Linux-Advocacy Digest #525, Volume #26 Mon, 15 May 00 23:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Ten Reasons Why Linux Sucks ("Bracy")
Re: ILOVEYOU virus for Linux (attached) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 ("Keith T. Williams")
Re: progamming models, unix vs Windows (mlw)
Re: Ten Reasons Why Syphon Sucks ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Here is the solution ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Banking - OCC opinion of Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: HUMOR: CSMA has the Tholenbot... we should have the Templetonbot. (was Re: The
"outlook" for MS) (ZnU)
Microsoft "Outlook" should be named Microsoft "Lookout" (mlw)
Re: Microsoft "Outlook" should be named Microsoft "Lookout" (Thomas Phipps)
Re: Here is the solution (Marty)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Bracy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ten Reasons Why Linux Sucks
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 01:51:20 GMT
I don't hate Windows. In fact, I owe a great deal to Microsoft and Windows.
It's given me a good job, and a good salary. It's also made me a good chunk
of change since a significant portion of my investment porfolio is invested
in Microsoft.
That being said, I *do* have some very big dislikes with Windows. You won't
find any disagreement from me that it's easier to use. But that ease of use
comes at a hefty price, and not just monetarily.
It leads people like you into thinking that *anybody* can be a network
administrator. It leads people like you into thinking that all you really have to
know how to do is how to point and click. It even leads training courses into
advertising that as fact: "If you can point and click a mouse, we can train you
to pass the MCSE exams!"
It leads people like you into thinking that MCSE certification is a more significant
credential than it really is. MCSE is a nice *starting point" in becoming a network
administrator, but it's certainly NOT a credential. It teaches you how to run
Windows NT when things are going well, but teaches you virtually NOTHING
about troubleshooting problems when they occur. In reality, "MCSE" really
stands for "Must Consult with Server Expert."
I know, because I'm the guy you call when things go wrong. I'm the guy you
call when one of the drives in your RAID 5 configuration fails and you have
no idea what to do. I'm the guy you call when you install Windows NT as a
PDC and then install Exchange, SQL, SMS, IIS, and Proxy on the damned thing
and then wonder why your server's performance is so bad. I'm the guy you call
when you run out of hard drive space on your NT partition and then go into Disk
Administrator and resize it. I'm the guy you call when you screw up your NT
configuration without making a backup first, and the guy you call when your
tape drive fails because you never cleaned it in the 2 or 3 years you've owned
it. And lastly, I'm the guy you call, saying "Walk me through it! Hold my hand
and show me how to do it so that I don't have to use my brain and think about
it!"
The fact of the matter is: if you can't figure out how to install Linux and get it
running, then you have no business being a network administrator. Whether
or not you run Linux makes no difference. If you haven't the necessary skills
to install Linux, then get the hell out of the computer room because you don't
have the necessary skills to run Windows NT either.. You're doing your
company, and your users a disservice by taking on a job you can't handle.
You're subjecting them to more loss of data to the ILOVEYOU worms, you're
subjecting them to more loss of data because you didn't know how to rebuild
an array, and you're subjecting your users to malicious hackers because you
didn't know how to set up a secure network.
Bracy
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Syphon
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. Netscape as the primary gui browser. Need I say more? Netscape sux
> even under Windows. IE 5.0 is light years ahead.
>
> 2. Email clients...Pine? Sendmail? Archaic kludges. If you want to
> MANAGE and play with your email instead of read it Linux is for you. You
> can sort catalog and score all that email on a bit by bit basis under
> Linux. real great geek stuff. Reading email seems to be secondary to
> playing with it.
>
> 3. Multimedia...Run antique versions of Real Player and not be able to
> run Real Juke box (no Linux version). Run cheap Winamp Clones that suck.
>
> 4. Graphics... Gimp? Name says it all. Even the trial versions of
> Adobe included with scanners are more powerful.
>
> 5. Internet? Call your favorite ISP and tell them you run Linux...
> Make sure and listen to the laughter at the end of the phone....
>
> 6. Supported printers? Damm better be a Postscript printer, linsux
> seems to be the only folks using these printers these days.... Otherwise
> you will be burdened by some filter that a pimple faced geek dreamed up
> that won't utilize 10 percent of your printers capabilities.
>
> 7. Have a scanner? read the above. same thing applies....
>
> 8. Networking....Want to get the whole family pissed off at you? Take
> away their internet conection sharing, standard under Win98se, and try
> and set up the same deal under Linux...
>
> Hint: Give up now, because others far more qualified than you have
> already thrown in the towel.
