Linux-Advocacy Digest #951, Volume #25 Tue, 4 Apr 00 23:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters. (Jim
Richardson)
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
(Damien)
Re: 2000: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine! (Terry Porter)
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
(Damien)
Re: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine! (Tim Kelley)
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS (Gary Hallock)
Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading (Bob Lyday)
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
("Alan")
Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
("Alan")
Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows (Tim Kelley)
Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Top 10 reasons why Linux sux (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Why Linux on the desktop? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows (Tim Kelley)
Re: Win2000 kicks ass (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading (Bob Lyday)
Re: For the WinTrolls - incredible (Terry Porter)
Re: What should be done with MS ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 02:24:55 GMT
On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 14:51:03 GMT,
Leonard F. Agius, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>"LShaping@..." wrote:
>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk) wrote:
>> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >>>>>>>>>><snip>
>>
>> >>Believe that whatever the government does, MS will come out on top of
>> >>it all. Checked your phone bill lately? Deregulation did wonders for
>> >>us all in that market :(
>> >
>> >Long distance rates within the U.S. used to be about 30 cents
>> >a minute, and now they are 5 cents. It's amazing how this
>> >guy just pours the lies out so glibly and hopes that we will
>> >believe them.
>>
>> Before AT&T was broken up, long ago, long distance rates were
>> approaching one dollar per minute.
>> LShaping
>
>So what? Now we have multiple local and near zones, where it is now more
>expensive today to dial a number on the other side of town (at least in
>Detroit, Chicago, and other Ameritech locations). It's cheaper for me to
>call one of my siblings out of state than to call my parents fifteen miles
>a way. Degregulation did cause long distance rates to fall, but what you
>may not have realized is that in the bad ole' days of one Ma Bell, the long
>distance rates were subsidizing the local service. Now it doesn't. I'm not
>making that up, either. The Michigan Public Service Commission (which
>regulates local utilities) stated that fact two years ago.
Right, so the guys who can compete. (the long distance companies) are cheaper
than before the breakup. But the stuff you have no choice on (the dial-tone
provider) is more expensive, free clue, the guys with the monopoly, (dial tone)
are gouging you, because they have a monopoly.
For me, given my calling habits, Sprint PCS is cheaper than POTS, and
as soon as my ISP gets wireless, then I'll drop the landline completely.
>
>I can't speak for you, but I make a hell of a lot more local calls than I
>do long distance, so in the end, deregulation costs me more in the way of
>higher over all phone bills.
>
>
How much of that is either taxes, or fees to a govt. protected monopoly?
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damien)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 05 Apr 2000 02:27:41 GMT
On Wed, 05 Apr 2000 01:56:19 GMT, in alt.destroy.microsoft,
Shell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| It is my contention that it is in fact Apache which put Netscape into the
| ground.
Apache pre-dates Netscape . . . but that's okay.
| Think about it for a bit. In both the case of Netscape and Internet
| Explorer they gave the browser away for free. Why?
| The thought was, they could get you hooked and then sell backend
| services(i.e the Server) to make income.
True in the case of IE. Netscape did the same in an attempt to keep
that from happening.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: 2000: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine!
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 5 Apr 2000 10:32:23 +0800
On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 23:41:21 GMT,
Leonard F. Agius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
>
>Defrag a hard drive regularly? Are you kidding - I interview with one sales
>manager that PAID someone to come to his house twice a year to do that (he
>only defrags TWICE A YEAR???). Back up their system files? "Huh?"
>
Are you aware Leonard, that with Linux, its not necessary for someone
to "come to your house" ?
Unlike Windows, Unix has always had easy to use *remote* admin built in. Windows
has only denied that facility to you.
>This, people, is the mass market that drives the marketing decisions of
>hardware and software providers. Period.
People who couldn't be bothered learning how to use that new fangled bow
and stuck with their easy to understand club or sword, were the ones usually
found laying in a field doing a porcupine impersonation.
The world has moved on Leonard, your arguments, like Heather/Steve are
only vain pleadings to stop the future, and stay in the past. Period.
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 days 15 hours 38 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Damien)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 05 Apr 2000 02:33:04 GMT
On Tue, 4 Apr 2000 21:14:35 -0500, in alt.destroy.microsoft,
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Mark S. Bilk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
| news:8ccr85$mej$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
|
| > Meaning what, that Microsoft hasn't bombed the headquarters
| > of Red Hat? MS has spewed out huge amounts of propaganda
| > against Linux and other competitors, some secretly financed
| > in astroturf operations, has paid for rigged benchmarks, used
| > non-disclosure agreements to prevent companies from publishing
| > benchmarks where Linux comes out ahead, put up a whole website
| > full of lies about the competition, etc.
|
| > http://www.deja.com/=dnc/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=342778662
|
| Rigged benchmarks? Even Linus and the others that KNOW linux agreed that
| the benchmarks showed faults in Linux, and they did lots of work to fix
| those faults. If they were rigged, why did Linux have to be improved?
