Linux-Advocacy Digest #729, Volume #34 Wed, 23 May 01 13:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Ian Davey)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Karel Jansens)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Karel Jansens)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (Karel Jansens)
Re: Linux Mandrake Sucks!!!! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Single sign-on authentication for Novell, Windows and Linux? ("Fabio Mazzocchi")
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (chrisv)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Robert W Lawrence)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (chrisv)
Re: Warning to new users of Windows XP ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (Dave Martel)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (Donn Miller)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (chrisv)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (Donn Miller)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! ("Ayende
Rahien")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (chrisv)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Chronos Tachyon)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (chrisv)
Re: What is the licence aggreement for REDHAD professional server? (Richard
Thrippleton)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 15:56:44 GMT
In article <SgQO6.2199$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Rich Soyack"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >How about hatred of homosexuals?
>>
>> That's a perfect example of why homophobe is used to describe someone who
>> hates homosexuals. There's no other word for it.
>
>What's wrong with that phrase?
It's not concise enough.
>>
>> > Homophobe is not common usage in the USA.
>>
>> I'm not sure I believe that,
>
>As I don't believe that homophobe is in common usage in the UK.
Well it is, you can bury your head in the sand all you want. You'll even find
it used in the mainstream media and news organisations, here you go:
http://newssearch.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/KSEnglish.
exe?
method=mainQuery&ATNMYFIELD_Headline=&db0=English&xoptions=sortboth&numresults
=1000&BATCHHITS=25&querythreshold=50&query=homophobic
In the UK you can't get much more mainstream than the BBC.
>> I've certainly seen plenty of Americans use it.
>> Though perhaps it's nervousness about using the "H" word amongst certain
>> circles, unless ranting about those who are "goin' to heeelll".
>
>Those who use the word "homophobe" here over use it. It is coming to mean,
>the act of disagreeing with a political stand taken by homosexuals.
Not at all, it's closer to a term like racist. And homophobes are just as
likely as racists to physically assault the targets of their hatred,
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 12:21:08 +0000
T. Max Devlin wrote:
> Said Karel Jansens in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 21 May 2001
>>T. Max Devlin wrote:
> [...]
>>> Those were called "tachyons", and as a part of serious physics theory,
>>> they disappeared at least a dozen years ago.
>>
>>Oh, I don't know. There is still nothing in general relativity which
>>precludes the existence of tachyons. The problem is that they are on the
>>other side of the c-barrier, meaning that is will be very hard to learn
>>anything about them other than the theoretical possibility that they
>>exist.
>
> I'm afraid you don't seem to understand the difference between a label
> used for a mathematical construct in physics, and the mathematical
> construct itself. Not being precluded is not sufficient; yes, we know
> for a fact that tachyons don't exist. There is no theoretical
> possibility that "c is a barrier", or that anything is "on the other
> side", or that tachyons 'exist'. None. Get it?
>
The fact that c is the absolute velocity only means that, and nothing more.
That we do not know what is on the other side does not mean that there is
no other side.
>>If anybody else is confused by this, I would like to take this opportunity
>>to endorse Michio Kaku's book "Hyperspace. A Scientific Odyssey Through
>>Parallel Universes, Time Warps, and The Tenth Dimension". Since I've read
>>it, the tenth dimension no longer holds any secrets to me, and I play
>>hyperguitar for fun <G>.
>
> More seriously (and much more currently and scientifically accurately),
> anyone interested should read "The Elegant Universe" by Brian Greene.
> Once you've read it, you won't use silly nonsense words like
> "hyperspace". ;-)
>
Please read the book before making silly comments like that.
>>The April issue of Popular Science has an interesting article on Weird
>>Space Drives. Apparently NASA has committed itself (sort of, as usual) to
>>undertaking an interstellar mission within a 25 to 50 year timeframe.
>>These guys give a completely new meaning to the term "optimism".
>
> You have a completely incorrect understanding of what "undertaking"
> means. They've been planning interstellar missions "within a 25 to 50
> year time frame" for longer than they have been NASA! ;-)
>
Read the article.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
===============================================================
Has anybody ever wondered why Microsoft launched Windows 95
with a song that contains the line: "You make a grown man cry"?
