Linux-Advocacy Digest #690, Volume #26 Thu, 25 May 00 20:13:08 EDT
Contents:
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (Gary Hallock)
Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers. (Steven Fosdick)
Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers. (Steven Fosdick)
RedHat 6.2 Enterprise Edition (ajam)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (Gary Hallock)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (Gary Hallock)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Who is Linux hurting the most (Gary Hallock)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Seán Ó Donnchadha)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (josco)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Loren Petrich)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (Gary Hallock)
Re: Linux good choice for home desktop. (Darren Wyn Rees)
Re: Here is the solution (WickedDyno)
Re: UNIX Linux only ISP ("Francis Van Aeken")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Loren Petrich)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (josco)
Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers. (Bloody Viking)
Re: HP-UX vs. Linux (Christopher Browne)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (Christopher Browne)
Re: Ten Reasons Why Linux Sucks (Christopher Browne)
Re: Is the PC era over? (Christopher Browne)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 19:10:22 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Drestin Black wrote:
>
>
> Wonder when I'll see some s/390's in TPC benchmarks? You know, smoking those
> wimply scsi drived Compaq's with their lame Intel architecture...
I don't know. But TPC benchmarks are not relevant for many applications.
Gary
------------------------------
From: Steven Fosdick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers.
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 01:54:45 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The inkjet is an el cheapo, so I'll need to do it in software. What is the
>> way you make the carriage return character in C? I know about \n for the
>> linefeed and the \f for the formfeed.
>
> \r seems to be pretty common. i am not sure if it has been blessed by
> any standards body.
AFAIK \r is ISO Standard C for the CR character which ASCII defines.
So yes it is standardised.
------------------------------
From: Steven Fosdick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers.
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 01:56:35 +0000
In article <pUPW4.9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bloody Viking
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Csaba Raduly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : Anyway, you need to find the DIP switches (if any), specifically the
> : one that says "Auto CR" or something to that effect. That will do a CR
> : when receiving a LF.
>
> The inkjet is an el cheapo, so I'll need to do it in software. What is the
> way you make the carriage return character in C? I know about \n for the
> linefeed and the \f for the formfeed.
Maybe it will have to be done in software, but that doesn't mean you have to
write the software to do it. Check out the Printing Howto as referred to earlier
as there is bound to be a way to tell the print spooler to put the CRs in.
------------------------------
From: ajam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RedHat 6.2 Enterprise Edition
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 19:20:44 -0400
I wonder what people think about RedHat charging $2500 for its RedHat
6.2 Enterprise Edition distro. Are they out of their minds? What a rip
off? That's $2500 for what? Motif? That could be $100 - 200, then
what else? I cannot believe how selfish these people have become!
Comments!?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 19:16:50 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Drestin Black wrote:
> I don't agree. Linux 2.3.99999 may exist but I've never seen Linux
> 2.4.00000 - have you?
>
> Meanwhile, I'm holding DataCenter Beta 2 in my hands and Beta 1 is running
> right this second. It says W2K Datacenter, it doesn't say "W2K Adv. Server
> Soon-to-be-enhanced-to-DataCenter-Abilities"
You are just showing you're ignorance. The 2.3.99-pre9 kernel IS the beta
version of 2.4. It is simply a convenient convention for labeling
releases. The 2.3 kernel becomes 2.4 when it is released for production
use.
Gary
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 19:25:42 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Drestin Black wrote:
>
>
> I maintain that I've not seen a kernel stamped Linux 2.4. 2.3.xxx maybe but
> not 2.4. That is true.
>
You are just showing yourself to be a total idiot. As has been explained to
you many times before, the odd numbered kernels are aplha and beta copies of
the even numbered kernels. 2.3.99-pre9 IS the beta version of 2.4. There
will never be a beta copy labeled 2.3.xxx simply because of the naming
convention used. When 2.3 is ready for release, the version number will be
changed to 2.4 with NO changes to code. Do you understand now, or do I have to
repeat it again and again. What an idiot you are!
>
> Linux SMP is not as good as NT SMP - that remains a fact. I am not aware
> that 2.4 has been not only made available but actually tested to demonstrate
> it has better smp support. Sure, somewhere linus said: "Hey 2.4 will have
> better SMP support" but where is that *proven*?
>
2.3.99-pre9 IS the beta copy of 2.4. You can download it today from
www.kernel.org. The changes I meantioned are in this beta copy and have been
for some time.
>
> Today, linux can run on 32 processors while only a beta version of Data
> center can do the same. True. Wait until July/august, then Datacenter will
> be released and both will have 32 processor support. Then we can test and
> see which scales better. Based on tests with Unisys servers we've seen and
> run I'm putting the easy money on the safe bet. Near linear scaling, I never
> thought I'd see the day... and then I did... got the windows media file
> too...
Gary
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 18:37:10 -0500
<jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)> wrote in message
news:L9BY9tzSDwrQ-pn2-2hYgJE1IC2fy@localhost...
> > I'm not sure how the conversation switched to this, but the original
> > argument was about the code that detected non-MS-DOS. Since the warning
> > messages are disabled in the retail version of Windows 3.1, it wouldn't
show
> > them.
> >
> [Bzzzztt!]
>
> Wrong answer. This is the same copy of Windows 3.1 that originally
> refused to run with DR-DOS 6 (I only ever bought the one - I kept
> switching the underlying operating system until it would function
> reasonably well, going - in an upward line - from MS DOS 5 via DR-DOS
> 6 to OS/2 Warp 3).
>
> So I have in fact disproven both claims you made, i.e. the one where
> you said GA Windows 3.1 didn't have any "warning messages" in it
> anymore, as well as the one where you claimed that those warning
> messages were aimed at _any_ non-Microsoft version of DOS.
Andrew schulman says quite specifically that DR-DOS *DID* work with windows,
unless you were running it in standard mode. Standard mode did not work
because of Novell acknowledge bug in DR-DOS.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 19:32:16 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Who is Linux hurting the most
Drestin Black wrote:
> didn't you know? they all work for free and give away everything they write
> for your company to everyone else in the world cause they
> steal^H^H^H^H^Hborrow code from other open sores(tm) projects to create
> theirs anyway.
>
> Are there any paid linux programmers? besides, I didn't know there was a
> language called "linux" - I thought it was a kernel.
>
I'm a Linux programmer and I do not work for free and I do not steal code. Of
course, you wouldn't survive for 10 minutes where I work.
Gary
------------------------------
From: Seán Ó Donnchadha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 19:33:06 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) wrote:
>>
>>Let me guess. You're also confident that the world would have been a
>>better place had Microsoft never existed, right? Why do Microsoft
>>bashers all seem to think they can see into alternate realities?
>
>Perhaps they are acquainted with the original and alternative
>products that Microsoft bought or bullied out of existence
>using what what are now being exposed as unfair practices.
>
Yeah, too bad they can't actually name any that were made by a company
that didn't either shoot itself in the head (Netscape), or happily
take Microsoft's money and run (Fox).
Besides, their practices aren't being exposed as unfair; most business
practices are. They're being exposed as illegal under a controversial
law that no two people seem to interpret the same way.
You know, I began suspecting some time ago that antitrust law wasn't
really what it seemed to be - that perhaps it owed its vagueness and
ambiguity to cunning design rather than bad legislature. Could it
exist specifically to grant the government the unlimited power that it
would otherwise eventually lose? At least one person agrees with me:
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/comment/0,5859,2575253,00.html
"I'm reminded of the teachings of Machiavelli who told the prince to
keep shifting the power back and forth between the provinces and the
capitol, thus forever preventing any possible adversary from gaining
sufficient power to threaten the kingdom. It all sounds very
un-American, but quite effective..."
"To the degree the proponents of the DOJ position demonize MS and
claim any type of principled "high ground", I'm compelled to call
them liars or fools. Neither side is being honest with the citizenry
when they claim any moral superiority in light of the overall reality
of the situation."
>
>People did manage to get their letters typed before MS-windows
>ever existed.
>
Great! After we destroy Microsoft, let's bring back the Pony Express!
------------------------------
From: josco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 16:45:11 -0700
-- joseph
On Thu, 25 May 2000, Seán Ó Donnchadha wrote:
> josco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Hey, I fully admit that MS royally screwed up their defense. That
> >> doesn't mean however that Naptime Jackson *ISN'T* a biased and
> >> vindictive luddite.
> >
> >Hey, I'll agree with vindictive. A judge's job is to be vindictive: use
> >the law to determine punishment and remedies.
> >
>
> vindictive:
>
> 1. Disposed to seek revenge; revengeful.
