I would love to see the BSD manual published. O'Reilly breifly did that (probably almost ten years ago), but now it's all but impossible to find. I contacted them, and apprently they don't even have any copies in their warehouse. I'd love to have an updated copy.
But where will they get the manual from? CSRG is gone, and there are now three major BSD4.4lite-based OSes. My guess is they would go with FreeBSD's manual, since FreeBSD is the most successful, well known, and, some would argue, the most advanced of the three. But, truth be told, OpenBSD has an excellent manual, and I'll sometimes even consult it when I work with FreeBSD boxen.
Speaking of manuals, an excellent resource is the FreeBSD Project's manual webpage, actually a CGI script which allows to you to consult manuals from CSRG BSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, several Linux distributions, SunOS (pre- and post-BSD-Exodus), as well as less common Unices such as Minix (har har), Plan 9, Ultrix, and Seventh Edition.
While we're ontopic, Sun Microsystems publishes a Solaris reference which is essentially the printed manual, but I would not recommend this book. All of Sun's Solaris books are absolutely horrid. (Which I've never understood; their Java books are wonderful.) Complete wastes of money. The only remotely useful things are the discussions of the mail system and network filesystems in the "Advanced System Administration" book.
Hands down, the best single Unix command reference book you can buy at the moment is O'Reilly's Unix in a Nutshell, but that is straight SVR4, with some Solaris-specific commands thrown in for good measure. You'll get what amounts to an abbreviated manual, along with stuff on shells, editors, and maybe a few system calls. If you would like to do system-level programming, Stevens' Advanced Programming in the UNIX Environment will counter-balance the Nutshell book nicely. Can never have too many reference books.:)
Forgive me, I love computer books, and tend to talk about them a lot
But that still does nothing for BSD users. Face it, guys, BSD is seen by much (dare I say most?) of the business IT world as "old" UNIX. Which it is, of course, but I don't find anything particularly wrong with that. But, it's a stumbling block which caused me to stop pushing it. (That, and the fact that my company is large enough to need the two dozen Sun and IBM boxen. I don't see many companies switching from Big Iron to clusters of x86 Free Unix boxen, but the high value and TOC of cheap x86 Unix are going to keep the current wave of IT startups going for another ten years.)
I honestly don't think I would buy BSD in a Nutshell. I'd rather have a printed manual, to complement Unix in a Nutshell, rather than replace it. Isn't that all I'd need? The vi and emacs syntax will be the same. So will awk, sed, and grep (for the most part). I'll be carrying two books around either way, so that stuff is just redundant.
Some say, "why have a printed manual at all, when everything is available on the system or online?" But you may be doing work at a location with both old and new SunOS boxes, and you're working on new SunOS, and you want to be make sure your shell scripts are portable between boxes. Having a printed BSD manual might come in handy then. Or you're on the subway going home from work, and you get in an argument with your geek buddies about proper BSD shutdown syntax. Or if you're like me, you just love computer books. So I'd buy the manual. But not the Nutshell book.
Okay, I'm ranting again.
"InfoMonk" mentions a mysterious BSD book in the works? I'm excited. I think a book on mid-level kernel work would do well. (Something to fill the void between The Complete FreeBSD and Design and Implementation of the 4.4BSD-lite OS.) Or a book on BSD-specific networking and TCP/IP. Hey, Roblimo, get us an interview with TOR so I can bug him about this.;)
In fact, the vast majority of console games are designed by companies like Acclaim, EA, and Square, and not the console maker. But you are correct; the console maker gets a chunk of the profit for every game sold. That's the price of the "Licensed by Nintendo" splash screen.
Here's a question: is the Xbox supposed to be used with a TV (like a console) or a monitor (like a PC)? At a TV's resolution, even my Voodoo 1 is pretty slick; it almost seems a waste to use those l337 nVidia graphics chips. I sure hope Microsoft isn't betting that HDTV will have caught on by the time this imaginary toy is released.
I could probably go to xbox.ign.com and find this out in two seconds, but I feel like contributing some ignorance to this excellent discussion.
Oh, by the way, Tracy Bonham owns me. Guess why I'm still up at 6:45AM.
I hate to say it, but the troll is right. This site may claim to not give a shit about Microsoft, but jumps at the chance to post anything concerning them. You seem to do a fair job with other subjects, but when it comes to Microsoft, you're just an online tabloid. You'll openly attack Microsoft one day, and ruminate over their vaporware console the next. What's the deal? And why do I feel that the Rob "I can't watch Quicktime movies because I never use Windows, except for all of my games" Malda will be one of the first to own one?
