When did the wintrolls officially return?
Bobbie
Well, it seems after a few weeks of peaceful Linux advocacy, the wintrolls
have once again returned.
I guess it has something to do with the stun effect having worn off after
Microsoft pushed back Vista to 2007.
Oh well.
--
Bobbie the Triple Killer is at http://members.shaw.ca/bobbie4/index.htm
Today's posting comes via the numbers 0 & 1, Suse 10.0 and Pan Newsreader.
http://www.opensuse.org/Download
charles_qu...@yahoo.com
You sure are funny to watch Bobbie!
Bobbie
charles_quackenbusch exclaimed:
You're actually doing pretty good there flatty, but your incestant
crossposting keeps giving you away.
Malware Magnet
>
> Well, it seems after a few weeks of peaceful Linux advocacy, the wintrolls
> have once again returned.
> I guess it has something to do with the stun effect having worn off after
> Microsoft pushed back Vista to 2007.
> Oh well.
>
>
LOL! Yes indeed... I have found that the number of troll posts increases
sharply whenver there is a significant advance made in the OSS world - even
if it is a single troll using a dozen (dozens of?) different Yahoo and
GMail addys.
Something that comes to mind is Novell/SUSE's new Xgl desktop, which is
impressive no matter to which camp one might belong. I shared this with one
of our Microsoft sales reps last Wednesday and, in spite of his MS purist
attitude, he simply "had to have" it. He began asking how to configure his
computer for dual boot, etc., but we eventually came to the conclusion it
would be better for him to build a separate Linux box.
This person is a total "gadget guy" and, being an MS sales rep, he has already
been using his copy of Vista for several weeks. His first reaction after
seeing the streaming video of Xgl was, "Whoa... Microsoft has some catching
up to do."
Obviously, he's not the only one who feels this way.
As for me - I personally don't care for GUIs, gadgets, and toys. However, since
this sort of thing is already positively impacting the growth of OSS, I am
all for it.
--
Life is short. How do you want to be remembered?
Paul Cooke
the new version of the Kororaa live distro with all that fancy xgl goodness
has an installer... I'm having fun on a spare box with it...
|Kororaa Xgl Live CD 0.2 Released!
|Thursday, April 6, 2006, 16:33
|Code-name: "Blood, sweat and tears."
|
|Note: For current bugs and issues in this release please see bugs page.
|
|Ladies and Gentlemen, this is the one you've been waiting so patiently for!
|After narrowly dodging insanity I am able to release Kororaa Xgl Live CD
|version 0.2! We have hacked our Kororaa Installer to work with this Xgl
|Live CD, so easy installation is now possible! This version also sports
|both Radeon and Intel DRI support, KDE 3.5.2, updated Gnome 2.14, Arch-CK
|2.6.16 Kernel, SCSI support and more!
--
XP, unsafe on the information highway at any speed
Paul Hovnanian P.E.
>
> Well, it seems after a few weeks of peaceful Linux advocacy, the wintrolls
> have once again returned.
> I guess it has something to do with the stun effect having worn off after
> Microsoft pushed back Vista to 2007.
> Oh well.
They never really go away. Its just having to install all those critical
patches that slows their posting down from time to time.
--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:Pa...@Hovnanian.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
(Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.)
nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu
Seems to me the Linux advocates have been doing pretty well lately.
Sometimes you log on to find a slew of troll postings, but mostly
there's been a lot of telling stuff that they have no answer for, not
only positives about Linux and its progress, but also negatives about
Windows. Of course the Vista delay doesn't help the trolls much, and
in the meantime, Linux keeps picking up momentum.
Paul Cooke
> Bobbie wrote:
>>
>> Well, it seems after a few weeks of peaceful Linux advocacy, the
>> wintrolls have once again returned.
>> I guess it has something to do with the stun effect having worn off after
>> Microsoft pushed back Vista to 2007.
>> Oh well.
>
> They never really go away. Its just having to install all those critical
> patches that slows their posting down from time to time.
>
don't you mean the scheduled wipe and complete re-install...