> 2. Marked by or resulting from a desire to hurt; spiteful.
>
> -- www.dictionary.com
>
> Is this really what you believe a judge's job is to be?
Gosh, yes.......just use the full meaning of a word, not a child's
definition.
Vindictive \Vin*dic"tive\, a. [For vindicative, confused with L. vindicta
revenge, punishment, fr. vindicare to
vindicate. Cf. {Vindicative}.]
1. Disposed to revenge; prompted or characterized by revenge; revengeful.
I am vindictive enough to repel force by force. --Dryden.
2. Punitive. [Obs.]
{Vindictive damages}. (Law) See under {Damage}, n. -- {Vin*dic"tive*ly},
adv. -- {Vin*dic"tive*ness}, n.
--- From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) (web1913)
and.....
vindictive [vin dktiv ] adjective
1. vengeful: looking for revenge or done through a desire for revenge
2. spiteful: feeling, showing, or done through a desire to hurt
somebody
3. LAW meant to punish: used to describe damages awarded by a court
that are set higher than the amount necessary to compensate the victim,
in order to punish the defendant
Encarta World English Dictionary [North American Edition] & (P) 1999-2000
Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Developed for Microsoft by Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: 25 May 2000 23:37:36 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Loren Petrich wrote:
[some history of Nazi Germany, and Hitler's successes before 1941 and
failures afterwards]
>Anybody who claims that a discussion of historical examples is
>the end of a thread is an IDIOT>
I agree. Intel has been much more careful about antitrust issues,
and it has managed to avoid serious trouble.
Bill Gates, however, seems to be digging a (metaphorical) hole for
Microsoft similar to the one that Adolf Hitler had dug for Germany, with
his unwillingness to compromise.
>> there do seem to be some interesting parallels and lessons here. Making
>> peace with one side or the other could have saved Nazidom, but Hitler
>> refused to do it. And Hitler had had a long history of stabbing allies in
>> the back.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 19:38:55 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Just goes to show, when I get angry, I sometimes don't proof what I write.
Before you make some stupid comment, Drestin, here are the corrections.
Gary
Gary Hallock wrote:
>
>
> You are just showing yourself to be a total idiot. As has been explained to
> you many times before, the odd numbered kernels are aplha and beta copies of
^^^
should be alpha.
>
> the even numbered kernels. 2.3.99-pre9 IS the beta version of 2.4. There
> will never be a beta copy labeled 2.3.xxx simply because of the naming
^^^^
should be 2.4.xxx
>
> convention used. When 2.3 is ready for release, the version number will be
> changed to 2.4 with NO changes to code. Do you understand now, or do I have to
> repeat it again and again. What an idiot you are!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Wyn Rees)
Subject: Re: Linux good choice for home desktop.
Date: 25 May 2000 23:36:53 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 24 May 2000 19:04:45 GMT,
Frank Rizzo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
in <hJVW4.38357$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
>
>
Well, my desktop looks like a big black square. And I've
usually got a little $ sign (or something else, eg #) in
the bottom left hand corner.
--
this is my .sig, show me yours
------------------------------
From: WickedDyno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Here is the solution
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 19:40:03 -0400
In article <dX6X4.3644$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Illya Vaes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Daniel Johnson wrote:
>> >"Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >>>Actually, MS quite frequently makes its APIs available
>> >>>separately from the OS.
>> >>No they don't and they are arguing they should integrate more APIs
>> >>into
>> >>the OS.
>> >Sure they do. ODBC, DirectX, OLE. Wheredyathink "DLL Hell"
>> >comes from?
>>
>> According to MS advocates on cooa, this alledged "DLL Hell" doesn't
>> exist.
>> Funny how y'all flip-flop on such matters...
>
>Welcome to .advocacy... Here's your accordion.. :D
>
ROFL!
--
| Andrew Glasgow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| SCSI is *NOT* magic. There are *fundamental technical |
| reasons* why it is necessary to sacrifice a young goat |
| to your SCSI chain now and then. -- John Woods |
------------------------------
From: "Francis Van Aeken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: UNIX Linux only ISP
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 20:47:33 -0300
Sparc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8gk3vs$kfp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> No windoze users allowed to connect to us, we have
> designed a service with UNIX an Linux only in mind.
Good idea! Let's split the world in two parts: those who use only UNIX
or a clone and those who use whatever they feel like using.
