Linux-Advocacy Digest #636, Volume #32 Sun, 4 Mar 01 12:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... (Perry Pip)
Re: Windoze Domination/Damnation ("Weevil")
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Craig Kelley)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Craig Kelley)
Re: NT vs *nix performance ("Chad Myers")
Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time (Craig Kelley)
Re: NT vs *nix performance ("Chad Myers")
Re: NT vs *nix performance (Michael Vester)
Re: It's here! IBM's new Linux ad! (Tim Hanson)
Re: Breaking up is so very hard to do... (mlw)
Re: It's here! IBM's new Linux ad! (Tim Hanson)
Re: Mircosoft Tax (Perry Pip)
Re: Mircosoft Tax (Craig Kelley)
Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time (mlw)
Re: Windoze Domination/Damnation (Scott Gardner)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: 4 Mar 2001 15:54:45 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 04 Mar 2001 15:02:17 +0000,
pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Edward Rosten wrote:
>>
>> Could you back this with more than 1 example. The cli tools + piping is
>> one axample of a very elegant design o parts pulling in the same
>> direction.
>
>Elegant? You must be kidding me.
>
>So tell me this:
>
>taskA > taskB
^
>
>how does taskB communicate the results of its operation to taskA?
In your example it doesn't, because you can't tell the difference
between a redirect '>' and a pipe '|'.
>Enter CORBA Gnome architecture to fix up broken thinking such as this.
>How was that inspired - guess - M$
Bullshit. It was inspired by OMG, which was founded in 1989 be several
companies, Microsoft not being one of them:
http://www.omg.org/news/about/
>Component programming is clearly the way to go. Small is beautiful, but
>only when it is also smart.
Component programming has it's context, pipes have another, as other
IPC's have thiers. No one is a solution for everything. With Unix you
have all of them available.
Perry
------------------------------
From: "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windoze Domination/Damnation
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 16:03:47 GMT
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > > There's absolutely NOTHING stopping people from buying Linux or BeOS
> > > seperately.
> >
> > Yes, there is. If someone gets an OS automatically loaded on the
> > system, the impulse is to look no further for another OS.
>
> That's not actually STOPPING them, that's just laziness.
>
> --
> Pete
There's nothing really stopping you from saving a little money, catching a
plane to China, and trying to single-handedly stop the human rights abuses,
by force if necessary. The only thing STOPPING you is cowardice and/or
laziness.
--
- Weevil
================================================================
"The obvious mathematical breakthrough [for breaking encryption schemes]
would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers."
-- Bill Gates, The Road Ahead (pg 265), 1995
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: 04 Mar 2001 09:14:43 -0700
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> > > I'm surprised any OS or application needs extra or multiple drivers in
> > > this day an age. All the drivers (and there should just be one set) ought
> > > to be in the OS, not in an application. Is that clear enough for you?
> >
> > But that is just your opinion. Other people may have different ideas about
> > what they prefer (I know e.g. that I do like the fact that Applix Office
> > has native, fast drivers for PCL printers which bypass the Ghostscript
> > pipe).
>
> My opinion? What???
>
> Any OS that requires multiple copies of drivers per applications has got
> to be the DUMBEST OS around!
Will you stop ranting already?
PageMaker for *WINDOWS* does the EXACT SAME THING! Every time you
complain about the OS WRT the Gimp, the same exact things could be
said of Windows.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: 04 Mar 2001 09:15:02 -0700
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> > Then explain PageMaker for Windows.
>
> Difficult, since I don't have that product.
Then uninstall the Gimp, and you'll be happy as well.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 16:02:08 GMT
"Norman D. Megill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:tVso6.6808$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Sharing with your friends so that they
> > can make copies" is *NOT* authorized copying under the copyright
> > laws...OF ANY PERIOD in US history.
>
> This is a common misconception that the RIAA wants you to believe. In
> fact making a copy of an audio recording is perfectly legal in the US,
> even if you don't own the original recording, as long as it is for
> noncommercial purposes. The reason for this is the Audio Home Recording
> Act (AHRA).
>
> Since 1992, the U.S. Government has collected a tax on all digital
> audio recorders and blank digital audio media manufactured in or
> imported into the US, and gives the money directly to the RIAA
> companies, which is distributed as royalties to recording artists,
> copyright owners, music publishers, and music writers:
>
> http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/ch10.text.html
>
> In exchange for those royalties, a special exemption to the copyright
> law was made for the specific case of audio recordings, and as a result
> *all* noncommercial copying of musical recordings by consumers is now
> legal in the US, regardless of media:
>
> http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/1008.html
>
> "No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of
> copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a
> digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an
> analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the
> noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making
> digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings."
