Linux-Advocacy Digest #622, Volume #34 Sat, 19 May 01 13:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Microsoft Common Language Runtime give Windows Big Advantage ("Doug Ransom")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Daniel Johnson")
Re: Linux Mandrake Sucks!!!! (Donn Miller)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (Michael Vester)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Edward Rosten")
Re: which linux dist? (Michael Vester)
Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better) ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Who to install a .gz.tar file? ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ("Edward Rosten")
Re: which linux dist? ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Win 9x is horrid (Peter Hayes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply-To: "Doug Ransom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Doug Ransom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Microsoft Common Language Runtime give Windows Big Advantage
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 07:56:08 -0700
> >
> I agree that CORBA and COM both have kind of suck in the same way.
> CORBA can be used for secure implementations though.
>
> > >
> > > Funny you should say that. Mozilla heavily uses a COM clone they call
> > XPCOM
> > > (cross platform COM i guess), and IIRC Bonobo is also based on COM's
> > design
> > > as well.
> > >
> > > > > Does anyone know of any efforts to support the common language
runtime
> > > on
> > > > > linux? That would make the platform so much better and
development of
> > > new
> > > > > stuff much quicker.
> > > >
> > > > I did find a couple of sites that I don't think were jokes on the
> > > > subject. Mostly Linux seems to be leaning toward CORBA-SOM-DSOM.
> > Comparing CORBA to Microsoft Common Language Runtime is like comparing
> > MS-DOS to Linux.
> > CORBA isn't anywhere near as useful.
> >
> > > > Especially as IBM is putting lots of money into the arena.
> > >
Throwing money at CORBA implementation is not going to help.
Whats cool about the CLR compared to CORBA or COM:
- garbage collected, not referenced counted. Therefore faster development
times and runtimes, and a better user experience (fewer memory leaks,
smaller working set).
- better languate integration
- choice of languages, and easy to mix & match. "In addition to Microsoft,
several companies are producing compilers that generate managed code. I am
aware of compilers for APL, CAML, Cobol, Haskell, Mercury, ML, Oberon, Oz,
Pascal, Perl, Python, Scheme, and Smalltalk. In fact, Rational is planning
to create a Java-language compiler that targets the .NET common language
runtime.". You don't have to program in C#, Java, or another objective-c
ripoff if you don't want.
- cross platform binaries. The CLR typically performs the back end compile
on install or program load as desired, and the correct optimizer can be
chosen then (i.e. pentium 2 vs 3 instructions).
Here is an article.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/dotnet/cpguide/cpconinsidenetframework.htm
Note the CLR specification, while designed by Microsoft, is being
standardized by ECMA. I don't think Microsoft owns it. They currently own
some of best development tools for it.
It would be really cool to get the runtime supported on linux. Even if
existing C programs were compiled to this spec it would improve
interoperability and performance. Apps like shells, word processors, etc.
would only need be compiled once.
If linux could do this, then MS would have a lot less advantage or linux,
and linux users would get a richer and simpler experience.
------------------------------
From: "Daniel Johnson" <[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: Sat, 19 May 2001 15:42:00 GMT
"Quantum Leaper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:esmN6.8944$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > I would rather have C64 then a IBM PC (which I have both currently).
> > > A simple test was to program a print loop in BASIC and the C64 was
> > > 3/4 the speed of the PC, even thought the CPU was less then 1/4 clock
> > > speed.
> >
> > I don't quite get it. The C64 was slower; why prefer it?
> >
> Price and everyone one I knew had a C64.
It held on for a while on its price, but in the long
run PCs came down.
> > Sure, maybe it had a batter BASIC implementation,
> > but not enough better to overcome its other problems,
> > like the low clock speeds.
>
> Whats interesting is MS did both BASICs.
Yes. MS may not have had the hang of
segment, maybe.
[snip]
> > Mostly there was assembly, though.
>
> The most common BASIC compiler used P-code (smaller and slower) and M-code
> (larger and alot faster), any hand coded Assembly code would fly past a
> BASIC compiled program.