<http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1945808,00.asp>
|LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla.?In a rare discussion about the severity of the
|Windows malware scourge, a Microsoft security official said businesses
|should consider investing in an automated process to wipe hard drives and
|reinstall operating systems as a practical way to recover from malware
|infestation.
|
|"When you are dealing with rootkits and some advanced spyware programs, the
|only solution is to rebuild from scratch. In some cases, there really is no
|way to recover without nuking the systems from orbit," Mike Danseglio,
|program manager in the Security Solutions group at Microsoft, said in a
|presentation at the InfoSec World conference here.
"Dust off and nuke from orbit"... says it all really...
Hope you've got all your install and driver disks... and all your program
serial numbers...
rapskat
> This person is a total "gadget guy" and, being an MS sales rep, he has already
> been using his copy of Vista for several weeks. His first reaction after
> seeing the streaming video of Xgl was, "Whoa... Microsoft has some catching
> up to do."
>
> Obviously, he's not the only one who feels this way.
>
> As for me - I personally don't care for GUIs, gadgets, and toys. However, since
> this sort of thing is already positively impacting the growth of OSS, I am
> all for it.
What I find incredulous is the number of nay-sayers who take one look at
XGl and all of a sudden state that *now* Linux is ready for the desktop.
Why?! Because of some spiffy? If I buy some junker and clean it up,
paint it and wax it to a high gloss, is it going to drive any better?
Linux has been ready for the desktop for some time. The evidence of this
is that developers are able to dedicate resources to developing pretty -
it means that the core functionality is already set.
Compare this to other desktop platforms that put all this effort and
expense into making it look nice, but neglect the necessities like
stability, functionality, and security. These are patched on later, just
as long as it looks good!
--
rapskat - 18:40:49 up 14:19, 4 users, load average: 1.87, 2.00, 1.95
The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is
probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners.
-- Ernst Jan Plugge
Roy Culley
<9634344.v...@127.0.0.1>,
Paul Cooke <paul.c...@NOSPAMblueyonder.co.uk> writes:
> Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
>
>> They never really go away. Its just having to install all those
>> critical patches that slows their posting down from time to time.
>
> don't you mean the scheduled wipe and complete re-install...
>
> <http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1945808,00.asp>
>
>|LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla.?In a rare discussion about the severity of the
>|Windows malware scourge, a Microsoft security official said businesses
>|should consider investing in an automated process to wipe hard drives and
>|reinstall operating systems as a practical way to recover from malware
>|infestation.
>|
>|"When you are dealing with rootkits and some advanced spyware programs, the
>|only solution is to rebuild from scratch. In some cases, there really is no
>|way to recover without nuking the systems from orbit," Mike Danseglio,
>|program manager in the Security Solutions group at Microsoft, said in a
>|presentation at the InfoSec World conference here.
>
> "Dust off and nuke from orbit"... says it all really...
He is quite correct of course. Whenever malware is found on a system
the only solution is a complete reinstall. This has been the norm for
years on non-MS OS's.
> Hope you've got all your install and driver disks... and all your
> program serial numbers...
No doubt a major reason many people just accept that their system is
infected with goodness knows what. A windows reinstall is such a
hassle to many.
Roy Culley
<1144615777.9...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu" <nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu> writes:
>
> Bobbie (remove-this) wrote:
>> Well, it seems after a few weeks of peaceful Linux advocacy, the wintrolls
>> have once again returned.
>> I guess it has something to do with the stun effect having worn off after
>> Microsoft pushed back Vista to 2007.
>> Oh well.
>
> Sometimes you log on to find a slew of troll postings, but mostly
> there's been a lot of telling stuff that they have no answer for,
> not only positives about Linux and its progress, but also negatives
> about Windows. Of course the Vista delay doesn't help the trolls
> much, and in the meantime, Linux keeps picking up momentum.
I'm sure a lot of it has been due to the posts by the other Roy. By
pointing out so many pro-Linux articles gives the trolls a difficult
time. Using his rss feeds I tried to post some links but it is just
too time consuming for me. Others have been doing it as well.
Of course the vista delay, because of security concerns, and the
Office delay do make it harder for the wintrolls. It must be really
tough to be a wintroll these days. :-)
Larry Qualig
Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
> Bobbie wrote:
> >
> > Well, it seems after a few weeks of peaceful Linux advocacy, the wintrolls
> > have once again returned.
