Linux-Advocacy Digest #259, Volume #33 Sun, 1 Apr 01 19:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (GreyCloud)
Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP. (GreyCloud)
Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure (Bob Hauck)
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: Formatting a floppy (GreyCloud)
Re: Baseball (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Hey, JS PL was Re: Microsoft abandoning USB? ("����")
Re: Linux needs a standard, user proof distro ("Masha Ku' Inanna")
Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP. (Roy Culley)
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> ("JS PL")
Re: Microsoft has gone insane ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP. (GreyCloud)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 14:17:58 -0700
Scott Erb wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > Scott Erb wrote:
>
> -snip a bunch of insults and lame attacks-
>
> > FUCK YOU and your LYING PROPAGANDA SPEWING ASS.
>
> I'll keep correcting you with facts, and showing how your claims,
> unsubstantiated and unsupported, are dead wrong.
>
> If you don't like it, feel free to hurl more insults.
>
> > There is no "democratic" about it. We are a Republic. More
> > specifically, we are a CONSTITUTIONALLY LIMITED REPUBLIC.
>
> The proper term is a Democratic Republic, or, as I explained, a Liberal
> Democracy. You are simply wrong, I've even pointed to books, I can give
> you some more cites if you want.
>
> But since they contradict your silly whims, you'll just call it
> propaganda, and rely on your unsupported assertions. Very lame. But
> very easy to slap down.
>
> > NOWHERE in *ANY* government laws and sort of democratic *anything*
> > allowed at the State or Federal level.
>
> You're wrong. The day for elections is even specified, elections are
> part of democracy. Certainly we don't have pure, crude democracy of
> unlimited majority rule. No one is arguing for that.
>
> > If you want to run a town, or even a county, as a democracy, you
> > are fully within your rights to do so.
> >
> > But the US Constitution, the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND, specificies
> > in UNMISTAKABLE language the the United States is a Republic.
>
> A Democratic Republic. No matter how much you try, you can't deny that
> the two terms are not contradictory. Republics can take many forms,
> ranging from authoritarian to democratic. This is basic stuff, Aaron.
> Where are you getting your information -- just from your whims?
>
> > Not a "democratic republic"....just a Republic.
> >
> > Popular election of Representatives and Senators does *NOT*
> > a democracy make, nor a Democratic Republic make, so you and
> > your PROPAGANDA NOISE about the US being a "democratic Republic"
> > can go take a flying fucking leap off a cliff.
>
> (chuckle) You're simply wrong. Representative democracy is precisely a
> system where you choose representatives and Senators, and they make
> laws. Our system is partially a representative democracy, though not
> completely, due to the role of the President and Courts. I'm simply
> stating reality. You calling it propaganda with unsubstantiated and
> unsupported (and bizarre) claims only makes you look a tad silly.
>
> > Wrong. The United Kingdom is a Representative Democracy.
> > However, *WE* do not have a parliamentary system, therefore,
> > we are not a Representative Democracy
>
> We're a Presidential system, but also have a legislative branch that is
> indeed a form of representative democracy. It's not a pure form like
> the UK, since the President has specific powers that limit what the
> legislature can do (the whole checks and balances thing).
>
> > To wit, you previously said that the United States is a "democratic
> > republic", and *NOW* you said that it is a "representative
> > democracy".
> >
> > Well, which is it? A Democracy by Representation, or a
> > Republic by Democracy?
>
> Democratic Republics can also be representative democracies. That is
> one way the Republic can be formed. Republics have whatever mechanisms
> and attributes their constitutions create.
>
> Perhaps, rather than simply throwing out strange assertions, you should
> back them and explain precisely what you mean by terms like Republic,
> Democracy, etc. Or is that too HARD for you?
>
> > It can't be BOTH ways.
>
> It certaily can.
>
> > Therefore, I have now demonstrated, by your own definitions,
> > that you lied at least once.
>
> (chuckle) Your word games are only attempts to obfuscate the obvious
> fact you're defending an undefendable position. You need to study these
> things, you're very misguided on some real basics.
