Linux-Advocacy Digest #408, Volume #33 Fri, 6 Apr 01 00:13:11 EDT
Contents:
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (GreyCloud)
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] (Richard E.
Silverman)
Re: Baseball (GreyCloud)
Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin (Tim Kelley)
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (Fred K
Ollinger)
Re: Microsoft should be feared and despised ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("Roger Perkins")
Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism) ("Roger Perkins")
Re: Java (was Re: 696 Native MacOSX Apps So Far -) (Fred K Ollinger)
Re: Communism ("Roger Perkins")
Re: Communism ("Roger Perkins")
Re: Microsoft should be feared and despised ("JS PL")
Re: 696 Native MacOSX Apps So Far - (GreyCloud)
Re: Phases (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: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 20:11:45 -0700
"Gunner �" wrote:
>
> On 05 Apr 2001 09:36:49 GMT, "Alex Chaihorsky"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I have only found this in Aaron's answer - I do not no why, but my server
> >does not show the Erbs part (Marx was naive). So, >>>> is my words and >> -
> >Erb's
> >So I answer here:
> >
> >> >"Scott D. Erb" wrote:
> >> > Marx was naive. He believed that if you got rid of capitalism you could
> >have complete
> >> > liberty, the state would whither away, you would end exploitation. He
> >was motivated
> >> > by the industrial slums, and how horrid the workers were paid. He
> >wanted the workers
> >> > to rise up against that, and believed if they did they could
> >collectively control the
> >> > means of production and everyone would be better off.
> >> >
> >> > He was wrong. Dead wrong. Tragically wrong. But there is no way Marx
> >or Engels (and
> >> > I've read a lot of their private writings, including a lot of Engels
> >stuff in the
> >> > original German) would have ever supported the kind of brutal tactics of
> >a Stalin, Mao
> >> > or Pol Pot.
> >> >
> >
> >OK, Erb, time to get the gloves off. You do not answer my arguments, as I
> >did yours. You write you stuff over my arguments. That betray you for who
> >you are - a man who does not argue honestly. As opposed to many a net
> >writer, I am giving you my true name and, if you send me private e-mail I
> >will supply you with my address, so you can sue me if you want.
> >Manifesto directly talks about the follwoing points (see below in from my
> >previous posing).
> >To call a man who called for liquidation of propert NAIVE?
> >How NAIVE is to separate children from parents?
> >How NAIVE is to enslave workers into armies?
> >How NAIVE is to make children of age 9 work for their enslavers?
> >How NAIVE is to PREDICT that this can only be done using a DICTATORSHIP?
> >
> >There was NOTHING that Stalin, Lenin or Mao invented that was not in
> >Marx/Engels works (including BTW concentration camps that WERE INVENTED by
> >them (Engels) "We will have enourmous resistance to our reforms, so we will
> >need to have SPECIAL ISOLATED PLACES...." because they knew that no prison
> >will be able to hold all the "resistance". The only theoretical additions to
> > Marxism- were:
> >1. Communist revolution is possible not only in developed industrial
> >countries but also in agrarian ones (after it happened in Russia) (Lenin)
> >2. Socialism can be built in a single country (build, but not maintained)
> >(Stalin)
> >3. There is a possibility of coexistance of two systems (wrong, as was
> >proved by history)
> >Everything else is reworking, retelling, advancing, developing, recombining
> >of Marxism.
> >
> >Now about poor Marx being not responsible for the mayhem his students
> >created.
> >Marx revisionists sung several songs:
> >1. Marx was misunderstood.
> >2. Marx was misinterpreted
> >3. Marx was wrong, but he meant well
> >4. Marx was who he was, but contemporary socialism has nothing to do with
> >him.
> >
> >I just remind you that the Hitler's revisionists claimed:
> >
> >1. Hitler was misunderstood
> >2. Hitler was misinterpreted
> >3. Hitler was wrong, but he meant well
> >4. Hitler was who he was, but the neo-Nazism is has nothing to do with
> >Hitler.
> >
> >The only argument (weak) for the bastard not to be THE MONSTROUS figure in
> >the human history was the fact that by the end of his life he denounced all
> >his work and said "I am not a Marxist anymore".
