Linux-Advocacy Digest #319, Volume #34 Tue, 8 May 01 11:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Bill Hudson caught LYING again. ("goggel")
Re: the Boom, Boom department (Salvador Peralta)
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (robert bronsing)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... (Neil Cerutti)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("JS PL")
Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP. (Fred K Ollinger)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (robert bronsing)
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why does Flatfoot feel so threatened? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Microsoft's move away from perpetual licensing proves that the closed source
model doesn't work! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: WinTrolls and advocates are the ones who are geeks! (chrisv)
Re: WinTrolls and advocates are the ones who are geeks! (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (chrisv)
Re: Bill Hudson caught LYING again. ("billh")
Re: Bill Hudson caught LYING again. (redc1c4)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "goggel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Bill Hudson caught LYING again.
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 13:23:51 GMT
stop saying this lol thing. I'm getting mad of it.
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the Boom, Boom department
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 06:36:03 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Darren Wyn Rees quoth:
> 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.
No, they just make you pay for every piece of software that you get
over and above the barebones OS. Want to program in windows?
That'll cost you. Want licensing to run something other than a PWS?
That'll cost you. Want office functionality? That'll cost you.
Want a graphical front end to FTP? That'll cost you. Want to send a
fax? That'll cost you.
etcetcetc
You've actually got the nads to tell us that bundling software with
the OS is worse for the consumer than forcing them to pay for it?
lol...
--
Salvador Peralta -o)
Programmer/Analyst, Webmaster / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Tue, 8 May 2001 16:27:13 +0200
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:V2SJ6.11663$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Steve Sheldon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9d7ugc$fj6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >
> > > > Now - sure, MS could do what you propose. Come out with
Windows -3112
> > "The
> > > > Antiupgrade" and have it rewritten from the ground up by european
> teens
> > on
> > > X
> > > > supporting only the very latest popular standards and just ignoring
> > > > everything that is "uncool" in the scene at that minute and just
> ignore
> > > the
> > > > VAST installed userbase and blow off every single manufacturer and
ISV
> > and
> > > > force them to grok some new undocumented (documentation is uncool
and
> > > boring
> > > > to true hackerz) APIs...
> > > >
> > > > <sarcasm>yea, great idea!</sarcasm>
> > >
> > > Now that's just being silly.
> >
> > Not really, it's called Linux.
>
> Huh? Linux presents the same API as unix has since at least the early
> 80's and will run most unix programs with just a recompile of the
> same source code. It is Microsoft that has refused to follow that
> working standard and given us the never-ending API-of-the-month
> to follow without ever getting it right - hence the yearly promises
> that the upcoming 'next' version will finally do what they have been
> promising for years.
What *have* they been promising for years?
------------------------------
From: robert bronsing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 15:28:46 +0200
Isn't being 'homosexual' without doing the act called being a homophile?
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> > By the same token, merely having homosexual attractions does NOT make
> > homosexuality...
>
> I'll quote Ritchard Ritchard (from `Bottom' here)
>
> I _AM_ hetrosexual. Well, I'm hetrosexual with intent.
>
> ie, you can be homosexual without doing anything about it.
>
> -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
--
Robert Bronsing
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Cerutti)
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Date: 8 May 2001 13:29:29 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
pookoopookoo posted:
>Isn't there a place to download the binaries precompiled (I'm
>sure there is)? I've never compiled anything in my life =) I
>think if I had to recompile my kernel, I would go into coronary
>arrest.
Don't underestimate your abilities.
Compiling the Linux Kernel is totally automated using the make
program, a utility you don't need to understand at all to use.
The most complex part, to me, is installing the new kernel
sensibly and dinking around with modules. The kernel Makefile
comes with a rule for 'lilo' that should automate even the
installation part, though it doesn't work for distributions that
put the kernel in /boot (Redhat based?).
Dinking around with modules is still a pain, and many of the
HOWTOs still pretend it is more likely that someone will build a
monolithic kernel than a modular kernel.
--
Neil Cerutti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
*** Your child was bitten by a bat lizard and the hospital bill
cost you $200. ***
------------------------------
From: "JS PL" <hi everybody!>
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, 8 May 2001 09:33:38 -0400
"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]...
> > > > > 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.
Come now....just because it doesn't explain it in your Microsoft File book,
don't mean you cant learn it.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fred K Ollinger)
Subject: Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP.
Date: 8 May 2001 13:44:56 GMT
Stuart Krivis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 20:28:28 GMT, Michael Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > Brian Rourke wrote:
: >
: >> If Apple and Microsoft can make installation easier, why not emulate
: >> that? Wouldn't you agree that easy installation is better than hard
: >> installation?
