Linux-Advocacy Digest #567, Volume #33 Fri, 13 Apr 01 02:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor (Michael Vester)
Re: MS and ISP's ("JS PL")
Re: Blame it all on Microsoft (Jerry Coffin)
Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company (Chad Everett)
Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a (Chad Everett)
Re: Inktomi Webmap -- Apache has 60% now. ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Baseball (Ed Allen)
Re: hmm getting tired of this! (MjM)
Re: New directions for kernel development (Brent R)
This is a fucking miracle! CD-R Follow up story (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: they should have used w2k or nt (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: hmm getting tired of this! (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: What's your take on this story? (Microsoft opening up the MSOffice (Matthew
Gardiner)
Re: Linux.org, gnome.org and linux.com (Matthew Gardiner)
Col. Hack (MjM)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.shareware.programmer,comp.editors,comp.lang.java.help,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.java.softwaretools,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Need your recommendation for a full-featured text editor
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 14:10:28 -0700
Dan Miller wrote:
>
> "Dave Martel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Mon, 9 Apr 2001 14:29:14 -0700, "Dan Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> "Paul Kinnucan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >>
> > >> I must throw in my vote for XEmacs/Emacs as well (XEmacs is just
> > >> prettier); although a programmer's editor is much like a choice of
> > >> underware: use what's comfortable for you, and avoid the ones that
> > >> rub you the wrong way.
> > >>
> > >So, you're recommending Brief?? It hasn't been available for awhile...
> >
> > Brief's the best programmer's editor I ever used. Despite
> > compatability claims I've never found another editor that duplicates
> > Brief's intuitiveness. Too bad Borland bought it up and then forgot
> > about it.
> >
> I agree... I used Brief for over a decade, and *loved* it... it's still the
> prototype for many of the capabilities that people expect to see in a
> Dos/Windows editor. I've always resented Borland's grab; if they didn't
> want to use the program, why did they buy it and kill it?? It's not like
> they were trying to protect turf for their editor, whatever it was called...
>
> But then, Borland has often been confused about what direction it was
> going...
I was a big fan of Brief too. Wrote many lines of code with it. Still use
it when editing a big file in losedos. Unfortunately, it can't deal with
the > 8.3 filenames. When Boreland bought Brief, I had great
expectations. I was disappointed.
Now I use vi because it is on all Solaris computers that I work with. I am
getting pretty comfortable with it but it doesn't have the features of
Brief. Also, I am spending some time with Emacs. At work, I have to use a
losedos version of Emacs. At home, I can run the GNU version. Very
powerful but require a commitment in time to learn.
--
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: "JS PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS and ISP's
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 00:22:17 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said JS PL in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 9 Apr 2001 12:42:54 -0400;
> [...]
> >MS holds no "right" to be on all computers, but my power company holds
the
> >"right" to be my sole supplier of electricity. That is a true monopoly.
[...]
>
> Sounds more like a true public utility. Tell me, is this "right" that
> they have something they always have by their nature, or something which
> is imbued unto them from outside?
It doesn't matter. They are the lawfully granted the right to be the sole
supplier of electricity. No one else may sell electricity in their area. A
person who puts up a windmill, or any type of generator may not sell the
electricity they produce, except back to the monopoly holder in my area. And
I like the term "sell back" as if it was once and is always theirs. That is
a true monopoly.
>I think you're just using the term
> "right" to mean "whatever I decide it means". Kind of like the way you
> use the word "monopoly". Why does the government writing regulations
> making your power company the sole supplier of your electricity confer a
> "right" to do so? Wouldn't that really be just the "ability", or the
> "opportunity", rather than the "right"?
Nope. It's the right, not the ability, but it's a nice try on your part
(not).
> What is this thing you call "right"? And why should we imagine you have
> any better idea of what that abstraction pertains to then you do for
> "monopoly", which you've obviously simply made up an almost random
> definition for?
mo�nop�o�ly
n., pl. mo�nop�o�lies.