> >
> >
> >>>>> Alex wrote:
> >> > > > 1. Complete liquidation of private property
> >> > > > 2. Liquidation of the family, introduction of "official, open mutual
> >> > > > ownership of wives"
> >> > > > 3. Children taken from families are brought up by community
> >(Hillary,
> >> > > > hello!)
> >> > > > 4. Industrial armies, not employer - employee, (and that is from the
> >guy who
> >> > > > LOVES proletariat!)
> >> > > > 5. Central credit by central banks with total banking monopoly for
> >the
> >> > > > State.
> >> > > > 6. Age when children start working - 9 years of age (Resolution of
> >Geneva
> >> > > > International Congress).
> >> > > >
> >> > > > If this is not the most monstrous document in the history of the
> >> > > > civilization, please, state which one is.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > This system was implemented four times almost totally - in Hitler's
> >> > > > concentration camps, Stalin's GULAG and Mao's re-educational
> >settlements and
> >> > > > Pol Pots' Cambodia camps.
> >> > > > Partially - USSR, Red China, Vietnam, North Korea.
> >> > > > Superficially - Poland, E. Germany, Hungary, Mongolia,
> >Czeckoslovakia
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Why would Marx be spiining other than out of excitment?
> >> > > > Typical (I hate this word) socialist attitude - they all have
> >aberrated
> >> > > > Marx. NO! THEY DIDN'T!
> >> > > > All socialists remain civilized untill they seize the power. Then
> >the
> >> > > > Marxist bestiary begins.
> >> > > > EVERY TIME.
> >> >
> >
> >>>Erb again;
> >
> >> > Marx was fantasizing about what he thought would lead to a utopia. He
> >was wrong. He
> >> > thought the state would whither away, it didn't. His goal was to end
> >alienation and
> >> > create perfect liberty, his ideas did not lead that direction. His
> >errors were
> >> > typical of 19th century social science (over-determination, bad
> >predictions), and
> >> > ultimately the errors in his theories helped lead to the kinds of horror
> >you
> >> > describe. But to demonize Marx personally because of that is simply
> >misguided, and of
> >> > course irrelevant.
> >> >
> >> > At the very least now Social Democrats and most leftists recognize that
> >the vision of
> >> > "scientific socialism" espoused by Lenin and the Communists was not only
> >wrong, but
> >
> >First of all there were never any "Scientific socialism" only "Scientific
> >Communism" I know because I was the first guy in the history of Leningrad
> >University to get "F" for that at State Exam. I even got to the front page
> >of University paper for that. You had to be braindead not to get "C", but I
> >was so annoying to the "professors" that they gave me an "F" despite the
> >direct order not to do so from Dean.
> >
> >How anyone who has a brain can say that the guy who created detailed theory
> >how to destroy human society, who gave concrete reccommendations how to
> >enslave working population, destroy families, establish WORKING ARMIES,
> >establishing dictatorships - this is FANTASIZING?
> >In that case the whole "MeinKampf" is fantasizing too, right?
> >Marx was just fantasizing in his 100+ volumes of detailed plans of the
> >destruction of the Western Civilization?
> >In that case, all you marxists and socialists are just idiots who spent
> >their lives studying an old dirty man thoughts, right?
> >
> >The problem with you is inablity of honest debate. In one way its bad, in
> >another -good. Marxism is a religion. It is a religion of cowards who are
> >afraid to go to the world and take risks of their own. It is a religion of
> >the weak who are afraid to be pushed aside by the strong. It is a religion
> >of envy, dark, black envy of the talentless and the lazy alike.
> >But mostly the honorless cowards, who say - "I do not dare and will not let
> >you dare".
> >Congratulations, Erb, you have choosen the right crowd.
> >At first I thought that we can have a discussion. Then I thought that you
> >are just not that good informed (not a sin). Now I see that you are liek the
> >rest of them - a liar, a cheat and a snake. "Marx was fantasizing". About
> >100 million people are dead in Russia, Chine, etc. because of these
> >"fantasies" and you have an audacity to call it an ERROR?
