Linux-Advocacy Digest #318, Volume #26 Sun, 30 Apr 00 14:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: TYPING ERRORS (Grant Fischer)
Re: TYPING ERRORS (Andrew Henshaw)
Re: Linux to destroy Microsoft. ("Otto")
Re: TYPING ERRORS (2:1)
Re: A split? ("Otto")
Re: TYPING ERRORS (Grant Fischer)
Re: Split Dude! (Kevin)
Re: which OS is best? (Roger)
Re: which OS is best? (Roger)
Re: MICROSOFT IT THRU! MICROSOFT IS THRU! (Roger)
Re: KDE is better than Gnome (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Advocay off the Net. (2:1)
Re: A split? (Bob Hauck)
Re: what's the best tool for linux to get IPs? (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Be & Linux & Microsoft... ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: Split Dude! (Jim Richardson)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Fischer)
Subject: Re: TYPING ERRORS
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 13:13:18 GMT
On Sun, 30 Apr 2000 12:00:09 GMT, MK
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The standard typewriter keyboard is Exhibit A in the hottest new case
> against markets. But the evidence has been cooked.
[Post a URL instead!]
The QWERTY "fable" is used to illustrate a complicated theory; saying
that it doesn't apply to QWERTY doesn't disprove the theory in other
applications.
Questions to ponder:
If QWERTY wasn't the best keyboard layout for mechanical typewriters
then why did it win?
Regardless of whether it was the best or not for mechanical typewriters,
then why does it remain so predominant in the age of computer keyboards?
There are no jamming constraints to worry about anymore.
That's the point; no matter how MS' desktop OS and file formats got
into a dominant position, they enjoy a an advantage over new,
possibly better competitors.
--
Grant Fischer (gfischer at hub.org)
------------------------------
From: Andrew Henshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: TYPING ERRORS
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 13:34:54 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
MK wrote:
>
> The standard typewriter keyboard is Exhibit A in the hottest new case
> against markets. But the evidence has been cooked.
>
> By Stan Liebowitz and Stephen E. Margolis
>
...snip...
So apparently, the QWERTY vs DVORAK keyboard story is not technically sound,
but it has become "locked-in" as anecdotal evidence of "lock-in" in markets
(presumably, because it was the first such story to see wide distribution).
:)
Andy Henshaw
------------------------------
From: "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux to destroy Microsoft.
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 13:41:32 GMT
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I agree!
> Linux will destroy Microsoft and we will have
> a one world OS.
That'll be the day.....
>
> Think of all the wars and agreements we've
> been making for the last 100 years!
>
> Linux will be the worlds first true
> global effort and it will be sucessful!
Yeah right.....
>
> My hat's off to Linus.
> He should be awarded the prize!
Without the GNU, Linux would be reduced to practically nothing. Awarding a
prize to Linus Torwald, not to Richard Stallman the founder of the FSF, is
principally the same as Microsoft taking the credit for inventing the GUI
and other technologies. You can put your hat back now....
Otto
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: TYPING ERRORS
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 15:21:01 +0100
Grant Fischer wrote:
>
>
> If QWERTY wasn't the best keyboard layout for mechanical typewriters
> then why did it win?
It was designed to be the worst design with the least obvious key layout
design. The reason for thgis is that old mechanical typewriters couldn't
keep up with the very fast typing speeds of professtonal typists (the
keys jammed) so a layout was designed to reduce typing speed. It then
became the standard.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold weather is
because
of all the fish in the atmosphere?
-The Hackenthorpe Book Of Lies
------------------------------
From: "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A split?
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 14:23:23 GMT
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I have some comments on this proposed split.
>
> What they need to do is bust Microsoft up into
> 4 major chunks.
>
> #1. Microsoft Operating Systems.
> #2. Microsoft appliances.
> #3. Microsoft Development tools and Databases.
> #4. Microsoft Internet mistakes.
Based upon what?
