Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 11:34:33 +0000
I changed the topic and put us back on-topic, since I'm trying to tie
it into shadowrun.

> laws of the land. If Microsoft weren't restricted by those laws,
> Linux would be dead.

I'll debate this more. Below.

> The megas would never let Linux get to the point where it is now.
> They'd nip it in the bud - "Hey, I hear XX has developed a new OS
> with some possibility of promise! If we can't have it, no one can."

This assumes they hear of it. While normally corps R&D depts and
Intel depts are supposed to be well-informed, they spend their time
and money looking at each other. Something the developed as Linux
did wouldn't have promise at first, except in the eyes of the
original developer (I'm seeing Linus as decker with a penguin icon
:)) One or two revisions by the devloper and a few others interested
in the challenge or the possibility, and suddenly it's chock full of
potential and performance. So you pass budding. On to the next
stage...

> OS, and those that did wouldn't be able to do much. If they develop
> in secret (very difficult, unless you're the only one working on it,
> and you're not connected to the net), then it's no threat. If they
> then release it simultaneously everywhere, Mega #1 ties things up
> legally while Mega #2 writes virii to combat the OS directly, while
> Mega #3 kills the author(s) to discourage further development.

Well, I'd say the in secret wouldn't be so hard, as the corps don't
look to the public areas too much for secrets...and if they do, they
don't look for public domain secrets. But let's just assume that it
does get developed so I can discuss your next argument.

Mega #1 ties things up legally.....where? There is no legal entity
responsible for the new system...thousands of owners (no doubt a ton
of them shadow deckers anyway, the rest all hardcore geeks) crossing
national and corporate boundries.

Mega #2 writes a virus: Okay, I'll accept that. But then all those
hardcore geeks take it as a direct challenge (never rile a geek...).
Either they fail to beat the virus, or they succeed. This then
stands as a testimony to the new systems power, and further
entrenches it among the geeks, not to mention a few "minor" geeks.
Mega 2 just helped any system that survives the assault.

Mega #3 kills the authors. Okay, poor Linus is toast. But the
system now has thousands of authors and developers...Linus has
already done his part. Sure, some of them will be scared enough to
back away, but all? Most? Enough?

In addition, how many Mega's are going to seriously consider any new
system a threat until it proves that it can be one? MS has been
working on forcing people to be dependant on their system, not
targeting other systems specifically. MS can write anti-Linux
viruses without getting caught. Legally? Hasn't even tried. Mega's
watch the bottom line, and there's no profit in quashing every
two-bit system that might come around...just the ones that have
potential to harm. And it's quite possible that that hasn't happened
yet (after all, you need some rare conditions to come up with this:
Talented developers who are willing to sacrifice all the potential
money involved.) I'd say it remains an unlikely (because of those
conditions) but purely possible situation in SR.

Others?

-=SwiftOne=-
Brett Borger
SwiftOne@***.edu
AAP Techie
Message no. 2
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 11:53:20 -0400
Brett Borger wrote:
>I changed the topic and put us back on-topic, since I'm trying to tie
>it into shadowrun.

We've been discussing the relationship of the megas to independents
in the 2050s. That's SR, isn't it?

>> The megas would never let Linux get to the point where it is now.
>> They'd nip it in the bud - "Hey, I hear XX has developed a new OS
>> with some possibility of promise! If we can't have it, no one can."
>
>This assumes they hear of it. While normally corps R&D depts and
>Intel depts are supposed to be well-informed, they spend their time
>and money looking at each other. Something the developed as Linux
>did wouldn't have promise at first, except in the eyes of the
>original developer (I'm seeing Linus as decker with a penguin icon
>:)) One or two revisions by the devloper and a few others interested
>in the challenge or the possibility, and suddenly it's chock full of
>potential and performance. So you pass budding. On to the next
>stage...

"Suddenly"? It's taken Linux many years to become "chock full of
potential and performance". In that time, *some* people at least
have noticed. But for the sake of argument, I'll let this pass.

>> OS, and those that did wouldn't be able to do much. If they develop
>> in secret (very difficult, unless you're the only one working on it,
>> and you're not connected to the net), then it's no threat. If they
>> then release it simultaneously everywhere, Mega #1 ties things up
>> legally while Mega #2 writes virii to combat the OS directly, while
>> Mega #3 kills the author(s) to discourage further development.
>
>Well, I'd say the in secret wouldn't be so hard, as the corps don't
>look to the public areas too much for secrets...and if they do, they
>don't look for public domain secrets. But let's just assume that it
>does get developed so I can discuss your next argument.

Sure.

>Mega #1 ties things up legally.....where? There is no legal entity
>responsible for the new system...thousands of owners (no doubt a ton
>of them shadow deckers anyway, the rest all hardcore geeks) crossing
>national and corporate boundries.

Sure - there are several legal entities responsible. Everybody
who contributed, for one. Sure, lots of them cross national
boundaries, but since when does that bother an international mega?

>Mega #2 writes a virus: Okay, I'll accept that. But then all those
>hardcore geeks take it as a direct challenge (never rile a geek...).
>Either they fail to beat the virus, or they succeed. This then
>stands as a testimony to the new systems power, and further
>entrenches it among the geeks, not to mention a few "minor" geeks.
>Mega 2 just helped any system that survives the assault.

Yup. And you can bet that its own systems will be at the top of
that list, no? "I was running a Fuchi deck and it stopped the
virus cold - my friend with a Penguin deck survived, but it meant
a reinstall..."

>Mega #3 kills the authors. Okay, poor Linus is toast. But the
>system now has thousands of authors and developers...Linus has
>already done his part. Sure, some of them will be scared enough to
>back away, but all? Most? Enough?