> >
> >Shame on you.
> >
> >
> >Alexander Chaihorsky
> >Reno, NV
> >
> >
> Someday Tovarich, Id like to shake your hand.
> Bravo! I am humbled.
>
> Respects, and deepest regards
>
> Gunner
>
> "...And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned
> from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let
> them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and
> pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of
> liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and
> tyrants. It is its natural manure."
> --Thomas Jefferson, Nov. 13, 1787
I second that!
--
V
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.security.ssh
Subject: Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ]
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard E. Silverman)
Date: 05 Apr 2001 22:36:50 -0400
>>>>> "Chad" == Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Chad> I never expected them to eradicate every existance of SSH1, I'm
Chad> merely suggesting that it's a bad idea to CONTINUE to DISTRIBUTE
Chad> SSH1.
I'm not sure what you mean by "SSH1." If you are specifically suggesting
that it would be good to discontinue use and distribution of the SSH1
software from ssh.com -- that is, the original implementation which
supports only version 1 of the protocol -- then I agree. In fact, they
have announced their intention to stop supporting and distrubuting it
within a few months. Its continued existence encourages people to create
version-1-only installations, which is bad. Unfortunately, ssh.com has
chosen to implement their protocol 1 compatibility by relying on a
parallel SSH1 installation, and that will hamper this effort. The OpenSSH
approach of supporting both protocols in one set of software is better, as
well as being less cumbersome and more secure, since it doesn't require
maintenance of two separate, coordinated SSH configurations.
If, on the other hand, by "SSH1" you mean implementations of the version 1
protocol, then of course I disagree, for the reasons stated earlier.
--
Richard Silverman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Baseball
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 20:39:14 -0700
"." wrote:
>
> > >Every time I use linux, it does what I would expect it to do. THAT'S
> ease
> > >of use.
> >
> > WHERE ARE THE LINUX BILLIONAIRES?????
>
Hmmm.. so that's what happens when you put 100 monkeys on 100
typewriters.
> I don't know, where do they keep the monkeys that can type?
>
> Apparently, they let them ask irrelevant questions on newsgroups.
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2001 02:51:34 GMT
webgiant wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Feb 2001 17:56:54 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>>Jedi, what do you think about Slackware compared to Debian? I'm thinking
>>>about Slackware for my next distribution.
>>
>>I never took a liking to Debian. However, I can certainly
>>see the appeal of it's package manager. They also have a
>>sound reputation when it comes to releases.
Well, my 2 cents:
I started with SuSE about three 1/2 years ago, then Slackware and Red Hat.
I tried Caldera and a quite a few others as well. Then Debian.
Debian didn't interest me at first, but I will never go back. It is just
too stable, and everything is just done so well. It comes with an
incredible amount of packages. Slackware's packaging system is a mess to
me, it's fine if you're the sort who likes to compile a lot of your own
software, since it doesn't ever get in your way. This is great for a
developer but a headache for a sysadmin. Besides, it is bsd-style init
which I personally do not like.
The release a little slower than other distros but one can always find
apt-sources for whatever you want. This winds up being better in the end
than Red Hat's method of releasing unuseable .0 and .1 releases.
> I've never seen the appeal of the Debian package manager. Any Linux
> distro--such as Debian--which expands to fill your hard drive like
> Windoze does needs a serious rewrite of its code. Expanding to fill
> all available space is sloppy coding, not a "feature" (no matter how
> Redmond likes to insist otherwise!)
What on earth are you talking about? "expanding to fill all available
space"?
deb is lacking a few things rpm has, but apt-get is so superior to anything
offered by any rpm based distro that it doesn't even matter. Red Carpet
comes close, and it is pretty, but unfortunately it graphical only, so it's
not like you can make security updates a cron job.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fred K Ollinger)
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: 6 Apr 2001 02:53:14 GMT
GreyCloud ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Scott Erb wrote:
: >
: > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
: > >
: > > Scott Erb wrote:
: >
: > -snip a bunch of insults and lame attacks-
: >
[deliberately snipped the rest]
Hey, I appreciate all the help, Scott. I think that clearly defining your
terms is the best way to do things. If you just define all the words the
way they are in the dictionary then Aaron's ideas make no sense.
