Desktop/Laptop Linux is a great SUCCESS - How to get started

[Mark S Bilk]

Desktop/Laptop Linux is a great SUCCESS - How to get started

On Mar 14, 3:56 pm, Torre Starnes <torre.star...@gmail.org> wrote:
> 1. Organization.
> 2. Realizing early on that fragmentation will kill the project
> quickly and reacting to bring the community together.

See below.

> 3. Providing what the consumer wants to pay for.
> 4. High quality applications.
> 5. Ease of use.
> 6. Filling a void instead of creating one.
> 7. Quality.
> 8. Financial backing.
> 9. Accountability.
> 10. Pride in the product.

Desktop Linux satisfies all of these criteria. Tens of millions
of people around the world are using it. It provides security,
power, multiple virtual desktops, flexible file systems,
modularity, processor independence, open source code, and zero
cost. Most of these advantages are not available in Microsoft
Windows or Apple Macintosh.

The only reason why Linux is not the most popular operating system
is that Microsoft has used many different coercive and deceptive
operations for 15 years to try to destroy it:

http://cosmicpenguin.com/linux/MICROSOFTS_WAR_AGAINST_LINUX.html

Regarding alleged "fragmentation", Linux offers lots of choices
in distributions [distros] and desktop environments [DEs]. This
doesn't "kill" anything, but some choices are much more powerful
and useful than others.

I've been using the SuSE (now OpenSuse) distro and KDE (now
specifically KDE3, _not_ KDE4) for ten years, because in my
evaluation, they are the best organized and maintained, and
the most powerful.

If you decide to use the Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, Redhat, or
Slackware distro instead of OpenSuse, you can get KDE3 as the
Trinity Desktop Environment:

http://www.trinitydesktop.org/

http://www.trinitydesktop.org/releases/3.5.13/

OpenSuse has a very helpful IRC channel, if you run into any
difficulties.

To avoid even the possibility of problems, you can ask someone
to install Linux on your computer for you! Simply find the
Linux User Group nearest you from one of the following lists,
and contact them. They will usually do it, for free of course,
if you bring your computer to one of their meetings. This makes
Linux as easy to use as buying the computer with it pre-installed.
No problems -- guaranteed!

http://www.linuxlinks.com/UserGroups/

http://dmoz.org/Computers/Software/Operating_Systems/Linux/User_Groups/

http://dir.yahoo.com/Computers_and_Internet/Software/Operating_Systems/Unix/Linux/User_Groups/

Here's some additional information:

20 Reasons You Should Switch To Linux
http://www.techradar.com/news/software/operating-systems/20-reasons-you-should-switch-to-linux-912294

20 Linux Alternatives for Common Windows Applications
http://www.datamation.com/open-source/20-linux-alternatives-for-common-windows-applications-1.html

67 Free Open Source Replacements for Really Expensive Applications
http://www.datamation.com/open-source/67-open-source-replacements-for-really-expensive-applications-1.html

With the correct choices, Desktop/Laptop Linux provides the best
computing environment by far, as a result of following the
principles of its parent Unix -- simplicity and modularity,

Try it -- you'll love it!

[-hh]

On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk <m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
> ...

> Try it -- you'll love it!

Already did. And again. I don't see any rational reason to ever
consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.

YMMV,

-hh

[Mark S Bilk]

Interesting. In the article that "-hh" is responding to,
I stated many rational reasons for using Linux:

>> [Linux] provides security, power, multiple virtual desktops,

>> flexible file systems, modularity, processor independence,
>> open source code, and zero cost. Most of these advantages
>> are not available in Microsoft Windows or Apple Macintosh.

>> With the correct choices, Desktop/Laptop Linux provides
>> the best computing environment by far, as a result of
>> following the principles of its parent Unix -- simplicity
>> and modularity,

But in his response, "-hh" deleted all those rational reasons
for using Linux and then said that he "[doesn't] see any".

Why would "-hh" do that?

I looked at about 20 of his recent posts to COLA, and when
he mentioned Linux, it was almost always to attack Linux
advocates. For example, he criticized them several times for
making personal attacks, but didn't criticize any anti-Linux
propagandists for anything, despite their copious use of personal
attacks, often employing obscenities. He also referred to
Linux users as being "the herd", which is a term used only by
Microsoft's lying anti-Linux propaganda gang.

I have to conclude that "-hh" is also an anti-Linux
propagandist. So why did he delete all the rational reasons
I gave for using Linux?

My article, adjudged excellent by a well-informed Linux advocate
to whom I showed it, went without a response for more than
three hours. Microsoft always tries to censor or negate
any positive information about Linux, wherever it appears,
and has done so for 15 years:

http://cosmicpenguin.com/linux/MICROSOFTS_WAR_AGAINST_LINUX.html

But the best the anti-Linux propagandists could come up with in
response to my article was a followup with all of my reasons
to use Linux deleted, and with the poster then saying that he
doesn't see any rational reason to use Linux. Totally lame,
but that's all they could think of.

Microsoft's anti-Linux department must be hoping that some
visitors to COLA will see the "-hh" article but not mine,
and so will be influenced against using Linux.

It's the visitors to COLA who come here to learn about
Linux that Microsoft has tried to influence with its 500,000
lying anti-Linux propaganda posts over more than ten years.
Linux users here are immune to Microsoft's lies, and almost
all of the anti-Linux propagandists are being paid by the
corporation to post those lies.

No other entity besides Microsoft has the motivation or
the resources to post 500,000 lying anti-Linux propaganda
articles to COLA, nor the 15-year history of vicious attacks
against Linux:

http://cosmicpenguin.com/linux/MICROSOFTS_WAR_AGAINST_LINUX.html

Linux advocates should stop talking to Microsoft's propaganda
posters. Talk to the audience -- the visitors -- and refute
the lies, but don't talk to the propagandists as if they were
people. They're not. They are sociopaths, which means that
they harm others in order to benefit themselves, they have no
conscience, and they lie constantly. They are no longer human,
just as a rabid dog is no longer a friendly pet. Both have
been transformed by a virus, cultural/memetic and biological,
respectively. Arguing with them is useless; they have never
changed their minds and never will. They are paid agents of
an evil corporation, which is trying to put all Internet
information and communication under government (fascist)
control -- previously with the "Palladium" firmware/software,
and now with the "secure boot" that will prevent computers
from running Linux.

This is real, deadly evil we're dealing with here: a gradual
plan to enslave every human being to the will and profit of
the few thousand ultra-wealthy psychopaths who are creating
what they call the New World Order. Recently Obama requested
and signed a law that allows the US government to kidnap and
murder anyone they want, anywhere in the world, without a trial.

After they stage a few false-flag terror operations involving
the Internet, they will pass a law putting all computers under
government control. No one will be able to access websites
like mine that tell the truth about what's going on, and how
world fascism has spread throughout the entire 20th and now
21st centuries, mostly from the United States.

http://cosmicpenguin.com

Linux folks, it's agents of these monsters that call you "turds"
and "the herd" and attack your families with obscenities. Have
you ever accomplished _anything_ by descending to their level
and arguing with them? No, you only make yourselves look bad
to the only audience that matters -- people who visit COLA
looking for information about Linux. The sociopaths bait you
into acting like they do, so that visitors won't be able to
tell the difference.

Heads up, people. This is not a drill.

[DFS]

Classic!

Where do all the cola nutcases come from? What attracts them to Linux?

Bilk, back on your meds before Pres. Obama has you kidnapped and murdered.

[Mark S Bilk]

Here's an antidote to the poison from Microsoft/DFS:

John Stewart -- Mother Country
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDIQcigvgrE

[DFS]

Here's an antidote to the lunacy from cola/Bilk:

"Chlorpromazine (aka Thorazine) is used to treat the symptoms of
schizophrenia (a mental illness that causes disturbed or unusual
thinking, loss of interest in life, and strong or inappropriate
emotions) and other psychotic disorders (conditions that cause
difficulty telling the difference between things or ideas that are real
and things or ideas that are not real) and to treat the symptoms of
mania (frenzied, abnormally excited mood) in people who have bipolar
disorder (manic depressive disorder; a condition that causes episodes of
mania, episodes of depression, and other abnormal moods)."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0000553/

[Mark S Bilk]

On Mar 15, 9:11 pm, Microsoft/DFS <nos...@dfs.com> wrote:
> On 3/15/2012 11:56 PM, Mark S Bilk wrote:
>
> > Here's an antidote to the poison from Microsoft/DFS:
>
> > John Stewart -- Mother Country
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDIQcigvgrE
>
> Here's an antidote to the lunacy from cola/Bilk:
> "Chlorpromazine (aka Thorazine) is used to treat the symptoms of
> schizophrenia (a mental illness that causes disturbed or unusual

http://cosmicpenguin.com/linux/MICROSOFTS_WAR_AGAINST_LINUX.html

MICROSOFT WROTE A SECRET MANUAL FOR ITS PROPAGANDA AGENTS
TELLING THEM TO LIE ABOUT COMPETING PRODUCTS AND TO CALL THEIR
USERS INSANE

A Microsoft document called "Effective Evangelism" and stamped
"HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL" on every page was obtained in the Comes
vs. Microsoft case. It's available at these locations -- PDF,
and HTML with a few comments:

http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/Comes-3096.pdf

http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20071023002351958

Here's an excerpt from it:

[quote] [Microsoft's] Evangelism's goal is to put the final
nail into the competing technology's coffin, and bury it in
the burning depths of the earth. Ideally, use of the competing
technology becomes associated with mental deficiency, as in,
"he believes in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and OS/2." Just
keep rubbing it in, via the [bribed] press, [bribed] analysts,
[Usenet] newsgroups, whatever. Make the complete failure of
the competition's technology part of the mythology of the
computer industry. [/quote]

[Kari Laine]

When you take such a strong attitude on something and lead people
against a good choice, you really should give out your reasoning.
Otherwise you are just paid Microsoft chill.

Linux is free. Free to use free to develop. Windows and OS X are totally
closed proprietary money cows for the corporates.

This week alone if have cleaned and reinstalled several Windows machines
because of malware and other symptoms which were not correctable without
reinstall. Linux does not have these problems.

One of them had also lost Windows media and serial number. That person
have to now buy Windows AGAIN or accept to start using Linux. Which
would be the best solution to the problem.

I personally use both Windows and Linux and I very much prefer Linux. It
is stable, fast and effective OS. With Windows machines I seem always to
have issues, which are not solvable.

