Linux-Advocacy Digest #679, Volume #25 Fri, 17 Mar 00 23:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux Virus Info Enclosed ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: An Illuminating Anecdote ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: An Illuminating Anecdote ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or Linux
(John Jensen)
Re: An Illuminating Anecdote ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: An Illuminating Anecdote (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: An Illuminating Anecdote ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux Virus Info Enclosed (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: (Michael
Paquette)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or Linux
(Matt Kennel)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Virus Info Enclosed
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 02:44:11 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Mr. Rupert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Chad Myers wrote:
>>
>> "Tim Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> Wow... where to start with this one...
>>
>> > It doesn't make a difference really. A default user can fuck up
>> > an NT system so bad that it won't run.
>>
>> False Statement #1
>
> You are dead wrong Mister!
M$ security (whether local user or remote access) is an
oxymoron. Doesn't anyone remember their 'fix' for a problem with their
proxy server (I think it was to allow netmeeting connections but can't
remember for sure) where they said you should open up ports 1k - 64k!
Unglaublich!!!
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 20:40:20 -0600
A transfinite number of monkeys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> 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.
Please provide a reference to anywhere that calls these "functionality
impairing bugs".
The real text says that it's 28,000 *POTENTIAL* real issues. Not that they
ARE real issues, let alone "impairing".
One of those bugs could be "Misspelled text in dialog box". How is that
impairing?
> 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.
There is no evidence to back up the assertion that MS has tried even once,
let alone "several times" to migrate to a completely NT system for Hotmail.
Where is this documentation? The only people claiming this have only
"unnamed sources close to Hotmail".
But still, why hasn't MS done the migration? Probably because they're
waiting for IA64. Solaris is a 64 bit system, not easily replaced by 32 bit
systems. For pure I/O, you'd want 64 bit processing.
> : 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?
When you pay an admin $100,000 a year, $319 is not very much.
> : >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.
normal users are restricted from making changes to network protocols or file
shares. Why would you want your normal users screwing around with that?
The idea of a normal user is that they aren't allowed to change any
administration settings.
> If that's not encouragement to run as "root", or administrator, what is?
A Power user is not root. Hell, an Administrator is not root either, as in
the Unix style.
In unix, a root user has full access and can do anything with any file.
Administrators are bound by the same rights as everyone else is and cannot
modify other users files without first taking ownership of them.
> 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...
Very few viruses effect NT/2000. More than Linux, sure. But a tiny
fraction of those that effect 95/98.
> 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.
[long story of swapping TNT card removed].
There is a much simpler solution. Remove the Video driver before removing
the card, power down, remove card, power up, let Windows 2000 auto-detect
the video card. Done.
> 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.
So, you don't know what you're doing.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An Illuminating Anecdote
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 20:42:22 -0600
abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8auahk$ils$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Visual C++ has a command line compiler, which is called by the IDE. You
> > don't need to use the IDE or MFC to use this. You don't seem to know
what
> > you're talking about.
>
> I think its very sweet that you use Visual C++. Just dont mistake
yourself
> for an actual programmer.
I use all sorts of tools, one of which is Visual C++.
Don't mistake yourself for an actual thinking person.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An Illuminating Anecdote
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 20:46:25 -0600
abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8auat9$ils$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What exactly is the difference between the OS crashing, and X crashing?
In
> > both cases you will lose all the open apps and the work you were doing
with
> > no chance of saving it.
>
> Oh really now? You need to stop thinking in windows terms.
You need to come up with a rational argument.
> When X crashes on me, pretty much the only thing I lose is netscape. I
> run everything else in xterms or rxvts or something inside SCREEN.
So because Netscape is the only X app you run, you think this is normal for
everyone else? People use things like Star Office, Applix, even EMacs has X
functionality.
> > Uptimes matter little if you still lose all your work due to buggy apps
and
> > GUI's.
>
> I never lose my work to buggy apps and GUIs, because I know exactly what
> I'm doing.
Yes, you know that X is unstable and shouldn't be used for real work.
------------------------------
From: John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or
Linux
Date: 18 Mar 2000 02:46:03 GMT
Terry Wilcox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: I was thinking about this earlier, how we have to take Usenet users at
: their word for the experience and knowledge. [...]