Rigged is the wrong term, more like 'contrived'. Benchmarks which
have considerably less relevence to real world situations then you
average benchmark, and that were designed that way because it would
put MS in favorable light.
Of course this still mean NT did prove to be better, even under these
ridiculous circumstances. Linux is not perfect and has benifited from
progress made in those areas.
| > If that were true, there wouldn't be so many Microsoft propa-
| > gandists lying about (mostly non-existent) shortcomings in
| > Linux, and trying in every other way to discourage people
| > from using it.
|
| Non-existant shortcomings. I see, so Linux is perfect. Glad to hear it.
| Everyone can stop work now. Go home (or if you're working from home, go
| out). It's done. Nother more to do.
He said *mostly* non-existent.
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine!
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 21:25:54 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Otto wrote:
>
> "Tim Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > let's count 'em:
> >
> > 1. DOJ ruling
>
> Give it at least a year before something actually happens.
stock's already plummetting.
> > 2. Netscape 6
>
> It still blows, especially under Linux
a minor irritation to put up with considering the alternative. Yu're speaking of
netscape 4x.
> > 3. KDE 2.0 (I haven't forgotten gnome just not paying attention)
>
> Isn't faster, or better than Windows interface.
Oh, so you've used it have you? Shit, TWM is an improvement over the windows
interface. It's not the "interface" windows advocates blab about. It's app
availability. Windows interface is hopelessly mired in 1970's concepts, and it
is impossible to extricate it from them. e.g., drive "letters".
> > 4. K Office
>
> Wanna be Office....
Nope. Uses open file formats. that's the REAL difference.
> > 5. Linux 2.4
>
> When, isn't it already late?
?
> > 6. Corel Office for linux
>
> Isn't free and just a cheap imitation of the real thing.
? It works.
> > 7. NDS for linux
>
> Who cares?
folks who want a secure directory service that works on many plaforms.
> > 9. Big linux strategy from IBM
>
> Even bigger strategy for Windows 2000 from IBM
haven't heard a peep. Making lotsa noise over linux.
> > 10. Total, utter failure of Win98. the biggest piece of
> > worthless shit ever sold to anyone.
>
> Question of opinion, millions disagree...
haven't met a single person who likes win98. Inclues all windows zealots and
linux haters.
> > Fat assed Windows is coasting, sputtering and dying, Linux is
> > behind but accelerating.
>
> Yeah, last year Linux was at the edge of the cliff. Speed off Linux....
wishful thinking.
> > 2000 will be more exciting for linux than 1999 was.
>
> And someone said the same thing in year 1998....
it was true then, it's true now.
> > Can they survive this? Let's hope not!
> Not only they can, they will. It'll be decided by the market and not DoJ.
the "market" decides nothing. People do. When will you market freaks get over
this ridiculous crap? Idiots talk of the "market" today the way people talked
about "god" a few centuries ago. Disturbing.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 10:38:16 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Don't make me laugh. My $69.00 Canon scanner came with enough "free"
> software to blow the doors off anything Linux has, including Gimp.
> Not to mention it worked perfectly out of the box.
> The wizards did everything from configuring to prompting me through
> making my first scan.
>
> Worked like a charm right out of the box and no overpriced SCSI
> needed.
>
> Sane?
>
> Should be called insane...What a joke.....
>
> Linux misses the boat again. When will you people understand that
> setup.exe is your friend?
>
> In this case all I did was pop the CD in and away it went.
>
> Steve
Don't make me laugh. I have the same exact Cannon printer/scanner as you with the same
Cannon software. It is a piece of crap, Control buttons for one screen overlay
parts of
the next screen - they don't know how to update the windows properly. And other then
the
c:/aux/aux trick, the most likely way to crash windows is running Cannon Creative.
Half
the time it decides to eject the paper early and then goes into crazy mode where it
only
prints a fraction of an inch per page and then ejects again.
Gary
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 19:36:24 -0700
From: Bob Lyday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading
Christian Gustafson wrote:
> >
> Microsoft will regroup and refocus again, as it has before, and recover from
> yesterday's decision.
We'll see.
Windows 2000 will be a great success (I love it)
Keep on fooling the idiots. Whoops, I guess you are one!
