Linux-Advocacy Digest #700, Volume #26 Fri, 26 May 00 14:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: RedHat 6.2 Enterprise Edition (Lars Gullik Bjønnes)
Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (EdWIN)
Re: UNIX Linux only ISP ("Francis Van Aeken")
Re: RedHat 6.2 Enterprise Edition ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX (JEDIDIAH)
democracy? ("Francis Van Aeken")
Re: democracy? (Grant Edwards)
Re: PHP vs Java (Mark Rafn)
Re: democracy? (JEDIDIAH)
Re: democracy? (Brian Langenberger)
Re: democracy? (Greg Yantz)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Wally Bass)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lars Gullik Bjønnes)
Subject: Re: RedHat 6.2 Enterprise Edition
Date: 26 May 2000 18:21:47 +0200
ajam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| 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!?
Is it this that you are talking about:
http://www.redhat.com/products/linux_oracle/
If so, $2500 is not expensive.
Lgb
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX
Date: 26 May 2000 12:02:14 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Linux rules? Hah! Linux lags! I want a decent GUI - it seems I have to have
>BOTH KDE and Gnome to get all the configuration tools (unless I want to
>scrabble around the multitude of text files configuring the system).
And the problem with that would be???? You don't actually need to
run GNOME, you just need the shared libs.
>I want
>to be able to use my Epson printer at 1400x720 DPI, instead of 360x360 on
>Linux.
Doesn't ghostscript take -r1440x720 as an argument?
>I want my network card to work (works on one machine but not
>another, huh?).
Your network card vendor has the driver. Install it just like
you would have a few months ago under windows.
>I want my sound card to work, I mean, how common does it
>have to be? SoundBlaster has been around a LONG time, yet I had enough
>trouble getting that to work!
Got me on this one. I thought you said sndconfig set it up
right.
>The driver running AHA1510, AHA1520 SCSI
>cards is the same one I saw years ago, what progress there?
Those cards don't do much of anything. What's wrong with the
driver. (And, hmmm... do you have a mix of ISA non-pnp cards
and PCI pnp in that box?).
>Oh dear, do I have to use my AHA2940 to get support?
I would never put an ISA card in a PCI box unless it was
absolutely necessary. If a 2940 is an option, use it
regardless of the drivers.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: EdWIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 17:09:47 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"David D. Huff Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Instead of taking a beating across the board. Might M$ stand a better
> chance of survival if it breaks up voluntarily then some part of the
> business could survive. The last couple of days they've been taking
> quite a beating in the stock market. Along with a lot of peoples'
> retirement money. Shouldn't the stockholders demand that they bite the
> bullet now and salvage what they can?
> They should split on their own terms, not what the government
dictates.
> Thus ensuring themselves their best chance for survival. Three parts
may
> be better than two, diversifying their cumulative losses.
NOTHING can save Microsoft! They're doomed, DOOMED, DOOOOMED, I tell
you!!!
Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer will puck blood, because Microsoft is
dooomed, dooooomed, I tell you... er, wait a minute, who's side am I
on again?
--
"Let all who oppose the OverMind feel the Fury of the Swarm!"
-- Infested Kerrigan, aka The Queen of Blades, StarCraft.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Francis Van Aeken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: UNIX Linux only ISP
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 14:31:49 -0300
Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> Francis Van Aeken wrote:
> > Sparc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> > > 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.
> But this fails to be a dichotomy, as some Linux users feel like
> using Linux.
The dichotomy is as follows: A, those who consider only UNIX and
B, those who consider other options as well (i.e. who do *not*
consider only UNIX).
Francis.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: RedHat 6.2 Enterprise Edition
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 17:30:13 GMT
They cranked up the price if the distro to $70???? I still get it for
free.... Ohhhhhh, you mean the BOXED set that includes SERVICE!!!! WOW
how unreasonable to pay $70 for what, 60 days of phone support.I could
be wrong about how much service Redhat gives with the box set. I use
Mandrake and only buy the box set to support them and
the install from CD is a bit faster than the net.
article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
ajam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Point well taken! And at first sight, I completely agree; but you
have to
> look a little bit further to realize that this is only the beginning.