>
> > Of course...the real truth is that you lied twice. Every time
> > you try to weasel in the word "democracy" to describe our system
> > of government, your are LYING.
> >
> > Remember, Asshole, several MILLION American took an oath to defend
> > the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES against *ALL* enemies, both
> > foreign and domestic.
>
> > People like you, claiming to have a PhD in Political Science, who
> > then go around telling lies like such as above, qualify, in no
> > uncertain terms, as ENEMIES OF THE CONSTITUTION.
> >
> > Make no doubt about it.
> >
> > Some day...when they you're lined up against the wall, and you
> > feel the hot, searing pain of bullets ripping through your body,
> > literally turning the very cells around the entry wound into
> > a worthless pool of slime in the wound cavity....just remember,
> > that I warned you.
>
> Yet by your definition, all our recent Presidents
> who talk about our democracy, all our legislators, all our supreme court
> justices, all who interpret the constitution and our system more like me
> than like you are just as guilty. In fact, by your definition, about
> 95% of the country is an enemy of the constitution!
>
> The rest of your inane babble snipped. You discredit yourself with your
> tirades and pathetic attempts at threats.
Its as I thought... you said you had a PHD. Which junior college in the
backwaters are you claiming to be teaching at? Are their credits gained
from taking your class and are they transferable to major Academic
institutions? Anybody can come in and make these claims. The only
problem with academia is that most of the professors deal in theories.
There are a few good profs that have been out in the real world and then
returned to academia with experience. Experience and experiences count
for quite a bit. Send us your references and that can be verified and
then we can start over again. So far I don't know you from Adam.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP.
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 14:23:11 -0700
Chad Everett wrote:
>
> On Sun, 01 Apr 2001 13:39:37 +1200, Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Correct! the book written about her was quite enlightening/
> >
> >Matthew Gardiner
> >
> >The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> >
> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Karel Jansens
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote
> >> on Fri, 30 Mar 2001 13:26:32 +0000
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> >Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> One person I would really hate to see in charge of the US is Steve Jobs.
> >> >> Could you imagine the havoc that would be unlessed! some finds out a
> >> >> secret, and Steve (who is renound for is "quick to fire" response, esp.
> >> >> the case of the ATI Randeon debarkle) would nuke the person. Personally,
> >> >> I would like to see Magarate Thature in charge of the US, balls of
> >> >> steel, ruling with an iron fist.
> >> >>
>
> I hate to tell you this, but Margaret Thatcher doesn't have any balls. You
> know what balls are, don't you?
>
> >> >Who is/was Margarate Thature?
> >>
> >> Most likely Margaret Thatcher, who was in 10 Downing Street in England
> >> (Great Britain?) back during (part of? all of?)
> >> Reagan's tenure as US president. :-)
> >>
> >> [.sigsnip]
> >>
> >> --
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
> >> EAC code #191 54d:20h:39m actually running Linux.
> >> Linux. The choice of a GNU generation.
> >
>
> -----= 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! =-----
As an aside joke... My wife was pulled over on the freeway for
speeding. A Renton police officer got out and was about to tell her she
was speeding, but before he could say anything she batted her eyelashes
at him and said "Are you soliciting tickets for the Policemens Ball?"
The officer replied "Maam, I'll have you know that the Renton Police
have no balls." Then it struck him what he just said and left.
--
V
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 21:49:22 +0200
The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
>>
>>I have two IDENTICAL machines at home...one with Linux, one with
>>Windows.
>>
>>The Linux machine is stable. I have tried every hardware swap
>>imaginable between these two machines to get either
>>
>>a) the Windows98 machine to quit crashing, or
>>b) the Linux machine to start crashing.
>>
>>So far, I have yet to discover *ANY* combination of hardware which
>>improves the reliability of Windows, nor *ANY combination of the SAME
>>PIECES OF HARDWARE which provokes Linux to crash.
>>
>>I even thought of the possibility that Windows makes the CPU get hotter:
>>The Windows machine even has more fans (about DOUBLE the air-flow rate
>>through the case).