If you don't care about Microsoft, don't talk about them at all. You think this is the only place on the Internet to go whine about them? Please. And so you say, "Well we can't ignore them. They're an unfortunate reality in the business world, and so to ignore them would be unrealistic." Yeah, almost as unrealistic as discussing the "possibility" (snicker) of GNU/Linux taking the desktop from Windows?
This site was better when no one was under the illusion that it's either a political force or a real news outlet.
Slashdot openly proclaims its hostility with that [mildly amusung, I'll admit] Borg icon. And all pro-Microsoft posters are flamed into oblivion. I see more anti-MS FUD in one day here than I've ever seen anti-Linux FUD in Redmond. And yet we still have those that would say, "It's news for nerds, not just news for Linux users." And then we see stories about the X-box and Windows-only games.
The FUD is going to be this movement's downfall. There's enough wrong with Microsoft; who needs to make stuff up? But every day I see more and more of this childish anti-"Windoze" attitude. When did it become so trendy to constantly talk about how much Microsoft sucks? When you installed your l337 Red Hat 6.2 distro? And why do I know that 99% of those poseurs could't even begin to discuss the technical merits of UNIX and NT kernels? But I digress. The childish attitude prompts people to say things like, "Oh, well I'm sorry, but I cannot possibly [do something on a computer] because I use Linux. <snobbish, elitist sneer>" Is that kind of attitude going to help us? No. The average luser sees that and thinks, "This guy uses some crazy, fringe OS. Apparently this OS can't do anything Windows can. And its users are mean and talk down to people." The fact that Malda, who usually rises above that crap, did this exact same thing in a story post a few days ago seems to be an omen. (Come on, Rob, you're as elite as it gets. You don't need do act that way. You should be encouraging the same mature activism that you applaud Maddog for, instead of perpetuating the snobbish-yet-amazingly-ignorant-5cr1p7-k1dd13 act. If you're willing to waste hours playing games on that Windows box, you should be willing to turn it on to see a video clip for a story post. For the amount of cash you get to run this site, you'd better be fucking willing to.)
In today's world, each and every Linux user on this site is a spokesman for our cause. Maturity and a realistic attitude, combined with a real knowledge of what makes Linux the best choice in some situations, is the only hope we have to take anyreal market share away from the "dreaded" Microsoft.
LOL, this is what happens when you start a rant at four in the morning. G'night.
...or bother replying to you. But who says I am on a quest for Slack? I simply want to alert the Slashdot populace to the Debian menace. Remember, Debian: the official Linux distribution of San Francisco. Hitler loves Debian! So does Connie Chung!
...but new Slashdot UIDs are now over 200,000, so he's almost l337, right? The funny thing is, he's been here almost as long as I have, (which isn't saying much), but has apparently learned nothing.
I actually find the UID/l337ness correlation quite interesting. For instance, while I am the first to admit that I have not been here long, I must look pretty l337 to someone who just got his UID, which is probably around 210,000. But I'm nowhere near as l337 as someone from below 50k. And the first 1,000 UIDs are practically godlike. LOL.
(Hmmm, "datadictator" called himself a "regular" in a previous post, yet he's only been here about sixth months. But we already knew he was a poseur, right?)
Non-AC's that diss AC's for being AC's are probably my biggest Slashdot pet-peeve (yes, even outranking ** syringe!). I used to have a very long rant about this in my user info. Maybe I should put it back.
"Plain text" on Slashdot isn't so. Bold tags, italics tags, et cetera still work, and since there is no "" tag in HTML, Slash just happily deleted it for you.:) The only major difference (in common practice) between Slashdot's "HTML Formatted" and "Plain Text" options is that your line breaks are automatically "<br>"-ified. If you want to retain the greater- and less-than symbols that you typed, you'll want to choose the "Extrans (html tags to text)" option. (Like I'm doing now, to avoid having to to > and < these examples.;)
Sort of confusing. I've never understood why they call it "plain text" when it obviously isn't. Usually, if you want what you and I think of as "plain text", choose "Extrans". And preview, of course.;)
I have a real problem with those that criticize AC's for being AC's. It's pretty fucking moronic in itself, and only helps to emphasize the fact that you have nothing to say. You're not better than anyone else because you took five minutes to get an ID, or because you visit the site so often that you feel you need one. Nor are you more welcome.
No one needs me to tell them you're an idiot, though. All one needs to do is read your response to the first post of this article.
