Linux-Advocacy Digest #677, Volume #25 Fri, 17 Mar 00 21:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: 11 Days Wasted ON Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED],net)
Re: CD-ROM question (Bob Hauck)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob Germer)
Re: Iridium Tech Support (Was Re: . . . Itanium . .. (Chad Irby)
Re: A Linux server atop Mach? ("MJP")
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse (A transfinite number of monkeys)
Re: Iridium Tech Support (Was Re: . . . Itanium . .. (evilsofa)
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Make linux primary OS at work? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse ("Dirk Gently")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED],net
Subject: Re: 11 Days Wasted ON Linux
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 00:33:01 GMT
On 17 Mar 2000 21:18:36 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Wolfgang Weisselberg) wrote:
>On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 03:53:55 GMT,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED],net <[EMAIL PROTECTED],net> wrote:
>> On 16 Mar 2000 23:47:12 GMT, Steve Mading
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The problem with Linux is that the only advantage I can see for a
> ^^^^^^^^^
>> small business owner is the much lower cost and that really only
>> applies to larger business's which have multiple systems and thus
>> higher licensing costs.
>
>Which is a valid comment, but not a proof. Unless you want to
>prove limited imagination.
The proof is, or will be in how many of these type establishments
switch to Linux.
>> You're going to sit this guy who owns a clothing store for example
>> down in front of Linux and tell him how great it is and how he is
>> going to save tons of money
>
>Wrong argumentation. Being able to avoid the vendor lock-in you
>describe further down is a much better argument ... and then you
>start when he has a system which seems to work for him! If you
>start earlier (when he chooses his system) almost all of the
>problems disappear.
He's been lied to once what makes you think he is going to trust the
Open Source movement. Again what is the reason for him to convert his
data if the current model works for him?
>> Proprietary format? Sure but that's not his fault.
>
>Of course it's not his programming. But I hold people responsible
>for the tools they use. Guns and bullets can kill, you know, even
>if you bought them ready-to-use. And if you use Outlook and post
>in HTML, I am not going any softer on you because you cannot use
>your tools or are unable to understand them.
People buy applications based upon a need and the need to support, or
be able to be supported (ie: account who needs his clients data in a
specific format). As long as the data is saved and available most
folks are more concerned with running their business and less
concerned of how, and where and what format their data is stored in.
As long as it is backed up properly.
>> The program works for him and he is happy.
>
>Then there's no reason at all to change. If he were unhappy,
>well ... that would be different.
Ok, but I was trying to build an argument for someone like the above
to switch to Linux.
>However your claim proves you are building up a straw man
>argument. Well, come here, troll, let me feed you some cyanide.
No. My argument shows that there is no reason other than cost for
someone other than a programmer, tinkerer etc to switch to Linux.
>> Then he gets to see Netscape in all of it's ugly looking font'ness,
>> not to mention Wordperfect 8 in which the fonts are so jagged you
>> dizzy looking at them and by now the guy is gone out the back door.
>
>You can integrate good fonts with Linux, too. After all, your
>business owner did set up Windows all by hims... wait ... no, he
>got someone to do that, right? So tell your consultant (of
>whatever OS he might be: "Do that!"). Which problem? After all,
>you saved enough with the OS that you *can* pay someone to
>configure it well ...
The majority of small business owners I have dealt with generally buy
pre-loads from the nearest CompUSA that meet the specifications of
either their accountant or the home office, in the case of a chain or
franchise.
>> Later he finds out that half the Win hardware he foolishly bought
>> wouldn't have worked and his ISP is Linux hostile and he would be on
>> his own for dialing up.
>
>The first part is cheapish hardware designed to reduce a CPU to a
>These evil hardware only exists to reduce your CPU 386 in speed in
>exchange of $10 and should not even be used under Windows. (And
>not only because it's a vendor lock-in again.)
Agreed but that doesn't help the switch to Linux argument. Take a look
in the Sunday NY Times and see how many systems have Win*hardware in
them. Most do and they happily work with Windows.
>Replacing the printer with some inexpensive real thing won't cost
>more that $100 or $150 (see other threads). Replacing the modem?