Yes. A good optimizing compiler was out
of the quesiton- it was too big for those little
computers, and anyway optimizing 6502
machine code is really hard.
[snip]
> > Yes, I know. Nostalgia is fun, but that doesn't
> > mean other technologies aren't better.
> >
> True, but price was alot better than a PC. I am currently using a P2
400,
> if I didn't know that were betters systems, I would still be using the
C128
> or C64.
I think you'll find that today you could not
mass produse Commodore 64 computers
cheap enough to win on price.
There was a time when it was cheaper, but
that didn't last.
[snip]
> > Sorta kinda.
> >
> > The C64 was cheap to produce, and Commodore
> > took advantage of that. But it didn't dominate
> > the home market the way PCs dominated
> > the business market. The Commodore 64
> > was slowly squeezed out as prices came
> > down on other computers.
> >
> Nobody could dominate like the PCs did in the business market place,
simply
> because they weren't IBM but the C64 was the closest for Home market.
That's not a reason. They couldn't dominate because
they had a great deal of competation that was
comparable in quality and price, and they
didn't have time to sort it out before the PC took
over.
> Over
> 10 million C64s and 128s and a few dozon C65s prototypes over the years.
Commodore 65? Never heard of that one.
> > Commodore knew that the C64 technology
> > had no future. That is why they invested
> > in the Amiga, which kept them going
> > until the early ninties.
> >
> Really, what about the C65? The real problem was Commodore knew the C64
> family of computers weren't going to go on forever. The Amiga gave them a
> way out and a way to shaft Atari.
Did this C65 get out of prototype?
The C128 was like the Apple III; a fail attempt to
nurse a geriatric technology on.
The Amiga was like the Macintosh; an attempt
to leapfrog the PC and produce something that
was actually better, not just cheaper.
As far as I know Commodore never found
an equivalent to the Apple IIgs, an succeful
way to nurse the geriatric technology on
a big longer.
> > But Commodores initially strong position
> > in the home market was eroding from '86 on,
> > at the least.
> >
> It still sold over 1/2 million computers up to 88 or 89, then it tanked.
> 85 was the strongest year with over 1.4 million units sold.
Yeah. 1985 was the year with the big price war.
Blood in the streets, that one. Commodore won,
if you can call that sort of thing winning. It was
the apex for the '64, but cheap only goes so far.
PC prices in 1985 were so high that there was
room for something cheaper. But as PC prices
came down, that market segment vanished.
[snip]
> > Sure it was. Commodore got behind its Amiga
> > product and managed to get some users and
> > some developers. It wasn't a stunning success,
> > but comparing it to the Atari story makes
> > it look like one.
> >
> Commodore was hoping for another C64 for the price was too high on the
> Amiga.
Well, yeah. To be another C64 they needed to be
better *and* cheaper, or else a lot cheaper.
The C64 wasn't just cheaper than most of its
8-bit competitors; it was in many ways a better
home computer too. That was very hard to beat.
[snip]
> > > A good compiler would do wonders when programming in assembly on the
> > > C64.
> >
> > Good compilers were virtually unknown then.
>
> I didn't mean for the code, but for the programmer. I have tried just
> about EVER compiler for the C64. I liked Buddy 64 for Assembly with
> Metabasic filling in the holes.
I don't understand. A "compiler for the programmer"? You
compile programmers? Doesn't that hurt? :/
> > There was no way one could run on the
> > C64 itself (or any other 8 bit); instead you
> > could get a minicomputer and then write your
> > own cross-compiler.
> >
> If you wanted to program some that changed the hardware defaults, I would
> tend to agree.
No, it was just that a good optimizer was more than
those little things could handle.
> If you left the memory map alone, it wasn't hard to
> program on the C64.
Compared to modern tools?
I mean, yes, compared to a TI-44/9a the C64
simply rocked. It even compared favorably
to early Apple II models, and was cheaper
to boot.
But next to an IBM PC? Or worst yet, a
late-eighties Macintosh?
The C64 had no way to grow. It got futher
and further behind.
