[Am-info] Re: Am-info digest, Vol 1 #889 - 14 msgs

sturde@az.com sturde@az.com
Sat, 15 Dec 2001 15:50:19 -0800


In <20011215050901.5D0F429B5F@lists.essential.org>, on 12/15/01 
   at 12:09 AM, am-info-request@venice.essential.org said:

>Send Am-info mailing list submissions to
>	am-info@lists.essential.org

>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>	http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/am-info
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>	am-info-request@lists.essential.org

>You can reach the person managing the list at
>	am-info-admin@lists.essential.org

>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
>"Re: Contents of Am-info digest..."


>Today's Topics:

>   1. LinuxPlanet / Crunch Time - Speak Now or Ever After . . . Regret
>Your
>       Silence (Mark Hinds)
>   2. Microsoft top security officer expected to join U.S. cybersecurity
>team (madodel@ptdprolog.net)
>   3. Aetna Plans 6,000 Job Cuts, Including 150 IT Positions (Fred A.
>Miller)
>   4. Re: Re: Who supports settlement, who got money from MS? (Felmon
>Davis)
>   5. Threat to Internet security is still Microsoft (Fred A. Miller)
>   6. Re: New Apple store near Beantown (Erick Andrews)
>   7. Re: New Apple store near Beantown (madodel@ptdprolog.net)
>   8. Re: New Apple store near Beantown (Eric Bennett)
>   9. Re: New Apple store near Beantown (Mitch Stone)
>  10. Re: New Apple store near Beantown (Erick Andrews)
>  11. Re: New Apple store near Beantown (Erick Andrews)
>  12. Re: New Apple store near Beantown (Mitch Stone)
>  13. Re: New Apple store near Beantown (Paul Rickard)

>--__--__--

>Message: 1
>Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:02:27 -0800
>From: Mark Hinds <zoro980@attbi.com>
>To: am-info <am-info@venice.essential.org>
>Subject: [Am-info] LinuxPlanet / Crunch Time - Speak Now or Ever After .
>. . Regret Your
> Silence

>http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/opinions/3952/1/

>--__--__--

>Message: 2
>From: madodel@ptdprolog.net
>Reply-To: Computerworld_Daily@Computerworld.com
>Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 14:49:01 -0500
>To: am-info@lists.essential.org
>Subject: [Am-info] Microsoft top security officer expected to join U.S.
>cybersecurity team

>I suppose next they'll make bin laden an anti-terrorist advisor.

>From: Computerworld_Daily@Computerworld.com 

>Microsoft top security officer expected to join U.S. cybersecurity team

>President Bush is expected to name Microsoft's chief security officer,
>Howard Schmidt, as vice chairman of the newly constituted federal
>Critical Infrastructure Protection Board.

>http://computerworld.com/nlt/1%2C3590%2CNAV47_STO66651_NLTAM%2C00.html


>--__--__--

>Message: 3
>From: "Fred A. Miller" <fm@cupserv.org>
>Reply-To: fm@cupserv.org
>Organization: CUPS
>To: "am-info" <am-info@venice.essential.org>
>Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 14:57:00 -0500
>Subject: [Am-info] Aetna Plans 6,000 Job Cuts, Including 150 IT Positions

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1

>Aetna Plans 6,000 Job Cuts, Including 150 IT Positions

>Aetna Inc. today announced plans to cut 6,000 jobs in 2002 through 
>layoffs and attrition, including the layoff of 150 IT workers.

>http://computerworld.com/nlt/1%2C3590%2CNAV47_STO66583_NLTWK%2C00.html

>- -- 
>Fred A. Miller
>Systems Administrator
>Cornell Univ. Press Services
>fm@cupserv.org

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
>Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

>iD8DBQE8GlmRIhTtc6nTZIIRAh7dAJ9LZ0ILwr219plnwbUA5sSNO7lvywCfRr9+
>RsQqDbGmCUV3Ei8CEExGxZw=
>=5zlt
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

>--__--__--

>Message: 4
>From: Felmon Davis <davisf@union.edu>
>Reply-To: davisf@union.edu
>To: <am-info@venice.essential.org>
>Subject: Re: [Am-info] Re: Who supports settlement, who got money from MS?
>Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 15:44:21 -0500

>On Thursday 13 December 2001 06:02 pm, Mitch Stone wrote:
>> --- From a message sent by Will Occam on 12/13/01 1:35 PM ---
>>[...]
>> If someone has made a patently counter-factual statement, or even a
>> disingenuous one, 
>>[...]

>weird, in my discipline, 'counterfactual' statements can be true: "If 
>I were Bill Gates, I'd open-source Windows" is a counterfactual. 
>(Don't know if it's true though!)

