Linux-Advocacy Digest #747, Volume #34 Thu, 24 May 01 05:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: aaron kulkis steals his brother ian turdboy's crack pipe ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: The nature of competition ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: The nature of competition ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: The nature of competition ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: The nature of competition ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! ("JS \\
PL")
Re: evolutionary (oh boy) psychology: the short form ("You've got MALE.. sex
organs!")
Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Ian Davey)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Ian Davey)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Ian Davey)
Re: Microsoft to Linux ("Glitch")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: aaron kulkis steals his brother ian turdboy's crack pipe
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 02:37:16 -0400
Steve Chaney wrote:
>
> Errunt R Kookla eeped:
>
> >No need to go to such expense, seeing how you promptly destroyed yourself.
>
> Welch!
As I said...why should I go to the trouble of convening a court
to destroy you....
when you fucking self destructed in less than 10 minutes.
Jackie the Tokeman is right...you're a fucking moron.
--
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.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The nature of competition
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 01:36:43 -0500
"Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9ec66m$263lf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Linux certainly has software that can be considered to be part of a
> > certain
> > task. For instance, there is video editing software for linux, there
> > simply isn't anything of the calibre of FAST Purple, or Avid Media
> > Composer, or even Adobe Premier.
>
> Have you tried Broadcast2000 - a broadcast quality editing suite for linux
> which can handle multiple 24bit 96khz audio tracks, firewire, every
mixing,
> wiping and fading effect imaginable and is still free.
Interesting. But I haven't seen any screenshots of anything but the audio.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The nature of competition
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 01:40:42 -0500
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9edm6r$gkf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> TPC is just a benchmark, not a real world measure. In the real
> >> >> world, it is Linux, not Win2K that shows up at the top end of
> >> >> acalibility and price/performance.
> >> >
> >> > Then why aren't we seeing any real world measurements?
> >>
> >> But we have. Linux is used at the top end of scalibility, where
> >> price/performance is really critical, since the costs are so high, ie
> >> supercomputers. There are several Linux machines in the top500, there
> >> are no Win2K or NT amchines in the top 500. A real supercomputer in
> >> real use is the real world. A benchmark setup is not.
> >
> > My understanding is that all of those "supercomputers" are "in
> > development", and not being used in the real world. The ones that are,
> > are clusters, not single machines.
>
> No, thewre are some real ones being used now. Check out the list at
> www.top500.org
>
> Yes, it is true, the computers are clustered in a tightly coupled network
> (by clusetering standards), but it still rates as a supercomputer.
> Besides, one measure of scalibility is the ability to cluster. In this
> area, Linux thrashes Win2K. If Win2K was so much better, we'd see Win2K
> clusters in the top500. We don't; we see Linux ones instead.
Strange, I don't see anything in the list which says which OS they run.
> >> >> >> Linux has been proven to be more stable.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > It has? How? I've seen no verifiable studies that show Linux's
> >> >> > uptime to be greater than anything else.
> >> >>
> >> >> 120 day MTTF, *with* nightly reboots.
> >> >
> >> > Really? There's Linux uptime studies that show this? Or did you
> >> > forget the question?
> >>
> >> Linux's uptime isn't at the top end (Only OS/390 and VM are with a
> >> guarnteed uptime of 35 years), but I'd wager that Linux can beat 120
> >> days with nightly reboots (ie Win2K's verified MTTF).
> >
> > Again, how come there are no studies?
>
> Who's going to pay?
Oh, companies like IBM, Sun, SGI, etc...
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The nature of competition
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 01:41:02 -0500
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9ef98o$dv7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Surprise, surprise, all of them run a veriant of UNIX. I wonder why? Chad,
> maybe you could answer that question.
They do? Where do you see that?
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The nature of competition
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 01:42:39 -0500
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Linux is free.
> >
> > More of that ambiguity.
> >
>
> What is ambigous about free?
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!!
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 01:45:13 -0500
"Michael Marion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> > Then it should be quite easy for you to provide two links, one the
pinout of
> > the PA-RISC and one the pinout of the Itanium to show they are the same,
> > right?
>
> Not that it matters, since the HP workstations use CPU modules (I think),
but
> HP says that the IA-64 CPUs will be swappable with the current PA-RISC
modules
> in some (a few/many/all? not sure) HP workstations out there now.
Actually, it says they will do this with board level upgrades, but even so.
Modules are not CPU pins. The CPU can have any pinout and still be
compatible with a module if there is enough logic on the module
circuitboard.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!!
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 01:45:57 -0500
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JamesW wrote:
> >In article <9e3jit$qb4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "chrisv"
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert) wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Does not Intel own and manufacture the ARM processor?
