Linux-Advocacy Digest #913, Volume #25 Sun, 2 Apr 00 13:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: distribpricing (JOE)
Re: Windows 2000 has "issues" (Robert Morelli)
Re: Windows 2000 has "issues" (Robert Morelli)
Re: distribpricing ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows 2000 has "issues" (Robert Morelli)
Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped (Douglas E. Mitton)
Re: Linux bugs!!! (Sitaram Chamarty)
Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped ("Rich Cloutier")
Re: Linux vs Windows development man-hours? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re: Darwin or Linux
(ZnU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: JOE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: distribpricing
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 15:31:09 GMT
Tim Kelley wrote:
> JAS wrote:
> >
> > Hello to all,
> >
> > I am wanting to get opinions from Linux users about the rising costs of both
> > Caldera and Red Hat Linux distributions. I use both Red Hat and Caldera 2.3
> > and like them much better than NT (I am an MCSE). My concern however is
> > that the rising prices of these distributions will compromise the spirit of
> > Linux. I have enjoyed offering small businesses great opportunities to have
> > quality information systems using Linux (Samba, Sendmail, Ipchains, etc.).
> > Hopefully in the future Linux will still be the choice that smaller
> > businesses can opt for rather than spending a lot of money for NT and (even
> > more trying) to keep it running as stable as NT.
> > I appreiciate your imput.
>
> 1. the distros are mainly for newbies who need the manuals and other goodies
> that come with them. Also consider that even though you may pay $80 for that
> Red hat or SuSE cd, you can install it on as many machines as you like. Enjoy!
> just heed the application licenses for the commercial software that comes with
> them.
>
> 2. http://www.cheapbytes.com
>
> 3. you can download the iso of disk one from ftp.redhat.com.
> You can get the contrib rpm's from contrib.redhat.com, tons of stuff there,
> around 1200MB worth of RPM's.
If a person can get there!
""
Forbidden
You don't have permission to access / on this server""
JOE
>
>
> 4. just get on with it and use Debian. More conservative than the corporate
> distributions, and if you've used Red Hat 6.x or Red Hat 5.0, you would know
> why.
>
> Debian is leagues above the corporate distributions. After Debian, Red Hat,
> SuSE, etc simply don't impress me that much anymore. Caldera can be nice if you
> need Netware tools. SuSE still has merit if you like having an entire internets
> worth of Free Software in one package.
>
> --
> Tim Kelley
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 09:09:06 -0400
From: Robert Morelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has "issues"
Shell wrote:
>
> Robert Morelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >One "issue" that Windows 2000 has just unrepressed, is a killer defect
> >that "poses a potentially devastating threat to ISPs, point-of-sale (POS)
> >systems and small- to midsize businesses." See,
>
> >http://www.crn.com/dailies/digest/breakingnews.asp?ArticleID=15279
>
> From the article:
>
> "The defect prohibits administrators from adding more than 51 IP addresses
> to a Windows 2000 Server configured as a domain controller (DC). "
>
> That statement right there points to this being a rather rare situation.
> I don't understand why this would be devastating at all.
I guess I never realized that rare things can't be devastating. That's actually
reassuring. Because sometimes I worry that maybe if there were 63,000, or maybe a
lot more, rare things and no one of them was too likely, but since there were so
many that I'd probably step on a few of them ... Oh, I guess I'm just rambling.
Well, come to think of it, that's not exactly true. I've been arguing for years
that we don't need quality standards for foods. I say, just get the food out the
door and on my table, and I'll pick the rat shit out of it when I see it. How many
cases of botulism and salmonella do you hear about, anyway?
> >You know, I got an electronic rolodex once for $14.95 that could only
> >store 50 names and addresses, and the next year they came out with one that
> >could do 100. So, if you thought it was a cool idea to migrate from Solaris
> >to Windows 2000 and you're business depends on this, don't panic. They'll
> >probably have the 100 IP version out next year.
>
> Did you read the article?
Yeah, I read it and it said nothing about rolodexes! So I thought I'd throw out
this helpful advice.
By the way, did you read the commentary beneath the article by the customers who
explain why this incredibly rare "issue" actually affected them? You know what they
say. Truth is stranger than fiction.
> >May I ask that we try to be compassionate? Yes, Microsoft is in denial.
> >And yes, they may lash out at those who threaten their defensive facade.
> >But try to imagine how much hurt and insecurity they feel. On the outside,
> >Windows 2000 pretends to be mighty and stable and scalable, but inside
> >it feels as infantile and unstable as NT. Remember, there is usually a stage
> >of denial that precedes the healing process.
>
> It appears you did not read the article, or at least have no understanding
> of the issue.