[going a bit off-topic]
I don't really like posts that use experience or knowledge as proof in
themselves. For the reasons you state, they are too questionable a claim
on the USENET. I find it a much more convincing evidence of experiance
and knowledge when someone lays out the data they are using, and
step-by-step, works their way up to the conclusions they draw.
I learn a lot from such posts, and appreciate them greatly.
John
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An Illuminating Anecdote
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 20:55:41 -0600
JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Visual C++ runs on Windows and *only* on Windows. GCC has been ported
to
> >> nearly every computer I can think of (and probably more that I've never
> >> heard of). Furthermore, Visual C++ is inseperable from its atrocious
> >> IDE and MFC underpinnings, both of which are disasters. Molest me not
> >> with your idiotic Visual C++ maunderings. Windows programmers with a
> >> clue use Borland C++ Builder (or Cygwin and GCC!).
> >
> >Visual C++ has a command line compiler, which is called by the IDE. You
> >don't need to use the IDE or MFC to use this. You don't seem to know
what
> >you're talking about.
>
> Much of what code value Visual C++ delivers is indeed imbedded
> in the IDE. The compiler itself (msvc) is typically not what
> is claimed to be functionally superior to gcc and friends by
> NT boosters.
It was stated that Visual C++ was "inseperable" from the IDE. That was
false. It was stated that it's also inseperable from MFC. That's also
false.
And Visual C++ has been proven to generate significantly faster and better
optimized code (the compiler, not the IDE) than GCC, although I haven't seen
any benchmarks from 2.95.
> >> If you think Office and Internet Exploiter are great products, feel
free
> >> to suffer with them for the rest of your miserable, drone-like life.
We
> >> want something better. If we don't like StarOffice (I don't), we use
Abi
> >> Word or WordPerfect for word-processing, Gnumeric or Wingz for
> >spreadsheets,
> >> and so on. And *our* software is Free; we didn't have to rip a CD from
a
> >> Warez board because we couldn't afford the usurious fees M$ charges for
> >> Office.
> >
> >Not all of it is free, especially if used commercially. QT costs in
excess
> >of $1000 for commercial use, and that's just a GUI toolkit.
>
> That product is rather the exception than the rule.
It was claimed that all Linux software is free. That is false.
> Everything else mentioned above is cheaper than it's Win32
> payware counterparts, especially msoffice.
You get what you pay for.
> StarOffice is just plain gratis.
It used to be free for non-commercial use. Has that changed? I haven't
looked at it since Sun took over. In any event, it doesn't do 1/10th of
what Office does. You may not need that other 90%, but there are people
that do. They don't all need every part of that 90%, but most people need
something of it, just not the same parts everyone else needs.
> >> > which did simply exited if the condition occurred. Even the X Windows
> >> > server does not properly handle failed allocations, and simply exits
> >> > (bringing down the entire desktop along with it) when the condition
> >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >> but doesn't crash the whole OS, as happens with Windows
> >
> >What exactly is the difference between the OS crashing, and X crashing?
In
>
> Everything not X keeps on chugging along quite nicely. This means
> that if you view X as a problem you can isolate certain applications
> from it.
While Linux has a significant number of useful non-X apps, more and more X
apps are coming down the pipe. It's not hard to imagine that in the not too
distant future, most users will be using more X than anything else. So, if
X crashes, it takes down the majority of their programs.
> >Uptimes matter little if you still lose all your work due to buggy apps
and
> >GUI's.
>
> Oddly enough, I seem to have more problems of that kind under NT,
> despite the fact that the apps I run under NT are presumably
> 'more production' than the ones I run under Linux.
They're also many times more complex than a typical Linux app. But we're
talking about the GUI, not the apps.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: An Illuminating Anecdote
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 02:53:31 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, B'ichela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Fri, 17 Mar 2000 17:50:31 -0500
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Fri, 17 Mar 2000 07:52:50 -0600, mr_organic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>You need to put down that giant crack pipe you've been smoking and take
>>a look at the market. Linux has grown so enormously in the last couple
>>of years because Windows apps *are not* superior, especially on the
>>server side. Windows is a buggy, obscure, badly-designed mess.
> Let us not forget OBSOLETE! Windows products from Microsoft
>are outdated in their design paradign. Almost every product is based
>on an Obsolete Single User Operating system model called MS-DOS. While
>I DO use DR-Dos 7.02 on my Xts, I don't expect to have the security
>and multitasking that one can expect from an operating system that
>was built from the beginning with those in mind.