> >>
> >> They own the company that makes ARM. The people employed to make the
ARM
> >> are not directly employed by intel.
> >>
> >> -Ed
> >
> >I thought Intel were a 'strategic partner' of ARM Holdings not the owner.
> >ARM Holdings is based in Cambridge - they design the StrongARM chips and
> >license these designs to others (Intel) to manufacture. Incidently
> >Motorola use StrongARM chips in their mobile phones.
>
>
> No no no. Erik Fuckenbush says HP makes these chips.
> He also passes along that we are all full of shit.
I said no such thing. I said HP makes the PA-RISC chip. Stop lying
charlie.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!!
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 01:46:37 -0500
"chrisv" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "chrisv"
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert) wrote:
> >>
> >>>Yeah, Intel doesn't make a RISC processor. They think RISC stinks.
> >>>
> >>>Nice try EF. Thanks for playing.
> >>
> >> Does not Intel own and manufacture the ARM processor?
> >
> >They own the company that makes ARM. The people employed to make the ARM
> >are not directly employed by intel.
>
> Okay, so Intel manufactures the ARM, and they own the company that
> designs the ARM, so I'd say that Intel does indeed "make a RISC
> processor."
Not to mention the i860 and i960 which Intel has made for almost a decade.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[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: Thu, 24 May 2001 01:55:30 -0500
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 21 May 2001
> [...]
> >> So? The same can be said for Win95 to Win98 to Win98SE to WinMe, and
now
> >> its NT to Win2K to XP.
> >
> >Which was exactly my point. Obviously the argument is bogus, since
things
> >develop over time.
>
> So why are the kernel versions consistent and numeric, and the MS
> 'developments' complete repackaging? MS claims that XP (and before that
> 2K, and before that NT) were "mostly all new code", IIRC. SO which is
> it, overhaul from the ground up, or 'develop over time'?
MS has not claimed that XP is mostly all new code, nor have they said NT4
was mostly all new code. Of course NT 3.1 was, and Win2k was a major
overhaul, but XP is a point release (5.1) and not a major rewrite.
> Or was your point that people have to pay for a new version of the
> kernel when it comes out at a regular interval, but get full upgrades
> for monopoly crapware for free, once they wait the necessary six to
> twenty four months (if ever) after the originally scheduled release date
> MS software tends to require before it is available?
>
> Just what is your point, Erik?
My point was to counter the statement that if MS had "got it right" the
first time, they wouldn't have needed a new version.
------------------------------
From: "JS \\ PL" <[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: Thu, 24 May 2001 03:22:39 -0400
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Aaron R. Kulkis in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 23 May 2001
> >JS \\ PL wrote:
> >>
> >> I have to say, Linux Mandrake 8 was looking real damn good. Support for
all
> >> my hardware (for once) easy set-up, even seting up networking and
connection
> >> sharing was painless. Good newsreader - Knode, pretty stable OS. I even
> >> liked the fact that it stayed connected to the Internet when switching
users
> >
> >this has been a fact of Unix family operating systems since they were
> >first networked (i.e. 1970's)
>
> The fact is, the very idea that a network connection would be broken
> because a user logged out (pardon me; because THE user logged out) is a
> Windowsism to begin with.
>
> >> (unlike Win2K)
> >
> >Another admission that Mafia$oft is over 30 years behind in basic
technology.
>
> More than that. Microsoft says XP will have it; nobody really knows if
> it is ever going to actually work.
Microsoft doesn't "say" they will have it. They HAVE it!
And it seems to work pretty good for my big 5 (five) users. All five can be
logged on, with programs open, and switching between users is very quick.
It's not a matter of saving a list of programs to be opened when that user
logs back in. The programs are open just as you left them. That word
document you have open is STILL open with the cursor still blinking right
where you left it. Half installed programs are STILL half installed when you
return. The only thing I've found is that a half played mp3 (in Winamp) is
closed down when a user switch takes place. But who knows, maybe Media
Player (tm) will automatically pause in the final version. :-)
I believe MS is on to something with Windows XP. Hell it even plays my OLD
dos games perfectly. Way to go Microsoft! Still #1 into the new millenium!
------------------------------
From: "You've got MALE.. sex organs!" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.singles,soc.men,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: evolutionary (oh boy) psychology: the short form
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 01:40:46 -0600
Gays are parading on your face?
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> "You've got MALE.. sex organs!" wrote:
> >
> > Get with it. You can't be a good little right wing bigot if you
> > can't read the program, Aaron.
> >
>
> Did it ever occur to you that I really don't give a fuck about gays...
>
> I just want to be able to live without them parading it around in my face.
