Linux-Advocacy Digest #327, Volume #34 Tue, 8 May 01 12:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: To Aaron (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux disgusts me (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Windows NT: lost in space? (Chad Everett)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:40 GMT
Said Daniel Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 07 May 2001
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Daniel Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 06 May 2001
>> >> No, they didnt. You are plainly not worth any more time. You ignore
>> >> evidence, including quotes from M$ executive.
>> >
>> >If you've got a quote from an MS excutive who says that
>> >the customers did not want Windows, I'd like to see it.
>>
>> Quotes from customers aren't enough?
>
>Well, Rick says that there are quotes from "M$
>executives" to support this.
No, Judge Jackson says there are quotes from MS executives to support
this.
>There are certainly a small number of customers who
>do not want Windows. Getting a few "Windows Suxors"
>quotes from *them* should be very easy.
If the small number of customers who do not want Windows is even the
tiniest bit larger than the unknown number of customers who did not want
it but bought it anyway, Microsoft has violated federal law. Capice?
>Getting MS to admit it would be another story, though.
Thus, the court evidence which convicted them sans confession, and the
remedy formulated sans admission of guilt.
>MS's whole pricing structure is predicated on Windows
>being very popular. I think that alone shows they think
>that it is popular.
Actually, that alone shows they have broken the law, and it is merely a
monopoly, if you are knowledgable of anti-trust law. Ironic you would
point it out; perhaps you're actually an anti-MS troll, who poses as a
sock puppet for kicks?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:41 GMT
Said "JS PL" <hi everybody!> in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 7 May
[...]
>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".
It certainly could, depending on which licenses were available to or
chosen by which vendors at which prices.
>That's LICENCES not VENDORS idiot.
You've gotta deal with both, and the predatory pricing, nimrod.
>During Microsoft's 1994 fiscal year - the final year in which it offered per
>processor licenses -
Until 1996, when they did so again. They were not blanket contracts for
every system sold by the OEM; they only covered a single product line.
And all the major vendors had one for every single product line.
>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.
According to who?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: To Aaron
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:42 GMT
Said Matthew Gardiner in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 08 May 2001
[...]
>Sorry, I probably didn't make my self clear, I meant the Lamb industry
>(which is part of the Meat Industry) could fund advertising to encourage
>people to eat US Lamb. In New Zealand we have the Meat Board which is
>run by a farmers around New Zealand, ranging from Lamb to beef, the
>boards responsibility, in conjunction with TradeNZ is to open new
>markets overseas and encourage consumers to eat "NZ Meat". The dairy
>board is another example, farmers sell milk to the Dairyboard (which
>each farmer has a share in), and they recieve money back from their
>input into the collective as well as recieving the benefits of economies
>of scale.
So that New Zealand sheep farmers can sell Lamb at a higher price? Yea,
I know trade organizations of farmers generally fund advertising
campaigns. I got some bones with that to begin with, but I'm not going
to open that can of worms any more than the one on tariffs or the one on
subsidies, just because some Kiwi shepherds want to sell more livestock
in the US. Sorry. No offense.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:43 GMT
Said Ayende Rahien in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 7 May 2001 12:10:27
[...]
>> But all will allow their users to intercommunicate with one another and
>> exchange information.
>
>I don't think that this is the reason.
>If Macs were as prelevent as PCs, then the same would've been true for Macs.
But that is the point, and is why that is the reason. Macs aren't PCs.
So "if they were as prevalent as PCs" doesn't matter; that won't make
them the same as PCs. The difference is the open architecture of the PC
versus the proprietary architecture of the Mac. I know hardware doesn't
really have all that much to do with it, but it is the root of the
matter.
>But that isn't what I asked, popularity aside, why did daniel thinks that
>Windows is better than a Mac as a desktop platform?
Because Daniel is a wintroll.
>Can you answer the question, not as daniel, obviously, but still.
Let me ask you a question, Ayende. If, just pretend, Microsoft were to
port Windows to the Mac, would that make the Mac a PC, and Apple no
different then Dell or Gateway? Why or why not?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:44 GMT
Said Ayende Rahien in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 7 May 2001 12:11:01
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Daniel Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 06 May 2001
>> >"Roy Culley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> [...]
