Linux-Advocacy Digest #655, Volume #25 Thu, 16 Mar 00 15:13:11 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux Sucks************************* ([EMAIL PROTECTED],net)
Re: which OS is best? (Peter Ammon)
Re: which OS is best? (JEDIDIAH)
Re: My Windows 2000 experience ([EMAIL PROTECTED],net)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: Darwin or Linux
(JEDIDIAH)
Re: C2 question (abraxas)
Re: C2 question (abraxas)
Re: C2 question (abraxas)
Re: C2 question ("Chad Myers")
Re: Bsd and Linux (Pjtg0707)
Re: C2 question ("Chad Myers")
Re: C2 question ("Drestin Black")
Re: hot news: Corel Linux and Intel, Linux the next desktop OS!! ("Chad Myers")
Re: A pox on the penguin? (Linux Virus Epidemic) ("Mr. Rupert")
Re: Question (George Richard Russell)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED],net
Subject: Re: Linux Sucks*************************
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 18:52:47 GMT
On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 18:35:59 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
wrote:
>On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 02:47:45 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED],net
><[EMAIL PROTECTED],net> wrote:
>>On 15 Mar 2000 17:13:50 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (david parsons)
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>> And even on the new machine, it doesn't recognise the Logitech
>>> scrolling mouse I've got.
>>>
>>
>>Win98 SE does fine with MY Logitech ScrollMouse Model M-BA47 (on the
>>bottom).
>>
>>Win98 regular did fine with the diskettes that came with mouse. You
>>DID try them didn't you?
>
> What if the user doesn't have those disks anymore. This actually
> turned up with one of the inlaws. Once they lost a driver disk
> they were rather at a loss.
http://www.logitech.com
Is your friend.
Oh BTW even without the drivers the mouse does function. It is just
the advanced functions that don't work. IOW you are not left mouse
less. You still have a 2 button mouse.
One last thing. Does your wheelmouse function, wheel and all, under
ANY Linux distribution right out of the box without having to use
IMWheel or some similar program?
Corel, Caldera, SuSE, TurboLinux current versions of all do not and
last time I looked there were no Logitech Linux drivers included with
the product (no surprise there) and you had to depend upon a program
another person wrote to get all the features you paid for.
Typical Linux.
>[deletia]
>
> For this kind of user, a reference version that is no less than
> 6 months old makes much more sense. Linux and FreeBSD deliver
> such a thing, Microsoft won't.
What kind of double speak is that?
IOW what are you trying to say?
Steve
------------------------------
From: Peter Ammon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 13:56:07 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Christopher Smith wrote:
>
> Uh huh.
> Please explain which superior products they killed (and how).
Go. They displayed an interest in developing software for Go's
handheld, then had their engineers get all the information they could
and never called Go again. Microsoft then announced their own handheld,
based on Palm Windows, and strong-armed Compaq and some other OEMs who
were interested in working with Go to drop the relationship. When it
became apparent that Go was no longer viable, Microsoft dropped
development of Palm Windows...if they ever developed it at all.
> Please explain how they set computing back 5 - 10 years.
> Please explain how they rammed anything down your throats.
Internet Explorer! Have you forgotten so soon?
-Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 18:54:58 GMT
On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 18:52:20 +0100, Olivier Borgeaud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The windows gui
>> is pathetic IMNHO. It lacks consistency
>
>This one is the best !
>
>ok, let's have a look on KDE or gnome ... Very consistent ;>)) Specially wen
>you want to configure hardware in control pannel !
A *cpl is not a part of the GUI actually. So you're simultaneously
showing your ignorance of both Windows AND Linux. Furthemore, you're
representing such *cpls in general, on both platforms, by implying
that they somehow are tightly integrated wrt the fluffier bells and
whistles of either GUI.
>
>Please, I also use linux, but only because I am intersted with (old)
>technologies. I found Linux so complicated that in fact, it is a very nice
>way to understand how computer works, process, scheduler, etc...
