Linux-Advocacy Digest #770, Volume #25 Thu, 23 Mar 00 12:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Bsd and Linux (Paul Jakma)
Re: Iridium Tech Support (Was Re: . . . Itanium . .. (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
Re: Bsd and Linux (Paul Jakma)
Re: Weak points (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Iridium Tech Support (Was Re: . . . Itanium . .. (Jason McNorton)
Re: A pox on the penguin? (Linux Virus Epidemic) (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1] (Roger Blake)
Re: Packaging Tools (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Bsd and Linux ("Peter T. Breuer")
W2K aquired by 1 million (yawn) (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Absolute failure of Linux dead ahead? (Mario Klebsch)
Re: Weak points (JEDIDIAH)
New research question, this time about Apache ("Tom Steinberg")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Paul Jakma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Bsd and Linux
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 16:10:16 +0000
"Peter T. Breuer" wrote:
>
> No. You edit host.conf or nsswitch.conf, where the sequence of lookups
> is defined. Libc checks that.
>
using the Name Service Switch libraries. But NSS and PAM are
complementary. (ie PAM doesn't replace NSS).
NSS is designed to virtualise the implementation of some standard unix C
library calls. (ie for all apps).
PAM is an API specifically for apps that deal with authentication and
session mgt.
> Peter
-paul jakma
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Iridium Tech Support (Was Re: . . . Itanium . ..
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 17:08:52 +0100
Bryant Brandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yeah, but it was an aussie jackrabbit. So skylab just pissed it off.
> It went on to slaughter 8000 Aborigonies and some tourists before going
> to England and killing some Brits in olde armour. The issue was finally
> brought to rest with the Holy Hangrenade. Imagine a swarm of those
> beasts.
> On a related note: Anybody here seen the 80's remake of The Blob?
Did you ever see "Night of the Lepus"?
Lars T.
------------------------------
From: Paul Jakma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Bsd and Linux
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 16:20:00 +0000
"Peter T. Breuer" wrote:
>
> IMNSHO It's a layer of obscurantist nonsense, in typical sysV style.
with that kind of attitude you shouldn't be using NSS,
/etc/nsswitch.conf either. In fact you shouldn't use any dlls, eg C
library.
Do you code in assembler and manually setup syscalls?
> It plays
> on your ignorance. No, it is not better for you. Give me one concrete example
> of anything that needs PAM.
>
nothing /needs/ PAM.
However on a system without PAM all those apps you listed need to each
implement a lot of things to do with session mgt that go beyond the
services provided the C library.
eg is /etc/nologin present? Do i need to setup limits? Is the users
password too obvious? is condition xyz valid that i need to do abc? All
things that are not in the C library (thank god), but that are still
common to programmes that do authentification/session mgt.
Without PAM each app would need to check these things with it's own
code. A huge wasteful replication of effort, and a nightmare for
administrators.
With PAM that is all moved outside the apps, with attendant gain in
flexibility and ease of administration.
> Peter
-paul jakma.
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Weak points
Date: 23 Mar 2000 16:28:08 GMT
SetMeUp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: 1) Serious and easy modem/fax and printer support.
: (sendmail makes me laugh, postscript printers suck)
How are sendmail and modems related? You can't possibly
be serious about the "suck"ness of Postscript printers.
The price is higher in some cases, but so is the quality - not
to mention the interoperability. If I want to swap Postscript
printers, all I need to do is give it the IP of the old one and
my apps don't know the difference.
: 2) Coherent window manager configuration files and behaviour.
Most modern window managers use GUI-based configuration.
You shouldn't need to mess with the files unless you want to.
: 3) If easy installation methods are to be so, better go back text mode
: installations or else improve the so called "easy" installations, because
: really suck.
I've never used graphical distribution installers. As for
application installers, programs like gnorpm makes the process
virtually trivial.
: 4) Apart from saying that there's decent software lack, just point that
: the tries to make it (aka Staroffice) produce such a bloated software as you
: claim Microsoft Office and the kind are. I disagree, Microsoft Office is far
: ahead from Staroffice, not to mention Applixware, LyX (huuhuhu), ...
I don't use "office"-type software. Non-frontended LaTeX handles
my typesetting needs and I don't do spreadsheet work. Staroffice
didn't look terribly impressive last time I checked, but perhaps
Corel's WordPerfect suite is better. I just haven't had the
inclination to check. All the software I use runs best on
UNIX-like systems so IMHO Windows is the platform that needs to
catch up.
: 5) Games ... yeah yeah, not every one like the 10 decent games. And
If you count xmame, add about 1900 games to that - most perfectly
emulated and some quite recent. I prefer classics like Nethack, Tempest
or SF2Turbo, myself. Linux isn't a great gaming platform, but if
games are what you want, a PC is a pretty poor economical choice
anyway.
: besides, X11 was awful and slow,
Moore's Law has made X11 speedy, if a bit overdesigned.
X11 was fast for me 7 years ago on Sparc5s running fvwm.
X isn't slow, it's the desktop environments.
: perhaps XFree86 4.0 get it closer to Windows desktop,
XFree86 comes with no desktops. That's not its job.
: though I don't think so. KDE ? Don't make me laugh, have
: you ever tried to change an icon on a 350MHz and 256MB SDRAM machine, hehe,
: pitiful.
No. I don't run KDE. Or GNOME. And X runs very fast for me.
: By the way, I do not like Quake, any more ? Huhu
Eh? That's nice.
: 6) Serious internet tools : pine sucks, Netscape breaks more than Windows
: 3.11 and is awful and slow. Nothing like IE 5 (the browser) and Outlook
: Express (yeah yeah, virus are a problem ... but prefer them than slrn, tin,
: krn and such sucky tools).
You'd rather have viruses than a tool you don't care for? You can't
be serious. I prefer my data intact, thank you. And I certainly don't
consider IE (or Netscape) a "serious internet tool". If I want to
get serious, I'll use tools like wget to extract data from the internet.
If you want pretty applications, just say so.
: 7) Yeah yeah, Apache runs very well under Linux ... but do not forget
: that under Solaris, FreeBSD, and even NT/2K too, and besides, home users
: don't really need a web server. Is Linux offering anything to home users ?
: And be serious, do not tell me about BSOD's evey 5 minutes because Windows
: 2000 (and NT almost) has never frozen.
Don't get so defensive. And try not to go off on tangents.
Home users can't be lumped into a group because they all need
different things. Linux offers plenty to some, and little to others.
: 8) I am going to stop in here, and wait for your answers, I hope you to
: do it without FUD and with real arguments (if any).
You'll have to actually give some real arguments before any real
replies can be made. What started as a wish list has turned into
a defensive bash-fest, so there's not much more that can be said.
If you don't care for Linux, don't run it.
------------------------------
From: Jason McNorton <[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: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 10:20:50 -0600
In article =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Lars_Tr=E4ger?=, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
> Bryant Brandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Yeah, but it was an aussie jackrabbit. So skylab just pissed it off.
> > It went on to slaughter 8000 Aborigonies and some tourists before going
> > to England and killing some Brits in olde armour. The issue was finally
> > brought to rest with the Holy Hangrenade. Imagine a swarm of those
> > beasts.
> > On a related note: Anybody here seen the 80's remake of The Blob?
>
> Did you ever see "Night of the Lepus"?
Nightmares.. giant.. rabbits.. fangs.. AHHHH
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: A pox on the penguin? (Linux Virus Epidemic)
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 16:44:18 GMT
On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 23:38:07 -0500, Andrew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>JEDIDIAH wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 22 Mar 2000 20:34:56 -0500, Andrew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >I wasn't debating the fact that a 386 w. 4MB configuration was ideal for running
>> >a semi-modern GUI. It's not. My point is that X running on a box of this nature
>> >is bloated compared to the Microsoft product. The networking layers, for
>>
>> NO IT ISN'T.