>> >I'm sorry that the existance of some who appreciates
>> >Windows pisses you off.
>>
>> You are happy your trolling is frustrating him, because you are an
>> immature child. The rest of your position and statements are just
>> posturing.
>
>
>The attempt to silence a man is the greatest honor you can bestow on him.
>It means that you recognize his superiority to yourself.
> --Joseph Sobran
Oh, Puh-Leeze! Next you'll be claiming that Chad Myers and Aaron Kulkis
are the leaders of the free world.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:45 GMT
Said Daniel Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 07 May 2001
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> You are happy your trolling is frustrating him, because you are an
>> immature child. The rest of your position and statements are just
>> posturing.
>
>... And loving it! :D
I know, I know. I just wish others could enjoy it as much as you do,
you know?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:46 GMT
Said Steve Sheldon in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 6 May 2001 18:27:28
>"Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Daniel Johnson wrote:
>> >
>> > Stac may have a case; I've heard conflicting reports.
>> >
>>
>> Stac won its lawsuit.
>
>My understanding is Microsoft countersued, and they settled out of court.
It sounds too much like a sequence the way you say it, and that is
incorrect.
Stac sued. Yes, MS countersued; they even one on one charge.
Nevertheless, in "the main suite", Microsoft lost, very badly. Stac
subsequently settled for a lesser settlement which involved 'partnering'
with MS. I think it's appropriate to presume they thought they were
saving their company (obviously their market position was precarious),
and then MS stabbed them in the back, again. They disappeared soon
thereafter, IIRC.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:47 GMT
Said Rick in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 06 May 2001 21:08:26 -0400;
>Steve Sheldon wrote:
>>
>> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Daniel Johnson wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Stac may have a case; I've heard conflicting reports.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Stac won its lawsuit.
>>
>> My understanding is Microsoft countersued, and they settled out of court.
>
>Your understanding is incorrect. The jury found Microsoft guilty of
>using Stacs compression technology. and awarde somethng like $120
>million to Stac. But, Stac reversed engineered DOS to find out how
>Microsoft was loding the compression routines, so they could to the same
>thing. The jury, not understanding that reverse engineering was an
>accepted technique, awarded Microsfot something like #13 million
>dollars.
Good point. I knew MS had won on one of their counter-claims, but I had
forgotten the details.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:48 GMT
Said Ayende Rahien in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 6 May 2001 23:46:44
>"Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:FNfJ6.7105$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
>
>> > Why? Is that because you're entirely ignorant of a century of
>> > precedent, perhaps?
>>
>> The Sherman Act leaves crucial terms undefined, and
>> the legal precendent seems to say that this means things like
>> 'markets' are whatever the prosecution wants them to be.
>>
>> That is why it invites abuse.
>
>You are making *sense*, in an advocary group, I'm pretty sure that this is
>against the rules.
No, he's not. It's insipid rhetoric, just as you'd expect. "Markets"
are whatever consumers want them to be, as determined by judges, not
prosecutors.
>I agree, especially when you are talking about the defination of a markets.
The Sherman Act doesn't leave the term market "undefined". It simply
isn't something that can be defined by law. That's why we call it a
"free market system". You're talking gibberish, see?
>> > You're begging the question, by presuming that the reason
>> > for MS's market share is the quality of their product; a baseless
>> > assumption given the circumstances of an anti-trust examination.
>>
>> I'm pointing out that their some of their products are
>> in fact really very good.
>>
>> That doesn't mean they succeeded because of this, but
>> it opens up the possibility, don't you think?
>
>I think that MS is going the wrong way with their products, especially the
>enterprise line.
OH, What a JOKE it is!!
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:49 GMT
Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 06 May 2001
>No. It would involve my giving my time away for free so that some
>corporation could reap the benefits of my work.
Corporations can't "reap" GPL very well, actually.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:50 GMT
Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 06 May 2001
>On Sun, 06 May 2001 20:43:59 GMT, Pete Goodwin
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>You think those distros are making huge profits? Yet some are collapsing.