Some of us are reading the responses so I don't think it's a waste of time
to respond here to the group.
Fred
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft should be feared and despised
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 15:06:53 +1200
<snype>
> That would be horrible. First of all, it gives the biggest parties
> more money to maintain their strangle-hold on politics. Secondly, it
> wouldn't address the super-soft money that is silently spent by the
> mass media on their candidates of choice. Thirdly, it abridges our
> freedom of speech by masking what we can say (our supreme court has
> ruled that money is speech).
Well, for example, we have 7 parties in parliament (National, Act, United,
New Zealand First, Greens, Alliance, Labour), the current government is made
up of an Alliance, Labour and Greens (same type of party as the one in
Germany) coalition. The Greens at the last election came from no-where to
holding the balance of power in the coalition. Also, another reason why
these parties do get in is because there is a +90% turnout on election
night, which also helps small parties to get into parliament. A MMP system
would be a viable alternative to the system currently being used in the US.
As for the president, the electral college has to be the biggest co-jobs
since Microsoft. Presidents should be voted in on the number of votes they
receive, thus, instead of a small, hicks-ville state holding the country to
ransom.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "Roger Perkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 21:14:34 -0700
Good for you. And there are the rest of us who will protect you and your
kind (not meant unkindly). It's what soldiers do.
Roger
AIRBORNE!
"Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Roger Perkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >"Except when you feel it's right" isn't in the Bible.
>
> No kidding? ;-)
>
> > The correct quote is "tho shalt not commit murder".
>
> Well, I am working back from the spanish version, which is simply
> "No matar�s".
>
> We would have to go to the original to decide which one is closer,
> wouldn't we?
>
> > And are you saying you wouldn't move to the
> >defense of a friend who was attacked?
>
> I am not a christian, so I am not morally bound by commandments.
> I would defend a friend. However, I would not kill a burglar. I would
> not kill a trespasser, unless he tried to kill me. I would not kill
> with a machinegun someone who was beating my friend with his fists.
>
> And if I killed someone, I would hate myself for it.
>
> > That makes you pretty spineless and self-centered, if you ask me.
>
> Since that's all in your mind, you can keep it there.
>
> >Rogerto you show a good intelligence.
>
> You seem to be confusing me with you, at least in the name.
>
> > Put that intelligence to work looking
> >up how statesmanship and international relations works then come back and
> >lets discuss this. If you can't do that with an open mind, don't do it
at
> >all. And I think you can.
>
> Well, I have an open mind. However, I have beliefs, and I have opinions.
> Many confuse disagreement with closemindedness. Hopefully you will not.
>
> --
> Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: "Roger Perkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: OT: Treason (was Re: Communism)
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 21:15:35 -0700
Actually, I had to take religion classes in college and that is what the
Greek comes out as. Nothing revisionist about that.
Roger
AIRBORNE!
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Roberto Alsina in alt.destroy.microsoft on 5 Apr 2001 14:33:05 GMT;
> >Roger Perkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>"Except when you feel it's right" isn't in the Bible.
> >
> >No kidding? ;-)
> >
> >> The correct quote is "tho shalt not commit murder".
> >
> >Well, I am working back from the spanish version, which is simply
> >"No matar�s".
> >
> >We would have to go to the original to decide which one is closer,
> >wouldn't we?
>
> Well, the Catholics say that its "thou shalt not kill". The "commit
> murder" phrasing is *definitely* revisionist.
>
> >> And are you saying you wouldn't move to the
> >>defense of a friend who was attacked?
> >
> >I am not a christian, so I am not morally bound by commandments.
> >I would defend a friend. However, I would not kill a burglar. I would
> >not kill a trespasser, unless he tried to kill me. I would not kill
> >with a machinegun someone who was beating my friend with his fists.
> >
> >And if I killed someone, I would hate myself for it.