>Well, how much is a modem these days? Replacing the sound card?
>I thought we talked 'small business', not game machine! You save
>more than that on not having to buy the licenses. (Also see the
>URL below.)
The hoops are becoming higher by the moment that this person has to
jump through in order to run Linux.
What is he gaining, other than cost for all of this jumping?
>The second part can easily be solved: Switch to a clueful ISP.
Easy for a single user, more difficult for a business that may have a
webpage, several email accounts, online transaction processing and so
forth.
>> So what is the reward for switching to Linux?
>
>Try your example for someone who is in a similar situation, but
>uses OS/2, Linux, AIX, SCO, or any other system. You'll find
>that there are quite some similarities. The differences seem to
>be that the vendor lock-in is not so hard. As has been said:
>You need a good reason to switch. "Just to run Linux" isn't.
With the exception of OS/2 the others are not aggressively trying to
compete with the Windows desktop like Linux is.
Server market yes, especially SCO, but desktop?
>> You have given him no reason to switch and in fact have given him
>> every reason to stay with MS. He wants to run a business, not
>> re-invent the wheel and have it turn out square.
>
>So he stays with MS, (after all, by your definition, he is happy
>with it!) but I am perfectly allowed to snicker evilly everytime
>his OS crashes. I think that's a fair deal.
If it does.
>> For a non-programmer, applications based
>> person for whom a PC is a tool to run a business I can't think of one
>> single reason to switch to Linux. Not even one.
>
>Gross oversimplification on the base of a constructed and
>weighted example is not really convincing. However, I think
>that you might have a limited imagination. Let's take a
>business owner who uses the PC as a tool, and nothing more.
>What's important to him?
>
>- It must RUN. No matter what.
Linux might have an edge here.
>- The apps and the environment must be good enough.
Linux just died on this one.....
>
- There must be a specialist somewhere in case of trouble.
Windows help is everywhere.
Good Linux help is hard to find.
>- It must be payable.
The help?
Why?
>Let's examine these things one by one.
>1. Windows 9x and even NT are not really that crashproof.
> (Neither is a misconfigured Linux.) For one example where
> they failed in that area, see the URL:
> http://citv.unl.edu/linux/LinuxPresentation.html
> (The Cats Pajamas)
> You see, sometimes your imagination fails. :-)
It's not an imagination. I see this type of scenario every single day.
Any OS can and does fail.
>2. This is the question with every OS. While Windows has many
> more applications, Linux is catching up. (and then there are
> programs you can only run under DOS or OS/2 or whatever)
Linux is definitely catching up, but Microsoft is also advancing.
The race is on. Example XFree 4.0 is only now providing things MS has
had for years.
Still no Quicken. How many accountants are running Linux or allow
their clients to run it?
>3. RH is but one example. Linux-Hotlines and support contracts
> are aviable everywhere by now. Even with 0900-numbers if you
> don't want a contract.
Just as overpriced and inept as MS's.
>4. Linux wins hands down here, especially if you are bigger than
> 1-PC-Mom'n'Pop shop.
Doubtful at the moment. Cost is the only reason, certainly not
applications that a mom and pop shop would be interested in.
>
>> Open Source way, it will steam roll Windows over time. Currently it is
>> not even close, and looking at the cryptic applications that folks
>> seem to be writing for Linux these days I doubt it ever will.
>
>Nobody forces you to use them. Actually, you could write a
>noncryptic (aka simple) wrapper GUI round them. This is of course
>the preferred way: Less code duplication, reuse of well tested
>code, choose-your-GUI.
Too many choices are confusing the issue and none of them are as
consistent as the Windows gui.
>> Meminfo? Don't we have enough of those already?
>
>Obviously not, else it would not have been written. Are you
>trying to tell people what to write? Hmmm ....
No I am showing what shows up on the home page of Freshmeat.net when a
Linux supporter tells someone to go there for an example of how many
programs are out there for Linux. Quantity maybe. Quality and useful
to normal folks? Debatable.
>> GPM? I thought you guys had figured out how to use mice by now?