>
>I think SOME people involved with them are/have made fortunes off of
>Linux.
>IBM will be making a fortune off of Linux as well by boosting it's
>hardware sales.
>
>Is any of this money going back to the people working hard to make and
>support Linux?
Well, yes, actually. IBM will make a fortune, which is why they're
hiring hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Linux people to work
hard making and supporting Linux. Doh!
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:51 GMT
Said GreyCloud in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 06 May 2001 21:01:21
[...]
>Because I screwed up in his eyes once. I later mentioned that I have to
>go thru care-giver hell to give help to my mother-in-law in her need.
>Apparently he hasn't had too much in the line of responsibilies yet or
>obligations to meet. But that's ok, I do admire his argumentative
>skills even if he makes an occasional mistake. I like him even more
>when he trounces and spanks a few trolls now and then. :-))
Well, I thank you for the compliments, but I have to admit that you are
giving too much credit to my memory. What was this 'screw up' that I'm
supposed to be remembering?
Perhaps I was (whoops) chastising you for developing for Windows or
something? Anyway, I don't hold grudges, sir; I mean that in general
because, as I've admitted, my memory is rather variable in temper in
such matters. Sorry for any misunderstandings.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:52 GMT
Said GreyCloud in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 06 May 2001 21:07:25
>Terry Porter wrote:
>>
>> 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!
>
>Pete was never a wintroll, he's just approaching linuxs' problems from a
>devils advocates position. In the beginning he sounded like one, but
>after a while it becomes clear.
Now you've gone and made me feel bad, because I've been spanking him a
bit lately.
You know how it goes.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:53 GMT
Said Pete Goodwin in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 06 May 2001 20:35:54
>T. Max Devlin wrote:
>
>> DirectX *sucks*.
>
>About as useless a statement as "Linux sucks". _How_ exactly does DirectX
>suck?
If I knew that, I'd have to be working for Microsoft and have a brain
the size of a planet. All I know is it sucks. The real question isn't
how it sucks, but why it sucks. If I knew that, I'd be working for Id
and driving a Ferrari.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux disgusts me
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:53 GMT
Said Pete Goodwin in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 06 May 2001 20:26:12
>T. Max Devlin wrote:
>
>> It is a trivial fix, with practically zero risk.
>
>Curious. If it is so trivial, why is not the default on various distros?
Because they are various distros. Distros are not produced for specific
hardware systems, so the distro producer does not deal with this kind of
thing. But OEMs are not distro producers; they do not currently perform
extensive configuration unless they are a premium VAR of some kind.
(And even then you would be shocked at the lack of effort made towards
producing 'clean' systems.) This is a result, you guessed it, of
Microsoft's illegal anti-competitive practices (it isn't necessarily
*Microsoft's* competitors that get screwed by this stuff, you know; it's
just 'competitors') which have allowed only OEMs with razor-thin margins
to maintain a presence in the marketplace. Sure, Linux OEMs could do
this kind of configuration, and put out the prettiest fucking systems
you've ever seen a computer buy for Christmas. But that ain't so easy
when you have to compete with Windows OEMs, you see.
The Linux OEMs can't become distro producers for similar reasons; that
would make them as direct a target for Microsoft as Sun or IBM or Apple
are.
Monopoly sucks.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:54 GMT
Said Edward Rosten in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 07 May 2001
09:28:42 +0100;
>> I had a flaked-out 24x CD ROM that would go schitzo and literally eject
>> itself while the disk was spinning at full RPMS. They'd litterally fly
>> out of the thing.
>
>That is _so_ cool!. I would definitely keep that drive :-)
LOL!
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:55 GMT
Said Chad Myers in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 07 May 2001 02:57:05
[...]
>I have a PII-400 with 256MB RAM and I can play Unreal Tournament while burning
>a CD.
Sure you do, Chad. We believe you.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:55 GMT
Said Steve Sheldon in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 6 May 2001 22:46:45
[...]
>I've been burning discs off my Windows 2000 server for quite some time.
>
>Never had a coaster due to the machine.[...]