I
> remember when not that long ago they cranked up the price of their
distro to
> around $70. Well, they have one at one hundred something. How many
> commercial applications have you seen lately that say something like
RedHat
> Ready? Just wait one more year or so!
>
> Christopher Browne wrote:
>
> > Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when ajam would say:
> > >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!?
> >
> > I consider this a non-issue.
> >
> > a) It's $2500 for largely a service offering.
> >
> > b) There are still $2 Red Hat 6.2 CDs.
> >
> > c) If RHAT can convince some people that it is worth paying them
> > $2500 for [whatever is in the box], then this occurs because
> > the parties involved consider [what's in the box] to be worth
> > _more than $2500_. [Basic economics: You pay $2500 for
something
> > because you value that something more than you value the $2500 in
> > your hand...]
> >
> > I won't be paying RHAT the $2.5K; surely you won't; if someone else
> > considers what they get to be worth the $2.5K, then there will be
the
> > happy result that everyone will have some degree of satisfaction.
> >
> > If $2500 is regarded as _too much_ for the Enterprise Edition, then
> > it _simply won't sell_.
> >
> > Life is too short to get disgusted over such a non-issue.
> > --
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] - <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
> > "NT 5.0 is the last nail in the Unix coffin. Interestingly, Unix
isn't
> > in the coffin... It's wondering what the heck is sealing itself into
a
> > wooden box 6 feet underground..." -- Jason McMullan
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 17:35:32 GMT
On 26 May 2000 12:02:14 -0500, Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[deletia]
>>I want my sound card to work, I mean, how common does it
>>have to be? SoundBlaster has been around a LONG time, yet I had enough
>>trouble getting that to work!
>
>Got me on this one. I thought you said sndconfig set it up
>right.
A non-pnp SoundBlaster will require the end user to manually
enter the ISA resources. They work like a charm otherwise.
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: "Francis Van Aeken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: democracy?
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 14:48:06 -0300
Gerald Willmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> CNN is conducting a poll whether MS should be split up and if yes into how
> many parts. Please take a minute to vote for a good cause.
> -> http://cnnfn.com/poll/microsoft_breakup.html
The results of these MS breakup polls (consistently 2/3 against) raise some
interesting questions about the implementation of democracy (in this case in
the USA).
Why is it that the opinion of the man in the street doesn't matter (because
they're stupid, stupid! (?)) and why is it that one single person (the judge)
is to make the decision? Shouldn't there be at least a panel or a jury?
Francis.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: democracy?
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 17:51:22 GMT
In article <392eb767$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Francis Van Aeken wrote:
>Why is it that the opinion of the man in the street doesn't matter (because
>they're stupid, stupid!(?)) and why is it that one single person (the judge)
>is to make the decision?
That's the way the legal system is designed. It can be changed
if enough people want it changed.
>Shouldn't there be at least a panel or a jury?
Possibly.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! .. I'm IMAGINING a
at sensuous GIRAFFE, CAVORTING
visi.com in the BACK ROOM of a
KOSHER DELI --
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Rafn)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.unix.programmer,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: PHP vs Java
Date: 26 May 2000 17:58:21 GMT
Andreas Kahari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I don't know of any links to the info you want and I'm not an authority
>on neither PHP nor Java but I do know that PHP is executed by the server
>and that Java programs are executed by the client.
No, the poster was asking about server-side java, aka java servlets or jsp.
It's code that executes on the server machine and spits out HTML (or
whatever) to the client.
>From an overview sense, it's no different from FastCGI, mod_perl, php,
coldfusion, etc.
> Ben Chausse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> We have a webserver on Debian 2.2 with apache 1.3.12 & mod_perl 1.21
>> and I would like to know what is the best between PHP and Java (.php or
>> .jsp) ????
The best is whatever gets the job done. The languages are different enough
that your coding styles and the type of tasks you want to do will determine
what's best - no outside benchmark will help.
You have mod_perl installed, why have you eliminated it from consideration?
--
Mark Rafn [EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.dagon.net/> !G
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: democracy?
Date: Fri, 26 May 2000 17:56:35 GMT
On Fri, 26 May 2000 17:51:22 GMT, Grant Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <392eb767$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Francis Van Aeken wrote:
Democracy versus Republic.