>I agree with your substantive point. just an orthogonal remark.

>Felmon

>--__--__--

>Message: 5
>From: "Fred A. Miller" <fm@cupserv.org>
>Reply-To: fm@cupserv.org
>Organization: CUPS
>To: "am-info" <am-info@venice.essential.org>
>Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:43:38 -0500
>Subject: [Am-info] Threat to Internet security is still Microsoft

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1

>Since 11 September the world has changed immeasurably, but some things 
>remain the same. The single greatest threat to Internet security is 
>still Microsoft -¡ not the soon to be Osama Haz Bin.

>http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/23418.html

>- -- 
>Fred A. Miller
>Systems Administrator
>Cornell Univ. Press Services
>fm@cupserv.org

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
>Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

>iD8DBQE8GnKKIhTtc6nTZIIRAjBHAJ44jVM0Ap1am24clRXsfKaz5TTjkACfRrcg
>319A+iOo+vXjj9pRztEgeqk=
>=1Iu8
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

>--__--__--

>Message: 6
>From: "Erick Andrews" <eandrews@star.net>
>To: "Multiple recipients of list" <am-info@venice.essential.org>
>Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:54:46 -0500 (EST)
>Reply-To: "Erick Andrews" <eandrews@star.net>
>Subject: Re: [Am-info] New Apple store near Beantown

>On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 14:28:12 +0000, John Poltorak wrote:

>>On Fri, Dec 14, 2001 at 09:04:35AM -0500, Erick Andrews wrote:
>>> It's nice to see even a little more competition to M$ even though
>>> very small.   Actually, this new retail store is not near any Microsoft
>>> facilities, here in the People Republic of Cambridge, but I know that
>>> it is right across the street from Lotus' headquarters.
>>> 
>>> For all you Mac folks, here's the item...
>>
>>
>>I hate to see people perpetuating this myth... Apple is not a Microsoft 
>>competitor. Apple is a hardware company. To suggest that Apple is a 
>>competitor dilutes the case that Microsoft has a 100% monopoly on the 
>>desktop, and you get stupid commentators saying that you are not forced to  
>>use Windows 'cos you can always buy a Mac'. Until MacOS runs on Intel it  
>>cannot be described as something which provides any real choice to using 
>>Windows. 

>Macintosh does not run a "Windows" operating system, so I don't understand 
>your point, legally, in your last sentence above.  I'm sure you know that.

>Apple is not just a "hardware company".  Microsoft, as far as I've ever 
>understood, did not write the Macintosh operating systems for the Motorola 
>cpu's found in Apple's hardware.  Once upon a time, Apple was closer to 
>Unix and academia before Windows came along.

>To be sure, application software like M$ Office and "Lookout Express" 
>are being shoved down the throats of new Mac buyers, but correct me if 
>I've forgotten, there are other Mac choices for these apps, too.  Less and less 
>now of an ideal choice, but no worse than IBM's half hearted support of
>my preferred OS:  Warp.

>Although many of us refer to "PC's" as Intel platforms (usually to mean MS
>OS's  these days), and Mac's as a distinctly different platform, most users in 
>the world don't know or care that much unless faced with fair choices.  
>Microsoft does NOT have a *100%* monopoly on the "fat client" desktop, 
>but it does *have* a monopoly damned close to it.  Still an illegal one.

>They are all desktop computers setup for the personal use of one user.

>I prefer to call them fat clients, more so now with mainstream networking 
>capability, but what the lawyers and judges accept lately is another story.  
>Judge Jackson became enlightened about this and understands the law
>and came to understand the need for more choice -- and wrote a very long 
>document called "Findings of Fact".

>Over simplifying "100%" monopoly here, "hardware company" there,
>PC, Desktop, and Macintosh somewhere else...may be useful as a
>limited introduction on the issues to those less informed...but I want
>more credibility and influence with those who should be more 
>technically and legally savvy of the industry:  to act against Microsoft.

>I don't want to sound like I'm preaching to the choir, but now consider 
>this:  many, many "hardware" manufacturers today have become virtual
>Microsoft companies.  Too many new PC products [sic] must be hacked
>by developers and users of OS's other than Windows to get them to work. 
>Kind of similar to Apple's position today, but the other shoe.

>>To all intents and purposes you are tied in to buying Windows when 
>>you buy a PC even though it is not required for using the PC. This is 
>>something which must be drilled home so that it eventually gets through 
>>to the general public. 

>No argument here.  The slimey blob expands and oozes along.  Those 
>who need the most drilling are the new judges and fearful prosecutors.




-----------------------------------------------------------
sturde@az.com

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