>
Well, well, Aaron,
now it gets funny. *You* as "Unix System engineer" should know that
a machine running Win98 (the one your Netscape is running on) *do*
run hotter than the same machine running linux, because the wintendo-OS�s
simply *never* put the processor into HALT. It is running all the time
full speed ahead.
I would have expected to have at least that basic knowledge from someone
claiming to have written his own little multiuser/multitasking system,
another lie from our beloved war hero, who still hasn�t figured out how
to get rid of his absurd Sig.
Peter
--
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 21:43:32 GMT
On Sat, 31 Mar 2001 22:03:07 GMT, Chad Myers
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Black & white requires no backlight, gives longer battery life. I am
>> not sure what "integrated Internet" is supposed to mean. Palm devices
>> certainly have browsers and email and all that.
> I mean that what little internet capabilities the Palm has, it's
> an after thought and usually hacked together.
How is the Palm's Internet capability "hacked together"? Please be
specific, because I think you are making stuff up again.
What about battery life? If you don't think that is important, I would
have to say you probably haven't tried to actually use a PDA in real life.
> Whatever browser it has isn't color and probably illegible and
> certainly not usable on a regular basis, not to mention the resolution
> is so poor on those things.
I interpret this to mean that you really don't know, have never seen
one, and are just guessing. It isn't made by MS, so it _must_ be
inferior seems to be your guiding principle. More made-up stories from
Chad.
> Email is difficult to read let alone type with its retarded "graffiti"
> rather than handwriting recognition like the PocketPC.
How is it "retarded", specifically? What is the accuracy rate vs the
accuracy rate of "real" handwriting recongnition? How about speed?
Please be specific, because I think you're making stuff up again.
>> Handspring has a cell phone attachment for theirs, and of course
>> there's the Palm VII.
>
> *yawn* so do most, if not all the PocketPCs.
The Handspring thing attaches directly to the back of the Visor so the
whole thing is one unit. You can dial by selecting from the address
book. You can also take caller ID info from the phone and put it into
the address book and can use the Visor to compose SMS messages and the
like. It is "integrated" as you Redmond-worshippers like to say.
I haven't seen anything like that for a Pocket PC. Perhaps you can
point me to one.
>> The iPaq has two things over Palm, really. One is that it can play
>> MP3's,
>
> And most videos and play many real-time video games (like space shooters,
> DOOM and other FPS's, etc)
You're gonna play DOOM on a 200x400 screen? Ok, maybe you would just to
have advocacy fodder. I was actually thinking of being able to have my
own music on airplanes without bringing a separate gadget. You know, a
use someone might actually care about.
> Not when you have a real browser, real email and contacts, word
> processing, videos, games, power-point presentations (yes, this is a
> big one) and many, many other things.
Powerpoint on a handheld screen is a "big one"? Maybe for someone who
believes hype and lies incessantly about things he has no knowledge of
it is.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: 1 Apr 2001 21:57:12 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Paul Holloway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Ok, troll boy, I'll give you have a chance here.
: What major Constitutional violations are currently being perpetrated?
Read the Constitution, and you'll be able to answer that for yourself.
I've alluded to some of them in other posts on this thread, but a
detailed listing would be far beyond the scope of a USENET posting.
And others already have chronicled them in far more detail than I
could hope to.
: How do we currently have an "oligarchy".
It is very obvious if you follow the money.
A handful of wealthy individuals, families, and institutions control
the media, the government, most large businesses, most of the supposed
"grassroots" movements (on BOTH sides), both major parties,
"education," and everything else that matters.
The left clearly sees the corporate side of this oligarchy; the right
clearly sees the government and union side. Both are correct. But
they don't realize that for the most part it is the same folks in
charge of all of these.
: By the way, the US is not a democracy, it's a republic. Maybe you
: meant "......masquerading as a republic?".
No, I meant what I said. Most of our alleged leaders defend
"democracy," which is not even remotely similar to a republic. And it
is very clear that we are becoming less like a republic, and more like
a democracy (at least superficially), all the time.