Sorry! I didn't make you angry, did I?
the> improved> PocketPC devices will be very popular,
Yeah, like I want Loseblows 98 on my damn handheld...why, so it
can poop all over my pocket? Ewwww, gross, dude!
Microsoft will continue to innovate
Oh man, there's the lame old line again...blah blah blah
> and produce> excellent products: SQL Server,
Ha ha ha ha. Only the worst large-scale database on Earth!
Nah, "must be the hardware..."
Internet Explorer,
Sure hosed my system! Hey, how come this dying cow won't
display 15% of my pages? "Must be the hardware", huh?
Win2K,
Yeah, I love getting BSOD's 3 times a day. Yeah, dude! That's
the mark of a Unix killer for sure! Not only that, but it's
also love the slowest OS ever made! I love it! I'm lazy
anyway! I have too much time! Notice that each Windows version
is slower and slower? Like Gates Law -- Moore's Law in
reverse! At some point, Windows is not even gonna run anymore!
Instead of "Put it on, get a cup of coffee", it'll be "Put it
on, go to Colombia!" Haw haw! Love those hardware
requirements! Hey, no prob, we're *all* made out of money!
Office,
I love triple-oeverpriced windbags that have to be reinstalled 3
times a month. Hey, keep up the "innovation", you're doing
great! Really! No kidding!
etc.
Yeah don't mention the rest...I just ate.
I> can't wait to> get a PocketPC later this month.
Hey, line up, there's one born every minute, Christian!
>
> The main purpose of yesterday's decision was to establish a starting point
> for the hordes> of parasitic trial lawyers who want to get a piece of something they
>do not deserve.
Haw haw. M$ reinvented the word "parasite"! Oh, yeah, and Bill
*deserves* every penny! He stole it fair and square! Haw haw!
>
> Microsoft will win on appeal.
Got a crystal ball, Christian?
Either way, we'll see a new administration in > the Fall that >
will end this ugly spectacle as soon as possible.
What the hell can they do, moron? Besides not argue the case
very forcefully...this case doesn't even have to be argued
anyway, it's so blatant...
>
> You OS/2 crazies
Yeah, we're nuts all right! We refuse to go along with the
*cattle*! Why don't you get Bill to arrest us for
"hooliganism", Christian?
are welcome to keep speculating as to which "remedies" you
think> are just and proper: > > show trials and executions of
all executives and employees,
Hey, your words, not mine, sir!
whatever whim> appeals> to your bitter selves these days.
Yeah, we're bitter all right! So are most mugging victims,
jackass! Just don't tell us where you live, okay?
>
> <sheesh>
No, the word is sheep, sir. The name of your species. He he
he.
you guys are *still* using OS/2?!
Yeah, we're completely insane! We're holding out for quality!
In fact, we demand it! We don't wanna join Bill Gates' harem of
"bitches"! What's it like being one of Bill's "bitches",
Christian? Does he feed you well? Does he ever get around to
you? Are you jealous of the other gals?
Oh yeah, is it "Christian" or "Christina"?
>
Haw haw. Cry in your beer, dude! Please don't commit suicide
now! No, don't! Please! Stop! We need some people to beat up
on! Ho ho ho ho!
--
Bob
"There are no significant bugs in our released software that any
significant number of users want fixed," Bill Gates, in an
interview with Focus magazine, Oct 23, 1995.
Remove ".diespammersdie" to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Alan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 02:37:08 GMT
Mark S. Bilk wrote in message <8ccr85$mej$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Believe that MS has done more for the home computing market than any
>>corporation to date. They have truely brought the geek world of
>>computing to the desktop of the typical soccer mom.
>
What does that have to do with them breaking the law? Because they are
successful, are they above the laws that you and I have to follow?
------------------------------
From: "Alan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: The Failure of Microsoft Propaganda -was- So where are the MS supporters.
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 02:37:14 GMT
Leonard F. Agius wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>"LShaping@..." wrote:
>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk) wrote:
>> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >>>>>>>>>><snip>
>>
>> >>Believe that whatever the government does, MS will come out on top of
>> >>it all. Checked your phone bill lately? Deregulation did wonders for
>> >>us all in that market :(
>> >
>> >Long distance rates within the U.S. used to be about 30 cents
>> >a minute, and now they are 5 cents. It's amazing how this
>> >guy just pours the lies out so glibly and hopes that we will
>> >believe them.
>>
>> Before AT&T was broken up, long ago, long distance rates were
>> approaching one dollar per minute.
