Well, V5.0 seems to be the best yet. I found in previous version there were
some serious bugs with standard C programs (for example, POVray, a public
domain ray tracer).
Even now, V5.0 has a problem with speed - compared to VC++, it's slow.
> It'd certainly be worth looking into, Linux could use a good development
> platform.
It was expected the end of last year, now this first quarter.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: "Nigel Feltham" <[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: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 23:31:11 -0000
>That's my point. As one who happens to be particularly sensitive to
>such scams, the value of the primary *goes down* for me, when it is
>packaged in a bundle, in proportion to the lack of value in the least
>valuable component in the bundle. In short, it can never get attractive
>"enough", for me. I would, and have, paid more for the primary alone,
>without the bundle.
>
I have even seem winmodems in shops where being a softmodem is
cunningly worded on the box to make it look like you are getting extra
features (I have one here with me now which I was given and on the box
as a feature it has 'Host Signal Processing technology which eliminates
redundant hardware components'. It is a 33.6k isa with pctel chipset ).
>of trade. The soft-modem manufacturers, in agreeing with Microsoft to
>not make drivers available for their products on non-Windows systems
>(and apparently, they must be, since there's no profit in refusing to
>make it possible for non-Windows consumers to use their own product),
>are in restraint of trade, a violation of the Sherman Act. There are
>strong doubts they will ever be charged, though, let alone convicted,
>anti-trust enforcement being as lax as it is.
>
Can you be sure that the hardware companies don't want to produce drivers
for other operating systems - Perhaps NDA agreements they had to sign to
get info for writing the windows drivers prevent this so MS are stopping
them
making their hardware more universally useful?
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sucking Linux 2.0.4!!!
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 12:36:05 +1200
Hi sfcybear,
> Wow, "S" is back!
Is S's trademark misspelling of every second word?
Frankly such a bad attempt at trolling gives me the warm fuzzies :-)
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft is 20-years BEHIND other OS vendors
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 00:32:01 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> I'm talking about having it set up during install time, like Mandrake
> >> and SuSE currently do and they have NOT been doing it for years. Sure
> >> you could use WVDial or something like that, but as far as being
> >
Flathead, what are you talking about?
Don't tell me anything SuSE will do because i use that distro right now.
You're making things up like any wintroll to be encountered here.
Try better next time
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 00:35:39 +0100
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> You anti-microsoft zealots put MS so high on a pedestal. They are
> omnipotent and carefully craft these huge conspiracies which they pull of
> flawlessly year after year. In your rush to decry them, you are willing
> to latch onto any feeble rumor and present it as fact (for instance, the
> neverending stories of how NT contains DEC source code line for line, how
> Hotmail was converted to NT right away and it crashed, how MS uses secret
> API's in their apps to make them work better than their competition, and a
> ton of others).
>
> Fact is, MS got lucky in a few key areas, and their competition failed to
> compete.
>
Well, this is the answer of a wintroll after he was out of answers.
Erik writes very moving stories, but thats it, just moving stories (anybody
got a handkerchief?)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 23:37:15 GMT
Why would one need to write their own version if Linux was the best to
start with? I'm sure most all users would love to write their own
operating system. Definately on their top ten most enjoyable ways to
spend their life.
Truth is most people would rather just wax and drive their cars than to
play full time mechanic. Same for operating systems.
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
> WMH wrote:
> >
> > "R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:92tf08$hjc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > I can understand why Linux users hate
> > > > Windows, it is something we are
> > > > too frequently forced to use even
> > > > though it, as an operating
> > > > environment, is terrible at best.
> >
> > I think you have this backwards. It is more often linux users who espouse
> > disdain for a group of people based on something as ludicrous as what
> > computer operating system they use. I've accepted this as fact based on the
> > vast majority of people I talk to. Converse with just about any linux user,
> > and the subject will inevitably come to some form of MS bashing. Talk to a
> > windows user, and they'll usually confine the conversation to windows.
> > If linux does enter into the conversation, it is almost always in a positive
> > light.
