Linux-Advocacy Digest #259, Volume #26 Tue, 25 Apr 00 15:13:10 EDT
Contents:
Re: Factory pre-installed Linux. (Joe Kiser)
Being a billboard - Linux Tshirts? (MJ)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (JEDIDIAH)
Re: Factory pre-installed Linux. (Joe Kiser)
Re: i cant blieve you people!! (Eric Bennett)
Re: which OS is best? (Pascal Haakmat)
Re: i cant blieve you people!! (Bob Germer)
Huh? - Unix undermining competitors (Tov Are Jacobsen)
Re: i cant blieve you people!! (Eric Bennett)
Re: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...) (Mike
Marion)
Re: gnu/linux logos (graphics) (John Sanders)
Re: Factory pre-installed Linux. (John Sanders)
Re: Factory pre-installed Linux. (David Steinberg)
Re: Red Hat Linux Backdoor Password Vulnerability (Mig Mig)
Re: Red Hat Linux Backdoor Password Vulnerability (David Steinberg)
Re: How does WINE work? (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Joe Kiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Factory pre-installed Linux.
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 13:57:16 -0400
mlw wrote:
>
> OK, lets say we can get some OEM's to do a good job at factory
> pre-installation. The box arrives at the door, excited, happy user
> connects the color coded wires, and violla! It boots. What should that
> user see?
>
> What kind of startup screen? Presumably an initial startup program that
> creates a new user name and password? Music?
Something similar to the Windows 9x OEM Authentication screen should
load on the first boot. Except this should set up user names,
passwords, the ISP,, Printer, and any other added hardware. Internal
hardware like modem, sound, video, and other hardware should have been
setup at the factory. This program should have a clean UI, and since
this distribution will run KDE, it should also be written using QT.
On normal booting, the user should *not* see the the console, or the
Kernel's output. Instead, they should instantly see a graphic screen on
bootup, like MacOS. Maybe even little pictures telling you when a
certain device driver has been loaded.
> Here is a list of "pre-configured" apps that must be setup and ready to
> function:
>
> Applix or StarOffice (Depending on the kind of deal you can get)
No, a person who is just starting out with PCs needs a consistent GUI.
Why should the arrows, dialog boxes, and menubars in Applix (Motif) look
nothing like the rest of the OS (QT/KDE)? I dunno if StarOffice QT or
some other toolkit, but the Office Suite should be consistant with the
rest of KDE. Maybe KOffice will fit in nicely, when it's complete.
> Netscape, of course. With Shockwave and RealAudio
Again, we run into the issue of a consistent GUI. Konqueror-2 would be
the safest browser since it is integrated with KDE, but Mozilla should
also be considered (when both are stable). Besides, Netscape is buggy
and unstable.
> KDE and/or Gnome (I prefer KDE)
Definantly KDE-2 (when released). Gnome is still unstable, development
is fragmented, and it's not as easy to use as KDE. I don't know what
Gnome is all about, just some KDE people who hated QT's license, I
guess.
> AcrobatReader
Or a KDE-compliant program that can read/search PDF files.
> Java
Integrated into the browser?
> Modem setup and configured.
Definantly. This should be done at the factory.
> PPP dialup ready to go with modem and dhcp.
PPP will be set up by the user the first time they boot.
> Sound card setup and configured.
> Video setup and configured.
At the factory.
> Optional network, setup and configured.
They can do this themselves. I doubt a first time user will be setting
up a network, though.
> All the mime-types have to be configured.
> All the file types have to have icons.
> The user must be able to "click" on a file and start the correct
> application.
> It all should have the commercial quality fit and finish of a fully
> configured system.
Yes, KFM would be great for this.
> Are the KDE or GNOME program menus sufficient, or should the OEM
> rearrange them to a more logical order? The default menus I see are
> biased toward the Window manager, not necessarily ordered as an end user
> would like.
What do you mean? I think the K menu in KDE and the foot menu in Gnome
are laid out simply enough, even though the programs should be listed in
Alphabetical order.
> What are the best multimedia programs?
Those that haven't been ported to UNIX yet.
> Would anyone care if we mixed and matched Gnome and KDE applications?
Yes. Two different toolkits, two different UIs, a beginner would be
confused as to why programs looked different. Again, the best bet is to
have one GUI, and it's programs, instead of two.
> Any suggestions?