I've never needed such understanding on a daily use basis even
Slackware was my prefered OS. While some PC XT arcana was
necessary, I learned that by using Windows not by using Slackware.
>
>Try to make a document with 400 pages with Staroffice or Applixware ... You
>will see how bad it works. Try to scroll the text... It takes alot of time,
I wouldn't want to make such a document with msword either.
The TeX jockeys here will gladly point out the errors of
your presumptions here.
[deletia]
Go back to your bridge.
--
|||
Resistance is not futile. / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED],net
Subject: Re: My Windows 2000 experience
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 18:59:52 GMT
On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 18:36:31 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
wrote:
>>It only counts for people who are capable of downloading
>>a file from the Web.
>
> That leaves out a lot of Windows users... <snicker>
Or people who would rather be running the latest video drivers for
their cards under Windows, instead of down loading anywhere from 12 to
25 files just to get Xfree 4.0.
http://www.xfree.org/4.0/Install2.html#2
For the brave at heart :)
Is True Type and font aliasing/smoothing finally supported out of the
box?
Steve
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
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: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 18:58:29 GMT
On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 03:31:54 GMT, Sal Denaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, 15 Mar 2000 01:13:00 GMT, JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Based on what? Have you seen the QT code? Do you know how portable or
>>>non portable it is?
>>
>> Mucking about in DVD players and MPEG decoders. I've also
>> mucked about in other interesting things but if I told
>> you about them, I would have to kill you.
>>
>> Wouldn't be a great loss though.
>>
>
>QT isn't a decoder. It isn't a program for playing movies. There is
Yes it is actually. There's a lot of file type abstraction
cruft but the essential funcition of the thing, eventually,
is to implement codecs.
>a lot more to it that that. Feel free to read Michael Paquette's post
>for a more in depth analysis of what is needed to play QT movies on
>Linux.
When the codec is not being hoarded by two companies in each
other's pockets, I've always just been able to use Xanim.
[deletia]
That fellow's quicktime project was/is redundant, especially
without any access to the more interesting codecs.
--
|||
Resistance is not futile. / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: C2 question
Date: 16 Mar 2000 19:00:40 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Note that the only OSen listed are versions of Trusted XENIX.
> It takes a special OS to make B2, as it requires things like the kernel's
> ability to detect and prevent inserting opcode, or code to derivate from
> it's originaly intended path of execution, etc.
There are also quite a few rules of physical access that must be considered
prior to B2 (and higher) certifications. Physical access rules increase in
amount and complexity as you go from there.
Also, B2 and higher systems cannot be networked in a traditional matter.
They CAN be networked, but to do so requires dedicated access connections...
(e.g., imagine a sparc ultra-5 with a PRI card and a dedicated PRI line
for all access...depending on how this sort of thing is implemented, many
dozens of layers of security can be utilized--this would be a method
of networking that, depending on implementation, could be acceptable under
B2 classification)
> Don't ask me more, because I don't know :) But I just know that B2 is a
> special system that would only be used in some of the highest levels of
> government guarding grave secrets of national security.
Its used in the private sector too, here and there. You find that level
of security utilized very often in large telcos and major backbone
providers. Ever get a chance to remotely program a DMS-500 switch for
a large telco? The security is quite often very nice...:)
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: C2 question
Date: 16 Mar 2000 19:02:47 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "George Marengo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> I've read recently that in its current form, Linux not only isn't C2
>> compliant, but that it cannot be C2 compliant because it doesn't
>> have Access Control Lists and auditing on ACL's -- it only has file
>> based permissions.
>>
>> Further, C2 certified Unix implementations have been "Trusted"
>> versions; i.e., no standard off the shelf Unix OS's have been C2
>> certified, as is the case with NT (various versions)
>>
>> I know that file permissions are the basis for the security model
>> in Linux, but I thought it also had ACL's.
> One of the major C2 criteria is that the OS have DAC (Discretionary
> Access Control) which consists of many things, one of which is
> ACLs on files and other resources (like the Registry, printers, etc).
