Linux-Advocacy Digest #316, Volume #34 Tue, 8 May 01 07:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Windows makes good coasters ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS (robert bronsing)
Re: the Boom, Boom department (Darren Wyn Rees)
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS ("Tom Wilson")
Re: the Boom, Boom department (Darren Wyn Rees)
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS ("Tom Wilson")
Re: the Boom, Boom department (Darren Wyn Rees)
Re: Now push hard (pip)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Now push hard (pip)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Windows makes good coasters ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS ("Edward Rosten")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 09:58:23 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9d8dq3$a9i$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:IVMJ6.9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Steve Sheldon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:9d7u27$t3i$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > > > I'll grant you that 2K appears to handle heavy utilization much
better
> > > than
> > > > NT4 did. That's one of the first things I noticed while using it.
> > >
> > > I highly doubt you know what heavy utilization is.
> >
> > Depends on the platform in question. Generating mpeg video in the
> background
> > while running WinAmp and compiling a large project at the same time
under
> > Windows certainly qualifies as heavy utilization. Frankly, I was
surprised
> > 2K didn't puke. As I mentioned before, I switched back to NT4 because of
> the
> > need for a few older utilities that won't run under it. No desire to
> upgrade
> > them right now. NT4 is "adequate" as a platform for VS6.
>
> Add more big IO operations, couple of servers, and then you get to what is
> called heavy utilization.
I no longer even consider an MS server solution. Linux does everything I
need it to do and has yet to fail me. The same wasn't true for NT in that
role. I don't see any reason to go to 2K when I already have an ideal and
workable solution. Windows, for me, will be a desktop tool only from this
point forward.
> I never had 2K puke at me from overload, btw, only from bad drivers.
> What are those utilities that you can't run on 2K?
ZipMagic, which I've grown to prefer over WinZip. (I know its' already out
there for 2000 but don't particulary want to upgrade right now)
FixIt Utilities (Again, already available for 2000. No desire to buy it
again unless I have to)
Scanner. (The 2000 driver update I downloaded crashes more often than not.
I'm sure they'll fix it eventually if they haven't already)
TV Card. (Same thing as above)
> I'm nearly certain that there are 2K replacements for them, or that they
> would work on 2K as well.
There, as previously mentioned are replacements available. I just don't need
to run 2K enough to justify it. My 2K is from our office MSDN subscription
anyway and I'll purchase my own copy when and if I decide to switch over to
it. I pay for what I use and I just don't need it right now. The 2k
installation I used served its' purpose as a test platform and familiarity
exercise. NT is, as previously mentioned, "adequate" for what I need Windows
for on the home system. The next phase of what we're working on has
absolutely nothing to do with Windows, anyway. My next personal project
(whenever I get the time to start it) won't be Windows related either. When
I start the next Windows project, It'll probably have to be with XP anyway
(Assuming it actually catches on, of course). 2K will probably be forgotten
like ME currently is.
> I went to 2000 because it has all the benefits of 9x combined with non of
> the minuses.
------------------------------
From: robert bronsing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 12:06:03 +0200
Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Tom Wilson wrote:
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > > > > I was hoping someday that the official linux mascot would be the
> > > > > > Seagull.
> > > > > > Visualize this: BG running hard for cover as a flock of Seagulls
> go
> > > on
> > > > > > a straffing run!
> > > > >
> > > > > The avian mammals or the 80's new wave group with the funny hair?
> > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > > You mean: "The aqautic avians or the 80's new wave gropu with the
> funny
> > > hair?
> > > >
> > > > answer: yes
> > >
> > > Aquatic or no, they're still mammals...
> >
> > birds are mammals????
>
> They are warm-blooded and the feathers are just modified hairs. As far as
> the egg laying thing goes, Platypuses lay eggs and THEY are considered
> mammals. Birds are kind of a big question mark. Especially when you throw in
> the dinosaur thing.
Being warm blooded is not the thing that makes a mammal, having mammae
is what makes the mammal.
Birds do not nurse their young, mammals do
>
> > > At any rate, birds lobbing dung at BG would be a bit less jarring than
> > > seeing that pale guy with the 57 Chevy hairstyle doing the same.
> >
> >
> > HEHHEHEH
> >
> > how about both...simultaneously.
>
> Surreal image to be sure.
