Linux-Advocacy Digest #163, Volume #26 Sun, 16 Apr 00 23:13:16 EDT
Contents:
Re: Rumors ... ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Be & Linux & Microsoft... (Jim Dabell)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! ("Tim Mayer")
Re: Athlon (Jeff Hall)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Mayor Of R'lyeh)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Bob Lyday)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Eric Bennett)
Re: Be & Linux & Microsoft... (Mike Marion)
Re: Linux for a web developer (Mike Marion)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Steve Ballantyne)
Re: New Linux User Question (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Linux for a web developer (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! (Steve Ballantyne)
Re: Be & Linux & Microsoft... (Loren Petrich)
Re: Backdoors in Windows 2000? (Machine-gun Kelly)
Re: THE SKY IS FALLING! THE SKY IS FALLING! Was (Re: MICROSOFT IT THRU! MICROSOFT
IS THRU! (Machine-gun Kelly)
Re: New Linux User Question (Joe Kiser)
Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert! ("Tim Mayer")
Re: Q: Best Linux Info Newsletter (Marada C. Shradrakaii)
Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1] (David
Steuber)
Re: BSD & Linux (Michael Kagalenko)
Re: Windows is scary all right (Ciaran)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Rumors ...
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 19:14:01 -0500
Bob Hauck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> MS lost the case and they will likely lose the appeal. In the process of
> losing the MS executives made themselves look like a bunch of greedy
> slimeballs to the public. Whether or not they lose the appeal, MS has a
> lot of image rebuilding to do. You're just going to have to deal with
> that. Trying to convince the world that MS are innocent victims of a DOJ
> conspiracy isn't helping.
I didn't say that MS was innocent. I said that the DOJ knew damn well what
they were signing when they agreed to the consent decree. We're not talking
about vague interpretation of the meaning of a single sentance (as in the
Sun trial), but an entire clause of the agreement. If the DOJ "made a
mistake" as obvious as this one, they should have all been fired.
Also, Judge Jackson has not had very good luck with his rulings against MS
on appeal. And there are enough flaws in both the findings of law and
findings of fact that are easily proven false that I have no reason to
believe this appeals round will be any different than all the ones that came
before.
------------------------------
From: Jim Dabell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Be & Linux & Microsoft...
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 01:01:47 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Davorin Mestric wrote:
>
[snip]
> this leads to a conclusion that open
> source and free projects will never lead a category in technological
> advances. free programs need comercial software.
Yeah, free software is never worthwhile or original, like Sendmail,
NCSA/Apache or BIND are. Oh wait.
Jim
------------------------------
From: "Tim Mayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 00:14:59 GMT
"C Lund" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <SvqK4.43209$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Mayer"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > So to clarify, do you switch between applications or documents on the
Mac?
> > This doesn't mean, can you select the application and then the document
from
> > within the application, but rather with a single mouse click can you
select
> > one of a handful of documents that you are currently editing. In
essence,
> > does the Mac focus on applications running, and the documents they
contain,
> > or on the documents.
>
> I'm still not sure what you mean, but I'll try anyway:
>
> If you have several apps running with several docs each in each their
> window, you'll see a mess of open windows on your desktop. The windows are
> sorted in the stack by which app they belong to. This means that if the
> app you last used was Photoshop, all your Photoshop documents will be on
> the top of your "stack of papers". Switch to a ClarisWorks document, and
> all the ClarisWork windows will be on the top of the "stack", while the PS
> windows will be moved further behind.
I think that answers it: Mac OS is a hybrid of both document and application
centric models.
It'll be interesting to see how OS X does it, since that will tell us what
Apple didn't like about their own OS.
Tim
------------------------------
From: Jeff Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.hadrware,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: Athlon
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 20:16:39 -0400
Athlon's manufacturer, AMD, is rated a "Linux Friendly Vendor" by
http://www.linuxhardware.net/vendors.html
I run an Athlon 700.
"Ralph H.Stoos Jr." wrote:
> To all you Linux fans,
>
> I have heard rumors and propaganda regarding the Athlon processor and
> Linux.
>
> Recent info says that you might need a special kernel for Linux to run
> properly on this CPU.
>
> Does anyone know conclusively is this is true? I want to buy Athlon
> just to keep Intel from running the whole show and of course run Linux
> on it to keep Microsloth from owning the show and theatre both.
>
> Let me know if you would be so kind.
>
> Please respond to the group but add this address too:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Thanking you prematurely,
>
> Ralph
------------------------------
From: Mayor Of R'lyeh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 19:41:47 -0500
On Sun, 16 Apr 2000 14:49:54 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(C Lund) chose to bless us with this bit of wisdom:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mayor
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> >Well, it sounds like more work to me than adjusting an
>> >application's memory partition size *once*. And we know
>> >Wintrolls consider that to be an undesirably complicated task.