Making Linux friendly enough for a person new to computers is going to
be a hard task. Mandrake and Corel aren't quite there yet, and there
simply aren't enough applications for Linux to be a desktop alternative,
yet.
--
-Joe Kiser
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.mindspring.com/~joekiser/
"Conserve water...piss in a sink."
-me
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (MJ)
Subject: Being a billboard - Linux Tshirts?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 18:01:00 GMT
Hi!
Is there a good place to buy non-company-aligned Linux
t-shirts? I'd prefer a site that's in the business of Linux advocacy.
thanks!
MJ
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 18:03:11 GMT
On Mon, 24 Apr 2000 23:37:58 +0100, William Palfreman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Sat, 22 Apr 2000 00:18:21 +0100, William Palfreman
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >
>> >> Fallacy: We only want what is good for business.
>> >> Fallacy: We are not willing to make tradeoffs that are bad for
>business.
>> >>
>> >> Both of these are reflected in the caselaw of most civilized nations
>> >> that put limits on commerce based on some public interest. The more
>> >> extreme examples would be racketeering, gambling, prosititution, and
>> >> the narcotics trade.
>> >
>> >So? You aren't seriously claiming that there in any public interest in
>> >drugs, gambling and prostitution being against the law, are you? What
>you
>>
>> Such laws are typically justified ONLY by notions of public interest.
>
>Such as?
The interests or the laws?
>
>>
>> >do is your own business, so long as you aren't harming anyone else, and
>when
>> >you are harming someone else (by doing something to them that they didn't
>> >agree to, like bashing them over the head) then and only then does it
>> >becomes an issue for law. There is no public interest involved in my
>> >playing cards or for that matter smoking heroin in my own home.
>>
>> That's very much a minority viewpoint.
>
>No, its a fact. Lighting up ones opium pipe in ones own home is an entirely
>private matter. Bashing someone over the head is not, as it involves doing
What PLANET are you from, nevermind what country.
This nation (USA) was founded by religious busybodies.
[deletia]
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: Joe Kiser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Factory pre-installed Linux.
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 14:06:06 -0400
Joe Kiser wrote:
> Why should the arrows, dialog boxes, and menubars in Applix (Motif) look
Just read the press release, Applix 5 uses Gtk
--
-Joe Kiser
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW: http://www.mindspring.com/~joekiser/
"Conserve water...piss in a sink."
-me
------------------------------
From: Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: i cant blieve you people!!
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 14:13:37 -0500
In article <8e4elh$mlg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Kim A. Sommer) wrote:
> I'm still surprised the MS stockholders haven't raised a fuss with the
> board for not settling the case out of court. That seems to be a prime
> example of not protecting the shareholders' interests. But then maybe
> hypnotism really does work.
>From what I have seen, most shareholders put the blame on Janet Reno,
not Bill Gates.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pascal Haakmat)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.flame.macintosh
Subject: Re: which OS is best?
Date: 25 Apr 2000 18:14:03 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Nevertheless, clicking on an icon for a drive letter and clicking
>sharing seems, to me, to be something far easier for most people to
>digest, remember, and do.
I tried to help my mother install a CD over the phone once. Hilarious, if
exhausting:
"Click the grey thing labelled C:; it's below the blue thing."
"There is no blue thing."
"Yes there is, it's the top of the window."
"Oh yeah. What should I do?"
"Click the grey thing labelled C: beneath it."
"There is no grey thing beneath it?"
"Well, there is a menu ..."
"I see that."
"... And below that there's a grey bar with some icons on them."
"OK. Should I click it?"
"Yes."
"Nothing happens."
"Where is your mouse now?"
"It's at the grey thing."
"Do you see C: on the screen?"
"Yes, here it is."
"Click it."
"Nothing."
"Did you click the grey thing labelled C:?"
"No, I clicked a yellow thing labelled C:."
"OK, click the grey thing ..."
And so forth. It did work out eventually.
--
CSMA posting style test
http://awacs.dhs.org/csmatest
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 14:20:47 -0400
Subject: Re: i cant blieve you people!!
On 04/25/2000 at 10:46 AM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kim A. Sommer) said:
> I'm still surprised the MS stockholders haven't raised a fuss with the
> board for not settling the case out of court. That seems to be a prime
> example of not protecting the shareholders' interests. But then maybe
> hypnotism really does work.