>
> The intent of Congress was clear when this law was passed:
>
> http://www.cni.org/Hforums/cni-copyright/1993-01/0018.html :
>
> From House Report No. 102-873(I), September 17, 1992:
>
> "In the case of home taping, the [Section 1008] exemption protects all
> noncommercial copying by consumers of digital and analog musical
> recordings."
>
> From House Report No. 102-780(I), August 4, 1992:
>
> "In short, the reported legislation [Section 1008] would clearly
> establish that consumers cannot be sued for making analog or digital
> audio copies for private noncommercial use."
>
> Therefore, when you copy an MP3 the royalties have already been paid for
> with tax dollars in accordance with the law. If you are a musician
> whose recordings are publicly distributed, then you are entitled to your
> share of these royalties by filing a claim under Section 1006
> ( http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/1006.html ).
>
> Now, this law does not apply to Napster, which is a commercial company.
> But as a consumer you are perfectly within your rights when you make a
> copy for noncommercial private use.
Nowhere in the cites you provided does it say that one can distribute
the copies one has made of the media.
The law provides for owners of media to make as many copies FOR THEMSELVES
as needed.
If I had a CD, I could make an MP3 version, a cassette tape version or
any other copied version I would like as long as I am the one using it.
I cannot, however, make copies and distribute them to my friends. Most
people do, and it's rather like speeding, it's not a big deal and most
people (even the RIAA) don't worry about it much. They're much more
worried about the people who make a business out of selling these
copies to their friends.
-c
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time
Date: 04 Mar 2001 09:18:38 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) writes:
> On 03 Mar 2001 08:10:28 -0700, Craig Kelley wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jay Maynard) writes:
> >
> >> This is standard GPV zealot doublethink. You *cannot* remove freedoms from
> >> the original code. That code is now, and will always be, free. If that were
> >> not the case, then the BSD codebase would have disappeared into SunOS a
> >> long, long time ago.
> >>
> >> Freedom must necessarily include the freedom to do things that piss you off,
> >> or else it is a hollow shell. The BSD license does, and the GPV does not.
> >> That is why calling the GPV free is a baldfaced lie.
> >
> >Enforced freedom.
> >
> >Whether it's an oxymoron or not depends on who you are.
>
> To me it certainly is.
>
> However, we should also look at what the GNU crowd mean by "free". They
> talk about the software being "free", as if the software has rights. If
> you believe that the "rights" of the software outweighs the rights of the
> user, then use the GPL. If you believe that the "rights" of the community
> outweigh the rights of the individual, get yourself a copy of the communist
> manifesto, move to China (or Cuba), and use the GPL.
I agree, but I can also understand the argument from the other side.
If the fear of commercial software outweighs your desire to write it,
then the GPL is for you.
If you would take it as a compliment if Microsoft "stole" your code,
then the BSD license is for you.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 16:03:36 GMT
"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 3 Mar 2001 21:42:08 -0500, JS PL <js@plcom> wrote:
>
> > Only 95% are forced to buy windows? Why not 100%?? What is different
> > about the five percent that they are exempt from being "FORCED" to buy
> > windows?
>
> Presumably they bought Macs instead of PC's.
Which is another reason why MS does not have a monopoly. They
can never establish price controls because Macs are a reasonable
alternative to the PCs and consumers could reasonably switch to the
Mac if the PC/Windows realm became too pricey (and indeed they
have as we have seen with the recent iMac v. PC price wars).
-c
------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 02:16:20 -0700
Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>
<snip>
> > > It's better to just buy the parts that YOU want and assemble it.
> >
> > Of course!!! I figured this one out a very long time ago. My
> > 486 is still functioning as a web and samba server. It has
> > just turned 10 years of age and works perfectly. It is on its
> > third hard disk but everything else is original. It has been
> > running 24/7 for the last 2 years. I estimate that it has
> > about 60,000 hours of usage. I have never had any problems
> > with any of my assembled pcs. Still have my assembled XT and
> > 386. Don't use them anymore but they still work. Hard disks
> > wear out but are easily replaced. Using SCSI insures that you
> > can replace a drive in the future. I can still get SCSI I
> > drives.