> Then the government should MANDATE that #2, #3 and #4 be cross
> compatible
> with OTHER operating systems.
Government mandate is never a good idea, especially in the software
industry. That could very easily backfire and require other propriatery
platforms, including Apple, Unix, etc, to be eliminated.
> Frankly, I think they could all just save time to declare UNIX as the
> UNIVERSAL OS and be done with what will be and what will not be.
>
> This seems to be the judgment of Microsoft itself as it heads more
> towards
> UNIX and away from lunacy.
You're suggesting a government mandated monopoly.
>
> But YES, 2,3, and 4 should all be forced to be NON-PROPRIETARY!
Since it would be government mandated, then it must be paid for by the
government. Just like any other government mandated policies. The extra cost
associated with such a policy might be levied on the American people as
"Cross-platform" tax.
> That is to say the Federal Government has been giving points to
> applicants who have Microsoft Certifications over people don't.
> Experience has been swept away in lue of Certifications.
And people who have Novell, Unix, etc, certifications are given points also,
over people who don't have such a certification. Not to mention the veteran
point system. I don't oppose either of the point systems, it is just to show
that the point system isn't up to Microsoft. It's managed by the Federal
Government.
>
> As you have to PAY Microsoft for your Certification, this
> is yet another example of how Microsoft has Defrauded the American
> people.
And as you pay for your Novell, Unix, Linux, Checkpoint, etc..
certifications, keep this in mind. It is "only" Microsoft who defrauds the
American people.
>
> IN this regard Microsoft is a discredit to the United States and
> is dragging the United States image down amongst other foreign powers.
Then why other countries are saying "Leave it to the Americans to break up
the most succesful company in their history"?
Otto
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Fischer)
Subject: Re: TYPING ERRORS
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 14:32:56 GMT
On Sun, 30 Apr 2000 15:21:01 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Grant Fischer wrote:
>>
>>
>> If QWERTY wasn't the best keyboard layout for mechanical typewriters
>> then why did it win?
>
>It was designed to be the worst design with the least obvious key layout
>design. The reason for thgis is that old mechanical typewriters couldn't
>keep up with the very fast typing speeds of professtonal typists (the
>keys jammed) so a layout was designed to reduce typing speed. It then
>became the standard.
>
>-Ed
Read the post I was responding to. It argues that this wasn't so.
It does agree that the keys are laid out to reduce jamming, but
not by reducing typist speed.
--
Grant Fischer (gfischer at hub.org)
------------------------------
From: Kevin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Split Dude!
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 14:46:37 GMT
Jim Richardson wrote:
>
> You get to decide who says what on usenet? that's... pretty fascistic itself
> don't you think?
>
> And from the odd coincidence dept, April 19 is the day that the US assaulted
> the compound at Mt Carmel, in which almost all the davidians died. April 19
> is also the day that the Nazis burned the wasrsaw ghetto down...
Godwin's law! You lose.
Kevin.
--
Java Programmer, Matrix fanatic
"There is no spoon."
- Neo
------------------------------
From: Roger <roger@.>
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: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 14:58:43 GMT
On Sat, 29 Apr 2000 04:17:30 GMT, someone claiming to be Jim
Richardson wrote:
> Why does linux have no problems with ps files, but M$ does?
Linux does have problems, without an app to do the translation. Such
apps are also available for Windows, so the only benefit Linux has is
the inclusion in the distro (assuming you have one that does)
------------------------------
From: Roger <roger@.>
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: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 15:03:17 GMT
On Sat, 29 Apr 2000 01:11:21 GMT, someone claiming to be Jim
Richardson wrote:
>On Fri, 28 Apr 2000 07:54:40 -0500,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>>Reinstall the latest Acrobat from Adobe.
>Why? it prints okay as is, it just has to open it first. With a working
>windows 9X setup, you don't tinker uneccesarily. THe registry is fragile
>enough as it is.