I don't know what easy means. If being able to set things up just the way I
want them then yes, I like easy. If being able to install FAST, then yes,
I like easy. MS fails on both accounts, apple's classic is simple, but it
still fails on first feature. Quick easy set-up means no choices. If you
have too many questions, user gets confused. I like debian install the best.
Few ques. the rest is config files.
BTW, I find mandrake to be just as easy as win. I esp. liked the old rh
text installer. I still find that to the easiest of all the pc installers,
save BEOS, of course, but BE gives you way less options during install.
Install should be irrelevent b/c most people don't need to do it. Just have
linux preinstalled and preconfigged and 99% of ease of use shit goes away.
People bitch about a bump here and there not realizing how truly great it is
to have a free alternative that can look and feel the exact same as win
which in Bill Gates words, he spends millions on developing. Even if lin is
slightly worse (it's better) than win, it is still amazing that something
w/ such a monetary and time advantage can be challanged.
Fred
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[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, 8 May 2001 16:46:57 +0200
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9d8ke9$jc4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Using fprintf's under Linux to print PS, you can print graphics from
> >> the command prompt. Under Windows this won't work.
> >
> > *fprintf* ? How the hell does *this* work?
> > fprintf takes a character array, and print it to a file, how do you take
> > a char array and make it into a graphic picture?
>
> You can access the device independent printer layer in Linux using
> (f)printfs. In windows, you have to use the GDI to get to the device
> independent printer layer.
Okay, haven't thought about that one.
You can do the same on Windows, I believe, can't you?
> >> How can you print device independent graphics in Windows without doing
> >> the whole GDI thing to a command line program?
> >
> > Same as you would do with Linux, output PS, activate GS to translate to
> > device dependent output. In this case, it would be to the GDI, which
> > would translate it to device dependent output.
>
> The probelm being here that windows does not allow arbitraty print
> filters to be put in to the printing sysetm. With UNIX, you dump a file
> to lpr and forget. The printer subsystem can then activate a filter based
> on the file type. Windows lacking this step requires you to print to a
> file, then run a program on that file (such as GS) in order to print it.
> This is a real pain for batch work.
Okay, I'll do some research in this direction, I can think of several
workarounds already, but none of them require zero user intervention at the
moment.
A possible solution would be to set up a filter on PS2PRN file, located on
%SYSTEM%, that *should* work.
And would require zero user intervention.
> >> If you have a PS printer hooked up to LPT1 then you can, but this is a
> >> special case.
> >
> > Then translate it like you do in Linux.
>
> The translator is not automatically triggered as in Linux.
Problem, yes. I'll see what I can make of that.
> >> I was not referring to text printing. I went to the effort to learn
> >> basic PostScript and not I can do graphics printing from all my command
> >> line apps that I need to print from, with graphics. I have used this
> >> ability quite a lot.
> >
> > Point taken, personally, I learned ASCII art :)
>
> It only goes so far... :-)
Far enough.
I once saw Linux's penguin as ASCII art, very amusing, (and bloody *huge* in
size).
> I think WMF would be an entirely suitable format (based on my limited
> knowledge of WMF), but most programs won't output WMFs and even if they
> did, you can't dump one straight to a printer via the GDI.
What is WMF?
> > I think that you are wrong, because it's just as easy to print from the
> > CLI on windows as it's on Linux, if you are going to output PS.#
>
> The difference is that under Linux, you can dump PS to the printer and
> get out graphics. In windows, you have to dump it to a file, then run the
> interpreter on the file, as a seperate step.
See my suggestion about PS2PRN, you dump PS to file, and it iterupt it for
you, and print.
> > And
> > easier if you are bypassing PS and going straight to GDI.
>
> For command line apps?
Sure, what is so bad in that? I'm not talking about DOS applications, I'm
talking about Win32, they can do that.
------------------------------
From: robert bronsing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 15:54:00 +0200
The majority of AIDS patients and HIV positive people in the world are
heterosexuals.
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> Ray Fischer wrote:
> >
> > Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >You write like someone who was abused as a child.
> >
> > You write like someone who's lost an argument and doesn't have the
> > good grace to concede nor the brains to withdraw.
>
> lost what argument?
>
> that guy guys spreading AIDS is a good idea?
>
> >
> > --
> > Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] into you -- Nietzsche
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey
> ICQ # 3056642
>
> L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
> can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> K: Truth in advertising:
> Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
> Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
> Special Interest Sierra Club,
> Anarchist Members of the ACLU
> Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
> The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
> Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
>
> J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
> The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
> also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
>
> I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
> challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
> between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
> Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
>
> H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
> premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
> you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
> you are lazy, stupid people"
>
> G: Knackos...you're a retard.