Your self-fellating babble about geeks would be more appropriate in the UF "geek groupie" forum. (In other words, you're lonely and came to Slashdot for acceptance, but have nothing to contribute. That's what the UF forum is for.) Get the fuck over yourself. You sound like Jon Katz, minus a hundred IQ points.
Can you back up that Bundy/Slashdot analogy, by the way? I'd really like to know what kind of bizarre logic comes up with something like that. I didn't even think people that stupid could use Windows.
(wink.)
And if you were a more observant luser, you would realize that talking about Linux and Open Source that way only makes you look worse. You should thank me for pointing this out to you now, before you make a bigger fool of yourself.
Now, please, I beg you to retort. Ignorance amuses me. You fell for two trolls within fifteen minutes, so I expect your reply to be especially amusing.
Don't feel bad, Jamie; CalamityJones was just trying to sound smart. He ends up reminding me of the BOFH lusers. "And you'll need to manually transmogrify the resonance capicators." "Well, duh!" If it were really such a "Duh"-type thing, AP wouldn't have covered it. (I hope.) And if CalamityJones is so fucking intelligent, s/he should be out saving the world, instead of trolling Slashdot.
F-15E's have enough power to accelerate while flying straight up, but I still wouldn't send one into a tornado.;) Above it, maybe. How high to you have to get to escape the winds and flying cows? I don't think it would require a low orbiter...
Hmph.:\ Why should we try to control the weather? I think that's awfully arrogant. If science acheives this, we're just asking for nature to bitchslap us; think "Titanic", but with reprecussions affecting more than a few hundred rich tourists (and Leonardo Dicaprio, of course).
I know how you feel. Last week, I found a site that gives away pictures of naked chicks, for free! It was so fucking amazing; I was going out of my mind! I thought, "This has to be the most revolutionary idea to ever hit the Web. Surely, Rob Malda will post this story."
But you know what? He ignored me! So I started sending him these e-mails, saying things like, "Hey, check out this great new site I found!" And there'd be a link. I don't know how he could have missed it; after all, I used a subject of "Free XXX!" so he'd not miss it. But still no reponse, and no post. Dammit, I'll bet someone will send Rob the same link next week, and he'll get credit.:(
No UNIX clone will be a consumer OS until it has: Copy/Cut/Paste and Drag&Drop integrated in the OS . . . A complete and reliable web browser . . . MS Office, or a suite that competes, feature for feature.
Solaris with CDE/dtwm fits the bill. (Mature GUI/Netscape/StarOffice.) I've ranted about this often before, so I'll spare you. The reason it could never have caught on was that during the early Nineties, when the foundations of the modern OS GUI where clicking into place,
a.) OpenWindows was in use, not CDE/dtwm
b.) SunOS was too expensive c.) SunOS wasn't available for Intel (closest you could get was 4.4lite;)
Oh, wait, you said UNIX clone. Solaris is real UNIX so it doesn't float too well with SLashdotters.;-p
I won't defend MS too much here lest I lose all karma, but no-one besides Apple has come as far as they have in integration of the GUI with the OS. Love it ot hate it. I like Windows 2000, actually, (gasps from the audience), and I like the modern Windows GUI. I think that the one area where Microsoft has come far with (and maybe even (gasp!) innovated in) is the meshing of OO theory with a nice GUI and a half-decent OS. Yes, I like NT5. Now burn my effigy and be done with it.
I will also spare you from my babbling about how I don't hate MS. But if Windows never were, the industry would be under that imagined boot of another superpower, like IBM (with OS/2) or Apple (with MacOS).
I wouldn't like that world any better.
Just fine them, place some restrictions on their business practices, let them be run over with civil suits, and them keep an eye on them. Don't break them up. No one needs that.
Okay, back on topic: I find this 'grassroots' effort quite amusing. It's like a militia of Microsoft stockholders, planning a last line of defense to keep their precious MS stock from plummetting to the depths of Red Hat's.
/me ducks
(Hey, Billy Boy, here's my expert advice: when you get the verdict, SELL. Sell it ALL. Don't wait to see what happens after the company is split and the stock with it. The stock won't survive the impending market crash. SELL. True, selling several billion dollars of the stock could probably make it almost worthless by itself, but you can't worry about that. Sell everything, airlift your mansion to the UK, and start a new software company. Call it LimeyOS. Complete with LimeyOffice and GSODs. (Green Screens of Death!) They'll love you. Brits are used to being trodden under the boots of the heartless rich.)
