From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 16 02:34:38 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59E6316A417 for ; Sun, 16 Dec 2007 02:34:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chuckr@chuckr.org) Received: from mail4.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail4.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.6]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4374613C43E for ; Sun, 16 Dec 2007 02:34:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chuckr@chuckr.org) Received: (qmail 18615 invoked from network); 16 Dec 2007 02:34:37 -0000 Received: from april.chuckr.org (chuckr@[66.92.151.30]) (envelope-sender ) by mail4.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 16 Dec 2007 02:34:37 -0000 Message-ID: <47648E28.3010903@chuckr.org> Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 21:32:08 -0500 From: Chuck Robey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071107 SeaMonkey/1.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ted Mittelstaedt References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: Re: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 02:34:38 -0000 (note, because I went a bit off-topic, I redirected this to -chat) Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > It's a chicken and egg problem. > > There's nothing wrong with writing an extremely strict standard. > The issue is the implementation. > > If your server implementation is so strict that most clients have > difficulty, then users will find something else and your standard > will end up on the dustbin. > > It's better to start out with a strict standard and a forgiving > server implementation, then as it falls into mainstream use, work > with the client developers to correct their stuff. > > We don't want to end up like Microsoft - which writes very lax > and contradictory standards, then makes up strict implementations. > Then every new release of their stuff breaks things. Well, M$ has additional sneaky reasons for that, it's called hijacking the standard. I personally believe they do it on purpose. You see, they did it for browsers, and that serves as a good example. Their competitors followed the standard, M$ really didn't, and since all the Windows owners, using Windows software to create their pages, were making pages that other browsers (at least at first) weren't able to correctly display. It's fairly scurrilous thing to do, especially if the company doing it was at the same time trumpeting how much they were supporting the standard. I was rather pleased when M$ had all that trouble establishing their browser as the #1 (they finally had to give it away). It's marketing tactics like that which cause me to react by refusing to have anything whatsoever to do with their product. > > Ted > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.17.2/1184 - Release Date: 12/14/2007 > 11:29 AM > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 17 09:17:40 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7193816A41B for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:17:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DA1F13C442 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:17:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from TEDSDESK (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id lBH9HaNa066217; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 01:17:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Chuck Robey" Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 01:18:42 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1914 In-Reply-To: <47648E28.3010903@chuckr.org> Importance: Normal Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 09:17:40 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Chuck Robey [mailto:chuckr@chuckr.org] > Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 6:32 PM > To: Ted Mittelstaedt > Cc: Andrew Falanga; Rob; FreeBSD Chat > Subject: Re: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use > > I was rather pleased when M$ had all that > trouble establishing their browser as the #1 (they finally had to give > it away). > Uh, they aren't giving it away, trust me. Every SSL certificate on every SSL server in the world that is automatically recognized by Internet Explorer without the user having to add in a root CA certificate, (ie: every commercial certificate) is chained back to one of the large SSL certificate issuers. (GTE trust, Verisign, etc.) These SSL certificates expire on a regular basis, and their owners have to continue to pay those CA's extortion money to get new certificates. Those CA's by contrast, have to continue to pay extortion money to Microsoft to a) have their root public keys included with IE distributions and b) not have Microsoft issue a root CA certificate revokement through the Windows Update mechanism. Those payments are gigantic. Imagine for a second if Verisign told Microsoft to kiss off, they were no longer going to pay Microsoft for "renting" space in the IE root certificate store. Microsoft would simply issue a root certificate revoke in Windows Updates for the Verisign public key, and a few weeks later millions of users would start getting messages that their browser was no longer recognizing the SSL certificate from ebay, paypal, Wells Fargo, etc. etc. If by some miracle those millions of users were to manually add those CA public keys into their root stores, Microsoft could merely continue to periodically issue revokements. ;-) So now you maybe understand why Microsoft chose to crush Netscape, and why they hand out IE like candy? > It's marketing tactics like that which cause me to react by refusing to > have anything whatsoever to do with their product. > Ah, yes, but you responded to my e-mail post to the mailing list, did you not? I guess you didn't look at the X-Mailer: header? Like it or not - you had something to do with their product. ;-) My advice is to modify your philosophy to the following: "It's marketing tactics like that which cause me to react by refusing to pay them anything whatsoever for any of their products" Much more pragmatic, workable, and effective. Ted From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 17 12:47:52 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A41216A419 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:47:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from mail1.webmaster.com (mail1.webmaster.com [216.152.64.169]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05E8813C4EB for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:47:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from however by webmaster.com (MDaemon.PRO.v8.1.3.R) with ESMTP id md50001813237.msg for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 04:37:47 -0800 From: "David Schwartz" To: "Tedm@Toybox. Placo. Com" Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 04:36:36 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Importance: Normal X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Mon, 17 Dec 2007 04:37:47 -0800 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Mon, 17 Dec 2007 04:37:47 -0800 Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:47:52 -0000 > Those payments are gigantic. Imagine for a second if Verisign > told Microsoft to kiss off, they were no longer going to pay > Microsoft for "renting" space in the IE root certificate store. > Microsoft would simply issue a root certificate revoke in Windows > Updates for the Verisign public key, and a few weeks later > millions of users would start getting messages that their browser > was no longer recognizing the SSL certificate from ebay, paypal, > Wells Fargo, etc. etc. Surely Microsoft could revoke keys out of any browser the same way. If the browser chose to use the Windows default key store, it would probably happen automatically. If not, nothing would stop the update from removing the certificate from whatever keystore other browsers use. > If by some miracle those millions of users were to manually add > those CA public keys into their root stores, Microsoft could merely > continue to periodically issue revokements. ;-) They could do this even to keys in Firefox, Netscape, or whatever other browser you use. > So now you maybe understand why Microsoft chose to crush Netscape, > and why they hand out IE like candy? Sorry, your argument makes no sense. More likely, Microsoft was afraid that a portable browser could become the platform of the future, making the operating system on longer particularly important. If that was going to happen, they had better be the market leader in the browser business. DS From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 17 17:33:39 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A71A16A480 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:33:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D88513C458 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:33:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17E8F20AF; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:33:31 +0100 (CET) X-Spam-Tests: AWL X-Spam-Learn: disabled X-Spam-Score: -0.1/3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on tim.des.no Received: from ds4.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180]) by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0381620A0; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:33:31 +0100 (CET) Received: by ds4.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 05393844B9; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:33:31 +0100 (CET) From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= To: davids@webmaster.com References: Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:33:30 +0100 In-Reply-To: (David Schwartz's message of "Mon\, 17 Dec 2007 04\:36\:36 -0800") Message-ID: <868x3ti5ud.fsf@ds4.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/22.1 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , "Tedm@Toybox. Placo. Com" , Andrew Falanga Subject: Re: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:33:39 -0000 "David Schwartz" writes: > More likely, Microsoft was afraid that a portable browser could become the > platform of the future, making the operating system on longer particularly > important. No. At the time (1995), Microsoft had no clue about what the Internet was and how important it would become. That was the year they launched their own dialup service modeled after AOL, and the year _The Road Ahead_, in which Bill Gates's ghost writer predicted that MSN would become the dominant computer network, was released (read the original, not the later revised edition which papered over the worst blunders). Microsoft expected to end up in control of client, network and content. It wasn't until 1996 that they did an about-face and bet, if not the farm, then at least a barn or two on the Internet. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 17 19:55:09 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEEFB16A418 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:55:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chuckr@chuckr.org) Received: from mail2.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail2.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D79FC13C461 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:55:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chuckr@chuckr.org) Received: (qmail 4967 invoked from network); 17 Dec 2007 19:55:09 -0000 Received: from april.chuckr.org (chuckr@[66.92.151.30]) (envelope-sender ) by mail2.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 17 Dec 2007 19:55:08 -0000 Message-ID: <4766D390.2000702@chuckr.org> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:52:48 -0500 From: Chuck Robey User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071107 SeaMonkey/1.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ted Mittelstaedt References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: Re: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:55:10 -0000 Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: >> It's marketing tactics like that which cause me to react by refusing to >> have anything whatsoever to do with their product. >> > > Ah, yes, but you responded to my e-mail post to the mailing list, > did you not? I guess you didn't look at the X-Mailer: header? > Like it or not - you had something to do with their product. ;-) > My mailer (I use Seamonkey to get at my imap server) didn't show me the entire header, it normally doesn't unless I electronically twist it's arm, but even so, that comment just sailed over my head. What did I have to do with their product? > My advice is to modify your philosophy to the following: > > "It's marketing tactics like that which cause me to react > by refusing to pay them anything whatsoever for any of their > products" > > Much more pragmatic, workable, and effective. > > Ted From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 17 20:59:13 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B095F16A41A for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:59:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from mail1.webmaster.com (mail1.webmaster.com [216.152.64.169]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A363113C45D for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:59:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from however by webmaster.com (MDaemon.PRO.v8.1.3.R) with ESMTP id md50001813725.msg for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:00:20 -0800 From: "David Schwartz" To: Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:59:06 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <868x3ti5ud.fsf@ds4.des.no> X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Importance: Normal X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:00:20 -0800 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:00:22 -0800 Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , "Tedm@Toybox. Placo. Com" , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:59:13 -0000 > "David Schwartz" writes: > > More likely, Microsoft was afraid that a portable browser could=20 > > become the > > platform of the future, making the operating system no longer=20 > > particularly > > important. =20 > No. At the time (1995), Microsoft had no clue about what the Internet > was and how important it would become. That was the year they = launched > their own dialup service modeled after AOL, and the year _The Road > Ahead_, in which Bill Gates's ghost writer predicted that MSN would > become the dominant computer network, was released (read the original, > not the later revised edition which papered over the worst blunders). > Microsoft expected to end up in control of client, network and = content. > It wasn't until 1996 that they did an about-face and bet, if not the > farm, then at least a barn or two on the Internet. So you're saying that long before Microsoft saw any importance to the = Internet, they felt that it was important to give away IE so they could = extort money from companies like Verisign to get their keys included? If = you don't see the Internet and ecommerce as important, why would you = think anyone would pay millions of dollars to get their key in? In any event, your argument is contradicted by the historical record, = from US v. Microsoft: ""Certain statements of Microsoft executives proffered by plaintiffs = indicate that the company recognized the impending danger. For example, = Microsoft CEO Bill Gates stated that the Netscape/Java combination = threatens to "commoditize" the operating system. See B. Gates 5/26/95 = e-mail (PI Ex. 2). Following a 1997 meeting with Mr. Gates, Microsoft's = Ben Slivka described Java as "the biggest threat to Microsoft" and wrote = to Mr. Gates that "clearly the work the Java team is doing has hit a raw = nerve with you." SJ Opp'n Ex. 60. And in an essay posted on Microsoft's = Web site, Mr. Gates recognized the potential of Netscape's browser to = "become a de facto platform for software development, ultimately = replacing Windows as the mainstream set of software standards." States' = PI Ex. 3. Other Microsoft executives recognized browsers as "alternative = platform[s] to Windows," B. Silverberg Internet Platforms & Tools Div. = Mtg. Agenda (emphasis in original) (PI Ex. 33), that might eventually = "obsolete" Windows. B. Chase 4/4/97 e-mail (PI Ex. 15). One Vice = President warned that "[t]he situation is threatening our operating = systems and desktop applications share at a fundamental level," and = declared: "Netscape pollution must be eradicated." J. Raikes 8/13/96 = memo (PI Ex. 34)."" DS From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 17 21:57:36 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6639416A418 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 21:57:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 006AC13C447 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 21:57:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id C869620BB; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 22:57:27 +0100 (CET) X-Spam-Tests: AWL X-Spam-Learn: disabled X-Spam-Score: -0.1/3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on tim.des.no Received: from ds4.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180]) by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7079A2049; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 22:57:27 +0100 (CET) Received: by ds4.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 4E3B084492; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 22:57:27 +0100 (CET) From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= To: davids@webmaster.com References: Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 22:57:27 +0100 In-Reply-To: (David Schwartz's message of "Mon\, 17 Dec 2007 12\:59\:06 -0800") Message-ID: <868x3trnlk.fsf@ds4.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/22.1 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , "Tedm@Toybox. Placo. Com" , Andrew Falanga Subject: Re: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 21:57:36 -0000 "David Schwartz" writes: > Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav writes: > > No. At the time (1995), Microsoft had no clue about what the Internet > > was and how important it would become. That was the year they launched > > their own dialup service modeled after AOL, and the year _The Road > > Ahead_, in which Bill Gates's ghost writer predicted that MSN would > > become the dominant computer network, was released (read the original, > > not the later revised edition which papered over the worst blunders). > > Microsoft expected to end up in control of client, network and content. > > It wasn't until 1996 that they did an about-face and bet, if not the > > farm, then at least a barn or two on the Internet. > So you're saying that long before Microsoft saw any importance to the > Internet, they felt that it was important to give away IE so they > could extort money from companies like Verisign to get their keys > included? If you don't see the Internet and ecommerce as important, > why would you think anyone would pay millions of dollars to get their > key in? Internet Explorer didn't get SSL support until 2.0 in late 1995. Even then, it wasn't until 3.0 in late 1996 that people started using IE. I was a staff member at a large IT event in early 1996 where Microsoft tried to hand out free IE 2.0 CDs; nobody wanted them. > In any event, your argument is contradicted by the historical record, > from US v. Microsoft: > > ""Certain statements of Microsoft executives proffered by plaintiffs > indicate that the company recognized the impending danger. For > example, Microsoft CEO Bill Gates stated that the Netscape/Java > combination threatens to "commoditize" the operating system. See > B. Gates 5/26/95 e-mail (PI Ex. 2). Following a 1997 meeting with > Mr. Gates, Microsoft's Ben Slivka described Java as "the biggest > threat to Microsoft" and wrote to Mr. Gates that "clearly the work the > Java team is doing has hit a raw nerve with you." SJ Opp'n Ex. 60. And > in an essay posted on Microsoft's Web site, Mr. Gates recognized the > potential of Netscape's browser to "become a de facto platform for > software development, ultimately replacing Windows as the mainstream > set of software standards." States' PI Ex. 3. Other Microsoft > executives recognized browsers as "alternative platform[s] to > Windows," B. Silverberg Internet Platforms & Tools Div. Mtg. Agenda > (emphasis in original) (PI Ex. 33), that might eventually "obsolete" > Windows. B. Chase 4/4/97 e-mail (PI Ex. 15). One Vice President warned > that "[t]he situation is threatening our operating systems and desktop > applications share at a fundamental level," and declared: "Netscape > pollution must be eradicated." J. Raikes 8/13/96 memo (PI Ex. 34)."" Java was little more than a toy in 1995, and Netscape did not support it until Navigator 2.0 was released in March, 1996. There was no way Microsoft could consider "the Netscape / Java combination" a threat in May 1995, because it simply did not exist. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 17 23:39:54 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 492CC16A473 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:39:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from mail1.webmaster.com (mail1.webmaster.com [216.152.64.169]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 396D113C4D5 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:39:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from however by webmaster.com (MDaemon.PRO.v8.1.3.R) with ESMTP id md50001813845.msg for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:40:02 -0800 From: "David Schwartz" To: Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:38:11 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <868x3trnlk.fsf@ds4.des.no> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:40:02 -0800 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:40:03 -0800 Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , "Tedm@Toybox. Placo. Com" , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:39:54 -0000 > Java was little more than a toy in 1995, and Netscape did not support = it > until Navigator 2.0 was released in March, 1996. There was no way > Microsoft could consider "the Netscape / Java combination" a threat in > May 1995, because it simply did not exist. >=20 > DES > --=20 > Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no I'm sorry, but this is contradicted by the historical record. Further, = your argument is not logical. Bill Gates could certainly anticipate = threats even when they did not yet exist. Both Java and Netscape existed = at the time, the Internet was growing at the time, and both technologies = (especially together) had the clear implication that it didn't matter = what OS you were running. -- http://www.businessweek.com/1996/29/b34842.htm Despite MSN, by May, 1995, Gates was sounding the Internet alarm. He = issued ``The Internet Tidal Wave,'' a memo that hit on the themes that = had been reverberating throughout Silicon Valley. He declared that the = Net was the ``most important single development'' since the IBM PC. ``I = have gone through several stages of increasing my views of its = importance. Now, I assign the Internet the highest level,'' he wrote. On May 27, Slivka issued his own alarm, titled ``The Web Is the Next = Platform.'' He warned that the Web had the potential to supersede = Windows. Says Slivka: ``I don't know if I actually believed that would = happen. But I wanted to make a point.'' -- http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,2069360,00.htm One example: the threat to Microsoft's operating system posed by joining = browser and Java technologies. According to Jackson's ruling, Microsoft = Chairman and CEO Bill Gates on May 26, 1995 wrote in an e-mail that "the = Netscape/Java combination threatens to "commoditise' the operating = system." -- http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f2600/vii-d.pdf See section 398. -- DS From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 18 06:39:47 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA99F16A420 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 06:39:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BC9213C45A for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 06:39:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from TEDSDESK (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id lBI6dgmK075158; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 22:39:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 22:40:44 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1914 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 06:39:47 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: David Schwartz [mailto:davids@webmaster.com] > Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 4:37 AM > To: Tedm@Toybox. Placo. Com > Cc: Rob; FreeBSD Chat; Andrew Falanga > Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use > > > > > Those payments are gigantic. Imagine for a second if Verisign > > told Microsoft to kiss off, they were no longer going to pay > > Microsoft for "renting" space in the IE root certificate store. > > Microsoft would simply issue a root certificate revoke in Windows > > Updates for the Verisign public key, and a few weeks later > > millions of users would start getting messages that their browser > > was no longer recognizing the SSL certificate from ebay, paypal, > > Wells Fargo, etc. etc. > > Surely Microsoft could revoke keys out of any browser the same way. If the > browser chose to use the Windows default key store, it would > probably happen > automatically. If not, nothing would stop the update from removing the > certificate from whatever keystore other browsers use. > That would almost certainly open MS for a lawsuit from the other software vendor, not to mention utterly destroying the trust that MS has worked to build up with the userbase on the windows update process. If everyone is worrying that Windows Update will modify some program that was never written by MS, never installed by them, they will turn it off. Then viruses and spammers will have a lot more ripe fruit and MS will have a lot of explaining to do. There is already a huge hue and cry over "forcing" people to update IE6 to IE7 by marking the IE7 update as an express update, so you have to deliberately deselect it during updates. And that is just a MS-written program, given to the user "for free" > > If by some miracle those millions of users were to manually add > > those CA public keys into their root stores, Microsoft could merely > > continue to periodically issue revokements. ;-) > > They could do this even to keys in Firefox, Netscape, or whatever other > browser you use. > Those browsers do NOT use the same keystore in Windows as IE uses. I doubt it has anything to do with worrying about MS revoking anything. > > So now you maybe understand why Microsoft chose to crush Netscape, > > and why they hand out IE like candy? > > Sorry, your argument makes no sense. > Do you really not understand it? I'll try one more time. Anyone who writes a browser that grabs major market share has a guarenteed stream of cash from the root certificate authorities. Netscape figured this out first, then when MS caught on, they pushed them out of business to grab that revenue stream. > More likely, Microsoft was afraid that a portable browser could become the > platform of the future, making the operating system on longer particularly > important. If that was going to happen, they had better be the > market leader > in the browser business. > Rubbish. We have had portable browsers, we have a portable language (Java) and nothing has come of that "platform of the future" hogwash. Ted From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 18 07:18:09 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F1E416A417 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 07:18:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from mail1.webmaster.com (mail1.webmaster.com [216.152.64.169]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A16E13C447 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 07:18:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from however by webmaster.com (MDaemon.PRO.v8.1.3.R) with ESMTP id md50001814450.msg for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:18:37 -0800 From: "David Schwartz" To: Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:17:24 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Importance: Normal X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:18:37 -0800 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:18:37 -0800 Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 07:18:09 -0000 > Do you really not understand it? I'll try one more time. Anyone > who writes a browser that grabs major market share has a guarenteed > stream of cash from the root certificate authorities. Netscape > figured this out first, then when MS caught on, they pushed them out > of business to grab that revenue stream. Do you have any evidence to suggest that this revenue stream motivated MS's browser push? I've cited quite a bit of evidence that supports other motivations. > > More likely, Microsoft was afraid that a portable browser could > > become the > > platform of the future, making the operating system on longer > > particularly > > important. If that was going to happen, they had better be the > > market leader > > in the browser business. > Rubbish. We have had portable browsers, we have a portable > language (Java) > and nothing has come of that "platform of the future" hogwash. Nevertheless, this is what motivated Microsoft's decision. Perhaps had Microsoft left the market alone, that would have happened. Perhaps not. But there's quite a bit of evidence to suggest that Microsoft feared that technologies such as the web and Java would make the OS irrelevent and acted to protect their cash cow. I'm not sure which of two arguments you are now making: 1) Microsoft didn't see the Netscape/Java threat to their OS at the time. 2) Microsoft did see the threat, but still acted to get root key revnue. 1 has been refuted by evidence. Many MS employees voiced precisely this fear. As for 2, do you have any evidence this motivated anyone to do anything? DS From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 18 08:38:48 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06F1B16A420 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 08:38:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=OF1OJa=RJ=vvelox.net=v.velox@yourhostingaccount.com) Received: from mailout07.yourhostingaccount.com (mailout07.yourhostingaccount.com [65.254.253.60]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA6AC13C465 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 08:38:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from SRS0=OF1OJa=RJ=vvelox.net=v.velox@yourhostingaccount.com) Received: from mailscan07.yourhostingaccount.com ([10.1.15.7] helo=mailscan07.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailout07.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1J4XPy-0006CN-5A for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 03:03:10 -0500 Received: from impout02.yourhostingaccount.com ([10.1.55.2] helo=impout02.yourhostingaccount.com) by mailscan07.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtp (Exim) id 1J4XPx-0007Rz-Aq; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 03:03:09 -0500 Received: from authsmtp11.yourhostingaccount.com ([10.1.18.11]) by impout02.yourhostingaccount.com with NO UCE id S8391Y0010EKrUA0000000; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 03:03:09 -0500 X-EN-OrigOutIP: 10.1.18.11 X-EN-IMPSID: S8391Y0010EKrUA0000000 Received: from c-98-206-161-17.hsd1.il.comcast.net ([98.206.161.17] helo=vixen42) by authsmtp11.yourhostingaccount.com with esmtpa (Exim) id 1J4XPw-0002xP-V3; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 03:03:09 -0500 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 02:06:15 -0600 From: Vulpes Velox To: "Tom Wickline" Message-ID: <20071218020615.4a808b48@vixen42> In-Reply-To: <53e3a9930712122035i74062c56k92d3e4f3883644cc@mail.gmail.com> References: <53e3a9930712060959t6f446534xee6ba49d043dd70a@mail.gmail.com> <200712110441.VAA05322@lariat.net> <1481.163.178.104.130.1197385733.squirrel@webmail9.pair.com> <200712111701.lBBH1LKH004886@fire.js.berklix.net> <200712111818.LAA17407@lariat.net> <475F1214.5020601@csub.edu> <47609DDC.1080809@chuckr.org> <8c50a3c30712121930h253f7d76tb96f7b7e979697c0@mail.gmail.com> <53e3a9930712122035i74062c56k92d3e4f3883644cc@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.0.2 (GTK+ 2.12.3; i386-portbld-freebsd6.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EN-UserInfo: 0d1ca1697cdb7a831d4877828571b7ab:1570f0de6936c69fef9e164fffc541bc X-EN-AuthUser: vvelox2 Sender: Vulpes Velox X-EN-OrigIP: 98.206.161.17 X-EN-OrigHost: c-98-206-161-17.hsd1.il.comcast.net Cc: "Julian H. Stacey" , Marc Spitzer , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, Brett Glass , Russell Jackson , Chuck Robey Subject: Re: Wine compatibility and performance on FreeBSD 7 X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 08:38:48 -0000 On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 23:35:36 -0500 "Tom Wickline" wrote: > On Dec 12, 2007 10:30 PM, Marc Spitzer wrote: > > > > One of the interesting things about socialism, in all in many evil > > forms(including gnu/fsf), is that they simply must lie about their > > program or no one of average intelligence would be stupid enough > > to sign up for it. It just goes to show you that without G_d > > religion gets much much worse. > > > > marc > > > > That one gave me a chuckle :D > > Your just pissed because GPL makes people give back there changes! > And from the way it looks you and a couple others > here are mad because you cant go use others work and not have to > contribute. You want the freedom to rob, steal pillage others > hard work for your own good... And now you call this socialism > because you cant do it? > > hahahaha.... What a crock of shit! The part that always pisses me off about the GPL is how it spills over into stuff that the links against it. From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 18 17:06:54 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB0C916A419 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 17:06:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54FCB13C46A for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 17:06:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from TEDSDESK (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id lBIH5XKS080441; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 09:05:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: , Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 09:06:40 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1914 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 17:06:54 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: David Schwartz [mailto:davids@webmaster.com] > Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 12:59 PM > To: des@des.no > Cc: Tedm@Toybox. Placo. Com; Rob; FreeBSD Chat; Andrew Falanga > Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use >=20 >=20 > So you're saying that long before Microsoft saw any importance to=20 > the Internet, they felt that it was important to give away IE so=20 > they could extort money from companies like Verisign to get their=20 > keys included? If you don't see the Internet and ecommerce as=20 > important, why would you think anyone would pay millions of=20 > dollars to get their key in? >=20 > In any event, your argument is contradicted by the historical=20 > record, from US v. Microsoft: >=20 Don't be foolish. Microsoft would have lost the case if they had admitted the real reasons for what they did. It isn't to MS's benefit to reveal anything about the real reasons they do a thing. MS had a large campaign going to misdirect to world. Initially it was to their advantage to get the world to believe that they didn't understand the Internet. In that way, the young Internet startup companies would spend their money fighting each other rather than uniting against Microsoft. It's obvious MS knew from the beginning the importance of the Internet. How quickly you forget TCP/IP and Window for Workgroups. How quickly you forget the addition of the TCP/IP protocol to the DOS/Lanmanager MS client. Even then, MS was working to deny funding to the likes of Trumpet Winsock and suchlike by giving away the Shiva TCP/IP client in the IE for Windows 3.1 Later on it became obvious to even a monkey that the Internet was important, so it wouldn't have been believable to maintain that campaign. So they changed gears and started using Internet as a red herring. MS did NOT want the attention focused on how they managed to engineer the Offie Applications market to become a monopoly. Nor did they want attention focused on how they managed to arm-twist all PC manufacturers into selling PC's with Windows preloaded. As a result, the court didn't really address those issues. Even today look at what goes on in the PC market. It is almost impossible to buy a low-end PC WITHOUT windows on it. Your paying for that copy of Windows even if you immediately take the machine home and wipe it. The anti-trust court should have banned the practice of forcing the consumer to pay for Windows, they should have mandated that ALL pc sales listed Windows as an optional line item the customer could choose to not pay for. It would have been simple to do. You walk into the computer store, and when you buy the PC if you say you want Windows an extra $50 or whatever is slapped onto the purchase price, and you get a serial number you key into the PC when you start it up. If you say no, you don't get the serial number and when you start the PC if you don't install the number, the system deletes Windows. Microsoft was very worried that the trial would focus on this and they would end up with this as a ruling. So, they engineered the focus on their destruction of Netscape. Everyone followed along and forgot about the preload situation. Ted From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 18 19:16:50 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB73716A418 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:16:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from af300wsm@gmail.com) Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com (wa-out-1112.google.com [209.85.146.183]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AFFB13C455 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:16:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from af300wsm@gmail.com) Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id k17so4356505waf.3 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:16:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; bh=i7zQdcAtnjGS5dbtI89fPUhP1m7Gx+LzW08xZmSVapQ=; b=n48qg+icNOREMOQ5D/SUUYWyAcuYMBZSOtbcX8RO6oO14vnyJPJTDiY8XJhyG0HUwRVWCg+kWW1ArviQmvKM2mYALlIbalWcOV2yvZUtRXbSTlZhFTz43LeIjKRIypU59Uw0342mHre7dEyBCLl9SqyCWAAH9sNOpZdyqu4C6nE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=rzpASC8n5CJWCPKXnL/T5FCMaFklDnr/S/sY1LOOuLYpcTv5JkleG9xKvVTilcSh8AmE9OWTlo0Ltz2rJ+KDeTGfANFKjvojUA8R9yq17Uv5/L12fXxQenv84MyB9kD4J2Yrd2gTD4iRMWRIcBkWSL9WgtK0wsbWnh88qpRYRMw= Received: by 10.114.146.1 with SMTP id t1mr641321wad.20.1198003867791; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:51:07 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.167.7 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:51:07 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <340a29540712181051y655dc4fet230f821edeb53057@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:51:07 -0700 From: "Andrew Falanga" To: "Ted Mittelstaedt" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: des@des.no, Rob , FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:16:50 -0000 On