> FWIW
> Kim
Despite the vast numbers of shares outstanding, insiders still have
virtually absolute control over MS. It is generally accepted that a 5-10%
stake in a company is sufficient to exert control. Bill G alone has nearly
40% with Allen another huge chunk.
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 13
MR/2 Ice 2.19 Registration Number 67
As the court closes in on M$, Lemmings are morphing to Ostrats!
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
From: Tov Are Jacobsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Huh? - Unix undermining competitors
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 19:29:17 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) skrev i
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[...]
> That leaves Unix with a stronghold that it can use to further undermine
> competitors in other markets.
Several competing vendors produce UNIX operating systems.
--
Tov Are Jacobsen
------------------------------
From: Eric Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: i cant blieve you people!!
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 14:32:30 -0500
In article <3905e24b$5$obot$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bob Germer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 04/25/2000 at 10:46 AM,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kim A. Sommer) said:
>
> > I'm still surprised the MS stockholders haven't raised a fuss with the
> > board for not settling the case out of court. That seems to be a prime
> > example of not protecting the shareholders' interests. But then maybe
> > hypnotism really does work.
>
> > FWIW
> > Kim
>
> Despite the vast numbers of shares outstanding, insiders still have
> virtually absolute control over MS. It is generally accepted that a 5-10%
> stake in a company is sufficient to exert control. Bill G alone has
> nearly
> 40% with Allen another huge chunk.
I don't think Gates has that much, especially after his recent donations
of stock. I think he's down to around 20-25% (which is, of course,
still a lot).
--
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: "Technical" vs. "Non-technical"... (was Re: Grasping perspective...)
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 18:34:56 GMT
s_Ea_DAag0n wrote:
> This is still not a technical answer. It might make sense for the
> accountants to insure that we are not tied in to one vendor, but
> technical people do not judge design quality by the number of
> vendors who support the thing.
A smart technical person does.. knowing that being reliant on one and only one
vendor can result in major problems due to massive increases in pricing, noone
else to turn to for support, etc.
> Also, it's not true remote Windows must be done from a Windows
> client. There are definitely products to do it from Unix. Of course you
Yes, there are very specific clients that must be used, and they must speak the
specific MS protocol(s) to talk to a WTS server. Whereas there are a multitude
of different clients and protocols that can be used to access unix boxes which
are based on open standards. (referring to graphical remote connections here).
> (a) Microsoft did not invent Terminal Server.
No, the argument is that it's one very specific and closed protocol which they
could change on a whim if the desired, and only specific clients can talk to it.
> (b) It requires an add-on tool which costs many.
That is a decent argument because if you want remote graphical capability, you
_have_ to buy it. Unix systems don't force you to buy an add on for these
features. X comes with unix OSes now, and can be gotten for free for many.
> You are aware than fully functiional telnetd implementations are
> avaialble for Windows, correct? Of course you will discount these,
What I can do via a text/telnet connection to an NT/w2k box is _severely_
limited compared to what I can do via telnet/ssh to a Unix box.
> Incorrect. There were many non-X based graphics programs before X.
> One was Sun's NeWS, and there were many other, long forgotten ones
> also.
Ah, but the GUIs were not required to run applications (unless the app itself
required a GUI of course).
> Who the fuck uses Windows 3.x/95/98? I am not interested in discussing
> these. Please keep your comments limited to NT/2000. For crying out loud.
So you're in charge of COLA now eh?
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc.
"Do you know what this is? No, I can see you don't. You have that vacant look
in your eyes that says, 'Place my head to your ear.. you will hear the sea!'"
--Londo, Babylon 5.
------------------------------
From: John Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: gnu/linux logos (graphics)
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 13:34:08 -0500
Darren Wyn Rees wrote:
>
> is there a collection of linux/linux-related graphics
> out there... as in all the identifiable LOGOS etc.
> used by the various contributors to the gnu/linux system ?
>
> --
> Le biblioteche ci hanno dato il potere,
> poi il lavoro č venuto e ci ha reso liberi.
> Che prezzo ora, per un piccolo assaggio di dignitą...
http://www.remotepoint.com
--
John W. Sanders
===============
"there" in or at a place.
"their" of or relating to them.
"they're" contraction of 'they are'.
------------------------------
From: John Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Factory pre-installed Linux.
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 13:29:57 -0500
mlw wrote:
>
> OK, lets say we can get some OEM's to do a good job at factory
> pre-installation. The box arrives at the door, excited, happy user
> connects the color coded wires, and violla! It boots. What should that
> user see?