> > I guess it has something to do with the stun effect having worn off after
> > Microsoft pushed back Vista to 2007.
> > Oh well.
>
> They never really go away. Its just having to install all those critical
> patches that slows their posting down from time to time.
Interesting statement given that the latest Ubuntu updates required a
system reboot. Uptime is now back to 1 day.
larry@ubu:~$ uptime
20:52:06 up 1 day, 9:28, 1 user, load average: 0.14, 0.29, 0.24
larry@ubu:~$
rapskat
Which updates were those? I just did them and didn't have to reboot.
Which version are you running?
In case you were wondering why my uptime is so low, it's because I just
booted back into Kubuntu from playing with the Kororaa XGl LiveCD.
--
rapskat - 21:53:51 up 18 min, 1 user, load average: 0.10, 0.26, 0.18
Failure is not an option. It comes bundled with your Microsoft
product.
-- Ferenc Mantfeld
High Plains Thumper
> charles_quackenbusch exclaimed:
>> Bobbie wrote:
>>
>>> Well, it seems after a few weeks of peaceful Linux
>>> advocacy, the wintrolls have once again returned.
>>> I guess it has something to do with the stun effect
>>> having worn off after Microsoft pushed back Vista to
>>> 2007. Oh well.
>>
>> You sure are funny to watch Bobbie!
>
> incestant crossposting keeps giving you away.
In comparison, he makes Piddie on Reeky look like a saint.
--
HPT
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> Interesting statement given that the latest Ubuntu updates required a
> system reboot. Uptime is now back to 1 day.
>
> larry@ubu:~$ uptime
> 20:52:06 up 1 day, 9:28, 1 user, load average: 0.14, 0.29, 0.24
> larry@ubu:~$
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
| in |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
| Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim
> Larry Qualig <lqu...@uku.co.uk> did eloquently scribble:
>
>>Interesting statement given that the latest Ubuntu updates required a
>>system reboot. Uptime is now back to 1 day.
>>
>>larry@ubu:~$ uptime
>>20:52:06 up 1 day, 9:28, 1 user, load average: 0.14, 0.29, 0.24
>>larry@ubu:~$
>
>
> The only updates linux ever needs a reboot for are kernel updates.
>
Linux: because reboots are for upgrades.
Peter Köhlmann
Wrong. You can "upgrade" all software on linux without reboots
A reboot is only required for "kernel-updates/upgrades"
--
Linux: Because rebooting is for adding new hardware
Mark Dodel
wrote:
-> begin risky.vbs
-> <1144615777.9...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
-> "nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu" <nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu> writes:
-> >
-> > Bobbie (remove-this) wrote:
-> >> Well, it seems after a few weeks of peaceful Linux advocacy, the wintrolls
-> >> have once again returned.
-> >> I guess it has something to do with the stun effect having worn off after
-> >> Microsoft pushed back Vista to 2007.
-> >> Oh well.
-> >
-> > Seems to me the Linux advocates have been doing pretty well lately.
-> > Sometimes you log on to find a slew of troll postings, but mostly
-> > there's been a lot of telling stuff that they have no answer for,
-> > not only positives about Linux and its progress, but also negatives
-> > about Windows. Of course the Vista delay doesn't help the trolls
-> > much, and in the meantime, Linux keeps picking up momentum.
->
-> I'm sure a lot of it has been due to the posts by the other Roy. By
-> pointing out so many pro-Linux articles gives the trolls a difficult
-> time. Using his rss feeds I tried to post some links but it is just
-> too time consuming for me. Others have been doing it as well.
->
-> Of course the vista delay, because of security concerns, and the
-> Office delay do make it harder for the wintrolls. It must be really
-> tough to be a wintroll these days. :-)
But the reality is that the wintrolls couldn't care less about truth
or how bad the latest wincrap is doing. They exist only to FUD. Note
how no matter how devistating the latest exploit of wienieDOS these
nutballs are never effected. Its all about the lies.
Mark
--
From the eComStation of Mark Dodel
http://www.os2voice.org
Warpstock 2006, Windsor, Ontario, Canada, Oct 12-15, 2006 -
http://www.warpstock.org
William Poaster
weary, came a tapping at my door when Jim posted this, & nothing more...
Bullshit. You just proved you can't read.
--
WARNING! Do not drive your
vehicle after using Windows.
Frustration may be taken out
on other road users.
Jim
I was talking about /hardware/ upgrades ;)
Peter Köhlmann
No, you weren't
--
Confucius: He who play in root, eventually kill tree.
Linonut
> But the reality is that the wintrolls couldn't care less about truth
> or how bad the latest wincrap is doing. They exist only to FUD. Note
> how no matter how devistating the latest exploit of wienieDOS these
> nutballs are never effected. Its all about the lies.
Hey now, I'm sure they are proud to call themselves "troll evangelists"!
Or MCSE's ("Microsoft Certified Software Evangelists").
Hallelujah! Ah got da Mahcrosoff spirrut! Laud a mercy, Ah feels da
innovashun takin' ovah my bahddy! Dat ole debbil Linux ain a gonna
touch may!
--
Kreegah! Bundolo Microsoft bolgani!
Larry Qualig
rapskat wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 17:53:24 -0700, Larry Qualig wrote:
>
>
> > Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
> >> Bobbie wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Well, it seems after a few weeks of peaceful Linux advocacy, the
> >> > wintrolls have once again returned.
> >> > I guess it has something to do with the stun effect having worn off
> >> > after Microsoft pushed back Vista to 2007.
> >> > Oh well.
> >>
> >> They never really go away. Its just having to install all those
> >> critical patches that slows their posting down from time to time.
> >
> > Interesting statement given that the latest Ubuntu updates required a
> > system reboot. Uptime is now back to 1 day.
> >
> > larry@ubu:~$ uptime
> > 20:52:06 up 1 day, 9:28, 1 user, load average: 0.14, 0.29, 0.24
> > larry@ubu:~$
>
> Which updates were those? I just did them and didn't have to reboot.
> Which version are you running?
>
> In case you were wondering why my uptime is so low, it's because I just
> booted back into Kubuntu from playing with the Kororaa XGl LiveCD.
I'm not 100% where this is logged but it appears to be
/var/log/dpkg.log but unfortunately this log doesn't contain date
entries. The bottom of the log contains this. It's been about 10-12
days since I last updated this machine so the patch could have been
issued anytime during this period. The date looks wrong mainly because
I'm pretty sure that I did the upgrade on the 8th and not the 6th but I
don't see any log entries for the 8th.
2006-04-06 21:21:08 status half-installed libcairo2 1.0.2-0ubuntu1
2006-04-06 21:21:08 status unpacked libcairo2 1.0.2-0ubuntu1.1
2006-04-06 21:21:08 status unpacked libcairo2 1.0.2-0ubuntu1.1
2006-04-06 21:21:08 status unpacked libc6-i686 2.3.5-1ubuntu12.5.10.1
2006-04-06 21:21:08 status half-configured libc6-i686
2.3.5-1ubuntu12.5.10.1
2006-04-06 21:21:09 status installed libc6-i686 2.3.5-1ubuntu12.5.10.1
2006-04-06 21:21:09 status unpacked locales 2.3.5-1ubuntu12.5.10.1
2006-04-06 21:21:09 status unpacked locales 2.3.5-1ubuntu12.5.10.1
2006-04-06 21:21:09 status half-configured locales
2.3.5-1ubuntu12.5.10.1
2006-04-06 21:22:59 status installed locales 2.3.5-1ubuntu12.5.10.1
2006-04-06 21:22:59 status unpacked libcairo2 1.0.2-0ubuntu1.1
2006-04-06 21:22:59 status half-configured libcairo2 1.0.2-0ubuntu1.1
2006-04-06 21:23:03 status installed libcairo2 1.0.2-0ubuntu1.1
Tim Smith
>
> The only updates linux ever needs a reboot for are kernel updates.
Well, those are the only updates that *need* a reboot, in the sense that you
*have* to reboot to apply the update. However, it's a damned good idea to
reboot on major library updates, too, as you have no guarentee that the
running system is in a consistent state after such an upgrade.
--
--Tim Smith
Jim
sorry, is this the five minute argument or the full half hour?