Oh, wait...
===============================================================
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 12:55:42 +0000
T. Max Devlin wrote:
> Said David Brown in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 22 May 2001 12:14:44
> [...]
>>I think the two of you have been reading way above your heads.
>
> We think you are an insulting and pathetic cretin.
>
>>You've heard
>>of wave-particle duality, and have grasped some of the ideas without
>>understanding the basics. Light does not swap between being particles
>>(i.e., photons) and waves as though these were two different states. It
>>is both at once.[...]
>
> This makes no logical sense at all. The only logical position would be
> that it is neither. Both particle and wave are most obviously
> incomplete descriptions of whatever this stuff is, whether you call it
> 'light', 'electromagnetic radiation', or 'radio waves'.
>
There is experimental proof of the particle/wave duality. ISTR an
experiment where individual electrons were fired through an interference
grid (two vertical slits - if you shine a light (or electron) beam through
them, you get an interference pattern on the other side). If electrons were
only particles, the firing of individual electrons would only have resulted
in a random scatter pattern on the other side of the grid; yet, right from
the start a clear interference pattern was forming, as if the electrons
knew where they had to go. This experiment can be explained by the
particle/wave duality. Do you have a better explanation?
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
===============================================================
Has anybody ever wondered why Microsoft launched Windows 95
with a song that contains the line: "You make a grown man cry"?
Oh, wait...
===============================================================
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 13:12:40 +0000
Chad Myers wrote:
>
>> Wouldn't you classify academic dissertations of 200 pages as serious word
>> processing? C't did a test on word processors beginning this year and
>> Word 2000 (SP1) consistently barfed on that.
>
> C't is a biased MS-bashing rag just like The Register. I have yet to
> see either posted a favorable article of Microsoft.
Do you read German or Dutch?
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
===============================================================
Has anybody ever wondered why Microsoft launched Windows 95
with a song that contains the line: "You make a grown man cry"?
Oh, wait...
===============================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux Mandrake Sucks!!!!
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:09:19 GMT
On Wed, 23 May 2001 02:45:35 GMT, "Richard J. Donovan"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Actually, it is called the "flatfish." Unless it's like Elvis, in which
>case it's "The Flatfish." Or perhaps it's like Elvis in the U.K.,
>whence "The Flatfish". But then, actually, one would call it `The
>Flatfish'.
And all this time I though Elvis was dead?
>Study orthography sometime [blah, blah, blah].
Errrr...... no.
Not my bag :)
>P.S. Mandrake doesn't suck. It just isn't as good as SuSE.
Agreed.
>P.P.S. Time for The Glenlivet.
Now ya' talking!!!!
flatfish++++
"Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
From: "Fabio Mazzocchi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.netware.connectivity,comp.os.netware.security
Subject: Re: Single sign-on authentication for Novell, Windows and Linux?
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 18:20:06 +0200
Hi all,
I know that for the moment Border Manager is not programmable.
The new version of Border Manager should be completely programmable
by a NMAS method, that is very easy to implement, and also cross-platform.
Has anyone information about the new release of NMAS.
Fabio Mazzocchi
"Stan McCann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Dean Thompson wrote:
> >
> > Hi!,
> >
> > You can link passwords on Linux and NT/Win2K systems together with the
help of
> > PAM SMB modules. There are also some PAM modules in existence for
validating
> > logins into Linux through various versions of Netware but normally the
Netware
> > server has to be operating in a bindery mode. I am not sure of too many
> > authentication modules which actually work with a NDS tree directly.
> >
>
> BorderManager Authentication might be able to do the job. I don't know
> for sure but it is something you can look into. I use it here to
> authenticate dial up users dialing into our Cisco router.
>
> --
> Stan McCann
> Computer Services Manager
> New Mexico State University at Alamogordo
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 18:59:19 +0200
"Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9efgpj$239$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9efc3a$g87$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:9ef90p$iti$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > How many *original* ideas has Microsoft given to the computer world?