>
> What kind of startup screen? Presumably an initial startup program that
> creates a new user name and password? Music?
Bill Gates High School Photo wallpaper. An icon that sez: "Start/Stop"
User name is fixed to be 'root'. No password. The theme from
MICROSOFT.
>
> Here is a list of "pre-configured" apps that must be setup and ready to
> function:
>
> Applix or StarOffice (Depending on the kind of deal you can get)
> Netscape, of course. With Shockwave and RealAudio
> KDE and/or Gnome (I prefer KDE)
> AcrobatReader
> Java
> Modem setup and configured.
> PPP dialup ready to go with modem and dhcp.
> Sound card setup and configured.
> Video setup and configured.
> Optional network, setup and configured.
These should all come up at the same time, automatically. The machine
should instantly hang-up. The user would disable/enable these at random
until the only stable combination of apps is discovered. (This might
serve the same purpose as a password).
If StarOffice is running, it must start Word immediately, and remove all
other word processors _and_ editors on the system.
Modem configuration and PPP setup will not work for 16 hours worth of
tinkering after which they will magically work flawlessly. This will
ensure the user gets
the same feeling of accomplishment as if he had really learned
something.
Also, one sound card replacement will be enforced for the above reason.
All apps will have really small fonts that are hard to read.
> All the mime-types have to be configured.
Or none.
> All the file types have to have icons.
Only as many as will not obscure the Bill Gates wallpaper figure.
> The user must be able to "click" on a file and start the correct
> application.
Triple click for this.
> It all should have the commercial quality fit and finish of a fully
> configured system.
One side of the case should be sprung out, and the fan grille pushed in
so that one fan blade only hit it. Floppy drive not secured would be
nice.
>
> Are the KDE or GNOME program menus sufficient, or should the OEM
> rearrange them to a more logical order? The default menus I see are
> biased toward the Window manager, not necessarily ordered as an end user
> would like.
These should alternate and have moving menus with every boot up. After
all, as long as it's graphical, it's intuitive.
>
> What are the best multimedia programs?
Tetris and chess.
>
> Would anyone care if we mixed and matched Gnome and KDE applications?
Would anyone notice?
>
> Any suggestions?
Persistent MAN pages.
>
> --
> 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"
--
John W. Sanders
===============
"there" in or at a place.
"their" of or relating to them.
"they're" contraction of 'they are'.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg)
Subject: Re: Factory pre-installed Linux.
Date: 25 Apr 2000 18:51:30 GMT
Joe Kiser ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: > What kind of startup screen? Presumably an initial startup program that
: > creates a new user name and password? Music?
: On normal booting, the user should *not* see the the console, or the
: Kernel's output. Instead, they should instantly see a graphic screen on
: bootup, like MacOS. Maybe even little pictures telling you when a
: certain device driver has been loaded.
Why? The kernel messages are very useful if something goes kaput. If
you're looking at your pretty picture of a penguin (or whatever logo you
would have a booting system display), something goes wrong, and it just
freezes, you're no better off then you are with Windows.
Why must every bit of "scary" information be hidden from the user? I
cannot accept that seeing some messages in text-mode, with no request that
the user actually DO anything, before starting X can possibly make a
system harder to use.
Similarly, a GUI installation program is not easier to use than a
curses-based program that offers the same choices, in the same sequence,
supplying the same information. A well-thought-out list of options is a
well-thought-out list of options, whether it's presented with pretty
graphical widgets or extended ASCII line drawing characters.
For example, Mandrake's GUI installation program mostly provides more
information and better controls than Red Hat's curses-based one (I haven't
used Red Hat's graphical one yet, but I understand it's basically the same
content-wise as the curses one). However, on my machine, during package
selection, I had some kind of video problem that made lines randomly
disappear. It became very frustrating to work with very quickly. For
that reason, I would say Red Hat's installation is easier to use.
Both of these installations blow Microsoft's Windows 98 installation out
of the water. My Windows installation experience: during one of three
reboots, I didn't pop the CD back in quickly enough (I had ejected it, so
it would boot from the hard drive), and a dialog box popped up asking me
to specify the location of a file that Windows needed, but there was no
browse button. I didn't even know what random drive letter Windows had
assigned my CD-ROM drive -- how was I supposed to know what file to
specify? All I could do was re-install, and be more careful about having
the CD in at the right time.