Kari

[Kari Laine]

This is right out of the The Top Secret Propaganda book of Microsoft.
Getting out in the court case "Comes versus Microsoft". Sorry I don't
have the link handy.

Shortly: Microsoft instructs Windows platform advocates attack the the
users of competing products as stupid and nut people.

So DFS you have properly indoctrinated.


Kari

[Chris Ahlstrom]

Mark S Bilk wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> <weird mixture ranging from truth to paranoia>

>
> http://cosmicpenguin.com
>
> Linux folks, it's agents of these monsters that call you "turds"
> and "the herd" and attack your families with obscenities. Have
> you ever accomplished _anything_ by descending to their level
> and arguing with them? No, you only make yourselves look bad
> to the only audience that matters -- people who visit COLA
> looking for information about Linux. The sociopaths bait you
> into acting like they do, so that visitors won't be able to
> tell the difference.

Yup. Even Lusotec is succumbing to the temptation to bite back.

> Heads up, people. This is not a drill.

No, it is a "drill down" :-D

microsoft drill down

--
I see you're still having reading comprehension problems. I didn't make
any mention of Bose stereo or audio equipment. I'm very familiar with
Bose... they're just down the road from me in xxxxxxxxxx, XX and I've
worked with and know several Bose employees.
-- Larry "Message-ID" Qualig

[Chris Ahlstrom]

Mark S Bilk wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Mar 15, 9:11 pm, Microsoft/DFS <nos...@dfs.com> wrote:

-------------

<chuckle>

> http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/Comes-3096.pdf
>
> http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20071023002351958
>
> Here's an excerpt from it:
>
> [quote] [Microsoft's] Evangelism's goal is to put the final
> nail into the competing technology's coffin, and bury it in
> the burning depths of the earth. Ideally, use of the competing
> technology becomes associated with mental deficiency, as in,
> "he believes in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and OS/2." Just
> keep rubbing it in, via the [bribed] press, [bribed] analysts,
> [Usenet] newsgroups, whatever. Make the complete failure of
> the competition's technology part of the mythology of the
> computer industry. [/quote]

A sample of such provided below.

--
Certainly Office is an order better than Open Office.
All new products have issues. The PS3 had oodles.
What HAS amazed me (and I was anti x-box before) was how well it has
scaled.
As for MS : they dont make HW. They stick their logo on it. Or do they?
They fabricate nylon/plastic shells and the like? I dont know 100% for
sure.
The fact is their SW works for people. Over 90% of the PC users in the
world use it. And it works for them. Yes there are idiots like WronG who
claim they spend 90% of their day fighting malware. But I also believe
it takes him 4 hours to open the fridge door.
-- "Hadron" <if2ffi$si3$1...@news.eternal-september.org>

[Chris Ahlstrom]

Kari Laine wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> I personally use both Windows and Linux and I very much prefer Linux. It
> is stable, fast and effective OS. With Windows machines I seem always to
> have issues, which are not solvable.

Similar here, though most of my Windows usage is in VMs these days, so
the problems are minimized. It's the only way to run Windows as far as
I am concerned.

--
They're not thank god. But Rasker IS probably a liar. Not always. But I
used to think he was just a bit incompetent. But as his stories become more
and more far fetched one has to consider the fact that like Peter he's an
out and out liar.
-- "Hadron", pot-kettle-black

[Hadron]

Chris Ahlstrom <ahls...@xzoozy.com> writes:

> Mark S Bilk wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> <weird mixture ranging from truth to paranoia>
>>
>> http://cosmicpenguin.com
>>
>> Linux folks, it's agents of these monsters that call you "turds"
>> and "the herd" and attack your families with obscenities. Have
>> you ever accomplished _anything_ by descending to their level
>> and arguing with them? No, you only make yourselves look bad
>> to the only audience that matters -- people who visit COLA
>> looking for information about Linux. The sociopaths bait you
>> into acting like they do, so that visitors won't be able to
>> tell the difference.
>
> Yup. Even Lusotec is succumbing to the temptation to bite back.
>
>> Heads up, people. This is not a drill.
>
> No, it is a "drill down" :-D
>
> microsoft drill down

Yegods! Creepy is sucking up to Mark S Bilk now!

[-hh]

On Mar 16, 5:44 am, Kari Laine <karitla...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 03/16/2012 01:01 AM, -hh wrote:
>
> > On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk<m...@cosmicpenguin.com>  wrote:
> >> ...
> >> Try it -- you'll love it!
>
> > Already did.  And again.  I don't see any rational reason to ever
> > consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>
> > YMMV,
>
> > -hh
>
> When you take such a strong attitude on something and lead people
> against a good choice, you really should give out your reasoning.

I already have; its in the archives.

> Otherwise you are just paid Microsoft chill.

Once again, the default assumption of Linux advocacy is that all of
their woes can only be due to how evil Microsoft is, and no other
possibility. Since you've not comprehended my prior comments, but
chosen to misinterpret them as shilling for MS, I'll make it simple to
understand:

Fuck Microsoft. Strong language to follow.


> Linux is free.

From a lifecycle cost management perspective, it is most certainly NOT
free.

> Free to use ...

False. It is only free to download.

> ... free to develop.

False. It is only free to download.

> Windows and OS X are totally
> closed proprietary money cows for the corporates.

Even if true, that doesn't make them technically unsuitable for
everyone's IT needs, nor does it automatically make them have the
highest lifecycle management cost.

> This week alone if have cleaned and reinstalled several Windows machines
> because of malware and other symptoms which were not correctable without
> reinstall. Linux does not have these problems.

False. Linux also has these cost risks ... they're just not
necessarily of the same general magnitude of Windows. See reasonably
objective information resources, such as:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_malware

> One of them had also lost Windows media and serial number. That person
> have to now buy Windows AGAIN or accept to start using Linux.

Human error is to blame, not the product. If you lost your car keys,
do you think that the automaker should replace them for you for free
too?

> Which would be the best solution to the problem.

Only from the shortsighted perspective of someone who clearly only
looks at "initial purchase price" and doesn't have a clue about how to
even start to do a lifecycle cost assessment.

> I personally use both Windows and Linux and I very much prefer Linux. It
> is stable, fast and effective OS. With Windows machines I seem always to
> have issues, which are not solvable.

And I've used all three of the major OSs, which means that I also have
insights as well as preferences.

For speed, I simply buy faster hardware.
For stability, I don't fuck around with inviting problems through
stupid system hacks/mods.
For solving, I've not lost any of my personal data .. or key desired
capabilities .. since before Linux was born.

So where are there any issues?

Oh, let me guess: if I were to jump through a different set of hoops,
I would have saved the $100 expense of an OS license on my upfront IT
costs.

Golly, a **hundred** bucks!! Applied across a typical three year
lifecycle, which means that the magnitude of this whine works out to
less than a buck a week.

So just what other things are you **currently** doing just to save $1/
week? Never buy a soda from a soda machine? Making a point to only
poop at work so as to use less of your own toiletpaper at home?
Scrimp on the tip for the waitress at that dinner out? FYI, do keep
in mind that not eating out at all (or as much) will save a lot more
than $1/week, so it is above this threshold.


-hh

[Hadron]

You pretty much own "Kari" at the moment. She's not too bright.

[Foster]

And how!
Where do these kooks come from?

I think it's the other losers and loser community at large that is
the attraction to Linux.
The unwashed bearded masses always seem to find each other and join
the comfort of the fold where there is no accountability.

The short answer is "foul" like to travel in flocks....

[Foster]

On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 06:12:48 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> Mark S Bilk wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On Mar 15, 9:11 pm, Microsoft/DFS <nos...@dfs.com> wrote:
> -------------
>
> <chuckle>
>
>> http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/Comes-3096.pdf
>>
>> http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20071023002351958
>>
>> Here's an excerpt from it:
>>
>> [quote] [Microsoft's] Evangelism's goal is to put the final

>

> A sample of such provided below.

You're really sinking to below low when you start sucking up to Mark
S. Bilk.

Even your former master Shitzferwitz agrees that Mark has a few
loose screws and a few over tightened bolts.

[Foster]

Incredible.

Liarmutt has no self worth or pride.

[Foster]

And that is the experience of 99 percent of everyone who tries
Linux.

They hate it.

[DFS]

On 3/16/2012 12:27 AM, Mark S Bilk wrote:
> On Mar 15, 9:11 pm, Microsoft/DFS<nos...@dfs.com> wrote:
>> On 3/15/2012 11:56 PM, Mark S Bilk wrote:
>>
>>> Here's an antidote to the poison from Microsoft/DFS:
>>
>>> John Stewart -- Mother Country
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDIQcigvgrE
>>
>> Here's an antidote to the lunacy from cola/Bilk:
>> "Chlorpromazine (aka Thorazine) is used to treat the symptoms of
>> schizophrenia (a mental illness that causes disturbed or unusual
>
> http://cosmicpenguin.com/linux/MICROSOFTS_WAR_AGAINST_LINUX.html
>
> MICROSOFT WROTE A SECRET MANUAL FOR ITS PROPAGANDA AGENTS
> TELLING THEM TO LIE ABOUT COMPETING PRODUCTS AND TO CALL THEIR
> USERS INSANE

The propaganda manual Microsoft gave me said to hang around cola
(cesspool.of.lying.advocates) and keep an eye on the loons. It said
they were drawn to Linux like flies to shit.

You look like a fly, Bilk.

The fact is, nothing MS has ever said approaches the sheer vitriol,
lunacy, idiocy, and dishonesty spewed by you and a thousand other Linux
assholes day after day after day for 20 years.

[Foster]

On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 10:46:24 -0400, DFS wrote:

> On 3/16/2012 12:27 AM, Mark S Bilk wrote:
>> On Mar 15, 9:11 pm, Microsoft/DFS<nos...@dfs.com> wrote:
>>> On 3/15/2012 11:56 PM, Mark S Bilk wrote:
>>>
>>>> Here's an antidote to the poison from Microsoft/DFS:
>>>
>>>> John Stewart -- Mother Country
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDIQcigvgrE
>>>
>>> Here's an antidote to the lunacy from cola/Bilk:
>>> "Chlorpromazine (aka Thorazine) is used to treat the symptoms of
>>> schizophrenia (a mental illness that causes disturbed or unusual
>>
>> http://cosmicpenguin.com/linux/MICROSOFTS_WAR_AGAINST_LINUX.html
>>
>> MICROSOFT WROTE A SECRET MANUAL FOR ITS PROPAGANDA AGENTS
>> TELLING THEM TO LIE ABOUT COMPETING PRODUCTS AND TO CALL THEIR
>> USERS INSANE
>
>
> The propaganda manual Microsoft gave me said to hang around cola
> (cesspool.of.lying.advocates) and keep an eye on the loons. It said
> they were drawn to Linux like flies to shit.
>
> You look like a fly, Bilk.