Dec 18, 2007 10:06 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David Schwartz [mailto:davids@webmaster.com] > > Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 12:59 PM > > To: des@des.no > > Cc: Tedm@Toybox. Placo. Com; Rob; FreeBSD Chat; Andrew Falanga > > Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use > > > > > > So you're saying that long before Microsoft saw any importance to > > the Internet, they felt that it was important to give away IE so > > they could extort money from companies like Verisign to get their > > keys included? If you don't see the Internet and ecommerce as > > important, why would you think anyone would pay millions of > > dollars to get their key in? > > > > In any event, your argument is contradicted by the historical > > record, from US v. Microsoft: > > > > Don't be foolish. Microsoft would have lost the case if they > had admitted the real reasons for what they did. It isn't to > MS's benefit to reveal anything about the real reasons they > do a thing. > > MS had a large campaign going to misdirect to world. Initially > it was to their advantage to get the world to believe that they > didn't understand the Internet. In that way, the young Internet > startup companies would spend their money fighting each other > rather than uniting against Microsoft. > > It's obvious MS knew from the beginning the importance of the > Internet. How quickly you forget TCP/IP and Window for Workgroups. > How quickly you forget the addition of the TCP/IP protocol to the > DOS/Lanmanager MS client. Even then, MS was working to deny > funding to the likes of Trumpet Winsock and suchlike by giving > away the Shiva TCP/IP client in the IE for Windows 3.1 > > Later on it became obvious to even a monkey that the Internet > was important, so it wouldn't have been believable to maintain > that campaign. So they changed gears and started using Internet > as a red herring. > > MS did NOT want the attention focused on how they managed to > engineer the Offie Applications market to become a monopoly. Nor > did they want attention focused on how they managed to arm-twist all > PC manufacturers into selling PC's with Windows preloaded. As > a result, the court didn't really address those issues. > > Even today look at what goes on in the PC market. It is almost > impossible to buy a low-end PC WITHOUT windows on it. Your paying > for that copy of Windows even if you immediately take the machine > home and wipe it. > > The anti-trust court should have banned the practice of forcing > the consumer to pay for Windows, they should have mandated that > ALL pc sales listed Windows as an optional line item the customer > could choose to not pay for. It would have been simple to do. > You walk into the computer store, and when you buy the PC if you > say you want Windows an extra $50 or whatever is slapped onto the > purchase price, and you get a serial number you key into the PC > when you start it up. If you say no, you don't get the serial number > and when you start the PC if you don't install the number, the > system deletes Windows. > > Microsoft was very worried that the trial would focus on this and > they would end up with this as a ruling. So, they engineered > the focus on their destruction of Netscape. Everyone followed > along and forgot about the preload situation. > > Ted > > You know, I'd never guessed that this much could come from such a simple question. Andy -- A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is it such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail? From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 18 19:29:33 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FD3B16A418 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:29:33 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan@langille.org) Received: from supernews.unixathome.org (supernews.unixathome.org [216.168.29.4]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D99AB13C4D3 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:29:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from dan@langille.org) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by supernews.unixathome.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFFD517076; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:29:32 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at unixathome.org Received: from supernews.unixathome.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (supernews.unixathome.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WNfdzZgmFg7G; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:29:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [192.168.80.128] (ismtp.afilias.com [216.217.55.254]) by supernews.unixathome.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA96F17040; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:29:28 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <47681F85.5030800@langille.org> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 14:29:09 -0500 From: Dan Langille Organization: The FreeBSD Diary User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071207) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Falanga References: <340a29540712181051y655dc4fet230f821edeb53057@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <340a29540712181051y655dc4fet230f821edeb53057@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Chat Subject: Re: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:29:33 -0000 Andrew Falanga wrote: > On Dec 18, 2007 10:06 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > You know, I'd never guessed that this much could come from such a simple > question. The least the culprits could have done is not highjack the thread when they moved to a new subject. -- Dan Langille - http://www.langille.org/ From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 18 20:10:17 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94E3016A420 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:10:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chuckr@chuckr.org) Received: from mail4.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail4.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.6]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D48313C4CC for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:10:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from chuckr@chuckr.org) Received: (qmail 7657 invoked from network); 18 Dec 2007 20:10:16 -0000 Received: from april.chuckr.org (chuckr@[66.92.151.30]) (envelope-sender ) by mail4.sea5.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 18 Dec 2007 20:10:16 -0000 Message-ID: <476828A0.2060901@chuckr.org> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:08:00 -0500 From: Chuck Robey User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071107) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Daniel O'Connor References: <86ve6wmgq4.fsf@ds4.des.no> <4a37b1e529bab094e2c50b7deca7df87@127.0.0.1> <200712182305.06426.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> In-Reply-To: <200712182305.06426.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: Kip Macy , Martin Cracauer , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, "Sam Fourman Jr." , des@des.no, mh@kernel32.de Subject: Re: amd64 NVIDIA support in FreeBSD 7 X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:10:17 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Redirected to -chat, because it got too flamish. Daniel O'Connor wrote: > On Tue, 18 Dec 2007, Marian Hettwer wrote: >> On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:37:07 +0100, Dag-Erling Smørgrav > wrote: >>> "Sam Fourman Jr." writes: >>>> I wonder if having a petition signed by a bunch of people would >>>> help this along, because I believe that amd64 3D accel on nvidia, >>>> is life or death to PC-BSD in a year or so. >>> What, exactly, do you think a petition would achieve? Can a >>> petition write code? Can a petition pay somebody to write code? >>> Petitions may work in a democracy, but neither nVidia nor FreeBSD >>> is a democracy. >> While this is true (by the way, what is FreeBSD? This is so wrong headed, I couldn't avoid commenting. FreeBSD is in no way a democracy. At best it is an oligarchy (if I have my definitions right?), meaning that it;'s run by a smaller set of folks who actually do the coding, and those folks are run 80% by what interests them, and only a VERY much smaller amount by what users want. Even ports is like this, although I will admit that users there have more input, it's still much below 50%, because it's really up to what the porters want to do, NOT what users want. That fella doing all those polls, I have this suspicion that he expects his polls to have some effect. The only effect it's going to have, is giving that person and only that person, so guidance, no other coder is likely to be guided by it more than the amounts I ahve listed above. FreeBSD is not now, and never has been a democracy. And, usually, this is a good thing, because it prevents folks that have no clear idea what the real effects will be of getting what they ask for, any real control. If you don't like this, take up coding yourself, that's the only way you can change it. nVidia is a >> corporation, therefor not a democracy, but what is FreeBSD?), at >> least a petition could show how many users would like to have amd64 >> nvidia support for FreeBSD. These numbers could (!) be interesting >> for nvidia. That's what you usually call a "market need" in captilsm >> speak. Although I do have my doubts wether we could show nvidia that >> our need as that big that nvidia would think "hej, wow, what a huge >> market, let's get em" ;-) I believe a better way would be just asking >> nvidia "Hej, how much money do you need to deliver and probably >> maintain a amd64 version of your driver for FreeBSD". Instead of >> signing a petition, users could donate... > > FreeBSD is a code-ocracy. > > You supply the code you get the votes. > (ish) > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHaCigz62J6PPcoOkRAshFAJ9pbWggU6xvgbo6IjturNPFeuKgVACgno9z ZkTfLiahqLpi4Gmoj0nA290= =1lIO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 18 20:13:25 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FDA316A46B for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:13:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from personrp@ccbh.com) Received: from 1upmc-msx-pp1.upmc.edu (1upmc-msx-pp4.upmc.edu [128.147.16.142]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3ECEA13C4FA for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:13:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from personrp@ccbh.com) Received: from 1upmc-msximc1.isdip.upmc.edu (1upmc-msximc1.isdip.upmc.edu [128.147.18.39]) by 1upmc-msx-pp4.upmc.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id lBIJfgH9004840; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 14:41:42 -0500 Received: from 1upmc-msx6.acct.upmchs.net ([128.147.16.61]) by 1upmc-msximc1.isdip.upmc.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Tue, 18 Dec 2007 14:41:42 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 14:41:40 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <340a29540712181051y655dc4fet230f821edeb53057@mail.gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use Thread-Index: AchBqpBQUWAPcUCzRsaMOu+Qs3NR+QAANOfg From: "Person, Roderick" To: "Andrew Falanga" , "Ted Mittelstaedt" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Dec 2007 19:41:42.0370 (UTC) FILETIME=[03C95420:01C841AE] Cc: des@des.no, Rob , FreeBSD Chat Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:13:25 -0000 I have been following this thread and I have to agree with Ted for reason that have always stuck with me about all the suits against Microsoft. 1) Earlier in the thread Ted talked about how Microsoft could issue patches that would disable third party software access to root key. Then someone responded and said that Microsoft would not do something like that because of the problems it would cause Microsoft. This brings to mind what Microsoft did to DR-DOS. Doesn't anyone remember this? If not, Microsoft placed code in it's software that cause the software not to work on DR-DOS although DR-DOS was fully compatible with MS-DOS. This destroyed DR-DOS and drove it out of the marketplace. 2) Microsoft's license with hardware vendor was (and I don't know if this has changed at all) that the vendor had to pay Microsoft a flat fee for every machine sold even if the machine did not include Windows. Otherwise they could not sell any machines with Windows pre-installed. These are 2 things that always struck me as far worse then bundling IE with the OS, but for some reason things like that aren't talked about much. And lately it seems to me that finding exactly what exactly the patches that come out on patch Tuesday actually do is darn near impossible - other than the vague description given by Microsoft. These are just some things that I've never liked, but then again I thought OJ was guilty too. Rod Person Programmer http://www.ccbh.com "Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinion, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation." --Oscar Wilde=20 From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 18 20:47:51 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D382816A418 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:47:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sfourman@gmail.com) Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.153]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43DFD13C468 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:47:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sfourman@gmail.com) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 16so484556fgg.35 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 12:47:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=IJHBwUkwiTqVpZ5BjatTyr1XSig8I+c2odopVtTh51o=; b=Jl8hsBgZxUMmdxSYIt068ji3uLJwPA2xGA0540s7sN1JOChR50Qs4cgzluLseYST47u7PuoXqIfTddqUQE9qI2FfsFFCAg8nATDm+rSX/1viMyzXTxBlDVLbtYKdti1REvlQ9lh0DgirN4edJxk1K2uYRsjiHZg/bAV2y4+wQ3Q= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=XV6NCgG006J8wI+mVQ2OGXNk/EkIGawf9kJiHXiBHGNy0PVwPOBg1JIOC4eZPdiGb3/lrDoqTk4zhJ3JvghUz2pH8QG6OqoMvemBthfCLzyKzTubaB6BGIH35V3whpo4ArfnATPgUI11XMj3OADlcsCy47IbRfQGQpgDXjzm/r8= Received: by 10.86.66.1 with SMTP id o1mr8073508fga.36.1198009148667; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 12:19:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.91.5 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 12:19:08 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <11167f520712181219j5fe8fbbek6bf6429a856d2ec2@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 14:19:08 -0600 From: "Sam Fourman Jr." To: "Chuck Robey" In-Reply-To: <476828A0.2060901@chuckr.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <86ve6wmgq4.fsf@ds4.des.no> <4a37b1e529bab094e2c50b7deca7df87@127.0.0.1> <200712182305.06426.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <476828A0.2060901@chuckr.org> Cc: Martin Cracauer , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, Kip Macy , des@des.no, mh@kernel32.de Subject: Re: amd64 NVIDIA support in FreeBSD 7 X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:47:51 -0000 On Dec 18, 2007 2:08 PM, Chuck Robey wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Redirected to -chat, because it got too flamish. > > Daniel O'Connor wrote: > > On Tue, 18 Dec 2007, Marian Hettwer wrote: > >> On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:37:07 +0100, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav > > wrote: > >>> "Sam Fourman Jr." writes: > >>>> I wonder if having a petition signed by a bunch of people would > >>>> help this along, because I believe that amd64 3D accel on nvidia, > >>>> is life or death to PC-BSD in a year or so. > >>> What, exactly, do you think a petition would achieve? Can a > >>> petition write code? Can a petition pay somebody to write code? > >>> Petitions may work in a democracy, but neither nVidia nor FreeBSD > >>> is a democracy. > >> While this is true (by the way, what is FreeBSD? > > This is so wrong headed, I couldn't avoid commenting. FreeBSD is in no = way a > democracy. At best it is an oligarchy (if I have my definitions right?), > meaning that it;'s run by a smaller set of folks who actually do the codi= ng, > and those folks are run 80% by what interests them, and only a VERY much > smaller amount by what users want. Even ports is like this, although I w= ill > admit that users there have more input, it's still much below 50%, becaus= e > it's really up to what the porters want to do, NOT what users want. > > That fella doing all those polls, I have this suspicion that he expects h= is > polls to have some effect. The only effect it's going to have, is giving= that > person and only that person, so guidance, no other coder is likely to be > guided by it more than the amounts I ahve listed above. FreeBSD is not n= ow, > and never has been a democracy. > The only reason I suggested a petition is to demonstrate to Nvidia that thee is a viable FreeBSD / PC-BSD userbase for amd64 my thinking was, they already have a i386 driver so an amd64 driver should not be too hard to get them to make. I wonder if nvidia would sponsor a bounty type fund, something like FreeBSD users donate 50% of the cost and nvidia donates 50% plus maintains it long term. in a private e-mail I have already asked the PC-BSD guys if they would consider sponsoring a bounty. Sam Fourman Jr. From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 18 23:27:20 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1762D16A419 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:27:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from mail1.webmaster.com (mail1.webmaster.com [216.152.64.169]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAB7B13C442 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:27:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from however by webmaster.com (MDaemon.PRO.v8.1.3.R) with ESMTP id md50001815425.msg for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:27:24 -0800 From: "David Schwartz" To: , Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:26:12 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:27:24 -0800 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Tue, 18 Dec 2007 15:27:35 -0800 Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:27:20 -0000 > Don't be foolish. Microsoft would have lost the case if they > had admitted the real reasons for what they did. It isn't to > MS's benefit to reveal anything about the real reasons they > do a thing. That's true, but that completely undercuts your argument. Giving IE away = to get revenue for listing root certificates would have been a perfectly = legitimate tactic. It would have had *NOTHING* to do with leveraging = their Windows monopoly. If Microsoft had been motivated as you claim, = saying so would have been a brilliant trial strategy. It was the other side that claimed that Microsoft's IE push was to = protect Windows. Microsoft had no counter argument. =20 > MS had a large campaign going to misdirect to world. Initially > it was to their advantage to get the world to believe that they > didn't understand the Internet. In that way, the young Internet > startup companies would spend their money fighting each other > rather than uniting against Microsoft. >=20 > It's obvious MS knew from the beginning the importance of the > Internet. How quickly you forget TCP/IP and Window for Workgroups. > How quickly you forget the addition of the TCP/IP protocol to the > DOS/Lanmanager MS client. Even then, MS was working to deny > funding to the likes of Trumpet Winsock and suchlike by giving > away the Shiva TCP/IP client in the IE for Windows 3.1 That is *my* claim. How do you think this disagrees with what I'm = saying? =20 > Later on it became obvious to even a monkey that the Internet > was important, so it wouldn't have been believable to maintain > that campaign. So they changed gears and started using Internet > as a red herring. >=20 > MS did NOT want the attention focused on how they managed to > engineer the Offie Applications market to become a monopoly. Nor > did they want attention focused on how they managed to arm-twist all > PC manufacturers into selling PC's with Windows preloaded. As > a result, the court didn't really address those issues. Maybe true, but that has nothing to do with *this* issue. =20 > Even today look at what goes on in the PC market. It is almost > impossible to buy a low-end PC WITHOUT windows on it. Your paying > for that copy of Windows even if you immediately take the machine > home and wipe it. =20 > The anti-trust court should have banned the practice of forcing > the consumer to pay for Windows, they should have mandated that > ALL pc sales listed Windows as an optional line item the customer > could choose to not pay for. It would have been simple to do. > You walk into the computer store, and when you buy the PC if you > say you want Windows an extra $50 or whatever is slapped onto the > purchase price, and you get a serial number you key into the PC > when you start it up. If you say no, you don't get the serial number > and when you start the PC if you don't install the number, the > system deletes Windows. Lose one argument, start another one? What do you think this has to do = with *anything* I said? To recap: The position I dispute: Microsoft pushed IE to get revenue from root = keys who pay millions to be listed. This is perfectly legal and = legitimate. My position: Microsoft pushed IE because they saw Java and Netscape as a = threat to their Windows monopoly. =20 > Microsoft was very worried that the trial would focus on this and > they would end up with this as a ruling. So, they engineered > the focus on their destruction of Netscape. Everyone followed > along and forgot about the preload situation. Which has zero to do with anything I said. DS From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 00:13:12 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1924A16A41A for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:13:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B920B13C457 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:13:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 770DD20B9; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 01:13:03 +0100 (CET) X-Spam-Tests: AWL X-Spam-Learn: disabled X-Spam-Score: -0.1/3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on tim.des.no Received: from ds4.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180]) by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8FA02049; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 01:13:02 +0100 (CET) Received: by ds4.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 4D3808448B; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 01:13:07 +0100 (CET) From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= To: "Sam Fourman Jr." References: <86ve6wmgq4.fsf@ds4.des.no> <4a37b1e529bab094e2c50b7deca7df87@127.0.0.1> <200712182305.06426.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <476828A0.2060901@chuckr.org> <11167f520712181219j5fe8fbbek6bf6429a856d2ec2@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 01:13:07 +0100 In-Reply-To: <11167f520712181219j5fe8fbbek6bf6429a856d2ec2@mail.gmail.com> (Sam Fourman, Jr.'s message of "Tue\, 18 Dec 2007 14\:19\:08 -0600") Message-ID: <8663yvfsoc.fsf@ds4.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/22.1 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Kip Macy , Martin Cracauer , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, Chuck Robey , mh@kernel32.de Subject: Re: amd64 NVIDIA support in FreeBSD 7 X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:13:12 -0000 "Sam Fourman Jr." writes: > The only reason I suggested a petition is to demonstrate to Nvidia > that thee is a viable FreeBSD / PC-BSD userbase for amd64 > my thinking was, they already have a i386 driver so an amd64 driver > should not be too hard to get them to make. Then you have not understood anything at all. The ball is not in nVidia's camp. http://wiki.freebsd.org/NvidiaFeatureRequests DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 00:58:13 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8965116A49E for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:58:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sfourman@gmail.com) Received: from mu-out-0910.google.com (mu-out-0910.google.com [209.85.134.184]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0700313C4CE for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:58:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sfourman@gmail.com) Received: by mu-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id i10so4322223mue.3 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:58:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=BfpR1/tWC4n4HyUIn6RjmuNfeUakS0Osc+7GEnEhBIk=; b=bAtbwz1ltuiWTibnCUGBtS8Z2N3sos82jtwgqoIe8MVygB2obVzjBKps69GhlmgU+ejMt/qBddaC/1b65cJQpRTWXRBsKLFUGMnjq4CFxus9t6sUFeQ3IxG33FVlBCaqwMBBmpxIG5x3phymc3W7rkod9+FHB1YJAVY5p4JozQ8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=W/nDHKCZPSFQak7tsIXvCPC03oul/QUsIfN4fX14fNtOX6ltorLhDPXWTqo0PPw8jFnutGPwn82fC7MtTMYBtm6uJ2Km6kp+oWubccWK9JvPANCUZ42cBvfQKxH1GIgqjdlO4kGqsWsy69ZXnRV51bIkagp1vMyVL65K7kRZULQ= Received: by 10.86.70.8 with SMTP id s8mr8301540fga.29.1198025891291; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:58:11 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.86.91.5 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 16:58:11 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <11167f520712181658y2e043004sd0b4ae2ed38f4ee2@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 18:58:11 -0600 From: "Sam Fourman Jr." To: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?=" In-Reply-To: <8663yvfsoc.fsf@ds4.des.no> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline References: <86ve6wmgq4.fsf@ds4.des.no> <4a37b1e529bab094e2c50b7deca7df87@127.0.0.1> <200712182305.06426.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <476828A0.2060901@chuckr.org> <11167f520712181219j5fe8fbbek6bf6429a856d2ec2@mail.gmail.com> <8663yvfsoc.fsf@ds4.des.no> Cc: Kip Macy , Martin Cracauer , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, Chuck Robey , mh@kernel32.de Subject: Re: amd64 NVIDIA support in FreeBSD 7 X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 00:58:13 -0000 On Dec 18, 2007 6:13 PM, Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav wrote: > "Sam Fourman Jr." writes: > > The only reason I suggested a petition is to demonstrate to Nvidia > > that thee is a viable FreeBSD / PC-BSD userbase for amd64 > > my thinking was, they already have a i386 driver so an amd64 driver > > should not be too hard to get them to make. > > Then you have not understood anything at all. The ball is not in > nVidia's camp. I understand what has to be done, I just don't see why Nvidia can not donate the code (and 50% of the time) to the FreeBSD code base to make the amd64 Driver happen. and let the FreeBSD community fund the other 50% (a kind of bounty fund) I personally would be willing to send something like $50.00 USD a month to any fund that would be for this cause. I think a FreeBSD bounty Program (if there even is such a thing) is a Great idea. I can think of a bunch of things I would support 1 amd64 Nvidia support 2 better Wine support for FreeBSD, like amd64 support 3 a evdev driver for xorg (so all the buttons on my mx1000 mouse work) just to name a few. I am not complaining by any means, I just wish there was something I could do other than code to help. one day I will beable contribute code. Sam Fourman Jr. From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 02:33:40 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD58F16A41B for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 02:33:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from soralx@cydem.org) Received: from pd4mo2so.prod.shaw.ca (idcmail-mo1so.shaw.ca [24.71.223.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6BF313C448 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 02:33:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from soralx@cydem.org) Received: from pd3mr5so.prod.shaw.ca (pd3mr5so-qfe3.prod.shaw.ca [10.0.141.12]) by l-daemon (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004)) with ESMTP id <0JT9003SIZ2PJB50@l-daemon> for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:32:49 -0700 (MST) Received: from pn2ml9so.prod.shaw.ca ([10.0.121.7]) by pd3mr5so.prod.shaw.ca (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-7.05 (built Sep 5 2006)) with ESMTP id <0JT900IM0Z2OJD80@pd3mr5so.prod.shaw.ca> for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:32:49 -0700 (MST) Received: from soralx ([24.87.3.133]) by l-daemon (Sun ONE Messaging Server 6.0 HotFix 1.01 (built Mar 15 2004)) with ESMTP id <0JT900EAWZ2NAF20@l-daemon> for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:32:48 -0700 (MST) Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 18:32:47 -0800 From: soralx@cydem.org In-reply-to: To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Message-id: <20071218183247.7b68a645@soralx> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.0.2 (GTK+ 2.10.14; i386-portbld-freebsd6.2) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit References: Cc: des@des.no, bitabyss@gmail.com, af300wsm@gmail.com, tedm@toybox.placo.com Subject: Re: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 02:33:40 -0000 > My position: Microsoft pushed IE because they saw Java and Netscape > as a threat to their Windows monopoly. > > Microsoft was very worried that the trial would focus on this and > > they would end up with this as a ruling. So, they engineered > > the focus on their destruction of Netscape. Everyone followed > > along and forgot about the preload situation. > > Which has zero to do with anything I said. I will act as an arbiter for a minute here, can I? The support for your position comes in bulk from "historical" data. Ted holds that the whole Netscape ordeal was manipulated to intentionally put Microsoft into vulnerable position in that respect, so as to divert attention of the court from other, far more important issues. I cannot judge how right this statement is, but I would thus say you are relying too much on those records being TRUE (a keyword here, means the kind of scientific truthfulness Feynman was lecturing about). So, it seems someone here tries to weasel out of the fight before it is over, no? ;-P > DS [SorAlx] ridin' VS1400 From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 03:17:57 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A61216A418 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 03:17:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sunnzy@gmail.com) Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com (wa-out-1112.google.com [209.85.146.176]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EF3A13C447 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 03:17:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sunnzy@gmail.com) Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id k17so4585588waf.3 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:17:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=Dt/pttl6XfLMbNGkgEO77D7ZZVEpSln56e2Q5d9lNfo=; b=IjUx8PiFs+gJQBgxfcfa/q2S9kdJekRWw3BYIsKD4LP7brr4izG6MNdAv5MQRqJq/BfKCdXshRDCBAgRmXODZWkQ+a+s6amZnLrPf58bgMLBT2UiW6OiplBLfY/UaWlzvMuIRTGOxDc8KwcAYvg+hMCYJFYf6XTpi+etGC7Y+O4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=RwgQpdf3aD08zB7sxeLmqxM5HFDk+Ihsvx2sF7XDWMHBJ5hOMICWe7x2asRkpvrNeFduMEt8mxyTjQW2p2N14uNGmJjgniI1/nrWZYaG0sd7rhhxooXgvcNVBKV6vASTB7LV2TGuuNJNTZJNbs0zIurGsETp+aF/hgZFDSJq5xM= Received: by 10.114.37.1 with SMTP id k1mr3675511wak.6.1198034277161; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:17:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.79.20 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:17:57 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:17:57 +1100 From: Sunnz To: "Sam Fourman Jr." In-Reply-To: <11167f520712181658y2e043004sd0b4ae2ed38f4ee2@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <86ve6wmgq4.fsf@ds4.des.no> <4a37b1e529bab094e2c50b7deca7df87@127.0.0.1> <200712182305.06426.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <476828A0.2060901@chuckr.org> <11167f520712181219j5fe8fbbek6bf6429a856d2ec2@mail.gmail.com> <8663yvfsoc.fsf@ds4.des.no> <11167f520712181658y2e043004sd0b4ae2ed38f4ee2@mail.gmail.com> Cc: Kip Macy , Martin Cracauer , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, Chuck Robey , =?UTF-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= , mh@kernel32.de Subject: Re: amd64 NVIDIA support in FreeBSD 7 X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: sunnzy+gnu@gmail.com List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 03:17:57 -0000 If you got enough friends, and willing to pay some money, why not put your money together to hire a programmer to work on a free and open source driver like: http://nouveau.freedesktop.org The Linux camp were able to raise $10'000, though it wasn't organised and the fund did not end up going anywhere, it is still something that can be done. -- Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 05:42:24 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D809616A419 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 05:42:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DECA13C467 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 05:42:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from TEDSDESK (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id lBJ5gMLQ089427; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:42:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 21:43:35 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1914 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 05:42:24 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: David Schwartz [mailto:davids@webmaster.com] > Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 11:17 PM > To: tedm@toybox.placo.com > Cc: Rob; FreeBSD Chat; Andrew Falanga > Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use > > > > > Do you really not understand it? I'll try one more time. Anyone > > who writes a browser that grabs major market share has a guarenteed > > stream of cash from the root certificate authorities. Netscape > > figured this out first, then when MS caught on, they pushed them out > > of business to grab that revenue stream. > > Do you have any evidence to suggest that this revenue stream > motivated MS's > browser push? I've cited quite a bit of evidence that supports other > motivations. > No you haven't. You have cited what MS has claimed. As I already stated, MS isn't going to tell the general public the truth about what they are doing. No company does. Strategy is always regarded as competitive data and trade secrets and NEVER voluntararily disclosed. You will find that in some instances it's even illegal for a corporation to do so. Such as during mergers and acquisitions. > > > More likely, Microsoft was afraid that a portable browser could > > > become the > > > platform of the future, making the operating system on longer > > > particularly > > > important. If that was going to happen, they had better be the > > > market leader > > > in the browser business. > > > Rubbish. We have had portable browsers, we have a portable > > language (Java) > > and nothing has come of that "platform of the future" hogwash. > > Nevertheless, this is what motivated Microsoft's decision. Perhaps had > Microsoft left the market alone, that would have happened. > Perhaps not. But > there's quite a bit of evidence to suggest that Microsoft feared that > technologies such as the web and Java would make the OS > irrelevent and acted > to protect their cash cow. There's evidence that Microsoft SAID that they feared this. But there is no proof that they ACTUALLY feared it. As so many other people OUTSIDE of Microsoft at the time were saying that the "platform of the future" was a load of hogwash, it seems to me to be rediculous to claim that there was any consensus in the industry that the "platform of the future" would actually happen, much less within Microsoft. It is only the very young and naieve, people new to an industry, who are swayed by such things. Those who have worked for many years in a business have seen initatives come and go. During the beginnings of the commercialization of the Internet, a large number of people who had never worked in computers or networking were climbing into it. It is understandable to expect that most of them would be starry eyed, ready to believe anything told to them. The same people that were believing Netscape would upset the industry were the folks dumping millions into pets.com and we know where that ended up. By contrast if you review the more boring writings of the established players in the industry at the time, you will find that few of them believed this nonsense. In fact, most of them were busy cashing out their patents, businesses, and ideas to the young and stupid - recognizing that the money wagon was in town full of people with money burning holes in their pocket ready to spend on anything. Didn't you ever stop and wonder why BSDI and cdrom.com merged and sold out to WindRiver? The people running that were smart - they knew when cash-rich idiots were vastly overvaluing an idea, and they took the money and ran like hell. > > I'm not sure which of two arguments you are now making: > Pretty understandable since you apparently have no grasp of business. > 1) Microsoft didn't see the Netscape/Java threat to their OS at the time. > > 2) Microsoft did see the threat, but still acted to get root key revnue. > > 1 has been refuted by evidence. Many MS employees voiced precisely this > fear. MS employees say what their bosses tell them to say. You apparently have never worked in a large company and do not understand how internal corporate propaganda works. > As for 2, do you have any evidence this motivated anyone to do > anything? > The evidence for 2 is obvious. If there is one thing that characterizes Microsoft it is that they continually add to their portfolio of money-getting products and never keep a money-losing product line going. They understand business, you see. MS would never pull an IBM-OS/2 thing where IBM propped up OS/2 Warp for years and years after it was obvious it would never be profitable. If IE, as you (or someone) was claiming was nothing more than Microsoft spending a huge amount of money for the good of the users, and getting nothing in return, MS would have killed it years ago, just like they killed IE for MacOS X. MS dumped a pile of money into development of IE7 because it gets a pile of money in return from the root certificate authorities. Just like MS dumps a pile of money into development of operating systems because they get a pile of money in return from the PC companies that sell PC's with Windows preloaded. All of this rubbish about MS positioning IE so they can "take over" the Internet (ie: html and browser standards) is a pile of nonsense, it is nothing more than smokescreen mostly from Microsoft, designed to keep customers from understanding how they -really- make money. MS kills projects like Windows Services for UNIX, (Server for NFS was deleted from Vista Enterprise & Ultimate, plus several other things) Microsoft Bob, and a host of others, because they tried, and got less in return than the cost of development. Get it? After all it is extremly simple and basic business. You make a product you think people might like, market the shit out of it, and if people don't buy it, you emotionlessly kill it and move on. What you don't do is crap like what, for example, General Motors did, which is make a product that doesen't make money (ie: Saturn) then after a decade of marketing the shit out of it, when the beancounters tell you it's still not making money, you pour