>
>Yes, you use GPM. It also does nice stuff like handle quite a
>range of touch screens and controls nearly every aspect of your
>mouse-needs. You can even have a 'magic' mouse-key combination to
>e.g. reboot your machine or other nice stuff ... if you need/want
>that. You'd not need that, but sometimes driver/kernel
>develloping can kill your KB and TCP-stack. Not all Linux users
>are drooling mouse pushers, you know? Some do program the kernel
Mom and Pop will love it. While they are trying out all this great
stuff their business will go down the drain.
...
>
>> RTP? So now I can turn my $450 Sony display into an etch-a-sketch.
>
>Why not? Imagine, someone might want or need that ability!
>Even with their $30000 extra-big flatscreens or their 3rd hand
>13" monitors. (But then, trolls lack imagination ...)
You still haven't given me a single reason why someone like mom and
pop should switch other than cost.
>> QextMDI? Yet another library that I am certain is needed somewhere and
>> for something.
>
>Are you frightened that people create stuff you don't understand?
>And which you probably never will use?
No I am saying when mom and pop go take a gander at Freshmeat.net they
will be very confused.
>> This stuff is scary..It reminds me of stuff I used back in the mid
>> 1980's to tweak my IBMPC, like NumLockOff.
>
>> Absolute FlintStone period.
>
>Ah. I see. You also wrote at least one useful aplication. What
>was it called, what did it do? (After all, you did not invent a
>kernel for your "IBMPC", right ...?)
I didn't have to. Still don't have to. See that's the problem with the
Linux camp you are always looking down at someone for not writing
code. It is also the very reason why Linux will peak and then fall to
earth faster than the Hindenberg.
>> BTW this was taken off the http://www.freshmeat.net page today.
>
>> >: If someone tells a business owner that he has to buy
>> >: new computers in order to get Linux up and running,
>> >: the business owner will give up on Linux since preserving
>> >: current technology investment is business owners' high priority.
>
>> Absolute truth and the main reason why for small business owners Linux
>> is not an option.
>
>I agree that having to upgrade to switch is something you'd not
>like to do. But having to upgrade for Windows (which is much more
>likely since Linux needs comparatively little resources) is OK? I
>bet not! But locked in, you won't be able to help yourself ...
Upgrading programs under Windows is soooo much easier than under
Linux..
>-Wolfgang
Steve
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: CD-ROM question
Date: 18 Mar 2000 00:35:22 GMT
Reply-To: bobh{at}slc{dot}codem{dot}com
On 17 Mar 2000 22:30:15 GMT, MerefBast <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Apparently some versions of LINUX require only lower case file
>and directory names
No, that's not true. What is true is that the default mount options of
ISO9660 without Rock Ridge extensions translate everything to lower case,
I guess because Unix users are used to everything being lower case. So if
your links are in upper case then they won't work.
>From the man page:
map=n[ormal] / map=o[ff]
For non-Rock Ridge volumes, normal name translation
maps upper to lower case ASCII, drops a trailing
`;1', and converts `;' to `.'. With map=off no
name translation is done. See norock. (Default:
map=normal.)
> Obviously we can't go against the international standard just
>because some versions of LINUX read CD-ROMs backwards.
Obviously. And no need either.
> Does anyone know if there is an option on a mount command or
>some similar action that users can take on LINUX to correctly
>mount and read upper case letters in file names?
Use "check=relaxed". From the man page:
check=r[elaxed] / check=s[trict]
With check=relaxed, a filename is first converted
to lower case before doing the lookup. This is
probably only meaningful together with norock and
map=normal. (Default: check=strict.)
-or-
Use lower-case links. Non-case-sensitive systems won't care.
> If anyone has a solution, please send it by private e-mail to
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. Thanks...
<grumble>
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 19:43:55 -0500
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT
On 03/17/2000 at 06:40 PM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) said:
> Emacs, vi, etc, are often the right tool for the job. If your task is
> editing autoexec.bat, maybe they are overkill. But if your task is
> writing 100k lines of C++ and managing releases with a version control
> system while ensuring that the code meets the company coding standards,
> then maybe they are great tools. Why can't you recognize that being able
> to use a program in the first five seconds is not the only criterion for
> goodness, especially when you are talking about professional-grade
> tools?