--
Robert Bronsing
------------------------------
From: Darren Wyn Rees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the Boom, Boom department
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 11:08:35 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.os.linux.advocacy :
>Its interesting to me that most distos dont include any really good Linux games.
I know Windows 2000 only ships with 4 games of a passable quality.
Most Linux distributions on the other hand ship with a lot of tripe.
>Because there are plenty of them.
This does not explain why Linux distributions waste distribution media
by shipping tripe.
Windows 2000 Professional fits on 1 CDROM. Some Linux distributions
require 2 or 3 CDROMs, because of the tendency of distributors to
'throw in' superfluous material, eg. the awful games.
--
"S+M is outta the question, have you got a better suggestion
I'm fed up of waving my right hand" - rat salad www.ratsalad.co.uk
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 10:09:32 GMT
"Glitch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron Ginn"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >
> >> > Actually, from my understanding, birds are closer to reptiles.
> >>
> >> Except for the warm-blooded part. They seem to me to be a sort of
> >> in-between or bridge species. Kind of the logical direction for
> >> dinosaurs to move in (had they not of course been wiped out so quickly)
> >> just for the efficiency reasons and also for the fact that atmospheric
> >> oxygen levels were declining (as some have illustrated). For some
> >> reason, I've always considered them, species-wise, to be more
> >> mammillian than reptilian. I can't quite put my finger on why, though.
> >
> > Birds don't produce milk for their young like mammals. This is am huge
> > evolutionary step for a single bridge species to make. It allows the
>
> evolutionary? It amazes me how many people have fallen for the lie of
> mutations being the cause for the existence of all the species of animals
> living today(not to mention how "lucky" we are that a star exploded that
> gave rise to a planet with a perfect enough enviornment to support life
> Talk about order in chaos; far fetched bed time stories more like it).
> It amazes me how scientists can be stupid enough to say
> that a single bolt of lightning (1.21 gigawatts for those BttF fans)
> caused amino acids to go haywire and make something out of nothing (a
> single celled organism) which led to the evolvement (their words,not
> mine) of the human species.
Stranger things have happened.
> I resent the fact that I, as a member of the human race, came from an ape
> and that birds used to be dinosaurs with feathers. Did they just keep
> waiting for 'evolution' to give them hollow enough bones to be able to
> fly? hogwash
They certainly couldn't surf the web, track down a wholesale bone vendor and
click in an order now could they? (No credit cards)
> > parents to not have to leave their young unattended to go out in search
> > for food. I have to agree that birds definately appear to be more
> > closely releated to reptiles than mammals although I'm no evolutionary
> > biologist, so this is mere speculation on my part.
> >
>
> birds are warm blooded, reptiles are cold blooded if im not mistaken; big
> difference
Among others.
Boy, talk about drifting threads. Linux as a consumer OS, birds, an 80's new
wave band, evolution debate regarding aformentioned birds, creationism....
------------------------------
From: Darren Wyn Rees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the Boom, Boom department
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 11:10:52 +0100
GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in
comp.os.linux.advocacy :
>Since when does microsoft throw in a show case game for free??
They do NOT throw in the proverbial old kitchen sink - per Linux.
--
"S+M is outta the question, have you got a better suggestion
I'm fed up of waving my right hand" - rat salad www.ratsalad.co.uk
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 10:16:07 GMT
"robert bronsing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Tom Wilson wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Tom Wilson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > > <snip>
> > > >
> > > > > > > I was hoping someday that the official linux mascot would be
the
> > > > > > > Seagull.
> > > > > > > Visualize this: BG running hard for cover as a flock of
Seagulls
> > go
> > > > on
> > > > > > > a straffing run!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The avian mammals or the 80's new wave group with the funny
hair?
> > > > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > > > You mean: "The aqautic avians or the 80's new wave gropu with the
> > funny
> > > > hair?
> > > > >
> > > > > answer: yes
> > > >
> > > > Aquatic or no, they're still mammals...
> > >
> > > birds are mammals????
> >
> > They are warm-blooded and the feathers are just modified hairs. As far
as
> > the egg laying thing goes, Platypuses lay eggs and THEY are considered
> > mammals. Birds are kind of a big question mark. Especially when you
throw in
> > the dinosaur thing.
>
>
> Being warm blooded is not the thing that makes a mammal, having mammae
> is what makes the mammal.