>> LShaping
>
>So what? Now we have multiple local and near zones, where it is now more
>expensive today to dial a number on the other side of town (at least in
>Detroit, Chicago, and other Ameritech locations). It's cheaper for me to
>call one of my siblings out of state than to call my parents fifteen miles
>a way. Degregulation did cause long distance rates to fall, but what you
>may not have realized is that in the bad ole' days of one Ma Bell, the long
>distance rates were subsidizing the local service. Now it doesn't. I'm not
>making that up, either. The Michigan Public Service Commission (which
>regulates local utilities) stated that fact two years ago.
>
>I can't speak for you, but I make a hell of a lot more local calls than I
>do long distance, so in the end, deregulation costs me more in the way of
>higher over all phone bills.
>
Had the same thing happen to me in college. The local phone company
defaulted to a small (per minute) fee for all local phone calls. After I
complained they offered me the unlimited local calls (for about $5.00 extra
per month).
Local phone companies are like credit card companies. Unless you complain,
you will pay the highest rates).
They are also under some significant government regulation (which MS isn't,
er wasn't).
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 21:32:18 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> The question is why is Linux Find so damm slow?
>
> Is it the disk i/o subsystem?
>
> The OS itself?
>
> What is the reason?
>
> Why is Windows so much faster at a brute force find a file name
> search?
>
> Steve
it is searching on a crippled filesystem with no concept of permissions, it has
no concept of filetypes or access times or anything else that unix find does.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Guilty, 'til proven guilty
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 02:28:49 GMT
In article <ubA*[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> If their applications division is separate from their OS division,
> they no longer have the same interest in having their applications
> only run on Windows; they can maximise their profit by porting them
> everywhere.
David,
You are assuming that it is possible to make more money by selling and
supporting MS's Application software on multiple platforms than by
selling and supporting it only on Windows. I believe this to be a false
assumption.
First, which applications are you referring to? MS makes a lot more
than just Office. Must they port them all? Surely MS Works need not be
ported to Solaris?
Second, do you have any idea how much money it costs to support
multiple platforms? They have to train staff in multiple platforms,
purchase enough machines of the other platforms, double their QA for
those platforms. Worse, they'll now have to test their products not
just based on the schedule for Windows 98, NT and CE, but also for the
release schedule of the other platform.
How many users of those other platforms are there? Are you sure the
market is big enough to compensate for the expense of entering it?
By the way, which platforms will they have to support? How few is too
few customers for them to support? They don't have to port to CP/M 86,
do they?
I hope you see there's a lot more to this question than meets the eye.
Finally, what's this got to do with the case that's up before the
court? This case is about the OS, IE, and maybe Visual J++.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Top 10 reasons why Linux sux
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 02:41:55 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Donal K. Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on 4 Apr 2000 13:11:54 GMT <8ccpmq$s4p$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Both X Windows and Windows can also define custom cursors,
>> complete with coloration if desired.
>
>X can only use two colours in its cursors. Unless someone's eased
>that restriction in a more recent version than I've got the docs for.
Well, my manpages suggest XRecolorCursor(), which takes pointers
to two XColor structures; it's the only thing I can think of
that might do something, erm, colorful with the cursors. :-)
So you're right.
I'm not sure why anyone would want more than two colors, admittedly,
but that doesn't mean much; after all, a certain character also once
said "640K should be enough for anybody" -- and we all know where
*that* went. :-)
(ObAmigaSigh: Amiga has 16-color cursors, which could even be
animated with a hack or two. :-) )
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random reminiscence here :-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Why Linux on the desktop?
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 02:43:13 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Mark S. Bilk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on 4 Apr 2000 20:40:44 GMT <8cdk0c$6im$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Matthias Warkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>It was the Mon, 03 Apr 2000 14:22:21 -0600...
>>...and John W. Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> > "Programming" means creating a program.
>>>
>>> Yep. As in, for example:
>>>
>>> First, I'm gonna click on that button to do X, then I'm going to use
>>> that slider to do Y, then I'm going to save this file as Z . . .
>>
>>Pointless. By your definition, feeding my cat is programming, too.
>
>Hoo boy, is it ever!
>
>But the results are not completely deterministic, since
>it uses fuzzy logic.
>
>There are certainly looping and branching capabilities,
>jumps, bytes, and hooks into the system.
>
>Also, tail recursion.
>
>Execution upon movement of the mouse is particularly well
>implemented.