>>
>> Win 3.x is just as slow and bloated and nasty as X is.
>
>Slow? Yes. Nasty? For sure. Usable? Quite, in that exact configuration. I've
>known people that actually used such a machine actively (with a 100MB HD) for 6
>years. That probably says a lot about them, but it was very active as their
>"school paper writing" machine for all that time. I doubt you could say the same
>thing for Linux running X on the same system.
This is simply hypocrisy. They are both the same kind of nasty.
[deletia]
--
So long as Apple uses Quicktime to effectively |||
make web based video 'Windows only' Club, / | \
Apple is no less monopolistic than Microsoft.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 16:48:16 GMT
On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 01:10:40 -0300, Francis Van Aeken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tony Houghton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> As long as Internet access isn't included in the BIOS, people will still
>> want their OS on disc :-).
>
>PCs will be able to boot off the Internet quite soon, and a lot of appliances
>have Internet access already built in (residing in ROM). Of course, CDs
>aren't dead *yet*.
The question is not whether or not you can but whether or not you
would want to. Various micros, even including PCs, have been able
to boot off of networks for quite some time actually. Some vendors
sell NICs for just this purpose.
--
So long as Apple uses Quicktime to effectively |||
make web based video 'Windows only' Club, / | \
Apple is no less monopolistic than Microsoft.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roger Blake)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.redhat
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1]
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 16:56:21 GMT
On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 14:09:03 GMT, Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Become superior before claiming you are.
The different OSes are superior in different areas.
Windows is easier to install and configure, particularly for a novice, no
doubt about it. (At least until Plug & Pray screws up, or the registry gets
corrupted, or you look at the system cross-eyed during the wrong phase of
the moon. :-)
However, Linux has superior performance, stability, flexibility, and security
for the knowledgeable user -- as well as being available at low or no cost.
Will Linux ever be accessible to today's typical "I want to use a 'puter while
remaining totally ignorant" user? Beats me. But for someone either experienced
or willing to learn, the rewards are definitely there in using Linux.
--
Roger Blake
(remove second "g" and second "m" from address for email)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd
Subject: Re: Packaging Tools
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 16:54:55 GMT
On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 03:04:31 GMT, Christopher Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when JEDIDIAH would say:
>>On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 01:18:51 GMT, Christopher Browne
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when JEDIDIAH would say:
>>>>On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 02:56:52 GMT, Christopher Browne
>>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Dr Sinister would say:
>>>>>>Perhaps you meant to say "Install Shield by contrast is fast and easy."
>>>>>
>>>>>Of course, what is more precisely correct is that
>>>>>
>>>>> "InstallShield is, in contrast with downloading tarballs, and then
>>>>> configuring, compiling, and installing them by hand, fast and easy."
>>>>>
>>>>>Which all adds up to an overall useless observation.
>>>>>
>>>>>It makes sense to compare the use of an RPM or dpkg package with the
>>>>>use of an InstallShield package.
>>>>>
>>>>>Of course, this is a .advocacy group, where comparisons are made when
>>>>>people feel like making them, where reason plays little role...
>>>>
>>>> Even the tarbal vs. rpm argument is useful. Tarballs have the
>>>> benefit of being much more flexible with respect to dependencies.
>>>> If you happen to be a minor version behind on some library, a
>>>> recompile can be simpler. Besides, most tarballs are just a matter
>>>> of regurgitating a couple of standard sequences.
>>>>
>>>> ./configure
>>>> make
>>>> make install
>>>>
>>>> These are all fairly descriptive and intuitive (given the
>>>> activity) mnemonics. They should be easy enough to remember
>>>> after the 5th or 10th time.
>>>
>>>A major merit of Ports, dpkg, and RPM are that they can be set up to
>>>*not require that the human remember anything.*
>>
>> They still have to remember the package command syntax.
>> 'packages' don't get you away from there. Whereas, the
>> typical GNU build commands are VERY intuitive. This is
>> especially true for source rpms.