(Wow, that was really uneccessary, wasn't it?)
I'd love to see what we could dredge up from Oracle and Sun's pasts. Remember the Republican Congressman who was all set to become SotH? Remember how this was in the midst of Blowjobgate, and how he viciously derided Clinton? Remember how it was then found out that this Congressman had not been faithful to his wife? Remember how he fled Washington in shame, forced to abandon the golden years of his political career? I can picture the same thing happening to Oracle in ten years. And I'll laugh my ass off. I like Oracle's products. But I hoped they plugged all potential leaks in their organization before they started playing tattle-tale with Redmond.
Yeah, I know... "Sure, every large company would do the same as Microsoft if they had the market share. Regardless, Microsoft gets fucked in the ass because they actually have the size and did the crime. Now they do the time." Oh well, so I'm a moron, right? Fuck it. I don't like the legal precedents that are being set here. I trust Microsoft more than I do Uncle Sam. At least Microsoft stops fucking you once they have your money.
Dude, you can never seem to get that right. You missed tons of "r's". Look: just copy the text you're going to post into your text editor of choice and do a "find" for all the "r's"!! It's obvious you have a lot of time on your hands, so why not spend an extra thirty seconds and troll with excellence?
Regexp makes it even easier. s/[Rr]//g; Then just type in the one "R" that you use at the beginning to refer to itself. Bada bing -- all done!
Yes, I'm feeding a troll. Yes, you may intentionally skip some "r's" to get people like me to respond. Oh well.
Slashdot Mirror
---------///----------
Alan Cox!!
...no, wait. Bill Joy in a clown costume.
Okay, okay, seriously... well a tasmanian devil sounds likely, but a devilfish is another possibility.
---------///----------
But where will they get the manual from? CSRG is gone, and there are now three major BSD4.4lite-based OSes. My guess is they would go with FreeBSD's manual, since FreeBSD is the most successful, well known, and, some would argue, the most advanced of the three. But, truth be told, OpenBSD has an excellent manual, and I'll sometimes even consult it when I work with FreeBSD boxen.
Speaking of manuals, an excellent resource is the FreeBSD Project's manual webpage, actually a CGI script which allows to you to consult manuals from CSRG BSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, several Linux distributions, SunOS (pre- and post-BSD-Exodus), as well as less common Unices such as Minix (har har), Plan 9, Ultrix, and Seventh Edition.
While we're ontopic, Sun Microsystems publishes a Solaris reference which is essentially the printed manual, but I would not recommend this book. All of Sun's Solaris books are absolutely horrid. (Which I've never understood; their Java books are wonderful.) Complete wastes of money. The only remotely useful things are the discussions of the mail system and network filesystems in the "Advanced System Administration" book.
Hands down, the best single Unix command reference book you can buy at the moment is O'Reilly's Unix in a Nutshell, but that is straight SVR4, with some Solaris-specific commands thrown in for good measure. You'll get what amounts to an abbreviated manual, along with stuff on shells, editors, and maybe a few system calls. If you would like to do system-level programming, Stevens' Advanced Programming in the UNIX Environment will counter-balance the Nutshell book nicely. Can never have too many reference books. :)
Forgive me, I love computer books, and tend to talk about them a lot
But that still does nothing for BSD users. Face it, guys, BSD is seen by much (dare I say most?) of the business IT world as "old" UNIX. Which it is, of course, but I don't find anything particularly wrong with that. But, it's a stumbling block which caused me to stop pushing it. (That, and the fact that my company is large enough to need the two dozen Sun and IBM boxen. I don't see many companies switching from Big Iron to clusters of x86 Free Unix boxen, but the high value and TOC of cheap x86 Unix are going to keep the current wave of IT startups going for another ten years.)
I honestly don't think I would buy BSD in a Nutshell. I'd rather have a printed manual, to complement Unix in a Nutshell, rather than replace it. Isn't that all I'd need? The vi and emacs syntax will be the same. So will awk, sed, and grep (for the most part). I'll be carrying two books around either way, so that stuff is just redundant.
Some say, "why have a printed manual at all, when everything is available on the system or online?" But you may be doing work at a location with both old and new SunOS boxes, and you're working on new SunOS, and you want to be make sure your shell scripts are portable between boxes. Having a printed BSD manual might come in handy then. Or you're on the subway going home from work, and you get in an argument with your geek buddies about proper BSD shutdown syntax. Or if you're like me, you just love computer books. So I'd buy the manual. But not the Nutshell book.
