On Tue, 2003-04-08 at 09:42, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > and just in time for those of you who need a little chuckle > this morning, i present an excerpt from a 2002 article, showing > why trying to sell linux as cheaper/more reliable/more secure, > etc. to IT might not work if you're dealing with truly luddite > computerphobes. > > i have removed all identifying info from this snippet, to > let you imagine what effect this individual had on his new > organization -- i'll post full, identifying info later. > > "Former XXX Director XXXXXXX XXXXXX was himself notoriously > technology-averse -- he had the computer removed from his office when he > took over XXXXXX, and he never began using email. When he left in June > 2001, the standard issue XXXXXX computers were 386 or 486 PCs -- machines > that were obsolete by the mid-1990s." FBI Director Louis Freeh http://www.ndol.org/blueprint/2002_jul_aug/11_failure.html Old news -- that article was published July 2002. How is this related to the installation, configuration, or use of Red Hat Linux 9 really baffles me though, Rob. Might I suggest you consider an alternate forum for political discussion. (Contact me off-list if you need some suggestions.) --Jeremy -- /=====================================================================\ | Jeremy Portzer jeremyp@xxxxxxxxx trilug.org/~jeremy | | GPG Fingerprint: 712D 77C7 AB2D 2130 989F E135 6F9F F7BC CC1A 7B92 | \=====================================================================/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