Life is cheap in SR. I'd say Enough. Sure, there will always be
the hardcore "I'd rather die than give in" sort, but I'm sure the
corps are willing to accept the exchange.

>In addition, how many Mega's are going to seriously consider any new
>system a threat until it proves that it can be one? MS has been
>working on forcing people to be dependant on their system, not
>targeting other systems specifically. MS can write anti-Linux

Heh - tell that to the OS/2 folks. IBM gets a license to use the
Windows code in OS/2 and then MS goes and tweaks the API just
enough to break just about everything.

>viruses without getting caught. Legally? Hasn't even tried. Mega's

I doubt that MS could write a virus without getting their buns
toasted. Virii move much slower nowadays than in the 2050s, not
to mention the millions of Linux users (not all of which are net
connected, anyhow).

Legally? MS doesn't have enough money to try that, and it would
be cheaper to rely on what they're good at (FUD/publicity). They
do flex their muscle occasionally though (like "Wang's" suit against
Netscape, for instance).

>watch the bottom line, and there's no profit in quashing every
>two-bit system that might come around...just the ones that have
>potential to harm. And it's quite possible that that hasn't happened
>yet (after all, you need some rare conditions to come up with this:
>Talented developers who are willing to sacrifice all the potential
>money involved.) I'd say it remains an unlikely (because of those
>conditions) but purely possible situation in SR.

Yeah, it's possible. I just see the ratio of power in the 2050s
to have swung more towards the megas than the independents. MS
isn't near the power levels of the A corps, let alone the AAAs.
Independents are more likely to be willing to do illegal stuff,
but so are the corps - I'd say it's likely that the corps win on
that front, too.

Ah well, I guess we just disagree.

James Ojaste

>
Message no. 3
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 12:07:28 -0500
On 1 May 98 at 11:34, Brett Borger wrote:

> In addition, how many Mega's are going to seriously consider any new
> system a threat until it proves that it can be one?

That is the case today. Linux has been busy plugging along for
several years, because MS never considered it a threat. Now Linux is
getting enough attention to become one, and MS is finally taking
notice.

I think the OS war has become a moot point in the SR era for one
reason: the crash of '29. Something that serious forced everyone to
work together to get over it. I see programmers and engineers from
all sides getting together to solve the problem. This integration of
ideas developed into the UMS system used in the SR world that we
know. The crash was a global crisis. In order to get the world back
online, this new global, corporate and government partner developed
OS was adopted by all, because of its support, security and
ease of use. And it was free. I'm sure there were attempts to
develop something else, but those attempts quickly died at the hands
of this free OS that everyone was using. Why buy something, when what
you can get for free works? This model grew in popularity until even
the thought of paying for an OS or using something else became a
silly concept.

Of course, that's all IMHO.

--

=================================================================
-DREKHEAD- drekhead@***.net - ICQ-UIN 2883757 -
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/6990/index.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Reality is the only obstacle to happiness." - Unknown
Message no. 4
From: "Jeremy \"Bolthy\" Zimmerman" <jeremy@***********.COM>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 09:18:19 -0700
> ease of use. And it was free. I'm sure there were attempts to
> develop something else, but those attempts quickly died at the hands
> of this free OS that everyone was using. Why buy something, when what
> you can get for free works? This model grew in popularity until even

I think this statement needs an analogy.

Compare Windows 95 to Linux with X-Windows. =)
Message no. 5
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 17:23:47 +0100
And verily, did Brett Borger hastily scribble thusly...
|This assumes they hear of it. While normally corps R&D depts and
|Intel depts are supposed to be well-informed, they spend their time
|and money looking at each other. Something the developed as Linux
|did wouldn't have promise at first, except in the eyes of the
|original developer (I'm seeing Linus as decker with a penguin icon
|:)) One or two revisions by the devloper and a few others interested
|in the challenge or the possibility, and suddenly it's chock full of
|potential and performance. So you pass budding. On to the next
|stage...

i just heard something recently about linus that i find quite....
enlightening....

Guess what the computer was that got him interested in operating systems....

Go on.... You'll never guess....
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 6
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 12:36:05 +0000
> >I changed the topic and put us back on-topic, since I'm trying to tie
> >it into shadowrun.
>
> We've been discussing the relationship of the megas to independents
> in the 2050s. That's SR, isn't it?

That's what I meant...I took the [OT] tag off. Man, I really am just
failing at getting my point across today. :)

> >Mega #1 ties things up legally.....where? There is no legal entity
> >responsible for the new system...thousands of owners (no doubt a ton
> >of them shadow deckers anyway, the rest all hardcore geeks) crossing
> >national and corporate boundries.
>
> Sure - there are several legal entities responsible. Everybody
> who contributed, for one. Sure, lots of them cross national
> boundaries, but since when does that bother an international mega?

So Mega 1 sues Linus...in every district they can. Throw out some
lawsuits against a few of the major non-shadow BBS too. End result:
Mega spends a fortune in legal fees, Linus is broke and out of luck
(this is before he gets geeked. Poor guy :) ) Linux is still
getting developed by the other thousands of people.

> >Mega #3 kills the authors. Okay, poor Linus is toast. But the
> >system now has thousands of authors and developers...Linus has
> >already done his part. Sure, some of them will be scared enough to
> >back away, but all? Most? Enough?
>
> Life is cheap in SR. I'd say Enough. Sure, there will always be
> the hardcore "I'd rather die than give in" sort, but I'm sure the
> corps are willing to accept the exchange.

I'd tend to diagree. Corps are certainly free to engage is such
violence, but kill too many and people start to notice. Notice means
bad rep, which means a dip in the bottom line. Corp Shadowfiles had
a nice bit about that. Worse yet, there doesn't have to be proof
that the corp is responsible. Just suspicsion is enough for the
fickle public. Ask Robert Jewell.

