<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2653.12">
<TITLE>RE: [Gllug] "linux is based on NT4, an 7 years old OS - very obso lette now..."</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<BR>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>-----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>From: itsbruce@uklinux.net [<A HREF="mailto:itsbruce@uklinux.net">mailto:itsbruce@uklinux.net</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Sent: 24 April 2003 15:46</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>To: gllug@linux.co.uk</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Subject: Re: [Gllug] "linux is based on NT4, an 7 years old OS - very</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>obso lette now..."</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 12:03:55PM +0100, Adrian McMenamin wrote:</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Because I don't regard communicating with the 500,000 plus people who read</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> the FT as pointless posturing (and neirther do MS obviously)</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>A bunch of Linux newbies foaming at the mouth and screaming "bloody</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>lier"[1] isn't going to impress anyone. There are any number of</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>articles in today's press detailing solid, serious work being done with</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Linux. Hysterical "advocacy" does nothing to augment this. Besides</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>which, if your intention is to communicate then I suggest you learn to</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>quote in a less confusing style.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>[1] This seems to be a common technique used in the hope of gaining</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>quick acceptance, though a more direct way to broadcast a person's lack</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>of wit I cannot imagine.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>======================</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>I apologise, not for the first time, at being forced to use MS Outlook. I alter its operation the best as I can to ensure that it works well on this list, but there is only so much I can do.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Indeed I am assume the confusion has caused you to quote people who are not me as me. Though I've also been around long enough to know spelling flames are the lowest form of criticism on the internet.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>However, the person being hysterical here is you.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>My first response stated:</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>"Well, the first step should be to write a letter to the FT (assuming this made the print edition) challenging these assertions in clear and measured tones."</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>I still think that is right. The FT has printed a story which contains a rather odd/bizarre assertion. Generally speaking the people who will have read this will read the FT day in, day out. So therefore to rebut this point the best thing to do is to write to the FT.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Btw I am not a newbie either. I've written two kernel device drivers and a filesystem (I admit this is read only at the moment, but I expect to add write capabilities in the next week or so as it is a piece of ongoing work).</FONT></P>
</BODY>
</HTML>