another couple billion bucks into it. (Or even better, make a product that people are screaming to buy - ie: the EV-1, then don't let anyone buy it, and then kill the project a few years later claiming nobody wanted one - then claim a few years after that that you don't understand why everyone is buying your strongest competitors version of the exact same thing you killed off - ie: the Prius) Ted From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 07:04:29 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E663F16A41B for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 07:04:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from mail1.webmaster.com (mail1.webmaster.com [216.152.64.169]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4D5E13C4F8 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 07:04:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from however by webmaster.com (MDaemon.PRO.v8.1.3.R) with ESMTP id md50001815740.msg for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:04:50 -0800 From: "David Schwartz" To: , Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:03:37 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: <20071218183247.7b68a645@soralx> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:04:50 -0800 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:04:51 -0800 Cc: des@des.no, bitabyss@gmail.com, af300wsm@gmail.com, tedm@toybox.placo.com Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 07:04:30 -0000 > I will act as an arbiter for a minute here, can I? > The support for your position comes in bulk from "historical" data. Ted > holds that the whole Netscape ordeal was manipulated to intentionally > put Microsoft into vulnerable position in that respect, so as to divert > attention of the court from other, far more important issues. I cannot > judge how right this statement is, but I would thus say you are relying > too much on those records being TRUE (a keyword here, means the kind of > scientific truthfulness Feynman was lecturing about). This is a better statement of what's wrong with Ted's position than I could ever make, and I thank you. Like any other conspiracy theory, you must interpret all the historical data according to the rules of the conspiracy. When some off-hand remark supports the conspiracy, it supports the conspiracy. When clear, documented statements conflict with the conspiracy, it is evidence of the conspiracy's effectiveness. If recourse to the historical record is off-limits, all that is left is speculation. If we accept, as Ted does, that we can't trust any documentation to reflect any truth at all, we will end up concluding whatever position we started with. Anything that conflicts is just evidence of how well the truth we search for was covered up. Ted can point to *no* historical evidence or evidence of any kind to support his claim that this revenue stream was a recognized at the time he claims it was or that it ever motivated anyone to do anything. He can argue that it should have and that it would be reasonable for it to have. The biggest counter-argument -- if Microsoft had a legitimate claim like this, they surely would have raised it in court when they faced the equivalent of a corporate death penalty. Ted has no response to this argument except the importance of keeping things secret. But this response justifies the absence of any evidence at all, so defends all claims equally. That means it supports no claims at all. DS From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 07:08:49 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D819516A417 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 07:08:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from mail1.webmaster.com (mail1.webmaster.com [216.152.64.169]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6A8E13C458 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 07:08:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from however by webmaster.com (MDaemon.PRO.v8.1.3.R) with ESMTP id md50001815742.msg for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:09:00 -0800 From: "David Schwartz" To: Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:07:46 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:09:00 -0800 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Tue, 18 Dec 2007 23:09:01 -0800 Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 07:08:49 -0000 > MS dumped a pile of money into development of IE7 because it gets a > pile of money in return from the root certificate authorities. Just > like MS dumps a pile of money into development of operating systems > because they get a pile of money in return from the PC companies > that sell PC's with Windows preloaded. All of this rubbish about > MS positioning IE so they can "take over" the Internet (ie: html and > browser standards) is a pile of nonsense, it is nothing more than > smokescreen mostly from Microsoft, designed to keep customers from > understanding how they -really- make money. > Ted This is getting really tiring. Do you have such much as a shred of evidence to support this? Yes or no. If you have no evidence, go away. If you have evidence, present it. DS From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 09:22:58 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6AC216A417 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:22:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E29113C46B for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:22:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from TEDSDESK (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id lBJ9MpfI090676; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 01:22:52 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: , Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 01:24:06 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1914 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:22:58 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: David Schwartz [mailto:davids@webmaster.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 3:26 PM > To: tedm@toybox.placo.com; des@des.no > Cc: Rob; FreeBSD Chat; Andrew Falanga > Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use >=20 >=20 >=20 > > Don't be foolish. Microsoft would have lost the case if they > > had admitted the real reasons for what they did. It isn't to > > MS's benefit to reveal anything about the real reasons they > > do a thing. >=20 > That's true, but that completely undercuts your argument. Giving=20 > IE away to get revenue for listing root certificates would have=20 > been a perfectly legitimate tactic. It would have had *NOTHING*=20 > to do with leveraging their Windows monopoly. If Microsoft had=20 > been motivated as you claim, saying so would have been a=20 > brilliant trial strategy. >=20 Why reveal anything if not needed? Microsoft has spend a lot of money creating the image that it is a wise and benevolent software company. It's only us renegade intellectual-property-thieving lyenuks users that are out there throwing mud. Wise and benevolent software companies give away software for the good of mankind. Not for base, grasping greedy money reasons. Not to mention as well if they say that, it undercuts the argument that they deliberately spent money to push Netscape out of business. The argument they were making is "oh gee, Netscape crashed, we didn't have anything to do with it" > It was the other side that claimed that Microsoft's IE push was=20 > to protect Windows. Microsoft had no counter argument. > =20 The real reason MS was there on trial was - da dum - that they were price-setting the OPERATING SYSTEM prices. The argument was that MS was a legal monopoly of operating systems and acting in an anticompetitive fashion. Why the trial brought Netscape into the trial at all is likely that it was a ploy to generate sympathy. It's still an open and shut case that MS is a monopoly of PC operating system software. That's why they are currently regulated by the EC in Europe. It's why the trial found them to be a monopoly. Forcing them to "untie" the browser from the OS was a remedy that was dreamed up - but, it really didn't answer the root problem of removing their dominance in the OS market. The argument that somehow the Netscape browser would have evolved into an OS in the future was always highly speculative and driven by the popular press repeating the Sun mantra of "write once, run anywhere" it was never seriously supported by the industry. Either way that MS would have responded to the assertion that the IE push was to protect windows would have fucked them further. It's a "have you stopped beating your wife" question. If MS claims that IE's push was to protect windows, then they are just validating the opposition's thesis that a web browser can make a computer operating system. If they deny it, then the opposition says well then them giving away IE is illegal dumping. > > MS had a large campaign going to misdirect to world. Initially > > it was to their advantage to get the world to believe that they > > didn't understand the Internet. In that way, the young Internet > > startup companies would spend their money fighting each other > > rather than uniting against Microsoft. > >=20 > > It's obvious MS knew from the beginning the importance of the > > Internet. How quickly you forget TCP/IP and Window for Workgroups. > > How quickly you forget the addition of the TCP/IP protocol to the > > DOS/Lanmanager MS client. Even then, MS was working to deny > > funding to the likes of Trumpet Winsock and suchlike by giving > > away the Shiva TCP/IP client in the IE for Windows 3.1 >=20 > That is *my* claim. How do you think this disagrees with what I'm = saying? > =20 Your claim was that MS "feared" the Internet. I'm telling you point blank that is total bullcrap. MS never feared the Internet, they planned from day 1 how to make money off of it, and merely regarded it as one more market to exploit. >=20 > The position I dispute: Microsoft pushed IE to get revenue from=20 > root keys who pay millions to be listed. This is perfectly legal=20 > and legitimate. >=20 > My position: Microsoft pushed IE because they saw Java and=20 > Netscape as a threat to their Windows monopoly. > Wrong. MS pushed IE to get money. Just like every other one of their products. MS sees nothing as a threat. They are far too arrogant to feel threatened by anyone or anything. Maybe once, a couple decades ago, when they were small and weak - then yes, maybe they felt fear. But not within the memory of just about everyone working there now. And when they were small and limp, (ie: micro-and-soft) the only one who really felt fear was Bill Gates - since it was mostly his personal money on the line, and if they went down, he would have suffered the most. Ted From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 09:48:31 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B63D16A418 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:48:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from frank@esperance-linux.co.uk) Received: from mailout.zetnet.co.uk (mailout.zetnet.co.uk [194.247.47.231]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB92413C457 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:48:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from frank@esperance-linux.co.uk) Received: from irwell.zetnet.co.uk ([194.247.47.48] helo=zetnet.co.uk) by mailout.zetnet.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1J4vXO-0004Dn-CD for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:48:26 +0000 Received: from esperance.zetnet.co.uk (54-144.adsl.zetnet.co.uk [194.247.54.144]) by zetnet.co.uk (8.14.1/8.14.1/Debian-9) with SMTP id lBJ9mPCk022024 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:48:25 GMT Received: (qmail 36566 invoked by uid 1001); 19 Dec 2007 09:48:20 -0000 From: "Frank Shute" Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:48:20 +0000 To: David Schwartz Message-ID: <20071219094820.GA36521@melon.esperance-linux.co.uk> Mail-Followup-To: David Schwartz , tedm@toybox.placo.com, FreeBSD Chat References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Face: *}~{PHnDTzvXPe'wl_-f%!@+r5; VLhb':*DsX%wEOPg\fDrXWQJf|2\,92"DdS%63t*BHDyQ|OWo@Gfjcd72eaN!4%NE{0]p)ihQ1MyFNtWL X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.3-RC1 i386 X-Organisation: 'Esperance Linux' X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (zetnet.co.uk [194.247.46.1]); Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:48:26 +0000 (GMT) Cc: FreeBSD Chat , tedm@toybox.placo.com Subject: Re: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Frank Shute List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:48:31 -0000 On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 11:07:46PM -0800, David Schwartz wrote: > > > > MS dumped a pile of money into development of IE7 because it gets a > > pile of money in return from the root certificate authorities. Just > > like MS dumps a pile of money into development of operating systems > > because they get a pile of money in return from the PC companies > > that sell PC's with Windows preloaded. All of this rubbish about > > MS positioning IE so they can "take over" the Internet (ie: html and > > browser standards) is a pile of nonsense, it is nothing more than > > smokescreen mostly from Microsoft, designed to keep customers from > > understanding how they -really- make money. > > > Ted > > This is getting really tiring. Do you have such much as a shred of evidence > to support this? Yes or no. If you have no evidence, go away. If you have > evidence, present it. > Just because there is no evidence for a conspiracy doesn't mean it's not real. As someone else pointed out, they believe OJ did it (as do I and many others) yet there is no (or little) evidence he did it. To support Ted's thesis, I'd point out that when the DOJ v MS came to court the browser war was moot, MS had already won. Yet the media concentrated on this aspect of the trial, but if you read Jacksons's findings of fact, it was the general anti-competitive behaviour of MS that Jackson dwelt on, not just browsers, which is why he recommended they be broken up. Why did the media report it like so? Because MS spin doctors were telling the journalists that this was what it was all about. Journalists are lazy, incompetent and technically inept, just like most people, and they couldn't be bothered to pick their way through the findings of fact and understand why MS was presenting this as "browser wars" rather than as their sustained anti-competitive, monopoly abusing behaviour. It wouldn't surprise me one iota if this smokescreen was to cover up their scamming millions from the root certificate authorities amongst many other abuses. -- Frank Contact info: http://www.esperance-linux.co.uk/misc/contact.html From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 10:15:18 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37E5516A41B for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:15:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (tim.des.no [194.63.250.121]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E298213C4D5 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:15:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from tim.des.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spam.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67AC020BE; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:15:09 +0100 (CET) X-Spam-Tests: AWL X-Spam-Learn: disabled X-Spam-Score: -0.1/3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on tim.des.no Received: from ds4.des.no (des.no [80.203.243.180]) by smtp.des.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F0FE20BD; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:15:09 +0100 (CET) Received: by ds4.des.no (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 7DBE084490; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:15:13 +0100 (CET) From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= To: "Sam Fourman Jr." References: <86ve6wmgq4.fsf@ds4.des.no> <4a37b1e529bab094e2c50b7deca7df87@127.0.0.1> <200712182305.06426.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <476828A0.2060901@chuckr.org> <11167f520712181219j5fe8fbbek6bf6429a856d2ec2@mail.gmail.com> <8663yvfsoc.fsf@ds4.des.no> <11167f520712181658y2e043004sd0b4ae2ed38f4ee2@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 11:15:13 +0100 In-Reply-To: <11167f520712181658y2e043004sd0b4ae2ed38f4ee2@mail.gmail.com> (Sam Fourman, Jr.'s message of "Tue\, 18 Dec 2007 18\:58\:11 -0600") Message-ID: <86tzmfkn2m.fsf@ds4.des.no> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/22.1 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Kip Macy , Martin Cracauer , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org, Chuck Robey , mh@kernel32.de Subject: Re: amd64 NVIDIA support in FreeBSD 7 X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:15:18 -0000 "Sam Fourman Jr." writes: > Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav writes: >> Then you have not understood anything at all. The ball is not in >> nVidia's camp. > I understand what has to be done, I just don't see why Nvidia can not > donate the code (and 50% of the time) to the FreeBSD code base > to make the amd64 Driver happen. They do not have the expertise required to implement those features. Those (very few) who do are busy with other things and / or not interested. > I think a FreeBSD bounty Program (if there even is such a thing) is a > Great idea. I can think of a bunch of things I would support > > 1 amd64 Nvidia support > 2 better Wine support for FreeBSD, like amd64 support > 3 a evdev driver for xorg (so all the buttons on my mx1000 mouse work) > > just to name a few. It all comes back to what I said the last time this issue came up on the lists: there is not sufficient interest in these features, with the definition of "sufficient interest" being that someone is interested enough to either learn the necessary skills and write the code, or put enough money on the table to hire someone who already has those skills. These features will be implemented as soon as, and not earlier than, there is sufficient interest in them, according to the definition above. DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 10:28:11 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCEF616A417 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:28:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2A2713C46B for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:28:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from TEDSDESK (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id lBJAS3Nt091124; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 02:28:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 02:29:25 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1914 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:28:11 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: David Schwartz [mailto:davids@webmaster.