But it * doesn't * print okay -- it asks for an association that it
shouldn't.
------------------------------
From: Roger <roger@.>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: MICROSOFT IT THRU! MICROSOFT IS THRU!
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 15:13:45 GMT
On Sat, 15 Apr 2000 21:57:12 GMT, someone claiming to be Glenn Valenta
wrote:
>Charlie Ebert wrote:
>> Microsoft has been forced to admit they created secret back doors to every
>> computer
>> system they sold out the DOOR!
>>
>> 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!
Source?
>How about the NSA backdoor in NT?
>
>Nobody seems to talk about that anymore.
Because we'd rather discuss things that actually exist, which this
doesn't.
>Funny how the MS owned news services (MSNBC,CNBC,NBC,ZD) keep quit (or at least
>suppressed to a low rumble) on the federal case and these MS backdoors and
>vulnerabilities that people keep discovering.
That's funny -- one of the first places I read about the FP issue was
MSNBC.
>Also of concern to me is if there is any conspiracy to have micro$oft swing the
>media outlets it controls to favor of the Bush campaign in return for the
>possibly having the federal case dropped against them.
Naw, they'll just use the black helicopters to whisk whoever wins to
Redmond for re-education
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.kde,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: Re: KDE is better than Gnome
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 15:14:56 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Apr 2000 13:28:53 GMT, Roberto Alsina <ralsina@my-
deja.com> wrote:
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote:
> >> On Thu, 27 Apr 2000 10:23:58 +0100, David Faure
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >JEDIDIAH wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, 26 Apr 2000 14:22:44 GMT, Roberto Alsina
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >> [deletia]
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> The Gimp should have access to xdnd.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Just because an application programmer has access to all
> >the bells
> >> >> >> and whistles, it doesn't mean that the programmer will
use
> >them.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Jedi, read what he wrote. He said Gimp HAS access to XDND, in
> >fact,
> >> >>
> >> >> He also said that you can't drag from kfm to gimp. KFM
is
> >> >> supposed to be conformant to the same standards as the
rest
> >> >> of KDE is it not?
> >> >
> >> >Don't mix up the KDEs.
> >> >KDE-1.x had a proprietary DnD protocol, whereas KDE-2.x uses the
> >>
> >> Oh, I hadn't realized. That's really QUITE interesting.
> >>
> >> Now I can have yet another reason for not trusting the
> >> KDE development team...
> >
> >Uh... switching from homebrewed protocols[1] to standards is a reason
> >not to trust KDE? Interesting point of view. Any other pearls of
wisdom
>
> ...that didn't quite happen, remember.
Oh, shut the fuck up. It started happening before GNOME decided that
Xdnd was the way to go. It is not happening at the speed you would
like? Probably. Is that something anyone should give a damn about? Fuck
no!
> That's the little 'detail' that I missed: that despite all the
> time that has passed in between the declaration of KDE agreeing
> to conform to the standard (xdnd), it hasn't yet.
Development of anything related to the old protocol stopped as soon as
the agreement was made. Development of all new things since then, has
used the new protocol. What more do you want? New versions of KDE 1.x
using the new protocol? That is just not going to happen, because KDE
1.x is in life support (barely!). Just major security fixes would
mean a new version.
> That's a rather fundemental aspect of a desktop to drag one's
> collective feet on.
Well, whatever you want to believe, you will believe.
> >you would like to share? Maybe if Sun released StarOffice under the
BSD
> >license, it would be a reason not to trust Sun?
> >
> >[1] David is using proprietary in a very specific way: it was a
protocol
> >based on the Offix protocol, with some extensions to make it more
> >suitable to KDE's needs. It was not closed, and anyone could use it.
>
> Then the term he was groping for was FRAGMENTED.
Nope. Proprietary. Proprietary does not mean closed, really. Look it up
in the dictionary.
> Offix
> Offix++
> xdnd
> Motif.