Johan Lindquist
Jim was all like, "Dude,
> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>> Jim wrote:
[..]
>>>I was talking about /hardware/ upgrades ;)
>>
>> No, you weren't
>
> sorry, is this the five minute argument or the full half hour?
Tee hee!
--
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana. Perth ---> *
17:47:51 up 7 days, 4:41, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
Linux 2.6.16.1 x86_64 GNU/Linux Registered Linux user #261729
Sinister Midget
That reminds me a bit of some of those Blammer revivals.
--
The sad thing about bashing Windows is that it's all true.
M
Don't know what you have got installed on your pc that caused a reboot, but
my kubuntu pc is fully up to date, as far as I can make out. It has never
asked me to reboot (so far) after doing an update.
Regards,
M
Peter Köhlmann
It is the 2 second argument.
You stated something, you were wrong, and thats it
Please enlighten us where in your line "Linux: because reboots are for
upgrades" the word "hardware" is to be found
--
Microsoft's Guide To System Design:
Let it get in YOUR way. The problem for your problem.
William Poaster
weary, came a tapping at my door when Jim posted this, & nothing more...
> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
Bullshit, you're backpedalling.
William Poaster
weary, came a tapping at my door when M posted this, & nothing more...
Nor have any of my SuSE installations.
The Ghost In The Machine
<rap...@gmail.com>
wrote
on Sun, 09 Apr 2006 18:47:12 -0400
<pan.2006.04.09....@rapskat.com>:
> On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 12:54:01 -0500, Malware Magnet wrote:
>
>> This person is a total "gadget guy" and, being an MS sales
>> rep, he has already been using his copy of Vista for several
>> weeks. His first reaction after seeing the streaming video of
>> Xgl was, "Whoa... Microsoft has some catching up to do."
>>
>> Obviously, he's not the only one who feels this way.
>>
>> As for me - I personally don't care for GUIs, gadgets, and
>> toys. However, since this sort of thing is already positively
>> impacting the growth of OSS, I am all for it.
>
> What I find incredulous is the number of nay-sayers who take one look at
> XGl and all of a sudden state that *now* Linux is ready for the desktop.
>
> Why?! Because of some spiffy? If I buy some junker and clean it up,
> paint it and wax it to a high gloss, is it going to drive any better?
>
> Linux has been ready for the desktop for some time. The evidence of this
> is that developers are able to dedicate resources to developing pretty -
> it means that the core functionality is already set.
>
> Compare this to other desktop platforms that put all this effort and
> expense into making it look nice, but neglect the necessities like
> stability, functionality, and security. These are patched on later, just
> as long as it looks good!
>
Personally, I've been using Linux on my desktop for a
number of years. Definitely ready for *my* desktop. :-)
I'm not sure what to make of Xgl and similar efforts.
Eye candy, for the most part; some applications might
become useful (e.g., open a door and walk into a game
as opposed to explicitly launching it -- or, perhaps,
walk into a virtual server room which indicates a failing
box) if the technology for GL-capable hardware becomes
prevalent enough.
Wobble-windows might be good for demos, though; they tend to
catch the user's eye. But for actual *use*...probably six
of one, half a dozen of another. The "fisheye" effect in
MacOSX is probably more useful if only because the mouse
pointer can be easily found.
Of course, the prettiest GUI won't matter a hill o' beans if
it keeps getting replaced by an error screen of some sort. :-)
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
Windows Vista. Because everyone wants a really slick-looking 8-sided wheel.
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
at 02:05 AM, r...@nodomain.none (Roy Culley) said:
>He is quite correct of course. Whenever malware is found on a system
>the only solution is a complete reinstall. This has been the norm for
>years on non-MS OS's.
When have you seen a virus or worm infestation on OS/2, z/OS or z/VM?
It's only with m$ malware that infestation is routine.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>
Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spam...@library.lspace.org
The Ghost In The Machine
<spam...@library.lspace.org.invalid>
wrote
on Mon, 10 Apr 2006 22:40:03 -0300
<443b1703$64$fuzhry+tra$mr2...@news.patriot.net>:
> begin In <u2kog3-...@dog.did.it>, on 04/10/2006
> at 02:05 AM, r...@nodomain.none (Roy Culley) said:
>
>>He is quite correct of course. Whenever malware is found on a system
>>the only solution is a complete reinstall. This has been the norm for
>>years on non-MS OS's.