>
> I'm curious. Why do you comment on an issue you have no understanding of?
>
> I mean, I can see why the journalists do that, like Imran Anwar the author
> of this article... they are ignorant and do not know better, and like to
> overblow things to get people to tune in.
There, there, now. Lash it out. And it's okay to cry, too. Then the healing
can begin.
> --
> Steve Sheldon email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> BSCS/MCSE url: http://www.sheldon.visi.com
> BEEF! - Cause the west wasn't won on salad.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 09:17:50 -0400
From: Robert Morelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has "issues"
Serge Luca wrote:
>
> . I
> <<I have work with Microsoft, they really do believe that "There is no time
> to do it right, but there is always time to do it again.">>
>
> When and where ? which building & unit ?
>
> Strange indeed, many people have worked with MS here ...
There's a famous quote from Gates that goes, "If you can't make it good,
make it look good." This was not a joke, but a serious exhortation to
MS programmers about the attitude they needed to adopt developing Windows.
Though I can't vouch for its authenticity, there's also the takeoff on
Yoda's advice, "Do or don't do. There is no try." At Microsoft, it
was, "Try or don't try. There is no do."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: distribpricing
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 16:15:03 GMT
The joy of Linux is -- there is *competition*! The last I looked Redhad
and Caldera were only 2 of MANY distributions. Most distributions priced
LOWER than Caldera or Redhat. If you don't like the price of the
"leading" distribution you have the *CHOICE* of other lower cost
distributions. Can we say the same about W2K??? I installed Mandrake 7.0
over the internet with NO cost except my Internet connection! Now you
get to do something that was unheard of in the MS OS age... SHOP for a
good OS price!
.
.
.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"JAS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello to all,
>
> I am wanting to get opinions from Linux users about the rising costs
of both
> Caldera and Red Hat Linux distributions. I use both Red Hat and
Caldera 2.3
> and like them much better than NT (I am an MCSE). My concern however
is
> that the rising prices of these distributions will compromise the
spirit of
> Linux. I have enjoyed offering small businesses great opportunities to
have
> quality information systems using Linux (Samba, Sendmail, Ipchains,
etc.).
> Hopefully in the future Linux will still be the choice that smaller
> businesses can opt for rather than spending a lot of money for NT and
(even
> more trying) to keep it running as stable as NT.
> I appreiciate your imput.
>
> JAS
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 09:34:36 -0400
From: Robert Morelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has "issues"
Christopher Browne wrote:
>
> Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Erik Funkenbusch would say:
> >Wow, could you have shown your lack of a clue any clearer?
> >
> >mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Robert Morelli wrote:
> >> This is so typical Microsoft programming. Some dweeb, not knowing how
> >> something should work, simply hard-codes some arbitrary number rather
> >> than taking the time to understand the problem.
> >
> >This is not a case of an arbitrary number hard coded. There is no such "51"
> >IP limit with the server. The problem is that on machines that are Domain
> >Controllers, if you go over 51 IP's, the server stops authenticating.
>
> Um. I can't decide. Does this mean that 51 is arbitrary? Or not?
>
> If you can explain why the number is 51, rather than being 50, 52, or 49,
> that would "break" the contention that 51 is arbitrary.
>
> If you can't explain why the number is 51, then the "null hypothesis,"
> which is that 51 is an arbitrary limit, persists with no reason to believe
> it to be false.
I'm sorry folks, but this one has to go to the Windows advocates. There is
an air tight argument that shows that no number can be arbitrary. If there
were arbitrary numbers, then there would be a smallest one. But by virtue
of being the smallest arbitrary number, it would be non-arbitrary. Therefore,
there can't be any arbitrary numbers, so 51 is not arbitrary. I suspect in
fact that some sort of thought process like this is behind a lot of Microsoft's
standards.
By the way, I didn't write what appears to be attributed to me in the quoted
material above. Dweeb isn't in my vocabulary, and, as I've just proven,
no number is arbitrary. It seems quite likely however that some idiot,
sitting in a cubicle in Redmond, had some other idiot higher up shout in
his face and punch his fist through the wall and tell him his ideas are
"random," because he thought he had the leisure time to figure out how to
do something right. And after wiping the spit off his face, he started
pecking at his keyboard with about as much sense as a chicken eating feed,
and inadvertently hard coded 51 into his work.
> >> Almost every version of every MS product has suffered from this very
> >> problem, exhibited in some form. With direct draw, it was screen size,
> >> with Windows 95, it is the number of Window handles, etc.