> Birds do not nurse their young, mammals do
Aware of that. I just have an odd feeling that had whatever catastrophy that
killed off the dinosaurs not happened (be it comet, astroid, or stock market
crash), the fork the birds were on would have perhaps taken our spot. Odd
ball theory, nothing more. I'm a programmer, not a naturalist.
------------------------------
From: Darren Wyn Rees <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the Boom, Boom department
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 11:16:15 +0100
"Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in comp.os.linux.advocacy :
>> Linux is not yet a credible games platform.
>
>What you meant to say is, "Linux does not have as many commercial games published for
>it as Windows does."
What I mean to say is precisely "Linux is not yet a credible games
platform". In other words, the majority of people don't take or
believe Linux to be an appropriate Operating System for which to play
games.
>This speaks *nothing* of Linux as a platform.
Yes, it does, it speaks volumes. Linux distributors are competing
in the desktop OS market against other non-Linux OSes that have
a plentiful supply of quality games available. Linux doesn't. Yet.
--
"S+M is outta the question, have you got a better suggestion
I'm fed up of waving my right hand" - rat salad www.ratsalad.co.uk
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Now push hard
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 11:22:36 +0100
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
> Mikkel Elmholdt wrote:
> >
> > "pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skrev i en meddelelse
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > <snip>
> >
> > > As far as non-GUI work is concerned I can say that Java has equal
> > > performance to native languages in many areas, but with the added
> > > advantages of byte-code portability and a large API.
> >
> > I'll buy that. I have seen benchmarks on CORBA ORBs written in both Java and
> > C or C++, and they performed equally well. The author of that benchmark went
> > as far as to declare Java dead on the desktop, but reigning supreme on the
> > server side .... but maybe he got carried away a bit :-)
> >
> > Mikkel
> For small utilities and applications, such as a media player, or a image
> viewer, Java is more than adequate. However, the excriment really
> starts to hit the fan when you try to create large, complex
> applications. The evidence is shown in Wordperfect Java Edition, slow,
> unstable, picky about what browser you used, it was a ticking time bomb.
To be fair: WP in Java was a load of sh*t. They could have used any
programming language and made it THAT bad.
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 06:27:16 -0400
JS PL wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > billwg wrote:
> > >
> > > I think that you would be hard pressed to cite any such e-mail that
> > > described a requirement for any illegal contract negotiation. Microsoft
> has
> > > been very rigorous in following the Consent Agreement in all actions
> > > subsequent to signing the Consent Agreement.
> >
> > you misspelled "tiptoeing on very-carefully worded changes they nogotiated
> > into the Consent decrees so that they could violate the spirit of said
> decrees."
> >
> > Judge Jackson recognized this, which is why he said he wants them broken
> up.
>
> Here's a breif description of the SPIRIT of the consent decree:
>
> DOJ - "Well after 12,000 hours of ass reaming, we got absolutely nothing to
> prosecute, but were HUGE and will never leave you alone.
>
> Microsoft - Here's a bone which will help you save face. Well sign this
> decree which really obligates us to do just about nothing and won't cost us
> a penny in sales losses.
>
> DOJ - Thank You, you saved our ass.
You are wrong. As ususal.
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 06:28:43 -0400
JS PL wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > JS PL wrote:
> > >
> > > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > JS PL wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > > Daniel Johnson wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Then I suggest you are being sloppy with your accusations;
> you
> > > > > > > > > know full well that MS never excluded anyone. At their
> *worst*
> > > > > > > > > they want you to sell *their* product, whatever else you may
> > > sell.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Then why were their OEM-licenses dependant upon NOT selling
> any
> > > > > > > > other vendor's OS?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > They weren't.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Remember, not everything Max says is true. :D
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Then, try expalain what a per-processor license is.
> > > > >
> > > > > The per processor license simply required the OEM to pay a royalty
> to
> > > > > Microsoft for each computer it manufactured containing a particular
> > > > > microprocessor type during the term of the agreement. The minimum
> > > commitment
> > > > > provision allowed the OEM to receive a volume discount by committing
> to
> > > ship
> > > > > a designated number of computers. These agreements had obvious
> benefits
> > > for
> > > > > both the OEM and Microsoft. Microsoft did not, however, require any
> OEM
> > > to
> > > > > enter into a per processor license in order for the OEM to license
> > > Microsoft
> > > > > 's operating systems products. Rather, it was one of several
> licensing
> > > > > options made available to each OEM, and it was selected only by
> those
> > > OEMs
> > > > > that found it to be to their economic advantage. Indeed, the
> majority of
> > > > > Microsoft's license agreements for its operating systems were not
> per
> > > > > processor agreements.