> >
> > MTS, Application Center.
> >
> > It would be easier if you defined original.
> >
> original = Something that has not been thought of before hand.
In this case, nothing that any company did was ever original, somebody else
thought about it before-hand.
The Rite (sp?) brothers weren't original, because other people thought about
flying before. Some even flew.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 19:12:01 +0200
"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Show me *one* good, free image viewer that is as capable as any of the
> > > standard Linux viewers. *That* is why I dislike Windows; every
> > > niggling little thing costs $20 (shareware) to $500 in order to fill
> > > in the same thing Linux does for free.
> >
> > InfraView.
>
> Cool; now why isn't it at download.com?
My mistake, it's IrfanView
http://download.cnet.com/downloads/0-10077-100-5786527.html?tag=st.dl.10012.
new.10077-100-5786527
> > Recent Windows versions has Image Viewer, too.
>
> Not Windows 2000.
I'm pretty sure it has it. Somebody can confirm it? I don't have a 2K handy
at the moment.
> > > Sure, the Windows software may have a few more features, but more
> > > often than not the Linux equivalents have other features not present
> > > in the Windows versions (is there an equal to cdparanoia for Windows
> > > yet?? It's only been 4 years now).
> >
> > CDEX.
>
> Also cool; but it still doesn't do acoustic sampling. It's nice to
> see GPL software out there for Windows.
There is *plenty* of GPL software to Windows.
Frex, I'm not aware of a single non GPLed C# IDE except MS' one.
SourceForge list nearly 600 programs for Windows that are GPLed.(and close
to 5000 for Linux that are GPLed :-) )
If you include other licenses, though, then it's 3.5K vs 6K.
There is just so much more software for Windows not under GPL that the
amount that is GPL is more or less hidden.
Not to mention that what most Windows users care with the GPL is that it's a
freeware.
> > > Some software packages simply
> > > aren't available for Linux in any form (Quark, Access) -- but that's
> > > only important if you *require* those packages.
> >
> > Indeed.
> > What you should've mentioned is CD-Burner, which (at least to my
knowledge)
> > you can't get for free for windows.
>
> Yes, but the CDROM drive you bought comes "bundled" with the Windows
> software anyway.
Yes, but mine, at least, sucks.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:31:35 GMT
On Wed, 23 May 2001 10:23:26 +0200, "David Brown"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Does XP allow you to setup a MS "Intellimouse" during installation? The
>last windows installation I did (Win98SE) didn't know of their existance -
>you needed an extra driver download or disk to set up an MS mouse ! Linux
>Mandrake, on the other hand, has supported it for many years.
Hmmm Win98se finds my Logitech wheel mouse just fine (model M Ba-47).
The only thing missing is all of the bells and whistles, some of which
are nice like click the wheel and you scroll pages with extreme fine
precision and smoothness up and down or left and right by moving the
mouse.
Mandrake half uses the same wheel mouse and in fact under 7.2 I had to
select MS Intellimouse to make it work. Selecting Logitech would leave
me mouseless every time.
flatfish++++
"Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
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: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:31:40 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Spot the gun-phobe.
Spot the basement-dwelling, Win98 using, outed idiot.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:32:22 GMT
On Wed, 23 May 2001 16:53:38 +0200, "David Brown"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>drivers. Not impressive. I was just curious if XP has begun to catch up on
>Mandrake regarding its bundled drivers and hardware detection and setup.
Mandrake half uses the mouse.
>
flatfish++++
"Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
From: Robert W Lawrence <[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
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:33:43 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina) wrote:
<> assume you say this from a religious perspective. In that case,
<>if you are a literalist, his behaviour doesn't matter all that
<>much, since already the desire is a sin.
I am not saying it from a religious standpoint at all. I was stating a fact.
Robert W Lawrence
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
1Peter 5:7
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:36:09 GMT
On Wed, 23 May 2001 03:33:55 GMT, T. Max Devlin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It seems to be working supremely well, actually. Whatever gave you the
>impression I care about "looking good"? That's a rather stupid and
Your doing a great job of not doing it.