> >viruses without getting caught. Legally? Hasn't even tried. Mega's
>
> I doubt that MS could write a virus without getting their buns
> toasted. Virii move much slower nowadays than in the 2050s, not
> to mention the millions of Linux users (not all of which are net
> connected, anyhow).

True. Also, I doubt MS could write a virus without
1) Having it not work
2) Except on their own systems
3) and blaming the latest delay in NT 5.0 on it.

> Legally? MS doesn't have enough money to try that, and it would

Wow, when MS doesn't have enough money for something, I tend to put
it on the list of things Megas wouldn't do in a hurry. MS isn't a
mega, but it still has a lot of money, which Megas tend to hold
rather dear...

> be cheaper to rely on what they're good at (FUD/publicity). They

Yup. I see a FUD campaign in the 2050's, but not a legal battle.
Esp since a legal battle lends authenticity to the opponent.

> Yeah, it's possible. I just see the ratio of power in the 2050s
> to have swung more towards the megas than the independents. MS
> isn't near the power levels of the A corps, let alone the AAAs.
> Independents are more likely to be willing to do illegal stuff,
> but so are the corps - I'd say it's likely that the corps win on
> that front, too.

Oh, I agree... just as the computer market now is corporation based.
I'm thinking in terms of recent additions. Fuchi, MCT, and 'Raku
have been basically dealing with UMS and custom hardware/software
algorithms. I see no reason why a "freebie" couldn't try and
compete. Maybe it wouldn't succeed....but if it lasts a while, it
could make for some interesting runs. Besides, isn't this exactly
how decker's utilities are spread?

-=SwiftOne=-
Brett Borger
SwiftOne@***.edu
AAP Techie
Message no. 7
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 12:30:59 -0400
Spike wrote:
>i just heard something recently about linus that i find quite....
>enlightening....
>
>Guess what the computer was that got him interested in operating systems....
>
>Go on.... You'll never guess....

Minix. Linus wasn't satisfied with minix so he decided to write his
own version. Or are you asking about the hardware? If so, I'm not
sure. Probably a 286 clone of some sort.

James Ojaste
Message no. 8
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 12:33:29 -0400
Jeremy "Bolthy" Zimmerman wrote:
>> ease of use. And it was free. I'm sure there were attempts to
>> develop something else, but those attempts quickly died at the hands
>> of this free OS that everyone was using. Why buy something, when what
>> you can get for free works? This model grew in popularity until even
>
>I think this statement needs an analogy.
>
>Compare Windows 95 to Linux with X-Windows. =)

The main reason that Windows 95 is so popular today is that it's
compatible (more or less) with Windows 3.1 which was compatible with
Windows 3.0, which was compatible with DOS 3.3. Is that what you
meant?

After the Crash, you don't have to worry about backwards compatibility
anymore.

The most recent version (X11R6.4) of X-Windows is only free for
non-commercial purposes, too...

James Ojaste
Message no. 9
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 17:34:11 +0100
And verily, did Ojaste,James [NCR] hastily scribble thusly...
|Minix. Linus wasn't satisfied with minix so he decided to write his
|own version. Or are you asking about the hardware? If so, I'm not
|sure. Probably a 286 clone of some sort.

How *dare* you insult my favourite computer in the whole wide world like
that?

:)

The Sinclair QL has a GOOD, preemptive operating system, it does
things that DOS could never do.....

And it was doing that 15 years ago....

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 10
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:17:56 -0500
>
> On 1 May 98 at 11:34, Brett Borger wrote:
>
> > In addition, how many Mega's are going to seriously consider any new
> > system a threat until it proves that it can be one?
>
> That is the case today. Linux has been busy plugging along for
> several years, because MS never considered it a threat. Now Linux is
> getting enough attention to become one, and MS is finally taking
> notice.
>
> I think the OS war has become a moot point in the SR era for one
> reason: the crash of '29. Something that serious forced everyone to
> work together to get over it. I see programmers and engineers from
> all sides getting together to solve the problem. This integration of
> ideas developed into the UMS system used in the SR world that we
> know. The crash was a global crisis. In order to get the world back
> online, this new global, corporate and government partner developed
> OS was adopted by all, because of its support, security and
> ease of use. And it was free. I'm sure there were attempts to
> develop something else, but those attempts quickly died at the hands
> of this free OS that everyone was using. Why buy something, when what
> you can get for free works? This model grew in popularity until even
> the thought of paying for an OS or using something else became a
> silly concept.
>
> Of course, that's all IMHO.
>
I don't see this ever happening precisely like this. That many folks
working together. Nope. It would be whoever can get the best product
out first, to make the most cash, before somebody else does.
I'm still convinced FASA used the Crash, simply to regulate the level
of technology, and to make it so people like us, wouldn't argue (much)
about the "matrix" its protocols, OS, etc. :)
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The universe doesn't have laws, it has habits. And habits can be broken.
Message no. 11
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:21:41 -0500
>
> > ease of use. And it was free. I'm sure there were attempts to
> > develop something else, but those attempts quickly died at the hands
> > of this free OS that everyone was using. Why buy something, when what
> > you can get for free works? This model grew in popularity until even
>
> I think this statement needs an analogy.
>
> Compare Windows 95 to Linux with X-Windows. =)
>
Guys the problem also is that a free product, doesn't have the
same investments behind it, because there's little to no money
being made. I love linux (and no my x-windows, doesn't look like Win95:))
but I still have to have a copy of Win95 for games, and MS Office.
Linux has come a long way (although their NFS support still needs some
work), but its not the same. I haven't seen anyone writing huge mass
market games for it, etc. Free software is wonderful, and it provides
a challenge to the megas, but it would most likely always be seen
in the hands of the "intellectuals" who liked to fiddle with their
OS, didn't mind things breaking, or writing it themselves. The masses
want somebody to call when it breaks, and to be able to wonder
down the store and by their programs. I don't see this changing even
by 2050. This is all IMHO of course.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The universe doesn't have laws, it has habits. And habits can be broken.
Message no. 12
From: Paul Gettle <pgettle@********.NET>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:35:03 -0400
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 11:34 AM 5/1/98 +0000, SwiftOne wrote:
>Mega #1 ties things up legally.....where? There is no legal entity
>responsible for the new system...thousands of owners (no doubt a ton
>of them shadow deckers anyway, the rest all hardcore geeks) crossing
>national and corporate boundries.