> > > >
> > > > AND... Microsft set the pricing so that it was almost impossible ot
> NOT
> > > > use per-processor licensing. And since vendors were already paying for
> > > > M$' OS, if they loaded another one, they ( and the customer) paid for
> > > > another license. And befor you start braying about percentages of
> > > > vendors, go do some researc of vendors and find out waht the
> percentage
> > > > of -shipping computers- they covered.
> > >
> > > Only 62% of total licences were ever sold under this type of licensing
> at
> > > it's highest point. That doesn't translate into "nearly impossible".
> > > That's LICENCES not VENDORS idiot.
> > >
> > > During Microsoft's 1994 fiscal year - the final year in which it offered
> per
> > > processor licenses - approximately 59% of MS-DOS units licensed by OEM
> > > customers were covered by per processor licenses. In fiscal year 1993,
> > > approximately 62% of MS-DOS units licensed by OEM customers were covered
> by
> > > per processor licenses. The prior year, Microsoft's 1992 fiscal year,
> > > approximately 51% of MS-DOS units licensed by OEMs were covered by per
> > > processor licenses. Per processor licenses made up 27% in fiscal year
> 1991,
> > > 22% in fiscal year 1990 and smaller percentages in earlier years.
> >
> > You may now explainthe difference between a per-processor license, and
> > an enduser license.
>
> Go learn the difference for yourself.
Note: No answer. Probably cant explain it.
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Now push hard
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 11:31:27 +0100
pip wrote:
>
> Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> > For small utilities and applications, such as a media player, or a image
> > viewer, Java is more than adequate. However, the excriment really
> > starts to hit the fan when you try to create large, complex
> > applications. The evidence is shown in Wordperfect Java Edition, slow,
> > unstable, picky about what browser you used, it was a ticking time bomb.
>
> To be fair: WP in Java was a load of sh*t. They could have used any
> programming language and made it THAT bad.
I should also point out that Java applications such as JBuilder, Forte,
that word processor who's link I can't remember (something office),
ArgoUML, even parsable is the pdf acrobat reader - all run quite well
and they are certainly "complex" applications. The problem is that
people just don't optimise their GUI work and probably come from a C++
background with bad habits and preconceptions and then wonder why things
don't work the same (also the GUI api is "over designed" imho). Also
remember that only _now_ are JVM's getting properly optimised and decent
JIT's integrated. Just like Linux on the desktop: watch this space :)
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 09:04:52 +0100
> The fact that it has not been done is not, I think, because it is
> somehow tougher on Linux than on Windows. I'd expect the opposite is
> true, in fact. I think the reason it has not been done is because of
> (get this) Microsoft's monopolization.
You seem to want to tie every ill to "Microsoft's monopolisation". It's
like listening to a broken gramaphone record.
> Since de-uglifying fonts requires knowledge and coordination of both the
> software and the hardware, neither OEM nor distro developers have the
> power and capability to "fix" the problem alone. Attempts to work
> together will merit Microsoft's wrath, though, and thus cost the OEM or
> developer money over and above the work (lost revenues, enhanced
> marketing to combat FUD, perhaps even a court case), so it simply
> doesn't get done.
There's no profit in companies working together to make a uniform
control panel - that's the more likely reason, rather than "Microsoft's
wrath". Bear in mind most companies want you to buy _their_ product, and
not others. So what advantage is there in making it generic? Other than
following standards - of which there are _none_ for configuration.
So, what's to stop the companies that make the distro's from working
together to do this?
--
---
Pete Goodwin
All your no fly zone are belong to us
My opinions are my own
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 05:36:01 -0500
"Glitch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron Ginn"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >
> >> > Actually, from my understanding, birds are closer to reptiles.
> >>
> >> Except for the warm-blooded part. They seem to me to be a sort of
> >> in-between or bridge species. Kind of the logical direction for
> >> dinosaurs to move in (had they not of course been wiped out so quickly)
> >> just for the efficiency reasons and also for the fact that atmospheric
> >> oxygen levels were declining (as some have illustrated). For some
> >> reason, I've always considered them, species-wise, to be more
> >> mammillian than reptilian. I can't quite put my finger on why, though.