Yea.

A fruit fly :)

[DFS]

You're under the impression cola "advocates" are not nuts? Fact is,
it's almost impossible to find an "advocate" who doesn't run around
muttering stupidity and craziness under their breath.



7: "Linux markets its cheaper products while appil trolls who promote
products to milk wimmin out of money with their money milking debt
creating iPiddys, and MP3 players such as ipod will happily side with
appil and their milking maidens targeting wimmin to milk wimmin dry and
putting them into debt."


Chris Ahlstrom: acts like a sashaying nancy-boy, tells us how his wife
runs his life and gave him a weekly allowance, uses Windows to make a
living but says Microsoft is "evil" and "cancer", says his wife is
probably physically stronger than males, defends moronic congenital
liars like Rex Ballard and 7 and chrisv, cataloged 660 Hadron posts but
labels others 'stalkers'...


chrisv: in 6 consecutive days posted this litany of ranting:

* What a piece of shit *liar* you are, "Ezekiel".
* You're a piece of shit, "Ezekiel".
* You sure are a shitty and transparent liar, "Ezekiel".
* lying fsckwit Ezekiel
* Hey Ezekiel, you stupid piece of shit.
* What you can expect from lying assholes like "Ezekiel"
* bald-faced liars like "Ezekiel"
* Even his shitty pals, like "Ezekiel".
* that POS hypocrite "Ezekiel"
* Are you mentally retarded, cc?
* Apple is slimey. As are you, "Lloyd".
* You are indeed slimey, "Lloyd", as is your beloved Apple Corp.
* "Ezekiel" is a piece of shit, DumFSck
* "Ezekiel" You shameless fscking liar.
* "Ezekiel", You are a filthy liar.
* "Ezekiel", You shameless fscking liar.
* "Ezekiel", You shameless fscking liar.
* "Lloyd" is simply a lying piece of shit,
* What transparent, idiotic, lying, immoral assholes, "Lloyd"
and "Ezekiel" are. What filth!
* How fscking obtuse do you want to be, "Ezekiel", you piece of shit?
* The trolling jackass filth "Lloyd" displays his ignorance again.
* Sounds like you're a piece of shit who attacks people for no reason,
"GreyCloud".... you fscking asshole?
* What a fscking asshole, you are, "GreyCloud".
* "GreyCloud" you piece of shit
* Having fun sucking-off that vile troll, "GreyCloud?
* You're a piece of shit again "GreyCloud"
* Poor "Ezekiel". You are a filthy liar, a dumbshit, and a fscking
asshole who makes a jackass of himself on a regular basis.
* fscking *filth* like Flatfish
* "GreyCloud" You piece of shit.
* "Ezekiel" you stupid piece of shit?


Rex Ballard: claimed he helped write the GPL, the specs for https,
designed SSL (secure sockets layer), designed Java and Java RMI, fixed
the FedEx package tracker and generated new $1 million/day for FedEx,
early cluster/grid programmer, early UNIX programmer, among the first
Internet users, early adopter of the Mac, first VCR salesman, created
the web browsing industry, contributed to MS-DOS and Win2000, are the
unrecognized Cisco Network Engineer #5, created one of the first
digitized voice response systems, wrote operating systems, saved IBM
tens of millions, told Yahoo, Amazon, and Lycos how to take it to the
next level, designed military weaponry while in high-school, have a
3-octave singing voice, inspired Robin William's character Mork, and was
the basis for Nicholas Negroponte's book "Being Digital".


Homer: "And the best excuse Intellectual Monopolists can muster for this
racket, is "it's the only way we can make any money", which is a bit
like a bank robber claiming he "needs" to rob banks, or a narcotics
peddler claiming he "needs" to sell narcotics, or slave owners
claiming the "need" to own slaves, whilst conveniently ignoring the
million other less corrupt ways to make a living. Meanwhile, anyone
who criticises this morally bankrupt mentality is stigmatised as a
"commie" or a "pirate", by those same nuts who think they have some
God-given "right" to monopolise knowledge, that they blatantly stole
/themselves/ from countless others who came before."



JEDIDIAH: "[Ezekiel] is a pro-monopoly zealot. He's only notion of
"success" is where you crush all rivals, grind them into dust, and force
everyone to use your product against their will."


Sinister Midget and Homer: "If Windows were the only choice I wouldn't
use computers."


Goblin: "boycottnovell.com [now techrights.org] is the most entertaining
and informative site on the Internet"



Roy Schestowitz: "I sense Microsoft hounded Hans Reiser until Hans
killed his wife"

> So DFS you have properly indoctrinated.

And you, Kari, have been properly and willingly fooled by the maniacal
idiots that call themselves "Linux advocates".



> Kari

[Kari Laine]

Well I happen to know Mark S. Bilk. We have discussed a lot lately. I
probably don't agree on everything with him but most of things I do - at
least the important ones, like human rights, wars are evil, 9/11 was
some kind of orchestrated plot, where goverment or at lest the secret
circles of it were involved. Mark is very intelligent person. He has a
wast knowledge on different things and has a very good procedure to get
to the root of things.

So instead posting this typical bullshit try to argue with him. You will
loose without Mark breaking a sweat. Why you will loose is not only that
he is more intelligent than you but because truth is on his side. That
is pretty hard proposition to win.

Best Regards
Kari

[chrisv]

>--

>The fact is their SW works for people. Over 90% of the PC users in the
>world use it. And it works for them. Yes there are idiots like WronG who
>claim they spend 90% of their day fighting malware. But I also believe
>it takes him 4 hours to open the fridge door.
> -- "Hadron" <if2ffi$si3$1...@news.eternal-september.org>

Such a shameless Winshill.

[Kari Laine]

On 03/16/2012 02:38 PM, -hh wrote:
> On Mar 16, 5:44 am, Kari Laine<karitla...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On 03/16/2012 01:01 AM, -hh wrote:
>>
>>> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk<m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> Try it -- you'll love it!
>>
>>> Already did. And again. I don't see any rational reason to ever
>>> consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>>
>>> YMMV,
>>
>>> -hh
>>
>> When you take such a strong attitude on something and lead people
>> against a good choice, you really should give out your reasoning.
>
> I already have; its in the archives.

Well you could maybe list 10 lines as a list so readers don't have to
scourge the archives for these.

>
>
>> Otherwise you are just paid Microsoft chill.
>
> Once again, the default assumption of Linux advocacy is that all of
> their woes can only be due to how evil Microsoft is, and no other
> possibility. Since you've not comprehended my prior comments, but
> chosen to misinterpret them as shilling for MS, I'll make it simple to
> understand:
>
> Fuck Microsoft. Strong language to follow.
>

Well many people whose Linux also use Windows and OS X. Fact is MS is
using it's power on the market to kill other options. There are lot of
cases where they were successful.
1. Gem
2. other dos versions
3. Lotus 1-2-3
4. OS/2
5. BeOS
6. NetScape

They are ugly cases. Even sabotaging a competitor is among them. They
modified Windows so that it wont't run on competing DOS product(I don'ẗ
remember the name of it for the moment).

Other method is withholding information on the APIs so the other guy can
not program for the Windows platform.

Microsoft is totally predatory company, which buys influence with money
to crush competition. They bribe decision makers and so on.
For example what happened to One Laptop for Each Child project. I
remember faintly that MS somehow sidetracked it. Does anyone know the facts?

Read the Comes versus Microsoft pdf.

MS office is a viral product because people send those documents as
email attachment and you have to have office and even newest version to
open them. This is the circle which must be demolished.

>
>> Linux is free.
>
> From a lifecycle cost management perspective, it is most certainly NOT
> free.
>

How much corporates use to solve problems with Windows or other MS
products. Patching and testing patching. Paying for anti-virus solution.
Windows is pretty expensive platform to keep running.

I am sure that big Linux based installation with right tools is very
cost effective to MS platform. Problem is managers think it is the risk
to be first on the desktop and nowadays "Nobody get fired for buying
Microsoft" is the saying.

A smart company could have a support department to keep Linux based
infrastructure going and practically pay 0 for the software. Naturally
they must have clever people in the support department. A mouse clinking
drone with Microsoft certificate won't do.

>> Free to use ...
>
> False. It is only free to download.
>

Well how it is not free to use? I don't pay anything for it and I have
all the needed software for free. I even though donate time to time
money to FOSS projects. And it is simple. Installation takes less than
hour and installation of new programs max few minutes. Hardware is found
without the typical Google for the driver, try to find right version,
install, reboot, what it is in Windows.

>> ... free to develop.
>
> False. It is only free to download.
>

If the whole environment is free. All the programming languages are free
so how it is not free?

>> Windows and OS X are totally
>> closed proprietary money cows for the corporates.
>
> Even if true, that doesn't make them technically unsuitable for
> everyone's IT needs, nor does it automatically make them have the
> highest lifecycle management cost.
>
>

You seem to like this concept of lifecycle. You should define it and
give an example how to calculate one. Otherwise it is just an empty
word, which sound impressive.

My sound personal opinion.
Lifecycle costs from lowest to highest
1. Linux
2. OS X
3. Windows

>> This week alone if have cleaned and reinstalled several Windows machines
>> because of malware and other symptoms which were not correctable without
>> reinstall. Linux does not have these problems.
>
> False. Linux also has these cost risks ... they're just not
> necessarily of the same general magnitude of Windows. See reasonably
> objective information resources, such as:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_malware
>
>

"There has not yet been a widespread Linux malware threat of the type
that Microsoft Windows software faces; this is commonly attributed to
the small number of users running Linux as a desktop operating
system[1], the malware's lack of root access and fast updates to most
Linux vulnerabilities.[2]"

Please send me a copy of Linux malware. It would be interesting to see.

>> One of them had also lost Windows media and serial number. That person
>> have to now buy Windows AGAIN or accept to start using Linux.
>
> Human error is to blame, not the product. If you lost your car keys,
> do you think that the automaker should replace them for you for free
> too?
>

I have seen these problems numerous times. And nowadays when new
machines does not come with DVDs - problem is very real.

Well when I loose my car keys I just buy new keys not the whole fucking
car.

