Linux-Advocacy Digest #915, Volume #25 Sun, 2 Apr 00 15:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux vs Windows development man-hours? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Windows 2000 has "issues" (abraxas)
Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped (John Hasler)
Re: Linux vs Windows development man-hours? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Nice link ("Dirk Gently")
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse ("Colin R. Day")
Re: OT:RANT:Long: If anyone develops an IDE for Linux PLEASE NO PROJECT FILES (or
MDI for that matter) ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: Let's just have a discussion about Global Domination (mlw)
Re: Linux vs Windows development man-hours? (Kool Breeze)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <"Charlie Ebert" [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux vs Windows development man-hours?
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 18:04:12 GMT
> Again, think of the bottom line. I'm trying to measure how fast=20
Linux will evolve
> compared to Windows. I don't care if something is used also for=20
another purpose.
> > > 3. Collapse redundant development. Since both KDE and GNOME have=
the
> > > same purpose, they shouldn't be added to each other. On the othe=
r=20
hand,
> > > there is some sharing between the teams and there is an advantage =
to
> > having
> > > two systems rather than just one, so that should count for a litt=
le.
> >
> > No. This falls back to one of my complaints that has been discussed=
=20
before.
> > Redundant development slows down the evolution of Linux. You should=
=20
count
> > redundant development, because it's still man hours that are being=20
spent to
> > "get there".
> No. Again, think of the bottom line. I don't care per say how much =
total time
> is spent. I care how fast the Linux code base evolves. If two people=
=20
spend 50 hours
> doing the same thing, only 50 hours of work is added to Linux even=20
though 100
> hours of human time were spent.
OKAY FOLKS. If that's the case then we have to take the total
Windows 2000 man hours and divide them by 4 as they had 4 distinct
branches which evolved to some point before it was decided on which
direction to go... That's why they were nearly 2 years behind on the=20
project. =20
The MORAL of this is DON'T EVEN BOTHER subtracting out branches and
the time spent on them. Pieces do accumulate. =20
Further, to say the KDE and GNOME are redundant is foolish.
If Windows 2000 gave the users 5 different options for how they wanted
their desktop to run, then they might actually be worth something.
Bottom line. You can't subtract the branches as you have no idea of=20
their impact on the product as a whole. =20
Let me just say this about your reasoning so it's clear to everybody=20
that you don't know what your doing.
To take away branch history from a project would be like saying,
The space program took only 150,X hours to develop because that's what
Rockwell had on the books for making the space shuttle!
And just because you go from Windows NT to Windows 2000 and had 4=20
branches doesn't mean you can just throw that time in the trashcan!
This is a HORSE RACE SON! You don't just ignore their buffonery!
So what if a guy from Debian spent 40 hours on Telnet then another guy
at Redhat spent 40 hours on Telnet, and yet another guy at Suse spent=20
40 hours on their telnet. =20
You now have 3 different telnets which will be merged in the next=20
release into one again. That's the way Linux works!
Microsoft does the same thing with their branches. Bill personally=20
picks thru the best of each tree to make his decision on the final DESIG=
N.
Why don't you look at it from a CORPORATE GUN SLINGER POINT OF VIEW!
Microsoft has to pay it's employee's BUCKS to make their OS.
Most the of the LINUX OS is indeed made by volunteers who charge the
world $0 for their efforts. Linux is then assembled into=20
distributions by a hand full of companies who pay people salaries to=20
do so. =20
So there are TWO ways man hours account for things son.
One is the evolution of the Operating system to be sure.
The other is the negative stuff you read thru on your P&L which is
amortized each month over the 3 years your allowed to amortize it in.
And to recognize those facts means that even if Microsoft had twice
the manpower on their project and were developing twice as fast,
you still have $$$$ going out the door to do so and thus their OS will
continue to become more and more expensive per release.
Think about it. Why should Windows 2000 cost over double that of NT=20
4.0??? Why is that???? They have global domination. 79% of the=20
world uses them so why is it doubling here????
IF anything with competition mostly gone it should fall over the=20
customer base.
So you can't just count MAN HOURS your have to count the dollars going
out the door to bring your OS to the market!!!