> >
> >DirectDraw never had any such issue. The version of DirectDraw in NT4 prior
> >to SP4 had a limit, this was not DirectDraw itself (in other words, it was
> >an implementation bug, not a bug in the design of DirectDraw).
> >
> >Windows 95 also had no arbitray number of window handles limit. Windows 3.x
> >and 9x had a fixed size (64k) heap for USER handles, which include menu
> >handles, window handles, etc. How many Windows you could open was variable,
> >depending on what was actually in each window. The 64K limit was not
> >"arbitrary" either, since it was a direct result of the 16 bit code in
> >Windows 3.x and 9x.
> >
> >In other words, nothing you've said here has anything to do with a hard
> >coded arbitrary limit. Not the 51 IP issue. Not DirectDraw. And not
> >Windows 95 window handles.
>
> A 64K heap *is* an arbitrary limit. Particularly on a system that
> had as one of its claimed intents that of "breaking" the 640K "barrier."
> Which was, by the way, *another* arbitrary limit.
>
> You've given no information that would provide any reason to believe
> other than the null hypothesis for these cases, which is that these
> limits represented arbitrarily established limits.
>
> There may be no counter out there that counts to 51 and prevents further
> authentication.
>
> It might instead be that there's a vector with 64 elements, where 13 of
> them are occupied by "internal stuff." Or it might be that there's a
> little database arbitrarily limited to 64K that stores the authentication
> tokens, and as the tokens are 1270 bytes long, there's room for only 51
> of them. Those are hypotheses I've made up that may bear no
> resemblance to reality; I do not claim them to be correct.
>
> However, were they to be true, they would represent hard coded arbitrary
> limits every bit as much as a bit of code that said:
> if (num_of_clients > 51) {
> raise_error(EXCEEDED_AUTHENTICATION_LIMIT);
> } else {
> authenticate_client();
> }
>
> In order for you to establish evidence against the null hypothesis,
> you actually have to provide _evidence_, as opposed to informationless
> bald claims. Otherwise, there is no reason to believe you.
> --
> "Win32 sucks so hard it could pull matter out of a Black Hole."
> -- Pohl Longsine
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Douglas E. Mitton)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 17:23:22 GMT
I've tried it several times with different versions of Mandrake and
they won't install (in any of the automated modes anyway) without a
swap partition defined. You may not need a swap partition to RUN
Linux BUT the installer makes you have one just to install.
Kurt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Even IF you do a "Stupid" Linux install, you need 2 partitions: one for swap
>> and one for your files.
>>
>> -- Rich C.
>> "Great minds discuss ideas.
>> Average minds discuss events.
>> Small minds discuss people."
>
>Never tried it, but if you have a decent amount of memory, you don't
>need a swap partition.
>
>Also, I think you can create a swap file that resides on an ext2
>filesystem. Didn't look like something worth trying.
>
>- Kurt
------------------------------------------------
Doug Mitton - Brockville, Ontario, Canada
'City of the Thousand Islands'
EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.cybertap.com/dmitton
Other: mitton.dyndns.org
SPAM Reduction: Remove "x." from my domain.
------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sitaram Chamarty)
Subject: Re: Linux bugs!!!
Date: 2 Apr 2000 16:26:15 GMT
On Sat, 01 Apr 2000 20:49:13 GMT, Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Find a way, ANY way of crashing the entire Linux operating system while
>operating as a non-root user! Please post anything you can find in this
>thread. I'm sure many people will be interested!
In all the years of working on flaky laptops (Acer laptops suck
:-) and good laptops (NEC laptops rule :-) and mediocre ones
(Toshiba - IMHO only, no flames please!) and a handful of
desktops, I have only found two situations that hung the entire
machine (in other words, it's not just X dying, and you can't even
telnet into the box and kill off some stuff)
1. the original pcmcia-cs version that came with RH 4.2 (or was
it 4.1 - it's so long ago I can't remember): pop a card in,
and pop it out again before cardmgr has finished doing its
insertion event handling (like within 2 or 3 seconds). Even
Ctrl-Alt-Del wouldn't work!
2. The Maestro 2E sound card on my NEC laptop requires special
drivers (either from opensound.com or from Zach Brown at RH).
In either case, this sound module insists on being LIFO'd - if
you insmod it, then rmmod something that was insmod-ed earlier
(like by popping out a pcmcia card), the machine would hang.
You have to remove the maestro module before you attempt to
rmmod any previously loaded one!
Too much detail? I guess what I'm really saying is - it ain't
easy. You really have to reach to find examples of users being
able to kill machines :-)
Sitaram
PS: Re #2 - a few weeks ago I found that, even though the machine
appeared to be hung, I could hit the "suspend" button and it would
go to sleep. When I resumed it, it would be alive again :-)
Weird, huh?