==========
Internal Memo to all MCT employees:

All employees are ordered to remove all copies of MatrixLinux-OS from
their office, home, an portable systems. MatrixLinux-OS has several
security backdoors that pose a direct threat to sensitive MCT data. As
such, it falls under MCT Corporate Legal Code, Title 875: Executing
Unsecure Computer Code. Employees are reminded that persons caught
violating Title 875 will be brought before their local MCT Judical
Board, and penalties range from Demotion with 240 hours of Corporate
Comunitity Service to Full Termination without Benifits.
Have a nice and productive workday.
==========

Hear that sound? That's what, about 1/5th of the legitimate geek
userbase hitting the delete key to save their job?


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.3

iQCVAwUBNUoHtc2C0fERRVM5AQG51wP/XbiAokMTOLeSSVkrLftbjxbcjqm3STfz
mjPkJm53yxRyuPrFnCiiyEaRMluO+MTx5idyy5LLyIRNZBu2VBv5/+wvcu66wD0g
ff+ZBlYM51DyXLNj8/vgc+xkh49P+Th4kvtOanXkemgio9/LKWHYpZTkWO4uG9y6
2Qx5TuVyG7U=
=3O/Y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
-- Paul Gettle (pgettle@********.net)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:11455339 (RSA 1024, created 97/08/08)
625A FFF0 76DC A077 D21C 556B BB58 00AA
Message no. 13
From: "Jeremy \"Bolthy\" Zimmerman" <jeremy@***********.COM>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 10:34:09 -0700
----------
> From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
> To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
> Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
> Date: Friday, May 01, 1998 11:21 AM
>
> Guys the problem also is that a free product, doesn't have the
> same investments behind it, because there's little to no money
> being made. I love linux (and no my x-windows, doesn't look like Win95:))
> but I still have to have a copy of Win95 for games, and MS Office.
> Linux has come a long way (although their NFS support still needs some
> work), but its not the same. I haven't seen anyone writing huge mass
> market games for it, etc. Free software is wonderful, and it provides
> a challenge to the megas, but it would most likely always be seen
> in the hands of the "intellectuals" who liked to fiddle with their
> OS, didn't mind things breaking, or writing it themselves. The masses
> want somebody to call when it breaks, and to be able to wonder
> down the store and by their programs. I don't see this changing even
> by 2050. This is all IMHO of course.
>

So in the end you have the deckers running their own OSs on their
computers, and the standard users running some mass-marketed crap?

Sounds about right.
Message no. 14
From: "Ojaste,James [NCR]" <James.Ojaste@**.GC.CA>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:49:03 -0400
Spike wrote:
>And verily, did Ojaste,James [NCR] hastily scribble thusly...
>|Minix. Linus wasn't satisfied with minix so he decided to write his
>|own version. Or are you asking about the hardware? If so, I'm not
>|sure. Probably a 286 clone of some sort.
>
>How *dare* you insult my favourite computer in the whole wide world like
>that?

Insult, what insult? It's not like I mind insulting your favourite
computer, but I'd like to know how to defend myself. ;-)

>The Sinclair QL has a GOOD, preemptive operating system, it does
>things that DOS could never do.....
>And it was doing that 15 years ago....

Well, DOS was based on Unix and CPM - each of which had preemptive
multitasking. DOS chose the worst features of each, discarded some
more stuff that was useful, warped the rest and sat there smugly as
IBM forked over the cash.

Unix was doing stuff that DOS could never do in the early 70s. I
don't remember exactly when X appeared on the scene, but Windows
has never matched it either. Beat that! :-)

James Ojaste
Message no. 15
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:48:38 -0500
>
> At 11:34 AM 5/1/98 +0000, SwiftOne wrote:
> >Mega #1 ties things up legally.....where? There is no legal entity
> >responsible for the new system...thousands of owners (no doubt a ton
> >of them shadow deckers anyway, the rest all hardcore geeks) crossing
> >national and corporate boundries.
>
> ==========
> Internal Memo to all MCT employees:
>
> All employees are ordered to remove all copies of MatrixLinux-OS from
> their office, home, an portable systems. MatrixLinux-OS has several
> security backdoors that pose a direct threat to sensitive MCT data. As
> such, it falls under MCT Corporate Legal Code, Title 875: Executing
> Unsecure Computer Code. Employees are reminded that persons caught
> violating Title 875 will be brought before their local MCT Judical
> Board, and penalties range from Demotion with 240 hours of Corporate
> Comunitity Service to Full Termination without Benifits.
> Have a nice and productive workday.
> ==========
>
> Hear that sound? That's what, about 1/5th of the legitimate geek
> userbase hitting the delete key to save their job?
>
>
Possibly. But your forgetting that true "geeks" would never work for the
megas. :) Employees are the drones, the unthinking sheep. No matter
how geeky they are. True geeks are the independents. :)