1.) Exclusive control by one group of the means of producing or selling a
commodity or service.
2.) Law. A right granted by a government giving exclusive control over a
specified commercial activity to a single party.
A company or group having exclusive control over a commercial activity.
A commodity or service so controlled.
Source: The American Heritage� Dictionary of the English Language, Third
Edition
Copyright � 1996, 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
Microsoft has neither exclusive control over operating systems or a right
granted by a government.
No one has or ever had the exclusive control over operating systems.
At least thats what I would assume considering that this page exists:
http://directory.google.com/Top/Computers/Software/Operating_Systems/
------------------------------
From: Jerry Coffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.theory,comp.arch,comp.object
Subject: Re: Blame it all on Microsoft
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 22:34:12 -0600
In article <9b5jrf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
[ ... ]
> That's one way of interpreting it. Of course there's this little detail
> that it's impossible for anyone but a market leader to *be* in a
> monopoly position.
Quite the contrary: he (Judge Jackson) decided that Microsoft had a
monopoly position because as a "finding of fact" he ruled that
Windows was the entire market being judged. Since that's a Microsoft
product, of course Microsoft has a monopoly on it. They didn't (and
don't) have the requisite market share to even be considered for
"monopoly" standing if you take all computers into account, or even
all desktop computer, or basically do anything other than simply
ignore everything except what you feel like.
IOW, a company does NOT have to have a market-leading position to be
considered a monopolist by Judge Jackson. A company could have only
one product that's only ever sold one copy, and by his logic, they
still have a monopolistic position because they're the only company
that sells that exact product.
--
Later,
Jerry.
The Universe is a figment of its own imagination.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Subject: Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 12 Apr 2001 23:20:59 -0500
On Thu, 12 Apr 2001 23:20:58 GMT, Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Chad Everett wrote:
>
>> Peter's problems was with DHCP and TWO network cards in his one
>> box. I would like a show of hands. How many people have
>> TWO network cards in their Windows machine with each card using DHCP
>> for configuration? OK, now, how many of you people with two network
>> cards in your Windows machine using DHCP for configuration had it
>> "just work" automatically with not manual configuration at all?
>> If you lie and raise your hand.......
>
>Oh boy. I have two cards. One is DHCP. One is a static address. This works
>FLAWLESSLY on Windows. It's barf time with BOTH Mandrake 7.2 and SuSE 7.1.
>
You didn't answer the question though. Did it configure all by itself on
Windows or did you have to do some manual configuration. By the way,
according to your own posts it works flawlessly on linux too...but you
need to start the DHCP manually after other services. You're just having
a heck of a time figuring out how to have your DHCP work at the right
place in startup scripts. Like Winnie the Pooh says: think, think, think.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Undeniable proof that Aaron R. Kulkis is a hypocrite, and a
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 12 Apr 2001 23:27:12 -0500
On Thu, 12 Apr 2001 19:58:14 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Jan Johanson wrote:
>>
>> No, the fact that "THREE other people" (your claim) have demonstrated how
>> easy something is which you cannot do only continues to make you sound
>> incompetent and a liar.
>
>Did they get the results I claimed?
>a) no
>B) YES
>
>
>Did they achieve those results by following my instructions?
>a) no
>B) YES
>
Whoa there Nellie! I did this all on my own. I never used a single
instruction from you. Don't be pulling a "Microsoft" on me man!
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Inktomi Webmap -- Apache has 60% now.
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 23:49:57 -0500
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >
> >
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > >
> > > >
> >
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > * Have You Heard...Compaq has been left red faced by a
> > defacement
> > > > > > > > > double whammy as two of its sub domains were vandalized by
two
> > > > > > > > > different hacking groups?
