can you belive that the mac advocates trade this stuff, even as they expand
their own unix-based os? jeez louise.

Jim Polaski wrote (to comp.sys.mac.advocacy):

In article <Q9mdndXywMD5WbbdRVn-gw@adelphia.com>,
"lefty" <lefty@bandaged.invalid> wrote:

"trade this stuff"??

Would you care to translate that to understandable gibberish instead of
just gobbledegook?

--
Jim Polaski
"The measure of a man is what he will do
knowing he will get nothing in return."

Jim Polaski wrote:

the thing that kills me is that you blythely post that as if it is an
indictment of linux, when most of it applies to any other os put in place of
windows. you trade the link, trade on the headline, without even getting
it. from the article:

"In most cases, however, companies don't have either the IT skills or the
trust relationships between IT and business management needed to pull off a
Linux server consolidation without incurring significant additional costs.
In the best cases, those costs will be primarily related to the time needed
to bring in the missing skills, vitalize IT and build those trust
relationships, but few companies know enough about Linux to realize it isn't
Windows -- meaning that MCSE ideas about computing don't apply."

read that paragraph again, substituting "mac os x" for "linux" and it works
just as well. if you think the cost of switching from windows is going to
stop you, then it doesn't matter where you are going. either you tackle the
"defenestration" or you don't.

or are MSCEs already trained for mac os x?

In article <ntqdnX22iNb5ZbbdRVn-jg@adelphia.com>,
"lefty" <lefty@bandaged.invalid> wrote:

No, its not an indictment. It's stating that many folks think of Linux
as being *FREE* because the distro is *FREE* or at most, $30 unless you
go Red Hat perhaps.

Why? Because those folks are making the same mistake as the people who
think that the cost of computers(really TCO) is but the purchase price
of the hardware.

It's making the point that you have administration costs in an
enterprise.

Note, I made no reference to OS X, the article did though. But that's
meaningless in terms of what its talking about.

Get off your bias horse and read calmly once in a while.

--
Jim Polaski
"The measure of a man is what he will do
knowing he will get nothing in return."

Jim Polaski wrote:
if you are just an idiot, and think that "the enterprise" can do _anything_
for "*FREE*" i might let it go. you are too stupid to spend time on.

think of anything "free" (air, water, iso downloads) and think what
companies spend to get them into the building and in use.

air might be closest ... but lol, "enterprises" tend to be big things that
need "buildings" and "air conditioners," "heaters," "venting," and
people/power to run them.

oh, so something isn't "*FREE*" you think you've proved more than that?

do you think you proved it had higher cost?

In article <g9ednSLe5e3InrHd4p2dnA@adelphia.com>,
"lefty" <lefty@bandaged.invalid> wrote:

You ought to take this up with the author. He is, after all, the one
making the claim. That I happen to agree to a point with him is
immaterial.

The point is so many go after Linux because they consider it "free". Go
look at so many accounts of those transitions and that's what they talk
about. That they are freed from the MS licensing costs.

glad you don't run a business, though.

--
Jim Polaski
"The measure of a man is what he will do
knowing he will get nothing in return."

Jim Polaski wrote:

the problem with this "look, linux is not free" thing is that it comes from
two kinds of people: dummies, and people with an agenda.

the fact is that linux _is_ free. it is just hard for a big business (an
enterprise) to put together a complete operation that is free. this is even
true when they use free components, like air or linux.

for a start, few people volunteer to help corporations. they pretty much
have to pay people to do anything. that starts costing money right there.
etc.

the author of that article at least had a useful agenda, to quantify the
costs for a corporation in a "defenestration" but you just peel off your
headline.

you take "linux is not free" as your headline, and your end of story. you
don't care what corporate operations really cost, and how _free_ software
can help. you just want to cast doubt on the whole thing.

everybody knows linux is free, but we also know that doing big business
costs money. duh.

Fearing a spontaneous XP reboot, lefty mumbled this incantation:

Man, my kill-file plonks all posters using Outlook Express.
Even reasonable posters such as yourself.

--
No, I won't fix your Windows computer!

In article <RvudnZGrDImczLHdRVn-uA@adelphia.com>,
"lefty" <lefty@bandaged.invalid> wrote:

Sorry left, but I do understand the concept of total costs.

--
Jim Polaski
"The measure of a man is what he will do
knowing he will get nothing in return."

Fearing a spontaneous XP reboot, Jim Polaski mumbled this incantation:

If that is true, that's about all you understand, OS-wise.

--
No, I won't fix your Windows computer!

lefty wrote:

Excellent point, lefty. Zealots get carried away to the point that
anything but unidimensional thinking is well,....unthinkable

Nicolas

Linønut wrote:

You have to forgive Polaski. He's the resident Mac zealot of csma. Now
that Windows has caught up with the Mac in more ways than one, he's
remained a relic of days gone by when the Mac and Apple were better than
Windows and MS respectively. Any attempt at disagreeing with him will
either earn you a moniker of "Windiot" or you'll be branded a troll.
Denial is a river after all


Nicolas

In article <Epidnbb-RKWW3bDd4p2dnA@comcast.com>,
Linønut <linønut@bone.com> wrote:

Right. Have you run a business? And for 25 years or worked for someone?
I've done both and wear a lot of hats, so, I do understand.

--
Jim Polaski
"The measure of a man is what he will do
knowing he will get nothing in return."

On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 22:41:35 +0000, Nashton wrote:


AHAH ahahahha HAHA ahaha HAh ahahaha HAHa ha ah ahahahah...
Oh, you were serious? How sad.

--
Rick

On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 22:42:42 +0000, Jim Polaski wrote:

Let's see, he's worked a cash register for McDonalds for 25 years, so yes,
he has probably worn a lot of hats.

--

Corollary to Clarke's Third Law:
Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced.