>OR, one could conclude MS will suffer precisely because "Most Linux >users are people who don't want to use Microsoft's products" Who is >this John Blair moron?
Exactly. What you seeing is increasing numbers of older installed machines shifting away from Microsoft software. This hits Microsoft directly since these are the people who microsoft planned on buying Win95/98/NT packages to upgrade their older machines with. If they are installing Linux on these machines instead, it's a lost sale for window products.
It's a rant. I had feeling when I saw this that the typical bullshit content hadn't changed one wit since I last glanced at this "newsletter" content. It reads like something you'ld find in the pages of PC Week doesn't it?
>Kernel patches can be obtained from a verified source such as kernel.org, but most other components have >no central infrastructure.
>No central infrastructure, as in you *have* to get patches to Microsoft OS's from Microsoft, and you can get >patches for Red Hat's product from, none other then, Red Hat!
>Of course, you can *also* follow freshmeat.net, or other freely available "portals" to also keep Linux up to >date. Then again, NTBugtraq is just as good a resource for keeping up on Microsoft issues as anything.
Those PC Week morons just keep digging themselves in deeper and deeper, don't they? They just don't know when to *SHUT UP*, do they?
Actually, though PC Week has done all of us a big favor. (though they won't like the results of it)
They've reminded all of us just how untrustworthy product reviews in magazines really are. Anyone remember the glowing reviews those software ram "expanders" for windows that ran in various mags a few years back untill people who actually bought the products discovered that they really didn't work as advertised.
There *HAD* to be a collective wince through Ziff-Davis land when those had some knowlege of how to actually *USE* a computer read this nonsense from the jokers at PC Week.
>They don't care what internals their desktop uses.
They'll care whem KDE crashes and burns on them when running software that works perfectly fine on machines running Gnome. Go ask the Amiga users the grief MUI (another bad idea) caused.
>Even though the HURD has GNU in front of it's name, don't kid >yourself into thinking that anyone will use it with Linux around. And >Linux doesn't have GNU in front of its name, unless you've been >successfully brainwashed by the GNU cult.
This has nothing to do with the GNU name nor the number of people using Linux or Hurd. It has *EVERYTHING* to do with creating/porting software bettween the two. I can see a fully working "Official" port of software like Xemacs for instance that has GNOME/COBRA support for both HURD and Linux designed in from the start.
>First off, it seems to me that your only criteria for software >excellence is that is has GNU in front of its name.
Actually he has a very important point. Gnome is a GNU project more or less. Which means major GNU and other software projects will be designed around the features of Gnome rather than whatever form KDE is using at the time. For example take HURD for example. No matter what anyone thinks about it's prospects, does anyone seriously think that software created for HURD is going to actually use the QT libs for *ANYTHING*? Now do you see the size and scope of the minefield the KDE userbase have just stumbled into.
>Heh, You've not tried Opera I guess. Opera is small, fast.. >(blah.blah.blah). To put it short. There are two things I miss from >my windows-days. It's Opera, and its mIRC.
>The word for valuing life above liberty is "slavery". I'll fight and >die for freedom just as my ancestors did, unless I remain convinced >the general populace doesn't want to be free and thus we can never >win.
You mean your ancestors fought for the freedom of the slaves they owned just like Washington and Jefferson did? Do any you dolts know what these guys really were like? Do yourself a favor and read Jefferson's views on race for instance. You might learn something about the man.
>In one of the earlier posts, someone asked about Mr. Bezroukov's >credentials. I think the questioon would be best answered by pointing >to the site http://www.softpanorama.org/
So basically he's a card-carrying member of the "Let's-claim-Y2K-will-bring-about-the-end-of-civil ation-as-we know-it-crowd, so-let's-write-a-bunch-of-books-and-articles-about -it-and-soak-the-suckers-with-our-consul ting-fees" crowd?
>Jane's approach to this story is fundamentally flawed because they > didn't clear it with Cringley first.