>
>No, it's *NOT* intuitive. Not reasonably *at all.*
Bullshit.
'make' and 'configure' are as intuitive as it gets.
>
>If you sit someone down at a computer, and suggest that they type in
>whatever comes to mind, it is not likely that they'll come up with the
>GNU build commands.
That's not true generally. That's the grand fallacy with claiming
things to be 'intuitive' for the novice. Why the gnu build commands
are 'intuitive' for the non-novice is that they relate conceptually
in useful, meaningful,memorably large 'chunks' to what is being done
rather than something like -i or -r or /a.
>
>The GNU build commands may be *readily learnable* by those that are
>literate with UNIX. Unix is *not* particularly intuitive. It has
They don't even require Unix literacy, just like something
like "reboot" or "mail" don't require a massive pre-cooked
conceptual framework to deal with and remember.
Mind you, this is the classic DOS (copy) vs Unix (cp) sort
of argument.
>built up over time, having complexity that arises from its history.
>It has got a steep learning curve which tends to discourage many; the
>"upside" is that being steep, those that *do* climb the hill can
>quickly get at powerful functionality.
>
>That is quite a different thing from being "intuitive."
Of the many things that are 'STEEP' in Unix, GNU
make isn't one of them.
--
So long as Apple uses Quicktime to effectively |||
make web based video 'Windows only' Club, / | \
Apple is no less monopolistic than Microsoft.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Bsd and Linux
Date: 23 Mar 2000 16:59:55 GMT
In comp.os.linux.development.apps Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: On 23 Mar 2000 08:34:23 GMT, Peter T. Breuer wrote:
:>I have NO trouble doing so!
: You have no trouble with redundant configuration but you have trouble
: logging into single user mmode ? Hmmmm ...
I certainly do. Remember that it requires a passwd. And a PAM suth
error is the potential problem!
:>Try a system crash.
: A system crash is unlikely to hose files that you aren't writing to.
Tell that to the machine next door.
: Try single user mode.
Uh uh .. can't get to it legally.
:>Single user mode won't work without login. It requires a passwd, normally!
: No, it does not. Not on Linux, it doesn't.
Oh yes it does .. on all current distros I know of (not that I've tried it
on my slack 7). Try it.
:>No, I don't understand a word of it. What does "auth" mean? Surely the
:>whole point is to control authorization! Why have a keyword? And
: So you understood "auth" ! Yes, auth means that the module in question
: is an "authorisation" module. Other types are "session", "account",
: and "password".
And what does the binding of a "kind" to a name imply? Surely PAM itself
knows what these libraries contain! If not, why not? Why don't they
contain a KIND variable, saying what they are?
:>what does "required" mean? And which docs would you recommend?
: "required" means that the module in question is required in order for to
: authentication to succeed. An example of something that *isn't* required is
What? You are talking tautologies, no? Authentication means verifying that A is A.
What other attribute than "required" can you possibly add to authentication?
I can understand having alternate methods available, but as soon as you say that
one of them is required, you make the alternates useless. So why say that one is
required?
Besides, why should I care? If I have my passwd, I have my passwd. That's all.
: xauth ( ie when you log in via ssh, you should still be able to log in
: even if xauth fails ) Another example is that if you're root, you can
This is normal. Login does not require X. Ssh does not care whether X proxying
succeeds or not (this is part of configuring ssh).
: run chsh for any user without enterring the root password.
That's because I'm root. You are saying that the one line of code in chsh
"if (!geteuid()) .." is saved for us by libpam?
:>/usr/doc/packages/pam/html/index.html
Sorry. I don't read html. I'll have to turn it into text to grok it. Got
a linear document, by any chance? :-).
: and go to the part that says system administrators manual. Then go to
: where it talks about the config file format. Wasn't too hard, huh ? (-;
Haven't got there yet. Ooops .. seems that listing was a holdover from before
I removed pam from that suse 6.3 system (and it works fine now). The document's
gone. I'll find it later.