And this is why I keep saying to everybody that Microsoft won't be
an OS supplier 10 years from now. If Microsoft is in business at all
it will be as an applications vendor and nothing more.
Bill Gates has enough intelligence to understand this concept and
this is where we arrive at a single Windows 2000 rather than=20
supporting a Win95, Win 98 and then NT platform.
It's beginning to hurt Microsoft.
What's next for Microsoft! Microsoft OFFICE for Linux.
That's what's next..
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has "issues"
Date: 2 Apr 2000 18:11:21 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So I have a domain controller on a subnet and a webserver on the same subnet
> serving up 30k ips. Theres something wrong.
I'm sorry...I wasnt thinking when I wrote this...
It is of course, impossible to have a windowsNT/W2K webserver with 30K sites on
it. I was thinking in unix terms.
Reasoning repsectfully withdrawn.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[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 17:09:00 GMT
Douglas E. Mitton writes:
> You may not need a swap partition to RUN Linux BUT the installer makes
> you have one just to install.
Or the Mandrake installer does, anyway. I suspect that they require swap
because it is the only way they can be certain that you will have enough
memory for the in-memory filesystem that they use during the install.
You can run Linux with no swap, but there is rarely any good reason to do
so.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <"Charlie Ebert" [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux vs Windows development man-hours?
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 18:28:40 GMT
> You still don't seem to understand the question. If Microsoft=20
programmers are
> working on features that Linux doesn't have, then that's man-hours=20
for Windows
> with no comparable man-hours for Linux. Since you seem to be=20
struggling with this,
> let me make it entirely clear: if that's the case, it's favorable to=
=20
Windows.
> Mind you, I posted this question because I want a real answer. I=20
would find it
> very depressing to think that Windows will survive long term against=20
Linux and
> other open source projects, but if that is a reasonable expectation, =
=20
I'll
> accept it. I'm pefectly willing to include aspects of Windows that=20
are still
> unmatched under Linux.
I think you can do that. Give us areas where Windows are still=20
unmatched by Linux.
Then you go ahead and tell me about how we are going to sell to our
bosses the concept of paying $1,000 a seat for a desktop from=20
Microsoft to be released in 2005. That's what it will cost us
at that time given their rate of VERSION INFLATION due to their=20
running from Linux. =20
When you see this in it's true light, Microsoft would have to offer
something REALLY FANTASTIC which could not be done with a similar=20
LINUX application. And that just seems impossible.
Let's bring into light the fact that NEWBIES from 20 years ago are
not the NEWBIES of today. Today's NEWBIES are already installing
copies of Suse 6.3 and Mandrake 7.0 and Redhat 6.1 and they are liking=20
it.
Microsoft's base was in it's NEWBIES.
NEWBIES typically don't have $1,000 to spend on their OS.
Frankly, I don't know why Microsoft thinks NEWBIES has $350 to spend=20
on their license of Windows 2000 either.
So just tell me that. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO JUSTIFY THE COST OF THIS=20
MESS? Forget who's the technological leader. Don't try and tell me
it doesn't matter.
My STREET IS NOT FILLED WITH JAGUARS AND FERRARI'S OUT THERE.
It's filled with Fords, Chevy's, Dodges, Nissans, Honda, Mazda but
damn little Porche's.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Dirk Gently" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Nice link
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 18:31:20 GMT
On Windows 98, it gives you several Blue Screens of DEATH!!!!! On 98 you
can try to open a file called aux/aux in paint and the same thing happens.
--
Jeff Lacy
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux Rules!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"John & Susie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Gary Hallock wrote:
> >
> > Francis Van Oaken wrote:
> >
> > > Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:N16F4.2477$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > > If you're using Windows, please click the link below for
> > > > something nice:
> > >
> > > Here's an even nicer one: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > Francis.
> >
> > Why? It's not like Chill maliciously created a web page to bring down
Windows. It's
> > simply points to a nonexistent file on you hard drive. Something
anyone might do if
> > they accidentally typed the wrong file name. You should be glad you
found out this way
> > rather than when you had other windows up with important work in
progress. It was
> > quite obvious that it was going to crash the system - it didn't take
much reading
> > between the lines to figure that out. Of course on Linux using
Netscape I got what I
> > would expect:
> >
> > Netscape is unable to find the file or directory named /c:/aux/aux.