Personally, I'm not sure if this makes Win32 obsolete, or just different.
I will note, however, that the Win32 API is a bit of a mess. While
it's chock full o' features (in particular, one can do all kinds of
nice stuff with text positioning -- X Window's text positioning by
comparision is pretty basic, although one can use XTextExtents() to
compute equivalents as required), it's also rather operating system
dependent.
For example, GetLastError() in Win95 seems to be rather irrelevant to
Windows 16-type calls, and the documentation in Visual C++ 6.0
states to ignore it. (Yeah, there's a good, solid, portable mechanism!)
To be fair, one can check OS, but that's a bit ugly; in X, one
usually doesn't have to do that, at least not at runtime.
X Windows, by contrast, hasn't changed horribly much in its basics,
although new stuff has been added.
And I can't say why MulDiv() is in there. Very odd stuff!
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An Illuminating Anecdote
Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 20:58:31 -0600
Bob Hauck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >While X isn't technically part of the OS, it's an OS-like component
> >because so many apps depend on it to run.
>
> And you know what? It is very rare that it fails. I can count the times
> a installed and working X server has crashed on me in the last five years
> on the fingers of one hand.
Don't run Netscape very often, do you? ;)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Virus Info Enclosed
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 03:00:02 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Fri, 17 Mar 2000 14:07:19 -0600 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>"Mr. Rupert" wrote:
>
>> > According to Microsoft, Windows 2000 Professional may hang after you
>> > install Microsoft IntelliPoint 2.2. Microsoft says that pressing
>> > CTRL-ALT-DELETE will not help. To resolve this problem, Microsoft
>> > says you have to reinstall Windows 2000 Professional.
>>
>> This one is a real beaut and will forever keep Microsoft OSs in
>> the Mickey Mouse league.
>
>Misleading and totally untrue. You don't have to reinstall at
>all, what you have to do is pick through the registry for 70+
>hours looking for the right things to delete.
Heh!
I think I know which one I'd rather do, admittedly. I certainly
hope that one can in fact back up the registry, though.
(It is a file, after all...one big gigantic super-modified something
or other database of whatever's in there. The question might be
how one restores it, of course...)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Today's term is, "single point of failure"...
------------------------------
From: Michael Paquette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 03:20:38 GMT
JEDIDIAH wrote:
>
> Do you have any idea what it would take to reverse engineer
> a video encoding scheme. Unless you do, you have no business
> whining that such a feat should have been achieved already.
Well, one does have to understand the subject. It's not
particularly hard, though. The biggest need is for lots and lots of
patience, and a willingness to discard approaches as they fail.
> >
> >In the meantime, go watch Willy Wonka and see which of the
> >characters you most resemble.
>
> Go fuck yourself, corporate bootlicker.
>
Gosh, he types real purty.
Great way to win friends and influence people. Your pearls of
wisdom will live on for years in DejaNews.
> Go somewhere else to live out your vision of
> a corporate serf's paradise.
'corporate serf's paradise'
Huh. I'm beginning to think we're trying to reason with an
intellectual giant who doesn't actually work for a living. Perhaps
someday when he moves out of his parent's house and has to buy his
own computer his attitude will change.
Mike Paquette
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Kennel)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or
Linux
Date: 18 Mar 2000 03:34:16 GMT
Reply-To: mbkennel@<REMOVE THE BAD DOMAIN>yahoo.spam-B-gone.com
On 17 Mar 2000 13:55:06 -0600, Jonathan W Hendry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:In comp.sys.next.advocacy JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:
:> This is why we chuckle at Apple when they claim to give away
:> BSD and not their hypocrisy when they do so the day after the
:> first TPM trailer was snugly vendorlocked away from anyone
:> who contributed to the BSD codebase.
:
:How tragic that people were kept from viewing the trailer for
:a bad movie. Tragic.
:
:However, as has been explained, the codec is the issue, and
:that isn't Apple's to give away.
True. If Apple decided it was a significant enough problem
1) buy a competing codec and free it
2) write a new codec
3) buy out Sorenson and free it
4) pay Sorenson to free the specs
You can substitute IBM,VAlinux,Redhat,FSF etc for Apple in the above as well.
--
* Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
*
* "To chill, or to pop a cap in my dome, whoomp! there it is."
* Hamlet, Fresh Prince of Denmark.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
