Linux-Advocacy Digest #246, Volume #34 Sun, 6 May 01 06:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux disgusts me (Terry Porter)
Re: Why 90% of CEO's are morons ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux has one chance left......... (Terry Porter)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Terry Porter)
Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux (Terry Porter)
Re: MS pushing retailers to hide Linux? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Terry Porter)
Re: Windos is *unfriendly* (Terry Porter)
Re: Windos is *unfriendly* (Terry Porter)
Re: WinTrolls and advocates are the ones who are geeks! (Terry Porter)
Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: where's the linux performance? (Nils Zonneveld)
Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Linux disgusts me (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Article: AOL in cahoots with Compaq, HP to derail WinXP, .NET? ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie (Ketil Z Malde)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux disgusts me
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 06 May 2001 08:05:03 GMT
On Sun, 06 May 2001 06:11:55 GMT,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Terry Porter wrote:
>
>> I believe the paradigm of x.0 software being buggy and therefore
>> best left alone, only applies to Commercial Software.
>
> AbiWord?
????????
>
>> This is one of the reasons that Linux software is often below
>> 1.0, the same paradigms dont apply.
>
> AbiWord?
?????????
>
> --
> Pete
>
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why 90% of CEO's are morons
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 02:56:37 -0500
You've posted this exact same diatribe in here at least 3 or 4 other times.
(in fact, it's almost verbatim).
How many more times will you post it?
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> My theory is based on the number of business that are in the shit
> because
> they stuffed around.
>
> Corel, a company that wasted money trying to create a Java version of
> Wordperfect Office 2000, then they went off on another tangent, and
> tried
> to create a computer called the Netwinder based around Linux and the
> strong
> arm processor, two abismal failures, and look at where they are. Had
> they
> focused on their core business and addressed the demands of customers
> who
> use Office 2000, that is, what features they demand, that are available
> in
> Office 2000 that aren't in Wordperfect, and when these issues are
> addressed, market the bloody software, and don't just sit back and wait
> for
> the customers to come to you, goto to the customer, grab the the
> customer
> by the balls, and say, "what ever Microsoft has offered you, we will
> beat
> it!", thats how you get the customers!
>
> Lotus, another example, their flag ship product, Lotus Smart Suite, they
> picked their ass's for 7 years, then finally realise that maybe it would
> be
> a good idea to port Lotus 123 from 16 bit to 32 bit!
>
> Be Inc, chewed through millions, yet, I see no results, AT ALL! Had
> they,
> right from day one started to pay off hardware and software companies to
> port their apps to their platform, then maybe the OS would not be
> gradually
> dying like it is now.
>
> SGI, a niche market company, it has an office in New Zealand that would
> be
> lucky to make 1 to 2 sales a year! it would be cheaper to fly a sales
> rep
> out their maintain a local presence instead of having 4 people employed
> in
> NZ. There hardware is made in woggs somewhere, and there is a darth of
> decent graphic, audio, video applications. Yet, instead of addressing
> the
> issue, they sit back and blame everyone else for their wowes.
>
> Need I go on?
>
> Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 06 May 2001 08:11:04 GMT
On Sun, 06 May 2001 06:21:36 GMT,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Because, flatfish, you appear to change name and ID quite regularly. There
> is an accusation that you do so, so as to appear to be a new user
> experiencing problems with Linux. It calls into question your sincerity, so
> therefore a certain number ignore what you and focus on your deception.
>
> Grammer/spelling is just an irritation - you can accept that in a message -
> though it can make the message difficult to read. However, it does not
> indicate insincerity.
>
> --
> Pete
>
Now why'd you have to say that Pete ?
I had you all nice and cozy in a Wintroll box!
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 06 May 2001 08:21:09 GMT
On Sun, 06 May 2001 05:59:51 GMT,
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>BTW what ever happened to your Linux computer?
>
> I installed Win95b on it, because it is the simplest option in a
> monopolized industry. I dual boot to Linux occasionally, but I've had
> five years of practice with monopoly crapware. Its still frustrating,
> but as the trolls say, "it's familiar". (Only they use a less accurate
> term.)
Interestingly Max has always posted from Windows, yet no one here has
ever accused him of being a Wintroll!
Please take note Wintrolls (you know who you are), its not what OS you USE
but what you *say* that gets you branded a Wintroll on COLA.
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Another Windows pc gets Linux
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 06 May 2001 08:16:34 GMT
On Sun, 06 May 2001 06:27:19 GMT,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Terry Porter wrote:
>
>>>> > It is? I've just demonstrated in another post that it takes far less
>>>> > steps in Word to write and print a letter.