> > > > > > > > > Publication: vnunet.com
> > > > > > > > > Issue Date: 22 March 2001
> > > > > > > > > Title: Compaq Websites Suffer Double Hack
> > > > > > > > > http://www.vnunet.com/News/1119535
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This was the article.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The article doesn't seem accurate.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> >
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.ols2.software-acq.compaq.com+
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Shows that on March 25th, the first site was running on
Compaq
> > Tru64
> > > > > > Unix,
> > > > > > > > and only switched to NT4 sometime in the last week or so.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Well, it may not seem accurate, but an intrusion is an
intrusion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm not sure I follow you. The article claims that it was NT4
that
> > was
> > > > > > breached, yet Netcraft seems to indicate that at the time of the
> > attack,
> > > > > > they were running Tru64 (and Apache). Clearly one must call
into
> > > > question
> > > > > > the validity of the article at all if they can't even get what
OS
> > the
> > > > > > computer was running correct.
> > > > >
> > > > > "The two sub domain servers, both running hackers' favourite
> > > > > Microsoft IIS 4 on NT, were hit overnight."
> > > > >
> > > > > This is the part above.
> > > >
> > > > Note also that it says which web servers were hit:
> > > >
> > > > "One of the defacements on www.ols2.software-acq.compaq.com by
> > > > Antihackerlink appears to have used the well documented Unicode
exploit
> > "
> > > >
> > > > And again, look at the link I provided:
> > > >
> > > >
> >
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.ols2.software-acq.compaq.com+
> > > >
> > > > It shows that www.ols2.software-acq.compaq.com was running Tru64
with
> > Apache
> > > > at about the time the article claims.
> > > >
> > > > > "Compaq's main site, Compaq.com, runs the less attacked Apache web
> > > > > server on
> > > > > Compaq's own flavour of Unix, Tru64."
> > > > >
> > > > > I would say by all of this that MS draws more attention to hackers
and
> > > > > that hackers do breach the security. If UNIX was the target, I'd
say
> > > > > they would have a more difficult time. Not impossible, just
difficult.
> > > >
> > > > Which is completely irrelevant to the point here. At least one of
the
> > > > breached computers was apparently actually running Unix, and not NT4
> > like
> > > > the article claims. That brings the entire article into doubt.
> > >
> > > I went to your suggested link. All I found was that
> > > www.ols2.software-acq.compaq.com uses NT. Never mentioned the Tru64
> > > UNIX as the server being intruded upon. But thats Compaqs problem.
> >
> > You appear to be blind. Look at the bottom of the page where it says
"OS,
> > Web Hosting History".
> >
> > See that table that says "Compaq Tru64" next to "Apache/1.3.11 (Unix)"
next
> > to "25-Mar-2001"?
>
> I did. It says IIs ... that ain't UNIX my boy.
Now you're just plain lying. It's right there in the table at the bottom of
the page.
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.ols2.software-acq.compaq.com+
It says quite clearly that on March 25th, 2001
www.ols2.software-acq.compaq.com was running Apache/1.3.11 under True64.
Saying otherwise is purely stupid.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Baseball
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Allen)
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 05:01:03 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said Anonymous in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 11 Apr 2001 13:56:07
>>
>>the fact you list more than one is itself part of the problem
>>if you catch my meaning.
>
>AH! Save me from having choices, Bill, PLEASE!?
>
"Stop thinking! MS will do it for you. We will weigh all the
choices and provide you with the best one."
"Never mind that you do not understand how the best choice for the
cowhand in Montana, the newspaper reporter in Geneva, and the banana
farmer in Costa Rica can all be the same. You do not really need to
do anything that the other ninety percent of people do not want to
do the exact same way."
"All businesses are really the same. All home users really should
connect to everything in the world through MSN."
"People who think otherwise have not been properly enlightened to
the value of MS making all their choices for them."
See how delightful and colorless the world MS intends for all of us will
be ?
You won't have to actually *live* your life, MS can just show you what
it was going to be like in Windows Media format.
--
Linux -- The Unix defragmentation tool.