>
> You'll be reading How-To's till the cows come home...Or your wife leaves
> you, whichever occurs first.
>
> 9. USB...Most devices barely, if at all, function.
>
> 10. Graphics...Take a look at the shitty font display of Netscrape
> under Linux...Makes your eyes tear doesn't it.
>
>
> That's only the surface. Linusx is a piece of garbage that needs to be
> exposed for the crap that it is...
>
> WANT TO RUN OUTDATED TEXT APPLICATIONS? TRY LINUX!!!!
>
> Ever Wonder why there are very few 1.x version Linux applications?
> Reason is they are too scared to commit to anything...Bunch of back room
> hackers they are....
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: ILOVEYOU virus for Linux (attached)
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 21:02:01 -0600
In article <8fq961$hag$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "cal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> This virus works on the honor system. Please delete a
>>> bunch of JPG and MP3 files from your system and
>>> forward this message to all your contacts.
>>
>>
>>
> YOU INFIDEL YOU!!!!
> Godd-----!!!
> All my Bill/Melissa && Tommy/Pam jpegs gone!!!!
>
> Now I gotta do an unscheduled backup restore...(sigh)
>
> PS: Some virus: didn't have to reboot the boxes two or three
> times...harumph.
>
>
Awright...now that my BM&&TP screensaver is working now...
Let me tell you something wiseguy...
You and your little pinko virus have HAD IT!!!
Your post and header info have been placed in my scumantics.scan.conf file.
Your little shi--- virus can not harm my boxes NO MORE!
Puiu!
Linux: Think/Experiment/Learn
Dos (and all gui variants):
yep:
------------------------------
From: "Keith T. Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.lang.basic
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 22:06:04 -0400
Roger <roger@.> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sun, 14 May 2000 22:54:46 -0400, someone claiming to be Keith T.
> Williams wrote:
>
> >No it wasn't. There were major discussions as to whether it should be
> >patented or copyrighted prior to the changes in the copyright law.
>
> Proof?
go read some computer magazines from the 70's.
>
> >Television was always covered, since prior to a television program being
> >made a script is written.
>
> I know that TV has always been covered -- that's what I said. But
> then language was added to specifically name the program itself as a
> protected expression, leading to that warning about not infringing the
> copyright that begins every movie sold on videotape.
>
> >Roger <roger@.> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> On Thu, 11 May 2000 18:41:30 -0400, someone claiming to be "Keith T.
> >> Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> >Software was first copyrightable in the 1976 update of the US
Copyright law.
> >> >And in the United States, the first copyright law was passed in 1790,
> >> >although it is mentioned in Article 1, Section 8 of the US
constitution.
>
> >> No, software was first explicitly mentioned in that "update" but it
> >> has always been covered, the same that a television program was
> >> covered before it was specifically named as a protected class.
>
>
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: progamming models, unix vs Windows
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 22:04:21 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The brief fad we call micro computers, i.e. CPUs that, today, would
> not
> > even be used in many embedded applications. The Z-80, 8080, 8086(88)
> > were all so underpowered that so many short cuts had to be made. The
> > single tasking paradigms, etc. They have all affected how we develop
> > programs today.
> >
> > Look at Windows. This is a prime example of an environment where micro
> > computer paradigms that have survived, not because they are better,
> but
> > it is what people have gotten used to.
> >
> > Just to name one: drive letters.
> > Why does one need drive letters? The only reason they exist is because
> > DOS did not have a hierarchical file system until version 2.0. 2.0!!!
> do
> > you believe it?
>
> First of all, your subject is wrong. This has absolutely nothing at all
> to do with programming models.
Give me a break, tell me how using drive letters does not constitute a
"programming model" in a programming.
>
> Second, drive letters have absolutely nothing to do with
> microcomputers. You are just displaying your ignorance of computer
> history by stating this. That great microcomputer system known as the
> VAX used drive letters (labels, actually) when running VMS. So did the
> PDP-11 operating systems such as RSX-11 and RT-11 (which, if you
> actually knew the basics of computing history, CP/M, and thus MS-DOS
> and Windows, were derived from). To continue my compelling attack of
> your fallacious argument, that great mainframe computer known as the
> Apple II did NOT use drive letters. As you can see, both microcomputer
> and non-microcomputer systems have used drive letters, and both
> microcomputer and non-microcomputer systems have NOT used drive
> letters, thereby blowing your whole argument completely out of the
> water.