Quite right about emacs. As to your last question, the answer is obvious:
The idiot to whom you replied is an Ostrat for whom complicated tasks are
beyond his capabilities.
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.09b Registration Number 67
As the court closes in on M$, Lemmings are morphing to Ostrats!
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
From: Chad Irby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Iridium Tech Support (Was Re: . . . Itanium . ..
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 00:52:37 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Vermillion) wrote:
> It looks like it might be turned off this week anyway.
The amateur astronomers are just *waiting* for someone to de-orbit the
Iridium satellites...
--
Chad Irby \ My greatest fear: that future generations will,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \ for some reason, refer to me as an "optimist."
------------------------------
From: "MJP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Linux server atop Mach?
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 18:54:02 -0600
Please ignore this message. It's St. Patty's day and I'm a low-comprehension
idiot.
MJP
"MJP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8auiqm$8lb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "J. B. Moreno" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > MJP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I think what he's trying to say is that real users don't really care
> > about application "portability" they care about /document/ "portability"
> > (in fact they normally have their own application preferences for a
> > particular platform and just want to use that while sharing the document
> > with someone else).
>
> Document portability is what's driving SGML/XML acceptance en masse.
>
> > BTW -- if you were using a decent newsreader like Xnews, the above text
> > from Chuck wouldn't have been messed up.
>
> MJP
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (A transfinite number of monkeys)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 01:14:38 GMT
On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 14:36:51 -0500,
Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: > So far, I have come to learn through these newsgroups that W2K is
: > riddled with more than 60,000 bugs
:
: lie
I believe the actual number is about 63,000, of which a mere 28,000 are
functionality impairing bugs.. Silly me, I don't think software with
28,000 bugs is of shipping quality, let alone 63,000.
: >, cannot scale to Hotmail-style services,
:
: lie
Heh? If it does, why does Hotmail continue to be based on Solaris, FreeBSD,
Apache and Qmail? MSFT has tried (several times I might add) to transition
Hotmail to an NT based platform, only to fail miserably every single time.
You can't dispute that, it's the documented truth.
: > is expensive to buy,
:
: depends if you live in your mom's basement and think the #1 reason linux is
: good is because it's all free
: but to anyone with a job, W2K is not expensive.
Heh again. $319 for a license for the desktop version of Windows 2000 just
feels like gang rape. Done much time, Drestin?
: >encourages users to run as root,
:
: lie
Oh?
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q243/3/47.asp
I installed Windows 2000 on my mother's computer, rather than subject her
to the crashing nightmare that is Windows 98. She wants to change ISPs,
so I told her to run the Internet Connection Wizard so she can get
all of her settings changed. She can't do it. She's a normal user,
not a power user, not an administrator.
If that's not encouragement to run as "root", or administrator, what is?
: > is a virus haven,
:
: lie
Which is why there are maybe 5 or 6 viruses that affect Linux/Unix systems,
but thousands that can affect Windows 95/98/NT/2000? Hmm.. Sounds like a
haven to me...
: >and is an administrative nightmare of endless
: > clicks and check boxes.
:
: as opposed to an administrative nightmate of endless command lines, scripts
: and man lookups?
The other day, I swapped someone's video card at the office. I removed
a TNT card, and replaced it with a Voodoo3 3000. The machine dual boots
Windows 2000 and Linux Mandrake 7.0. Aside from the crack the case, unscrew
and unseat, reseat and rescrew, and close the case, here's what transpired.
Windows 2000:
1) Boot up, and get 640x480x16 colors.
2) Download drivers from 3dfx, unzip.
3) Right click on desktop, get display properties, go to settings the
settings tab, hit the advanced button, go to the adapter tab, hit the
properties button, go to the driver tab, upgrade driver, hit next,
display a list of known..., have disk, browse, select, choose my card
from the list of options, answer several questions about digital signing
and OEM drivers, reboot, and finally choose my res/color depth.