Peter
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: W2K aquired by 1 million (yawn)
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 16:49:43 GMT
As predicted, Microsoft has announced an outstanding success and has
announced that "1 million units of Windows 2000 Aquired by Customers
Worldwide".
As you recall last February, I predicted that we would see some sort of
estimate of this sort shortly after the end of the first month.
Actually, I expected to see it at the end of the first week - so
Microsoft isn't even meeting my optimistic expectations.
As I pointed out back in February, Microsoft had several sales
campaigns starting in early 1998 in which it offered free upgrades to
NT 5.0 (later converted to Windows 2000) if they purchased NT 4.0.
According to previous press releases from Microsoft, several million
people (nearly 10 million by one report) took advantage of the offer.
My big question is where are the other 9 million users? Did they lose
interest? Did they switch to Linux? Did they lose their coupons
(worth over $200).
And Corel reports sales of WordPerfect for Linux (including bundleware)
of over 1 million copies per month. Not too bad considering it's one
of 3 competitors in the Office Suite catagory, not including the KDE
word processor or Netscape Communicator editor.
Congratulations Microsoft. You still owe about $2 billion to previous
"free upgrade customers".
Just to put this in context, Microsoft claimed actual SALES (to OEMs,
Retailers, and Corporate users) of 1 million in the first WEEK for
Windows 95 AND Windows 98.
Conversely, Windows NT 4.0, which had compatibility problems with
Windows 95 (no Fat32, no PnP, W95 drivers didn't work...) took almost 4
months to reach it's first million (about a month after SP3).
It looks like NT and Linux will be competing for the same market of
dissatisfied Windows 95 users. Of course, for Win2K you will need at
least 128 meg, at least a P-II/300, and at LEAST a 6 gig drive. As
usual Linux will work fine on the machines discarded by those not
satisfied with the performance of Win2K on their old 32
meg/Pentium-200/1gig drive machines.
Thank you Microsoft, for creating even more marketing opportunity for
Linux.
--
Rex Ballard - Open Source Advocate, Internet
I/T Architect, MIS Director
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 60 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 1%/week!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mario Klebsch)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Absolute failure of Linux dead ahead?
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 17:32:40 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne) writes:
>The problem with Pascal, as distinct from the others, is that the
>design just wasn't made for anything more than education.
>a) It defines a single pass compiler;
I have used a two pass pascal compiler for several years (Pascal-MT).
>b) It provides no way of splitting projects coherently into multiple
> files;
With the UCSD-Pascal system, you project could be splitted into
several units, Each unit had its own source file.
73, Mario
--
Mario Klebsch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: Weak points
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 17:05:12 GMT
On Thu, 23 Mar 2000 15:50:48 GMT, SetMeUp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 1) Serious and easy modem/fax and printer support.
> (sendmail makes me laugh, postscript printers suck)
Sendmail for the most part should be transparent to most users.
PS printers actually tend to be the better ones. Furthermore,
you're spreading the implicit LIE that Unix only supports PS
printers.
>
> 2) Coherent window manager configuration files and behaviour.
Each WM IS coherent. This is no different than switching between
explorer and Litestep or even two different win32 mail clients.
>
> 3) If easy installation methods are to be so, better go back text mode
>installations or else improve the so called "easy" installations, because
>really suck.
You're really full of shit here. For quite some time there have
been one button installs that make as many stupid assumptions as
an MS installer would. There's even eye candy to be had if you
really want it.
>
> 4) Apart from saying that there's decent software lack, just point that
>the tries to make it (aka Staroffice) produce such a bloated software as you
>claim Microsoft Office and the kind are. I disagree, Microsoft Office is far
>ahead from Staroffice, not to mention Applixware, LyX (huuhuhu), ...
Either put up or shut up. If you can't say anything useful, that
those of us that actually use these classes of software can relate
to (on or off Windows), then you're just blowing a whole lot of hot
air...