>> And I pointed out that your wrong, it only takes less steps than Word
^^^^ more
>> if you initiate Lyx from a Xterm
>
> Funny, it looked like more steps to me.
Opps my mistake, sorry, pls see correction above.
>
>> If Lyx is initiated from a icon, menu, or automatically via
>> filetype, then the number of steps are the same.
>
> That makes sense.
Ta.
>
>> I also pointed out that Lyx can be run remotely, something
>> Word cannot be, without 3rd party apps.
>
> That's only useful if you want to do that sort of thing.
But as a Linux user, I can and *do* such a thing, it makes perfect sense.
Have you ever run a GUI program on Linux from another Linux
box Pete ?
>
> --
> Pete
>
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS pushing retailers to hide Linux?
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 03:06:54 -0500
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:4L%I6.13309$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Is Micosoft up to their old tricks again.
Well, rather than investigate, let's make wild speculations without facts.
> I went into a Best Buy store looking to get the new version of Linux.
>
> The last I bought was Red Hat 6.1 and it was displayed prominently in the
> "operating systems" section along with Mandrake, TurboLinux, and
MacMillian
> distros that took up 3 or 4 shelves next to displays of Windows and Mac
Os'.
>
> This time the OS section only contained the various Windows operating
> systems, and I had to ask a clerk where the Linux products were. She
stated
> that "we keep them well hidden" and took me to the "computer books"
section
> where on a single bottom shelf was only the Suse distro for Linux.
>
> I know this type of thing is a common business practice, particularly for
> grocery stores, with cereals, canned foods, etc . . . so don't know if
this
> is necessarily illegal or not, but so MSish.
Likely, this is a result of where that particular store is getting its Linux
distributions. Many of them distribute through book wholesalers, which
means that the software gets put in the book sections instead of the
software sections.
I know my local Best Buy stocks Linux, on the software shelves. It sounds
more like this is a strange situation.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 06 May 2001 08:25:06 GMT
On Sun, 06 May 2001 05:59:52 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Said GreyCloud in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 05 May 2001 15:10:51
>>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>>> Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 05 May 2001
>>> [...]
>>> >I won't argue that point!!!
>>> >
>>> >Flatfish
>>>
>>> BWAH-HA-HA-HA-HA! As if you've ever 'argued a point'. LOL.
>>>
>>> You go troll, now, little flatfishie. Go insult some more people who
>>> know more than a tired old man who never really was very good with
>>> computers.
>>
>>Thanks a lot!
>
> You're welcome.
>
> Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
Did I miss something Max ?
I like Greybeard, hes got an adventurous spirit and a
sense of humour, why the accusation of 'tired old man'
????
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Windos is *unfriendly*
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 06 May 2001 08:27:41 GMT
On Sun, 06 May 2001 06:14:19 GMT,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Terry Porter wrote:
>
>>>> Tell us again Wintrolls, how "easy" Windos is to set up ?
>>>
>>> Funny I managed to do it ten minutes of faffing around.
>>
>> Well the poor (average) Windos user above couldnt, perhaps your
>> degrees helped out here ?
>
> Unlikely. It doesn't take a degree to figure out networking.
No but it takes a MCSE (at least) to figure out Windos networking :)
>
>>> I even managed to
>>> get Linux to talk to Windows (though it's a bit of struggle).
>>
>> Yeah I know, and while Windos keeps perverting standards it
>> won't get any easier.
>>
>> What are we having on our network today, Netbui or Netbios?
>
> Is Netbios a published standard? Is Samba a reverse engineered product?
Do bears shit in the forrest ;-)
>
> --
> Pete
>
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Windos is *unfriendly*
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 06 May 2001 08:31:32 GMT
On Sun, 06 May 2001 06:15:52 GMT,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Terry Porter wrote:
>
>> Yep, but remember its Windos, and networking has always been
>> difficult with that OS.
>
> That explains why I have Windows network up and running and Linux I have to
> start DHCP manually.
No it doesnt, it also doesn't explain why you couldnt get your NIC working
recently.
>
>>> Mind you, judging by the way
>>> the commercial companies trying to make a go of linux, maybe its brown
>> ^^^^ exploit
>>> tinted glasses.
>>
>> Comercialism and Linux OS sales **dont** mix.
>
> So Linux is not commercial?
>> Comercialism and Linux OS sales **dont** mix.
>
> --
> Pete
>
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: WinTrolls and advocates are the ones who are geeks!
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 06 May 2001 08:33:48 GMT
On Sun, 06 May 2001 00:18:26 -0400,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jasper wrote:
>>
>> "Linux users are really cool"??? Give me a break!