------------------------------
From: MjM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: hmm getting tired of this!
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 22:17:53 -0700
tony roth wrote:
>
> hate to be a killjoy but another one bites the dust!
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/migration/hotmail/default.asp
So Hotmail finally runs (totally?) on Windows products.
Microsoft took the damn thing over in 1997! It took them FOUR years, 2
Operating Systems and God knows how many supporting apps to convert it!
And why did they convert it? Because it was running poorly? They
BOUGHT something that didn't work for shit and needed FOUR YEARS of
investment to set straight? Ooh, sound business decision there.
No, they bought it because they thought they could run it on MS products
and point to it as an example of a successful Unix-Windows migration.
And finally, after FOUR YEARS, they can.
They're expounding this *success* on a webpage. Gee, if a company wants
to take FOUR years and TWO OSs to migrate your enterprise, perhaps you
should be looking at another solution.
Hell, and this was done AT COST. Hotmail didn't say to Microsoft,
"Please come and get rid of all these ugly BSD boxes, please, please,
please!"
This has been a hot-button Microsoft Project for FOUR FUCKING YEARS. MS
managers have been biting their fingernails down to bleeding stumps
waiting for the day when they could finally announce this MASSIVE
TRIUMPH. Give me a fucking break. If Hotmail were a 'real' business
and this was an actual real-world migration with Microsoft as the
vendor, Hotmail'd be so far out of business, they'd be filing their
Chapter 13s from Pluto.
Beat me, whip me, make me buy a Microsoft product.
MjM
------------------------------
From: Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: New directions for kernel development
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 05:16:58 GMT
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Recently, I've been thinking a lot about where Linux development should
> head now that 2.4 is out. Specifically, I've been thinking about how we
> ought to make some cultural changes as well as technical changes. Now I'm
> not *entirely* sure what directions we should head in as we move towards
> 3.0, but I'd like to point out a few areas that need to be addressed as well
> as propose some possible solutions. Nothing is set in stone yet, but these
> are definitely issues we need to work on.
>
> First off, I don't like a lot of the elitism that does on among Linux
> hackers. Just because you can tell what the following script does without
> executing it, doesn't mean that you're some kind of god.
>
> #! /usr/bin/perl
> @k = unpack "a"x5,'x_,d@';@o = unpack "a"x19,'Q8>tUxLm\@`Y%N@cIq]';
> while ($i<19){print chr((ord($o[$i])-ord($k[$i++%5])+91)%91+32);}
>
> Learning to hack Un*x is an impressive accomplishment, but it's closer
> kin
> to solving a Rubik�s cube than scaling Everest. If you think using Un*x
> makes you some kind of super genius who should be feared by mere mortals and
> end users, either get over it or start using *BSD. *BSD users (and
> developers) are all complete jackasses, so you'll fit right in.
>
> Secondly, I'd like to address the issue of cleanliness. Quite frankly,
> the
> standards of personal hygiene practiced by many members of this community
> are simply unacceptable. As you all know, I am a fairly clean cut,
> well-kempt person (I know, I have a bit of a gut, but compared to Maddog,
> Nick Petreley or ESR, I'm a modern Adonis.), and in the Linux community that
> is something of an anomaly. Virtually all users of Linux (and all other
> forms of Un*x) are unkempt, longhaired, beast-bearded dirty GNU hippies, and
> I am sick and tired of having to deal with them.
>
> The person I have the greatest problem with is that (in)famous
> communist
> RMS. Now, RMS may have been responsible for GNU, the GPL, GCC and many
> other contributions to the computing community, but his stance, as well as
> stench, displayed in his essays and actions, nauseates me. I mean, with
> that filth-ridden beard of his, where does he have room to demand that
> people refer to Linux as GNU / Linux? When he is as clean-shaven as I, he
> may claim that right, but until then, he should go back to playing his
> little flute and dropping acid like there�s no tomorrow. Honestly, if he
> doesn�t shut his mouth and go back to reading Marx, I�m going to shut it for
> him. I am sorry to sound so harsh, but a little hygiene every once in a
> while is a Good Thing(TM). Makes me wish I'd gone with a closed source
> license back in the day.