>
> There comes a point, I think, where you are simply telling yourself this
> in order to justify your moral perspective. You would like to think you
> would "hate yourself" if you killed someone. Whether you would or not
> remains to be seen, and so your contention becomes an unfalsifiable
> claim, unless you actually kill someone to find out. (I'm not
> recommending any moralistic experiments here, but I hope you'll see my
> point.)
>
> But you should be aware, Roberto, not that I don't admire your
> sentiments and believe them to be Right, your belief is quite possibly
> just self-delusion. Seems odd, doesn't it, since whether it is or is
> not is meaningless, unless you kill someone? A rather effective
> mechanism, this morality thing, eh?
>
> If you're a healthy person, you'd get over it. That wouldn't make you
> want to do it again. But you wouldn't have to scare yourself to
> convince yourself of that. (Unless you did, of course, want to do it
> again. I'd imagine it must be a memorable experience.)
>
> >> That makes you pretty spineless and self-centered, if you ask me.
> >
> >Since that's all in your mind, you can keep it there.
> >
> >>Rogerto you show a good intelligence.
> >
> >You seem to be confusing me with you, at least in the name.
>
> I noticed he's done that a lot. I think its just a typo; very common
> for Roger because his fingers "know" to type the word "Roger", even when
> his brain wants the similar but distinct "Roberto".
>
> I noticed myself putting "r's" at the end of the word "serve" last
> night, over and over again. Just because my fingers are used to typing
> "server".
>
> [...]
> >Well, I have an open mind. However, I have beliefs, and I have opinions.
> >Many confuse disagreement with closemindedness. Hopefully you will not.
>
> Wow. I'd like to engrave that on some people's foreheads. Well said.
>
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fred K Ollinger)
Subject: Re: Java (was Re: 696 Native MacOSX Apps So Far -)
Date: 6 Apr 2001 03:17:02 GMT
Donn Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: pip wrote:
: > It is unfortunate that people still think that Java is only any use in
: > applets. In fact I would argue that Java is not very useful for general
: > applet programming for the 'net anymore.
: > Donn, luckily Java is VERY useful as a general programming language that
: > _does not need a browser_ but can be run as an application. Also it is
: > very useful for server side programming using Servelts
: > http://www.linux.com/sysadmin/newsitem.phtml?sid=1&aid=11992 (this is
: > very useful if you don't get on well with PERL)
: Yeah, maybe you've got a point there. Java treats objects a little
: differently than C++, and it also removed some of the "dangerous" and
: insecure aspects of C++, such as working with pointers at the lowest
: level. Also, I believe that Java is very structured in terms of
: objects, starting from "java" and "java.lang" all the way up. For
: example, Java automatically (somehow) recognizes a string literal as a
: string object, so you don't have to do something like
I liked some of java's OO ideas a lot. I did hear, though that Sun changes
it's api a bit. This scares me b/c if this is the case then my code may break.
This doesn't seem to be
'write once, run many' in the long haul. Can someone reassure me about this
and maybe tell me if there's a way to avoid this trouble?
: string s1("A string object."); // C++ version
: string s2 = string("String object."); // Alternate C++ version
I always wondered how to do that. Thanks for the tip. (I'm new to programming).
Fred
------------------------------
From: "Roger Perkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 21:17:27 -0700
Well, Max, I am not signing my posts to please or impress you so get over
that. It's for me. And caps in a sig is not yelling.
Roger
AIRBORNE!
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Roger Perkins in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 4 Apr 2001 21:21:35
> >No, Max, it's because he's just a punk. Killfile him and move on. He
isn't
> >worth your brain cells.
>
> Killfiles are for wimps. You haven't been a shining example of wit or
> intellect, I have to point out. Maybe I've just got a mean streak for
> guys you yell AIRBORN! in every post. But it's been fun cross-posting
> with you. Drop by alt.destroy.microsoft if you have anything better
> than Aaron baiting to talk about.
>
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "Roger Perkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 21:18:13 -0700
And there you go! You finally figured him out.
Roger
AIRBORNE!
