Linux-Advocacy Digest #838, Volume #25 Mon, 27 Mar 00 15:13:07 EST
Contents:
Re: joys of command-line image manipulation (Tim Kelley)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (When in LA)
Re: Peter Norton is one smart dude ("Chad Myers")
Re: Giving up on Tholen (George Marengo)
Re: Peter Norton is one smart dude (George Marengo)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (Jack Troughton)
Re: Peter Norton is one smart dude ("Trevor Fuson")
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (Bob Germer)
Re: Strange idea (codifex maximus)
Re: Peter Norton is one smart dude (abraxas)
Re: Rumors ... (codifex maximus)
Re: Peter Norton is one smart dude (Mark Hamstra)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: joys of command-line image manipulation
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 11:14:49 -0600
Erna Odelfsan wrote:
>
> > Shell scripts are indeed a beautiful thing, aren't they?
>
> They are, but, NT has scriptting languages too, including PERL;
> scripts are not exclusive from Linux or Unix. Even DOS had a very
> primitive scriptting language, that could be easily extended with
> external commands very very easy to build. What's more, almost
> every GNU utility (including often script used like find, awk, sed,
> etc ...) has been compiled for Win32. So you are not really advocating
> Linux or Unix in here, just advocating scriptting, in which I agree to
> advocate too.
but linux, for example, has just scores of cli tools to do all
sorts of useful things with scripts. NT doesn't shit by
comparison.
Eg., Look at all the conversion utils that are typically in
/usr/bin (ps2pdf, tif2ps, etc., etc)
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: When in LA
Reply-To: When in LA
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Date: 27 Mar 2000 17:24:47 GMT
On Sun, 27 Mar 3900 00:25:22, Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
|> Finally, where the forecasters on TV really embarrass themselves is the
|> fact that the NWS issues updates only about every 6 hours, unless a
|> warning is called for. The TV guy at 4pm may find himself having setup
|> the 9:30 am forecast for his show, and because he has been in the
|> studio all day maybe he hasn't even looked outside nor looked at the
|> 3:30 pm update from the NWS before starting his program segment. Thus
|> he will report showers starting in the early evening which might have
|> been the a.m. forecast and there won't be a cloud in the sky.
|
|Now, here I totally disagree with you. At NBC 10 in Philadelphia, they
|have an in house staff of 4 licensed meterologists who appear on air
|supplemented by additional persons who do not appear on air. The forecasts
|are updated twice each half hour during the 5 to 9 AM period, during the
|1600-1830 period, and again at 2300. These folks are FULL TIME
|meterologists who can be seen refining the forecasts during the new as the
|weather center is open to the news set. During periods of hazardous
|weather, the on-air person often appears without makeup, often without a
|tie or jacket. When the weather is bad or potentially bad, one of the two
|senior meteorologists is the on-air person, the two less experienced ones
|only appear in relatively calm periods.
|
|During major weather events, NBC 10 will scrub entertainment programming
|with the weather folks appearing for as much as 20 minutes each half hour.
|They show the track of the storm, the precipitation forecasts (type,
|amount, duration, etc.) for the entire 100 mile circle around
|Philadelphia. They discuss in detail the differences between the City, the
|NJ suburbs, the Jersey shore, Delaware, the Lehigh Valley, the Poconos,
|Central New Jersey, etc.
|
|This past winter, I saw John Bolaris, the head of the bureau, on the air
|from before 0600 continuously until 2330.
Obviously regional differences. Here in Socal we really haven't had
any seriously life threatening weather in decades. The life
threatening stuff is earthquakes and they are here and gone in a
minute without warning. Next to that it is wild fires, essentially
the result of not having much inclement weather, dry brush. You
absolutely get the best information on wild fires from the TV stations
with just about the entire dial devoted to the event for a couple of
days as the fire is fought.
BobO
Marty Amodeo says: "If Glatt, Sutherland, yourself, or myself tried
to get someone fired for using a particular word it is a despicable
act."
David Sutherland made the following quotes in posts residing on
Dejanews:
If I posted anything remotely like Tholen's "queer" [Editor: Note
particular word in quotes] comments with my employers name
anywhere within that message, I would be escorted to the door,
and rightly so.[Editor: Note euphemism for firing]
If Tholen doesn't apologise in full, publicly and at great length, I
*will* advise his university, as this kind of bullshit *should* and
*will* be challenged.[Editor: Note threat]
I've asked Kenneth P. Mortimer, President, University of
Hawaii ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) for his opinion on how
certain members of the faculty are spending their time.[Editor: Note
admission to personal notification of employer]
Tholen used "queer" [Editor: Note particular word in quotes] as an
insult and a means to attack someone. This is discriminatory. He did
so from his employers account. His employer has a policy against
discrimination. Tholen acted against the policies of his employer.