>
> Next in line of dirty scuzz-balls I have to deal with, and probably the
> worst thorn in my side, is Alan Cox, the primary coder of my kernel's TCP/IP
> stack (ha, what a joke!) and all around dirty GNU hippy. Alan views
> toothpaste the same way a vampire views garlic. The man's wife (who I spent
> a few years with at the University of Helsinki) often calls me crying in the
> middle of the night to complain of the rank, unbearable stench the man
> exudes after sex. On several occasions at trade shows, exhibitions and beer
> bashes, I have nearly fainted from the torrent of rotten odor that pours
> from every inch of his toxic person. Along with the typical GNU hygiene
> (mis)habits he practices, he also bitches and whines about... well,
> everything. He lies a lot too; evidence for this can be seen in the fact he
> almost always wears cheap black sunglasses when talking to people he knows
> are better than him (such as myself).
>
> And then we come to ESR. I won't reiterate the sewer-dweller like
> cleansing
> habits he practices as well, but I would like to focus on his general
> lifestyle. I like to refer to ESR as AGB or �Arrogant Gas Baron.� The man�
> s flatulence is legendary. I honestly believe that given a meal of refried
> beans and a match, he could reach low earth orbit. If you have to meet with
> ESR for any reason, arrange for the meeting to be outdoors and try to stay
> upwind. And his flatulence isn�t limited to his posterior either.
> Frequently it comes out his mouth or even out of his keyboard. (Those of
> you who have read �The Cathedral and the Bazaar� or �Meditations of Sudden
> Wealth� will know exactly what I�m talking about here.) Additionally, he
> is a complete hillbilly. You know, the kind that goes to inner-city
> computer stores and buys 386s to set up as servers all over his house, with
> cigarette smoke-stained 14" monitors piled high upon his kitchen table. He
> has neither grace nor charm and can't last 15 seconds in conversation with
> educated company without drifting into a tirade on gun rights or the best
> methods for tanning road kill. Couple the above facts with his ruddy
> complexion (from drinking Jagermeister like it�s water) and his
> child-molester mustache and you�ve got the makings of one more person who
> pisses me off.
>
> Well, that's it for now. Hopefully with these feelings off my chest and into
> the Open Source community, things will change for the better. I'd like just
> once to talk to a Linux user or advocate who washes and changes their
> clothes at least weekly. Until then, I will be rejecting patches from anyone
> whose grooming standards do not measure up.
>
> Also, I have submitted this to slashdot with the title "A Proposed Remedy
> Involving Lingering Fud and Organizational Objections to Linux Systems." Be
> on the lookout for it.
>
> Thank you,
> --Linus Torvalds
ROFL.
It's sad but true.
--
- Brent
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: This is a fucking miracle! CD-R Follow up story
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 17:27:16 +1200
For those who had followed the luser a couple of posts back,
complaining, no, that is too soft, bitching because he could get his
CD-R work'in. Well, my experience is contry to his experience, in that
I only needed to edit to files and run one program, reboot, CD-R is
ready to roll. Guess how I did it? I read the fucking manual, I know,
bloody miracle!
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: they should have used w2k or nt
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 17:36:23 +1200
Ever admin. a Solaris server? probably not. Also, I would be interested
in who actually implemented it, from my experience, when it gets
implemented by a SUN Engineer (Such as a person from Solnet), you will
never face these problems. Also, I find it funny that you have not
included a link, and you have selectively chosen a part of the article
with out the circumstances surround the problem, or what hardware was
being used. So, when I read you little FUD spreading post, all I see is
a sad little man sitting behind an NT server praying to the almighty
bill in the hope that it doesn't crash.