Linux Mandrake 7.0:
1) Boot the machine, and kudzu tells me that it noticed the TNT is gone,
agree to let it remove the config for the TNT. Kudzu then tells me that
it sees a new Voodoo3. Let it configure the card.
2) Insert the Mandrake 7.0 CD as prompted. Watch it automatically install
the 3dfx Voodoo3 X-Server.
3) Watch the machine finish booting. X comes right up, 1280x1024x32bpp,
just as it was configured when the box had the TNT inside.
Both 3 steps, but the third step on Windows 2000 sure was long and arduous.
You might say, an administrative nightmare of endless clicks, check boxes
and radio buttons. The Linux side involved pressing the "enter" key twice,
just to confirm the removal of the TNT and addition of the Voodoo3.
--
Jason Costomiris <><
Technologist, cryptogeek, human.
jcostom {at} jasons {dot} org | http://www.jasons.org/
------------------------------
From: evilsofa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Iridium Tech Support (Was Re: . . . Itanium . ..
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 01:26:39 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chad
Irby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Vermillion) wrote:
>
> > It looks like it might be turned off this week anyway.
>
> The amateur astronomers are just *waiting* for someone to de-orbit the
> Iridium satellites...
They won't be de-orbiting them over populated areas. That reminds me of
SkyLab, by the way, which after a mind-boggling amount of hysterical
hysteria, ended up squashing a jackrabbit somewhere in backwoods
Australia.
--
The last words of General John Sedgewick, Union
commander in the American Civil War:
"They couldn't hit an elephant from this dist----"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 02:17:33 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <8au4a8$ils$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) wrote:
>
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> "Mr. Rupert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>
>>> Nothing worse than being stopped at a red light only to have a bum
>>> attempt to wash your windshield and hand you a W2K CD.
>
>> no, you're mistaken - W2K is not being given away free... the only OS I can
>> think of that fits your description is Linux. The bum may have realized that
>> no want accepts Linux CDs but would take a W2K copy in a heartbeat.
>
> Not true. A popular PC magazine was recently given 120,000 w2k disks by
> microsoft that they THOUGHT were the 120 day eval version. It turns out they
> werent; they were the full version. Alot of people in Spain are very happy.
>
> Microsoft gave away 120k copies of w2k for nothing.
Maybe not. I'm sure they were counted as copies sold. Didn't they just say
that 1,000,000 copies of w64k had been 'sold' already?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Make linux primary OS at work?
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 01:18:12 GMT
So here's my current situation:
1. Writing code, doing other real work on an out of date (2.6) solaris
box which I don't manage.
2. Using netscape as an integrated browser/mail client on NT. This is
bad. Netscape is crashing/corrupting a lot lately.
(Yes, I have two computers.)
3. Frequently getting M$ stuff in attachments. I like being able to
launch Word, etc from a single click on the attachment.
4. This is the biggie. Synching address book and calendar program
(meeting maker) with my palm IIIx. This is very important, as my Pilot
will sometimes beep at me and get my lazy ass out of bed so I don't miss
early meetings.
5. This is a nicety. Synching my palm pilot with AvantGo in NT, so I can
pull down the New York Times, etc.
Desire- To do everything in Linux because I'm a unix junkie, NT sucks,
and BG is the OS antichrist.
Problems:
1. Palm synch support.
Can I get Avantgo from Linux?
Could I have done my PalmOS 3.3 upgrade without using NT?
Can I synch my Palm with Meeting Maker from Linux?
2. Good integrated mail reader/browser required:
Is there a good linux browser/mail client out there?
I hate to admit it, but IE is a superior product to Navigator.
Some people rave about MUTT for a mail client, but for God's
sake, the thing looks like a VT100 with finger paint on it.
I am a total XEmacs geek, and I would love to be able to
M-C-<whatever> my heart away while I compose messages, but I'm not
sure I'm ready to give up rich text composition.
3. Good and reliable window manager required.
The version of enlightenment packaged with RH6.0 froze on me way too
much. I just ordered mandrake and I will be giving KDE a try.
4. Browser plugins.
If I browse in linux, I'll be missing out on certain
multimedia stuff, right?