One of the things that you appear to be missing is that classifications
HIGHER than C2 are not additive. Just because C2 classification
requires discretionary access control does NOT mean that the
classifications above it do also.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: C2 question
Date: 16 Mar 2000 19:08:57 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The DAC subsystem shan anow users to specify the list of individuals or
> groups of individuals who can access each object. The list shan additionally
> specify the mode(s) of access that is anowed each user or group. This implies
> that access control lists associated with each object is the only acceptable
> mechanism to satisfy the DAC/D3 requirement.
> =======================
> -END QUOTE-
> How can you specify a list of groups that have access to a specific file,
> for example?
Give group read/write/excecute access to that file, chgrp the file to the
group in question.
> If I have three groups: Accounting, Marketing, and Production, and they have
> different needs for this file. Let's say it's an annual sales report that
> Accounting has read/write/modify, Marketing has Read-only, and Production has
> Read-Only, in NT/2K I would do:
> Accounting: Read, Write, Modify
> Marketing: Read (Deny write for extra security)
> Production: Read (Deny write for extra security)
> How would I do this with the OWNER/GROUP/OTHERS methodology?
Youd do it with Sudo. But its a dumb thing to do, and it doesnt have much
to do with discretionary access as defined in the above mentioned document.
> What about Auditing? Can you audit a specific user's actions on a specific
> file when excercised through a group?
Yes, you can do this with Sudo.
> If John was a member of Marketing, and he attempted to write to the file,
> would it record a failure audit for Marketing, or a failure audit for
> John?
Either one. You can do this with Sudo.
> Can you do explicit Deny? And when I mean Deny, I don't mean to NOT give
> someone permissions, I mean, explicitly disallow them from accessing a
> resource? This is a requirement of C2.
Yes. You can do this with both file permissions and Sudo.
But what we're really talking about here is Unix, not linux. This sort of
access classification is common to most unices, including linux. Sudo is
an extremely handy utility.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: C2 question
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 13:17:02 -0600
"abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8arb0o$1d47$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Note that the only OSen listed are versions of Trusted XENIX.
>
> > It takes a special OS to make B2, as it requires things like the kernel's
> > ability to detect and prevent inserting opcode, or code to derivate from
> > it's originaly intended path of execution, etc.
>
> There are also quite a few rules of physical access that must be considered
> prior to B2 (and higher) certifications. Physical access rules increase in
> amount and complexity as you go from there.
>
> Also, B2 and higher systems cannot be networked in a traditional matter.
> They CAN be networked, but to do so requires dedicated access connections...
> (e.g., imagine a sparc ultra-5 with a PRI card and a dedicated PRI line
> for all access...depending on how this sort of thing is implemented, many
> dozens of layers of security can be utilized--this would be a method
> of networking that, depending on implementation, could be acceptable under
> B2 classification)
>
> > Don't ask me more, because I don't know :) But I just know that B2 is a
> > special system that would only be used in some of the highest levels of
> > government guarding grave secrets of national security.
>
> Its used in the private sector too, here and there. You find that level
> of security utilized very often in large telcos and major backbone
> providers. Ever get a chance to remotely program a DMS-500 switch for
> a large telco? The security is quite often very nice...:)
>
Ah... well there you have it. An OS like NT, 2000, Linux, or any other
common type OS could never really be considered for B2, but they do different
things, so it's not really a failing, it's just a different functionality.
Thanks for educating us all on B2 =)
-Chad
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pjtg0707)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Bsd and Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 19:20:50 GMT
On Thu, 16 Mar 2000 21:03:01 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Borland support Linux alredy, and are working on CBuilder and Delphi for Linux, and
>interbase and JBuilder alredy realsed. From the polls they did, it seems that Delphi
>and CBuilder will build the apps using GTK+, so develop on Delphi/CBuilder, and
>compile anywhere where there is GTK+, and (I guess) a Borland compiler. Also, they
>will make theyre products source-code compatible with Windows Borland products. So I
>guess we can see many Windows products come to Linux just because of this. Take a
>look at Borland site.