Matthew Gardiner
tony roth wrote:
>
> from redherring
>
> "So far, though, baseball's new Web strategy has gotten off to a rocky
> start. On Monday, when 28 of the league's 30 teams opened the baseball
> season, MLB.com crashed numerous times and was plagued with technical
> troubles throughout the day"
>
> from netcraft
> The site www.mlb.com is running Netscape-Enterprise/4.1 on Solaris.
--
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operater from Hell)
If you donot like it go [#rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: hmm getting tired of this!
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 17:42:51 +1200
tony roth wrote:
>
> hate to be a killjoy but another one bites the dust!
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/migration/hotmail/default.asp
So what you are saying is that if UNIX was a better solution, Microsoft
would select it? geeze, you are really thick. Hotmail is the poster
child for Microsoft, and is used as a guinea pig for any new think tank
ideas that come out of Microsoft. The last thing Microsoft wants to do
is admit defeat (even though most know they have already been beaten)
after 10 years of trying to beat UNIX off high end servers and
workstations.
Also, in terms of server sales, one must remember there are more small
businesses than large, and as a result, most of these small businesses
are owned by computer illiterate people who choose NT as a solution, not
because it is the best, because it is easy to install. The server
survey is based on NT server regardless of its use, so, I real terms,
you would still find UNIX with a strangle hold on the market in the area
of high end uses.
Matthew Gardiner
--
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operater from Hell)
If you donot like it go [#rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What's your take on this story? (Microsoft opening up the MSOffice
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 17:47:00 +1200
The author also forgets Microsoft's
"Embrace and extend" policy, aka, "lets fuck things up big time for
anyone operating a mixed platform environment".
Matthew Gardiner
Adam Warner wrote:
>
> http://www.zdnet.com/enterprise/stories/main/0,10228,2707056,00.html
>
> "With the next release of Office, known as Office XP, these users may get
> their wish. The native file format of Office XP is based on XML, a
> high-level superset of HTML that should be, practically by definition,
> open enough for anyone to create the tools necessary to accurately read
> and write Office files."
>
> I think Evan Leibovitch misses the point that Microsoft is quite capable
> of wrapping proprietary configuration information in a text-based format.
> We can hope that the MSOffice file formats will become transparent but I
> haven't heard any rumours that Microsoft intends to take such a positive
> step.
>
> Anyway, anyone with (a beta) of OfficeXP should be able to verify this.
> Has someone viewed the file format to see whether it is now transparent
> and easy to understand?
>
> Regards,
> Adam
--
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operater from Hell)
If you donot like it go [#rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux.org, gnome.org and linux.com
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2001 17:53:16 +1200
<snype>
I am in New Zealand, and I have never had any problems reaching those
sites. Malaysia has a very flaky Internet backbone, however, very soon,
you will find the quality will improve with a new fibre optic back bone
that is currently being laid.
Matthew Gardiner
--
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operater from Hell)
If you donot like it go [#rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
------------------------------
From: MjM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Col. Hack
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 23:00:11 -0700
I keep reading posts here from people who complain that they had to
'recompile the Linux kernel' to do something, and how this wasn't
necessary in Windows.
Well, all's fine and dandy if Windows supports your needs. But what if
you want to do something with your computer that Bill and Company have
decided you don't need to do? Guess what? You're Fucked!
You can't recompile ANY Windows kernel to do ANYTHING! You're stuck
with it, as-is.
Bill decides you need copy-protection at the kernel level on your sound
card? TOO BAD! That's what you get.
Bill decides you shouldn't be able to make a Fair-Use copy of a DVD you
bought? TOO BAD! Let me repeat: YOU CAN'T RECOMPILE ANY WINDOWS
KERNEL. You CAN'T DO ANYTHING that Bill has decided you shouldn't be
able to do.
Bill decides Windows is dropping support for your peripheral? Sorry!
You lose.
Yes, Windows is easy. It's called *submission*.
MjM
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