Any advice or support would be greatly appreciated.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Dirk Gently" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 01:31:41 GMT
Well, you know hitting enter is just
sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo hard. Clicking
6546416464.3516544654146464651321 times is much, much, much, much
simpler!!!!
--
Dirk Gently
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux Rules!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"A transfinite number of monkeys" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 14:36:51 -0500,
> Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : > So far, I have come to learn through these newsgroups that W2K is
> : > riddled with more than 60,000 bugs
> :
> : lie
>
> I believe the actual number is about 63,000, of which a mere 28,000 are
> functionality impairing bugs.. Silly me, I don't think software with
> 28,000 bugs is of shipping quality, let alone 63,000.
>
> : >, cannot scale to Hotmail-style services,
> :
> : lie
>
> Heh? If it does, why does Hotmail continue to be based on Solaris,
FreeBSD,
> Apache and Qmail? MSFT has tried (several times I might add) to
transition
> Hotmail to an NT based platform, only to fail miserably every single time.
> You can't dispute that, it's the documented truth.
>
> : > is expensive to buy,
> :
> : depends if you live in your mom's basement and think the #1 reason linux
is
> : good is because it's all free
> : but to anyone with a job, W2K is not expensive.
>
> Heh again. $319 for a license for the desktop version of Windows 2000
just
> feels like gang rape. Done much time, Drestin?
>
> : >encourages users to run as root,
> :
> : lie
>
> Oh?
>
> http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q243/3/47.asp
>
> I installed Windows 2000 on my mother's computer, rather than subject her
> to the crashing nightmare that is Windows 98. She wants to change ISPs,
> so I told her to run the Internet Connection Wizard so she can get
> all of her settings changed. She can't do it. She's a normal user,
> not a power user, not an administrator.
>
> If that's not encouragement to run as "root", or administrator, what is?
>
> : > is a virus haven,
> :
> : lie
>
> Which is why there are maybe 5 or 6 viruses that affect Linux/Unix
systems,
> but thousands that can affect Windows 95/98/NT/2000? Hmm.. Sounds like a
> haven to me...
>
> : >and is an administrative nightmare of endless
> : > clicks and check boxes.
> :
> : as opposed to an administrative nightmate of endless command lines,
scripts
> : and man lookups?
>
> The other day, I swapped someone's video card at the office. I removed
> a TNT card, and replaced it with a Voodoo3 3000. The machine dual boots
> Windows 2000 and Linux Mandrake 7.0. Aside from the crack the case,
unscrew
> and unseat, reseat and rescrew, and close the case, here's what
transpired.
>
> Windows 2000:
>
> 1) Boot up, and get 640x480x16 colors.
> 2) Download drivers from 3dfx, unzip.
> 3) Right click on desktop, get display properties, go to settings the
> settings tab, hit the advanced button, go to the adapter tab, hit the
> properties button, go to the driver tab, upgrade driver, hit next,
> display a list of known..., have disk, browse, select, choose my card
> from the list of options, answer several questions about digital
signing
> and OEM drivers, reboot, and finally choose my res/color depth.
>
> Linux Mandrake 7.0:
>
> 1) Boot the machine, and kudzu tells me that it noticed the TNT is gone,
> agree to let it remove the config for the TNT. Kudzu then tells me
that
> it sees a new Voodoo3. Let it configure the card.
> 2) Insert the Mandrake 7.0 CD as prompted. Watch it automatically install
> the 3dfx Voodoo3 X-Server.
> 3) Watch the machine finish booting. X comes right up, 1280x1024x32bpp,
> just as it was configured when the box had the TNT inside.
>
> Both 3 steps, but the third step on Windows 2000 sure was long and
arduous.
> You might say, an administrative nightmare of endless clicks, check boxes
> and radio buttons. The Linux side involved pressing the "enter" key
twice,
> just to confirm the removal of the TNT and addition of the Voodoo3.
>
> --
> Jason Costomiris <><
> Technologist, cryptogeek, human.
> jcostom {at} jasons {dot} org | http://www.jasons.org/
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