In spite of the fact that Windows' installation is graphical and
consistant interface-wise, one design oversight (leaving off a browse
button) made it completely useless. Because of the fact that Mandrake's
installation is graphical, it was subject to video problems that made it
harder to work with.
I know I've gone off on a tangent, but it makes an important point about
the subject at hand: a GUI does not guarantee easy-to-use. In some cases,
it can make things more difficult. Consistency in appearance is useless
if you don't provide the right controls for the job at hand.
It's all about providing the right controls and information for the job at
hand.
Yes, text messages are the right choice for booting a kernel. Stupid
little pictures of modems spinning and CD's farting cannot provide as much
information, and that's what those messages are supposed to do: provide
information. If a user doesn't know what to do with that information, he
can ignore it. At the very least, it will help when he calls tech
support.
The amount of information that Linux provides the user/administrator is
a huge benefit. Why should it be sacrificed to look less "scary"? Why
sink to Microsoft's level of "stupid little user, you can't possibly
understand what's going on here, so I'll silently take care of it
all...until I break, and you are left with no way to fix me."
: Making Linux friendly enough for a person new to computers is going to
: be a hard task. Mandrake and Corel aren't quite there yet, and there
: simply aren't enough applications for Linux to be a desktop alternative,
: yet.
Why should Linux become "friendly" enough for a person afraid of
computers? If you try to build Windows98, you will build Windows98, with
most of the same problems.
--
David Steinberg -o)
Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
------------------------------
From: Mig Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red Hat Linux Backdoor Password Vulnerability
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 20:59:08 +0200
Chad Myers wrote:
> Seeing as how a simple buffer overrun was mistreated as a "backdoor" that was
> purposely placed by Microsoft, I thought it was only fitting to see how
> Open Sores can fall victim to the same thing.
>
> http://xforce.iss.net/alerts/advise46.php3
>
> 'cept, it's not just a buffer overrun, it's an actual password placed in the
> product so that your linux box can be more easily used for DDoS'ing large
> eCommerce sites without having to mess around with actually hacking the box
> (not that that is harder or anything).
>
> "With this backdoor password, an attacker could compromise the web server as
> well as deface and destroy the web site."
Hmmm someone forgetting to change a password is hardly a backdoor Chad...
you must read more books. It's obviously idiotic that the packager didnt
change them but a backdoor is normally conceiled.. this is more of a
frontdoor :-)
Besides Chad.. guess what xforce.iss.net is running on according to
netcraft..
Of course Apache on Linux for security reasons
Cheers
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red Hat Linux Backdoor Password Vulnerability
Date: 25 Apr 2000 18:59:21 GMT
Drestin Black ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I claim the trademark on "Open Sores(tm)" :)
You can't, since you idiots stole it from "User Friendly," February 6,
1999.
Of course, the original context was that a clueless VP called it that,
because he's never HEARD of Open Source. The funny part is that a year
ago, there were still people who hadn't heard of Open Source. In another
couple of years, we'll look back at a time when there were still people
who didn't USE Open Source...and we'll laugh.
--
David Steinberg -o)
Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: How does WINE work?
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 15:02:23 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Quoting Stuart Krivis from alt.destroy.microsoft; Tue, 25 Apr 2000 07:17:10
>On Fri, 14 Apr 2000 06:41:28 GMT, The Ghost In The Machine
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
>>(OS/2 also had the advantage of having a Windows version
>>specifically for it -- or perhaps a patch; I don't remember now.)
>
>They actually licensed the code and modified it a bit, then compiled it with
>their own compiler. It ran better than MS's Windows 3.1 :-)
>
>The really neat thing was the version of OS/2 that was designed for use with
>your own copy of Windows.
>
>Win 3.1 is a DPMI server, as is OS/2 in "DOS" mode. So, they loaded the
>Windows kernel and patched it in memory to become a DPMI client like all
>other apps. It solved the problem and avoided modifying MS code permanently
>on the HD.
Unfortunately, it was easily broken by the Win 3.11 "patch" to Windows. This
"upgrade" (which was also the core of the now-forgotten Windows for Workgroups
product) followed on the heals of IBM's release of their "better Windows than
Windows" OS/2 version by a matter of weeks. One thing you've gotta say for
Microsoft; when it comes to defending a monopoly, they sure do cover all the
bases.
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