Joe
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Formatting a floppy
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 15:08:49 -0700
"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>
> GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> : "Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>
> 8<SNIP>8
>
> : I thought I smelled smoke several threads away. :-)
> : Sometimes its hard to keep the topic of this thread together.
> : My wifes PeeCee (HP) with an HP scanner and software during a scan
> : session, is almost unresponsive to a cancel command. You are right
> : about the hardware side of things regarding the PC hardware and its
> : performance under loading conditions.
> : Things just bog down. If I was a rich man I'd probably look into an
>
> Indeed they do. What stuck in my craw was the
> way Mr. "Manilow" was claiming that BeOS's
> multitasking was "maybe" better than WindowsNT's
> and that OS/2 could run hundreds of applications
> with absolutely no performance penalties. Anyone
> who's ever used PC hardware knows that this is
> impossible under any PC operating system, simply
> because of the limitations of the hardware.
>
> : Alpha or Sparc III. But I'm not and have to face the realities and
> : limitations of what I can afford. I can get a low end sparc for $950
> : new, but I'd have to see what it can do for me.
>
> You can get a good SGI Indy used for about $700-$800
> as well. Heck, you can sometimes find a 21" 13w3
> monitor for about $250. It's a bit cheaper to
> invest in older workstations than in newer consumer
> lever PC technology these days.
>
> * Holds up a shiny CD with the BSD daemon on it,
> and smiles for the camera...
>
> <SHAMELESS PLUG>
> And if you don't care for IRIX, or SunOS, you
> could always put NetBSD on either one.
> </SHAMELESS PLUG>
>
> : In earlier days, on the old venerable VAX 785, we added a graphics
> : terminal to it and installed Regis support. That poor old machine
> : really slogged down just running one fractal program. But then again we
> : only had at most three users logged on. Had to back away from that
>
> And you have to figure that back then, graphics
> were anything but a priority for computer systems.
>
> In the 1960's computer graphics, complete with
> phong shading, and animated sequences was very
> much alive, but people just didn't see any
> practical uses for it, so hardware wasn't
> really designed with anything but text-based
> applications in mind, I gather.
Yes, the text based solutions were all that we needed back then. But,
when bigger demands for tougher problems came about, sometimes simple
graphic drawings or representations were needed. The Sutherland
graphics systems that was in another dept. having to do with ship hull
designs was rather interesting... and only the gov. could afford things
like that then.
I ran into the same problem at work you have encountered here regarding
pcs. On the vax one user, a trs-80 owner, wanted to use the basic on
the machine. Ok, so I set him up an account. Later he came back
belly-aching because the basic had no LPRINT command. I told him "of
course it doesn't". You have to write to a named print queue to do
that. Further, if he wanted it to be general purpose he'd have to study
up on the system services and call the appropriate routines. He just
walked away and said the vax was a piece of crap. Oh well...
--
V
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Baseball
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 00:11:42 +0200
Chad Everett wrote:
>
> On Sun, 01 Apr 2001 01:36:55 GMT, Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >GreyCloud wrote:
> >>
> >> Anonymous wrote:
> >> >
> >> > mike wrote:
> >> > > Tomorrow I go see the Mariners play the Cardinals. Folks are
> >> > > expecting Mark McGwire to hit the ball completely out of the new
> >> > > stadium and be the first player to do so. My neighbor came over this
> >> > > morning with four tickets for the game, front row directly behind home
> >> > > plate. His employer -- a microsoft billionaire -- gave him the
> >> > > tickets. This means that Windows is superior to Linux.
> >> > >
> >> > > Where are the
> >> > > Linux billionaires?
>
> And there, in a nut shell, is the Microsoft argument for superiority. Thank
> you very much for proving, without a doubt, that Windows advocates are
> are, shall we say, *confused*.
>
As a foreigner, one of the things I appreciate the most of the English
language, is the elegance of the understatements.