Francis.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: 25 May 2000 23:43:44 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Illya Vaes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Edwin wrote:
>>David D. Huff Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>>Edwin I think beyond M$, I happen to care about some of the people whom
>>>have lost a great deal of their retirement funds due to this single minded
>>>lunacy of M$.
>>That's too bad. Tough breaks for them.
>Where are you every time an opponent of MS breakup tries to argue it shouldn't
>be done because "all those retiring saps will lose their pensions"???
This argument could be used to "prove" that it's wrong to
compete with M$, because doing so would make life difficult for those
hoping that M$ Pokemon cards, er, stock will finance their retirements.
Thus, Apple, Sun, the Linux community, etc. are all engaged in
economic sabotage for doing stuff that could hurt M$'s market share.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: josco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 16:53:17 -0700
On Thu, 25 May 2000, Seán Ó Donnchadha wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) wrote:
>
> >Perhaps they are acquainted with the original and alternative
> >products that Microsoft bought or bullied out of existence
> >using what what are now being exposed as unfair practices.
> >
>
> Yeah, too bad they can't actually name any that were made by a company
> that didn't either shoot itself in the head (Netscape), or happily
> take Microsoft's money and run (Fox).
And where was it proven Netscape shot itself in the head?
> Besides, their practices aren't being exposed as unfair;
They were exposed as being illegal.
> >People did manage to get their letters typed before MS-windows
> >ever existed.
> >
>
> Great! After we destroy Microsoft, let's bring back the Pony Express!
How about bringing back common sense for MS advocacy.
------------------------------
From: Bloody Viking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers.
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 23:50:52 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: You can invoke ghostview, gv file.ps, (assuming that you have a postscript
: file)
: and print from there.
Is there any way to make a Poscript "hello world" file to experiment with?
I'm sure a Postscript guru could hand-make a "Hello World" file.
--
CAUTION: Email Spam Killer in use. Leave this line in your reply! 152680
First Law of Economics: You can't sell product to people without money.
4968238 bytes of spam mail deleted. http://www.wwa.com/~nospam/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: HP-UX vs. Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 23:55:36 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when [EMAIL PROTECTED]
would say:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Ben =?iso-8859-1?Q?Chauss=E9?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Do you know what is best between HP-UX and Linux. We want to create a
>> web server, and we would like to know what is best does two one ????
>
>I admin^H^H^H^H^H endured HP-UX for nearly five years. HP-UX is an MPE
>programmer's nightmarish vision of what UNIX should have been, and it
>has ultimately managed to combine the worst features of both. We
>referred to it lovingly as "hockey-pucks", and joked about how apropos
>the OS acronym would have been if Packard's name had preceded Hewlett's
>in the company. Upgrades and patches are absolute hell. Package
>management is worse than any Linux distribution.
>
>The "one good thing"(TM) about HP-UX is HP support. Absolutely stellar,
>and probably the single factor keeping HP-UX from extinction.
Entertainingly, HP has a page entitled "Services & Solutions: Vintage
Software"
<http://www.hp.com/ssg/vintage/index.html>
I never had _any_ exposure to MPE; I'm not sure this is particularly
relevant to comp.os.linux.advocacy, but would be interested to see
some sort of compare/contrast of MPE with other OSes, to learn what
misfeatures to avoid, if nothing else...
Interesting faintly relevant links:
- Interex links to "somewhat open MPE sources"
<http://www.interex.org/tech/3000/hp30003.html>
- A bit of info on MPE
<http://www.robelle.com/smugbook/mpe.html>
- HP3K site
<http://www.3k.com/>
- OpenVMS "Hobbyist Stuff"
<http://www.montagar.com/hobbyist/>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/>
"Heuristics (from the French heure, "hour") limit the amount of time
spent executing something. [When using heuristics] it shouldn't take
longer than an hour to do something."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 23:55:42 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Drestin Black would say:
>"Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Drestin Black wrote:
>> > Datacenter exists today.
>
>The release of Datacenter has been delayed until July/August.
>
>Perhaps I can refer you to your dictionary on the meaning of the word
>"estimated"
Perhaps we need to thrash you with the clue stick marked "released."