>
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > >
> > > jet wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Aaron R. Kakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > jackie wrote:
> > > > > > amusingly enough if homosexuality is genetic the genes promoting it may
> > > > > > well be more numerous today because homophobia is so universal. that is
> > > > > > to say, by forcing men who would prefer the only the company of men to
> > > > > > marry a beard society has generated more of the very thing that might
> > > > > ^^^^^
> > > > > is this a typo?
> > > >
> > > > LOL! Aaron you have reached levels of ignorance that are shocking even for
> > > > you!
> > > >
> > > > A beard is a member of the opposite sex a homosexual person gets married to,
> > > > or has a similar kind of relationship with, in order to look straight.
> > >
> > > Well EXCUSE ME for not being up on the latest homosexual slang.......
> > >
> > > >
> > > > J
> > >
> > > --
> > > Aaron R. Kulkis
> > > Unix Systems Engineer
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> DNRC Minister of all I survey, homophobe, simpleton, right wing dufus, loser
> ICQ # 3056642
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 19:47:03 +1200
> > Look up the word technology. NTFS isn't ground breaking work.
Mainframes
> has
> > such technology 30 years ago.
>
> Mainframes didn't use file systems as we know them today 30 years ago.
They
> used DASD (Direct Access Storage Devices) with Access methods like VSAM.
>
30 years ago there weren't any hard disks, apart from the wincesters that
were being designed by IBM.
Matthew Gadiner
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 02:06:37 +0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Unknown"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I installed SP2 under Win2k and it worked perfectly, just like SP1
> did.
With MS products, it's newsworthy when something actually works right.
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:24:14 +0100
>>> But QED cannot possibly be entirely consistent with both quantum and
>>> relativistic theories.
>>
>>There is an inconsistency between *general* relativity and quantum field
>>theory, but *special* relativity does fine. This is plenty good enough
>>for terrestrial experiments.
>
> I really could care less about experiments; I'm not even a *theoretical*
> physicist, but even if I were, I would be one of those guys who couldn't
> care less about experiments.
Hmm. Without experiments, you have no way of verifying if your theories
are correct or along the right lines.
>>It should impress most scientists, too; QED makes quantitative
>>predictions which have been verified to an accuracy of about 1 part in
>>10^10 (the resolution of the experiment); you can only get this kind
>>of accuracy in experiments on light, so other physical phenomena can
>>typically not be tested to this kind of accuracy.
>
> I guess that's what happens when you can reduce everything to almost
> 'pure math' constructs.
I don't understand this comment. What should reducing everything to maths
have to do with its releation to the real world?
>>> I guess, but it kind of spoils it if you already know that we are well
>>> aware that, despite its strong correlation with experimental results,
>>> it is fatally flawed, logically.
>>
>>It's not a complete theory, because it doesn't explain all known
>>phenomena. Any more complete theory will have to contain QED (or
>>something that agrees with QED to an astonishing degree of accuracy) as
>>an asymptotic limit. On the other hand, QED isn't flawed *as a theory*
>>- it's perfectly consistent internally.
>
> I see what you are saying. And, yes, that is what I meant by "fatally
> flawed, logically"; it is only internally consistent. If it is not also
> consistent with everything externally, it is logically flawed. It
> isn't, I would say, at all *illogical*, though.
I think that you are confusing "logiclly flawed" with "incomplete". For
instance, Newtons Laws are logically fine, it just happens that they're
incomplete.
-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: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:27:05 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Said Edward Rosten in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 23 May 2001
>>>>The pyhsicists have long since sorted out that the speed of light is a
>>>>constant in free space. Not only that, but it is invariant through
>>>>relativistic transformations as well.
>>>
>>> Yes; physicists seem to split into two convenient groups: those who
>>> believe something, anything, is invariant, and those who are still
>>> discovering why this isn't the case at all.
>>
>>So noe Einstein's wrong too?
>
> No, Einstein was mistaken.
He was mistaken about Quantum Mechanics and the universe expanding, but
he wasn't wrong about the speed of light being invariant. At least no one
has shown his predictions to be incorrect. There are some
incompletenesses in his theories, though.
> He died still trying to discover precisely
> how he was mistaken, so apparently he was well aware of this fact. That
> doesn't make him "wrong", because nothing makes someone 'wrong' except
> being misunderstood. "Wrong" is a matter of metaphysics (you are wrong
> when you don't accept my morality); the term has no place in science or
> argument. "Mistaken" is a matter of reason and free inquiry.
I think you're trying to obscure the point by going off at a complete
tangent. In my book, if you were to say that the sky was green, you would
be wrong.
-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: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:37:06 +0100
>>> 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?
Well, more often than not, there isn't an argument at all. How do you
defeat incoherent babble?
> I know, I know, you firmly believe that you haven't lost a single one
> yet.
> LOL!
