Linux-Advocacy Digest #920, Volume #25 Mon, 3 Apr 00 05:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Win2000 kicks ass (Shadow Hunter)
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse (Christopher Browne)
Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped (Shadow Hunter)
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse (George Marengo)
Re: Windows 2000 has "issues" (Jim Richardson)
Re: Dish Network's site is DOWN if you don't use M$'s browser. (John & Susie)
Re: Microsoft's settlement offer : publish ALL OR NOTHING AT ALL ("Quantum Leaper")
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Nice link (Nico Coetzee)
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse (Christopher Browne)
Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse (George Marengo)
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse (Christopher Browne)
Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped (Darren Winsper)
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse (Ken Kinder)
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse (Ken Kinder)
Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped (Ken Kinder)
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse (George Marengo)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Shadow Hunter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win2000 kicks ass
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 23:07:39 -0400
Good point on the memory. Of course, as these programs get bigger and
bigger they soak more and more memory up hence the need for 128 megs
of RAM or 256 megs of RAM. Look at the MINIMUM requirements for
Windows 2000 Advanced Server and you're looking at 128 megs of RAM as
a requirement and 256 megs of RAM is recommend. I don't think I'll be
upgrading to this OS anytime soon. 96 megs of RAM I should think will
serve Linux just fine. Good luck on anything you're currently
developing and I wish you well.
Shadow Hunter
On Mon, 03 Apr 2000 04:10:37 +0200, Jianmang Li
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Yes you right more memory will help you survive longer. But remember only longer
>but not forever. The out of memory is mostly due to memory leakage. So no matter
>how much memory you have you crash the machine as long ass you run it for too
>long.
>
>I use MS visual studio on a P400/128 MB Windows 95 box. During debugging phase, I
>normally crash the machine two, three times a day. Generally two times crash of
>my own early stage buggy program will most likely bring down the Windows. One
>"healthy" habit that I developed under window is that - push that save button as
>often as you can, otherwise you regret for it.
>
>Normal user does not suffer as much as developer. First the developer use memory
>intensive tools such as compiler. Secondly developer runs buggy programs of their
>own on a buggy OS.
>
>Shadow Hunter wrote:
>
>> I can't say I have the same problems with Windows 98. I can't say too
>> much about new Linux Distro's at this point in time as I'm still
>> awaiting my copy of Redhat 6.2 to arrive from cheapbytes.com but this
>> system will be dual booting Windows 98 and RH 6.2. I have no problems
>> or crashes with Windows 98. Adding 32 megs of RAM to the 64 I already
>> had really made the system more stable then it was as it would
>> occasionally crash out and I believe that was due to running out of
>> memory more then anything. Just my experiences although I know a lot
>> of people have had trouble with 95 and 98 so I am not a Microsoft
>> Advocate by any means. After I learn all the little tricks to RH I'll
>> probably completely switch over since I do have another machine that
>> runs Windows 95 anyway. :)
>>
>> Shadow Hunter
>>
>> On Sun, 02 Apr 2000 23:10:56 GMT, "Dirk Gently"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >Hello. What medication are you on? I think you had better stop eight years
>> >ago. Windows CAN'T be better than Linux. Sure, it might have a better gui
>> >and more programs, but it still isn't better. The day Windows is better
>> >than Linux, 6545.546646 will be the answer to life, the universe, and
>> >everything (Not 42).
>> >
>> >At home, I have two 98 computers. One crash literally every 5 minutes. The
>> >other one crashes once a week (min). You're just lucky because 2000 thinks
>> >you like Microsoft.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 03:13:03 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Erik Funkenbusch would say:
>Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >Hardly. WinCE mightn't be as popular as PalmOS, but devices using it are
>> >certainly selling well. WinCE hasn't been around for that long either,
>> >whereas NT was around on several platforms for many years.
>>
>> Selling so well, that IBM just stopped making Wince boxes. Still making
>their
>> palm clone though.
>
>IBM just came out with a new Workpad that is CE based. The Workpad z50.
>
>This thing sells faster than IBM can produce it.
Oh yes, it's "new," and is "selling faster than IBM produces it."
With the minor detail that it has been, um, discontinued.
As a result, selling one unit a week represents "selling faster than
IBM produces it."
http://www.pdabuzz.com/Discussion/Forum4/HTML/000439.html
http://www.byte.com/feature/BYT20000202S0003
By the way, it wasn't discontinued recently; it's been several months...