There may be a beta edition out there somewhere, which is neither here
nor there. It's not _real_ until it MSFT actually decides to
_release_ it.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/>
Rules of the Evil Overlord #199. "I will not make alliances with those
more powerful than myself. Such a person would only double-cross
me in my moment of glory. I will make alliances with those less
powerful than myself. I will then double-cross them in their
moment of glory." <http://www.eviloverlord.com/>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: Ten Reasons Why Linux Sucks
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 23:55:48 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Craig Kelley would say:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne) writes:
>> 3. I'm not clear on whether the APIs are compatible; if the source code
>> using the varying approaches is outright different, that will have
>> Expensive SideEffects.
>>
>> It may not be obvious whether a particular program would benefit more
>> from one approach or the other; the question being whether the thread
>> switching overhead in a kernel-based scheme is outweighed by the ability
>> to parallelize.
>
>GUI and event-driven progrmaming seems to lend to threads rather
>nicely. Having your GUI program fork and wait doesn't make as much
>sense as a command-line version (in which multitasking *usually*
>involves multiple shell windows). Command-line apps usually have a
>clear path of execution which works great without threads (ditto for
>many server types).
That's a good point; I don't do much GUI stuff, and thus don't run
into threading much in my programming.
There is still some legitimate question of whether or not it is
preferable to do kernel-based threading or user-space threading. I
suspect it's _not_, with GUI apps, but can't contend that overly
strongly.
>PAN is a great example of multithreaded GUI programming. Compare it
>with any legacy X11 newsreader to see the difference.
I've not seen it yet; does it allow you to open up multiple article
windows at once? _That_ is the one thing that, of the text-based news
clients, only GNUS offers, by operating inside Emacs and thus allowing
multiple message buffers...
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/>
Rules of the Evil Overlord #51. "If one of my dungeon guards begins
expressing concern over the conditions in the beautiful princess'
cell, I will immediately transfer him to a less people-oriented
position." <http://www.eviloverlord.com/>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is the PC era over?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 23:55:52 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Donal K. Fellows would say:
>In article <8fudfo$20ou$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Christopher Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> What "the world needs," perhaps, is to have I/O managed via a set of
>>> asynchronous buses.
>>
>> Why does a typical PC need anything but a fast video card a bunch
>> of RAM, and a 100M ethernet interface? There are already 'appliance'
>> file servers, printers have had network interfaces for years, cheap
>> modem/routers are coming around, hubs/switches are cheap. The
>> advantage of this approach becomes obvious as soon as you plug in
>> the 2nd PC. When you can get the 100M for less than $20, why not
>> just build the chips into everything and only have one kind of
>> connector to worry about?
>
>Because 100Mbit ethernet can only realistically shift around 10MB per
>second and that would tend to get flooded very easily with the sheer
>quantity of data you'd end up slinging about. And you *really* don't
>want to swap over a network (I really don't want to remember it!) The
>words "bad idea" really fail to encapsulate just how horrid this is.
>Local HDDs make a big difference to machine speeds (especially app
>startup times) so you'd need to put some storage in locally, and
>100BaseT just isn't fast enough. ATM and FDDI are better, but much
>more costly and more difficult to install IIRC (ATM is also less well
>suited to internet traffic and TCP is better routed directly over ATM
>instead of having IP as a separate layer in there between, since you
>are then using a stream protocol over streaming hardware.)
>
>Another problem with using networking for all interconnects is the
>amount of contention you get. Or is it acceptable for the printing of
>a document by machine A to block the loading of a program executable
>by machine B? Avoiding this sort of problem as a network grows in
>size seems to be a major issue. Maybe smart hubs can handle this. I
>don't really know...
There is all that; the "balance" of things might be looked at thusly:
--> Having some local storage on the "little boxes," representing a
local cache of program/data, would be reasonably valuable.
I'd sure like to see Coda or InterMezzo get popular; both provide
a scheme whereby material gets cached locally and pushed back to
the central location (which might well be a distributed system)
when opportunity arises.
The point being that the local storage diminishes the amount of
network traffic.
This provides an excuse for having _one_ Serial ATA (or successor)
bus on the little desktop machines.
--> On the _server_, it would be attractive to provide a _whole bunch_
of buffered + cached + perhaps battery-backed-RAM-transactional
Serial-ATA-successor connections so that each disk has its own
_asynchronous_ "bus."
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/linux.html>
"The entire structure of the antitrust statutes in this country is a
jumble of economic irrationality and ignorance. It is the product: (a)
of a gross misinterpretation of history; and (b) of rather naive, and
certainly unrealistic, economic theories."
-- Alan Greenspan
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