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 11:08 PM > To: tedm@toybox.placo.com > Cc: Rob; FreeBSD Chat; Andrew Falanga > Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use > > > > > MS dumped a pile of money into development of IE7 because it gets a > > pile of money in return from the root certificate authorities. Just > > like MS dumps a pile of money into development of operating systems > > because they get a pile of money in return from the PC companies > > that sell PC's with Windows preloaded. All of this rubbish about > > MS positioning IE so they can "take over" the Internet (ie: html and > > browser standards) is a pile of nonsense, it is nothing more than > > smokescreen mostly from Microsoft, designed to keep customers from > > understanding how they -really- make money. > > > Ted > > This is getting really tiring. Do you have such much as a shred > of evidence > to support this? Yes or no. If you have no evidence, go away. If you have > evidence, present it. > David, this is getting really tiring. Do you have such much as a shred of evidence to support your assertion that Microsoft was really afraid of anything? Yes or no. If you have no evidence, go away. If you have evidence, present it. Ted From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 10:28:19 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CFEB16A41A for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:28:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C13D013C4F0 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:28:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from TEDSDESK (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id lBJAS3Nr091124; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 02:28:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: , , Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 02:29:18 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1914 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Cc: des@des.no, bitabyss@gmail.com, af300wsm@gmail.com Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 10:28:19 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: David Schwartz [mailto:davids@webmaster.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 11:04 PM > To: soralx@cydem.org; freebsd-chat@freebsd.org > Cc: tedm@toybox.placo.com; des@des.no; bitabyss@gmail.com; > af300wsm@gmail.com > Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use > > > > > I will act as an arbiter for a minute here, can I? > > The support for your position comes in bulk from "historical" data. Ted > > holds that the whole Netscape ordeal was manipulated to intentionally > > put Microsoft into vulnerable position in that respect, so as to divert > > attention of the court from other, far more important issues. I cannot > > judge how right this statement is, but I would thus say you are relying > > too much on those records being TRUE (a keyword here, means the kind of > > scientific truthfulness Feynman was lecturing about). > > This is a better statement of what's wrong with Ted's position > than I could > ever make, and I thank you. > Except that I said nothing about some vast mythical "conspiracy" But, continue. It's facinating. > Like any other conspiracy theory, you must interpret all the > historical data > according to the rules of the conspiracy. When some off-hand > remark supports > the conspiracy, it supports the conspiracy. When clear, documented > statements conflict with the conspiracy, it is evidence of the > conspiracy's > effectiveness. > > If recourse to the historical record is off-limits, all that is left is > speculation. > The historical record, like any record, is a mixture of truth and falsehood. > If we accept, as Ted does, that we can't trust any documentation > to reflect > any truth at all, I never said that. > we will end up concluding whatever position we started > with. Anything that conflicts is just evidence of how well the truth we > search for was covered up. > > Ted can point to *no* historical evidence or evidence of any kind > to support > his claim that this revenue stream was a recognized at the time > he claims it > was Except I don't do that. > or that it ever motivated anyone to do anything. He can argue that it > should have and that it would be reasonable for it to have. > > The biggest counter-argument -- if Microsoft had a legitimate claim like > this, they surely would have raised it in court when they faced the > equivalent of a corporate death penalty. Microsoft never faced the equivalent of a corporate death penalty. How much do you know about anti-trust law? Apparently nothing. Anti-trust trials are not designed to "kill" the offending corporation. Even the most famous recent one - the breakup of the Bell system - did not have as it's goal the "killing" of Bell Telephone. The trials are intended to correct an abnormal market. An abnormal market is one in which a monopoly has gotten all market share worth getting. Note that it isn't important if that happened as a result of all customers choosing the company's products voluntarly or if the company engineered it. The fundamental assumption is that a monopoly hurts consumers because the lack of competition means that according to the capitalist system, consumers will be overcharged without competition in a market. Overcharging hurts consumers. The anti-trust remedy is to break the monopoly up or cause it to divest. It is not to put it out of business. "killing" Microsoft was never a goal of the anti-trust trial. The problem though is when it came to brass-tacks: the construction of a remedy - the judge realized that making Microsoft divest the applications division - ie: Microsoft Office - would not correct the operating system monopoly. Conversely, divesting the operating system division would not correct the office applications monopoly. In other words, divestiture did not appear to be any kind of a usable remedy. As a result the judgement was to force MS to "open" it's standards, ie: make it more transparent how the Windows internals work. That goal was largely accomplished. However, what wasn't forseen by the judge (understandable since the judge was an idiot) was that MS would go ahead and open the standards, then start waving the banner of "intellectual property infringement" about. That is why today the SAMBA project won't let anyone work on the samba code who has seen the Microsoft networking code. The MS networking code is freely available from Microsoft - you just sign a form with them and you get it. Then you will know all about how the SMB implementation on Windows works. If your a commercial software vendor this works fine since your distributing binaries - and Microsoft cannot show those compiled binaries to a judge and claim copyright or patent infringement. But if your distributing an open source implementation of the SMB networking your screwed because Microsoft can see your code, and they can take your code and their code to a judge, show the judge the signed form you signed to get their code, and claim that your infringing on their intellectual property. So in short, the remedy of the antitrust trial was defeated after the fact. It is pretty obvious that Microsoft figured out all of this before the trial, and took pains to divert attention from it so that the judges rulings would not cover the intellectual property aspect. Otherwise the judge would have ruled that interfaces and standards that were opened could NOT be patented or licensed. > Ted has no response to this > argument except the importance of keeping things secret. Well you never made this arguement before. Now that you have, I answered it. Ted From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 12:18:39 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC8DC16A46B for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 12:18:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F85C13C4DB for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 12:18:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from TEDSDESK (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id lBJCIYvv092165; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 04:18:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: "Frank Shute" , "David Schwartz" Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 04:19:50 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1914 In-Reply-To: <20071219094820.GA36521@melon.esperance-linux.co.uk> Importance: Normal Cc: FreeBSD Chat Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 12:18:39 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Frank Shute [mailto:frank@esperance-linux.co.uk] > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 1:48 AM > To: David Schwartz > Cc: tedm@toybox.placo.com; FreeBSD Chat > Subject: Re: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use > > > On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 11:07:46PM -0800, David Schwartz wrote: > > > > > > > MS dumped a pile of money into development of IE7 because it gets a > > > pile of money in return from the root certificate authorities. Just > > > like MS dumps a pile of money into development of operating systems > > > because they get a pile of money in return from the PC companies > > > that sell PC's with Windows preloaded. All of this rubbish about > > > MS positioning IE so they can "take over" the Internet (ie: html and > > > browser standards) is a pile of nonsense, it is nothing more than > > > smokescreen mostly from Microsoft, designed to keep customers from > > > understanding how they -really- make money. > > > > > Ted > > > > This is getting really tiring. Do you have such much as a shred > of evidence > > to support this? Yes or no. If you have no evidence, go away. > If you have > > evidence, present it. > > > > Just because there is no evidence for a conspiracy doesn't mean it's > not real. As someone else pointed out, they believe OJ did it (as do I > and many others) yet there is no (or little) evidence he did it. > > To support Ted's thesis, I'd point out that when the DOJ v MS came to > court the browser war was moot, MS had already won. Yet the media > concentrated on this aspect of the trial, but if you read Jacksons's > findings of fact, it was the general anti-competitive behaviour of MS > that Jackson dwelt on, not just browsers, which is why he recommended > they be broken up. > > Why did the media report it like so? Because MS spin doctors were > telling the journalists that this was what it was all about. > > Journalists are lazy, incompetent and technically inept, just like > most people, and they couldn't be bothered to pick their way through > the findings of fact and understand why MS was presenting this as > "browser wars" rather than as their sustained anti-competitive, > monopoly abusing behaviour. > > It wouldn't surprise me one iota if this smokescreen was to cover up > their scamming millions from the root certificate authorities amongst > many other abuses. > These days they do things a bit differently, but the money flow is the same. Partly to answer David but as folks are interested, here's how it works. As of Windows XP, MS ceased adding in new root certificates into the certificate store they distributed with the web browsers. The existing roots, Verisign and the like, were undoubtedly scammed millions during the height of the dot-com boom, -directly- from MS. Today, the money still goes to Microsoft, but MS hides it a little better. What happens today is as follows: 1) A root certificate authority wants to insert it's public key into Internet Explorer. They submit the key to Microsoft which distributes it to all the Windows Update Servers. 2) When IE hits a SSL site with a certificate signed by the new root, (or singned by an old root with a new certificate) if it lacks the root public key it silently contacts a windows update server and checks if a key for that CA is available, if so it downloads and installs it without informing the user. This process is documented here: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/archive/security/news/rootcert.mspx?mfr=tru e This is how Microsoft distributes root keys. Now, the question is, how does the root CA go about getting it's key into the Windows Update Servers and what do they have to pay? It turns out, quite a bit. ON that page, MS lists the requirements for the root CA. Primary among them is: "...Engage a licensed auditor of the WebTrust for CAs program and complete that process..." 3) WebTrust (http://www.webtrust.org/) is jointly developed by the AICPA and the CICA as part of SysTrust. You can get their standard cheaply enough. The rub is buried in the standard: "...The entity's confidentiality and security performance is periodically reviewed and compared with the defined confidentiality and related security policies..." In short, the world's Certificate Authorities must undergo audits every 6 to 12 months by a provider that is certified under Webtrust by the AICPA/CICA. These are not cheap and pricing isn't easily available - but I did find a comment in an old 2001 article that stated they can run upwards of a quarter million dollars for a large enterprise (like a CA) PER AUDIT. Of course, that's money that is paid to the CPA firm doing the audit - not directly to Microsoft - but, we aren't done with the money chain yet. 4) AICPA defines CPA's that are experienced with doing WebTrust audits as Certified Information Technology Professionals (CITP). Where are these people? It turns out that most of them are working at firms that sell and install and integrate accounting software solutions, which is about what you would expect. 5) Now, what is the most popular software package that these accounting firms recommend to their clients? Is it Navision? Solomon? Great Plains? Well, as a matter of fact, yes. All those were acquired by Microsoft years ago and are now part of what Microsoft calls "Microsoft Dynamics" Microsoft Dynamics is today the most sold software package for firms large enough to require an accounting firm to install it, the same firms that Microsoft tells the root CA's that they must be certified by, in order to install their root CA's into the Windows Update servers. It is no wonder that these accounting CPA firms recommend Microsoft Dynamics to their clients. They aren't out there recommending Linux accounting packages. They are pushing Dynamics, and the constant stream of updates to it from Microsoft. In exchange for all that free business Microsoft is more than happy to throw a bone to these firms by requiring the root CAs to submit to their periodic audits. Security - it's a family business. Ted From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 16:11:19 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7C1D16A417 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:11:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from mail1.webmaster.com (mail1.webmaster.com [216.152.64.169]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6E3313C45D for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:11:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from however by webmaster.com (MDaemon.PRO.v8.1.3.R) with ESMTP id md50001816162.msg for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:11:54 -0800 From: "David Schwartz" To: , Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:10:43 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:11:54 -0800 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:11:54 -0800 Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:11:19 -0000 =20 > The real reason MS was there on trial was - da dum - that they were > price-setting the OPERATING SYSTEM prices. The argument was > that MS was a legal monopoly of operating systems and acting in > an anticompetitive fashion. Why the trial brought Netscape into the > trial at all is likely that it was a ploy to generate sympathy. That's funny because every source I have says that the Microsoft trial = started because Microsoft was accused of leveraging its Windows monopoly = to win the browser war. I could provide at least a dozen cites about = this, including quotes from the lawyer who convinced the DOJ to bring = the suit. But I know there's no point, because you'll say that even = though he said X, that doesn't prove that X is really why he did it. I'll bet you don't have one shred of evidence to support the claim that = the trial wasn't primarily motivated by this alleged use of leverage. =20 > It's still an open and shut case that MS is a monopoly of PC > operating system software. That's why they are currently regulated > by the EC in Europe. It's why the trial found them to be a monopoly. > Forcing them to "untie" the browser from the OS was a remedy that > was dreamed up - but, it really didn't answer the root problem > of removing their dominance in the OS market. Why is that a problem exactly? > Either way that MS would have responded to the assertion that the > IE push was to protect windows would have fucked them further. It's > a "have you stopped beating your wife" question. Please explain how responding "we gave IE away so we can charge for key = inclusion" would have harmed Microsoft. This seems like a perfectly = legitimate "give away the razor and sell the blades" approach. It = provides an explanation other than protecting Windows, which is exactly = what Microsoft would have watned. =20 > If MS claims that IE's push was to protect windows, then they > are just validating the opposition's thesis that a web browser > can make a computer operating system. If they deny it, then > the opposition says well then them giving away IE is illegal > dumping. This is a nonsensical argument. Selling a razor for less than cost to = make money on the blades or a printer for less than cost to make money = on ink is perfectly legitimate. Any argument that avoided a reference to = their Windows monopoly would have been a huge plus for MS. They raised = no such argument. You can argue that this could be because the secret was too valuable to = risk, but you can't argue that it wouldn't have helped MS. =20 > > The position I dispute: Microsoft pushed IE to get revenue from=20 > > root keys who pay millions to be listed. This is perfectly legal=20 > > and legitimate. > >=20 > > My position: Microsoft pushed IE because they saw Java and=20 > > Netscape as a threat to their Windows monopoly. =20 > Wrong. MS pushed IE to get money. Evidence? Oh right, you don't have any. (Although, of course, as stated = this claim is true. The question is by what mechanism this would make = money, and there's no evidence at all to support Ted's view.) It is amazing that you tie such a simple issue into such a crazy = conspiracy theory. There is simply no evidence whatsoever that anyone = recognized the revenue stream from root key inclusion during the browser = wars. If this is true, why can't Ted find a single mention of it?! Ted is arguing not just that someone recognized this but that it = actually motivated Microsoft. This despite no evidence from any source. DS From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 16:35:10 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5035916A417 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:35:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from mail1.webmaster.com (mail1.webmaster.com [216.152.64.169]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FF6913C4F3 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:35:08 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from however by webmaster.com (MDaemon.PRO.v8.1.3.R) with ESMTP id md50001816182.msg for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:36:04 -0800 From: "David Schwartz" To: Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:34:54 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:36:04 -0800 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Wed, 19 Dec 2007 08:36:05 -0800 Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:35:10 -0000 > David, this is getting really tiring. Do you have such much as a shred > of evidence to support your assertion that Microsoft was really > afraid of anything? Yes or no. If you have no evidence, go away. If you > have > evidence, present it. > Ted Nothing would satisfy you except perhaps a video tape of Bill Gates being nervous. When we talk about a corporation being motivated by fear, we know that a corporation is not a human being and has no feelings. It can't actually be afraid of anything. However, tons of evidence from that time period suggests that Microsoft feared that the Internet could pose a threat to its Windows monopoly in various ways. Tons and tons of evidence supported this view, and the antitrust trial (which Microsoft lost) was about precisely this. I don't deny that Microsoft later found ways to profit from IE. I don't even deny that these ways may have motivated later actions. However, there is no evidence whatsoever that Microsoft saw root key inclusion as a way to profit from IE during the browser wars. There is simply not one shred of evidence to support this view. If Ted had any, he'd present it. I don't deny that it's possible. I don't deny that had Microsoft thought of that at the time, it likely would have motivated them. I simply deny that Microsoft thought of it at the time. This would require a kind of foresight on Gates' part that he simply didn't have. It really doesn't matter whether Bill Gates genuinely feared that the Internet could topple his OS monopoly by making OS unimportant or if he was just covering his bases. The fact is, he acted to leverage his Windows monopoly to kill IE and the only reason with any evidence at all to support it was that it is that this was to protect Windows. You may find some evidence to suggest that Microsoft thought that the browser might be a way to control other markets. For example, if your browser defaults to your portal, then your book selling site might have an advantage over a competitor's. It's quite possible that this also motivated Microsoft to think winning the browser wars was important. There is just no evidence that root key issues had any role in the browser wars. Ted insists they did against all evidence. DS From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 22:30:07 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7FAB16A41A for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:30:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7617C13C46B for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:30:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from TEDSDESK (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id lBJMU031096332; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:30:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: , Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:31:02 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1914 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:30:07 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: David Schwartz [mailto:davids@webmaster.