Check the name and
> > try again.
>
> Netscape running under NT also says it cant find the page. Whats it
> supposed to do?
>
> >
> > Gary
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 18:35:04 +0000
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Tue, 28 Mar 2000 18:06:20 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > >Unless you su root, type rm * -rf and then realize you were in /home
> rather
> > >than /home/userx
> >
> > Thats pretty hard to do if the current working directory is in your
> command
> > prompt.
>
> Most admins I know don't do that, since that gets annoying when you're 20
> levels deep in directories and typing off the end of the screen.
but you still get the end of the directory path, which means that you would
have "home"
rather than "userx" at the end of your prompt. If that isn't safe enough, use
pwd.
Also, in two years of using Linux, I've never done an accidental recursive
delete, even
though I run as root almost all the time (yes, I'm bad).
<snip>
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: OT:RANT:Long: If anyone develops an IDE for Linux PLEASE NO PROJECT FILES
(or MDI for that matter)
Date: 2 Apr 2000 18:51:52 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Richard Corfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: A current problem I'm having in another MS Access project is trying to
: detect if a field is empty. I may try looking at the text box on the
: form rather than the database field. According to the debugger
: initials.Value=Null yet the following IF block doesn't trigger
: IF initials.Value = Null OR initials.Value = "" Then
: ...
: Endif
: I've tried the various vbNull, vbNullString, IS NULL, IS NOTHING, =
: NOTHING with various failures. Also note that I've coded based on
: shortcut OR which apparently VB doesn't do - but surely if the left is
: true then the result should be independant of the right (or did I read
: somewhere that nulls in boolean algebra upset things?)
Microsoft VBA-based products in general (including Access, VB, and
Office) handle nulls in a fashion that is worse than useless (because
it not only is incorrect in places, but it's *inconsistently*
incorrect, and relies heavily on catching run-time errors in order to
guarantee proper behavior).
However, Access has a useful function called Nz which returns either
the value if it isn't null, or some arbitrary Variant (IIRC) if it is.
The construct IF Nz(initials.Value,"")="" Then .... will usually
work, although *only* in Access. It would be possible to write an
equivalent in VB, but if you may be using a combination of different
data access technologies (ADO, RDO, DAO, raw ODBC or OLE DB, raw SQL
passthrough queries, with or without data controls, etc.), it is
fiendishly difficult to write a handler that will work and/or report
a useful error message reliably.
My usual approach is to try to coerce the Value of a field into the
type I know I'm looking for (String, Long, Date, or Boolean most of
the time). If an error is trapped on the line where the conversion is
happening, then I have a value that is either invalid, empty, or Null.
If the difference between these is important I can test for it here.
Otherwise, if the cast/conversion/coercion does work, I will end up
with the right thing 99.999% of the time. Which, by VB standards, is
actually fairly good. You do need to know in advance what type you're
looking for. If you want to write code that is not reliant on the
specific database or data access technology, a table listing field
names and types and their owning tables is very useful. The system
tables will contain this information.
And, yes, I know these must sound like God-awful kludges to anyone
with experience in more robust environments, but it is trivial
compared to some of the crap that any VB programmer has to live with
on a daily basis.
Joe
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Let's just have a discussion about Global Domination
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 14:57:32 -0400
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> Microsoft has told us all along what was necessary for a commercial
> software vendor to acquire global domination of the Operating System
> Market.
>
> What answers has Microsoft provided us.
>
> In the beginning, there was Microsoft with DOS and UNIX's galore
> with UNIX.
>
> The Microsoft DOS system was easier for NEWBIES to use, so it took
> off.
I wouldn't say that MS-DOS was ever "easier" to use than UNIX. It was
certainly cheaper.
>
> To make the NEWBIE even more happy Microsoft made Windows 3.X.
After NEWBIE found Windowed 1.x and 2.x unusable.
>
> This also put them in competition with Apple.
>
> What was the final analysis! They gave the customer what he wanted.
> A CHEAPER OS for a CHEAPER PC, the IBM PC CLONES.