Oh, please. "drive specifiers" and "drive labels" are different from
"drive letters." "drive letters" are limited to 26, drive specifiers are
not limited. I made no mention of the UNIX metaphor of mounting file
systems. I have used VMS, CP/M, and countless other systems. You are the
one that assumes I was basing my observations strictly on a UNIX
metaphor. Mine was the observation of how limited DOS had to be and how
no effort was made to get rid of the limits.
You, however, choose to insult.
>
> Obviously, you have never used any operating system aside from Winux or
> Lindows. The argument between drive labels and mount points is well-
> understood by most seasoned computer users, but you have given no
> indication that you understand the issues (you state no reason why
> mount points are better than drive labels).
One can form an opinion, pretty quickly, about one person by the way
they address another.
--
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"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Ten Reasons Why Syphon Sucks
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 01:57:59 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Syphon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. Netscape as the primary gui browser. Need I say more? Netscape sux
> even under Windows. IE 5.0 is light years ahead.
When Netscape crashes under Linux, I just have to restart Netscape.
When IE crashes, I have to reboot. You call that progress?
> 2. Email clients...Pine? Sendmail? Archaic kludges. If you want to
> MANAGE and play with your email instead of read it Linux is for you.
> You can sort catalog and score all that email on a bit by bit basis
> under Linux. real great geek stuff. Reading email seems to be
> secondary to playing with it.
If you want to become infected with MELISSA or ILOVEYOU, sure Windoze is
definitely superior.
> 3. Multimedia...Run antique versions of Real Player and not be able to
> run Real Juke box (no Linux version). Run cheap Winamp Clones that
> suck.
Does anyone out there know what he's talking about? I've got multimedia
that shames Windoze.
> 4. Graphics... Gimp? Name says it all. Even the trial versions of
> Adobe included with scanners are more powerful.
What Adobe trial software? And I've got versions of Adobe stuff for
Linux that is as good or better than the Windoze product.
> 5. Internet? Call your favorite ISP and tell them you run Linux...
> Make sure and listen to the laughter at the end of the phone....
My ISP runs Linux exclusively. So does his competitor. The helpdesk is
sorta not-too-bright(TM), but that's 'cause they mainly hafta deal with
Windoze users.
> 6. Supported printers? Damm better be a Postscript printer, linsux
> seems to be the only folks using these printers these days....
> Otherwise you will be burdened by some filter that a pimple faced geek
> dreamed up that won't utilize 10 percent of your printers
> capabilities.
I've got two HP printers that give as good print quality as I could get
with Windoze.
> 7. Have a scanner? read the above. same thing applies....
Did you by any chance dig your copy of Linux out of a dumpster behind
Microsoft?
> 8. Networking....Want to get the whole family pissed off at you? Take
> away their internet conection sharing, standard under Win98se, and try
> and set up the same deal under Linux...
You're an idiot. Linux is to networking what Microsoft is to tin cans
and string.
> Hint: Give up now, because others far more qualified than you have
> already thrown in the towel.
And others far more qualified than you have moved to Linux.
> You'll be reading How-To's till the cows come home...Or your wife
> leaves you, whichever occurs first.
Actually, my wife is reading the how-to's. And we keep track of the
cows in an Oracle database.
> 9. USB...Most devices barely, if at all, function.
Sorta like Windoze.
> 10. Graphics...Take a look at the shitty font display of Netscrape
> under Linux...Makes your eyes tear doesn't it.
What shitty fonts? My display looks just fine right now, except that
it's displaying the bovine defecation you posted.
> That's only the surface. Linusx is a piece of garbage that needs to be
> exposed for the crap that it is...
Yeah, well you ain't the one to expose it. Shit, you can't even spell
Linsux correctly. What a fscking moron. Windoze material you are.
> WANT TO RUN OUTDATED TEXT APPLICATIONS? TRY LINUX!!!!
Who's outdated? Who else's operating system still boots a ten-year-old
text-based OS before loading a window manager? Doh!
> Ever Wonder why there are very few 1.x version Linux applications?
No. Ever wonder why all Microsoft software isn't labeled "beta" as it
should be?
> Reason is they are too scared to commit to anything...Bunch of back
> room hackers they are....
Yeah, but they sure do scare the hell out of Microsoft, eh?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Here is the solution
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 02:00:04 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
hauck[at]codem{dot}com wrote:
> I moved to Linux for a variety of reasons:
>
> 1. Multiuser. I have a home network and the way Linux allows all
> resources to be available anywhere was (and still is) attractive.
>
> 2. Stability. Linux is more reliable than OS/2. Sorry.