>> Which would be the best solution to the problem.
>
> Only from the shortsighted perspective of someone who clearly only
> looks at "initial purchase price" and doesn't have a clue about how to
> even start to do a lifecycle cost assessment.
>

Now define the term.

>
>> I personally use both Windows and Linux and I very much prefer Linux. It
>> is stable, fast and effective OS. With Windows machines I seem always to
>> have issues, which are not solvable.
>
> And I've used all three of the major OSs, which means that I also have
> insights as well as preferences.
>
> For speed, I simply buy faster hardware.

Not all people can afford that.

> For stability, I don't fuck around with inviting problems through
> stupid system hacks/mods.

Windows is know to deteriorate simply by itself. You have to be prepared
to reinstall it 1-2 times a year to keep it slick.
Today I tried to fix a problem. When computer went to sleep and come
back it always lost wired network connection and had to be rebooted to
work again.

> For solving, I've not lost any of my personal data .. or key desired
> capabilities .. since before Linux was born.

Thanks to Linux many Windows users have not lost their data.

>
> So where are there any issues?
>
> Oh, let me guess: if I were to jump through a different set of hoops,
> I would have saved the $100 expense of an OS license on my upfront IT
> costs.
>

How you earn the money with the computer if you just buy the OS. A
typical worker on computer needs applications. And there are several
good ones free. Naturally many of those are available to Windows and OS
X also.

But MOST people don't prefer Linux because it is FREE but because it is
BETTER !

> Golly, a **hundred** bucks!! Applied across a typical three year
> lifecycle, which means that the magnitude of this whine works out to
> less than a buck a week.
>

See above. Add anti-virus and 3-6 reinstall in those three years.

> So just what other things are you **currently** doing just to save $1/
> week? Never buy a soda from a soda machine? Making a point to only
> poop at work so as to use less of your own toiletpaper at home?
> Scrimp on the tip for the waitress at that dinner out? FYI, do keep
> in mind that not eating out at all (or as much) will save a lot more
> than $1/week, so it is above this threshold.

You seem to be fixed with this ONLY buying OS. Tell me now which
programs you use for you work and how much they cost.


>
>
> -hh

Kari

[chrisv]

> "-hh" wrote:
>>
>> Once again, the default assumption of Linux advocacy is that all of
>> their woes can only be due to how evil Microsoft is, and no other
>> possibility.

Started reading this exchange, just for fun, and "surprise", I see
"-hh" leading-off with the above *shameless, ridiculous lie*.

So, I read no further.

It's good to be occasionally reminded of why some of these filthy
fscking liars, like "-hh", are allocated space in my bozo bin.

[DFS]

On 3/16/2012 12:59 PM, Kari Laine wrote:
> On 03/16/2012 03:14 PM, Foster wrote:
>> On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 06:12:48 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>> Mark S Bilk wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>
>>>> On Mar 15, 9:11 pm, Microsoft/DFS<nos...@dfs.com> wrote:
>>> -------------
>>>
>>> <chuckle>
>>>
>>>> http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/Comes-3096.pdf
>>>>
>>>> http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20071023002351958
>>>>
>>>> Here's an excerpt from it:
>>>>
>>>> [quote] [Microsoft's] Evangelism's goal is to put the final
>>
>>>
>>> A sample of such provided below.
>>
>> You're really sinking to below low when you start sucking up to Mark
>> S. Bilk.
>>
>> Even your former master Shitzferwitz agrees that Mark has a few
>> loose screws and a few over tightened bolts.
>
> Well I happen to know Mark S. Bilk. We have discussed a lot lately. I
> probably don't agree on everything with him but most of things I do - at
> least the important ones, like human rights, wars are evil, 9/11 was
> some kind of orchestrated plot, where goverment or at lest the secret
> circles of it were involved.

heh!

> Mark is very intelligent person.

Bilk is a brain-addled moron.

Read some of his idiocy at http://cosmicpenguin.com/linux/

* "Microsoft has written the software (called "Palladium") to implement
total government censorship of the Internet."

* "Linux and other Open Source software ... has its defects corrected as
soon as possible..."

* "Microsoft also threatens to withdraw its profitable ads from computer
magazines if the magazines run favorable articles about Linux."


Most of what he says on that page is bullshit anti-Microsoft lies and
stupidity along the lines of what Rex Ballard says.

> He has a
> wast knowledge on different things and has a very good procedure to get
> to the root of things.

Yes he does:

1) proclaim something happened or is true
2) offer no proof
3) accept no arguments against his idiocy

> So instead posting this typical bullshit try to argue with him. You will
> loose without Mark breaking a sweat. Why you will loose is not only that
> he is more intelligent than you but because truth is on his side. That
> is pretty hard proposition to win.

What "truth" is that?

You mean like this hooey: "Microsoft also threatens to withdraw its
profitable ads from computer magazines if the magazines run favorable
articles about Linux."?

Fact: Just the other day the MSNBC website recommended putting Linux on
older computers.
http://www.gadgetbox.msnbc.msn.com/technology/gadgetbox/10-ways-make-best-old-crappy-computer-388004


Fact: Bilk is a lying idiot.

[Foster]

Bilk is a truther who takes statements out of context, uses dubious
"evidence" and "sources" as factual and basically keeps changing the
story when confronted with the holes in his theories.

IOW a real nut.

[DFS]

chrisv: X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572 (Windows only)

chrisv: "I buy a lot of Windows PC's to use as test stations, and I've
been buying refurbished XP machines and have no plans to change."
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/540e8d3903f1e9cd?hl=en

chrisv: "Home Premium OEM is available for $100 online... My daughter
runs it"
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/80f7d039e11e8e4f?hl=en

[DFS]

* Zeke: "chrisv responds to all my posts"
* chrisv: "Zeke is a filthy liar"

* chrisv: "All Snit does is lie"
* chrisv: "I am 100% honest."

* chrisv Jul 2010: "[The iPad] is, clearly, an expensive toy,
and one that I have little desire for. The vast majority of
the populace sees it the way that I do, I'm sure."
* chrisv: Dec 2010: "I thought all-along that the iPad
would be a success."
* chrisv: "I don't lie."

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2012-03-16, -hh <recscub...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> On Mar 16, 5:44 am, Kari Laine <karitla...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On 03/16/2012 01:01 AM, -hh wrote:
>>
>> > On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk<m...@cosmicpenguin.com>  wrote:
>> >> ...
>> >> Try it -- you'll love it!
>>
>> > Already did.  And again.  I don't see any rational reason to ever
>> > consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>>
>> > YMMV,
>>
>> > -hh
>>
>> When you take such a strong attitude on something and lead people
>> against a good choice, you really should give out your reasoning.
>
> I already have; its in the archives.
>
>
>> Otherwise you are just paid Microsoft chill.
>
> Once again, the default assumption of Linux advocacy is that all of
> their woes can only be due to how evil Microsoft is, and no other

No. Just basic rhetoric.

[deletia]

--
Nothing quite gives you an understanding of mysql's |||
popularity as does an attempt to do some simple date / | \
manipulations in postgres.

[OldGoat]

On 3/16/2012 4:12 AM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Mark S Bilk wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On Mar 15, 9:11 pm, Microsoft/DFS<nos...@dfs.com> wrote:
> -------------
>
> <chuckle>
>
>> http://www.groklaw.net/pdf/Comes-3096.pdf
>>
>> http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20071023002351958
>>
>> Here's an excerpt from it:
>>
>> [quote] [Microsoft's] Evangelism's goal is to put the final
>> nail into the competing technology's coffin, and bury it in
>> the burning depths of the earth. Ideally, use of the competing
>> technology becomes associated with mental deficiency, as in,
>> "he believes in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and OS/2." Just
>> keep rubbing it in, via the [bribed] press, [bribed] analysts,
>> [Usenet] newsgroups, whatever. Make the complete failure of
>> the competition's technology part of the mythology of the
>> computer industry. [/quote]
>
> A sample of such provided below.
>

Are you trying to suck up the bottom of the bilge now?

[OldGoat]

Get out those old fashioned fly tapes that have the glue on them.
Then we can all watch him flapping away.

[OldGoat]

Looks like someone hung up some fly paper called Linux.
They're all stuck on it.

[OldGoat]

Everything in the world is a lie in your diseased mind, turd.

[OldGoat]

And it smells like fly paper too.

[Homer]

Verily I say unto thee that Kari Laine spake thusly:

> On 03/16/2012 02:38 PM, -hh wrote:
>> On Mar 16, 5:44 am, Kari Laine<karitla...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> Fuck Microsoft.
[...]

> They are ugly cases. Even sabotaging a competitor is among them. They
> modified Windows so that it wont't run on competing DOS product(I
> don'ẗ remember the name of it for the moment).

DR-DOS.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/11/05/how_ms_played_the_incompatibility/

> Other method is withholding information on the APIs so the other guy
> can not program for the Windows platform.
>
> Microsoft is totally predatory company, which buys influence with
> money to crush competition. They bribe decision makers and so on. For
> example what happened to One Laptop for Each Child project. I remember
> faintly that MS somehow sidetracked it. Does anyone know the facts?

http://news.softpedia.com/news/One-Laptop-Per-Child-Sabotaged-by-Microsoft-and-Intel-71941.shtml
http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS7642674933.html

> Read the Comes versus Microsoft pdf.

http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/assets/attachments/Petition.pdf

Summary (Microsoft's Predatory Response to GNU/Linux):

http://jeremy.linuxquestions.org/2007/07/15/comes-vs-microsoft-petition-shows-how-microsoft-blocked-linux-sales

Microsoft's infamous "Evangelism is WAR!" training brief:

http://antitrust.slated.org/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/3000/PX03096.pdf

Summary (How to Get Your Platform Accepted as a Standard - Microsoft
Style):

http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20071023002351958

>>> Free to use ...
>>
>> False. It is only free to download.
>>
> Well how it is not free to use? I don't pay anything for it and I have
> all the needed software for free. I even though donate time to time
> money to FOSS projects.

Personally I don't care about GNU/Linux's low/zero cost. It's completely
irrelevant to me. I only care that it's Free, and that whatever money I
do spend on it doesn't go anywhere near Microsoft and Apple. Microsoft's
OEM racket and (their and Apple's) patent extortion make that goal
unnecessarily difficult, though.

> Please send me a copy of Linux malware. It would be interesting to
> see.