> >
>
> I have an 80M SCSI I if you're interested.
> Actually, I have two (DEC RZ23-E), but one's broken.
> I'll have to test to see which one works and which doesn't.
>
Thankyou for your kind and generous offer but I currently
don't need one. I am currently have one SCSI drive more than I
need, a 300 megabyter. My 486 has a 3.5 gigabyter, it was the
smallest I could find. Back in the 80's when I built my first
pc, I acqired a SCSI hard disk from a Mac dealer. They were
surprised that I would put a SCSI into a pc. I simply replied,
"What else would I use?" SCSI has always been a good
performance enhancer for a pc.
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
<snip>
--
Michael Vester
A credible Linux advocate
"The avalanche has started, it is
too late for the pebbles to vote"
Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
------------------------------
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: It's here! IBM's new Linux ad!
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 16:33:24 GMT
Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>
> Tim Hanson wrote:
> >
> > Is this walkin' the walk? Or what?
> >
> > http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/linux/passport.swf
> > --
> > "Never underestimate the power of a small tactical nuclear weapon."
>
> valid URL, but ust black-colored page .. :-(
>
It works. Do you have Flash?
--
"But I don't like Spam!!!!"
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Breaking up is so very hard to do...
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 11:39:12 -0500
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> > Previous Supreme Court decisions say nothing bad about Judge Jackson's
> > behavior nor post-testimony comments.
>
> Well, they do now
The appellate court is NOT the supreme court.
--
The majority of the stupid is invincible and guaranteed for all time.
The terror of their tyranny, however, is alleviated by their lack of
consistency.
-- Albert Einstein
========================
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: It's here! IBM's new Linux ad!
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 16:38:13 GMT
Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> "Tim Hanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Is this walkin' the walk? Or what?
> >
> > http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/linux/passport.swf
>
> Well, the cards are certainly on the table now, aren't they?
>
> Big Blue -vs- Big Bill
>
> The Thriller in MaGNUli...
>
> Place your wagers, gentlemen!
>
It's more than that. Now all the major Unix vendors, which have seen
market share decline while Linux grabs the spotlight for fastest server
growth away from Microsoft, are forced to revisit their so far anemic
Linux strategy. Look for some me-tooisms from HP and Compaq.
Sun, for example, is finding out that the Linux community isn't stupid
enough to accept all these "Heads I win, tails you lose" overtures.
--
"But I don't like Spam!!!!"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: 4 Mar 2001 16:38:30 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 4 Mar 2001 15:42:19 GMT,
Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The same CD which you get from RedHat with a nice manual can be had
>> from CheapBytes for $1.98
>
>No, the Cheapbytes CD only includes the downloadable stuff.
I don't know about Cheapbytes but the RH manual is on the downloadable
CD in html, pdf, and installable RPM formats.
>
>What I am saying is that the "MS's prices are too high" claim is
>unsubstantiated nonsense.
Have you priced MS office lately?? How about Visaul Studio with all
the wizbangs?? How about a server for a mere 25 clients. What if you
need remote access to your Win Machines...add on the cost of
PC-anywhere. And usefull documention on Windows is extra too. With
Linux you get all that functionality for nothing.
>From another angle, do you know what MS's reported profit margins are??
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: 04 Mar 2001 09:49:23 -0700
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Windows XP is the same thing as Windows 2000; they use the same NT
> > > > core that NT4 and NT3 did.
> > > >
> > > > Windows ME isn't much cheaper than Windows 2000.
> > >
> > > Windows XP will ship in three major versions. Personal, Pro, and
> Server.
> > > Pro is equivelant to Windows 2000 today and will cost about the same.
> > > Personal has fewer features and will cost what ME costs today.
> >
> > Just like NT shipped with 3 major versions which were all exactly the
> > same at the core?
>
> Yes, they use the same kernel. So what? It's the license that you are
> buying, not the software.
>
> The Personal license does not allow you to become a member of an NT/2000
> Domain (much like Win9x can't be a member of a domain, though it can access
> domain resources). It only supports one processor (Pro supports 2
> processors). Pro supports multiple monitors, Personal doesn't.
Sounds like fun.
> > > > Yes, but most people use Microsoft Word and not professional tools.
> > >
> > > Most professionals do not, and the market for professionals has
> increased
> > > greatly.
> >
> > Not that I've seen. Adobe hasn't shipped a new version of PageMaker
> > in well on 4 years now. I only know one person who owns PageMaker,
> > but I know dozens who bought Photoshop. One is a niche product, the
> > other is more mass-market.