>
> F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
>
> E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
> her behavior improves.
>
> D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> ...despite (C) above.
>
> C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
>
> B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
> method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
> direction that she doesn't like.
>
> A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
--
Robert Bronsing
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 14:03:41 GMT
On Mon, 07 May 2001 21:16:10 -0700, GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 07 May 2001 09:01:14 -0400, Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>>
>> >A Pentium IV chip, that is...
>> Too expensive at the moment.
>>
>> Flatfish
>
>You wouldn't want one anyway. The power dissipation alone is 54 Watts!
>With the cost of power going up?
Oucchhh!!
Flatfish
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Why does Flatfoot feel so threatened?
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 14:21:04 GMT
On Tue, 08 May 2001 03:29:01 -0000, Ray Chason
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 06 May 2001 16:21:39 -0000, Ray Chason
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>As for bloat, take a good look at what KDE and StarOffice are headed
>>towards.
>
>Then use Enlight...oh, yeah, that's even more bloated :-) Use
>Windowmaker, fvwm2, or twm. I happen to think twm is clumsy and ugly
>as sin, but I would never presume to tell others that they can't use
>it.
Actually I kind of like Enlightenment because it is so vastly
different from any of the other WM's. I could never take to
WindowMaker for some reason. That docking thing and clip thingie
seemed odd to me. Icewm is pretty decent and kde and Gnome are ok, but
growing by the minute. I also think CDE (CDESIM) is pretty basic and
easy to use.
>>>2) If you want to waste your money on AOL or MSN, that's your choice.
>>> I'd rather have a real ISP, so that
>>
>>I don't, but the average pre-load comes with an ISP already built into
>>the price at least for a year or so.
>
>A quick trip to bestbuy.com revealed nothing of the kind. Not exactly
>an exhaustive market survey, I'll grant. If you refer to one of those
>deals where you yoke yourself to AOL for three years and get $400 off
>the price of your computer, then let's do the math.
Sunday's NY Times was chock full of ad's for the miserable beasts.
Sometimes you have to read the fine print very carefully because part
of the rebate includes a years subscription to a (usually inferior)
isp. But people are doing it by the truckload.
>$400 amortized at 18% over three years is about $14.46/mo. IIRC the
>cost of the service is about $22.95/mo. The effective price, then,
>is about $8.49/mo. Not too bad, if you don't mind a three-year
>obligation.
True, but the service really sucks, MSN is probably worse than AOL and
Compu$serve is even worse yet.
>
>>>If Power Point is a requirement, then Power Point is what you should
>>>use. If she just needs to be able to show images, then any program
>>>in that class will do; in a pinch you could even use the Gimp.
>>
>>When a grade is at stake I prefer to use a known product instead of
>>being a hero and running a Linux version in the hope that it will work
>>ok on the teachers PC.
>
>You have struck, right on the head, the reason that so many despise
>Microsoft, the reason that many become Penguinistas: vendor lock.
>Nothing but PowerPoint really works with PowerPoint because the
>format is a trade secret.
I know that, but ease of use and general acceptance are a big selling
point.
>Many Windows advocates argue that the current state of affairs, with
>a set of monopolistic standards, is better than the status quo ante
>where multiple incompatible products competed; and that's true as
>far as it goes. But monopolistic standards are only best if you are
>the monopoly. For the consumer, they are only second best.
I don't agree with any of the dirty tactics MS has/have used and I was
right in the middle of the OS/2 / DRDOS /Stacker etc debate years ago.
I hated it then and I hate it now.
>What I advocate is not Linux per se, but open standards, open protocols,
>open file formats. I can read email with Outlook, or I can use Eudora,
>Pegasus, Pine, or KMail. I can read news with Outlook, or I can use
>Netscape, Gravity, Agent, PAN, KNode, tin, or slrn. I can cruise the
>Web with Explorer, or I can use Netscape, Konqueror, Opera, or Lynx.
I'm all for that and I have absolutely nothing against OpenSource.
What bothers me is the zealot "Linux is better because........"
approach.
I have not found this to be even remotely true for a desktop system on
the average users desk and that is what I debate.
The server or developer market is a completely different animal and
Linux is a great alternative in that arena.
>I can even write my own clients.
I write songs :)
>Open standards are why we're all using PCs and not Macintoshes. Open
>standards are what made the Net what it is. Even the wall socket that
>powers your PC is an open standard. There is no reason but the
>interests of a single large corporation that this happy state of affairs
>cannot prevail for word processors, spreadsheets, databases, and such.