>>
>> Rock climbing, skydiving, bushwalking and dirt bikes are cool. Using
>> a computer is just a means to finding the time and money to do these
>> things.
>>
>> Only a computer geek would ever post something like what is written
>> below.
>>
>
> I'm a Linux user. I'm also an artist, and a war veteran.
>
> Is that cool, or what?
>
Absolutly!
Im a dirt bike rider, and Linux is every way as much fun as
that pastime, just *different*.
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 08:38:12 GMT
Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 6 May 2001 04:25:21
>"green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9d28j3$b60$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> > whether they bought it or not, powerpoint is bad even when comparing
>> > to other ms products. why they just don't expand word to turn the
>> > page in landscape and do big fonts i'll never know.
>>
>> to hard for the time pressed ms users ( all my uni lectures are done in
>> power point, using standard templates. no imagination needed.)
>>
>>
>> put it in word and it becomes two hard.
>>
>> and even more bloated. by keeping features down you can help minimise
>bugs.
>
>Have you *seen* Word's feature list?
>The only thing it can't do is to make you coffee, and that is because no one
>makes a USB coffee-maker.
The only thing it can't do is the one thing it needs to do, which is to
provide reliable, useful, and convenient functionality as a word
processor. Its list of "features" is entirely irrelevant, in
comparison, and it fails on that very point.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 03:36:15 -0500
"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 5 May 2001 13:14:44 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > No, they're not. Using GPL'd source as a reference makes the work a
> > derived work, and subject to the GPL's license terms.
>
> That's just wrong. They are only subject to the GPL if they use the
> code.
Since the GPL doesn't fully define what a "derived work" is, that means it
is up to the judge to decide. RMS has said that he believs code based on
GPL'd code is still subject to the GPL's license.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 04:03:36 -0500
"Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 5 May 2001 19:54:17 +0200, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >"JVercherIII" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:ADVI6.297$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Civility people! I use both Linux and Windows, and both have their
places
> >> (IMHO). I make a living right now writing VB programs so I'm kind of
> >living
> >> off the Microsoft gravy train. That being said, they do some things
which
> >> are very unpleasing. My main complaint with Microsoft is that they
stifle
> >> innovation. They never have come up with an original idea.
> >
> >Bullshit, and a big one.
>
> Man, you'd better brush up on your history.
>
> >To name a few of the top of my head:
> >COM
> >COM+
>
> These are not original ideas, they came out of OMG and CORBA
COM existed before the OMG did. COM was first developed in 1988 by Bob
Atkinson, Tony Williams,
and Craig Whittenburg. The OMG was not even founded until 1989, and didn't
issue its first spec until 1991.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 12:15:23 +0200
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Pg3J6.9817$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > >An API is not complete without the documentation of what its function
> does.
> >
> > You mean the library won't work if a programmer makes a function call
> > unless the function is documented?
>
> He means that the program must be expected to break when you upgrade
> the library to the next version if you use anything beyond what is
> documented. If you link statically that might not be a problem.
Not the library is expected to break if what is uses have been changed or
remove.
Otherwise, it can go on happily with any number of updates.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 04:09:58 -0500
"Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 5 May 2001 13:52:28 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >CORBA came after COM. COM originated at MS in 1987, but wasn't actually
put
>
> Please cite a source for this 1987 date. OMG started approx. 1989.
You're
> COM origination date is fictitious.
You're correct, it was 1988, not 87.
>From the forward of Essential COM Charlie Kindel (one of the early COM
supporters) writes:
COM began in 1988 as a result of the works of Bob Atkinson, Tony Williams,
and Craig Whittenburg.
Work began on the first implementation of COM in OLE 2.0 in 1990, as part of
Bill Gates "Information at your Fingertips" campaign.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 04:14:01 -0500
"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 5 May 2001 13:52:28 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > CORBA came after COM. COM originated at MS in 1987, but wasn't
> > actually put into a product until OLE 1, which MS released in April of
> > 1992 in the form of Windows 3.1.
>
> OLE 1 was an ugly hack on top of DDE and had very little in common with
> DDE as we know it today.
Correct, I meant OLE 2. OLE 1 shipped with Windows 3.0, OLE 2 shipped with
Windows 3.1.
------------------------------
From: Nils Zonneveld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: where's the linux performance?
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 11:29:43 +0200
Jonathan Martindell wrote:
[.....]
> Forte for Java and
> StarOffice both load many, many times faster in windows vs linux.
[.....]