>
> I listed Photoshop in my list of software that hasn't changed price.
Oh but it has. Photoshop used to go for $899 (back in the days of
Windows 3.1).
> > > > Because it's not *worth* that much for a word processor. Microsoft
> > > > gets away with it because they have enforced compatibility (IMHO).
> > > > This is the reason why the monopoly is a bad thing for consumers, and
> > > > is the core of the argument.
> > >
> > > Wordperfect can read and write word documents just fine.
> >
> > Then why don't people buy it? If there is a free market, and
> > Wordperfect is just fine at reading *all* Word documents (including
> > OLE spreadsheets and DAO snippets), then how come it isn't wildly
> > successful? It does cost about 1/4th as much. Boggles the mind.
>
> I didn't say it did everything Word did, I said it can read and write word
> documents just fine. It doesn't do everything Word does.
You didn't answer my question. Why don't people buy it? What
specific features are required by 90% of the population to make them
use Word?
> > > > WordPerfect, in short, *can't* compete because the market isn't fair.
> > >
> > > How is that MS's fault? What could they do to prevent that?
> >
> > How about
> >
> > 1) Stop pre-loading at ridiculous rates with Windows bundles (ie,
> > using one monopoly to foster the other)
>
> Make up your mind. You just sat here and bitched about how high the price
> of Word was compared to it's competitors, now you're bitching because it's
> too cheap. Can you at least choose a single position and stick with it?
Actually, I never complained about the high price of Windows/Word
myself. I said that Microsoft obviously has more profit than it
really needs; that it doesn't have the customer's best interests at
heart.
Secondly, the complaint is that Microsoft pretty much gives away Word
with new computers so that the user isn't tempted to go out and buy a
competitor's product. This creates a "trickle-down" situation, to
borrow from Reaganomics for a moment: everyone who deals with said
person must now also use Word. Your boss buys a new Vaio, and
suddenly everyone in the company must now use Word.
You have to go out of your way to use non-Microsoft products. It's
like that by design because Microsoft holds all the OS strings that
the OEMs depend on.
> > 2) Stop integrating their desktop products with their operating
> > system (ala IE/Netscape debacle -- see DOJ for more info)
>
> Word is not integrated with the OS, nor is any other package in the Office
> suite.
It's integrated to the same extent that IE is. It's even bundled with
Windows in most new computers.
> > 3) Compete on *merits* instead of *marketing* -- that's what really
> > irks me; Microsoft makes some REALLY GOOD software. If they
> > weren't so *afraid* of losing (Bill Gate's paranoia at work, I
> > suppose) all the time, they could actually work with other
> > companies and people instead of against them all the time.
>
> The purpose of business is to make money. Further, when you are a
> publicly held company, you have a legal responsibility to increase
> your profits and increase the value of your stock. If you don't,
> you can be sued.
Any business that puts money ahead of customers should be reminded of
*who* gives them license to practice in the first place. Business
aren't automonous monsters that mindlessly generate profit. Real
people work there with real families and friends. Microsoft has many
such individuals, most of which would rather have cool products with a
good name than be labled a monopoly that will eek every cent they can
out of their "consumers".
Your average Microsoft programmer isn't out to snare new consumers,
but that's what the business side of the company's goal is. They
*can* compete on mertis, they *have* good products. If they follow
through with the marketeer's orders and enforce all that they are
threatening to with Windows XP it'll be bad for them. You can't
excuse such behavior because they have a "legal responsibilty" to do
so; they have a much more important moral responsibility to their
partners (ie, customers).
If they really want to compete with Linux/BSD, then they should
lighten up a bit and stop treating their customers as potential
pirates all the time.
> > > > I know you're going to disagree, but that's the heart of the argument
> > > > as described by Orin Hatch (R-Utah), 18 states' attrouney's general,
> > > > the US Department of Justice and the very conservative judge Jackson
> > > > (appointed by Ronald Reagan).
> > >
> > > Uhh.. I didn't see Wordperfect mentioned in the trial.
> >
> > It wasn't, but it's the same issue.
>
> No, it's not the same issue. There may be similarities, but it's not the
> same.
Use your imaginiation.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 12:07:18 -0500
Jay Maynard wrote:
>
> On Sat, 03 Mar 2001 23:11:43 -0500, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >One man's freedom is another mans prison. Perspective has a very important role
> >in the definition of freedom. Should southern plantation owners have had the
> >freedom to run their farms as they see fit, or was slavery infringing on
> >another's freedom?