--
Friends help you move. Real friends help you move bodies.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: Shadow Hunter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 23:12:38 -0400
>I haven't used Corel, but I can say that Mandrake 7.0.2 picked up my
>hardware better then Win2K. I mean, it got my 2940UW card and tape drive,
>CDRW, Zip, Sound Blaster, the NIC, brand spanking new Voodoo 3500 and
>everything worked with no problems. If RedHat and the others continue
>this trend towards simplicity in the setup, I think Linux really has a
>chance against Windows.
Just as another thing to add for whatever reason I could not get my
USRobotics ISA 56k modem to work under Windows 2000. It detected it,
install drivers for it, but then just got nothing but hardware errors
after setting up DUN and everything to go with it. In Linux that
USRobotics gets picked up automatically and I connect 48,000bps all
the time no problems. I'm not that impress with Windows 2000. Not to
mention that my Intel EtherExpress which installs automatically under
95 and 98 wasn't able to installed in Windows 2000 either for some
still unknown reason. Oh yeah, I'm real impressed and I do agree I
believe Linux will potentially pull ahead. I personally think MS bit
the big one on Windows 2000 and will probably slice their own throats
in the process.
Shadow Hunter
------------------------------
From: George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 03:16:37 GMT
On Mon, 03 Apr 2000 02:58:36 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
wrote:
>On Sun, 2 Apr 2000 00:25:44 -0600,
> Erik Funkenbusch, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>
>>Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> >Hardly. WinCE mightn't be as popular as PalmOS, but devices using it are
>>> >certainly selling well. WinCE hasn't been around for that long either,
>>> >whereas NT was around on several platforms for many years.
>>>
>>> Selling so well, that IBM just stopped making Wince boxes. Still making
>>their
>>> palm clone though.
>>
>>IBM just came out with a new Workpad that is CE based. The Workpad z50.
>>
>>This thing sells faster than IBM can produce it.
>
>This thing came out almost a year ago.
>Also, visiting commerce.www.ibm.com and searching for Z50, results only
>in accessories, no machines. Wonder if they are still making them? The
>only product named workpad that I can find, is their palm pilot clone.
> Of course, if you trot on over to
> http://www.byte.com/features/BYT20000202S0003 you can read the reaction
>of one writer (who really likes his Z50) to IBM's discontinuing them...
> Sorry to be the bearer of bad news Eric...(no, that's not sarcasm)
Ouch... it would be pretty hard to even make the claim that it
sold well even when they were selling it. Who would drop a product
in <1 year if "This thing sells faster than IBM can produce it" were
really true?
Eric Funkenbusch, fess up... you made that claim up, didn't you?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has "issues"
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 03:24:55 GMT
On Sat, 1 Apr 2000 21:03:06 -0600,
Erik Funkenbusch, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Christopher Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >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?
>
>No, it means that it's a threshold, not a "hard coded" arbitrary limit. The
>empahsis here is on "hard coded".
>
>> 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.
>
>My understanding is that it's a stack related issue. 51 seems to be the
>threshold that causes causes this on domain controller machines.
>
>> 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.
>
>The number may be arbitrary, but the number was not a *CHOSEN* arbitrary
>limit that was *HARD CODED* as mlw suggests.
So they randomly decided that 51 was enough? I mean it's either
1) Chosen and coded in or
2) A result of some other limit.
If 1, why? if 2, what is the other limit.
It sure sounds like another way for M$ to try and sell more boxes...
Like the diff between NTWS 4.0 and NTS 4.0
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: John & Susie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
rec.video.satellite.dbs,alt.satellite.tv,rec.video.satellite.misc,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.infosystems.www.browsers.x,comp.infosystems.www.browsers,comp.infosystems.www.browswers.misc
Subject: Re: Dish Network's site is DOWN if you don't use M$'s browser.
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 00:01:49 -0400
Worked OK for me (Communicator 4.5)? But if they cant design web pages
to suit the general public, dont go there.
John
Randy Crawford wrote:
>
> Simply amazing.
>
> I just tried to visit http://www.dishnetwork.com, but every
> time it crashed Netscape within visiting one, or at most two
> links off the main page. (I'm running Linux Redhat 6.0,
> Netscape 4.61, and I'm no newbie to Living Without Windows.)
>
> On the main page DN states that they DO NOT SUPPORT Netscape.
> Period. If you want to visit their site, "You should download
> Internet Explorer". They claim that it's Netscape's problem
> that their site crashes and burns and there's nothing they can
> do about it.
>
> UNbelievable. So much for selling Dish Network systems to
> all the AOL subscribers (who use Netscape).
>
> I bought a Dish Network system about a year ago. I *had*
> planned on renewing my subscription, and I wanted to see what
> their current services and hardware looked like.