> >
> > Birds don't produce milk for their young like mammals. This is am huge
> > evolutionary step for a single bridge species to make. It allows the
>
> evolutionary? It amazes me how many people have fallen for the lie of
> mutations being the cause for the existence of all the species of animals
> living today(not to mention how "lucky" we are that a star exploded that
> gave rise to a planet with a perfect enough enviornment to support life
> Talk about order in chaos; far fetched bed time stories more like it).
> It amazes me how scientists can be stupid enough to say
> that a single bolt of lightning (1.21 gigawatts for those BttF fans)
> caused amino acids to go haywire and make something out of nothing (a
> single celled organism) which led to the evolvement (their words,not
> mine) of the human species.
We won the galactic lottery. Big deal. SOMEONE has to win the lottery
every so often, assuming enough people play, likewise given enough stars and
planets orbiting stars, the 1 in 1 billion chance of forming life will
likely happen at least once, and probably more than once. For those beings
living on said planet, it might seem fantastically improbable that life
began that way, and it is. Just as it is to the guy that wins the lottery.
> I resent the fact that I, as a member of the human race, came from an ape
> and that birds used to be dinosaurs with feathers. Did they just keep
> waiting for 'evolution' to give them hollow enough bones to be able to
> fly? hogwash
You didn't come from an ape, unless there's something about your parents
you're not letting on. Your lineage can be traced back to apes.
Chimpanzees have 90+% of the same DNA as humans. In fact, Chimpanzees are
closer to humans than they are to apes, and other types of monkeys.
> > parents to not have to leave their young unattended to go out in search
> > for food. I have to agree that birds definately appear to be more
> > closely releated to reptiles than mammals although I'm no evolutionary
> > biologist, so this is mere speculation on my part.
>
> birds are warm blooded, reptiles are cold blooded if im not mistaken; big
> difference
It seems that Snakes and reptiles became cold blooded as a form of natural
defense. Many animals can see in the infrared, and thus see heat. By being
cold blooded, the animals blend into the background, even in the infrared.
Since they can't fly, they needed some other way to keep from being eaten.
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Article: Want Media Player 8? Buy Windows XP
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 10:42:09 GMT
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > > Nah! FUD!
> > >
> > > You qouted the whole articles for *two* words?
> > > And what was FUD about it?
> >
> > GPL is a viral thing... totally untrue.
>
> Really? Show me how I can incorporate GPL code with any other code without
> turning the whole thing to GPL?
Why should you be allowed to incorporate PROPRIETARY code in
your application without submitting to owner conditions?
Just because you've got it for free?
> Where is the GPLed browser using Gecko?
> Where is non-GPL KDE application?
Just looking at my Desktop icons:
Borland's Kylix isn't GPL, it costs a lot of money, and runs
under GNOME and KDE.
XSmbrowser (a very nice "network neighborhood"
implementation) isn't GPL, it costs a few bucks, and runs
under GNOME, KDE and whatever.
--
Giuliano Colla
Before activating the tongue, make sure that the brain is
connected (anonymous)
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 12:44:49 +0100
> Do you really think I will *ever* again be suckered by Microsoft? They
> can go to hell. I�ve had it for all the future to come. I don�t believe
> this crap that they "really got it right this time" no longer.
Exactly. If you've been conned by them in the past, vote with your feet
and go elsewhere. I have. Why can't the wintrolls see that we're no
longer prepared to try out luck with the con men.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 12:51:26 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Donn Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Edward Rosten wrote:
>
>> It's farly well agreed on that birds are not a bridge between mammles
>> and reptiles.
>
> I think centipedes are the original primates, because they split off
> into various animal and insect groups. Correct?
centipedes? At one point in time, arthropods (of which the centipede is
one) and vertibrates diverged from one point and gained their various
skeletons. I doubt they split from centipedes since centipedes are land
based arthropods and vertibrates started off as sea based life forms. I'm
not an expert on this, and this is about the limit of my knowedge. I'd
sugest you consult a paeleontologist.
> I'll bet you could
> trace all animal and insect species back to the centipede.
Er...
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