Looking good that is.
>ignorant suggestion, flatheadfishbrain. You've been posting here long
>enough to know that; we can tell that is true, because, like so many
>trolls with red, stinging butt-cheeks before you, you've been unable to
>resist the urge to try to annoy me with silly names.
I didn't start the name calling, you did T-Bone.
I will cease and desist if you will.
flatfish++++
"Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
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: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:38:15 GMT
The Danimal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Biologists largely abandoned the "good of the species"
>notion somewhere around the middle of the last century, replacing
>it with the notion of diverse individuals within a species competing
>for resources and reproductive opportunities, leading to a distribution
>of winners and losers that over the long term drives evolutionary
>change.
Of course, the "winners" now days are often people who drop out of
school to become unwed mothers (and the men they love). More kids for
them=more money, while people who work for a living often limit the
number of children they have, due to the financial burden.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Warning to new users of Windows XP
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:39:50 GMT
On Wed, 23 May 2001 05:56:33 +0200, "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Your prediction is wrong, it's already flooding the warez groups.
That's the beta, I said the gold copy. You can legally buy the beta
(ain't that a trip!) for $10.00 or so.
flatfish++++
"Why do they call it a flatfish?"
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 10:28:01 -0600
On Wed, 23 May 2001 13:46:46 GMT, "Chad Myers"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > >
>> > > > Not to mention new innovation. Everything that was out there for
>> > > > Linux was either a rehashed 30-year old app with a new GUI
>> > > > front end, or a cheap knock-off of a current Microsoft app.
>> > >
>> > > I seem to remeber smug Apple users saying the same thing about a
>> > > certain other OS a few years ago... look what has happened since.
>> >
>> > That was their (rather misguided and uneducated) opinion. Win95
>> > was hardly a MacOS knock-off. There were many new features that
>> > Apple wouldn't come to know for another 5 years (until MacOS X).
>>
>> I suspect we'll be saying that about *your* comments eventually.
>
>Well, it's simple fact. The Macvocates have never been known for
>sound thought. They are quite wrong about the Win95 looking like the
>Mac. About the only thing similar to the Mac in Win95 is the
>recycle bin, but similar technologies had existing on the PC for
>quite some time, it just wasn't built into the OS.
And on Unix for quite a while before that. Windows 95's gray 3D look
was lifted from Motif, and the "start" button that I often hear of as
MS's only innovation of the time, was actually just an MS
implementation of the program launchers that third parties had already
released for Windows 3.x.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 12:41:53 -0400
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Ayende Rahien wrote:
> There is *plenty* of GPL software to Windows.
> Frex, I'm not aware of a single non GPLed C# IDE except MS' one.
> SourceForge list nearly 600 programs for Windows that are GPLed.(and close
> to 5000 for Linux that are GPLed :-) )
> If you include other licenses, though, then it's 3.5K vs 6K.
Right. I always compile myself the latest XEmacs beta from source, both
under FreeBSD, and again under Windows with Cygwin. This thing is a
godsend, because I can compile/install a lot of GNU software under
Windows.
====== 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: 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: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:43:38 GMT
"jet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> You could easily have asked Aaron whether your assumption is correct.
>> Yet you chose not to. Why? Do you normally invent facts about other
>> people and assume they are true? Of course I know the answer to that
>> is "Yes." Sloppy thinking is your trademark.
>
>Oh, sweet irony.
No, NOT sweet irony. You just got routed in that argument, girly.
Buy a clue.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 12:45:54 -0400
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Edward Rosten wrote:
> Technology?!
>
> Are you trying to claim that the recycle bin (and its many synonims on
> other platforms) is a _technology_?
It's just UI design. It's all about the UI design. People who claim
that Linux is dead on the desktop put a huge emphasis on UI design,
instead of what's under the hood. Win 2000 and XP aren't new technology
either, because they're based on VMS. All good software is based on
proven existing code, so the "old technology" argument just doesn't hold
water.