Yes, UNIX was also still embroiled in an AT&T licensing mess.
>
> Microsoft quickly began to dominate the Workstation market.
>
> OS2 evolved along the same light. OS2 had some problems.
> IBM insisted on writing all the drivers themselves.
> Microsoft started a policy of having VENDORS write the drivers for
> them.
Microsoft and IBM developed, jointly, OS/2 1.x. It was IBM's insistence
that OS/2 1.x run all the major DOS programs AND run on a 80286 that
made OS/2 1.x the late dog that it was.
>
> IBM had a bad reputation from the start from all the people who delt
> with them during the mainframe wars. Those IBM only shops with
> IBM only employee's in them. Anybody who said anything bad about IBM
> and was overheard was suddenly fired with no chance to gain employment
> again. These were the HARD OLD DAYS back when IBM attempted to gain
> global domination of the mainframe markets.
>
> IN those days, MICROSOFT corporation was everybody's hero.
> Believe me, they were!
>
Yes, I remember. How far they have fallen. Remember the quote, "Choose
your enemies well....."
> So they made it all the way to the top then began a policy of making
> proprietary communications interfaces built into their WEB BROWSER.
>
> They attacked and devestated Netscape.
>
> It was at this point in time that Microsoft quit attacking other OS
> companies. They had won the war for the PC and were beginning to
> attack other companies applications which gave threat to continued
> global domination of the desktop.
>
> Netscape was the next logical target. HTML was the saloon.
> The INTERNET was the street where the gunbattle took place.
>
> Netscape got one shot off and in the process received 5 rounds to the
> chest.
>
> The county folks saw this and decided to bust up the Microsoft gang
> before they lost control of the county.
>
> Basically what we are saying here is what we said about IBM from 30
> years ago. Once they achieve global domination a corporation has to
> resort to quasi criminal actions to remain on top.
>
> Let's look at what Linux does now. Let's examine the desktop,
> the multi user OS that Linux is, let's look at the network,
> let's see the netscape communicator now healed from his wounds.
>
> Now let's tell the truth. Linux right now offeres more than NT does
> for the desktop? Truth or False?
>
> It's TRUE. There is JAVA support under LINUX. There's nothing NT
> offeres which Linux doesn't already offer. Nothing.
>
> Let's look at the price issue.
> $45 for Suse 6.4, $65 for Redhat Deluxe. $45 for Mandrake 7.0.
> $8 for Debian. $350 for Windows 2000. $190 for NT 4.0.
Don't forget, it is also "free" once you have obtained it. Meaning that
you can copy it all you want.
>
> They are no longer the cheapest OS. If you have a large office
> building full of people, say 450 pc's worth, I'm going to have to
> buy 450 * 350 = $157,500 is the cost to upgrade my desktops.
> That doesn't count servers.
>
> You could do the same thing under LINUX for $0 if you had somebody
> working for your firm who knew how to use FTP.
Just but it once a quarter for 29.99 and copy it all you want.
>
> What's worse is everything advertized to work under the LINUX
> distribution does work and everything under the Windows 2000 OS does
> not work. They are saying 30% of 2000 is broken. 30%! That's just
> freaken pathetic man!
>
> What really sucks is I work for a company which is chained to
> Microsoft currently. If their product doesn't work, then I could
> loose my job. That's what I'm facing right now. I'm facing a sorry
> product which was picked for us by people with high school educations.
>
> I'm not joking here. I work for a couple of high school educated
> folks who we're smart enough to start their own business but we're not
> smart enough to be able to pick out an OS to base it on.
It has been my experience that it is not the level of education a person
attains, but the level of knowledge a person pursues. I know a lot of
BS/MS that are stupid. I know a lot of high school grads that are
brilliant.
>
> We live in troubled times.
>
> I've got Mandrake 7.0 installed in my machine.
> It's really a dream compared to the NT install.
>
> A NEWBIE would love it, high school educated or not.
>
> 2 years from now, there won't be a NEWBIE on this planet who won't
> love a LINUX install. LINUX system administration wizards and the
> like.
>
> So we've brought ourselves to the third reason Microsoft stays in
> power. "IGNORANCE".