Exactly. We're seeing the techno-pundits like Cringley worse nightmare coming to pass with Jane's decision with this article, which is Slashdot being viewed in a positive manner by the mainstream press such as CNN and the like. Remember it's the people who has ties to the traditional computer industry trade rags like Cringley, Jerry Pournelle and the rest of that crowd are the ones who are the most down on Slashdot and it's users, mostly because they know we have very little use for them and their opinions.
>BSD licenses are trying to create a sort of Software Title Deed. Much >like there is no license forcing me to reveal the workings of an
Wrong. BSD licenses are the software industry effort at creating an sweatshop enviroment. Take a real good look at the attitudes and statements of the die-hard anti-GPL element and explain how they are any diffrent from the people running the sweatshops. They pretty much aren't.
>Yikes! You really do live in a backward country!:-) Here in the UK, >banks charge less for direct debit, because it saves them paperwork.
Here in the US, most banks I've looked at have a monthly service charge of up to $5 dollars for direct debit on top of the monthly fees for the checking account itself. Direct debit is a great deal. For the banks,that is. Consumers as usual get shafted, especially the ones who can least afford it. Ironic thing is with all the "new technology" being introduced into the phone,cable and banking industry, we're seeing more and more of this comming to pass.
There's a reason people don't use direct funds transfers. It's a rip-off. In case you idiots haven't noticed, most banks charge extra for direct debit or whatever you want to call this nonsense. And besides, it can really really screw up your planning of a buget for a month. Say for instance your phone bill for the month is say $45.00 but something came up (say you needed work done on your car) Now with a checking account you can pay $25.00 on the phone bill and divert the other $20.00 towards paying for the car repairs. With the direct funds transfer crap, the phone company would take the $45.00 straight out of your checking acount. Now you see why people don't use it?
>Later on, with DirectX, they wanted to provide a better game >environment than DOS could provide. I haven't seen too many DOS games > lately, so I assume that's going well.
You're an idoit. The reason you haven't seen too many DOS games is that Microsoft wants to force people into buying Windows 95/98/2000/WinWhatever. Are you actually claiming the bloated shit,er games that are coming out now for Win 95/98 are actually better that the older DOS games like Crusader: No Remorse by Origin or anything that's running on the game machines? Don't make me laugh at you....
>My first Linux, RH 4.1, was a Mac. But only because they put "Red >Hat" on the box in big letters and "Macmillan" in fine print. I >didn't realize what I had done until I saw the return address on the > registration form.
A *LOT* of people I think got burned by this. When I first saw the MacMillan RedHat package in Electronics Boutique after hearing about it from a friend I assumed that it was the official Redhat package (support from RedHat ect) with the books from MacMillan on cdrom added in. Which when you stopped and thought about it made a lot of sense.
The ZDNET Labs crowd can install a bunch of games and other nonsense on their machines,but can't be bothered with actually maintaining them. What's *WRONG* with this picture?
>Yeah, and also you'll need to make an alloy that is stronger than >diamonds and can withstand the intense pressure that can CREATE >diamonds from GAS. You're gonna have a helluva time.
All you need is a GUNBUSTER. Everthing else will take care of itself.
>Brett Glass has a long history of being anti-GPL. His arguments on >the Infoworld Electric fora were thoroughly refuted and he hasn't >been seen there for a while. The gist of his opposition to the GPL is >that it prevents people making money off software. Any attempt to >disprove this (Look at Red Hat etc) met with personal abuse, denial, >a change of subject, or silence.
Check out the Sept 1999 and Oct 1999 archives over at the lynx-dev Mailing list archives (http://www.flora.org/lynx-dev/html/) for messages with subject headers of "Re: lynx-dev Re: Licensing Lynx" and "Re: lynx-dev More on lynx copyright". Brett's been a busy little troll. Basically he and a bunch of his pals wants the lynx-dev group to "to allow them to use the code of Lynx in proprietary software packages, saying that this will help your "colleagues" compete with Microsoft." Yeah right. It's basically Brett's ranting about how the GPL won't let him and his cronies steal the work of other people again.