>
> >It's just that noone did. Then, when Xdnd came up, the choice was
made
> >to switch to it. But since KDE 1.x was already in maintenance mode,
and
> >development went into KDE2, it won't be finished until KDE2 is
released.
>
> ...just another reason to await (or even help) GNOME become
> more stable...
You know, if I believed you would actually go and code for GNOME,
I would respect you much more. But so far, you seem to me a poser,
and nothing else. Just blah blah blah from you.
--
Roberto Alsina (KDE developer, MFCH)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Advocay off the Net.
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 15:26:33 +0100
CAguy wrote:
> Power in what sense? speed of applications? windows blows the doors
> off Linux in GUI speed using DirectX.
Of course it does --- directx provides direct access to the screen
memory, so it would be much faster than going through the whole X thing.
X with the SHM extension blows the doors off the windows GDI in terms of
speed. So what? All you've pointed out is that windowed systems are
slower than systems that provide access to the screen memory, in terms
of graphics speed.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold weather is
because
of all the fish in the atmosphere?
-The Hackenthorpe Book Of Lies
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A split?
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 16:30:42 GMT
On Sat, 29 Apr 2000 19:02:29 GMT, James A. Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Charlie Ebert wrote:
>> Who the hell is being naive? If you break the law you had better expect
>> to get you company busted up into very small peices.
>
>Which law ?
The Sherman Act. You know, the same law that was used to bust up Standard
Oil and AT&T.
[rest snipped]
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.bobh.org/
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: what's the best tool for linux to get IPs?
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 17:04:45 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm looking for a program to trace IPs on linux,
> one that get's by firewalls and stuff.
> Does any one know of a program like that?
> Thankx!!
It's actually included on your standard distribution. If
you have an ethernet card that supports promiscous mode, and
you can tap in to the connection between the inside router and
the firewall, you can get some pretty detailed traffic information.
It's similar to etherfind. I think it's a gnome utility, but it
might be KDE. I was running it a few days ago, but can't find it
now.
Placement is critical. If you are connected to a switch instead
of a hub, all you'll see is your own traffic. If you are
connected to a hub on the outside of the firewall, you'll only
see the firewall address and the external internet addresses. If
you are connected too far from the inner master router, you'll
only see the packets for that subnet. In the case of a switch,
You will only see traffic on that segment leading to the switch.
Needless to say, you probably want to keep this "sniffer" in the
same room as the rest of your routing and switching equipment, and
you want to control who has access to it.
I was using it a couple of days ago, but I can't remember the name
(it's on the SuSE desktop as a menu ICON if you are logged on as root).
--
Rex Ballard - Open Source Advocate, Internet
I/T Architect, MIS Director
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 60 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 1%/week!
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Be & Linux & Microsoft...
Date: 30 Apr 2000 17:10:41 GMT
Brian D. Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: While we all hold our own opinions of which OS is better (and I favor
: Linux), the viability of that platform is determined by a number of
: factors of the Total Cost of Ownership. To date, I cannot recommend
: Linux in our environment.
You mean across the board, or anywhere? If you mean the former, I'd
have to agree; the investment in learning and using Windows-only
productivity apps in most companies is enormous and retraining those
users is going to be an inherently slow and gradual process. If you
mean the latter, I'd have to respectfully disagree, because even in an
environment with almost all Windows-based clients, Linux turns out to
be a far better server platform, and offers a head start toward
migrating important custom apps away from proprietary Windows
technologies and toward open, industry-standard ones.
: Not until there are a few more enterprise
: tools (such as journaling file systems, ACLs, and perhaps better volume
: management, at the minimum). Some of the TCO factors to consider are:
: 1. APPLICATIONS, APPLICATIONS, APPLICATIONS. Advantage: Microsoft.