Again, I am troubled about your categorization of "education" as a way
to enlightenment. Yes, people with a desire for enlightenment and
education can better themselves through collage. Just remember, George
W. bush and Dan Quale graduated collage. Abraham Lincoln, the Wright
brothers, H.G. Wells, and many other great names had not.
I think education level considered more importantly than it really is.
Wisdom, intelligence, experience, common sense, and character are not
built in collage, they are born and raised in a person.
>
> IT was a part of Bill's strategy from the beginning.
> Global domination is nothing more than having control over the worlds
> "IGNORANT PEOPLE".
This can be said about anyone who wishes to gain control over people.
Control can not be exerted without power. One can not have power without
influence over many. More often than not, evil has influence over
ignorance.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Charlie
>
> If Bill GATES were a drug dealer then the world would be a cemetary.
--
Mohawk Software
Windows 9x, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com
"We've got a blind date with destiny, and it looks like she ordered the
lobster"
------------------------------
From: Kool Breeze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux vs Windows development man-hours?
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 19:01:51 GMT
Yup, you're right. After review I compeletey missed the question. Oh
well, no more 2am posts.
On Sun, 02 Apr 2000 05:15:24 -0400, Robert Morelli
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>This doesn't really address the question I posed. I'm not asking about developing
>Linux software versus developing Windows software.
>
>Kool Breeze wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 31 Mar 2000 18:16:01 -0500, Robert Morelli
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >Does anyone have a comparison of the amount of development time that is
>> >currently going into developing Windows versus Linux? I'd prefer not to get
>> >responses that point out the obvious, that it's hard to make a direct
>> >comparison. I know that but I still consider the question interesting,
>> >because the bottom line here is which OS will evolve and add new features more
>> >quickly.
>> >
>>
>> I have been lucky enough (due to timing of our companies' buy-out)
>> been able to compare.
>>
>> I took two programmers two years (4 man years) to develop a Linux
>> solution at my office. Some of that time was spent building a windows
>> front end (BTW Im one of the programmers/Project Manager). I had to
>> learn Win32/MFC aas I went. Mostly 50-90 hours/week for my part. The
>> other programmer was a 40 hour (leave at 5pm sharp) kinda guy.
>>
>> Our parent company has had 5 years and 5 programmers and are just now
>> starting to roll out a pure-NT solution. 25 man years. They will spend
>> another year working out major bugs and adding enhancements as I did.
>>
>> The products have the same functionality.
>>
>> IMHO, it takes many more lines of code in Win32. There is no
>> core-dumps that pinpoint the problem on Win32 (Unless you run Dr
>> Watson or some util...)
>>
>> The functions in Win32 are cumbersome and the Win32 API is changing
>> (at a slower rate, but now there's W2K to deal with...)
>>
>> IMHO it takes about twice the resources (time OR programmers) to
>> develop in Win32 and/or C++, twice the hardware and twice the support
>> resources of a *NIX application. You more than likelly will have twice
>> the turnover and twice the initial installation costs. Oh and twice
>> the downtime. NT development requires lots of knowledge about threads,
>> fibers (ok...maybe not fibers) and such since you need advanced
>> programming techniques to get around the bloat of the OS itself.
>>
>> Of course, your support contracts aren't as easy to since most
>> customers think they can administer NT (false sense of security made
>> by the knowledge of how to handle a dialog box/menu system).
>>
>> Yup. I am dealing with this all now. Of course in some cases above
>> twice is a little high depending on your application/system, but then
>> again twice can be way low. Eg. In our case we run 6 apps on one Linux
>> box. We run one of those apps on 6 NT boxen for the pure NT solution.
>>
>> One advantage of NT/W2K for any project, is that it's an easy sell.
>> Perception of NT/W2K overrides the realities. This means after the
>> sell, large amounts of down time is tolerated as well. It's often
>> blamed on the poor programmers (and the main one on that project is
>> VERY good...I can tell from what he says). BTW: I have met about 3
>> good programmers in my 12 professional years of experience. The rest
>> are mediocre at best.
>>
>> Most people out there have blindly bought into the MS marketing.
>> People believe.
>>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