>
>> I haven't seen anyone say that. What I have seen is people
>> pointing out that having to perform that task at all flies in
>> the face of all of the ease of use claims.
>
>"People" generally being Wintrolls who find that to be an undesirably
>complicated task...
I haven't yet met a Windows user who thinks its at all complicated.
But doesn't it seem odd to you that an OS whose main purpose was to
shield users from having to figure out settings expects them to know
about memory management?
--
Every Mac user is an idiot. Every goddamned one of us.
Andy Walton
3/19/2000
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 17:38:58 -0700
From: Bob Lyday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Tim Mayer wrote:
>
> " I
> tried to confirm this, but have no predictable way of getting IE to crash.
>
Hmmmmm.
Try running it, that usually works. ;)
--
Bob
"None of us makes it through life without being shown, politely,
what an ass he is," Kurt Vonnegut, "Mother Night".
Remove ".diespammersdie" to reply.
------------------------------
From: Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 20:37:39 -0400
In article <jArK4.43241$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Mayer"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But if Adobe, a devoted Mac ISV, doesn't offer this feature then I doubt
> any
> would. Given the limitations of cooperative multitasking schemes, why do
> you think that it's caused by Adobe drivers and not Apple's operating
> system? If I remember correctly, Windows 3.0, 3.1 and 3.11 wfwg all
> shared
> this same trait with Mac OS. Coincidence? I think not.
There is nothing specific about printing that requires a program to
refuse to yield the CPU. There were plenty of other tasks that used to
cause similar problems... for example, it used to be that you could not
do anything in the Finder while there was a file copy taking place.
Today, that is no longer the case. There's no reason printing couldn't
be fixed too, without changing the multitasking model.
If I had to guess, I would guess the current problems have nothing to do
with the multitasking model. More likely there might be non-reentrant
printer drivers, but I don't know enough about Mac printer drivers to
say for sure whether that is a roadblock to fixing this.
--
Eric Bennett ( http://www.pobox.com/~ericb/ )
Cornell University / Chemistry & Chemical Biology
CBS News report on Fort Worth tornado damage:
"Eight major downtown buildings were severely damaged and 1,000 homes were
damaged, with 95 uninhabitable. Gov. George W. Bush declared Tarrant County
a disaster area. Federal Emergency Management Agency workers are expected
to arrive sometime next week after required paperwork is completed."
------------------------------
From: Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Be & Linux & Microsoft...
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 01:11:51 GMT
Davorin Mestric wrote:
> never, because open source projects are terrible at writting new things and
> excelent at coping existing programs. this leads to a conclusion that open
> source and free projects will never lead a category in technological
> advances. free programs need comercial software.
That's one of the most rediculous and illogical statements I've seen in here.
Why do you think commercial vendors add new things? Because their customers
want them, that's why.
OSS projects also add things their customers/users want... and don't immediately
jump on the bandwagon building those bells and whistles that aren't as
beneficial... but they do make them if customers/users really want them.
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc.
"Administering a Linux server is no more difficult than properly running
Windows NT."
-- Infoworld, November 24, 1997
------------------------------
From: Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux for a web developer
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 01:28:29 GMT
Davorin Mestric wrote:
> they lock you into a even more limited set of hardware for linux, and
> overpriced offerings from sun and similar.
What logic tells you this?
Windows: x86
Linux: x86, Sparc, Alpha, M68k, etc.
Hell, even Solaris is x86 and Sparc.
Yeah... linux is more limiting on the hardware you can use.
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc.
Homer Simpson: "To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's
problems." -- Simpsons
------------------------------
From: Steve Ballantyne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 13:37:24 +1200
In article <p4sK4.43267$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Mayer"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Steve Ballantyne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <BGoK4.2400$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Shock
> > Boy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > Ah, so Apple is the reason that Linux, AIX, Solaris, HPUnix, and
> > > others
> > > all
> > > exist?
> > >
> > > How um.. niave.
> > >
> >
> > I don't normally bother to point out spelling errors, but I'm compelled
> > to observe that when they occur as the last word of a snappy-comeback
> > type post, and particularly when that comeback is accusing the previous
> > poster of naivety... O Shock Boy -- you look such an idiot...
> >
> > Har har har har har (cruel laughter fading into the distance)
>
> All this because "Shock Boy" hit the 'i' key before the 'a' key. I doubt
> this is a rare occurance in this NG.
>
> Tim
>
But rarely so perfectly timed! (har har har etc...)