>
> 3. Unix-alike. I happen to like Unix. This may be an acquired
taste.
>
> 4. Open Source. I like to tinker.
>
> 5. Growing user base means improving hardware and application
support.
>
> 6. I quit writing Windows apps a while back (still use DOS
sometimes).
>
> Other options would be one of the BSD's, a Mac (if you really like the
> desktop metaphor) or NT (yes, really). I wouldn't recommend Win9x to
> anybody without a very specific need. Which of these you pick largely
> depends on what features of OS/2 you found most useful, what things
you
> think it lacks most, and how your needs are evolving. None of them
are
> especially "OS/2 like", although to tell you the truth NT is probably
the
> closest in many ways.
This is an _extremely_ close minded view as you do not consider any
systems besides Unix, Mac, and Windows. Did you even know that (GASP!)
other systems actually exist? The best OS for an OS/2 user to move to
is VMS. Point by point:
1. Multiuser. VMS has considerably better support for multiuser than
Linux especially in networked environments and is ideal for home use.
Clustering will save most home users much more time than if they need
to move to Linux. The shared system disk, plus the ability to share
devices over the network (which Linux still doesn't do right...) are
among the nicest features.
2. Stability. VMS is considerably more stable than Linux.
3. OS/2-alike. VMS command syntax is very close to OS/2 syntax.
Obviously, most users would want to move to something close to what
they know, than something difference. Why should they move to a Unix
like syntax as you contend?
4. Open source. The VMS source code is available for a nominal fee.
5. All of the open source tools are available, but you get superior
tools for free also (especially advanced programming tools, which have
no equivalent on Linux) so there is no need to go to open source stuff
really.
6. I don't progam on Windows either. What does this have to do with
anything?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Banking - OCC opinion of Linux
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 02:05:01 GMT
Does anybody here have any experience with the banking industry and OCC
(Office of the Comptroller of the Currency) regulators and their view
of linux? I'm doing some security work with a bank and they're
wondering about the OCC's view of linux. In this case, it is not in
a 'core processing' environment. It's mearly being used in conjunction
with some support services (duct tape) to make some other management
jobs simpler.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: HUMOR: CSMA has the Tholenbot... we should have the Templetonbot. (was
Re: The "outlook" for MS)
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 02:12:31 GMT
In article <8fq91q$ltc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <8fphc1$vl$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) wrote:
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Stephen S. Edwards II
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > A UNIX advocate posting from a Macintosh? How interesting.
> >
> > Alot more common than youd think. Half the computers in my house
> > are macs, and rightfully so.
>
> IMHO, anybody who advocates both Unix and Mac, at the expense of
> Windows, has a non-technical agenda, and should be globally kill-filed
> by all readers of the advocacy nesgroups.
I consider it quite reasonable. Mac OS wins on usability, Unix wins on
power and scalability. Most people need one or the other. Windows is a
poor compromise.
[snip]
--
The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected.
-- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Microsoft "Outlook" should be named Microsoft "Lookout"
Date: Mon, 15 May 2000 22:11:00 -0400
Sorry, just had to be said.
--
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"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Phipps)
Subject: Re: Microsoft "Outlook" should be named Microsoft "Lookout"
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 02:14:42 GMT
and I fully agree
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, mlw wrote:
>
>Sorry, just had to be said.
>
>--
>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"
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Here is the solution
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 02:16:39 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> This is an _extremely_ close minded view as you do not consider any
> systems besides Unix, Mac, and Windows. Did you even know that (GASP!)
> other systems actually exist? The best OS for an OS/2 user to move to
> is VMS. Point by point:
>
> 1. Multiuser. VMS has considerably better support for multiuser than
> Linux especially in networked environments and is ideal for home use.
> Clustering will save most home users much more time than if they need
> to move to Linux. The shared system disk, plus the ability to share
> devices over the network (which Linux still doesn't do right...) are
> among the nicest features.
>
> 2. Stability. VMS is considerably more stable than Linux.
>
> 3. OS/2-alike. VMS command syntax is very close to OS/2 syntax.
> Obviously, most users would want to move to something close to what
> they know, than something difference. Why should they move to a Unix
> like syntax as you contend?
>
> 4. Open source. The VMS source code is available for a nominal fee.
>
> 5. All of the open source tools are available, but you get superior
> tools for free also (especially advanced programming tools, which have
> no equivalent on Linux) so there is no need to go to open source stuff
> really.
>
> 6. I don't progam on Windows either. What does this have to do with
> anything?
How do you get VMS to run on an entry level (ca $800 or less) machine?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