> >
> > > Microsoft asserts that if users don't pay Microsoft about 20-30 billion
> > > a year, that they will stop making software, all computers will become
> > > nothing more than boxes with blinking lights, and civilization will
> > > revert into the Stone Age.
> >
> > I know of no such assertion. This sounds grandiose , contrived, and
> > paranoid.
> > Reality, look into it.
> >
> > > When Microsoft decided to get into the Internet, it ignored all
> > > of the standards and guidlines and began introducing it's own
> > > proprietary protocols. Many of these "innovations" introduced
> > > severe security holes, enabled the proliferation of viruses ranging
> > > from benign Milissa type viruses to catastrophic "I Love You" viruses.
> > > Other "Stealth" viruses, including some that may have originated in
> > > Microsoft's labs, remain undetectable exept for the tell-tail dump
> > > of an encrypted file at strange hours in the morning. It could be
> > > your registry, your web browser "history", or maybe just your e-mail
> > > log.
> >
> > The Microsoft browser is more compliant than the Netscape offering.
> > The viral threat is easily tharwted by a competent admin.
> > If you were to read as much pertinent information related to these topics as
> > you do man pages, you would know this.
> >
> > > The Linux community watches their market go through quantum leaps
> > > in terms of quality, reliability, ease of configuration, ease of use,
> > > and innovation that Microsoft can only wish they could produce, only
> > > to be "locked out" of the market with "Windows Only, no alteration
> > > of boot sequence" contracts that prevent these innovations from
> > > ever seeing a mass market.
> >
> > Linux is not ready for the consumer desktop. If it were, its acceptance
> > would
> > have grown of its own weight. It may yet grow to mass usage. --when it's
> > able to.
> >
>
> Which is more popular, Unix or Windows?
>
> Here's a clue.
>
> Which of the two is sooooooooo popular that users decided to write
> their own version, so that they could free themselves of having to
> pay for upgrades, etc.
>
> Obviously, there aren't enough people who love Windows enough to
> write their own version and fix all the goddamned bugs.
>
> --
> 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: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows fails again
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 23:40:28 +0000
JM wrote:
> Plus installing all of my programs, putting back all my backed up
> files, renaming them after DOS translated them all to upper-case 8.3.
Well, if you use DOS to restore the files, I'm not suprised it mangled the
names. I've always restored files with Windows, it doesn't do that sort of
thing. Also depends on the tool you use to do the backup. I just copied the
files to a CD or another drive. I mean, you have to really work hard to get
shortened filenames, so what on earth where you playing at?
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux now or Linux(TM) tomorrow
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 23:27:22 GMT
Man, this has been discused to death. If they modify Linux they must
release the code. That code would then be available to everyone. I could
then be incorportated into other distros and, poof, MS no longer has the
advantage. Or, more likely, improve the code and get it to work right
and release a linux that performs better than Linux
In article <9380ur$6dm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am concerned with the growing number of linux distrobutions
> unavailable or extrememly inconveniant to users with a less then dsl
> service
> also as the following for linux grows will micro$oft or some other
> vested intrest company attempt a grab at the gnu lincense by
modifieing
> linux just enough to make it uncompatible with standerd linux and thus
> make the common user more inclined toward there version because of the
> infamy of their name...
> linux as we all know is at a less then mature level of development as
> an os(lack of drivers and uncompatability with hardware)
> but as it advances how will the other big vested intrests react to it?
> if in 5 years time 50% of the server world and 25% of the standerd
user
> world running Linux instead of windows or Unix what will happen?
> will big intrests attempt a squash down on linux before then?
> or will one of the major distributers of linux now ie.red hat or
> macmillin sell there intrests to one of them who would be able to make
> linux more compatible and also charge money for this compatability>?
> i mean teh GNU protects the OS but not the applications for it and as
> we have seen before microsoft protects everything
> so as we move along in the road linux as an OS where will we be when
> big intests and the powers that be take a serious intrest in takeing
> back what linux stole?
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