That sounds an awful lot like you just figured out how to blame yourself
or something else for all the coasters you ended up with.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 08 May 2001 16:04:56 GMT
Said Jan Johanson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 7 May 2001 07:16:13
>It continues to amaze me that the ONLY people having these sorts of absolute
>failures under Windows are linux users.
No, they're just the ones who know enough to complain. Everybody else
just blames it on something else, not realizing it is just that Windows
sucks.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software
Date: 8 May 2001 16:08:04 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 08 May 2001 16:03:35 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said Roberto Alsina in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 7 May 2001 13:51:52
>>On Sun, 06 May 2001 20:21:46 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...]
>>>I had thought that, according to you, no software can be "derivative" of
>>>any other software, but can only contain copies of other software.
>>
>>Guess what? If I take GAWK and change 10% of it, the new thing is
>>derivative from GAWK. If you really thought I said that, you are not
>>reading carefully.
>
>I was trying to make a point. Some times, you see, you say you can
>"take X" and "change it", but the result is still just "X", not
>something new and derivative of "X". Some times, you say that it is
>"not X", though derivative. How is anybody supposed to know, precisely,
>when software that gets modified is still the same software, though
>modified, and when it is supposed to be new software, but derivative?
I don't have a clear answer to that. I'd say it depends on many many
factors. However, I don't think it makes any difference regarding
licensing of the software.
>It is this "abstraction error" (changing the term 'software' or the
>identifier 'X' from category to label, or vice versa, without noticing)
>which causes the problems we are discussing.
>>> I
>>>can't see what that has to do with "good" or "bad", and those things
>>>don't have anything to do with software's commercial value. Or so it
>>>would seem from the commercial software world which you are defending.
>>
>>Ok, if you object to the use of "good" and "bad":
>>
>>"commercial-grade software can be derived from non-commercial-grade
>>software, so copyright of non-commercial-grade software is quite
>>important"
>
>This makes the point clearer, that you are begging the question.
>Whether a product is "commercial grade" is for the consumer, not the
>producer, to absolutely determine.
Yes, so? That doesn't mean you should restrict the discussion on
software licensing to "commercial grade software" (whatever that
is supposed to mean) as you attempted.
>>>>>>But if you really need that, I produced a image archiving system for a
>>>>>>newspaper, without access to the database used by the newspaper.
>>>>>>I did have another database that implemented the same API, though.
>>>>>
>>>>>And you're still going to refuse to see why that small distinction is a
>>>>>big one, are you?
>>>>
>>>>What small distinction?
>>>
>>>The distinction between your awareness of the API, and the library's
>>>existence.
>>
>>I am also aware of the distinction between an ox and a lightbulb, but
>>I don't see where I used either in the previous post.
>
>You don't routinely mix up oxes and lightbulbs in your speech. If you
>did, you would notice it. These two differences have a great impact on
>the discussion.
I did not mix my "awareness of the API" and "the library's existence" in
my speech, whatever those two terms were supposed to mean.
>>>>> [...remainder of Roberto missing the point again deleted as
>>>>>unproductive...]
>>>>
>>>>Fine by me. Now, if you also applied that to your product!
>>>
>>>It's been very productive for me, thanks. You've helped me clarify a
>>>rather large number of arguments concerning software copyright.
>>
>>Well, you still seem pretty confused.
>
>That must be because you are confused about my explanation. I am not
>confused, nor even unsure of my argument.
What explanation?
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Subject: Re: Windows NT: lost in space?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 8 May 2001 10:33:23 -0500
On Tue, 08 May 2001 07:45:48 GMT, Tom Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
><snip>
>
>> > Yes...they are a nation of chess-players, compared to the US, which
>> > is a nation of poker-players.
>> >
>> > when it comes to this sort of algorithm development, the chess-player's
>> > mind will always be the best for the task
>> >
>> Mind you, wouldn't you play chess if you lived in Siberia, from negative
>> 50 degrees celcius during the winter to a max of 35-40 degrees celcius
>> during the summer.
>
>Explains the massive amounts of Vodka guzzled, too.
>
and when the vodka runs out, they switch to polyethelyne glycol.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