>
>--
>Best regads,
> David Tabachnikov (NetHunter)
>Please sign the Linux driver petition at http://www.libranet.com/petition.html
>
>
>
I wonder if Microsoft will be far behind should such massive migration
takes place. They can probably buy everyone out.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: C2 question
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 13:22:06 -0600
"abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8arbg9$1d47$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > How can you specify a list of groups that have access to a specific file,
> > for example?
>
> Give group read/write/excecute access to that file, chgrp the file to the
> group in question.
So that would allow you to have more than one group have permissions to a
file? What if you wanted 3 groups?
>
> > Accounting: Read, Write, Modify
> > Marketing: Read (Deny write for extra security)
> > Production: Read (Deny write for extra security)
>
> > How would I do this with the OWNER/GROUP/OTHERS methodology?
>
> Youd do it with Sudo. But its a dumb thing to do, and it doesnt have much
> to do with discretionary access as defined in the above mentioned document.
Are you kidding? ACLs are at the heart of DAC. Being able to EASILY add
users, groups, and other types of authenticated resources to a permissions
list for a given resource are necessary for fine grained access control.
Using a bunch of backhanded techniques is not only difficult and obtrusive,
but it's plain silly for something that seems so natural.
"I have a file, I want this guy, that guy, this group, and that group to have
access to this file, but this guy should only have read, and this group should
have modify"
> > What about Auditing? Can you audit a specific user's actions on a specific
> > file when excercised through a group?
>
> Yes, you can do this with Sudo.
What, exactly does sudo do? And how come, on an average RH 6.0 install, I can't
seem to find the sudo command anywhere?
> > Can you do explicit Deny? And when I mean Deny, I don't mean to NOT give
> > someone permissions, I mean, explicitly disallow them from accessing a
> > resource? This is a requirement of C2.
>
> Yes. You can do this with both file permissions and Sudo.
You can explicitly deny one person, and explicitly allow another?
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: C2 question
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 14:21:37 -0500
"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> George Marengo wrote:
> >
> > I've read recently that in its current form, Linux not only isn't C2
> > compliant, but that it cannot be C2 compliant because it doesn't
> > have Access Control Lists and auditing on ACL's -- it only has file
> > based permissions.
> >
> > Further, C2 certified Unix implementations have been "Trusted"
> > versions; i.e., no standard off the shelf Unix OS's have been C2
> > certified, as is the case with NT (various versions)
> >
> > I know that file permissions are the basis for the security model
> > in Linux, but I thought it also had ACL's.
>
> AFAIK, there is no such thing as "of the shelf" C2 compliance. An
> install, as built, may be evaluated to be C2 compliant, a precise
> specification of an install may result in a C2 compliant system, but a
> software package, in a box is not. So, no, Windows NT is not C2
> compliant "off the shelf." A particular installation of NT may have been
> evaluated to be C2 compliant, but NT as a whole can not be.
No OS can be. Only specific configurations are C2 certified, not particular
installations.
>
> As for whether or not Linux can be C2 compliant, I don't know. It is
> unclear to me whether or not NT can be C2 compliant while still offering
> networked services.
NT 4 has been C2 WITH and without networking.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: hot news: Corel Linux and Intel, Linux the next desktop OS!!
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 13:23:50 -0600
"abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8arad4$1d47$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> BTW, you might want to think twice before you say something like "BestBuy
> (where the more informed consumer shops)". In my opinion, informed consumers
> shop mostly online and in specialized computer stores like Microcenter.
>
> Circuit City and BestBuy are hardly acceptable to informed consumers.
Notice I said "more informed" More informed does not necessarily = totally
informed.
You would have to admit that the guy who buys computer related stuff from
BestBuy or CompUSA has a *little* more clue than the guy who buys from
Wal-Mart, yes?