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The universe doesn't have laws, it has habits. And habits can be broken.
Message no. 16
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:50:21 -0500
>
> ----------
> > From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
> > To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
> > Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
> > Date: Friday, May 01, 1998 11:21 AM
> >
> > Guys the problem also is that a free product, doesn't have the
> > same investments behind it, because there's little to no money
> > being made. I love linux (and no my x-windows, doesn't look like Win95:))
> > but I still have to have a copy of Win95 for games, and MS Office.
> > Linux has come a long way (although their NFS support still needs some
> > work), but its not the same. I haven't seen anyone writing huge mass
> > market games for it, etc. Free software is wonderful, and it provides
> > a challenge to the megas, but it would most likely always be seen
> > in the hands of the "intellectuals" who liked to fiddle with their
> > OS, didn't mind things breaking, or writing it themselves. The masses
> > want somebody to call when it breaks, and to be able to wonder
> > down the store and by their programs. I don't see this changing even
> > by 2050. This is all IMHO of course.
> >
>
> So in the end you have the deckers running their own OSs on their
> computers, and the standard users running some mass-marketed crap?
>
> Sounds about right.
>
Possibly. But you notice Linux can read HPFS, Vfat, etc etc.
NT can't read HPFS (in version 4), or ext2, or much else besides FAT and
NTFS. This goes back to the theory, microsoft doesn't have to destory
anyone, eventually you will use their product, because its all there is.


--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The universe doesn't have laws, it has habits. And habits can be broken.
Message no. 17
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:51:50 -0500
>
> Well, DOS was based on Unix and CPM - each of which had preemptive
> multitasking. DOS chose the worst features of each, discarded some
> more stuff that was useful, warped the rest and sat there smugly as
> IBM forked over the cash.
>
> Unix was doing stuff that DOS could never do in the early 70s. I
> don't remember exactly when X appeared on the scene, but Windows
> has never matched it either. Beat that! :-)
>
We're comparing an OS that has a concept of a user and process, to
one that doesn't. Then we're projecting this 50+ years into the future.
(When the market is only what 30 years old or so). Does anybody
else see problems with this. :) Ah well, it passes a slow friday that is
for sure.

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The universe doesn't have laws, it has habits. And habits can be broken.
Message no. 18
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 18:57:10 +0100
And verily, did Ojaste,James [NCR] hastily scribble thusly...
|Unix was doing stuff that DOS could never do in the early 70s. I
|don't remember exactly when X appeared on the scene, but Windows
|has never matched it either. Beat that! :-)

No.
In fact, if I ever did get a PC, which may become a distinct possibility
(as someone offered to give me one (ooo-errr...)), the first thing I'd do
would be to format the hard drive to remove all M$ viri, and instal linux.


Of course, then I'd install uQLx....
:)
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 19
From: David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 12:16:44 -0600
Spike wrote:
/
/ And verily, did Ojaste,James [NCR] hastily scribble thusly...
/ |Unix was doing stuff that DOS could never do in the early 70s. I
/ |don't remember exactly when X appeared on the scene, but Windows
/ |has never matched it either. Beat that! :-)
/
/ No.
/ In fact, if I ever did get a PC, which may become a distinct possibility
/ (as someone offered to give me one (ooo-errr...)), the first thing I'd do
/ would be to format the hard drive to remove all M$ viri, and instal linux.
/
/
/ Of course, then I'd install uQLx....
/ :)

<Red Leader> Stay on topic... stay on topic. </Red Leader>

<GridSec>

Guys. You are wandering dangerously near the off-limits subject of OS
wars (see the FAQ). Please bring it back to Shadowrun.

Thank you.

</GridSec>

-David
--
"That which we do not know supports that which we know."
- Joseph Campbell
--
email: dbuehrer@******.carl.org
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm
Message no. 20
From: Paul Gettle <pgettle@********.NET>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 14:18:54 -0400
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 01:48 PM 5/1/98 -0500, Lehlan wrote:
>Possibly. But your forgetting that true "geeks" would never work for
the
>megas. :) Employees are the drones, the unthinking sheep. No matter
>how geeky they are. True geeks are the independents. :)

Oh, please. If only 'True' geeks were to run this new OS that we've
been speculating about, then the userbase would never be wide enough
to remotely pose a threat to the Mega's iron griped control on what
runs on people's computers.

If it's big enough to worry the megas then it has to be apealing to to
the 'just geeky' also, and not just to the 'True' geek.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.3

iQCVAwUBNUoR/82C0fERRVM5AQFDBAQAgQNIgONWvdWopVHanmY4cakVvHd13rQ1
1AqZ46fqMXTVnfqKDwIwmPAPgS+bWkreP/v5cM7ltcj+I07dj96A0cjfmcvRtwl+
ec+w5KfNfnEf0cM1zI6o8iI3ByJUGgo7vI4VSkhTVfVL8Dp4JXYlBlEBrir86xZR
FMmoU/AaGGo=
=G/0i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
-- Paul Gettle (pgettle@********.net)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:11455339 (RSA 1024, created 97/08/08)
625A FFF0 76DC A077 D21C 556B BB58 00AA
Message no. 21
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 14:32:33 -0500
On 1 May 98 at 13:17, Lehlan Decker wrote:

> I don't see this ever happening precisely like this. That many folks
> working together. Nope. It would be whoever can get the best product
> out first, to make the most cash, before somebody else does.

There are committees working together now. EIA/TIA, ANSI, DVD
Consortium, etc. And that is just to set standards for operatability.
The Crash brought the technological, but more importantly, the
economic world to a halt. Such a catastrophic event would certainly
be a reason to open up the lines of communication. A jointly
developed OS would be the quickest and safest way to get back up and
running. Quick because so many varied resources could be poured into
it. Safe, because everyone shares the same code base (no backdoors,
because the others would catch it, or if there are, everyone knows
about them).