>
> But I've changed my mind. If any vendor has the hubris to state
> that they won't serve me unless I CHANGE OPERATING SYSTEMS, or
> that they're unable to master the trivial technology of creating
> web pages that work with more than ONE browser, they clearly don't
> care if they lose millions of potential customers. And of course,
> they're incompetent idiots.
>
> Is Dish Network this clueless on other topics? I find this
> attitude to be incredibly self serving and short sighted. Do
> their stockholders know this? Does *Rupert Murdoch* know this?
>
> So... Anybody want to buy a Dish Network system? I'm switching to
> Direct TV.
>
> Randy
>
> --
> Randy Crawford
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.engin.umich.edu/labs/cpc
------------------------------
From: "Quantum Leaper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft's settlement offer : publish ALL OR NOTHING AT ALL
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 04:25:20 GMT
"Gooba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:eFSF4.8515$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> It just struck me last night and I don't know if it's been explored yet.
An
> Open Sourced Windows would allow people to create new desktops for it,
> right? KDE for Windows?
>
> And considering we already have the option of a command line boot, then
> isn't it theoretically possible to already create such a thing?
>
> Seemed relevant to the thread...<shrug>
>
New desktops are nothing new with Window9x and NT. There about a dozen or
so, desktops you can use, instead of Explorer. Try
http://floach.pimpin.net/
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 23:45:26 -0500
Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> This thing came out almost a year ago.
> Also, visiting commerce.www.ibm.com and searching for Z50, results only
> in accessories, no machines. Wonder if they are still making them? The
> only product named workpad that I can find, is their palm pilot clone.
> Of course, if you trot on over to
> http://www.byte.com/features/BYT20000202S0003 you can read the reaction
> of one writer (who really likes his Z50) to IBM's discontinuing them...
> Sorry to be the bearer of bad news Eric...(no, that's not sarcasm)
The page does not exist.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 06:53:55 +0200
From: Nico Coetzee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Nice link
==============C9512ABFE4D0EB33C2D30965
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
John & Susie wrote:
> Gary Hallock wrote:
> >
> > Francis Van Oaken wrote:
> >
> > > Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:N16F4.2477$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > > If you're using Windows, please click the link below for
> > > > something nice:
> > >
> > > Here's an even nicer one: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > Francis.
> >
> > Why? It's not like Chill maliciously created a web page to bring down Windows.
>It's
> > simply points to a nonexistent file on you hard drive. Something anyone might do
>if
> > they accidentally typed the wrong file name. You should be glad you found out
>this way
> > rather than when you had other windows up with important work in progress. It was
> > quite obvious that it was going to crash the system - it didn't take much reading
> > between the lines to figure that out. Of course on Linux using Netscape I got
>what I
> > would expect:
> >
> > Netscape is unable to find the file or directory named /c:/aux/aux. Check the
>name and
> > try again.
>
> Netscape running under NT also says it cant find the page. Whats it
> supposed to do?
>
> >
> > Gary
What is that link again ? Is it c:\aux\aux or /c:/aux/aux? I would like to play with
it a
bit. Thanx.
Nico
--
=========================================================
This signature was added automatically by Linux:
.
Confirmed bachelor:
A man who goes through life without a hitch.
==============C9512ABFE4D0EB33C2D30965
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
John & Susie wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>Gary Hallock wrote:
<br>>
<br>> Francis Van Oaken wrote:
<br>>
<br>> > Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message <a
href="news:N16F4.2477$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:N16F4.2477$[EMAIL PROTECTED]</a>...
<br>> >
<br>> > > If you're using Windows, please click the link below for
<br>> > > something nice:
<br>> >
<br>> > Here's an even nicer one: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<br>> >
<br>> > Francis.
<br>>
<br>> Why? It's not like Chill maliciously created a web page to
bring down Windows. It's
<br>> simply points to a nonexistent file on you hard drive.
Something anyone might do if
<br>> they accidentally typed the wrong file name. You should be
glad you found out this way
<br>> rather than when you had other windows up with important work in
progress. It was
<br>> quite obvious that it was going to crash the system - it didn't take
much reading
<br>> between the lines to figure that out. Of course on Linux
using Netscape I got what I
<br>> would expect:
<br>>
<br>> Netscape is unable to find the file or directory named /c:/aux/aux.
Check the name and
<br>> try again.
<p>Netscape running under NT also says it cant find the page. Whats it
<br>supposed to do?
<p>>
<br>> Gary</blockquote>
What is that link again ? Is it c:\aux\aux or /c:/aux/aux? I would like
to play with it a bit. Thanx.
<p>Nico
<pre>--
=========================================================
This signature was added automatically by Linux:
.