: Yes we have StarOffice now, but transferring documents between MSOffice
: and StarOffice can leave a little to be desired. (SO's Arial font
: translation sucks). There are also a number of other office
: applications that business have invested in (both in terms of licenses
: and user training) including MS Project, Visio, VisualBasic, and a host
: of non-Microsoft products. Before Linux is viable as a desktop OS in
: the enterprise, we need the apps, or a decent windows emulator to run
: the Windows version. (WINE isn't there yet).
For the time being, offices that are highly dependent on Office and VB
really don't have a lot of immediately viable alternatives.
But to me this represents one of the best reasons for migrating away
from proprietary "technologies."
One possible approach might be to begin a project to convert all Word
and Excel documents to nonproprietary formats wherever possible, to
rengineer Access apps into client-server database apps, and to
separate VB user-interface components from the underlying business
logic and data access technologies (which is how even MS recommends
that larger VB apps be written in the first place) so that all three
pieces can be decoupled from one another and gradually implemented
using better technologies as maintenance or expansion is needed.
Although I use Linux on the desktop, and therefore had to take the
next step and switch to a competing office suite, it is not necessary
to go all the way in this direction to reap significant benefits.
Once you've developed a culture of respect for interoperability and
open standards, it is still possible to use Microsoft end-user
applications in this environment, or non-Microsoft applications (such
as the Windows version of StarOffice or WordPerfect) within a Windows
environment. You just have to make sure these products default to
saving in a nonproprietary format.
: 2. Commercial support. Advantage: Microsoft. Recall that sometimes
: accounts and non-technical managers end up making technology decisions.
: Not a good idea, but you need to be able to support your choice of
: platform. Yes, there is now commercial support from RedHat and
: Covalent, so its not as much of an issue as it once was, but it's still
: an impediment
I would have to disagree on this point. Microsoft's product support
is quite poor and expensive, and since only it has source, there is
noplace else you can turn; by contrast, ANYONE can support an
open-source product, and lots of companies do, including every Linux
distributor, and your own programming staff can troubleshoot and fix
any problem you will ever have without your needing to go to an
outside vendor at all.
: 3. System Administration Staffing, Recruiting and Retention.
: Advantage: Microsoft. You can't open your car door on the highway
: without knocking over an MSCE these days. We have a very tight IT labor
: market, and Linux/UNIX expertise is harder to find and higher priced.
: I've recruited and interviewed candidates for Linux/Unix admins, and I
: speak from experience on this matter.
Unix/Linux sysadmins are a lot more expensive, but a LOT more
cost-effective too: in my admittedly limited experience, one competent
one, with a part-time backup (probably a programmer) can easily
support a >1000 person organization, whereas it would take at least
5-6 good MSCEs or over a dozen average ones to administer an NT
network of comparable size.
: 4. Office Productivity. Advantage: Microsoft. Every Larry, Curly, and
: Moe knows how to navigate through Microsoft Windows, and Windows
: Applications. It's in the schools, now. If you don't have windows
: desktop (or something that looks just like), you'll have a steepr, more
: costly training curve.
I'm sorry to say MS does have the advantage here, not because there is
not aggressive competition, but because no one else can reliably read
M$ proprietary formats.
But most businesses could easily switch to Star or Applix, keeping a
few boxes running Office for the occasional odd document that won't
convert properly. Since both suites are cross-platform, you can do
this well in advance of any migration of desktop clients to Linux.
: 5. Cost of unscheduled downtime. Advantage: LINUX. However, Windows
: is much better than it used to be, and, again, the bean-counters and
: technophobe managers are comfortable with Microsoft, and tend to
: discount the cost of Microsoft crashes
The cost of unplanned downtime varies dramatically from one
organization to another. I've found that many accept this downtime as
a "normal" cost of doing business. But most organizatiosn do have
mission-critical apps where downtime is simply unacceptable, and if
those apps are running under Windows, then they are very strong
candidates for migration.
: 6. Licensing cost. Advantage: LINUX. No comparison. Less than $50US
: for a commercial linux distribution for the entire enterprise, compared
: to $4,000 + $85/user for Windows NT.