Tholens employer is now aware of this. [Editor: Note reason for
contacting employer]
Pretty despicable, I have to agree Marty.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Peter Norton is one smart dude
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 12:11:14 -0600
"abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8bnqg8$n6l$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >> NTFS 5 (which is implemented in Windows2000 and read by NT 4.0 SP4 and
higher)
> >> has a change journal.
>
> > Neat. Now its just like MacOS 7.5.1.
>
> Oh, and BeOS DR3.0, IRIX and Purgatory/Inferno.
>
> Catch up microsoft! Catch up! Tell us you invented it! We'll believe you!
Do you have some kind of problem, abraxas? All I said was that it had it,
I never (nor did Microsoft) claimed that it was some kind of miracle.
W. Kiernan asked, I replied.
Perhaps you should go back on the medicine.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on Tholen
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 18:13:58 GMT
On Mon, 27 Mar 2000 10:13:33 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeff
Glatt) wrote:
>>George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>I didn't evade it. Jeff Glatt lied.
>
>Incorrect. Tholen is one lying.
Hey, whatever... you two boys can fight it out.
------------------------------
From: George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Peter Norton is one smart dude
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 18:37:59 GMT
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 02:30:29 +1000, "Christopher Smith"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"George Marengo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On 27 Mar 2000 04:50:32 GMT, "Stephen S. Edwards II"
<snip>
>> >You're answer did, IMHO, denote a slight flavor of sarcasm. NTFS is
>> >indeed a journaled filesystem. Perhaps you thought NTFS to be much like
>> >FAT16?
>>
>> Are you talking about NTFS or NTFS5?
>
>Erm, it doesn't matter. NTFS has been a (metdata) journaling FS since its
>inception.
As I understand it, a Journaling File System has a log that it keeps
of all changes to the filesystem. The following, from the April
Windows2000 Magazine, in an article titled "NTFS5 vs. FAT32",
says:
One problem with large file volumes is that operations that
need to analyze changes to files (such as a backup program
that analyzes file date stamps and timestamps to determine
which files you need to back up) put an enormous load on the
server's disk subsystem. Luckily, Win2K provides a new
feature called the change journal that alleviates this
problem. The change journal is a volume-specific log that
details all file changes on that volume.
That sounds like a Journaling File System has been added in NTFS5,
not something that's existed. Am I missing something here?
You have to be a member (i.e., have a subscription code) but here's
the search criteria I used -- click on the first link.
http://www.winntmag.com/Articles/Content/8294_01.html?SearchString=journal
or here's a different one that talks about the change journal:
http://www.windowsmagazine.com/news/0901/0930c.htm
------------------------------
From: Jack Troughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 13:58:30 -0500
Jim Stuyck wrote:
>
> Joe Ragosta wrote:
>
> > In article <8bjpph$p1e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen) wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > So if we have a conversation about I have to bring up the item being
> > > talked about each time? It is never implicity referenced? The 92
> > > million was added to IBM's bottom line from OS/2. The 92 million that we
> > > were talking about was part of IBM's revenue. OS/2 contributed 92
> > > million
> > > as I said in my previous statements, and I was wondering what you think
> > > that means for OS/2. Would you like to talk about the 92 million IBM
> > > says
> > > OS/2 generated for it? That is an awkward way of communicating that you
> > > need, the inability to reference what is being talked about from previous
> > > statements.
> > >
> >
> > I think you might want to start by taking some basic economics courses.
> >
> > Start by learning the difference between "revenue" and "bottome line".
>
> You make a valid point, Joe.
>
> Esther Schindler's article in "Sm@rt Reseller", the source of the "$92 million"
> number, reads thus:
>
> The OS/2 business line contributed $92 million to IBM's bottom line in
> 1999, say sources. Most of the increased sales performance was in
> OS/2 client sales, which were at $46 million, sources added.
>
> Confusing, 'eh? If you assume "apples and apples," then it *appears* Esther's
> numbers are both sales, although most of $92 million, or $46 million, isn't
> "most of" in my sense of measurement (it's half). But if the "92 million" was
> actually a "bottom line" (after burden), then the "$46 million" in "sales"
> wouldn't
> come close to "most of." So, I'm leaning to both numbers being "sales."
You're forgetting server sales here... I suspect IBM got a lot more
revenue from server sales than from client sales last year. One,
each server costs ~8x as much as the client, and they've been
pushing the server much harder in the channel, since MS has the
client market largely locked up if the client's buying from an OEM.
> What I find disappointing is the $46 million in OS/2 client sales. That's maybe
>
> only 500,000 (or fewer) copies, WAY down from numbers bandied about a few
> years ago. In addition, $46 million in sales might support about 200-300
> employees, give or take, WAY down from the numbers that once were
> employed in Boca Raton/Austin on OS/2.