Confirmed bachelor:
A man who goes through life without a
hitch.</pre>
</html>
==============C9512ABFE4D0EB33C2D30965==
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 04:55:39 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Erik Funkenbusch would say:
>Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> This thing came out almost a year ago.
>> Also, visiting commerce.www.ibm.com and searching for Z50, results only
>> in accessories, no machines. Wonder if they are still making them? The
>> only product named workpad that I can find, is their palm pilot clone.
>> Of course, if you trot on over to
>> http://www.byte.com/features/BYT20000202S0003 you can read the reaction
>> of one writer (who really likes his Z50) to IBM's discontinuing them...
>> Sorry to be the bearer of bad news Eric...(no, that's not sarcasm)
>
>The page does not exist.
Strange; if you search the Byte archives at <http://www.byte.com/features/>,
and query for "z50," it quotes that as the URL to the very first story
on their list, which is entitled:
"BYTE Feature: IBM's Discontinued WorkPad z50: Right for You?"
It then provides a Javascript entry that will jump you on to the article
that appears to be hosted on <http://www.eoenabled.com/>.
But apparently your web skills aren't up to doing such lofty levels
of research...
--
If con is the opposite of pro, is Congress the opposite of progress?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2000 23:29:26 -0500
Kurt wrote:
> Yea, but I'm pretty sure that with 128 MB of ram, it doesn't absolutely
> need to use that swap space (hell, I only have 161 MB ram + swap).
> That's just how the kernel decided it wanted to use the available
> memory.
It depends on what you're doing.
I have some draft components for a game, which lets the user specify the map
size at run time. It will support *any* size of map that you have the memory
resources for. I have consumed 256Mb of RAM + 256Mb of swap while testing it.
I'd test it for more if I had access to a machine with more.
Naturally, you wouldn't want to actually run a game with the game data in swap,
though even that might be tolerable with sufficient locality of reference. OTOH,
it's real nice if your game kicks all your idle apps into swap so that you can
use almost all your RAM for game data. Better, IMO, than having to close all
your other apps to run a resource-intensive game.
Similarly, I have seen The GIMP kick lots of other stuff into swap so it could
grab many megabytes of RAM to do image manipulations with multiple layers of
undo's.
For most PCs, swap size = RAM size is a fairly small percentage of total disk
space, and therefore a fairly cheap "reserve" memory capacity. If you're tight
on disk space, or if experience tells you that you never need much/any swap,
then by all means, don't feel obligated to allocate any. But having it might
make a difference that one time a year when you try some image manipulation that
takes just a wee bit more memory than you have RAM for. And of course, you
don't have any idea what applications/operations you'll want to try next year.
> A buddy of mine seemed dissapointed when he upgraded to 256 MB
> and was still using swap space.
I Am Not An Expert, but I hear very frequently that Linux proactively swaps out
certain things to keep more memory free for on-demand availability -- and also
grabs lots of "extra" memory for buffers and the like. So it looks like it is
using a very large percentage of your resources when it really isn't doing very
much. But unlike certain other operating systems often discussed here, it's
pretty good at shuffling those resources around when your program needs them.
(No "51" for us, thank you!)
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 05:34:57 GMT
On Sun, 2 Apr 2000 23:45:26 -0500, "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> This thing came out almost a year ago.
>> Also, visiting commerce.www.ibm.com and searching for Z50, results only
>> in accessories, no machines. Wonder if they are still making them? The
>> only product named workpad that I can find, is their palm pilot clone.
>> Of course, if you trot on over to
>> http://www.byte.com/features/BYT20000202S0003 you can read the reaction
>> of one writer (who really likes his Z50) to IBM's discontinuing them...
>> Sorry to be the bearer of bad news Eric...(no, that's not sarcasm)
>
>The page does not exist.
Eric, follow the steps, one by one, and you'll be able to find the
story that shows your claim about IBM being unable to keep up
with sales to be fraudulent:
Go to http://www.byte.com
In the Search window, enter the term "z50"
Click on "Search"
Click on the link titled:
BYTE Feature - IBM's Discontinued WorkPad z50: Right For You?
The upside is that the writer really likes the z50, and at the
closeout price he thinks it's a great deal. But what does he say
about the downside?
The big downside is the Z50 is slow. Even the dumbed-down
Win CE operating system seems to overwhelm the 131 MHz MIPS
processor and 16 Mbytes of internal memory.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 05:56:22 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when George Marengo would say:
>On Sun, 2 Apr 2000 23:45:26 -0500, "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>>Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> This thing came out almost a year ago.
>>> Also, visiting commerce.www.ibm.com and searching for Z50, results only
>>> in accessories, no machines. Wonder if they are still making them? The
>>> only product named workpad that I can find, is their palm pilot clone.