------------------------------
From: "Rich Cloutier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 12:31:50 -0400
"Matthias Warkus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> It was the Sun, 02 Apr 2000 03:29:47 -0400...
> ...and Kurt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Even IF you do a "Stupid" Linux install, you need 2 partitions: one
for swap
> > > and one for your files.
> > >
> > > -- Rich C.
> > > "Great minds discuss ideas.
> > > Average minds discuss events.
> > > Small minds discuss people."
> >
> > Never tried it, but if you have a decent amount of memory, you don't
> > need a swap partition.
> >
[lazy reply to previous poster's comment]
Disk space is cheap enough; I would think that the surest way to crash your
system is to have it run out of memory. My PII with 128 Megs of RAM still
uses swap space with KDE, Netscape, a term window or two, KFM, and a couple
of chat programs running.
> > Also, I think you can create a swap file that resides on an ext2
> > filesystem. Didn't look like something worth trying.
>
> However, this makes it possible to have a daemon running that creates
> and adds swap space on-the-fly if your swap is filling up. Kind of
> neat, but I don't know whether anyone does that.
>
This is new then. I last partitioned my drives with kernel 36 in RH5.2. Or
else I just missed it. Anyway, I know that Windows runs faster when there is
a dedicated swap file, so I would assume that a dedicated swap partition
that doesn't go through the file system would also be faster.
[sigsnip]
-- Rich C.
"Great minds discuss ideas.
Average minds discuss events.
Small minds discuss people."
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <"Charlie Ebert" [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux vs Windows development man-hours?
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 16:31:37 GMT
> As I'm sure you've gathered from my post, I'm no apologist for=20
Microsoft.
> But I just can't believe that the numbers you're claiming are=20
realistic.
> According to their web site, Microsoft has about 35,000 employees of =
whom
> about 14,000 are in R&D. Where are you getting 800? Now, 14,000 is =
not
> realistic either.
There are only 800 actual programmers.
Microsofts 14,000 employees are mainly tied across a wide product
support effort. Just look at their product line.
There are sales forces, support forces, administrative forces.
Represenatives managing foreign offices and that's where you got
35,000 for a number of total employee's. =20
But there are only 800 programmers. I know this because I have a=20
relative who's a programmer for Microsoft Office working there.
But I won't give his name out over the air because I don't want him
harrassed for my bulletin. =20
If anything the complaint is that Microsoft has the balance of their
workforce tied up on the Marketing department. =20
Bill's so concerned about that he decided to put his own personal=20
spur's on and ride the PA team anyway. What a guy.
They have a massive QA department where they test everything with
the drivers for many products also. I don't know how big but, it's
well staffed.
> > The average development body at Microsoft committes him/herself
> > to a 55 hour week.
> >
> > Linux on the other hand is managed at several levels.
> > There's the Kernel level managed by Linus, whereby you have
> > about 200 people involved, helping him maintain the kernal.
> >
> > Then you have the different distributions such as Suse with 350
> > people, RedHat with 400 people, Debian with 300 people, Turbo linux
> > with 300 people, Mandrake with 100 people, so on and so forth.
> When you say RedHat has 400, is that number comparable to Microsoft's=
=20
35,000
> total, their 14,000 in R&D, or their putative 800 programmers?
Programmers are the only ones who can put ideas into code. =20
There are 450 involved in Windows 2000. That's it.
> > Then let's view the drivers situation. The manufacturers write
> > hardware drivers for Windows operating systems and then they
> > submit them to the test via Microsofts independent contracted testin=
g
> > agency.
> >
> > Linux either has a programmer volunteer to write the driver himself =
or
> > the hardware manufacturer does it himself for linux.
> >
> > So Linux is once again clearly ahead in manhours!
> I don't follow your argument here. Let me point out that I don't care=
=20
whether
> work is done by a Microsoft employee or a green Martian. It's=20
man-hours that
> go into Windows versus man-hours that go into Linux that I care about.=
> The only way Linux could be winning on the driver front is if there=20
are more
> supported devices under Linux, or if the drivers have more features. =
=20
I
> suppose this is conceivable if we're only talking Windows 2000, but I=
=20
don't
> think this is an area where either system is going to pull ahead.
This is an area where Microsoft is currently ahead. But this isn't
MY point. MY point is how many manhours are being spent developing
the PROJECT. I'm not going to make comparisons about manhours spent
writing drivers. This is mainly due to the fact that the drivers=20
percentage in manhours on the project, either way, accounts for less
than 5% of the total project time. And also due to the fact I've
already pointed out that Microsoft has their vendors write all=20
the drivers, thus they are out 0 bucks! That's the thing they used
to BEAT OS2 with. OS2 insisted on writing all their own drivers.