>Great. Now, not only will I have to deal with the popular >misconception of what a hacker is, but I'll have to deal with an >entire generation trained to believe that I'm a bad person. I fear >that, despite some small victories, we're losing the hacker/cracker >nomenclature battle on the large scale.
What's the big deal here people? So the DOJ wants to wipe out Script Kiddies. Quite frankly I don't see anything wrong with this. I think it's past time that it was taught that wanting to be a Script Kiddie is a bad thing. And let's be clear here, this is exactly what the whinning is really about. It really has nothing to do with being a old-school hacker at all, as most of the comments in this thread is clearly showing.
>All my apologies if I sound a little bit thick-headed, but why on >Earth create another licence?
Basically so the anti-GPL crowd can rip-off your code for their own purposes. That's what this "Toward a Better Open Source License" nonsense basically boils down to.
>But if they did do this-how much would it cost? And who really "owns" >the moon? Would it fall under the GPL?;-)
Actually, I think the moon would fall into the same legal catagory as Antarctica. I doubt it'll ever be possible for someone to actually claim ownership of any territory on the moon. At best you'll be able to lease it through the U.N.
>Not true at all. Runs fine on 8 bit DAC's. I can only imagine the >poor clerks at Circuit City having to listen to your drivel...
Nope. I know people who works in the electronics department at K-mart and Wal-mart and there are problems with the Matrix DVD and certain DVD players. They've been instructed to give refunds to customers.
Slashdot Mirror
>OR, one could conclude MS will suffer precisely because "Most Linux >users are people who don't want to use Microsoft's products" Who is >this John Blair moron?
Exactly. What you seeing is increasing numbers of older installed machines shifting away from Microsoft software. This hits Microsoft directly since these are the people who microsoft planned on buying Win95/98/NT packages to upgrade their older machines with. If they are installing Linux on these machines instead, it's a lost sale for window products.
>Is this a rant or a newsletter ?
It's a rant. I had feeling when I saw this that the typical bullshit content hadn't changed one wit since I last glanced at this "newsletter" content. It reads like something you'ld find in the pages of PC Week doesn't it?
>Kernel patches can be obtained from a verified source such as kernel.org, but most other components have >no central infrastructure.
>No central infrastructure, as in you *have* to get patches to Microsoft OS's from Microsoft, and you can get >patches for Red Hat's product from, none other then, Red Hat!
>Of course, you can *also* follow freshmeat.net, or other freely available "portals" to also keep Linux up to >date. Then again, NTBugtraq is just as good a resource for keeping up on Microsoft issues as anything.
Those PC Week morons just keep digging themselves in deeper and deeper, don't they? They just don't know when to *SHUT UP*, do they?
Actually, though PC Week has done all of us a big favor. (though they won't like the results of it)
They've reminded all of us just how untrustworthy product reviews in magazines really are. Anyone remember the glowing reviews those software ram "expanders" for windows that ran in various mags a few years back untill people who actually bought the products discovered that they really didn't work as advertised.
There *HAD* to be a collective wince through Ziff-Davis land when those had some knowlege of how to actually *USE* a computer read this nonsense from the jokers at PC Week.
>They don't care what internals their desktop uses.
They'll care whem KDE crashes and burns on them when running software that works perfectly fine on machines running Gnome. Go ask the Amiga users the grief MUI (another bad idea) caused.
>HURD is not Unix. Linux is not Unix. What was your point?
That KDE has just driven itself headlong into a dead end. That KDE has been infected by the mindset that sank the Amiga in the end.
>Even though the HURD has GNU in front of it's name, don't kid >yourself into thinking that anyone will use it with Linux around. And >Linux doesn't have GNU in front of its name, unless you've been >successfully brainwashed by the GNU cult.