The rare examples of GNU/Linux "Malware" typically comprise OS-agnostic
attacks that usually involve stolen passwords and/or social engineering,
and therefore have no bearing on the security of GNU/Linux itself.
Actual /viral infections/ and /exploited/ privilege escalation
vulnerabilities have mostly been limited to untested hypotheses and lab
experiments. In practice this means the vast majority of GNU/Linux users
will never suffer a security breach of any kind, provided they use
GNU/Linux the way it was meant to be, and keep it updated. This
contrasts with Windows, where security breaches are an accepted
inevitability and daily occurrence.

IMO the biggest threat to GNU/Linux security comes from those within the
community itself, who wish to undermine its inherent security for the
sake of "convenience" (e.g. PolicyKit). IOW the further once gets from
having a clear policy of privilege separation (and therefore the closer
one gets to Microsoft's single user, zero-security paradigm) the more
vulnerable one's system becomes.

--
K. | "You see? You cannot kill me. There is no flesh
http://slated.org | and blood within this cloak to kill. There is
Fedora 8 (Werewolf) on šky | only an idea. And ideas are bulletproof."
kernel 2.6.31.5, up 38 days | ~ V for Vendetta.

[Rockinghorse Winner]

* It may have been the liquor talking, but

-hh <recscub...@huntzinger.com> wrote:

> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk <m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
>> ...
>> Try it -- you'll love it!
>
>
> Already did. And again. I don't see any rational reason to ever
> consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>
> YMMV,
>
> -hh

Just the convenience of not having to think twice about spyware or virii is
major. When I come on a malicious web site I just snicker. Sometimes I'll
poke around just to see how depraved it's creators are: no worries! For
that alone, I treasure my linux machine.

I remember all too well the times I used to have to shut down my browser or
Windows itself due to a web site causing my hd to spin endlessly, or
wouldn't let me leave or some such thing. True, I was running less than the
ideal h/w configuration, but I didn't see why I was being compelled to spend
money to overcome inherent faults in the Windows browser experience, when I
could switch to linux and be done with it!

I was being shook down for the privelege of an inferior browsing experience.
I just didn't see the logic of it, and still don't.

Not to mention all the other reasons to switch to linux.

Terry
--
"There are two means of refuge from the miseries of life: music and cats."
-Albert Schweitzer

badass linux - gentoo 3.2.1

[Chris Ahlstrom]

Rockinghorse Winner wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> * It may have been the liquor talking, but
> -hh <recscub...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk <m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
>>> ...
>>> Try it -- you'll love it!
>>
>>
>> Already did. And again. I don't see any rational reason to ever
>> consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>>
>> YMMV,
>>
>> -hh
>
> Just the convenience of not having to think twice about spyware or virii is
> major. When I come on a malicious web site I just snicker. Sometimes I'll
> poke around just to see how depraved it's creators are: no worries! For
> that alone, I treasure my linux machine.

Indeed.

> I remember all too well the times I used to have to shut down my browser or
> Windows itself due to a web site causing my hd to spin endlessly, or
> wouldn't let me leave or some such thing. True, I was running less than the
> ideal h/w configuration, but I didn't see why I was being compelled to spend
> money to overcome inherent faults in the Windows browser experience, when I
> could switch to linux and be done with it!
>
> I was being shook down for the privelege of an inferior browsing experience.
> I just didn't see the logic of it, and still don't.
>
> Not to mention all the other reasons to switch to linux.

Started up a Jabber client for Windows today. It dropped one of my
contacts, and spun forever trying to connect to the Windows-based XMPP
server.

Gajim on Linux? No problemo.

I would suffer greatly if Linux suddenly disappeared.

But then I'm a "nasty piece of work". :-D

--
Yet you don't answer his question. Where did he lie you dishonest little
"advocate" you? Come on. You're telling lies again to suck up to the
"advocates" again aren't you? Why do you do it?
You're a nasty piece of work, no two ways about that.
-- "Hadron" <1hag67-...@news.eternal-september.org>

[Rockinghorse Winner]

* It may have been the liquor talking, but

Mark S Bilk <ma...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:

> On Mar 15, 4:01 pm, -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk <m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
>> > ...
>> > Try it -- you'll love it!
>>
>> Already did. And again. I don't see any rational reason to ever
>> consider Linux for my main desktop ever again. YMMV, -hh
>

...snip

That is a mouthful! No, I don't think the trolls are paid shills or even
sociopaths. Well, *maybe* sociopaths.

Mostly, I think they are simply immature and like bringing attention to
themselves by throwing verbal grenades. Almost universally, their claims
are untrue or exaggerated, and hardly worth debating except perhaps as an
exercise. I killfile all except the entertaining ones.

[Ezekiel]

"Homer" <use...@slated.org> wrote in message
news:fpkc39-...@sky.matrix...

> Verily I say unto thee that Kari Laine spake thusly:
>> On 03/16/2012 02:38 PM, -hh wrote:
>>> On Mar 16, 5:44 am, Kari Laine<karitla...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>> Fuck Microsoft.
> [...]
>> They are ugly cases. Even sabotaging a competitor is among them. They
>> modified Windows so that it wont't run on competing DOS product(I

>> don'? remember the name of it for the moment).
>
> DR-DOS.
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/1999/11/05/how_ms_played_the_incompatibility/

And which product version of Windows was incompatible with DR-DOS?

Answer - None. This was in a developer preview beta copy of Windows and was
never shipped in any release or to any customer.

>> Please send me a copy of Linux malware. It would be interesting to
>> see.
>
> The rare examples of GNU/Linux "Malware" typically comprise OS-agnostic
> attacks that usually involve stolen passwords and/or social engineering,
> and therefore have no bearing on the security of GNU/Linux itself.
> Actual /viral infections/ and /exploited/ privilege escalation
> vulnerabilities have mostly been limited to untested hypotheses and lab
> experiments.

Your memory is failing old man. This is barely 6 months old.

<quote>
Kernel.org Linux repository rooted in hack attack
Rootkit not detected for 17 days
Posted in Enterprise Security
August 31st 2011

Multiple servers used to maintain and distribute the Linux operating system
were infected with malware that gained root access, modified system
software, and logged passwords and transactions of the people who used them,
the official Linux Kernel Organization has confirmed.
</quote>
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/08/31/linux_kernel_security_breach/

--

"Share price is a measure of market confidence based on current performance.
The market is apparently twice as confident of Google as it is of Apple, and
20 times more confident than it is of Microsoft.

So what Google is doing today is apparently better than what others are
doing."

Homer - failing badly at finance 101.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

Rockinghorse Winner wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> That is a mouthful! No, I don't think the trolls are paid shills or even
> sociopaths. Well, *maybe* sociopaths.
>
> Mostly, I think they are simply immature and like bringing attention to
> themselves by throwing verbal grenades. Almost universally, their claims
> are untrue or exaggerated, and hardly worth debating except perhaps as an
> exercise. I killfile all except the entertaining ones.

Which are entertaining?

--
Tell me you sycophantic little suck up and liar, where is all your self
righteous indignation and whining about being nice when you slag off
"fuckheads" who are REAL OSS developers? You know , where you got
carried away like a puppy chasing its tails and started to lecture Joerg
Schilling? Or when Willy Poaster and his gang post about Snits wife and
family? I will tell you : no where to be seen because you are a
hypocritical little arse with an agenda to show off and proclaim
yourself the group techy. Which is a laugh and a half because you're as
transparent as a window pane.
-- "Hadron". Copied from Google Groups.

[DFS]

On 3/16/2012 8:30 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Rockinghorse Winner wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> That is a mouthful! No, I don't think the trolls are paid shills or even
>> sociopaths. Well, *maybe* sociopaths.
>>
>> Mostly, I think they are simply immature and like bringing attention to
>> themselves by throwing verbal grenades. Almost universally, their claims
>> are untrue or exaggerated, and hardly worth debating except perhaps as an
>> exercise. I killfile all except the entertaining ones.
>
> Which are entertaining?

All. Absent us "trolls", this group would implode in a huge fart of
boredom as you sit around and lie to each other about the "evil"
Microsoft and Apple.

[-hh]

On Mar 16, 1:36 pm, Kari Laine <karitla...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 03/16/2012 02:38 PM, -hh wrote:
> > On Mar 16, 5:44 am, Kari Laine<karitla...@yahoo.com>  wrote:
> >> On 03/16/2012 01:01 AM, -hh wrote:
>
> >>> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk<m...@cosmicpenguin.com>    wrote:
> >>>> ...
> >>>> Try it -- you'll love it!
>
> >>> Already did.  And again.  I don't see any rational reason to ever
> >>> consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>
> >>> YMMV,
>
> >>> -hh
>
> >> When you take such a strong attitude on something and lead people
> >> against a good choice, you really should give out your reasoning.
>
> > I already have; its in the archives.
>
> Well you could maybe list 10 lines as a list so readers don't have to
> scourge the archives for these.

The same value applies for the OP when they made their unsubstantiated
claims. Get the OP to substantiate and others will follow ... but
don't give them a free ride by asking others to do better.

> >> Otherwise you are just paid Microsoft chill.
>
> > Once again, the default assumption of Linux advocacy is that all of
> > their woes can only be due to how evil Microsoft is, and no other
> > possibility.   Since you've not comprehended my prior comments, but
> > chosen to misinterpret them as shilling for MS, I'll make it simple to
> > understand:
>
> > Fuck Microsoft.  Strong language to follow.
>
> Well many people whose Linux also use Windows and OS X. Fact is MS is
> using it's power on the market to kill other options. There are lot of
> cases where they were successful.
> 1. Gem
> 2. other dos versions
> 3. Lotus 1-2-3
> 4. OS/2
> 5. BeOS
> 6. NetScape
>
> They are ugly cases.

They're also ancient history. How about keeping the discussion
relevant by keeping it to recent sins?

> Even sabotaging a competitor is among them. They
> modified Windows so that it wont't run on competing DOS product(I don'ẗ
> remember the name of it for the moment).
>
> Other method is withholding information on the APIs so the other guy can
> not program for the Windows platform.
>
> Microsoft is totally predatory company, which buys influence with money
> to crush competition. They bribe decision makers and so on.
> For example what happened to One Laptop for Each Child project. I
> remember faintly that MS somehow sidetracked it. Does anyone know the facts?
>
> Read the Comes versus Microsoft pdf.
>
> MS office is a viral product because people send those documents as
> email attachment and you have to have office and even newest version to
> open them. This is the circle which must be demolished.

It only will get demolished if it illegal.