-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: Win2k Sp2 Worked perfectly
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 10:40:12 +0100
> NTFS is 40 years old ? W2k will run fine on a P200 with 128 Mb RAM.
> Doesn't seem all that different from running SuSE 7.1 with KDE to me.
Yah. Whatever. It certainly won't run well on a P133 w/72M.
It's also hard to use and cumbersome (for me).
-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
------------------------------
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: Thu, 24 May 2001 08:42:22 GMT
In article <X4TO6.1195$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Rich Soyack"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> http://newssearch.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/KSEnglish.
>
>Nothing was on this site when I tried accessing it.
I gave you the direct URL to the search term, it gave tons of hits.
>> exe?
>>
>method=mainQuery&ATNMYFIELD_Headline=&db0=English&xoptions=sortboth&numresul
>ts
>> =1000&BATCHHITS=25&querythreshold=50&query=homophobic
>>
>> In the UK you can't get much more mainstream than the BBC.
>
>Again, when I was in The Netherlands I watched BBC and don't remember
>hearing it. By the way,
>isn't BBC an organ of the Liberal Government?
The BBC is independant of the government, and has existed under liberal and
conservative governments alike.
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
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: Thu, 24 May 2001 08:45:34 GMT
In article <X4TO6.1195$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Rich Soyack"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> You'll even find
>> it used in the mainstream media and news organisations, here you go:
>
>When I worked in The Netherlands last year I read English newspapers and I
>don't remember seeing it in common usage.
>>
>> http://newssearch.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/KSEnglish.
>
>Nothing was on this site when I tried accessing it.
I gave you a direct link to the results of a search that returned lots of
hits.
>> exe?
>>
>method=mainQuery&ATNMYFIELD_Headline=&db0=English&xoptions=sortboth&numresul
>ts
>> =1000&BATCHHITS=25&querythreshold=50&query=homophobic
>>
>> In the UK you can't get much more mainstream than the BBC.
>
>Again, when I was in The Netherlands I watched BBC and don't remember
>hearing it. By the way,
>isn't BBC an organ of the Liberal Government?
It's independant of the government, always has been, whether under liberal or
conservative governments. You can guarantee the various opposition parties
would kick up a big stink if it were any other way.
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 08:54:02 GMT
In article <X4TO6.1195$[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.
>
>And "homophobe" is not correct usage of the word.
It's a common enough usage for people to understand it's meaning, and it's
certainly how it is used over here. Otherwise terms like "homophobic
violence" wouldn't make any sense, when used to describe frequent
physical attacks on gays by homophobes.
>> You'll even find
>> it used in the mainstream media and news organisations, here you go:
>
>When I worked in The Netherlands last year I read English newspapers and I
>don't remember seeing it in common usage.
>
>>
>> http://newssearch.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/KSEnglish.
>
>Nothing was on this site when I tried accessing it.
It was a direct link to the search results, where there were lots of hits...
You should find similar results on the webpages of the independant
broadcasters over here.
>> exe?
>>
>method=mainQuery&ATNMYFIELD_Headline=&db0=English&xoptions=sortboth&numresul
>ts
>> =1000&BATCHHITS=25&querythreshold=50&query=homophobic
>>
>> In the UK you can't get much more mainstream than the BBC.
>
>Again, when I was in The Netherlands I watched BBC and don't remember
>hearing it. By the way,
>isn't BBC an organ of the Liberal Government?
The BBC is independant of the government, always has been, whether under
liberal or conservative governments. You can guarantee the opposition parties
would kick up a big stink if it were any other way. It's there as a public
service broadcaster and as such, belongs to the people.
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: "Glitch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft to Linux
Date: Thu, 24 May 2001 02:47:34 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Richard Thrippleton"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <XotO6.1651$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Kistner
> wrote:
>>I have set up a Linux workstation and exploring the possibilities to
>>migrate from Microsoft to Linux. One issue I'm curious about is that my
>>Microsoft world is a peer-to-peer network (netbui) where I share
folders
>>and devices across this simple network. I'm running Windows 98 in the
>>Microsoft world and Redhat Linux 7.0 in the Linux world. I'm not in a
>>position to immediately convert my legacy systems to Linux. But in the
>>transition time it would be nice to be able to share folders/devices
>>across both worlds.
>>
>>1. Is there a way to have my Linux machine share folders and/or devices
>>with the Microsoft world?
> The simplest way is with an ftp server. This will of course allow
> user/password based login and/or anonymous login. Of course it won't be
> sharing as in mounted drives, but it will be two way whole file
> transfer.
> If you really need to have files edited in situ on the drive, then
> you need to look into Samba.
since when has FTP and Samba worked over the NetBEUI protocol?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