====== 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]>
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 19:35:06 +0200
"Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9efhpv$45m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > Word 97/2000 viewer:
> > http://office.microsoft.com/downloads/2000/wd97vwr32.aspx
> >
> > Power Point 97/2000/XP viewer:
> > http://www.microsoft.com/office/ork/xp/appndx/appa13.htm
> >
> > There are viewers for everything else, too.
>
> I have not checked the above sites. Do these applications run on Linux,
> BeOS, Mac?
Windows.
>
> I see my *mistake* programming is just typing, my secretary can do it?
> *shrug*
Depending on the secretary, I think. :-D
> BTW I didn't say it was *useless*. Don't put words into my mouth. I'm
> pointing out
> that Winvocates are always complaining about CLI and typing under Linux
and
> supposedly in Windows *EVERYTHING* is sooooo much easier using the GUI.
"All
> you ever need to do is use the GUI. blah.. blah... blah.." This further
> proves that to do anything more producive under windows requires technical
> knowledge and typing at some sort of command prompt.
You know, the GUI require typing too.
I've no objection to typing, what I consider as the GUI's advantage is that
it allows you learn via trial & error, which is more natural than reading
docs.
> > > Linux has less than 5% of the desktop market. Why are you Windows guys
> so
> > > worried about Linux? Live and let live, use what works for you.
> >
> > Um, no, Linux has less than 2%, not 5%, that is Macs.
>
> It's still less than 5% isn't it? Or has basic high shool math been
> redefined in my absence?
Windows has less than 99% of the server market. - is an absolutely true
statement.
However, the impression that this gives is that Windows has *close to* 99%
of the server market.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 19:37:08 +0200
"Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9efgu7$25v$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > Sorry Terminal Server won't run ALL MS apps.
> >
> > What applications won't run? I've used it quite extensively, I can't
> recall
> > *ever* having an application not working.
> >
> Age Of Empires
Okay, if you says so, I've played Drakan via TS, though.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 19:40:09 +0200
"Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On 22 May 2001 19:15:32 -0500,
> Jan Johanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > "Fred K Ollinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:9eejc5$ctu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Where do I download a copy of win xp?
> Sadly this may be Ms's last publicly available 'piratable OS', as
> home piracy now offends Ms's palate.
Considerring the WinXP licensing model, I wouldn't be surprised to see it
publically avialable to download.
------------------------------
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: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:50:14 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>So, have you ever produced children with your wife through
>the EXCLUSIVE use of blowjobs, and nothing else?
OhmyGod this thread is too hilarious!
------------------------------
From: Chronos Tachyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:52:13 GMT
On Wed 23 May 2001 06:39, JamesW wrote:
> In article <hFwO6.3261$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>> even the blackest object will still reflect a tiny amount of light.
>>
> A black hole?
>
A black hole is not an object, it is a collapsed gravitational field. All
the light that hits it is absorbed and, eventually, re-radiated as Hawking
radiation.
--
Chronos Tachyon
Guardian of Eristic Paraphernalia
Gatekeeper of the Region of Thud
[Reply instructions: My real domain is "echo <address> | cut -d. -f6,7"]
------------------------------
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: Wed, 23 May 2001 16:59:10 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Edward Rosten wrote:
>>
>> > I promised myself that I would plonk this thread, but KNode doesn't do
>> > it for me and I happened to read it today. Ah well.
>>
>> Same here, but PAN doesn;t seem to do it very well. I plonked Aaron,
>> because he's a real idiot.
>
>Translation: I, Ed Rosten, admit that I cannot defeat Aaron's arguments.
Unlikely. Hell, who here HASN'T defeated one or more of your
arguments?
I know, I know, you firmly believe that you haven't lost a single one
yet. LOL!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Thrippleton)
Subject: Re: What is the licence aggreement for REDHAD professional server?
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 17:52:07 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, KerryHB wrote:
>I am thinking of using many cheap Intel PC as SERVERS.
>
>Can I buy one copy Redhat Professional Server and install it on 50 PCs?
You can buy one copy and install it on as many PCs as you like.
Alternatively you could download for free one copy and install it on as many
PCs as you like.
Richard
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