--
Giuliano Colla
------------------------------
From: "����" <����@����.��m>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Hey, JS PL was Re: Microsoft abandoning USB?
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 18:44:40 -0400
"Roger" <roger@.> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 31 Mar 2001 22:27:22 -0500, someone claiming to be JS PL
> wrote:
>
> >"Roger" <roger@.> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >> Off topic for this thread, but Max has claimed at least two
> >> conversations with you re: a problem with IE which was solved by
> >> replacement of a video card. Since he originally claimed it was me,
> >> in spite of being corrected before (and since it is, after al, Max)
> >> I'm inclined to take his recent version of the fantasy with a huge
> >> grain of salt.
> >>
> >> Do you recall the threads he's babbling about?
>
> >I remember having a problem with a bad video driver causing screen
freezes a
> >couple years ago, right about the time Win98SE came out. It was a problem
> >with a Viper V550 and WinSE which reared its ugly head most often while
IE
> >was open. Changing the card out fixed the problem.
>
> As I thought: driver, not hardware, and not exclusively IE.
>
> Max was lying again.
Oh hell yes, when he's not consumed into one of his schizophrenic delusions
of the Great Monopoly he's just plain making up lies.
------------------------------
From: "Masha Ku' Inanna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux needs a standard, user proof distro
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 18:46:50 -0400
<lots snipped>
> I've been hearing the last few years that Linux is going to be big
> competition for Windows. The way that would happen is if it was as easy
> to use as Windows. If it's not easy for techless users to set up and
> use on their own, they'll just go with Windows instead.
>
It is big competition, currently, I think. It has hit a stage where enough
people are irritated with Microsoft, coupled with enough interest generated
in a viable "alternative" that they're willing to go FAT free, especially
when faced with an OS that is of no-cost to the user, vs paying for upgrade
upon upgrade upon upgrade to software that grows less and less compatible
with their older software and hardware, forcing them to upgrade their
hardware to vendors "certified" by Microsoft to support their hardware, AND
have, looming on the horizon the whole "Hailstorm" initiative (or .NET or
their subscription service or whatever)
> I just hope they make a more user freindly and standerdized version that
> will bring Linux closer to being an alternative to Windows.
Linux's main strength is that it is NOT Windows. Linux, and most of the
so-called "real" operating systems, whatever that means, does not try to
hide the technology behind the OS with a pretty interface as the only means
of working with the OS. Windows does. Apple does, to an extent (thinking of
OS-X as being more command-line available). When you dummy down an OS to
make it more appealing to the so-called "users" out there, you render the
user ultimately dependant on the OS to handle those tasks. When that
happens, "tech-support" can step in to save the day, usually with incredibly
outrageous fees.
I'd rather learn to use an OS on its own terms even if that means learning
to master a CLI. A GUI is nice, but it is a tool, like anything else with an
operating system, and I'd like to be able to dictate when to use a GUI and
when not to for my own use.
Certain things, after all, can be performed more effectively with a single
typed command than with a series of menu clicks, dialog-box clicks, and
radio-button clicks.
But Windows has convinced the world that all you need to do is "point, click
and it will just work."
It must be cool to be fooled, afterall.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roy Culley)
Subject: Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP.
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 23:57:01 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett) writes:
> On Sun, 01 Apr 2001 13:39:37 +1200, Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Correct! the book written about her was quite enlightening/
>>
>>Matthew Gardiner
>>
>>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Karel Jansens
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> wrote
>>> on Fri, 30 Mar 2001 13:26:32 +0000
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> >Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> One person I would really hate to see in charge of the US is Steve Jobs.
>>> >> Could you imagine the havoc that would be unlessed! some finds out a
>>> >> secret, and Steve (who is renound for is "quick to fire" response, esp.
>>> >> the case of the ATI Randeon debarkle) would nuke the person. Personally,
>>> >> I would like to see Magarate Thature in charge of the US, balls of
>>> >> steel, ruling with an iron fist.
>>> >>
>
> I hate to tell you this, but Margaret Thatcher doesn't have any balls. You
> know what balls are, don't you?