--
Steve Ballantyne
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: New Linux User Question
Date: 16 Apr 2000 21:46:12 -0400
On Mon, 17 Apr 2000 02:13:36 +0200, Davorin Mestric wrote:
In case you haven't guessed, this guy is an all-Windows man. Hell, I bet
he even wears Windows boxer shorts.
>it's really cheap.
>
>> What are the basic disadvantages for runnig Linux?
>
>linux is an unix.
That's also an advantage.
>you will have problems with it since most of the programs and drivers need
>documentation to get then running.
Wrong.
>you will not be able to use any of the programs that exist on windows. you
>will be forced to use netscape or even something worse.
Not clear what you mean by "even something worse"
> you can forget about all the nice development tools that are available on
>windows, like visual basic, c, delphi.
What about the nice dev tools available on Linux, like QT/KDE/KDevelop,
perl, python, etc.
Sure, if you're a windows zealot, and you only want to run Windows
applications, there is obviously no point trying anything different.
However, the original poster sounds a little more open minded than this.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Linux for a web developer
Date: 16 Apr 2000 21:53:53 -0400
On Mon, 17 Apr 2000 02:03:22 +0200, Davorin Mestric wrote:
>
>> Yes, component programming can be done on UNIX.
>
>please specify how.
Try any corba orb.
>>Yes, debugging
>> is easy in perl, and it has a debugger.
>
>yes, but what about debugging your other cgi scripts and programs?
Most of the other dev tools also have debuggers.
>>Yes, database access is quite easy
>> on UNIX and all the buzzwords and acronyms in the world will not change
>that.
>
>but is it easier than using ADO?
I don't know, because I haven't used ADO. It's trivial for anyone
who knows SQL and (insert_your_favourite_language)
real web developers know SQL.
>> Yes, apache has built in support for XML and XSL.
>
>but can your perl use it?
Yes.
> can you use it from php?
Not that I know of, not that I've ever needed it.
>you can say whatever you want but web developers on windows hava a nicer,
>richer, more logical, more functionaly environment.
Well this is an absurd claim to make if you don't know squat about UNIX.
It proves nothing except that you're too biased to consider using anything
other than what you're used to.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: Steve Ballantyne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 13:55:51 +1200
In article <jArK4.43241$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Mayer"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Steve Ballantyne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "James L.
> > Ryan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > in article wukK4.42391$[EMAIL PROTECTED], Tim Mayer at
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 4/16/00 10:54 AM:
> > >
> > > > How does the Mac handle printing one document while you edit
> > > > another?
> > >
> > > Just fine! The document to be printed is placed in a print queue and
> > > while this queue is being serviced you are free to do whatever else you
> > > wish, including editing other documents or running other applications.
> >
> > And, as a historical note, the Mac has been able to do this since about
> > 1986, first as a third-party add-on, later as a regular part of the
> > system -- long before PCs were able to do any sort of multitasking at
> > all. Except maybe Sidekick, and other TSR-based stuff, if you could call
> > that multitasking. I know history doesn't mean much to Wintel fans --
> > hey, why should it? You'll be regenerated a couple of seconds after you
>
> Even in DOS, print spooling using the "PRINT.EXE" utility was available.
> QNX and other Unix derivatives were also available on PC's at the time, so
> any argument about PC's not supporting multi-tasking or print spooling is
> ridiculous.
QNX? Too bad the applications I used back then weren't available on
UNIX. Or did it not occur to you that I might be interested in printing
documents from particular applications, rather than just "printing' in
general? The arrogance of PC fanatics and their determination to push
one hardware platform on the rest of us, regardless of how we prefer to
work, is something that's persisted from the 80s to the present.
>
> > get fragged anyway -- but Macintosh print spooling must have saved me
> > working months worth of time compared to using a PC back in the 80s and
> > early 90s.
>
> Just imagine how much more time spooling in the background would save
> you.
>
> > As for print spooling as an interuptible task -- well, sure, current
> > drivers are, ummm... But I don't think that's Apple's fault -- current
> > versions of the Mac OS allow applications to be internally threaded and
> > for these threads to be managed by the OS. With a re-write, I imagine
> > Adobe could do that with its printer drivers as well. They probably
> > won't, though -- Adobe's Mac printer drivers are extremely robust; they
> > ain't broke, they don't need fixing.
>
> But if Adobe, a devoted Mac ISV, doesn't offer this feature then I doubt any
> would. Given the limitations of cooperative multitasking schemes, why do
> you think that it's caused by Adobe drivers and not Apple's operating
> system? If I remember correctly, Windows 3.0, 3.1 and 3.11 wfwg all
> shared this same trait with Mac OS. Coincidence? I think not.