>
> 5) Games ... yeah yeah, not every one like the 10 decent games. And
>besides, X11 was awful and slow, perhaps XFree86 4.0 get it closer to
>Windows desktop, though I don't think so. KDE ? Don't make me laugh, have
>you ever tried to change an icon on a 350MHz and 256MB SDRAM machine, hehe,
>pitiful.By the way, I do not like Quake, any more ? Huhu
I've had no problems changning icons on a 100Mhz, 32M machine.
You're also quite full of it here as well. Why is Windows so
weak that you have to actively LIE to prop it up?
BTW, I've not been merely limited to Quake, or even Quake3.
As far as games go, we might be a bit behind in the release
cycles and some of the particular big name titles might not
be available. However, we do avoid much of the crap that
litters PC game shelves.
You can say the same about the Mac: quality over quantity.
>
> 6) Serious internet tools : pine sucks, Netscape breaks more than Windows
>3.11 and is awful and slow. Nothing like IE 5 (the browser) and Outlook
>Express (yeah yeah, virus are a problem ... but prefer them than slrn, tin,
>krn and such sucky tools).
Netscape under Linux doesn't even break more than IE5 under NT4.
This is just more recycled third party clueless fud. The same
goes for claiming that there aren't any other GUI mail clients and
your inability to address real user relevant points.
>
> 7) Yeah yeah, Apache runs very well under Linux ... but do not forget
>that under Solaris, FreeBSD, and even NT/2K too, and besides, home users
>don't really need a web server. Is Linux offering anything to home users ?
>And be serious, do not tell me about BSOD's evey 5 minutes because Windows
>2000 (and NT almost) has never frozen.
So? Microsoft is specifically discouraging home users from
using or installing NT5. So claiming it as a trump for
home users is rather disengenuous.
>
> 8) I am going to stop in here, and wait for your answers, I hope you to
>do it without FUD and with real arguments (if any).
The only one spreading FUD here is you. All one has to do to refute
you is point out the lack of any real detail in your post.
--
So long as Apple uses Quicktime to effectively |||
make web based video 'Windows only' Club, / | \
Apple is no less monopolistic than Microsoft.
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Steinberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: New research question, this time about Apache
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2000 17:09:51 -0000
Woah, OK. Looks like I've managed to instigate a bit of a battle here.
Thanks for the comments, though. I will certainly work on modifying some
parts as a consequence. I should stress that when I talked about
professional software, I was thinking of profession in the monetary context,
like a professional sportsman.
I have a few new questions though, which are cropping up as I move along. At
the moment I am working on an explanatory chapter than talks about Linux's
history and more important the reasons that it has proved so explosive in
growth and interest terms. I've used a lot of the thoughts people presented
to me over the last few weeks. My questions relate to this really.
1) Can anyone tell me about the history of Apache and Sendmail? I am looking
to find out how it is that they came to dominate their market sectors on the
web. Just a link would be good, but any personal thoughts are even better.
2) I know the 12 million estimate figure for Linux usage around the world.
However, I'd like to get as many stats to do with opensource as possible,
especially in fields like web serving where Open source has some dominant
elements. Anything people can tell me or point me towards will be
appreciated, especially % of internet hosts running opensource
specifically Linux ) and old stats to do with opensource and Linux take-up
in all forms over time. I have seen lots of figures about "in 1991 there
were about 20 people and in 2000 there are millions" but I'd appreciate
knowing whether the growth has been linear or exponential or what.
3) Geographic/demographic info on the opensource community. I know it must
be pretty scarce, but it'd be interesting. After all, not many world beating
trends start in Finland.
4) Lastly, any thoughts on the critical-mass theory of open source success.
This is the theory that states that you require a critical mass of coders
floating around the internet for good ideas to get converted to good
programs, and that this critical mass was inevitibly going to happen some at
some time during the growth of the internet. It did, and this was in
1991(ish).
thanks again. All comments, criticisms and vicious personal attacks
welcomed.
Tom
===========================================
Tom Steinberg,
Institute of Economic Affairs,
http://www.iea.org.uk
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