Grief, it's a figure of speech. Anyway, I saw her on TV pissing in a
urinal. If she's got a willy then I presume she has balls as well.
Oops, that was spitting image wasn't it? :-)
------------------------------
From: "JS PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 18:54:42 -0400
"Roger" <roger@.> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 04:40:13 GMT, someone claiming to be T. Max Devlin
> wrote:
>
> >Said Roger in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 29 Mar 2001 14:52:26 -0600;
>
> >>On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:36:11 GMT, someone claiming to be T. Max Devlin
> >>wrote:
> >>>And made assumptions about the variables that are entirely unsupported,
>
> >>>and in fact ridiculous, no doubt. Like my old buddy Roger, who had to
> >>>replace his video *hardware* to get *IE* to work, and acted as if it
was
> >>>a hardware failure.
>
> >>1. Not now, nor never was your buddy
> >>
> >>2. Never made such a claim.
>
> >Yup, all happened, just like I said. We even reprised the discussion a
> >couple times over the last year or so. You posted the whole story
> >yourself, to illustrate why Windows failures can be blamed on
> >"hardware". You got IE5, and installed it, and your computer crashed,
> >so you got a new video card, and that "fixed" the "problem".
>
> Nope. Never happened. You're confused again -- perhaps it was your
> imaginary friend that you had such an exchange with?
>
> Or maybe you can produce a message ID from either exchange? (What am
> I saying? That would be * way * to much like supporting an assertion
> with facts for Max to ever consider it ... )
>
> >>Of course, what can you expect from a person with so much Internet
> >>experience that he once berated another poster for using his
> >>postmaster's IP address. Said address being 127.0.01.
>
> >No, that's 127.0.0.1, and it is not "his postmaster's IP address".
>
> That was rather my point -- you made the claim that it was your PM's
> IP, and that claim formed the basis for your little rant vs. that
> poster.
That's hilarious! I'm sorry I missed that little exchange.
.
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft has gone insane
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2001 01:00:38 +0200
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Do you know where I can get Mozilla for Solaris 8 x86??
>
I'd say, according to the Mozilla website, it should build on all Unices,
if you have the requisite libraries and tools installed. Don't know what
Solaris 8 has or has not, but there are no prebuilt binaries, so you are
going to have to compile it yourself.
Build dependencies and instructions are on:
http://www.mozilla.org/build/unix-details.html
HTH,
Mart
PS: a word of warning, this beast is HUGE. on my PC (500Mhz Pentium III
with 128M) a stripped down build (no mail, news, no debugging code) takes
about 1.5 hours.
--
Write in C, write in C,
Write in C, yeah, write in C.
Only wimps use BASIC, Write in C.
http://www.orca.bc.ca/spamalbum/
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP.
Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 16:04:04 -0700
Roy Culley wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett) writes:
> > On Sun, 01 Apr 2001 13:39:37 +1200, Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>Correct! the book written about her was quite enlightening/
> >>
> >>Matthew Gardiner
> >>
> >>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
> >>
> >>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Karel Jansens
> >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> wrote
> >>> on Fri, 30 Mar 2001 13:26:32 +0000
> >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>> >Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> One person I would really hate to see in charge of the US is Steve Jobs.
> >>> >> Could you imagine the havoc that would be unlessed! some finds out a
> >>> >> secret, and Steve (who is renound for is "quick to fire" response, esp.
> >>> >> the case of the ATI Randeon debarkle) would nuke the person. Personally,
> >>> >> I would like to see Magarate Thature in charge of the US, balls of
> >>> >> steel, ruling with an iron fist.
> >>> >>
> >
> > I hate to tell you this, but Margaret Thatcher doesn't have any balls. You
> > know what balls are, don't you?
>
> Grief, it's a figure of speech. Anyway, I saw her on TV pissing in a
> urinal. If she's got a willy then I presume she has balls as well.
> Oops, that was spitting image wasn't it? :-)
Was that a Benny Hill one?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