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 8:11 AM > To: tedm@toybox.placo.com; des@des.no > Cc: Rob; FreeBSD Chat; Andrew Falanga > Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use >=20 >=20 > =20 > > The real reason MS was there on trial was - da dum - that they were > > price-setting the OPERATING SYSTEM prices. The argument was > > that MS was a legal monopoly of operating systems and acting in > > an anticompetitive fashion. Why the trial brought Netscape into the > > trial at all is likely that it was a ploy to generate sympathy. >=20 > That's funny because every source I have says that the Microsoft=20 > trial started because Microsoft was accused of leveraging its=20 > Windows monopoly to win the browser war. I could provide at least=20 > a dozen cites about this, including quotes from the lawyer who=20 > convinced the DOJ to bring the suit. But I know there's no point,=20 > because you'll say that even though he said X, that doesn't prove=20 > that X is really why he did it. >=20 > I'll bet you don't have one shred of evidence to support the=20 > claim that the trial wasn't primarily motivated by this alleged=20 > use of leverage. > http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm "...II The Relevant Market Currently there are no products, nor are there likely to be any in the = near future, that a significant percentage of consumers world-wide could = substitute for Intel-compatible PC OPERATING SYSTEMS... ...Therefore, in determining the level of Microsoft's market power, the = relevant market is the licensing of all Intel-compatible PC OPERATING = SYSTEMS..." ...Section 412...Most harmful of all is the message that Microsoft's = actions have conveyed to every enterprise with the potential to innovate = in the computer industry. Through its conduct toward Netscape, IBM, = Compaq, Intel, and others, Microsoft has demonstrated that it will use = its prodigious market power and immense profits to harm any firm that = insists on pursuing initiatives that could intensify competition against = one of Microsoft's CORE PRODUCTS...." Now, was there a big hue and cry in the finding of fact concerning = browsers? Certainly. However, the web browser was never a Microsoft core product. = I will also point out that the fundamental argument in the fact finding = was that Netscape was charging and Microsoft started giving away a web browser = for free, forcing Netscape to give theirs away for free - all of this = completely ignores that the Netscape code was originally free code, copied from NCSA, and that there were other free web browsers besides Netscape and IE available a the time. In other words, the court was bashing = Microsoft for giving away a browser for free to compete against another company = that simply took free open source browser AND server code and started = charging money for it. That is why the fact finding DID NOT state that the most harmful was = that MS misused the so-called browser market. The entire "MS is bad because they pushed Netscape out of business" argument only makes sense in the context of the times - when a lot of people like you were running around claiming a web browser was an operating system. The original market was NOT defined as a browser market - it was defined as an OPERATING SYSTEM market - and the "most harmful" actions of Microsoft to the market = concerned their CORE PRODUCTS - which at the time were PC OPERATING SYSTEMS. Thomas Penfield Jackson knew at the time that a finding of fact that MS was a monopoly in the BROWSER market would not hold up. So he = carefully penned a finding that WOULD hold up - one that's foundations rested on anticompetitive behavior in the OPERATING SYSTEM market - with a lot of Netscape web browser window dressing merely as evidence that MS was a nasty company. The fact of the matter is that the succeeding judge Colleen = Kollar-Kotelly is ignorant of how the computer market works, and is merely a mouthpiece for conservatives. She didn't reverse the findings of fact since she did not have the knowledge of how the market works to understand them. Instead she just issued a remedy that did practically nothing. =20 > > It's still an open and shut case that MS is a monopoly of PC > > operating system software. That's why they are currently regulated > > by the EC in Europe. It's why the trial found them to be a = monopoly. > > Forcing them to "untie" the browser from the OS was a remedy that > > was dreamed up - but, it really didn't answer the root problem > > of removing their dominance in the OS market. >=20 > Why is that a problem exactly? >=20 You know, at this point I'm just going to end this. If you still don't understand why a single computer operating system being the dominant PC operating system is a problem, you are a lost cause, and frankly, your statement has almost certainly killed your credibility with anyone running an operating system other than Windows. Ted From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 22:45:07 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C6F516A420 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:45:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.192.90]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7C5F13C455 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:45:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) Received: from TEDSDESK (nat-rtr.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com [65.75.197.130]) by mail.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id lBJMj5JW096477; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:45:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tedm@toybox.placo.com) From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" To: Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:46:07 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1914 In-Reply-To: Importance: Normal Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:45:07 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: David Schwartz [mailto:davids@webmaster.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 8:35 AM > To: tedm@toybox.placo.com > Cc: Rob; FreeBSD Chat; Andrew Falanga > Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use > > > When we talk about a corporation being motivated by fear, we know that a > corporation is not a human being and has no feelings. It can't actually be > afraid of anything. > > However, tons of evidence from that time period suggests that Microsoft > feared Oh brother. > > This would require a kind of foresight on Gates' part that he > simply didn't > have. > > It really doesn't matter whether Bill Gates genuinely feared that the > Internet First it was "Microsoft feared" Now it's "Bill Gates feared" > could topple his OS monopoly by making OS unimportant or > if he was > just covering his bases. The fact is, he acted to leverage his Windows > monopoly to kill IE Now your just so carried away that you aren't even paying attention to what your writing. "leverage windows to kill IE?" > > You may find some evidence to suggest that Microsoft thought that the > browser might be a way to control other markets. For example, if your > browser defaults to your portal, then your book selling site might have an > advantage over a competitor's. It's quite possible that this also > motivated > Microsoft to think winning the browser wars was important. > > There is just no evidence that root key issues had any role in the browser > wars. Ted insists they did against all evidence. > The root key issue that your so hung up on was a single example cited by me in a response to Chuck Robey's statement that Microsoft is "giving away" IE. Go back and re-read it. Notice that I DID NOT say in that post that this was the ONLY way that Microsoft makes money of IE. It is you that has somehow jumped to the conclusion that I was asserting this is the ONLY way Microsoft makes money off IE. There's plenty other ways. Ted From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 19 23:25:43 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFEA716A417 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:25:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from mail1.webmaster.com (mail1.webmaster.com [216.152.64.169]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2B8913C468 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:25:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davids@webmaster.com) Received: from however by webmaster.com (MDaemon.PRO.v8.1.3.R) with ESMTP id md50001816887.msg for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:26:25 -0800 From: "David Schwartz" To: Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:25:23 -0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 In-Reply-To: X-Authenticated-Sender: joelkatz@webmaster.com X-Spam-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:26:25 -0800 (not processed: message from trusted or authenticated source) X-MDRemoteIP: 206.171.168.138 X-Return-Path: davids@webmaster.com X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-MDAV-Processed: mail1.webmaster.com, Wed, 19 Dec 2007 15:26:27 -0800 Cc: Rob , FreeBSD Chat , Andrew Falanga Subject: RE: Suggestions please for what POP or IMAP servers to use X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:25:44 -0000 > > This would require a kind of foresight on Gates' part that he > > simply didn't > > have. > > > > It really doesn't matter whether Bill Gates genuinely feared that the > > Internet > First it was "Microsoft feared" Now it's "Bill Gates feared" Since I made it precisely clear what I mean in both cases, what exactly is your problem? Obviously, a company can't actually feel fear. > > could topple his OS monopoly by making OS unimportant or > > if he was > > just covering his bases. The fact is, he acted to leverage his Windows > > monopoly to kill IE > Now your just so carried away that you aren't even paying attention > to what your writing. "leverage windows to kill IE?" I've tried to debate with you in good faith, but now you've proven you're just an asshole. I noticed that you put "your" instead of "you're". Perhaps I should ignore your argument because of it. > The root key issue that your so hung up on was a single example cited Because your claim on that issue is false. You made a false claim, I pointed out that it was false. The only reason I am "so hung up on" it is because you continue to defend it despite the fact that there's not one shred of evidence to support it. You added a bit of conspiracy hypothesis to your argument, you got called on it, and now you're pissed. > by me in a response to Chuck Robey's statement that Microsoft is "giving > away" IE. Go back and re-read it. Notice that I DID NOT say in that post > that this was the ONLY way that Microsoft makes money of IE. It is you > that has somehow jumped to the conclusion that I was asserting this is > the ONLY way Microsoft makes money off IE. There's plenty other ways. Nice try at rewriting history. Here's your original claim: >> Those payments are gigantic. Imagine for a second if Verisign >> told Microsoft to kiss off, they were no longer going to pay >> Microsoft for "renting" space in the IE root certificate store. >> Microsoft would simply issue a root certificate revoke in Windows >> Updates for the Verisign public key, and a few weeks later >> millions of users would start getting messages that their browser >> was no longer recognizing the SSL certificate from ebay, paypal, >> Wells Fargo, etc. etc. >> >> If by some miracle those millions of users were to manually add >> those CA public keys into their root stores, Microsoft could merely >> continue to periodically issue revokements. ;-) >> >> So now you maybe understand why Microsoft chose to crush Netscape, >> and why they hand out IE like candy? You specifically said that root key revenue was one of the motivations for Microsoft's decision to "crush Netscape" and "hand out IE like candy". You never said it was the only reason but you did say it was a significant reason. You have still have not provided one shred of evidence to support this claim. In any event, there's no point in trying to debate someone whose mind is closed and is incapable of arguing in good faith. Again, you have yet to present even the tiniest shred of evidence that possible root certificate revenue motivated Microsoft to give away IE or crush Netscape. That remains your personal conspiracy theory, and when it is challenged, you react like all conpsiracy theorists do. DS From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 20 03:52:26 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CAF616A41A for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 03:52:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsdworld@gmail.com) Received: from an-out-0708.google.com (an-out-0708.google.com [209.85.132.245]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6C3B13C45A for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 03:52:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsdworld@gmail.com) Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c14so938420anc.13 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:52:25 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=R3LkydwiQg5hmDDESE5quyQO8xKME2rYRAMq3TCf/VE=; b=c+M7EO8rF6QYTtE7xkzP6EGwLxRc8CQ1d3RiGnYI39lFQGv/9URyMPoJRH52psJwxfcNKO4RvUXTcknOY+a23UL0HvCAgxstjILxC4fNQKYi/J+FKRd1YTqyBuljtPAzbB0axe3EYHK3A17Q6iO6FWIFGk+TnxPngzdYymVImcs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=RxXzEZbz4drzWiUf5bTIXXRzcAxi6ScnP+ENlspeuoELGEW0mi98Dd8aJ/35DHFQqmd9FkEY1NV+d2YGM73+cE9QanlhvsMES7kJlysT2UNmv/WflTle/ey2cISRMTFEVPiUkHLKl9TKPuD+w/3Ddzjxx9FKrfg3uQy2A5yikC0= Received: by 10.100.106.1 with SMTP id e1mr1830385anc.35.1198121239549; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:27:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from Desktop.rochester.rr.com ( [74.74.228.251]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id p5sm18613819roc.2007.12.19.19.27.17 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 19 Dec 2007 19:27:18 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4769E140.5010406@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 22:28:00 -0500 From: Benjamin Adams User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071214) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FreeBSD Chat Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Live CD X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 03:52:26 -0000 I want to create my own live cd. I'm looking for a good tutorial. Live cd will be off version 7.0 of FreeBSD. Thanks Ben Adams From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 20 04:51:39 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3718B16A420 for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 04:51:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) Received: from cain.gsoft.com.au (cain.gsoft.com.au [203.31.81.10]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C981E13C45A for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 04:51:38 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) Received: from inchoate.gsoft.com.au (inchoate.gsoft.com.au [203.31.81.30]) (authenticated bits=0) by cain.gsoft.com.au (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id lBK4pYDg016836 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:21:34 +1030 (CST) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) From: "Daniel O'Connor" To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:21:24 +1030 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <4769E140.5010406@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4769E140.5010406@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1383575.V8k3AfkAT6"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200712201521.31709.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> X-Spam-Score: -3.977 () ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.58 on 203.31.81.10 Cc: Benjamin Adams Subject: Re: Live CD X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 04:51:39 -0000 --nextPart1383575.V8k3AfkAT6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Thu, 20 Dec 2007, Benjamin Adams wrote: > I want to create my own live cd. I'm looking for a good tutorial.=20 > Live cd will be off version 7.0 of FreeBSD. http://www.freesbie.org/ I've only made 6.2 ones but I don't see why 7.0 wouldn't work. =2D-=20 Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum GPG Fingerprint - 5596 B766 97C0 0E94 4347 295E E593 DC20 7B3F CE8C --nextPart1383575.V8k3AfkAT6 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBHafTT5ZPcIHs/zowRAsVaAJ9UTj0yigrHZHgkwnvyvpqc4/UrWACePcm0 sfrpNxu7mu2O3+oW30LbyRg= =SmO1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1383575.V8k3AfkAT6-- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Dec 20 13:27:35 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D3E216A478 for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 13:27:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from db@db.net) Received: from diana.db.net (diana.db.net [204.228.229.66]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F7C413C4F7 for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 13:27:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from db@db.net) Received: from diana.db.net ([204.228.229.66] helo=localhost ident=mailnull) by diana.db.net with esmtp (Exim 4.66 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1J5Kxt-000Jlr-9Z; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 05:57:29 -0700 Received: from diana.db.net ([127.0.0.1] helo=localhost) (envelope-from ) id 1J5Kxr-000EaO-1b; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:57:27 -0500 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:57:26 -0500 From: Diane Bruce To: Daniel O'Connor Message-ID: <20071220125726.GA48013@night.db.net> References: <4769E140.5010406@gmail.com> <200712201521.31709.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200712201521.31709.