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 04 Apr 2001
> >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> >>
> >> Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 04 Apr 2001
> >> >Roger Perkins wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Rogerto, most people don't even know what the International is, much
less
> >> > ^^^^^^^
> >> >
> >> >You're losing it, Roger...REALLY REALLY fucking losing it.
> >>
> >> If you have to shout, Aaron, it must be because you're lying.
> >
> >Does the word "emphasis" mean anything to you, Max?
>
> Seriously, Aaron, you know I wouldn't steer you wrong. The emphasis
> needs to be in your diction, not your typography or volume. People stop
> listening REAL quick, unless you use such tricks extremely rarely.
>
> Do you see what I mean? When you have "fucking" in the sentence,
> putting anything else in capitals just makes you look like a complete
> fucking moron.
>
> Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
>
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "JS PL" <jspl@jsplom>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft should be feared and despised
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2001 23:21:17 -0400
"Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Thu, 05 Apr 2001 17:31:19 -0400, Peter Ammon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Chad Everett wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 5 Apr 2001 12:39:49 -0400, JS PL <jspl@jsplom> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >You ought to see what all they throw in when you buy BackOffice 2k @
> >> >$3900.00! You think it's bad that you get a little extra by buying
Server @
> >> >$1000+
> >> >
> >> >If streaming media server is truly "free" where might I download it to
run
> >> >on Win98? Oh...? What's that? NOWHERE!! So if I want the "free" server
how
> >> >much do I need to fork over? Oh.... a thousand bucks?! That don't
sound too
> >> >free to me!
> >> >
> >> >I guess it's back to the old drawing board, for you.
> >> >
> >>
> >> So I guess the answer is: Yes, you ARE stupid. If you want to
download
> >> Windows Media Services server for FREE. Go to:
> >>
> >> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/en/download/default.asp
> >>
> >> It can be downloaded for FREE by selecting 'Windows Media Services 4.1"
> >> from the "Windows Media Tools and Services" menu. Hit the download
> >> button to download it for FREE. Did I mention that it's FREE?
> >>
> >> Do you need any more handholding are is that enough for now?
> >
> >No server on Windows 95 through Windows 2000 professional.
> >
>
>http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/en/technologies/platforms.asp
> >
>
> So let me see if I've got this. You're claiming that a product that can
> be downloaded and used for free is not really free unless you can run it
on Windows
> 98 or Win2K Pro?
The whole argument was started by someone claiming the media server was
bundled for free in (of all products!) Windows2000 SERVER! And if I remember
correctly, they claimed the only reason why MS decided to add it to the
Win2K "Server" package was to put Real.com out of business. Even though
other types of servers are part of the package for free such as the news
server, chat server, ftp server, what else? fax server? But as soon as they
add a streaming media server to the package it's suddenly a bad thing
because it adds competitive pressure to Real Inc.!! The server isn't free.
You have to purchase Win2K server to get it.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 696 Native MacOSX Apps So Far -
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 21:18:59 -0700
SamanthaJoy wrote:
>
> Seems like OSX is really moving fast... 696 Apps have now been
> written... Here is an amazing link to get up to speed:
>
> http://osx.hyperjeff.net/links.html
>
> And here is a link to the Native OSX Apps...
>
> http://osx.hyperjeff.net/Apps/
>
> As we all know, OSX will the main distro of UNIX within the year, so its
> a good time to get ahead of the rush..
>
> The OSX Server Version will be released in May...
>
> http://www.apple.com/macosx/server/
>
> Here are some screenshots:
>
> http://www.apple.com/macosx/server/screenshots.html
>
> It's what everyone wanted Linux to be!
>
Already is.
> SAM
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Phases
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 21:20:06 -0700
Chad Everett wrote:
>
> On Wed, 4 Apr 2001 20:43:24 +0200, David Jordan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > First you learn Windows, then you discover things, then
> >you learn GNU/Linux, then discover things, then you back
> >to Windows to work quicker, but with a GNU/Linux
> >firewall between you and the net.
> >
>
> ...then you post some moronic message to USENET, then you discover
> the truth that Linux is better, then you realize your mistake and
> change your USENET identity so that people won't realize you're
> the moron who posted the original message.
LOL!!!!
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