>
> Nice try, but even I (who considers himself a Southern gentleman) do not
> support the idea of slavery - for it does indeed harm others without their
> consent. Talk about persective: How does the BSD license even come close to
> the evil of slavery?
No analogy of the sort was presented. The slavery analogy was presented to
establish an unambiguous connection between viable freedom and reasonable
restraint.
It isn't until the next paragraph that the concept is reduced to the
fundamental argument that freedom must coexist with discipline and control.
Debating wasn't a strong point for you, was it?
>
> >The BSD license is anarchy. A person can contribute code to the world. Someone
> >else can build upon this work, and not contribute. This means that someone is
> >gaining an advantage from something they do not own.
>
> As long as they are not harming you without your consent, they are not
> infringing on your freedom.
I disagree. If I copyright something GPL and decide to share it. No one should
be allowed to build upon it without either sharing back to the community, or
properly compensating me.
>You, by your insistence on the GPV, are
> infringing on others' freedom to profit from the fruits of their own labors
> by dictating the terms under which they can do so. This is not freedom. It
> is Communism.
Wrong, it is capitalism at its best. What right does someone have to capitalize
on the work of others without proper compensation? Under GPL, compensation can
be in the form of sharing. If you don't want to share, you must contact the
individual copyright holders and arrange a licensing scheme that will allow you
to use code which you do not own.
The GPL is more closely analogous to the original idea behind patenting before
it became the source of legal land mines for corporations.
I have the right to copyright something as GPL, it is my "freedom" to do so.
You have the right NOT to use GPL code if you do not like the conditions.
Freedom is a wonderful thing.
--
The majority of the stupid is invincible and guaranteed for all time.
The terror of their tyranny, however, is alleviated by their lack of
consistency.
-- Albert Einstein
========================
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Gardner)
Subject: Re: Windoze Domination/Damnation
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 17:08:34 GMT
On Sun, 04 Mar 2001 04:27:23 GMT, "Tom Wilson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I had my own experience with Gateway helping a friend get a replacement
>power supply. Your experience mirrors mine almost exactly.
>
>(Tech Support) "You'll have to run the diagnostics program."
>(Me) "That's not possible."
>(Tech Support) "I can't help you unless you run the diagnostics program"
>(Me) "What part of 0 volts power good do you not understand?"
>
>It took over an hour and several different reps until I got someone who
>knew his head from a hole in the ground. They Fed-Exed a new one next day
>air and apologized profusely. Thank heavens there are still SOME competent
>folks out there.
>
>--
>Tom Wilson
>Sunbelt Software Solutions
>
Not really germane to the thread, but I have had some suprising
experiences with Dell computers, of all people. My brother ordered a
Dell with a 17" monitor. The computer arrived on time, but the
monitor was DOA. He called the customer supoort department, who
apologized and promised to send out a new monitor next-day air. The
next morning, the new monitor arrived, but it was a 19", not a 17".
There was a note that said "We don't have any of the 17" monitors
available for immediate shipping, so please take this monitor in its
place for no additional charge. If this monitor isn't suitable, we'll
find you a 17", but it may take a day or two." Needless to say, he
kept the 19".
On my last deployment, one of my squadronmates had a Dell
laptop that the hard drive died on. Dell asked him about three
questions to rule out the simple stuff, and then next-day'd him a new
hard drive.
My wife's Dell laptop warrants a complete story in itself. We
ordered it online on December 19th of last year. We hoped to have it
for a trip back home to Texas from Virginia on the 23rd, so we opted
for next-day shipping, completely forgetting that Dell would have to
assemble and test the system before it was shipped. Anyway, we went
to their tracking site the next day and found that it wasn't due to be
shipped until January 9th. Oh well, nothing we can do about that.
But then we checked the next day, and the ship date had been moved to
December 25th! We checked the next day (the 21st) and found that it
had already shipped!! We got it the evening of the 22nd, and were
able to take it with us on our trip. Keep in mind that all of this
was happening right around Christmas, when any company would have a
legitimate reason to be swamped.
Last month, the DVD-ROM drive in her laptop died an ugly
death, and Dell sent a new one to us next-day.
Based on these experiences, any laptop I buy in the future
will be a Dell, and if I ever decide to buy a computer rather than
assembling one, it will probably be a Dell as well.
Scott
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