You've never read anything about how the Mac OS does threading, have you?
--
Steve Ballantyne
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Subject: Re: Be & Linux & Microsoft...
Date: 17 Apr 2000 02:04:18 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Davorin Mestric wrote:
>I can not argue that Sun is taking a hit. But when Compaq, Dell, and
Gateway >and >other giants in the PC. manufacturing business report 50% of
their servers have >Linux installed on them, you can be this has little to
do with SUN.
And one wonders how many of the remainder have *BSD on them...
>As of last months statistics, based on world wide computer usage as of
>1-1-2000, >Linux accounted for 4% of the world wide desktop market.
>Their market has been doubling every year since inception.
This would make it approximately comparable to the MacOS's market
share(!)
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 22:26:49 -0500
From: Machine-gun Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: Backdoors in Windows 2000?
> Im tester and developer and windows 2000 have a backdoor. A lot of magasine
> talk about that. im test presently the program and the backdoor have a
> security. is secure to use windows 2000.
> Anyway a backdoor or private investigation is not rare.
Ladies and gentlemen, I think we've found a big part of the problem with
the Windows OS ;]
Doesn't Microsoft supply you with spell checkers or any sort of grammar
checking prog?
MGk
--
"Got Zombie?"
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 22:31:02 -0500
From: Machine-gun Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.security,comp.os.ms-windows.networking.tcp-ip,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: THE SKY IS FALLING! THE SKY IS FALLING! Was (Re: MICROSOFT IT THRU!
MICROSOFT IS THRU!
> >This MEANS to the STUPID and IGNORANT that the U.S. Government has ACCESS
> >to every MS equipped machine in the world and therefore they
> >CAN NOT BE TRUSTED ANYMORE!
You mean the government could be trusted in the first place?
MGK
--
"Got Zombie?"
------------------------------
From: Joe Kiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: New Linux User Question
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 22:26:25 -0400
Tobias Adrianse wrote:
> What are the basic advantages for running Linux. ( I am looking into red
> hat)
Better for servers than Windows 95.
> What are the basic disadvantages for runnig Linux?
Lack of decent desktop apps.
> Will my programs run the same even if they are meant to be run under a
> windows 98 OS?
No. Same concept as trying to run a OS/2 program under Windows.
> Will I still be able to use Internet Explorer and programs that I currently
> have.
No, Linux comes with buggy, ugly Netscape only. Mozilla also runs, but
not to the point where you want it as your main browser.
--
-Joe Kiser
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.mindspring.com/~joekiser/
"I walk the Earth another day
The wicked one that comes this way
Savior to my own, devil to some.
Mankind falls, something wicked comes."
-Iced Earth, The Coming Curse
------------------------------
From: "Tim Mayer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Become a Windows Registry Expert!
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 02:43:18 GMT
"Steve Ballantyne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <jArK4.43241$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Mayer"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "Steve Ballantyne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> > message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "James L.
> > > Ryan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
...
> >
> > Even in DOS, print spooling using the "PRINT.EXE" utility was available.
> > QNX and other Unix derivatives were also available on PC's at the time,
so
> > any argument about PC's not supporting multi-tasking or print spooling
is
> > ridiculous.
>
> QNX? Too bad the applications I used back then weren't available on
> UNIX. Or did it not occur to you that I might be interested in printing
> documents from particular applications, rather than just "printing' in
> general? The arrogance of PC fanatics and their determination to push
You don't understand what I'm saying. The "PRINT.EXE" utility would install
a print spooler available to all DOS applications. It uses a timer tick to
steal CPU cycles and dump information from a buffer to a printer. Pretty
simple, and I'm not sure why this spooling thing is such a big deal. For
multi-tasking, well a number of options existed to add multi-tasking to
DOS -- DR DOS for instance. I'm not certain of the time, but they sure were
close to 1990.
> one hardware platform on the rest of us, regardless of how we prefer to
> work, is something that's persisted from the 80s to the present.
Huh? Now that's hilarious. ONE PC PLATFORM? Really!
It's also intriguing that you dwell on the past; the good old Mac days.
What's wrong, does the Mac of today not meet your expectations?
> > > get fragged anyway -- but Macintosh print spooling must have saved me
> > > working months worth of time compared to using a PC back in the 80s
and
> > > early 90s.
> >
> > Just imagine how much more time spooling in the background would save
> > you.