> >> Linux is free.
>
> >  From a lifecycle cost management perspective, it is most certainly NOT
> > free.
>
> How much corporates use to solve problems with Windows or other MS
> products. Patching and testing patching. Paying for anti-virus solution.
> Windows is pretty expensive platform to keep running.

That observation doesn't have any relevance to Linux's costs.

> I am sure that big Linux based installation with right tools is very
> cost effective to MS platform. Problem is managers think it is the risk
> to be first on the desktop and nowadays "Nobody get fired for buying
> Microsoft" is the saying.

Amazing how we are all "so sure" of the outcome that is not being
exploited by businesses. Ocham's Razor would suggest simpler
explanations than that every IT manager is a coward.

> A smart company could have a support department to keep Linux based
> infrastructure going and practically pay 0 for the software. Naturally
> they must have clever people in the support department. A mouse clinking
> drone with Microsoft certificate won't do.

The financial expense model is pretty simple: it is to compare costs
of (software + support labor) for each. The key observation is that
software is basically a one-time expense whereas support labor is
ongoing.

> >> Free to use ...
>
> > False.  It is only free to download.
>
> Well how it is not free to use?

Because "use" includes the cost of your time, as well as how it
creates value.

> I don't pay anything for it and I have
> all the needed software for free. I even though donate time to time
> money to FOSS projects. And it is simple. Installation takes less than
> hour and installation of new programs max few minutes. Hardware is found
> without the typical Google for the driver, try to find right version,
> install, reboot, what it is in Windows.

Wrong observation. What you want to look at is the cost of your time
and the productivity it can be employed with. For an example by
analogy, you can dig a hole for "free" by using your bare hands, but
it will take hours to make a hole that's 2ft deep ... but if you were
willing to buy a shovel, that hole can be dug in a few minutes.
Factor in the value of your time and you can calculate how much each
hole cost you to dig. You can also calculate how many holes you have
to dig before the shovel pays for itself.

For example, if your time is worth $10/hr, buying a shovel costs $20
and it takes 1 hour to dig a hole by hand vs 5 minutes by shovel:

First hole: $10 by hand ... vs .. ($20 + 5/60*$10) = $20.83
Second hole: $20 ... vs ... $21.67
Third hole: $30 ... vs $22.50
etc

Now looking at these same numbers again, as a productivity metric:

Average Cost per Hole

By hand: always $10

By Shovel: starts at $20.83 ... then is $10.84/hole, and drops to
$7.50/hole by the third ... etc.

Conclusion: if you're digging more than two holes, it is cost-
advantageous to buy a shovel.

> >> ... free to develop.
>
> > False.  It is only free to download.
>
> If the whole environment is free. All the programming languages are free
> so how it is not free?

Your time is not free.

> >> Windows and OS X are totally
> >> closed proprietary money cows for the corporates.
>
> > Even if true, that doesn't make them technically unsuitable for
> > everyone's IT needs, nor does it automatically make them have the
> > highest lifecycle management cost.
>
> You seem to like this concept of lifecycle. You should define it and
> give an example how to calculate one. Otherwise it is just an empty
> word, which sound impressive.

Already done in part above with the simple "Should I buy a shovel?"
example. For the rest, Google is your friend, although taking some
professional training in the field would go a long ways in learning
how to apply.

> My sound personal opinion.
> Lifecycle costs from lowest to highest
> 1. Linux
> 2. OS X
> 3. Windows

Which lacks any substantiative quantification. Given that you claim
to not even know what life cycle cost analysis even is, your opinion
is effectively indistinguishable from random guessing.

> >> This week alone if have cleaned and reinstalled several Windows machines
> >> because of malware and other symptoms which were not correctable without
> >> reinstall. Linux does not have these problems.
>
> > False.  Linux also has these cost risks ... they're just not
> > necessarily of the same general magnitude of Windows.   See reasonably
> > objective information resources, such as:
>
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_malware
>
> "There has not yet been a widespread Linux malware threat of the type
> that Microsoft Windows software faces; this is commonly attributed to
> the small number of users running Linux as a desktop operating
> system[1], the malware's lack of root access and fast updates to most
> Linux vulnerabilities.[2]"
>
> Please send me a copy of Linux malware. It would be interesting to see.

Sorry, I don't distribute malware.

> >> One of them had also lost Windows media and serial number. That person
> >> have to now buy Windows AGAIN or accept to start using Linux.
>
> > Human error is to blame, not the product.  If you lost your car keys,
> > do you think that the automaker should replace them for you for free
> > too?
>
> I have seen these problems numerous times. And nowadays when new
> machines does not come with DVDs - problem is very real.

How does what change this from being a human error?

> Well when I loose my car keys I just buy new keys not the whole fucking
> car.

Irrelevant for as you pointed out, you have to **BUY** the keys.

> >> Which would be the best solution to the problem.
>
> > Only from the shortsighted perspective of someone who clearly only
> > looks at "initial purchase price" and doesn't have a clue about how to
> > even start to do a lifecycle cost assessment.
>
> Now define the term.

http://www.google.com/search?&q=life+cycle+cost+analysis+example

> >> I personally use both Windows and Linux and I very much prefer Linux. It
> >> is stable, fast and effective OS. With Windows machines I seem always to
> >> have issues, which are not solvable.
>
> > And I've used all three of the major OSs, which means that I also have
> > insights as well as preferences.
>
> > For speed, I simply buy faster hardware.
>
> Not all people can afford that.

You're falling into the "Penny Wise and Pound Foolish" fallacy.

> > For stability, I don't fuck around with inviting problems through
> > stupid system hacks/mods.
>
> Windows is know to deteriorate simply by itself. You have to be prepared
> to reinstall it 1-2 times a year to keep it slick.

Which is a cost, although 1-2x/year isn't anywhere near the typical
experiences I've seen. Based on my observations, I'd say that the
reinstalls occur more like once every 2 years. Granted, this doesn't
include hardware failures or purposeful upgrades, but naturally,
neither of these logically apply to this modality's cost.

> Today I tried to fix a problem. When computer went to sleep and come
> back it always lost wired network connection and had to be rebooted to
> work again.

Yes, that's technically a 'cost'. Now quantify how significant it is,
such as on an annualized basis. That means you at least need to know
what the per-occurrence loss function is, and its frequency to
quantify.

> > For solving, I've not lost any of my personal data .. or key desired
> > capabilities .. since before Linux was born.
>
> Thanks to Linux many Windows users have not lost their data.

Because they have all of their data backed up onto a Linux
fileserver? What's the hierarchy of factor significance here...be
sure to address how the OS choice of a backup system more significant
than deciding to have a backup in the first place.

> > So where are there any issues?
>
> > Oh, let me guess:  if I were to jump through a different set of hoops,
> > I would have saved the $100 expense of an OS license on my upfront IT
> > costs.
>
> How you earn the money with the computer if you just buy the OS. A
> typical worker on computer needs applications. And there are several
> good ones free. Naturally many of those are available to Windows and OS
> X also.

And there's commercial products that may offer even higher
productivity. See the "Shovel" analogy.

> But MOST people don't prefer Linux because it is FREE but because it is
> BETTER !

And you've quantified this ... how?

> > Golly, a **hundred** bucks!!  Applied across a typical three year
> > lifecycle, which means that the magnitude of this whine works out to
> > less than a buck a week.
>
> See above. Add anti-virus and 3-6 reinstall in those three years.

You still haven't done the math. For example, assuming that a modern
IT knowledge worker earning $100K/year and is in an enterprise with
100% overhead, the implications are that each 1% change in their
productivity is equal to $2,000 per year. As such, if a Windows PC
has an extra $900 in IT hassles per year to keep it running, but the
user's use of that tool results in him being a mere 1% more
productive, then it is in the financial best interest of the
enterprise to use windows anyway, because they have a net gain of
$1100.

> > So just what other things are you **currently** doing just to save $1/
> > week?  Never buy a soda from a soda machine?  Making a point to only
> > poop at work so as to use less of your own toiletpaper at home?
> > Scrimp on the tip for the waitress at that dinner out?    FYI, do keep
> > in mind that not eating out at all (or as much) will save a lot more
> > than $1/week, so it is above this threshold.
>
> You seem to be fixed with this ONLY buying OS. Tell me now which
> programs you use for you work and how much they cost.

No, not at all: the costs of every tool goes into the life cycle
equation. An extension of the above example would be that that $1100/
year 'advantage' would be decremented by the initial & recurring
software license expenses too. For example, if there's an annualized
upgrade cost to MS-Office of $100 and a similar annualized average
upgrade cost to Adobe of $300, then the advantage would be reduced by
$400 to $700/year.


-hh

[Rex Ballard]

On Thursday, March 15, 2012 7:01:20 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk <m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
> > ...
> > Try it -- you'll love it!

I have been using Linux for about 19 years now, and as one of my primary desktop operating systems.

> Already did. And again. I don't see any rational reason to ever
> consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>
> YMMV,
>
> -hh

On Thursday, March 15, 2012 7:01:20 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk <m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
> > ...
> > Try it -- you'll love it!

I've been using Linux for 19 years, and as a primary operating system for at least one of my computers for the last 10.

The evolution from SLS to Slackware and Yddragsil and then Mandrake, Red Hat, and Suse has taken us from systems that struggled to work on Monochrome monitors with

> Already did. And again. I don't see any rational reason to ever
> consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>
> YMMV,
>
> -hh

On Thursday, March 15, 2012 7:01:20 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk <m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
> > ...
> > Try it -- you'll love it!
>
>
> Already did. And again. I don't see any rational reason to ever
> consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>
> YMMV,
>
> -hh

On Thursday, March 15, 2012 7:01:20 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk <m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
> > ...
> > Try it -- you'll love it!
>
>
> Already did. And again. I don't see any rational reason to ever
> consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>
> YMMV,
>
> -hh

On Thursday, March 15, 2012 7:01:20 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk <m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
> > ...
> > Try it -- you'll love it!
>
>
> Already did. And again. I don't see any rational reason to ever
> consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>
> YMMV,
>
> -hh

On Thursday, March 15, 2012 7:01:20 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk <m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
> > ...
> > Try it -- you'll love it!
>
>
> Already did. And again. I don't see any rational reason to ever
> consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>
> YMMV,
>
> -hh

On Thursday, March 15, 2012 7:01:20 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk <m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
> > ...
> > Try it -- you'll love it!
>
>
> Already did. And again. I don't see any rational reason to ever
> consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>
> YMMV,
>
> -hh

On Thursday, March 15, 2012 7:01:20 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk <m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
> > ...
> > Try it -- you'll love it!
>
>
> Already did. And again. I don't see any rational reason to ever
> consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>
> YMMV,
>
> -hh

On Thursday, March 15, 2012 7:01:20 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk <m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
> > ...
> > Try it -- you'll love it!