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: Benjamin Adams , freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Live CD X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 13:27:35 -0000 On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 03:21:24PM +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote: > On Thu, 20 Dec 2007, Benjamin Adams wrote: > > I want to create my own live cd. I'm looking for a good tutorial. > > Live cd will be off version 7.0 of FreeBSD. > > http://www.freesbie.org/ > > I've only made 6.2 ones but I don't see why 7.0 wouldn't work. I have made a 7.0 live CD using a modified set of scripts from freesbie.org (http://www.db.net/hamfreesbie), I have not yet released it however. Perhaps: http://people.freebsd.org/~db/freesbie_notes.txt might be useful. - Diane -- - db@FreeBSD.org db@db.net http://www.db.net/~db From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 21 06:03:52 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 060C016A418 for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2007 06:03:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from logicbaby@gmail.com) Received: from nz-out-0506.google.com (nz-out-0506.google.com [64.233.162.231]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8408513C447 for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2007 06:03:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from logicbaby@gmail.com) Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id l8so104016nzf.13 for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 22:03:50 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:to:subject:from:cc:content-type:mime-version:references:content-transfer-encoding:date:message-id:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=mqoHbgze70IJ66ftKMyRAxVTuhP8bIsetrdUquloSMA=; b=egKGM2b2BU9iUd7RPPk2sawfmRJxmkPszeZYSPgQ0hq4mwzn1LG7lI1/3nKnwtZ/worzSf9bAhAXBj3+jHwIq8gwQ5dGgkWAhLl4SmZV95Yuylb3HyPjWh/m1dQ2iA5wlIzQmqEw2DN9A57DNimqKR8ffqdi7OYZTVv+0NZFE2U= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=to:subject:from:cc:content-type:mime-version:references:content-transfer-encoding:date:message-id:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=cNMMbqqw5UjgfQWbE1NynfEe3m/421oMqCfBf0Ojuc5ge8CRSfkJpu7QxUxtRvooueOl1ASHuKO7SRvxBkwvijb1YJ9dGGmmCQgmpxbaY52ehOHcBITO4yi/I6oTfNJ/d7Piiw83mCqxHory0GmL53mnwrGYEqw1CuEWGr6YMzE= Received: by 10.115.76.1 with SMTP id d1mr961289wal.108.1198215369922; Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:36:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from dragon-windows ( [124.119.50.19]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id n32sm1359511wag.13.2007.12.20.21.36.07 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 20 Dec 2007 21:36:09 -0800 (PST) To: "Diane Bruce" From: Dragon Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=gbk MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4769E140.5010406@gmail.com> <200712201521.31709.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <20071220125726.GA48013@night.db.net> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 13:35:56 +0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20071220125726.GA48013@night.db.net> User-Agent: Opera Mail/9.24 (Win32) Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Live CD X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 06:03:52 -0000 http://www.relaxbsd.org/main/ RelaxBSD , chinese FreeBSD liveCD > On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 03:21:24PM +1030, Daniel O'Connor wrote: >> On Thu, 20 Dec 2007, Benjamin Adams wrote: >> > I want to create my own live cd. I'm looking for a good tutorial. >> > Live cd will be off version 7.0 of FreeBSD. >> >> http://www.freesbie.org/ >> >> I've only made 6.2 ones but I don't see why 7.0 wouldn't work. > > I have made a 7.0 live CD using a modified set of scripts from > freesbie.org > (http://www.db.net/hamfreesbie), I have not yet released it however. > Perhaps: http://people.freebsd.org/~db/freesbie_notes.txt might be > useful. > > - Diane > -- > - db@FreeBSD.org db@db.net http://www.db.net/~db > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 21 16:04:53 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E966D16A419 for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:04:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from logicbaby@gmail.com) Received: from nz-out-0506.google.com (nz-out-0506.google.com [64.233.162.229]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95F6913C447 for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:04:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from logicbaby@gmail.com) Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id l8so179970nzf.13 for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:04:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:to:subject:from:content-type:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:user-agent; bh=xIahIw4uAMBKvynKw6vF+2dslTDBdS9MZD9DAPF97jk=; b=iSwXynPDMHp6F0GYfh6o7lo7wZ5sLJRDCicuSvV5NtxLIZp2e9p3Oz0KzbOUf9YQsVvBpSEvZi/Z8Z0BM9ckPCRhR+fpITiOxshmjZKe4u8uZFSLew0TLxM9XTBW5q0lBoQ0cLe6GseKiJfkivzbZ4fYmPasJcMgZrCIwnZr+Mw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:to:subject:from:content-type:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:user-agent; b=R22115CYTY+6y9vnTmw1vdXTo5rRyYg75fibtBH0P2gLjxsK7BpBOMNdYLh5nyxN2yKV9n6LvLZXBIQWYxa3e43Jjg/NzMjkArVcg/cZr7TfCv2GU1NptpYZ4AqN9VUgvhep2isLVu7mMwB0kR9Jzxn9ldN9KfWhlN7jjjEHbYs= Received: by 10.110.68.10 with SMTP id q10mr622518tia.22.1198253090503; Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:04:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from dragon-windows ( [124.119.50.19]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id h35sm4289097wxd.20.2007.12.21.08.04.45 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:04:49 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 00:04:30 +0800 To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org From: Dragon Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=gbk MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: User-Agent: Opera Mail/9.24 (Win32) Subject: start sawfish X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:04:54 -0000 How to start sawfish? I have edit ~./xinitrc exec sawfish From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 21 16:21:21 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4A4916A420 for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:21:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from reed@reedmedia.net) Received: from c-0500.emailmediator.com (c-0500.emailmediator.com [64.85.162.118]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BFB013C46B for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:21:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from reed@reedmedia.net) Received: from pool-71-170-114-32.dllstx.fios.verizon.net ([71.170.114.32] helo=reedmedia.net) by c-0500.emailmediator.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1J5kch-0007k1-Qr; Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:21:20 -0500 Received: from reed@reedmedia.net by reedmedia.net with local (mailout 0.17) id 17131-1198254184; Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:23:05 -0600 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:23:04 -0600 (CST) From: "Jeremy C. Reed" To: Dragon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: start sawfish X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:21:21 -0000 On Sat, 22 Dec 2007, Dragon wrote: > How to start sawfish? > I have edit ~./xinitrc If using startx, you probably want ~/.xinitrc (note the period is front of file name) > exec sawfish Jeremy C. Reed From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 22 00:34:46 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8C3116A46E for ; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 00:34:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aryeh.friedman@gmail.com) Received: from mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.4.199]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7051313C44B for ; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 00:34:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aryeh.friedman@gmail.com) Received: from flosoft.no-ip.biz (ool-435559b8.dyn.optonline.net [67.85.89.184]) by mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTP id <0JTF00J1FC7X70K0@mta4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Fri, 21 Dec 2007 19:04:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from flosoft.no-ip.biz (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by flosoft.no-ip.biz (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id lBM04inq065004 for ; Fri, 21 Dec 2007 19:04:44 -0500 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 19:04:44 -0500 From: "Aryeh M. Friedman" To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Message-id: <476C549C.8050206@gmail.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.5 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071217) Subject: where to put doc and www sources X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 00:34:46 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I maintain a local cvs repo and decided to also create a local mirror of the latest docs and web site and just wanted to know the "right" (by convention) to put this stuff for now I put docs in /usr/src/docs (i.e. cd /usr/src;cvs -q -d /home/ncvs checkout doc to create it) - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems http://www.flosoft-systems.com Developer, not business, friendly -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHbFSczIOMjAek4JIRAhlhAJ9HO0CooleXgxSAZMEUXKWvggZSiACfbeX7 CRFv9FtCLQx5/lv/LjW9lsQ= =jC5F -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 22 01:09:18 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0073716A418 for ; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 01:09:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jcw@highperformance.net) Received: from mx1.highperformance.net (dsl081-163-122.sea1.dsl.speakeasy.net [64.81.163.122]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99E7013C442 for ; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 01:09:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jcw@highperformance.net) Received: from w16.stradamotorsports.com (w16.stradamotorsports.com [192.168.1.16]) by mx1.highperformance.net (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id lBM19FAK025000; Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:09:15 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jcw@highperformance.net) Message-ID: <476C63BF.7040305@highperformance.net> Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:09:19 -0800 From: "Jason C. Wells" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070922) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Aryeh M. Friedman" References: <476C549C.8050206@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <476C549C.8050206@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=2.5 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=failed version=3.1.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.6 (2006-10-03) on s4.stradamotorsports.com Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: where to put doc and www sources X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 01:09:18 -0000 Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > I maintain a local cvs repo and decided to also create a local mirror > of the latest docs and web site and just wanted to know the "right" > (by convention) to put this stuff for now I put docs in /usr/src/docs > (i.e. cd /usr/src;cvs -q -d /home/ncvs checkout doc to create it) man hier might answer your question. Later, Jason From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 22 07:52:13 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B5AE16A418 for ; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:52:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anonymous@dv3.darrenherman.com) Received: from dv3.darrenherman.com (dv3.darrenherman.com [64.13.231.41]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0336213C45A for ; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:52:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from anonymous@dv3.darrenherman.com) Received: (qmail 12201 invoked by uid 48); 22 Dec 2007 02:05:36 -0500 Date: 22 Dec 2007 02:05:36 -0500 Message-ID: <20071222070536.12198.qmail@dv3.darrenherman.com> To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org From: Nelson George MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: GRAND IMPORT AND EXPORT COMPANY X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: exportfreightfwd@yahoo.co.uk List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 07:52:13 -0000 GRAND IMPORT AND EXPORT COMPANY. Goods for Import / Export & Freight Fwdg. Svcs. Units 3A & 3B, Olympic Way, Sefton Business Park, Aintree Liverpool, L30 1RD, UNITED KINGDOM. Attn, I am Nelson George, we are a group of business men who deal on raw materials and export into America/Canada We are searching for representatives who can help us establish a medium of getting to our costumers in America/Canada as well as making payments through you to us. Please if you are interested in transacting business with us we will be very glad. I will also like to note here that acting as our payment agent in your country in other words, you will be collecting payment from customers we supply goods to, by doing this on our behalf you will be paid 10% of every amount that you collected. This is how it goes when ever there is a payment to be made by any of them (our customers) you will be sent cash which you later send to us with the account we shall provide you. But payment can also come in Money Order/ Cashier's Cheque which will be written in your name and in the case of Money Order/Cashier's Cheque you will have to cash it. We shall go into an agreement, by signing an agreement form that we be sent to you. (1) Your Name:......................................................................... (2) Your Postal Address:........................................................... (3) Your Phone/Fax Number:..................................................... (4) Your Occupation:................................................................. (5) Your Age:............................................................................ (6) Your Driver's License:........................................................... Very Respectfully, Nelson George, President GRAND IMPORT AND EXPORT COMPANY Goods for Import / Export & Freight Fwdg. Svcs. Units 3A & 3B, Olympic Way, Sefton Business Park, Aintree Liverpool, L30 1RD, UNITED KINGDOM From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 22 15:04:34 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A503416A41A for ; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:04:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aryeh.friedman@gmail.com) Received: from mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.4.198]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9511313C461 for ; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:04:34 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aryeh.friedman@gmail.com) Received: from flosoft.no-ip.biz (ool-435559b8.dyn.optonline.net [67.85.89.184]) by mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-8.04 (built Feb 28 2007)) with ESMTP id <0JTG00BN2HVKE1I0@mta3.srv.hcvlny.cv.net> for freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 10:04:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from flosoft.no-ip.biz (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by flosoft.no-ip.biz (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id lBMF4WHm059356 for ; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 10:04:32 -0500 Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 10:04:32 -0500 From: "Aryeh M. Friedman" To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Message-id: <476D2780.30703@gmail.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.5 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071217) Subject: DB options in the base system X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:04:34 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 What options exist for databases in the base system (no installed ports/packages). The reason for asking is the ports re-engeering group is looking at possibely using a "real" db for persitence instead of the rather non-standard/ah-hoc /var/db/* layout (before someone flames me this is *NOT* an attempt to break backwards compatility just if adopted a goal to move towards) - -- Aryeh M. Friedman FloSoft Systems http://www.flosoft-systems.com Developer, not business, friendly -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHbSeAzIOMjAek4JIRAqKuAJ9lHSmYG4qN89HnVGnAZ7XB3xMAaACeMzve Iio7v2whXL3wk5l3rLCIt7E= =oA2E -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Dec 22 16:12:10 2007 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22A6316A417 for ; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 16:12:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mspitzer@gmail.com) Received: from ro-out-1112.google.com (ro-out-1112.google.com [72.14.202.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6E3A13C455 for ; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 16:12:09 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mspitzer@gmail.com) Received: by ro-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id m6so2785147roe.13 for ; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 08:12:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=nK3F6VSVGhSyW93fVjbiEvyHVwdMqNqWd3jLAjIim3Q=; b=j50RduZZ8R+7vAq+LF79AOvdP+X/pW61PsokB+y9mYrl/bz+pyk/KlHz4KeRDwPrcMrbJGxKTE/ZmV749zCAyuPa/tkBX2rWy7hKnOf3UkSfataOAWD88EWk23uOYT1cw/ZcfTAwzxCrPS9BwjIzQxraKWeTkTPUv1cpNMsHZ2Q= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=W9pa4we1emWbXcWlFEAs4AEprBjn9zznd40HFSCFoKIF64SHxn3ywvxj0ONO6n8JZBqcXuTKYwT+rP91vh695p0Hgpwbn9Zh+mIahiJwRsbIrU66cU9d/YDESDfd+E9fjg6eZP/HriRRAR3i3N31hJYk66Lklw56LS/7KBqeuNo= Received: by 10.142.89.9 with SMTP id m9mr1110520wfb.116.1198339928591; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 08:12:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.97.14 with HTTP; Sat, 22 Dec 2007 08:12:08 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <8c50a3c30712220812j2cbb7f89jc1b6ed133476ff54@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 11:12:08 -0500 From: "Marc Spitzer" To: "Aryeh M. Friedman" In-Reply-To: <476D2780.30703@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <476D2780.30703@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: DB options in the base system X-BeenThere: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Non technical items related to the community List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 16:12:10 -0000 On Dec 22, 2007 10:04 AM, Aryeh M. Friedman wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > What options exist for databases in the base system (no installed > ports/packages). The reason for asking is the ports re-engeering > group is looking at possibely using a "real" db for persitence instead > of the rather non-standard/ah-hoc /var/db/* layout (before someone > flames me this is *NOT* an attempt to break backwards compatility just > if adopted a goal to move towards) Well to the best of my knowledge none. There is berkleydb 1.x but that is more of a key/value store, as is the *dbm stuff. Perhaps the core team could be approached about adding sqlite to core if you need a relational db in the base system. I do not think you have a shot of adding a "real" dbms to the base, postgres for example, as it is just not a good fit. Another one to look at is metakit, not sure what the license is on this one though. Thanks, marc > > - -- > Aryeh M. Friedman > FloSoft Systems > http://www.flosoft-systems.com > Developer, not business, friendly > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iD8DBQFHbSeAzIOMjAek4JIRAqKuAJ9lHSmYG4qN89HnVGnAZ7XB3xMAaACeMzve > Iio7v2whXL3wk5l3rLCIt7E= > =oA2E > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > -- Freedom is nothing but a chance to be better. Albert Camus