> >
> > > As for print spooling as an interuptible task -- well, sure, current
> > > drivers are, ummm... But I don't think that's Apple's fault -- current
> > > versions of the Mac OS allow applications to be internally threaded
and
> > > for these threads to be managed by the OS. With a re-write, I imagine
> > > Adobe could do that with its printer drivers as well. They probably
> > > won't, though -- Adobe's Mac printer drivers are extremely robust;
they
> > > ain't broke, they don't need fixing.
> >
> > But if Adobe, a devoted Mac ISV, doesn't offer this feature then I doubt
any
> > would. Given the limitations of cooperative multitasking schemes, why
do
> > you think that it's caused by Adobe drivers and not Apple's operating
> > system? If I remember correctly, Windows 3.0, 3.1 and 3.11 wfwg all
> > shared this same trait with Mac OS. Coincidence? I think not.
>
> You've never read anything about how the Mac OS does threading, have you?
Only a little, but enough to understand that the programming model isn't all
that different from 16 bit Windows. Have you read anything about the Mac OS
yourself? If not, then why not just check out the Apple site, and download
Darwin 1.0 while your reading the wealth of technical information.
Tim
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marada C. Shradrakaii)
Subject: Re: Q: Best Linux Info Newsletter
Date: 17 Apr 2000 02:49:51 GMT
>What's the best Linux newsletter to keep up to date on the news, releases,
>etc.
>
>Thanks.
I scan freshmeat.net daily or more. It covers essentially everything new from
a software standpoint, and occasionally runs an editorial. For non-software
updates, you may have to find another source (i. e. linuxtoday.com)
--
Marada Coeurfuege Shra'drakaii
members.xoom.com/marada Colony name not needed in address.
DC2.Dw Gm L280c W+ T90k Sks,wl Cma-,wbk Bsu#/fl A+++ Fr++ Nu M/ O H++ $+ Fo++
R++ Ac+ J-- S-- U? I++ V+ Q++[thoughtspeech] Tc++
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.redhat
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 has 63,000 bugs - Win2k.html [0/1] - Win2k.html [0/1]
From: David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2000 03:00:01 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) writes:
' > Fucking GOTO's all over the place.
'
' Have you looked at the source for the linux kernel?
david@Interloper:> pwd
/usr/src/linux
david@Interloper:> find . -name '*.c' -exec grep ' goto ' {} \; | wc
580 2212 19404
Color me surprised. Some of those are in comments, BTW. This is the
2.2.14 kernel from kernel.org.
--
David Steuber | Hi! My name is David Steuber, and I am
NRA Member | a hoploholic.
http://www.packetphone.org/
Information Center, n.:
A room staffed by professional computer people whose job it is
to tell you why you cannot have the information you require.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Kagalenko)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.openbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.os.qnx
Subject: Re: BSD & Linux
Date: 17 Apr 2000 02:47:10 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Theo de Raadt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote
][EMAIL PROTECTED] (david parsons) writes:
]
]> In article <8d0i3u$2ifh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
]> Timothy Murphy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
]> >jd hendrex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
]>
]> >[revisionism]
]>
]> >I'm surprised at the way Minix has been written out of history.
]>
]> I'm not. There's a large contingent out there that is
]> trying their damnest to edit history so that RMS is the
]> alpha and omega of free(1) software, and editing out
]> Minix is a pretty important part of this revisionism.
]
]Ah.... Minix....
]
]Back in the old days, when I was young, a couple of friends and I
]ported Minix to the sun 3/50. Then I ported it to my Amiga (before
]some other people did).
]
]Then the disk died ;-)
]
]Minix was absolutely horrible. Message passing like that is just wrong.
In that flamewar Linus asserted that microkernels are just a fad,
and they're going to be slower than monolithic kernels.
Personally, I am not sure about this. Have any of you guys tried QNX demo
disk at http://qnx.com/iat/index.html ?
They fit a kernel, networking, windowing system with a browser and
dialer and a few misc. applications like a web server on one 1.44 floppy. I doubt
this can be done with *BSD and Linux. Picobsd just barely manages
to include kernel and networking.
QNX is microkernel, message-passing based OS.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Windows is scary all right
From: Ciaran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 19:57:34 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter) wrote:
>On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 14:33:46 +1000, craig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>
>>Or maybe the largest ISP (and coincidently, always rates as
the "best, most
>>reliable service" in user surveys) in Australia that is almost
exclusively
>>NT. I know its not fortune 500, but it is still large to say
the least!!!!.
>
>Which ISP is this ?
>I hope you don't mean Big Drip ?
Thats the only biggest ISP in Australia I can think of. Frankly
I dont view this as much of an endorsment... I wouldnt trust any
IT descisions that Telsta make further than I could personally
throw them. I mean Jeez... they aint even that good a connecting
phone together :)
Cheers,
Ciaran
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