I've been using Linux for 19 years. We've come a long way from TAMU and SLS Linux to Mandrake, Red Hat, SUSE, then Ubuntu, and Android.

In those early days, it took a lot of shell scripting to get it working on a monochrome monitor, where you could push the resolution almost to a Sun, but if you pushed it too far, the monitor would catch fire.

And to think it took almost 18 years for the combination of Apple and Google and other Linux/Unix advocates to finally break into a "niche" market that Microsoft couldn't block. And now the OEMs are seeing far more profit from Android devices than for laptops that have been discounted into oblivion, because Windows 7 seems to just keep slowing down more and more from when you buy it, while Android devices just keep getting more and more applications, and iPads are going out the door as fast as Apple can make them.

Now we are seeing the "convertable" tablets, tablets with keyboards that look and act like Laptops when you want them to, and look and act like tablets when that's what you want.

> Already did. And again. I don't see any rational reason to ever
> consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.

How does that go? Never say never?

Have you considered an iPad? or an Android Tablet?

What if it came with a 15 or 17 inch monitor or a Full HD output to a 1080p monitor? And what if you could attach a keyboard or use a bluetooth keyboard, and what if that tablet had all that power in either a 7 inch or 10 inch display of it's own?

Android tablet customers choose between 16 and 32 gigabyte SSD storage because 16 Gigabytes is plenty, especially when you have external devices for back-up storage, SDHC removable storage up to 64 gb, and you can upload/download your information with Windows using the tablet as a hard drive.

And you are probably using Linux even if your core operating system is Windows. If you are running FireFox, Chrome, or Eclipse based application, Symphony, Lotus Notes, or most Java applications, then it's a pretty good chance that the application was originally created and tested on a Linux machine, which assures developers that it will run equally well on Linux, Windows, and Mac, without needing custom code for each system.

Microsoft has had to give up it's proprietary hooks just to stay in the game, and many corporate customers are STILL installing Windows XP rather than Windows 7 because there is no significant productivity gain on Windows 7 and Windows 7 machines in default configuration get slower and slower over time, and disk I/O is horrible because Windows users have to check everything with Antivirus AND Microsoft Indexing - even if it's just a web page being loaded into the local cache.

MS-Office 2010 had to have ODF support, and had to comply with the standards set and now controlled by Oracle and IBM, who hold a lot more clout in corporate IT shops than Microsoft has ever held - especially in server and enterprise environments.

Many corporations are now requiring that ANY upgrades to Windows 7 or Office 2010, and even MS-Project or Visio - be justified and funded by the organization requesting the MS Software rather than being standard items provided by the corporate umbrella at the cost of jobs in divisions that neither want nor need the newer software.

Today, if you want to do have the latest upgrades for 10 people, you have to cut one employee from your OWN staff to get it.

Meanwhile, these companies have formally adopted Linux and Open Source for the desktop. Even Windows users are encouraged to select items from the free catalog of 100 to 200 applications available for Linux AND Windows, and are given the names of comparable commercial products. Employees can earn incentives, such as memory upgrades and hard drive upgrades in exchange for switching from the high priced software to the Open Source software.

Switch to 64 bit Linux and the company will offer you upgrades to 8GB and 500 gigabyte hybrid drives, which will be loaded with Linux as the main OS, and if you still need Windows XP to communicate with a client, you can use a VMWare image, or the client has to pay for their own laptop, and pay the extra expenses of maintaining the second laptop


> YMMV,

> -hh

[Mark S Bilk]

On Mar 17, 6:57 pm, -hh <recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
> > >> On 03/16/2012 01:01 AM, -hh wrote:
> > >>> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk<m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
> > >>>> ...

> > >>>> Try [Linux] -- you'll love it!

>
> > >>> Already did. And again. I don't see any rational reason to ever
> > >>> consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>

> The same value applies for the OP when they made their unsubstantiated
> claims. Get the OP to substantiate and others will follow ... but
> don't give them a free ride by asking others to do better.

I'm the OP, and here's part of what I wrote in the article
that started this thread, which can be seen here:

https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/browse_frm/thread/412b619ba778cd7f/2229a0149c77c9dc?hl=en#2229a0149c77c9dc

>Desktop Linux provides security, power, multiple virtual

>desktops, flexible file systems, modularity, processor
>independence, open source code, and zero cost. Most of
>these advantages are not available in Microsoft Windows or
>Apple Macintosh.

SECURITY -- Virtually no successful Linux malware exists.
Unlike Microsoft Windows, Linux doesn't require anti-malware
programs that have to be continually updated. That's because
Linux follows the principles of Unix, which was designed for
security from its beginning because it's a multi-user OS.

The rare invasions of Linux systems have only been the result
of long tardiness in upgrades or human engineering (stealing
passwords offline, etc.) Whereas Microsoft Windows malware
has cost businesses many tens of billions of dollars in lost
productivity and system repair.

Google for: computer viruses billions dollars

MULTIPLE VIRTUAL DESKTOPS -- Linux KDE3 gives you 20 screens
(desktops) in which you can set up programs for 20 different
tasks, like mail, website, programming, music, etc. In each
full-screen desktop your display shows only the programs you've
set up in it, plus any that you've specified to appear in all
desktops. Of course, each program can be minimized or returned
to normal size as usual. You can leave the programs set up and
running in each desktop, because they use negligible CPU cycles
when you're not actively using them. To switch between these
desktops, all you do is click on the name of the desired desktop
(task) in the little pager applet that's displayed in all the
desktops, and you're there.

How would you do this in Microsoft Windows? Suppose you want to
set up about 5 programs for each task. If all you have is Windows'
single screen, you would have about 100 programs in the taskbar,
which would therefore occupy about a third of your display. To
switch to another task, you would have to minimize all the programs
of the current task, find the programs for the new task among the
100 in the taskbar, and maximize them. Or you could kill all the
programs of the current task, and restart all the programs of the
new task, positioning their windows on the screen the way you need
them, and initializing them to the desired directories, etc.
Either of these methods forces you to do substantial extra work.

If you are a power user, and employ your computer for lots of
different tasks, the multiple desktop facility of Linux KDE3 will
save you enormous amounts of time and work that are wasted with
Microsoft Windows.

FLEXIBLE FILE SYSTEMS -- Linux has soft-links. Say you have ten
directories containing music, separated according to performer.
You can soft-link all those directories into one directory and
search them all by searching that single directory. You can
also soft-link them into another set of directories by type --
rock, jazz, etc. All without moving or affecting the original
files. The soft-links only take up a few bytes each.

Linux can mount filesystems -- hard disk partitions, DVDs, USB
flash drives etc. -- anywhere in the directory tree, and they
can be moved easily.

Linux can also read file systems of non-Linux operating systems.
Windows can't read non-Windows file systems (unless some other
OS is using a Windows format).

MODULARITY -- By separating various OS functions and minimizing
their interaction, stability is greatly enhanced, and configuring
is made much easier. For example, in Linux the kernel is separate
from the graphic system, while in Microsoft Windows they are one
big mess. Can you say "Blue Screen Of Death" ?

PROCESSOR INDEPENDENCE -- The same open-source programs can be
recompiled to run in Linux on many different processors, from
tablets to desktops to mainframes.

OPEN SOURCE CODE -- Allows users to add or modify features of
programs (or pay someone else to do it).

ZERO COST -- Zero initial cost and zero upgrade cost for Linux
and its application and development software.

"-hh" deleted and ignored _all_ of these advantages of Linux
except zero cost, to which he responded with a long-winded series
of phony examples employing entirely made-up numbers! Does he
get paid by the word for posting lying anti-Linux propaganda?

A survey of recent "-hh" posts shows him criticizing Linux users
for personal attack, but never criticizing anti-Linux posters
for theirs, which are much worse and more numerous.

"-hh" also calls Linux users "The Herd" which is an anti-Linux
propaganda term used only by Microsoft's anti-Linux gang.

So we see that "-hh" shows all the signs of being a dedicated
anti-Linux propagandist, and that he deceptively deletes
pro-Linux information.

Summing up:

Linux has many proven advantages over Microsoft Windows.

"-hh" exhibits all the signs of being a dedicated anti-Linux
propagandist.

"-hh" deletes and ignores information about the advantages of
Linux. He says that he will never use Linux, but doesn't give
any reason for that assertion. Apparently he hopes that people
will accept his ideas on faith, but since he is a dedicated
anti-Linux propagandist, they certainly should _not_ believe
what he says.

[-hh]

On Mar 18, 10:39 am, Rex Ballard <rex.ball...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, March 15, 2012 7:01:20 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
> > On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk <m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
> > > ...
> > > Try it -- you'll love it!
>
> I've been using Linux for 19 years, and as a primary operating
> system for at least one of my computers for the last 10.
>
> The evolution from SLS to Slackware and Yddragsil and then
> Mandrake, Red Hat, and Suse has taken us from systems that
> struggled to work on Monochrome monitors with

Thanks, but I'd be more interested in hearing what the other OSs are
that you just revealed you're using on those "non primary" systems,
and why that is.

Wow, something on your system is broken in your quoting software. By
any chance, were you posting from your 'primary' system?

> I've been using Linux for 19 years. We've come a long way
> from TAMU and SLS Linux to Mandrake, Red Hat, SUSE, then Ubuntu,
> and Android.
>
> In those early days, it took a lot of shell scripting to get
> it working on a monochrome monitor, where you could push the
> resolution almost to a Sun, but if you pushed it too far,
> the monitor would catch fire.

IIRC, I ditched monochrome 29 years ago. Perhaps we could discuss
something that's a quarter century closer to topical?

> And to think it took almost 18 years for the combination
> of Apple and Google and other Linux/Unix advocates to finally
> break into a "niche" market that Microsoft couldn't block.

On the desktop, the break into MS's dominance was entirely due to
Apple...and half of the reasons why it took so long probably have to
do with how severely Apple stumbled after Jobs left.

> And now the OEMs are seeing far more profit from Android devices
> than for laptops that have been discounted into oblivion,
> because Windows 7 seems to just keep slowing down more and
> more from when you buy it, while Android devices just keep
> getting more and more applications, and iPads are going out
> the door as fast as Apple can make them.