>
> When have you seen a virus or worm infestation on OS/2, z/OS or z/VM?
> It's only with m$ malware that infestation is routine.
>
And that's probably why Microsoft is so successful. :-/ It's a
secondary market and they're all so happy that Microsoft can get
infected and bring *them* money. :-/
I hope I'm wrong... :-)
Mark Kent
Peter Köhlmann <peter.k...@t-online.de> espoused:
full half-hour, I'd say...
--
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
VICARIOUSLY experience some reason to LIVE!!
Jim
if you're going to be pedantic:
LINUX: BECAUSE FORCED SYSTEM RESTARTS ARE FOR HARDWARE UPGRADES WHICH
INVOLVE THE TEMPORARY REMOVAL OF AA CASE PANEL AND LOCATION OF A FREE
PCI SLOT.
Better?
Johan Lindquist
Peter Köhlmann was all like, "Dude,
[snippety]
>>> Jim wrote:
>>>>>Jim wrote:
>>>>>>Linux: because reboots are for upgrades.
>>>>I was talking about /hardware/ upgrades ;)
> You stated something, you were wrong, and thats it
You misinterpreted someone and saw an enemy where there were none,
again, and /that/ is really it.
> Please enlighten us where in your line "Linux: because reboots are
> for upgrades" the word "hardware" is to be found
You're free to get a clue at any time, Peter. The rest of us, at
least the ones who do not see trolls around every corner and feel a
desperate need to "challenge" every flamebait with a single pointless
word, are already quite enlightened in this case.
If you ever stop shooting blindly at anything that moves in a way that
feels threatening to you, I think you might actually be able to write
something worth reading, but it's been a long time since I saw a post
of yours that contained any substance.
Just sayin'. You're free to do as you please, of course.
hth, hand.
--
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana. Perth ---> *
09:10:43 up 8 days, 20:04, 2 users, load average: 0.73, 0.57, 0.45
Johan Lindquist
Jim was all like, "Dude,
> if you're going to be pedantic:
>
> LINUX: BECAUSE FORCED SYSTEM RESTARTS ARE FOR HARDWARE UPGRADES
> WHICH INVOLVE THE TEMPORARY REMOVAL OF AA CASE PANEL AND LOCATION OF
> A FREE PCI SLOT.
Well, if you're going to be that pedantic, cpu and memory upgrades
do not fit in pci slots. Also, there's people who run their systems
with the top down too so you wouldn't necessarily have to remove any
case panels, even if I couldn't personally stand the noise myself.
Also, there's.. well, actually, if you.. no, I don't have anything
else right now. Carry on.
--
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana. Perth ---> *
09:22:11 up 8 days, 20:16, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.05, 0.20
William Poaster
this:
> So anyway, it was like, 08:58 CEST Apr 12 2006, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
> Jim was all like, "Dude,
>
>> if you're going to be pedantic:
>>
>> LINUX: BECAUSE FORCED SYSTEM RESTARTS ARE FOR HARDWARE UPGRADES WHICH
>> INVOLVE THE TEMPORARY REMOVAL OF AA CASE PANEL AND LOCATION OF A FREE
>> PCI SLOT.
>
> Well, if you're going to be that pedantic, cpu and memory upgrades do not
> fit in pci slots. Also, there's people who run their systems with the top
> down too so you wouldn't necessarily have to remove any case panels, even
> if I couldn't personally stand the noise myself. Also, there's.. well,
> actually, if you.. no, I don't have anything else right now. Carry on.
Rather than admit he was wrong in the *first* place, he just keeps digging....
Johan Lindquist
William Poaster was all like, "Dude,
> Rather than admit he was wrong in the *first* place, he just keeps
> digging....
Maybe I got it wrong, but it doesn't seem to me the OP is one of the
bad guys.