> I think my biggest program was 30K or so, in Assembly,
> though the program sucked. Most of my programs were about 10K and filled
a
> 1541 disk with source code. Also having JiffyDos helped alot when I
> programmed, one of the best disk speed ups there was...
Yeah, the C64 always had a problem with disk
speed.
> > But generating good, fast, small code for
> > the 6502 is a very hard problem, even
> > with an early-eighties mini to play with. It
> > was not a real friendly instruction set for
> > compilers, either, as it happens.
> >
> I never had problems creating good fast, and small code though it may take
> me a couple of rewrites to get it small. I remember a small section of
> code, I wrote, it was over 2K long, in the end it was 62 bytes long and
> did the same thing.
Lots of programmers could do it by *hand*;
if you could have written a program to do it
that would run on an 8-bit PC, you would
have revolutionized the industry.
[snip]
> > And there were even grosser hacks. Ever
> > heard of "Sweet-16"?
> >
> I don't remember it off hand, one of the best was FLI, it interlaced 2
> pictures to make it appear to have 192 colors. You had to have code for a
> PAL or NTSC, since the timing was different on them.
It was an Apple II thing. A little simple bytecode interpreter
that supported a 16-bit instruction set.
It was slower than raw assembly, but it was quite a bit
smaller too. And on those computers smaller could be
very important.
[snip]
> > Yeah. Some of those systems didn't have what we'd
> > call an API. You could call into bits of the builtin
> > BASIC from assembly though, sometimes.
> >
> > It got better as time went on, though.
>
> Every thing tends to better as time goes on....
Well, yeah. But there were limits, as long
as you had a 6502 or Z80 in there.
By the end of the eigties, some of those old
8-bits had grown actual APIs. I find that a bit
remarkable, actually.
> > > 8 bit registers were almost never used in the 6502, it was
> > > mainly memory based, with 16 bits.
> >
> > Erm. Mainly?
>
> I almost never used the accumulator, unless it was to add or subtract
> something. I was comparing it to the 8085, with was register based,
which
> you had to everything in the registers.
The 6502 had *no* two-address instructions
at all. You could do things like INC and DEC
directly to memory, but that's pretty much
it.
Sure, if you wanted to copy memory around
you could do it using X and Y instead
of A, but what's the advantage in that?
[snip]
> True there weren't 16 aritemetic, but MOS wanted a simple and fast 8 bit
> CPU, which if they had added that stuff, it would have made it slower.
> Just compare the Z80 and 6502, the Z80 had to run 2X clock speed just to
> match the 6502.
Yes, the 6502 was remarkably fast considering the limits
it had. But more improtantly, keeping it simple made
it *cheap*.
> BTW I may be alittle rusty on programming on the C64 but I do know quite
> abit about the C64/C128, since I used one up until 1995 and was Editor of
my
> local Club newletter for 2 years.
I'm sure you do. I was more of an Apple II fellow myself.
[snip]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 11:47:18 -0400
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Mandrake Sucks!!!!
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> remember to add [EMAIL PROTECTED] to the list as well.
Actually, I'm not so sure about Ubercat. Steve lives in NY on Long
Island, and ubercat's posting IP returns:
Name: va-charlottesville3a-908.chr.adelphia.net
Address: 24.51.147.140
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 18:55:00 +0200
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9e5v0u$idd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Yes, they do, or they are not code reviews.
> >
> > Wow, suddenly, reviewing code isn't a code review simply because it
> doesn't
> > review every line in a program. Do you have any idea how long it would
> take
> > to review 35 million lines of code?
>
> Had they got it right the first time, they wouldn't need to review 35
> Million lines of code.
Nice rethorics, now show me the > 15KLOC that "they got it right the first
time".
Hell, wu-ftpd is 8KLOC, and they *still* didn't got all the bugs out.
> Also, they would have programmed more efficiently,
> and it wouldn't have bloated to 35 Million lines of code vs. the 6 or so
> million Solaris 8 04/01 has.
What does Solaris comes with? Please refer to only those 6 - 8 MLOC that you
talked about.