Forte runs on Java itself, so the performance of the JVM determines the
performance of Forte. The Java engine and JIT compiler on Win* systems
is actually faster than the Java engine on Linux systems. Maybe it's
because Sun build a JVM for the Windows platform and didn't build a
Linux version for the JVM (so it had to be made by a third party).
Furthermore Windows is optimised to run on crappy hardware, while the
original X-windows software is designed with mainframes in mind. The
paradigma of X-Windows does not fit the use of a single machine as both
server (called a client in X-Windows lingo) and desktop system.
Nils
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 09:35:28 GMT
"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:bzXI6.22443$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "Ian Pulsford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Craig Kelley wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Many (all?) TCP/IP stacks were developed to be BSD-compliant. The
> > > > > internet wasn't developed on UNIX, but UNIX made it what it is
today
> > > > > (you're splitting hairs). Any way you look at it, Microsoft would
> > > > > have done everything *worse* than it is now (see SMB, ntrpc,
ActiveX
> > > > > -- all communication technologies specifically designed to make
people
> > > > > dependent on Windows).
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Doesn't matter M$ wasn't in the networking game at that stage anyway
and
> > > > now it lags with ipv6 implementation too. Recent Unixes have it
built
> > > > in, Windows 2000 and NT have 'developer' add-ons. That'll be fun,
as
> > > > the internet migrates to ipv6, watching M$ catch up.
> > >
> > > As the internet migrates to ipv6? You haven't any idea how long that
is
> > > going to take, do you? It would not surprise me if in 10 years, the
> > > internet were still primarily ipv4. You're only going to see ipv6
> > adoption
> > > in local private wide area networks for the foreseeable future.
> >
> > With the way the internet grows it will HAVE to be much sooner then 10
> > years. We're not going to have the luxury of putting the transition off.
>
> It's a good thing Linux systems already ship with IPV6 installed and
> running out-of-the-box. Obviously, open standards are inferior to
> commercial ware. (sarcasm)
Any bureaucratically controlled organization is slow to respond to change.
Software companies in particular. For crying out loud, OS/2 was originally
meant to be the operating system for the 286-Based IBM-AT . Suffice it to sa
y they missed their deadline.
Open source programmers will always be ahead of the curve as they have no
pointed heads directing their efforts or nervous investors rushing the
product out the door before it is finished. Enviable position to be in, if
you ask me. I'm lucky where I am (closed source shop) as the CEO generally
defers to us come decision time and has more than enough technical know-how
to understand our reasoning.
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux disgusts me
Date: Sun, 6 May 2001 09:08:45 +0200
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> Anti-aliased fonts affect the performance of a computer. I finally
>> disabled them on my NT laptop, because it made screen updates in
>> one of my programmer's editors noticeably slower.
>
> I switch 'em on, and every Windows desktop is still faster than Linux.
>
No, not NT4. *That* one is clearly not as fast as XFree4
Peter
--
Stop repeating yourself. Try something original - like suicide
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Article: AOL in cahoots with Compaq, HP to derail WinXP, .NET?
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 09:47:11 GMT
"Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 05 May 2001 15:23:56 +0100, dw133
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >Pete Goodwin wrote:
> >
> >> And replace it with what? The AOL desktop?
> >
> >Please don't say that, the thought sends shivers down my spine.
>
> "You've got menu!", "You've got window!", "You've got dialog!".....
LOL Good One!
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Alan Cox responds to Mundie
From: Ketil Z Malde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 06 May 2001 10:09:31 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Yep, and my contention is that a BSD-style license will eventually
>> knock out all the GPL code out there as well; the most free license
>> will win in the end.
While I don't necessarily think that would be a bad thing, I don't
think it's likely. For one thing, a corporation would probably be
more comfortable releasing code under GPL than under BSD - that way,
competitors couldn't make improvements without also giving them
back.
Also, with the "nice" BSD license, you can "hijack" code into a GPL
project, but not vice versa. Thus, in theory, for each BSD project,
you can have an equal GPL project - in practice, few care enough to
fork just for the license.
> No. The BSD license allows your code to be hijacked by Gates and
> other dispicable free-loaders.
Sometimes, this is what you want - e.g. from infrastructure products.
The bad thing about it, is that corporations tend to use it and abuse
it - "improve" without sharing changes, and thus breaking things.
I'm not sure Gates is so much worse than everybody else, but being so
dominant, he has more to gain by breaking standards - at some point it
gets easier to replace a Sun box with an NT box, than to replace fifty
PCs with workstations.
I still think that software (and other "intellectual property")
produced with public funding, should be as unencumbered as possible.
Meaning BSD rather than GPL.
-kzm
--
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