--
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana. Perth ---> *
11:44:14 up 8 days, 22:38, 2 users, load average: 0.08, 0.70, 0.57
Mark Kent
Johan Lindquist <sp...@smilfinken.net> espoused:
> So anyway, it was like, 11:28 CEST Apr 12 2006, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
> William Poaster was all like, "Dude,
>
>> Rather than admit he was wrong in the *first* place, he just keeps
>> digging....
>
> Maybe I got it wrong, but it doesn't seem to me the OP is one of the
> bad guys.
>
No, he's not. It was a lighthearted remark, and if you look carefully
at what he was following up to, it was very clear, at least to me,
precisely what he meant. Okay, he could've worded it better, but his
error was typographical not intent, to my mind, so I do not agree with
William P nor with Peter K on this one.
Peter Köhlmann
> begin oe_protect.scr
> Johan Lindquist <sp...@smilfinken.net> espoused:
>> So anyway, it was like, 11:28 CEST Apr 12 2006, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
>> William Poaster was all like, "Dude,
>>
>>> Rather than admit he was wrong in the *first* place, he just keeps
>>> digging....
>>
>> Maybe I got it wrong, but it doesn't seem to me the OP is one of the
>> bad guys.
>>
>
> No, he's not.
I am not sure, but I seem to recall some rather dumb claims from him. Can be
wrong on that one, though
> It was a lighthearted remark, and if you look carefully
> at what he was following up to, it was very clear, at least to me,
> precisely what he meant.
What he following up to was all about software
So I find it somewhat strange that it should be so very clear that he meant
"hardware" when the discussion before was all about software
> Okay, he could've worded it better,
He certainly could
> but his
> error was typographical not intent, to my mind, so I do not agree with
> William P nor with Peter K on this one.
>
I don't know exactly what you mean here, I have not called "Jim" a wintroll
(yet)
--
Microsoft: The company that made email dangerous
And web browsing. And viewing pictures. And...
Mark Kent
I think he was just attempting to produce a mildly amusing wordplay
based on the previous poster, which backfired badly. I believe his
reference was about /kernel/ replacement, but he neglected to include
the word kernel, which has caused huge confusion. I do not believe that
he was aiming to indicate that Linux required a reboot after a package
update, which is how it came out.
William Poaster
He said "Linux: because reboots are for upgrades." Now put yourself in a
*newbie's* boots & read it. What would *you* think? (Rhetorical question
BTW)
William Poaster
> Mark Kent wrote:
>
>> begin oe_protect.scr
>> Johan Lindquist <sp...@smilfinken.net> espoused:
>>> So anyway, it was like, 11:28 CEST Apr 12 2006, you know? Oh, and,
>>> yeah, William Poaster was all like, "Dude,
>>>
>>>> Rather than admit he was wrong in the *first* place, he just keeps
>>>> digging....
>>>
>>> Maybe I got it wrong, but it doesn't seem to me the OP is one of the
>>> bad guys.
>>>
>>>
>> No, he's not.
>
> I am not sure, but I seem to recall some rather dumb claims from him. Can
> be wrong on that one, though
Take a look at Message-ID: <P_MZf.18925$g76...@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net>
"it's a lot easier to hit a big target than to hit a small one. Gets much
more publicity, too.
It's the same thing with shooting. Hit a large target, not a problem, the
broadside of a barn is one huge target. Can't very well miss. Now, take a
ha'penny at 100 yards. Bloody small target, takes insane amounts of skill
and a rock-steady hand (not to mention a deadly accurate scope) to even
come close.
Microsoft is the barn. Linux is the ha'penny at 100. Which is the easier
target?"
Which has been disproved in other threads.
>> It was a lighthearted remark, and if you look carefully at what he was
>> following up to, it was very clear, at least to me, precisely what he
>> meant.
>
> What he following up to was all about software So I find it somewhat
> strange that it should be so very clear that he meant "hardware" when the
> discussion before was all about software
>
>> Okay, he could've worded it better,
>
> He certainly could
>
>> but his
>> error was typographical not intent, to my mind, so I do not agree with
>> William P nor with Peter K on this one.
>>
>>
> I don't know exactly what you mean here, I have not called "Jim" a
> wintroll (yet)
--
Mark Kent
William Poaster <will...@jvyycbnfg.zr.hx> espoused:
Yeah, I know... :-)