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Mr. Rupert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A pox on the penguin? (Linux Virus Epidemic)
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 13:18:31 -0600
Drestin Black wrote:
>
I hope you are not comparing a super user knowingly installing step
by step a program containing a virus to that of a virus showing up in
Windows as an email attachment.
In your examples below, 'rm' could be classified a virus.
You are quite the idiot, today.
Mr Rupert
> Ready or not, Linux viruses are coming, and no one is inoculated.
>
> http://www.securityfocus.com/commentary/2
>
> How to get infected using Linux...
> by ralmeida
>
> calvin:~$ wget http://somesite/happy99.tar.gz
> calvin:~$ tar zxf happy9.tar.gz
> calvin:~$ cd happy99
> calvin:~$ ./configure
> calvin:~$ make
> calvin:~$ su
> calvin:~$ make install
> calvin:~$ exit
> calvin:~$ happy99
> You must be root to run this program
> calvin:~$ su
> calvin:~$ happy99
> (ops!)
>
> Re:How to get infected using Linux...
> by QuantumG ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> (User Info) http://www.virusexchange.org/vlad/
>
> hehe.. more like:
>
> calvin:~$ wget http://somesite/pointlessgadget.tgz
> calvin:~$ tar -xzvf pointlessgadget.tgz
> calvin:~$ cd pointlessgadget
> calvin:~$ ./configure
> calvin:~$ make
> calvin:~$ ./pointlessgadget
>
> "that was boring.. I'm gunna go shoot stuff"
>
> calvin:~$ su
> calvin:~$ /usr/leet/leetgame
>
> pointlessgadget was infected with a virus.. when you ran the virus it
> infected every one of your running processes, including your shell. You su'd
> to root and it peaked at your psuedoterminal to snarf the root password. It
> then su'd to root and infected every running process on the machine. You
> then ran leetgame and the virus infected it. Next you'll probably run 'ls'
> and then it's all over.
>
> Fiction? You can do it using ptrace.
> You can read about it here(some linux viruses are at the bottom of this
> link - feel free to experiment):
>
> http://www.big.net.au/~silvio/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (George Richard Russell)
Subject: Re: Question
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2000 19:27:25 GMT
On Wed, 15 Mar 2000 11:10:56 -0600, Codifex Maximus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> What makes Linux a good operating system?
The features it provides, and the way in which it provides them.
Multitasking, memory protection, multiuser, etc...
>Linux operates the system like an operating system should.
>> What are it's advantages and disadvantages/problems?
>Linux advantages:
>Stability, access to the source code, freedom from the whims of one
>corporate entity, and a gigantic community of users who love to help.
Yup.
>Simple install procedures.
Oh yeah? Seen dselect? pkgtool? The prettified fdisks? Where to install lilo?
What to install? what is a caching dns server, and why should I care? etc..
Linux is large and complex. Its (various) install methods are complex because
of the range of types of install and targets for install.
Move from curses to X didn't magically simplify things.
>Powerful UNIX type command structure.
Some (novices) find this a liability. Lack of a consistent GUI etc.
>Linux disadvantages:
>Umm... Uh... Hmmm... that is a good question.
>Linux requires that you be ready to learn something.
Its fussy about hardware support.
Its inconsistently, and often, innacurately documented.
Its extremely configurable (without sanity checking what changes you make)
Its not designed as a desktop OS - all desktop features are effectively
retrofitted - or missing. Font / Printer support, 3d graphics, 3d sound, GUI
control applets, etc.
Lack of packaged software ( slowly improving )
>> What are Windows' advantages and disadvantages/problems?
>Windows' advantages:
>Widespread use and availability of packaged software.
>The possibility that Windows *MAY* successfully configure itself to the
>point where it *MAY* be usable.
Note that linux has some rudimentary plug n play capability - video cards, net
cards, some soundcards - not to Windows extent, but improving.
>It's easy to reinstall.
No its not! I have to find the DOS 6 boot disk with CD driver each time.