>>> Of course, if you trot on over to
>>> http://www.byte.com/features/BYT20000202S0003 you can read the reaction
>>> of one writer (who really likes his Z50) to IBM's discontinuing them...
>>> Sorry to be the bearer of bad news Eric...(no, that's not sarcasm)
>>
>>The page does not exist.
>
>Eric, follow the steps, one by one, and you'll be able to find the
>story that shows your claim about IBM being unable to keep up
>with sales to be fraudulent:
>
>Go to http://www.byte.com
>In the Search window, enter the term "z50"
>Click on "Search"
>Click on the link titled:
>BYTE Feature - IBM's Discontinued WorkPad z50: Right For You?
Thanks; 'twill be interesting to see if this gets ignored by the
most sophisticated Eric...
>The upside is that the writer really likes the z50, and at the
>closeout price he thinks it's a great deal. But what does he say
>about the downside?
>
> The big downside is the Z50 is slow. Even the dumbed-down
> Win CE operating system seems to overwhelm the 131 MHz MIPS
> processor and 16 Mbytes of internal memory.
All that being said, you can apparently run NetBSD on these little
guys, which ought to be pretty slick.
It's sort of too bad that they didn't survive in the marketplace;
Pricewatch still reports a few places where you can get Z50s for around
$400.
--
"Keep your arms and legs attached to your torso at all times."
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric Griswold)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Winsper)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped
Date: 3 Apr 2000 06:16:23 GMT
On Sat, 01 Apr 2000 19:20:58 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Apr 2000 19:07:13 +0100, "Nick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >Still haven't got the wheel on my mouse working yet...
>
> IMWheel should do the trick.
>
> Try:
>
> http://www.freshmeat.net and look for IMWheel.
IMWheel isn't really needed. Just shove this in your XF86Config file:
Buttons 5
ZAxisMapping 4 5
That is assuming your aren't using XFree4.
--
Darren Winsper (El Capitano) - ICQ #8899775
Stellar Legacy project member - http://www.stellarlegacy.tsx.org
DVD boycotts. Are you doing your bit?
This message was typed before a live studio audience.
------------------------------
From: Ken Kinder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 06:15:08 GMT
[ outlook debate ]
> Such a program could operate under Unix as well. Your mail aliases are
just
> as accessible to a binary program (and more and more binary releases
are
> coming out these days).
True enough, but fewer Linux programmers are stupid enough to encourage
running mysterious binaries sent through email. StarOffice is I'm sure
an exception. Outlook isn't a flaw of the OS, it is its own flaw.
--
Ken Kinder
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Ken Kinder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 06:21:32 GMT
In article <8b06a1$bl6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[MS switching hotmail to NT]
> If so, then I see only two possibilities:
>
> (a) They tried and failed; or
>
> (b) They didn't try, when they said they would (meaning they lied).
>
> So they're either dishonest or incompetent. Take your pick, but I
> would have more respect for them if they were merely incompetent
> rather than dishonest.
They did try and they did fail. Do you not remember shortly after it was
purchased my Microsoft it was annonced to be running NT? No one could
really tell - the servers were so hosed no one could get to them.
Shortly after, everything reverted to Unix for hotmail.<p>
Figuring this out isn't brian surgery. They were trying to migrate from
a high-performance 64-bit OS running on 64-bit cutting edge hardware to
NT running on Intel. Of course that's going to sink scalability.
--
Ken Kinder
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Ken Kinder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 06:24:20 GMT
In article <8c5drd$j40$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Nick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What are the 10 things about Linux you wish you knew before you got
a
> > copy and started installing?
>
> Good point.
>
> Number one on my list would definitely be the fairly new Winmodem
stuck in
> my PCI slot. Thank god for Windoze user friends that you can sell them
on to
> : )
>
> Still haven't got the wheel on my mouse working yet...
There's a HOWTO on that. www.linuxdoc.org
--
Ken Kinder
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2000 06:58:10 GMT
On Mon, 03 Apr 2000 06:21:32 GMT, Ken Kinder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>In article <8b06a1$bl6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>"Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>[MS switching hotmail to NT]
>
>> If so, then I see only two possibilities:
>>
>> (a) They tried and failed; or
>>
>> (b) They didn't try, when they said they would (meaning they lied).
>>
>> So they're either dishonest or incompetent. Take your pick, but I
>> would have more respect for them if they were merely incompetent
>> rather than dishonest.
>
>They did try and they did fail. Do you not remember shortly after it was
>purchased my Microsoft it was annonced to be running NT?
Actually, I don't. Do you have a link for that announcement?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