Okay, I'm ranting again.
"InfoMonk" mentions a mysterious BSD book in the works? I'm excited. I think a book on mid-level kernel work would do well. (Something to fill the void between The Complete FreeBSD and Design and Implementation of the 4.4BSD-lite OS.) Or a book on BSD-specific networking and TCP/IP. Hey, Roblimo, get us an interview with TOR so I can bug him about this. ;)
---------///----------
---------///----------
I could probably go to xbox.ign.com and find this out in two seconds, but I feel like contributing some ignorance to this excellent discussion.
Oh, by the way, Tracy Bonham owns me. Guess why I'm still up at 6:45AM.
---------///----------
---------///----------
---------///----------
If you don't care about Microsoft, don't talk about them at all. You think this is the only place on the Internet to go whine about them? Please. And so you say, "Well we can't ignore them. They're an unfortunate reality in the business world, and so to ignore them would be unrealistic." Yeah, almost as unrealistic as discussing the "possibility" (snicker) of GNU/Linux taking the desktop from Windows?
This site was better when no one was under the illusion that it's either a political force or a real news outlet.
Slashdot openly proclaims its hostility with that [mildly amusung, I'll admit] Borg icon. And all pro-Microsoft posters are flamed into oblivion. I see more anti-MS FUD in one day here than I've ever seen anti-Linux FUD in Redmond. And yet we still have those that would say, "It's news for nerds, not just news for Linux users." And then we see stories about the X-box and Windows-only games.
The FUD is going to be this movement's downfall. There's enough wrong with Microsoft; who needs to make stuff up? But every day I see more and more of this childish anti-"Windoze" attitude. When did it become so trendy to constantly talk about how much Microsoft sucks? When you installed your l337 Red Hat 6.2 distro? And why do I know that 99% of those poseurs could't even begin to discuss the technical merits of UNIX and NT kernels? But I digress. The childish attitude prompts people to say things like, "Oh, well I'm sorry, but I cannot possibly [do something on a computer] because I use Linux . <snobbish, elitist sneer>" Is that kind of attitude going to help us? No. The average luser sees that and thinks, "This guy uses some crazy, fringe OS. Apparently this OS can't do anything Windows can. And its users are mean and talk down to people." The fact that Malda, who usually rises above that crap, did this exact same thing in a story post a few days ago seems to be an omen. (Come on, Rob, you're as elite as it gets. You don't need do act that way. You should be encouraging the same mature activism that you applaud Maddog for, instead of perpetuating the snobbish-yet-amazingly-ignorant-5cr1p7-k1dd13 act. If you're willing to waste hours playing games on that Windows box, you should be willing to turn it on to see a video clip for a story post. For the amount of cash you get to run this site, you'd better be fucking willing to.)
In today's world, each and every Linux user on this site is a spokesman for our cause. Maturity and a realistic attitude, combined with a real knowledge of what makes Linux the best choice in some situations, is the only hope we have to take any real market share away from the "dreaded" Microsoft.
LOL, this is what happens when you start a rant at four in the morning. G'night.
---------///----------
What a coincidence; neither do mine.
---------///----------
---------///----------
---------///----------
I actually find the UID/l337ness correlation quite interesting. For instance, while I am the first to admit that I have not been here long, I must look pretty l337 to someone who just got his UID, which is probably around 210,000. But I'm nowhere near as l337 as someone from below 50k. And the first 1,000 UIDs are practically godlike. LOL.
(Hmmm, "datadictator" called himself a "regular" in a previous post, yet he's only been here about sixth months. But we already knew he was a poseur, right?)
Non-AC's that diss AC's for being AC's are probably my biggest Slashdot pet-peeve (yes, even outranking ** syringe!). I used to have a very long rant about this in my user info. Maybe I should put it back.
Keep on postin', noble AC...
---------///----------
Sort of confusing. I've never understood why they call it "plain text" when it obviously isn't. Usually, if you want what you and I think of as "plain text", choose "Extrans". And preview, of course.
---------///----------
---------///----------
No one needs me to tell them you're an idiot, though. All one needs to do is read your response to the first post of this article.
Your self-fellating babble about geeks would be more appropriate in the UF "geek groupie" forum. (In other words, you're lonely and came to Slashdot for acceptance, but have nothing to contribute. That's what the UF forum is for.) Get the fuck over yourself. You sound like Jon Katz, minus a hundred IQ points.