I don't think a company would go it alone. Too risky. A company may
certainly have developed and used their own OS, but who else would
adopt it? Nobody knew who created the virus. Fear and uncertainty
would keep corps from putting an outside product on their systems.
Security concerns would be high. No IT manager is going to put his
system back onto a global network, unless he can be damn sure who he
is connecting too, and what they are using. The development
partnership would solve that problem. The IT manager would know the
OS, and the players involved. Hell, some of them were his people.

The questions has to be asked; why would a corporation spend
resources to develop a none revenue generating product? It flies in
the face of capitalism. The answer is simple: without the global
reach they once had, most corps are in serious trouble. Their
sources of income have become severely limited. Do they spend
resources on a venture that guarantees they can get their computers
up and connected to the world again, or do they take a risk and try
and develop there own system, and hope it is adopted and accepted by
their customers and partners? No brainer. Most CEO's are going to
take the sure thing every time.

> I'm
> still convinced FASA used the Crash, simply to regulate the level of
> technology, and to make it so people like us, wouldn't argue (much)
> about the "matrix" its protocols, OS, etc. :) --

Your probably right, but you can still speculate a reasonable
explanation.

--
=================================================================
-DREKHEAD- drekhead@***.net - ICQ-UIN 2883757 -
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/6990/index.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Reality is the only obstacle to happiness." - Unknown
Message no. 22
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 14:48:48 -0500
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> At 01:48 PM 5/1/98 -0500, Lehlan wrote:
> >Possibly. But your forgetting that true "geeks" would never work for
> the
> >megas. :) Employees are the drones, the unthinking sheep. No matter
> >how geeky they are. True geeks are the independents. :)
>
> Oh, please. If only 'True' geeks were to run this new OS that we've
> been speculating about, then the userbase would never be wide enough
> to remotely pose a threat to the Mega's iron griped control on what
> runs on people's computers.
>
> If it's big enough to worry the megas then it has to be apealing to to
> the 'just geeky' also, and not just to the 'True' geek.
>
I was being sarcastic. Besides even the "just geeky" population, isn't
large enough to pose a threat to the megas. Besides most of us who do have
linux or something else running, also have Windows, MSoffice etc. So they aren't loosing
money over us. :)

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The universe doesn't have laws, it has habits. And habits can be broken.
Message no. 23
From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 14:59:06 -0500
>
> On 1 May 98 at 13:17, Lehlan Decker wrote:
>
> > I don't see this ever happening precisely like this. That many folks
> > working together. Nope. It would be whoever can get the best product
> > out first, to make the most cash, before somebody else does.
>
> There are committees working together now. EIA/TIA, ANSI, DVD
> Consortium, etc. And that is just to set standards for operatability.
> The Crash brought the technological, but more importantly, the
> economic world to a halt. Such a catastrophic event would certainly
> be a reason to open up the lines of communication. A jointly
> developed OS would be the quickest and safest way to get back up and
> running. Quick because so many varied resources could be poured into
> it. Safe, because everyone shares the same code base (no backdoors,
> because the others would catch it, or if there are, everyone knows
> about them).
>
> I don't think a company would go it alone. Too risky. A company may
> certainly have developed and used their own OS, but who else would
> adopt it? Nobody knew who created the virus. Fear and uncertainty
> would keep corps from putting an outside product on their systems.
> Security concerns would be high. No IT manager is going to put his
> system back onto a global network, unless he can be damn sure who he
> is connecting too, and what they are using. The development
> partnership would solve that problem. The IT manager would know the
> OS, and the players involved. Hell, some of them were his people.
>
> The questions has to be asked; why would a corporation spend
> resources to develop a none revenue generating product? It flies in
> the face of capitalism. The answer is simple: without the global
> reach they once had, most corps are in serious trouble. Their
> sources of income have become severely limited. Do they spend
> resources on a venture that guarantees they can get their computers
> up and connected to the world again, or do they take a risk and try
> and develop there own system, and hope it is adopted and accepted by
> their customers and partners? No brainer. Most CEO's are going to
> take the sure thing every time.
>
Perhaps your right. However I see a whole bunch of consortiums, not
just one. The governments are going to have their own ideas of what
a new "secure" network should be. (Think about VCHIP, DES encryptions vs
others).
Megas will have their own ideas. Cooperation may occur, but human nature
being what it is, I just don't see it being that easy and bloodless.
What's a great quote "I love standards, there are so many to choose from"


> > I'm
> > still convinced FASA used the Crash, simply to regulate the level of
> > technology, and to make it so people like us, wouldn't argue (much)
> > about the "matrix" its protocols, OS, etc. :) --
>
> Your probably right, but you can still speculate a reasonable
> explanation.

But of course. If we couldn't speculate, the list would be a much quieter
and boring place. :)
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Lehlan Decker 644-4534 Systems Development
decker@****.fsu.edu http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~decker
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The universe doesn't have laws, it has habits. And habits can be broken.
Message no. 24
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 15:00:33 EST
> Guys. You are wandering dangerously near the off-limits subject of
> OS wars (see the FAQ). Please bring it back to Shadowrun.

Ahem. About 5 or six messages before this I composed a wonderful
message ripping on Microsoft, and basically saying stuff we've all
heard before. I then deleted it. Seeing this message, I see it was
the right choice, but if you could all do me the favor of pretending
you read that message, were stunned at my logic and in awe of my
rhetoric, I'd appreciate it. Thanks.

-=SwiftOne=-
Message no. 25
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 14:56:45 EST
> Internal Memo to all MCT employees:
>
> Hear that sound? That's what, about 1/5th of the legitimate geek
> userbase hitting the delete key to save their job?

Uh huh. And how many people pirate software, use mp3's, copy
videotapes, and otherwise bootleg stuff? Nice theory, but reality
seems to be on my side here.