(BTW, can't they count? 6 to 8 is pretty big gap)
------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 02:34:51 -0700
<snip>
> >
>
> It seems to me when anything gets deregulated it sends a signal to that
> particular industry to start using any tactics necessary to jack up the
> prices. The population didn't increase that much in one year to cause
> these power shortages. Most of the power industry says that they have
> their plant down due to maintenance. They used to do these in a short
> period of time and made for other arrangements for alternative
> generation. Now they just keep them offline to jack up the price. Just
> like the 73 oil shortage.
>
> I use wood heat and don't need an alarm clock anymore. So I'm not in a
> bind if they do shut down the power for a while.
>
That's right, you mentioned before that you have retired. Did you work in
IT most of your life? My next contract will not require an alarm clock. I
will be building a giant pipe erosion tracking system for one of northern
Alberta' s oil sand facilities. A time and material contract (my favorite
kind). The plant site is a bit crowded with over 7,000 construction
workers so I will be doing most of the work from home. IT does not matter
what time I start or finish. Just a month or so of meetings with the
engineering staff, i need an alarm clock for that. If the rolling
blackouts interfere with my work, I will install that generator.
> > My father was so annoyed with our power situation, he installed a 6.5
> > kilowatt gasoline generator and wired it into his house. If we get some
> > long blackouts, I am going to get a generator too.
> >
> > --
> > Michael Vester
> > A credible Linux advocate
> >
> > "The avalanche has started, it is
> > too late for the pebbles to vote"
> > Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
>
> --
> V
--
Michael Vester
A credible Linux advocate
"The avalanche has started, it is
too late for the pebbles to vote"
Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[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: Sat, 19 May 2001 18:10:20 +0100
> This is what the CDC used to say before political pressure was brought
chukachukachuka... here come the black helicopters...
> to bear. Tell me, why do you think vaginal transmission is common in the
> rest of the world but not in Europe or the USA?
Condoms+low icidence.
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: which linux dist?
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 02:36:46 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Sat, 19 May 2001 12:14:15 +0100, root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >I am currently using Slackware as I find it extremely fast and powerful.
> >
> >But now that I have a bit of money :) I don't know if to buy Red Hat
> >Deluxe edition or Mandrake 8.0
> >
> >I tried Mandrake 8.0 and it is brilliant as everything works out immediately
> >but I found it a bit too slow and painful to get rid of all the services i
> >did not really need.
> >
> >Which distribution would you recommend?
>
> SuSE 7.1, or whatever the latest version is.
>
> flatfish
Has Flatfish (capitalized because it is used as a proper noun) become a
Linux advocate?
--
Michael Vester
A credible Linux advocate
"The avalanche has started, it is
too late for the pebbles to vote"
Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better)
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 19:22:17 +0200
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Jan Johanson wrote:
> > >
> > > AFAIK, no (except maybe Perl)
> > > There is a regex COM object, RegExp I think, that is accessible to
just
> > > about anytihng in Windows, inclusing WSH lanaguages.
> >
> > Actually - yes it does:
> >
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/dotnet/cpguide/cpconintroductiontoregulare
> > xpressions.htm
>
> What a great link! Nice marketing, no meat.
Click the "Show TOC"
And then you get to the meat.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?URL=/library/dotnet/cpguide/cp
conintroductiontoregularexpressions.htm
a.. Manipulating Strings
a.. .NET Framework Regular Expressions
a.. Introduction to Regular Expressions
b.. Regular Expressions as a Language
a.. Using The Regular Expression Classes
b.. Using Backreferences
c.. Regular Expression Solutions to Common Requirements
c.. Regular Expressions Language Elements
d.. Details of Regular Expression Behavior
e.. Regular Expression Examples
Here is the relevent section.