Can you back up that Bundy/Slashdot analogy, by the way? I'd really like to know what kind of bizarre logic comes up with something like that. I didn't even think people that stupid could use Windows.
(wink.)
And if you were a more observant luser, you would realize that talking about Linux and Open Source that way only makes you look worse. You should thank me for pointing this out to you now, before you make a bigger fool of yourself.
Now, please, I beg you to retort. Ignorance amuses me. You fell for two trolls within fifteen minutes, so I expect your reply to be especially amusing.
---------///----------
Thank you.
---------///----------
---------///----------
Hmph. :\ Why should we try to control the weather? I think that's awfully arrogant. If science acheives this, we're just asking for nature to bitchslap us; think "Titanic", but with reprecussions affecting more than a few hundred rich tourists (and Leonardo Dicaprio, of course).
---------///----------
. . . nah, couldn't be . . .
---------///----------
But you know what? He ignored me! So I started sending him these e-mails, saying things like, "Hey, check out this great new site I found!" And there'd be a link. I don't know how he could have missed it; after all, I used a subject of "Free XXX!" so he'd not miss it. But still no reponse, and no post. Dammit, I'll bet someone will send Rob the same link next week, and he'll get credit. :(
---------///----------
Solaris with CDE/dtwm fits the bill. (Mature GUI/Netscape/StarOffice.) I've ranted about this often before, so I'll spare you. The reason it could never have caught on was that during the early Nineties, when the foundations of the modern OS GUI where clicking into place,
Oh, wait, you said UNIX clone. Solaris is real UNIX so it doesn't float too well with SLashdotters. ;-p
I won't defend MS too much here lest I lose all karma, but no-one besides Apple has come as far as they have in integration of the GUI with the OS. Love it ot hate it. I like Windows 2000, actually, (gasps from the audience), and I like the modern Windows GUI. I think that the one area where Microsoft has come far with (and maybe even (gasp!) innovated in) is the meshing of OO theory with a nice GUI and a half-decent OS. Yes, I like NT5. Now burn my effigy and be done with it.
I will also spare you from my babbling about how I don't hate MS. But if Windows never were, the industry would be under that imagined boot of another superpower, like IBM (with OS/2) or Apple (with MacOS).
I wouldn't like that world any better.
Just fine them, place some restrictions on their business practices, let them be run over with civil suits, and them keep an eye on them. Don't break them up. No one needs that.
Okay, back on topic: I find this 'grassroots' effort quite amusing. It's like a militia of Microsoft stockholders, planning a last line of defense to keep their precious MS stock from plummetting to the depths of Red Hat's.
/me ducks
(Hey, Billy Boy, here's my expert advice: when you get the verdict, SELL. Sell it ALL. Don't wait to see what happens after the company is split and the stock with it. The stock won't survive the impending market crash. SELL. True, selling several billion dollars of the stock could probably make it almost worthless by itself, but you can't worry about that. Sell everything, airlift your mansion to the UK, and start a new software company. Call it LimeyOS. Complete with LimeyOffice and GSODs. (Green Screens of Death!) They'll love you. Brits are used to being trodden under the boots of the heartless rich.)
(Wow, that was really uneccessary, wasn't it?)
I'd love to see what we could dredge up from Oracle and Sun's pasts. Remember the Republican Congressman who was all set to become SotH? Remember how this was in the midst of Blowjobgate, and how he viciously derided Clinton? Remember how it was then found out that this Congressman had not been faithful to his wife? Remember how he fled Washington in shame, forced to abandon the golden years of his political career? I can picture the same thing happening to Oracle in ten years. And I'll laugh my ass off. I like Oracle's products. But I hoped they plugged all potential leaks in their organization before they started playing tattle-tale with Redmond.
Yeah, I know... "Sure, every large company would do the same as Microsoft if they had the market share. Regardless, Microsoft gets fucked in the ass because they actually have the size and did the crime. Now they do the time." Oh well, so I'm a moron, right? Fuck it. I don't like the legal precedents that are being set here. I trust Microsoft more than I do Uncle Sam. At least Microsoft stops fucking you once they have your money.
I need some coffee. Good evening, mates.
---------///----------
Regexp makes it even easier. s/[Rr]//g; Then just type in the one "R" that you use at the beginning to refer to itself. Bada bing -- all done!
Yes, I'm feeding a troll. Yes, you may intentionally skip some "r's" to get people like me to respond. Oh well.
---------///----------
/me ducks
---------///----------
---------///----------
Oh, and to the bitchy AC complaining about the slogan: ;-p
---------///----------