-=SwiftOne=-
Message no. 26
From: Paul Gettle <pgettle@********.NET>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 15:17:17 -0400
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 02:56 PM 5/1/98 -0500, SwiftOne wrote:
>Uh huh. And how many people pirate software, use mp3's, copy
>videotapes, and otherwise bootleg stuff? Nice theory, but reality
>seems to be on my side here.

Which reality in particular, 1998, or 205X?

- From everything I've read in the sourcebooks, living as a citizen of
an extraterritorial would be similar to the experience of living under
a totalitarian regime. A benevelent one, I'll grant you, but still.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.3

iQCVAwUBNUofp82C0fERRVM5AQG7ugQAtjJ5tQU8vQc/u1sp9HVKbYdJ6RSQz+Tj
UmF088RfSJWcIFinQnHwz+FVNAdl7GCQCcTJxUO/hfcR+UEtjkFgN3To3SWPGvHm
iTD6BMAOsUMcpfV1vh4nnhMwMFbntGc7whOViMSXTnJrymyx7oEvrYRCdA/2y4cY
V4nyZiNXB7w=
=ih/a
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
-- Paul Gettle (pgettle@********.net)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:11455339 (RSA 1024, created 97/08/08)
625A FFF0 76DC A077 D21C 556B BB58 00AA
Message no. 27
From: Brett Borger <bxb121@***.EDU>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 15:23:43 EST
> >Uh huh. And how many people pirate software, use mp3's, copy
> >videotapes, and otherwise bootleg stuff? Nice theory, but reality
> >seems to be on my side here.
>
> Which reality in particular, 1998, or 205X?

well, 205x, but I'm keeping human nature as basically the same in
both.

> - From everything I've read in the sourcebooks, living as a citizen
> of an extraterritorial would be similar to the experience of living
> under a totalitarian regime. A benevelent one, I'll grant you, but
> still.

I'll agree with that. But Big brother had unlimited resources and a
passive populace. (meta)Humanity is just too rebellious for a mega
to nit-pick all employees personal habits. (Or rather, they will
nitpick, but they can't afford to monitor and enforce everyone.) The
only time the Mega will take the extreme step is when the cost of
doing so (including the hit to reputation, which will affect sales
AND future employees) is when it will save them more money than not
doing so.

-=SwiftOne=-
Message no. 28
From: Drekhead <drekhead@***.NET>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 15:26:20 -0500
On 1 May 98 at 12:16, David Buehrer wrote:

> <Red Leader> Stay on topic... stay on topic. </Red Leader>

Good one, David. :)


--
=================================================================
-DREKHEAD- drekhead@***.net - ICQ-UIN 2883757 -
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Alley/6990/index.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Reality is the only obstacle to happiness." - Unknown
Message no. 29
From: "Ubiratan P. Alberton" <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 16:54:02 -0300
Jeremy "Bolthy" Zimmerman escreveu:
>
> ----------
> > From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
> > To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
> > Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
> > Date: Friday, May 01, 1998 11:21 AM
> >
> > Guys the problem also is that a free product, doesn't have the
> > same investments behind it, because there's little to no money
> > being made. I love linux (and no my x-windows, doesn't look like Win95:))
> > but I still have to have a copy of Win95 for games, and MS Office.
> > Linux has come a long way (although their NFS support still needs some
> > work), but its not the same. I haven't seen anyone writing huge mass
> > market games for it, etc. Free software is wonderful, and it provides
> > a challenge to the megas, but it would most likely always be seen
> > in the hands of the "intellectuals" who liked to fiddle with their
> > OS, didn't mind things breaking, or writing it themselves. The masses
> > want somebody to call when it breaks, and to be able to wonder
> > down the store and by their programs. I don't see this changing even
> > by 2050. This is all IMHO of course.
> >
>
> So in the end you have the deckers running their own OSs on their
> computers, and the standard users running some mass-marketed crap?
>
> Sounds about right.


I prefer the other theory of the "unified OS" that came after the
Crash, but with
some twists: The base code for all systems is the same (ASIST), with
each corp adding
it's own "twist" to the system it makes in 2059. Mostly cosmetic
changes, because everybody
else will still use ASIST and major changes create incompatibility.
ASIST would be
currently in version 7.0, because it's the 7th generation of decks now.

Ubiratan
Message no. 30
From: "Jeremy \"Bolthy\" Zimmerman" <jeremy@***********.COM>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 13:29:15 -0700
----------
> From: Ubiratan P. Alberton <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
> To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
> Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
> Date: Friday, May 01, 1998 12:54 PM
>
> Jeremy "Bolthy" Zimmerman escreveu:
> >
> > ----------
> > > From: Lehlan Decker <decker@****.FSU.EDU>
> > > To: SHADOWRN@********.ITRIBE.NET
> > > Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
> > > Date: Friday, May 01, 1998 11:21 AM
> > >
> > > Guys the problem also is that a free product, doesn't have the
> > > same investments behind it, because there's little to no money
> > > being made. I love linux (and no my x-windows, doesn't look like
Win95:))
> > > but I still have to have a copy of Win95 for games, and MS Office.
> > > Linux has come a long way (although their NFS support still needs
some
> > > work), but its not the same. I haven't seen anyone writing huge mass
> > > market games for it, etc. Free software is wonderful, and it provides
> > > a challenge to the megas, but it would most likely always be seen
> > > in the hands of the "intellectuals" who liked to fiddle with
their
> > > OS, didn't mind things breaking, or writing it themselves. The masses
> > > want somebody to call when it breaks, and to be able to wonder
> > > down the store and by their programs. I don't see this changing even
> > > by 2050. This is all IMHO of course.
> > >
> >
> > So in the end you have the deckers running their own OSs on their
> > computers, and the standard users running some mass-marketed crap?
> >
> > Sounds about right.
>
>
> I prefer the other theory of the "unified OS" that came after the
> Crash, but with
> some twists: The base code for all systems is the same (ASIST), with
> each corp adding
> it's own "twist" to the system it makes in 2059. Mostly cosmetic
> changes, because everybody
> else will still use ASIST and major changes create incompatibility.
> ASIST would be
> currently in version 7.0, because it's the 7th generation of decks now.
>