But...where does the catnip fit into all this??? :-)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert extreme confusion here
------------------------------
From: Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: benchmark for speed in linux / windows
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 21:39:27 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Otto wrote:
>
> "Tim Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I tried this last night, here's what I found:
> >
> > # rm -rf /mnt/win_drive/windows
> >
> > Total time: 3 seconds
> >
> > C:\ deltree c:\windows
> >
> > Total time: ~5 minutes (!) (win98)
> >
> > Linux is faster! :-)
> >
>
> Isn't there a difference between removing a mounting point under Linux and
> deleting a directory under DOS or Windows? Under Linux the folder isn't
> deleted, just the drive in itself. Would be a sad statement if it would take
> as long as deleting the folder.
Nothing is deleted when you remove a mount point in linux.
> This is what I tried last night:
>
> C:\fdisk /mbr
>
> Total time: 2 seconds and Linux is gone
> Well, not really but you get the picture....
You miss the point. Of course my little "benchmark" was ridiculous.
The point is, it's exactly the same sort of benchmark that M$ uses (e.g.,
Mindcraft) to promote windows. There is *no* difference. I use thjis examply
carefully because it highlights the absurdity of benchmarks. Now I can claim
that linux is 75 times faster than windows! Just like Windows NT is "2.3x"
faster than linux at web serving! Or that EDO ram was 50% faster than FPM ram.
It's all utter bullshit.
--
Tim Kelley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Win2000 kicks ass
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 02:46:26 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Mon, 03 Apr 2000 21:48:42 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Mon, 3 Apr 2000 19:07:20 +0100, Robert Moir
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8c8u10$il7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> WOW A WHOLE MONTH WITH OUT A CRASH???? REALLY??? WOW!!!!!
>>> You MUST be a MS user to be impressed with a months worth of uptime.
>>> Unix/Linux are used to getting a year or more of uptime.
>>> .
>>
>>If he's only had it for one month and got one month of uptime, thats 100%
>>uptime Matt, so that would be quite impressive if it continues. Let's see
>>what he says in 12 months.
>
>It'll never happen. Windows has to reboot if you so much as change an IP
>address or install any software.
My understanding is that that's been fixed in Win2K. In fact,
it's not strictly true for Windows NT 4, either -- our IT guru
can release an IP and acquire a new IP using 'NET' commands
without rebooting the system easily. (Of course, do I remember
how to do it? Nope...and I didn't bother to take notes. Aargh!
Also, I don't know if this is true for static IPs.)
Whether the GUI is sufficiently intelligent to do the same,
I don't know. I hope so, but I doubt it.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- NT? New Technology?? Not There. No Thanks.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2000 19:46:25 -0700
From: Bob Lyday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux stocks soar in aftermarket trading
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Amen.... It will peak and sink faster than the Titanic.
Oh, Heather, baby...you're so cute when you're mad! I love it!
Hey, quit insulting M$ products, "Heather"! After all, doesn't
NT stand for "New Titanic"? Or am I wrong here? Correct me,
hun...please, darlin?
>
> Steve
>
> >Microsoft makes more money in one hour than all the Linux companies made in
> >the last ten years. Linux will never be a mainstream desktop OS .
Yeah, they made a hell of a lot of money yesterday, huh, dude?
Like -86 billion! How many companies can pull that off? M$ is
awesome! Wow! That's way better than Linux! Good job! With
that little stock market feat, you just wiped out *all* MSFT's
profits for the last year! No way could Linux pull that off!
M$ is so cool, man!
--
Bob
"There are no significant bugs in our released software that any
significant number of users want fixed," Bill Gates, in an
interview with Focus magazine, Oct 23, 1995.
Remove ".diespammersdie" to reply.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: For the WinTrolls - incredible
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 5 Apr 2000 10:47:22 +0800
On Tue, 04 Apr 2000 09:53:40 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 4 Apr 2000 09:01:28 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (No Name) wrote:
>
>No. The Linux community hides behind .99 releases for years at a time
>to frightened to commit to a version 1.0.
Sure Steve, unlike Ms who go straight from ver2 to ver6 for marketing
reasons, ie be seen to be keeping up with their compeditors.
>This way when the program sucks, and most Linux programs do suck,
As a Wintroll Steve, has scant knowledge of Linux programs.
> they
>can claim "what do you expect it is still being developed".
Wrong, read the "cathedral and the bazzar" sometime Steve me old troll.
>
>Steve
>
>
>
>
>>At least the Linux community calls things by their name, and when
>>there is a bug, bug it is called.
And *fixed*.
>
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 days 15 hours 38 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: What should be done with MS
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2000 02:42:42 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In a way I feel sad that the Samurai laws can not apply to Microsoft.
I.e.
> when a Samurai was found guilty of a crime he comited Hara-Kiri,<snip>
I sorta have this feeling that MSFT has already committed sepuku; they
just don't know how deep the knife has penetrated yet....
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