This has nothing to do with the GNU name nor the number of people using Linux or Hurd. It has *EVERYTHING* to do with creating/porting software bettween the two. I can see a fully working "Official" port of software like Xemacs for instance that has GNOME/COBRA support for both HURD and Linux designed in from the start.
>First off, it seems to me that your only criteria for software >excellence is that is has GNU in front of its name.
Actually he has a very important point. Gnome is a GNU project more or less. Which means major GNU and other software projects will be designed around the features of Gnome rather than whatever form KDE is using at the time. For example take HURD for example. No matter what anyone thinks about it's prospects, does anyone seriously think that software created for HURD is going to actually use the QT libs for *ANYTHING*? Now do you see the size and scope of the minefield the KDE userbase have just stumbled into.
>Heh, You've not tried Opera I guess. Opera is small, fast .. >(blah.blah.blah). To put it short. There are two things I miss from >my windows-days. It's Opera, and its mIRC.
That's odd. I don't miss either one.
>The tree of liberty must be watered periodically with the blood of >tyrants and patriots alike. It is its natural manure. -- Thomas >Jefferson
Does anyone else find quoting a slave owner (Jefferson) about liberty to really,really ironic?
>The word for valuing life above liberty is "slavery". I'll fight and >die for freedom just as my ancestors did, unless I remain convinced >the general populace doesn't want to be free and thus we can never >win.
You mean your ancestors fought for the freedom of the slaves they owned just like Washington and Jefferson did? Do any you dolts know what these guys really were like? Do yourself a favor and read Jefferson's views on race for instance. You might learn something about the man.
>In one of the earlier posts, someone asked about Mr. Bezroukov's >credentials. I think the questioon would be best answered by pointing >to the site http://www.softpanorama.org/
l ation-as-we know-it-crowd, so-let's-write-a-bunch-of-books-and-articles-about -it-and-soak-the-suckers-with-our-consul ting-fees" crowd?
So basically he's a card-carrying member of the "Let's-claim-Y2K-will-bring-about-the-end-of-civi
>I've READ the release notes, no Java plugins. In fact, here's all my >plugins:
Who cares about Java? Most people with half a clue disable that crap anyway as soon as they install the browser......
>Jane's approach to this story is fundamentally flawed because they > didn't clear it with Cringley first.
Exactly. We're seeing the techno-pundits like Cringley worse nightmare coming to pass with Jane's decision with this article, which is Slashdot being viewed in a positive manner by the mainstream press such as CNN and the like. Remember it's the people who has ties to the traditional computer industry trade rags like Cringley, Jerry Pournelle and the rest of that crowd are the ones who are the most down on Slashdot and it's users, mostly because they know we have very little use for them and their opinions.
>BSD licenses are trying to create a sort of Software Title Deed. Much >like there is no license forcing me to reveal the workings of an
Wrong. BSD licenses are the software industry effort at creating an sweatshop enviroment. Take a real good look at the attitudes and statements of the die-hard anti-GPL element and explain how they are any diffrent from the people running the sweatshops. They pretty much aren't.
>Yikes! You really do live in a backward country! :-) Here in the UK, >banks charge less for direct debit, because it saves them paperwork.
Here in the US, most banks I've looked at have a monthly service charge of up to $5 dollars for direct debit on top of the monthly fees for the checking account itself. Direct debit is a great deal. For the banks,that is. Consumers as usual get shafted, especially the ones who can least afford it. Ironic thing is with all the "new technology" being introduced into the phone,cable and banking industry, we're seeing more and more of this comming to pass.
There's a reason people don't use direct funds transfers. It's a rip-off. In case you idiots haven't noticed, most banks charge extra for direct debit or whatever you want to call this nonsense. And besides, it can really really screw up your planning of a buget for a month. Say for instance your phone bill for the month is say $45.00 but something came up (say you needed work done on your car) Now with a checking account you can pay $25.00 on the phone bill and divert the other $20.00 towards paying for the car repairs. With the direct funds transfer crap, the phone company would take the $45.00 straight out of your checking acount. Now you see why people don't use it?