You'll probably be interested in this:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/dotnet/cpguide/cpconusingregularexpression
classes.htm
begin 666 bo.gif
M1TE&.#EA#P`/`+/_``!FS "<____`/___\[.SLS,S)R<G ```/___P``````
M`````````````````````"P`````#P`/```$3G ,(ZNUAM![3Q@:9FR#)VWC
M69E@*@G&<92?=!"#<!: 7)>XEX'G6^%T$R(+6($I?[?<KN>I14\$(NT3'66U
2M)*W0 :7`.BT>K:2N=^'" `[
`
end
begin 666 dc.gif
M1TE&.#EA$ `0`*(``/___V:9S `S9C-FF9G,_\S__P```````"'Y! ``````
M+ `````0`! ```-%"+K<.S!&!T:X.$ W2"D`6%A#TSE"*C!=D67K0S@%$<1*
F^V)X-2^?VHWU"WT(MIYN-Y0I@L@DT<54>J[1BY+)8ZB^8$4"`#L`
`
end
begin 666 bs.gif
M1TE&.#EA$ `/`+/_```SS)S._Z7.]YR]U@"<_V;,_____\[.SIR<G ```,#
MP ```````````````````"'Y! $```H`+ `````0``\`0 114,FI4J(S@0U.
M(1]!6$,E?"@HCIBD`8EQ!%9K%3A^4:^GAJM=A=.Q( ZR&L8B;&42.N?MEVMJ
=?"G@[M5)K40U;A><0!A*&4Y99A H>;#!6Q(!`#L`
`
end
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Who to install a .gz.tar file?
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 18:26:34 +0100
> Furthermore, Mandrake7.2 will install and find your CD burner along with
> mkisofsand all the things you need. Why not get that from a magazine
> cover CD and use Mandrake instead?
RH7.1 should have done it too.
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 18:34:52 +0100
>> Hardly. I beleive ASCI White still holds that record - 12.3 teraflops
>> for the first version released a year ago. The goal is 100 teraflops
>> by
>> 2004.
>>
>> http://www.llnl.gov/asci/platforms/white/
>
> Interesting! And what OS is that running? Linux?
>
> AIX, IBM's proprietary implementation of UNIX.
You are such a wanker. You love snipping so as to quote people out of
context.
Idiot.
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 18:36:37 +0100
> I think the SETI program is a farce! No offense to you, but I often
> wonder what good does it do them? Radio waves travel a little slower
> than the speed of light.
Radio waves travel *exactly* at the speed of light, since they're the
same stuff.
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: which linux dist?
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 19:07:26 +0100
> I am currently using Slackware as I find it extremely fast and powerful.
>
> But now that I have a bit of money :) I don't know if to buy Red Hat
> Deluxe edition or Mandrake 8.0
>
> I tried Mandrake 8.0 and it is brilliant as everything works out
> immediately but I found it a bit too slow and painful to get rid of all
> the services i did not really need.
>
> Which distribution would you recommend?
By the sounds of it, you'd probably be better off with slackware.
-Ed
> Nick
> (any reply here or to [EMAIL PROTECTED])
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win 9x is horrid
Date: Sat, 19 May 2001 18:01:53 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 19 May 2001 03:48:44 -0500, "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> "Peter Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > I have to disagree with you there. This will stop the casual pirate,
> > > e.g. the person who has Win/Office at work and 'borrows' it to take it
> > > home for their own use. They won't want to go hunting out warez sites
> > > for a >100MB download.
> >
> > Every big city has its "Sunday Market" where for £15-20 you can get
> > virtually any mainstream software for the Wintel platform on CD, plus,of
> > course, Win98-2000. I suppose if they really want Windows-XP and/or
> > Offfice-XP they'll hunt out these stalls.
>
> Sorry, I can tell you for a fact that no such "sunday market" exists in my
> area, and it's a metropolitan area of more than 2 million people and one of
> the top advertising markets.
Must be a British phenomenon then.
Ayr has its Sunday Market, where it's reported this week that someone's
been convicted for selling counterfeit PC and Playstation games - for the
second time.
That's in a town of around 30-40,000. Glasgow has 750,000 and the "Barras"
is notorious for counterfeit and pirate CDs. It's been repeatedly raided.
Same in most other cities.
Peter
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