"Post PC Era" transition would be one set of tea leaves. That MS
hasn't been able to transform themselves into this segment - - despite
billions spent trying - - is one factor; another is just how netbooks
got run over like an armadillo in Texas.

> Now we are seeing the "convertable" tablets, tablets with
> keyboards that look and act like Laptops when you want them
> to, and look and act like tablets when that's what you want.

A throwback to ten years ago; time will tell if these tablet hybrids
get any traction, but I'd not make any wager on that saggy horse: I'd
personally suspect that the 2012 & 13 market leader by at least a 3:1
margin will be as an accessory to the iPad.

> > Already did.  And again.  I don't see any rational reason to ever
> > consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>
> How does that go? Never say never?

It goes "Fool me once ... fool me twice". Linux hasn't really
changed.

> Have you considered an iPad?  or an Android Tablet?

For some productivity tasks, some of these have been adopted.
However, Android simply is not Linux: it is a trademarked product of
Google...who has simply hidden how they make people pay for that
product.

> What if it came with a 15 or 17 inch monitor or a Full HD
> output to a 1080p monitor?  And what if you could attach a
> keyboard or use a bluetooth keyboard, and what if that tablet
> had all that power in either a 7 inch or 10 inch display of it's own?

What if we stopped making speculations about what other peoples' use
cases are?

> Android tablet customers choose between 16 and 32 gigabyte
> SSD storage because 16 Gigabytes is plenty, especially when
> you have external devices for back-up storage, SDHC removable
> storage up to 64 gb, and you can upload/download your information
> with Windows using the tablet as a hard drive.

A claim that utterly ignores what the diversity in customer use case
needs can be. For example, when I head out on the road with my
camera gear, I'm often carrying over 100GB worth of CF memory cards.
Feel free to humor me by explaining to me how I'd plug a CF into an SD
slot...just as the first step in an intellectual exercise that will
then have to next figure out how 100GB is going to fit into the 16GB
internal memory.

> And you are probably using Linux even if your core operating
> system is Windows.



>  If you are running FireFox, Chrome, or Eclipse based application,
> Symphony, Lotus Notes, or most Java applications, then it's a pretty
> good chance that the application was originally created and tested
> on a Linux machine, which assures developers that it will run
> equally well on Linux, Windows, and Mac, without needing custom
> code for each system.

I can personally recall running Lotus Notes and Lotus Symphony back in
the 1980s, before Linux even existed. I can also recall that Java
started at SUN, and those workstations ran on Unix...not Linux.
Insofar as Firefox & Chrome, they're just "Johnny Come Lately"
applications .. I can recall running NCSA Mosaic ... hey, I still have
version 2.0.1, including its documentation file:

"NCSA Mosaic for the Macintosh 2.0.0 Beta 12 NCSA Mosaic for the
Macintosh Beta 12 for the 68K Macintosh was released Wednesday, May
31, 1995. for the Power Macintosh was released Wednesday, May 31,
1995. Please read the following information regarding this release,
before downloading the software using the links on this page. Since
this is a BETA release, there are many new features or bugs that you
will need to be aware of to make your use of the new release a
pleasant experience. For best results, please remove the preferences
file and allow the latest Beta to create its own preference file. We
will continue to keep the comprehensive Known Bugs page as up-to-date
as possible. To help us do this, please email us with any problems you
find that are not related to those listed on the known bugs page. Use
the Mail Developers feature from the Balloon Help menu, or email to
mosai...@ncsa.uiuc.edu. If you are seeing huge characters here....
Please go to the styles dialog and reset the style for BLOCKQUOTE and
TYPEWRITER to the default. This is the result of a leftover bug from
version 1.0.3..."

Which of course was followed by Netscape Navigator.

> Microsoft has had to give up it's proprietary hooks just to
> stay in the game, and many corporate customers are STILL
> installing Windows XP rather than Windows 7 because there

> is no significant productivity gain on Windows 7 ...

Agreed; perhaps you can take a moment to explain to poor "Kari Laine"
how things like productivity factor into Life Cycle Cost Management
analysis and the like :-)


> ... and Windows 7 machines in default configuration get slower

> and slower over time, and disk I/O is horrible because Windows
> users have to check everything with Antivirus AND Microsoft Indexing
> - even if it's just a web page being loaded into the local cache.

Of course, in an Enterprise environment, there's also sluggish
performance that's a necessary evil which is coming from the Linux-
based Firewall that's also doing malware checking.

> MS-Office 2010 had to have ODF support, and had to comply with
> the standards set and now controlled by Oracle and IBM, who
> hold a lot more clout in corporate IT shops than Microsoft has
> ever held - especially in server and enterprise environments.

Merely examples of competing interests ... and I do note the
conspicuous absence of crediting Linux with creating any of this use
of open standards.

> Many corporations are now requiring that ANY upgrades to
> Windows 7 or Office 2010, and even MS-Project or Visio - be
> justified and funded by the organization requesting the MS
> Software rather than being standard items provided by the
> corporate umbrella at the cost of jobs in divisions that
> neither want nor need the newer software.
>
> Today, if you want to do have the latest upgrades for 10 people,
> you have to cut one employee from your OWN staff to get it.

Given that the fully burdened cost for one good white collar knowledge
worker is easily around $200K/year, you're suggesting that those ten
(10) sets of upgrades are costing you $20K per seat. While that's
possible with some products, it doesn't sound particularly credible
for general "Office" applications.

> Meanwhile, these companies have formally adopted Linux and
> Open Source for the desktop.  Even Windows users are encouraged
> to select items from the free catalog of 100 to 200 applications
> available for Linux AND Windows, and are given the names of
> comparable commercial products.  Employees can earn incentives,
> such as memory upgrades and hard drive upgrades in exchange
> for switching from the high priced software to the Open Source software.

Those hard drives must still cost $10,000 each too ;-)

It is impossible to generalize to a generic "companies". For example,
my local employer's policy is that free software is explicitly
prohibited on any device on their network. This includes your desktop
PC if you want to attach it to the network for any service: email,
servers, printers, internet, etc.

> Switch to 64 bit Linux and the company will offer you
> upgrades to 8GB and 500 gigabyte hybrid drives, which
> will be loaded with Linux as the main OS, and if you
> still need Windows XP to communicate with a client,
> you can use a VMWare image, or the client has to pay
> for their own laptop, and pay the extra expenses
> of maintaining the second laptop

Haven't seen that at all where I'm at, although based on other
posters' comments, I suspect that what you're describing is the
workgroup that is where all of the software programmers are kept
locked up, and generally not expected (or allowed) to interact with
the living.

There's a lot more professions out there in the big wide world other
than just programming, and it is dangerous to try to generalize to
'all' based upon the status in any one niche ... no matter how much
one may be personally invested in that particular one:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalizability_theory



-hh

[-hh]

On Mar 18, 9:36 pm, the sockpuppet "Mark S Bilk"
<m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
>
> {deleted without reading}

>
> "-hh" deletes and ignores information about the advantages of
> Linux.  He says that he will never use Linux, but doesn't give
> any reason for that assertion.

Mark S Bilk is lying.

Because as I stated up front as my first line of comment:

"Already did. And again."

In addition, I've repeatedly stated that I've previously used linux,
and have already stated that based on my firsthand experiences and
user applications, it has offered no material advantages. I've
previously articulated some specific use case examples.

Proof of this is in the archives ... and still in this thread, as just
illustrated.


Believe who you will.




-hh

[OldGoat]

On 3/18/2012 7:36 PM, Mark S Bilk wrote:
> On Mar 17, 6:57 pm, -hh<recscuba_goo...@huntzinger.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 03/16/2012 01:01 AM, -hh wrote:
>>>>>> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk<m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> Try [Linux] -- you'll love it!
>>
>>>>>> Already did. And again. I don't see any rational reason to ever
>>>>>> consider Linux for my main desktop ever again.
>>
>> The same value applies for the OP when they made their unsubstantiated
>> claims. Get the OP to substantiate and others will follow ... but
>> don't give them a free ride by asking others to do better.
>
> I'm the OP, and here's part of what I wrote in the article
> that started this thread, which can be seen here:
>
> https://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/browse_frm/thread/412b619ba778cd7f/2229a0149c77c9dc?hl=en#2229a0149c77c9dc
>
>> Desktop Linux provides security, power, multiple virtual
>> desktops, flexible file systems, modularity, processor
>> independence, open source code, and zero cost. Most of
>> these advantages are not available in Microsoft Windows or
>> Apple Macintosh.
>
> SECURITY -- Virtually no successful Linux malware exists.

That is because Linux has a hard time executing anything before it croaks.

[OldGoat]

On 3/18/2012 8:39 AM, Rex Ballard wrote:
> On Thursday, March 15, 2012 7:01:20 PM UTC-4, -hh wrote:
>> On Mar 15, 3:39 pm, Mark S Bilk<m...@cosmicpenguin.com> wrote:
>>> ...
>>> Try it -- you'll love it!
>
> I have been using Linux for about 19 years now, and as one of my primary desktop operating systems.
>

Go out and find a used microVAX with VMS on it.
You'll find it a more sophisticated system to work with.
Best OS I've ever used.
Life is short, so you are wasting time on linux.

[Mark S Bilk]

What nonsense! I leave my Linux desktop running
for months at a time (currently 47 days), interrupted
only by a power failure or a need to modify the
hardware.

Microsoft is really scraping the bottom of the barrel
when it pays whoever is hiding behind the "OldGoat"
false identity.

[Peter Köhlmann]

Whenever you think that this senile old fool could not possibly come up with
dumber "arguments", he does.

Doing the "flatfish lunacy" isn't exactly the way to be credible, GreyCloud

[Hadron]

What total and utter nonsense. Linux servers have been hacked on
numerous occasions.

[Hadron]

VMS was an overengineered monster.

[High Plains Thumper]

Mark S Bilk wrote:

> OldGoat wrote:
>> Mark S Bilk wrote:
>>
>>> SECURITY -- Virtually no successful Linux malware exists.
>>
>> That is because Linux has a hard time executing anything before it
>> croaks.
>
> What nonsense! I leave my Linux desktop running for months at a time
> (currently 47 days), interrupted only by a power failure or a need to
> modify the hardware.
>
> Microsoft is really scraping the bottom of the barrel when it pays
> whoever is hiding behind the "OldGoat" false identity.

Mark, I think you'll find that reply from none other than the GreyCloud
nymthief.

--
HPT