This was their mistake.
Linux just insists they be GNU licensed if possible.
> > Linux started almost 10 years after Microsoft did. They are 10
> > years behind. But that's not completely true as most of the
> > Systems design was already layed out for them. All they had
> > to do was copy the model for their own.
> >
> > So in code maturity, Linux is just about 2 years behind Microsoft.
> > Let's say that, if it's even 2 years.
> I'm not so sure. Microsoft had worked with IBM on OS/2 until their=20
break.
> The head of the NT team had previously developed VMS. Also, for=20
several
> years, the word was that Microsoft intended to "redo UNIX right,"=20
meaning
<I deleted a large pile of crap here!>
What the author was trying to say is that OS2 experience counts for
Win 3.11 experience, counts for Win 95, counts for Win NT, counts
for Win 98, counts for Win 2000. This is total rubbish.
Win 2000 is nothing like NT. If anything you might as well start
Microsofts experience clock when Windows 2000 was released.
I say this with confidence as most of their crap which worked in NT
doesn't work on 2000 now. I've got a customer who want's to use
a poll-select terminal emulator for mainframe access on his Windows
2000 box. Core-technologies said it's because Windows 2000 doesn't
pass Poll-Select and their box is broke. We now have to wait on
a Microsoft patch to get Core's product line going again! So this=20
poor fool who bought 35 pc's equipped with bridge for the whopping
price of $7,000 a piece will not have to sit on a spindle!
Linux on the other hand was based on 30 years experience with UNIX.
And they cloned it very well. I don't see REAMS of people bitchin
on the news group about how LINUX doesn't emulate UNIX very well.
So, I'll correct my original consideration about Linux being 2 years
behind Microsoft and replace it with Microsoft was born YESTERDAY,
ONCE AGAIN!
I'm also going to take the time to say that most of Microsoft's latest=20
innovations are un-necessary and silly. If you ever get it
to work, that is.
> An important question here is whether this work is contributing to the=
=20
Linux
> base, or just the specific issues related to the distribution. If=20
the latter
> is the case, it's redundant work.
Spoken like a TRUE MICROSOFT GURU! Bug patches are not REDUNDANT WORK=20
sonny. They are necessary to fix bugs.=20
Also, you don't release product with bugs like Microsoft did. You do=20
the Debian dance with those BUG HORIZON WALLS until the product is bug=20
free.
To address your primary concern, "Where's the freedom of choice here"
That's more Microsofts fault than anybody else. They have been=20
pushing a globally dominated Microsoft world. And they are the ones
who are going to pay the price by ensuring it's a Linux dominated=20
world. =20
But it's not all that bad. You will still have your choice of the
BSD's, Linux, or the GNU HERD. Now what will it be?
Charlie
------------------------------
From: ZnU <[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: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 16:38:47 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ZnU wrote:
> > RealPlayer is a media player. QuickTime is an entire media architecture.
> > It wouldn't be quite as easy to port, obviously.
>
> Actually you are wrong there. You would have to port the RealMedia
> architecture which shouldn't be any less complex than the QuickTime
> architecture.
This doesn't follow at all. QuickTime is _much_ more complex than
RealPlayer. They really aren't very similar products.
> > Consumer pressure? From the 1% of the market that uses something other
> > than Mac OS or Windows?
>
> Actually Linux has a 4% marketshare in the desktop OS market.
> Insignificant from a consumer standpoint but don't laugh because Linux
> has only made a serious shot for the desktop market over the past 2
> years. MacOS 12% but Apple has had 15-16 years.
Linux still hasn't made "a serious shot for the desktop market." It
still isn't something most people could even think of using as a desktop
OS, and it still lacks basic apps.
> > You don't seem to understand capitalism very well. If Apple thought
> > there would be a suitable return on investment (in whatever form),
> > QuickTime would be ported to non-mainstream OSes. Or do you think it's a
> > Big Conspiracy?
>
> Why doesn't Apple pay a few hundred grand to a company like LokiSoft
> which ports Win32 games to Linux? I am sure they would love Apple's
> business. Apple could have another company do it just like OperaSoft is
> getting specialized firms to port Opera to non-Wi32/Unix OS's.
Apparently, QuickTime was only ported to Windows only by taking a large
chunk of the Mac OS API with it. I doubt Apple would like the idea of
having some other company gain access to all of that. It's also
questionable whether any other company could be familiar enough with the
(really big) codebase to do the port in any reasonable time.
--
The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected.
-- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