Like I said I have no problem with standards.
>You noted in another post that you dislike Word. Wouldn't it be nice
>if you could choose another word processor and not worry about being
>compatible with the guy down the street who uses Word?
Yes it would and I use WordPro (Lotus) and generally it works but I
have had incompatibilities at times though they have been minor.
I use only about 10 percent of the features of any of this monster
office suites anyhow and I suspect others, many others are in the same
boat.
>You may argue that Joe Sixpack doesn't care about open standards, and
>you'd probably be right. But he should care.
Long term maybe, but right now Joe is in some AOL Chat Room discussing
Jerry Springer and sipping a tall one :)
>
>>>GUIs are nice. GUIs are pretty. GUIs are easy.
>>>
>>>But most GUI apps can't be batched in any meaningful way.
>>
>>Joe user doesn't care.
>
>But I do. Those of us who can do more with our computers shouldn't be
>limited to what one corporation thinks an ill-defined "Joe User" wants.
>Don't weld my hood shut just because you can't change your own spark
>plugs.
MS, like Apple made some choices based upon what they believed the
market wanted. The object was to make the pc easier and more friendly
to use and appeal to the majority of the user base. Running batch
files/jobs just isn't something the average person does. In fact most
typical users don't even multi-task, they task switch.
>
snip..........
>
>>As a general statement I have used many applications d/l'd from
>>Freshmeat and most of the ones I have used are half done and crude
>>with little or no documentation.
>
>The neat thing about shareware and free-as-in-beer-ware is that you
>can try them, and if you don't like them, you delete them and you've
>lost nothing but a little time.
True, but you can do the same with WIndows and if you go to
winfiles.com and take a look at the applications there they are far
more useful to average Joe than FreshMeat ones seem to be.
Nice talkin to you :)
Flatfish
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Microsoft's move away from perpetual licensing proves that the closed
source model doesn't work!
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 14:25:16 GMT
On Tue, 08 May 2001 04:37:01 GMT, jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Microsoft's move away from perpetual
>licensing proves that the closed
>source model doesn't work!
>
>Read this article on CNET!
>
>http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-5851009.html?tag=lh
>
>The inherent problem with the closed source
>model, is that any company that provides
>such software must come up with revised
>versions to generate a profit even if
>no further revisions are warranted or even
>desired by the people using the software.
>
>With the open source software model, the public
>has the ability to fork off the code, keep
>their own versions, and hence retain the
>functionality and carry it to newer operating
>systems and other computing environments indefinitely
>as they see fit.
>
>So you see even Microsoft is admitting that
>the closed source model doesn't work.
Knowing how Microsoft thinks, and taking that into account, I suspect
they are testing the waters to see how they can conjure up a way to
"semi-open source" their products, have Open Source programming
community maintain and upgrade the code, and of course have Microsoft
some how, some way make all of the money off the entire operation with
the programmers getting nothing.
Just a thought......
flatfish
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: WinTrolls and advocates are the ones who are geeks!
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 14:33:18 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>chrisv wrote:
>>
>> You're a kook...
>
>Not according to the people I work with
They obviously don't read this newsgroup.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Subject: Re: WinTrolls and advocates are the ones who are geeks!
Date: 8 May 2001 14:36:33 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 08 May 2001 14:33:18 GMT, chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>chrisv wrote:
>>>
>>> You're a kook...
>>
>>Not according to the people I work with
>
>They obviously don't read this newsgroup.
Well, Aaron once said "different personas for different (activities?
I can't recall)".
He apparently tries to keep a facade of sanity in face to face
interactions.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 14:43:50 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>IF most men were bisexual, then you would see all kinds of guys
>hooking up for sex after striking out with the chicks.
>
>Since such a thing doesn't happen, then your assumption is false.
You are wrong, and your logic is false.
>Hope that helps.
False logic supporting incorrect conclusions don't help, sorry.
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Bill Hudson caught LYING again.
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 14:52:36 GMT
"goggel"
> stop saying this lol thing. I'm getting mad of it.
When Kulkis posts the hilariously stupid, I'll LOL.
------------------------------
From: redc1c4 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,us.military.army,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Bill Hudson caught LYING again.
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 15:00:26 GMT
billh wrote:
>
> "goggel"
>
> > stop saying this lol thing. I'm getting mad of it.
>
> When Kulkis posts the hilariously stupid, I'll LOL.
laughing that hard, that often, could cause physical damage.....
redc1c4,
ROTFLMFAO!
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