>Windows' disadvantages:
>Being under the explicit control of one corporate entity.
One source of support, information, and bug fixes.
>Being a platform with which the user can be forced to upgrade software
>on a regular basis even though the old software provided all the
>functionality perceived as needed.
StarOffice on Linux needs updated to read new formats, just as Office on Win
would.
How many Linux users use Netscape 3, since 4 (despite bugs, performance
problems etc) has better Java / CSS / rendering, and of course Linux users
will jump to Mozilla / v5 for better java, stronger crypto, faster rendering
etc. Everyone updates, especially desktop systems in constant use.
>You can only imagine what is going on in it's innards.
Thats too scary.
>Programmed incompatibilities with software produced by competitors of
>the one corporate entity that owns the operating system.
As opposed to Linuxes no backwards compatibility - why there is Netscape
for Linux 1.2 and 2.0 (i.e. different vers) and binary compatibility is often
poorly handled.
>Being used as a vehicle with which to co-opt the standards processes
>towards the goal of perpetuating the financial benefit enjoyed by the
>one corporate entity.
>Lack of diversity in the interface.
As opposed to too much (uneeded / unwanted / pointless) diversity. Xt / Motif /
TK/ Qt / GTK / Xforms / some more / + curses etc.
>> Why Linux will (or possibly won't) replace Windows, and when?
>Linux gives users freedom from being the vassals of the one corporate
>entity.
Several Linux vendors will compete for your fealty.
>Linux levels the playing field for all competitors be they Hardware or
>Software players.
i.e. any smart performance / feature hacks in contributed drivers to
Linux will be seen and copied by your competitors. HAND.
Or binary old drivers will earn you more trouble than praise.
>Linux promises Software innovation that rivals the speed of Hardware
>innovation - and proceeds without the constraints placed on it by one
>corporate entity.
It still looks like avery old OS, and trails hardware innovation by 3 to 6
months till drivers are written.
Compared to some rival OS's, it is not especially innovative - its playing
catch up to various others in several markets (thats the innovative thing, to
chase both server / desktop / embedded os in one)
>Linux opens many doors for scalable computing such that the hobbyist can
>build a supercomputer in his/her basement and delve into the mysteries
>that were the former exclusive domain of well funded organizations.
With expensive fast hardware. Like a moderately large network.
>Linux lowers costs on a grand scale when it's cost is factored into the
>needs of a large userbase.
Add a bunch of retraining, and the salary of the admin(s) which are usually
high for Unix trained admins.
>There are no hard limits placed on the direction nor the extent to which
>Linux development can go.
Some areas however, remain conspicuously undelved into.
>> What competition between the two has occurred already?
>Largely in the server space. Linux is occupying installations that
>Microsoft wishes to target with NT.
To be cynical, both Linux and NT are growing in the same arena. Linux may be
pushing out NT in new systems, but it could also be pushing out SCO / BSDI /
Solaris x86. Its already finished minor x86 Unix varients, like Coherent.
The NT installs may be new systems in non Unix using arenas. Who knows?
>> What people should switch to Linux now (or who already has)?
>Anyone who values a dollar, freedom, peace of mind.
Any hobbiest / programmer / cash strapped / student
Novices / casual users / professional users without time to reatrain / no.
>> Anything else you might want to add.
>If all you want is to play games and pay regularly for something you
>have already paid for... Windows is for you.
If you care more for software than OS's, windows is for you.
>However, if you want to be someone who never has to worry if the
>computer is going to fail, a power user, programmer or competent
>computer scientist/technician then Linux is your OS right now. The
>everyday casual user is being accommodated so that if you are the game
>player... you are about to have your wishes come true in Linux.
In three or more years, said every year since 1998.
George Russell (registered Linux user 61117)
--
One ring to bring them all, and in the darkness bind them.
Lord of the Rings, J.R.R.Tolkien
Hey you, what do you see? Something beautiful, something free?
The Beautiful People, Marilyn Manson
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