I have little doubt that when Esther said "92 million to the bottom
line" she knew exactly what she was saying. IOW- We don't really
know what the revenue was, other than that it's > 92 million
dollars. One big point that she was trying to make I think is that
client sales are _up_, not down: "Most of the increased sales
performance was in OS/2 client sales, which were at $46 million,
sources added."
> Actually, "confusing numbers" have been the one *consistent* thing coming
> from IBM in regards to OS/2 sales!
I don't really find it all that confusing; client sales are up;
server sales are about the same, total profit was ~92 million, total
revenue was >92 million. How much greater? Don't know. What portion
of the sales price represents profit? 50%? 185 million in sales.
25%? 370 million in sales. Do we know? No. Are we going to be able
to find out? Probably not.
> > Now, which was it? Did OS/2 add $92 M in revenue or $92 M to the bottom
> > line. If the former, how much did it really add to the bottom line?
Joe, Esther has been covering IT for many years; I think that when
she says "bottom line" she knows exactly what she's talking about. I
think it's safe to say that IBM profited to the tune of around 92
million last year from sales of OS/2 warp.
Jack
Montreal PQ
CANADA
------------------------------
From: "Trevor Fuson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Peter Norton is one smart dude
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 11:02:02 -0800
Christopher Smith wrote in message <8bo3vv$io7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
>"abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> Neat. Now its just like MacOS 7.5.1.
>
>Eh ? Since when was HFS journalled ?
Since never. Not even the much hyped OS X will be journaled.
This goes a long way to explain how and why errors occur. B-Tree structures
are complex. If one becomes damaged, erroneous information is read into File
Manager and the referenced files can also become damaged. This is why it's
vital to run Disk First Aid or similar utilities on a regular basis.
http://til.info.apple.com/techinfo.nsf/artnum/n19516
Disk First Aid can and does fix some kinds of damage to the HFS wrapper.
Users should only see the above message if Disk First Aid could not fix the
damage. If the error message appears everytime Disk First Aid is run on the
volume, Apple recommends backing up any important files, erasing the volume
and restoring the software.
Although this type of damage is rare, the HFS wrapper can be damaged by
having power removed from the computer when it is in use or after a crash
when using incompatible software.
http://til.info.apple.com/techinfo.nsf/artnum/n31056
TOPIC
Mac OS X Server depends more on an orderly shutdown of the operating system
than Mac OS 8 does. If the computer is turned off or restarted abruptly,
there will probably be damage to the file system. If this happens, it is
necessary to run the fsck command to check for and repair any file system
damage.
Remember: Because Mac OS X Server is a server operating system, it should
stay running all of the time.
http://til.info.apple.com/techinfo.nsf/artnum/n60056
Improper shutdown or a forced power cycle are always valid reasons to run
the fsck utility to repair the system drive.
http://til.info.apple.com/techinfo.nsf/artnum/n24501
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 14:19:53 -0500
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
On 03/27/2000 at 06:46 AM,
Nonnaho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> From: Nonnaho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Newsgroups:
>
>>comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,>comp.os.linux.advocacy
> Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
> Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2000 06:46:19 -0800
> Organization: Intel Corporation
Well, looky, looky here. This asshole posts from Intel. I must contact
Personnel at Intel immediately with this message and a bunch of others. I
seriously doubt that Intel approves of people posting trash from their
network.
> Lines: 45
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <1i0D4.13260$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <8biqpj$7mf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <tj9D4.13327$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <8bjhbr$kd9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <FBjD4.13465$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> <rVuD4.13495$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> NNTP-Posting-Host:
> pwarner-desk.sc.intel.com
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; U)
> X-Accept-Language: en
> Path:
> If you guys would directly answer questions, we wouldn't be seeing
> these childish word games.
> Nonnaho
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.10 Registration Number 67
As the court closes in on M$, Lemmings are morphing to Ostrats!
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
From: codifex maximus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Strange idea
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 01:47:02 -0600
Erna Odelfsan wrote:
>
> Is it closed software another way of sharing a project ? I mean, while
> open source encourages sharing coding applications, closed software
> encourages you to pay them for doing that. How many things have Microsoft
> done since its creation ? More or less than open source ? (I ask) If it has
> done more (it succeeded a lot, failed another), does it mean money support
> is better than brain support for software projects to get done ?
Microsoft is a corporation. They are in the business for the money and
like any other corporation, will do whatever it takes to beat the
competition.
Microsoft's esteemed leader, Bill Gates, believed that money could be
made with software but had to fight against an already ingrained culture
that wanted to share everything - UNIX was a major player. To get rid
of the sharing and bring about the charging, Microsoft spent much time
fighting what they deemed piracy - the unauthorized sharing of code and
binaries.