I don't have any of my fluff books at hand, but I thought ASIST was the
simsense interface... I'd view that more on par with drivers for my monitor
than as an OS. Hmmm... I wonder if it's a matter of computers being more
modular... =T
Message no. 31
From: "Ubiratan P. Alberton" <ubiratan@**.HOMESHOPPING.COM.BR>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Fri, 1 May 1998 18:14:34 -0300
Jeremy "Bolthy" Zimmerman escreveu:

> > I prefer the other theory of the "unified OS" that came after the
> > Crash, but with
> > some twists: The base code for all systems is the same (ASIST), with
> > each corp adding
> > it's own "twist" to the system it makes in 2059. Mostly cosmetic
> > changes, because everybody
> > else will still use ASIST and major changes create incompatibility.
> > ASIST would be
> > currently in version 7.0, because it's the 7th generation of decks now.
> >
>
> I don't have any of my fluff books at hand, but I thought ASIST was the
> simsense interface... I'd view that more on par with drivers for my monitor
> than as an OS. Hmmm... I wonder if it's a matter of computers being more
> modular... =T


I don't have yhe books either, but ASIST is the thing that regulates
everytihng in
the deck. It interprets you orders and tells the hardware to do what you
want. That looks
like an OS to me :) .

Ubiratan
Message no. 32
From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 14:43:52 +0100
Spike said on 17:23/ 1 May 98...

> i just heard something recently about linus that i find quite....
> enlightening....
>
> Guess what the computer was that got him interested in operating systems....
>
> Go on.... You'll never guess....

A QL?

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html - UIN5044116
You're gonna like it, but not a lot.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 33
From: MC23 <mc23@**********.COM>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 09:26:59 -0400
Once upon a time, Gurth wrote;

>Spike said on 17:23/ 1 May 98...
>
>> i just heard something recently about linus that i find quite....
>> enlightening....
>>
>> Guess what the computer was that got him interested in operating systems....
>>
>> Go on.... You'll never guess....
>
>A QL?

Timex Sinclair?

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

Ancient cultures believed that names held great power, personal names
more so and they were guarded very closely. To protect themselves, they
answered to another name, because if another discovered their real name,
it could be used against them.
History repeats itself.
Welcome to the Digital Age.
I am MC23
Message no. 34
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 18:37:27 +0100
And verily, did Brett Borger hastily scribble thusly...
|
|> Guys. You are wandering dangerously near the off-limits subject of
|> OS wars (see the FAQ). Please bring it back to Shadowrun.
|
|Ahem. About 5 or six messages before this I composed a wonderful
|message ripping on Microsoft, and basically saying stuff we've all
|heard before. I then deleted it. Seeing this message, I see it was
|the right choice, but if you could all do me the favor of pretending
|you read that message, were stunned at my logic and in awe of my
|rhetoric, I'd appreciate it. Thanks.

I'll never be stunned by a Microsoft ripping post....
(I'd agree wholeheartedly, but wouldn't be stunned...)

:)

OK... STOP HITTING ME!
I'LL SHUT UP NOW!

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 35
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 19:11:54 +0100
And verily, did Gurth hastily scribble thusly...
|A QL?

Darn.... Have you been reading ahead in the posts?
If not, I'll stop now before I get in trouble....
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 36
From: Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 19:12:50 +0100
And verily, did MC23 hastily scribble thusly...
|>A QL?
|
|Timex Sinclair?

Sinclair, yes. Timex had nothing to do with Sinclair on this side of the
pond....

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
|Principal Subjects in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
|Comp Sci & Electronics | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |
Message no. 37
From: Sheldon Rose <scrose@****.COM>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 14:38:39 -0500
> > >
> >
> > So in the end you have the deckers running their own OSs on their
> > computers, and the standard users running some mass-marketed crap?

I have to disagree with this statement. Just because an OS is
mass-marketed or not does not denote weather or not it is crap... I'm
fond of win95/NT even if it is system 7 with some dumb stuff added in.
To have a vast selection of user friendly affordible applications is an
advantage in and of itself. I use Linux and my X-windows is higly
customized I like to mess with things now and then.


> > Sounds about right.
> >
> Possibly. But you notice Linux can read HPFS, Vfat, etc etc.
> NT can't read HPFS (in version 4), or ext2, or much else besides FAT and
> NTFS. This goes back to the theory, microsoft doesn't have to destory
> anyone, eventually you will use their product, because its all there is.

This is somewhat valid but then again can you say scanner I though you
could. :)
Message no. 38
From: Sheldon Rose <scrose@****.COM>
Subject: Re: "Free" Software (was: Euro question)
Date: Sat, 2 May 1998 14:58:23 -0500
Lehlan Decker wrote:

> I was being sarcastic. Besides even the "just geeky" population, isn't
> large enough to pose a threat to the megas. Besides most of us who do have
> linux or something else running, also have Windows, MSoffice etc. So they aren't
loosing money over us. :)

This is the kicker We have 4 computers in a house that has three people
living in it. :) We have a couple of older machines a 486/33 16meg/350MB
drive, a 486/66 16meg/500MB drive, both are using win95 as the OS. A P90
24meg/2GB drive running linux and X-windows, a P166 32meg/8GB drive also
running win95 (Might stick NT workstation on this one) but that is still
a microsoft product. :) as you stated the good folks who make the mass
marketed OS's are not loosing money over the one machine that is running
main stream products.

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about "Free" Software (was: Euro question), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!