Admittedly a minor component of TCO in most cases, but yes, Linux
definitely wins here.
: 7. Importance of the Server to the business. Depends. Business
: Critical databases don't tend to be put on Microsoft NT. or Linux.
: They run under Sun Solaris, HP HP/UX, or IBM AIX (or AS/400).
Usually, but unfortunately not always.
A lot of database apps start their lives as non-critical, and grow to
become mission-critical over time. Not only are many of these hosted
on NT, but some are running on MS Access of all things. :( Much of my
work consists of reengineering these vile monstrosities into genuine
client-server apps. By tradition, we have always used MSSQL for
back-ends and VB for the front-ends (and for a frighteningly large
portion of the business logic as well). I would prefer Web or Java
clients and Linux or Unix for the database and application servers.
It looks like we are headed that way, but only slowly, and there is
significant resistance from the "all-MS" camp which doesn't see the
problems with the way we're doing it now or the advantages of
migrating to industry standards.
: There are more, but you get the idea. The bottom line is that the
: choice of platform should be decision based on the business requirements
: and cost of ownership, and the same answer doesn't apply to everyone.
Absolutely. One other point to consider though: in larger companies,
at least, these decisions are made by nontechnical managers, often
with little or no regard to the input of their technical staff.
Business requirements play no real role in that sort of decisionmaking
process. It's all about marketing and hype. And one of my fears is
not that these large organizations won't adopt Linux, but that when
they do, they'll do it for the wrong reasons, with a poorly thought
out plan (or no plan at all), and then Linux will get blamed for the
mess that ensues. That is basically what happened with Java.
: If you have high uptime requirements and a 24x7 operation, you'll
: probably prefer Linux/UNIX (at least for your servers). For others,
: Windows NT may be the right answer. In either case, it's still
: virtually impossible to justify anything other than Microsoft windows on
: a corporate desktop.
I can accept NT Workstation as a decent client platform - it runs most
Win32 apps, and seldom crashes - but I would strongly suggest
migrating to open standards and protocols, even in the NT environment,
wherever possible. This is a long and gradual process, but once it's
completed, it then becomes possible to choose the right OS based on
business requirements rather than vendorlock.
And W2K is a big problem right now. It turns out that most of our
hardware won't support it, and lots of our custom (in-house and
vendor-purchased) apps won't run on it. The cost of moving to W2K
enterprise-wide might exceed the cost of moving to Linux! We're kind
of hoping these problems will get ironed out, but, as usual, we're at
the mercy of M$ to do so - no one else can fix these problems because
no one else has the source.
Since NT4 support will gradually dwindle as W2K becomes more
prevalent, we're really between a rock and a hard place.
: Having said that, I see Linux in the same spot NT was about 5 years ago,
: when it was the upstart OS against the dominant Novell. Now, its Linux
: that has the momentum, and everyone's been jumping on the bandwagon. In
: a few years time, many of the advantages that Microsoft now enjoys will
: also be possessed by Linux, which will make it easier (and more common)
: to justify it in the enterprise. I look forward to it.
Me too!
Joe
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Split Dude!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2000 17:36:54 GMT
On Sun, 30 Apr 2000 14:46:37 GMT,
Kevin, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>
>
>Jim Richardson wrote:
>>
>> You get to decide who says what on usenet? that's... pretty fascistic itself
>> don't you think?
>>
>> And from the odd coincidence dept, April 19 is the day that the US assaulted
>> the compound at Mt Carmel, in which almost all the davidians died. April 19
>> is also the day that the Nazis burned the wasrsaw ghetto down...
>
>Godwin's law! You lose.
>
>Kevin.
>
>--
>
Perhaps you should have read the post to which I was replying, and perhaps you
should also read Godwins, which is invoked when someone is compared to either
Hitler or Nazis, not when they are mentioned.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