Closed software, as a business model, has had more development put into
it than the software itself. Ideas were dreamed up to maximize profits
for Microsoft, such as licensing software, copy protection, dependancies
placed in the software to prefer Microsoft products, getting rid of
concurrent users of a license, per-processor license fees for Windows,
etc...
Microsoft, also, fights competition by creating incompatabilities with
competing software (even if it's a previous version of Microsoft own
software) and getting rid of or absorbing the competition's research and
market using profits from thier primary market - Windows.
These points I've made underscore the fact that Microsoft is
DIAMETRICALLY opposed to open-source style software; open-source style
software is the antithesis of Microsoft and attacks the very core of
thier philosophy and business model.
Microsoft is not alone in fearing open-source software; there are other
corporations that are reluctant to enter the fray based largely on fears
of losing marketshare. I have something to say about this condition...
you are already losing your market to Microsoft before open-source
software and philosophy was even a blip on the radar. With a fairly
level playing field consisting of a stadardized and commoditized
Operating System and Hardware, application software can be written that
is easily portable, with less expensive development costs, and that
allows for a broad range of hardware with few dependancies. Also, and
most importantly, there will be no locking out of ISV's because there
will be no one entity who controls the OS.
I'll tell you what Microsoft has done... they've taken things that other
people researched, packaged them in a pretty box and sold them to you
when you could have had it for free.
Codifex Maximus
I'm the rat that jumped out of the maze.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Peter Norton is one smart dude
Date: 27 Mar 2000 19:58:37 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8bnqg8$n6l$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >> "W. Kiernan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >>> Mark Hamstra wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > "W. Kiernan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > > Was it really Chad Myers who wrote?:
>> >>> > > >
>> >>> > > > ...NTFS, which has journaling.
>> >>> > >
>> >>> > > It does? That's news to me.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > You shouldn't be so quick to broadcast your ignorance.
>> >>>
>> >>> I shouldn't ask questions, you mean. I should learn by telepathy,
>> >>> osmosis, however you do it, you bigdeal genius you.
>>
>> >> Of course! <grin>
>>
>> >> NTFS 5 (which is implemented in Windows2000 and read by NT 4.0 SP4 and
> higher)
>> >> has a change journal.
>>
>> > Neat. Now its just like MacOS 7.5.1.
>>
>> Oh, and BeOS DR3.0, IRIX and Purgatory/Inferno.
>>
>> Catch up microsoft! Catch up! Tell us you invented it! We'll believe
> you!
>>
> maybe Linux will catchup some day later too and claim Linus wrote it.
Yes, that would happen...except that people who use linux consistently understand
the way computers work and where their software comes from.
Catch up microsoft! catch up!
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: codifex maximus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Rumors ...
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2000 01:58:10 -0600
Donn Miller wrote:
>
> Erna Odelfsan wrote:
>
> > What truth is it there in Microsoft being forced to liberate Windows
> > 98/Millenium source code and developing Office for Linux just to not have to
> > split among several companies ? I know this is a little off-topic, but know
> > too that many persons in here follow Microsoft issues from very close.
>
> I think this rumor may have gotten a little distorted. Microsoft
> proposed a number of things so they wouldn't be required to work under
> the oversight of the government. One item was that they offered to
> open up a small piece of the Windows source code. I think the idea is
> to let other companies see some of the Windows source code to
> eliminate the effect of its (apparent) monopoly. I seriously doubt
> that MS is going to release the source code as open source - they will
> just let a limited amount of companies see it, if they require it.
> Certain companies that make Windows emulators, such as Bristol, which
> makes Wind/U, may need to see the Windows source code. I seriously
> doubt if they would consider make the source code available to the
> Wine project, although it would be nice.
>
> They would only open up a small portion of the Windows source, under
> extenuating circumstances. Also, remember this is only a proposal for
> settlement, so it doesn't necessarily mean they will do it anyways.
> It looks like the DOJ isn't happy with Microsoft's settlement ideas
> anyways...
>
> - Donn
Releasing source code today wont keep them from changing it tomorrow.
--
Codifex Maximus
I'm the rat that jumped out of the maze.
------------------------------
From: Mark Hamstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Peter Norton is one smart dude
Date: 27 Mar 2000 14:57:29 -0500
George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As I understand it, a Journaling File System has a log that it keeps
> of all changes to the filesystem.
[...]
> Am I missing something here?
Yes. Journaling File System does not imply data logging. In other
words, a filesystem that logs just the metadata to a journal is
a Journaling File System. A filesystem that logs the data as well
as the metadata is, of course, also a Journaling File System, and
has some advantages and performance differences as compared to a
JFS implementation that only logs metadata.
NTFS has always been a metadata logging JFS, and NTFS5 is now also
a data logging JFS.
--
Mark Hamstra
Bentley Systems, Inc.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