>Later on, with DirectX, they wanted to provide a better game >environment than DOS could provide. I haven't seen too many DOS games > lately, so I assume that's going well.
You're an idoit. The reason you haven't seen too many DOS games is that Microsoft wants to force people into buying Windows 95/98/2000/WinWhatever. Are you actually claiming the bloated shit,er games that are coming out now for Win 95/98 are actually better that the older DOS games like Crusader: No Remorse by Origin or anything that's running on the game machines? Don't make me laugh at you....
>My first Linux, RH 4.1, was a Mac. But only because they put "Red >Hat" on the box in big letters and "Macmillan" in fine print. I >didn't realize what I had done until I saw the return address on the > registration form.
A *LOT* of people I think got burned by this. When I first saw the MacMillan RedHat package in Electronics Boutique after hearing about it from a friend I assumed that it was the official Redhat package (support from RedHat ect) with the books from MacMillan on cdrom added in. Which when you stopped and thought about it made a lot of sense.
The ZDNET Labs crowd can install a bunch of games and other nonsense on their machines,but can't be bothered with actually maintaining them. What's *WRONG* with this picture?
>Yeah, and also you'll need to make an alloy that is stronger than >diamonds and can withstand the intense pressure that can CREATE >diamonds from GAS. You're gonna have a helluva time.
All you need is a GUNBUSTER. Everthing else will take care of itself.
>Brett Glass has a long history of being anti-GPL. His arguments on >the Infoworld Electric fora were thoroughly refuted and he hasn't >been seen there for a while. The gist of his opposition to the GPL is >that it prevents people making money off software. Any attempt to >disprove this (Look at Red Hat etc) met with personal abuse, denial, >a change of subject, or silence.
Check out the Sept 1999 and Oct 1999 archives over at the lynx-dev Mailing list archives (http://www.flora.org/lynx-dev/html/) for messages with subject headers of "Re: lynx-dev Re: Licensing Lynx" and "Re: lynx-dev More on lynx copyright". Brett's been a busy little troll. Basically he and a bunch of his pals wants the lynx-dev group to "to allow them to use the code of Lynx in proprietary software packages, saying that this will help your "colleagues" compete with Microsoft." Yeah right. It's basically Brett's ranting about how the GPL won't let him and his cronies steal the work of other people again.
>Great. Now, not only will I have to deal with the popular >misconception of what a hacker is, but I'll have to deal with an >entire generation trained to believe that I'm a bad person. I fear >that, despite some small victories, we're losing the hacker/cracker >nomenclature battle on the large scale.
What's the big deal here people? So the DOJ wants to wipe out Script Kiddies. Quite frankly I don't see anything wrong with this. I think it's past time that it was taught that wanting to be a Script Kiddie is a bad thing. And let's be clear here, this is exactly what the whinning is really about. It really has nothing to do with being a old-school hacker at all, as most of the comments in this thread is clearly showing.
>All my apologies if I sound a little bit thick-headed, but why on >Earth create another licence?
Basically so the anti-GPL crowd can rip-off your code for their own purposes. That's what this "Toward a Better Open Source License" nonsense basically boils down to.
>But if they did do this-how much would it cost? And who really "owns" >the moon? Would it fall under the GPL? ;-)
Actually, I think the moon would fall into the same legal catagory as Antarctica. I doubt it'll ever be possible for someone to actually claim ownership of any territory on the moon. At best you'll be able to lease it through the U.N.
>Not true at all. Runs fine on 8 bit DAC's. I can only imagine the >poor clerks at Circuit City having to listen to your drivel...
Nope. I know people who works in the electronics department at K-mart and Wal-mart and there are problems with the Matrix DVD and certain DVD players. They've been instructed to give refunds to customers.