>
>>Why is it that the opinion of the man in the street doesn't matter (because
>>they're stupid, stupid!(?)) and why is it that one single person (the judge)
>>is to make the decision?
>
>That's the way the legal system is designed. It can be changed
>if enough people want it changed.
>
>>Shouldn't there be at least a panel or a jury?
>
>Possibly.
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: democracy?
Date: 26 May 2000 18:04:50 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Francis Van Aeken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Gerald Willmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
:> CNN is conducting a poll whether MS should be split up and if yes into how
:> many parts. Please take a minute to vote for a good cause.
:> -> http://cnnfn.com/poll/microsoft_breakup.html
: The results of these MS breakup polls (consistently 2/3 against) raise some
: interesting questions about the implementation of democracy (in this case in
: the USA).
: Why is it that the opinion of the man in the street doesn't matter (because
: they're stupid, stupid! (?)) and why is it that one single person (the judge)
: is to make the decision? Shouldn't there be at least a panel or a jury?
Microsoft isn't running for office, they're being put on trial.
Just because they've won the popularity contest among the general
public doesn't change the fact that they've been found guilty of
breaking antitrust laws. Even if a jury trial was involved, the
jurors would not get the option of finding Microsoft not guilty
simply because they might like the company and not want to see
it broken up - the facts of the trial are all that's relevant.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: democracy?
From: Greg Yantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 26 May 2000 14:05:05 -0400
"Francis Van Aeken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Gerald Willmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> > CNN is conducting a poll whether MS should be split up and if yes into how
> > many parts. Please take a minute to vote for a good cause.
> > -> http://cnnfn.com/poll/microsoft_breakup.html
> The results of these MS breakup polls (consistently 2/3 against) raise some
> interesting questions about the implementation of democracy (in this case in
> the USA).
The fact that you take a poll so seriously makes me wonder a few basic things:
-have you bothered to consider sample size and distribution?
-do you understand the difference between representative democracy
and mob rule?
> Why is it that the opinion of the man in the street doesn't matter (because
> they're stupid, stupid! (?))
Noone ever said that. The opinion of the man in the street has both direct
and indirect outlets. The direct outlet is the ballot box. The indirect
outlet is through demonstration of some kind- either public, or letter
writing to one's elected representatives- to let elected folks know what
sort of policies are likely to be rewarded at the ballot box next time out.
> and why is it that one single person (the judge)
> is to make the decision? Shouldn't there be at least a panel or a jury?
Because for a representative system to actually *function*, once an
official (either elected or appointed) is in position, within certain
bounds of accountability they should be free to do as they think best.
It's a bit of a trade-off.
Anything else, particularly elected officials basing their "leadership"
on daily opinion polls, tends to resemble pandering to the mob.
(Circus & dole, anyone?)
> Francis.
-Greg
------------------------------
From: wallyb6@nospam (Wally Bass)
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: Fri, 26 May 2000 18:07:47 GMT
On 26 May 2000 09:18:52 -0400, Seán Ó Donnchadha wrote:
>... pliability ... is the very nature of (software). That which
>Mr. Jackson is calling "illegal tying" in this case is nothing
>less than the lifeblood of the software business. All software,
>in all application categories, survives by gradually absorbing
>functionality that previously resided elsewhere. That's why word
>processors have grown spell checkers, drawing tools, and file
>managers. That's why spreadsheets have grown word processing and
>graphics features. That's why the Java framework started out
>bare-bones and is now a rich API for everything from database
>access to 3D graphics. Software *MUST* adapt with the times and
>absorb new capabilities; otherwise it dies. To say that a
>software product can no longer evolve this way is to kill it,
>plain and simple. But to say that the most important software
>product (Windows) cannot adapt to the most important
>technological trend in decades (Internet/Web) is outright
>insanity.
So what is this? Proof by irrelevant example?
Word processors "grow" spell checkers, drawing tools, and file
managers because those functions are closely related to what a
word processor does, namely produce and manage documents. Java
grows more API's because that is the nature of what programming
languages do... provide a platform for programmers to implement
whatever they chose to implement.
That does not much resemble the relationship between operating
systems and internet browsers. Operating systems provide
platforms for applications. Internet browsers are applications.
Just like other applications, you can start a browser, or you can
stop it, without stopping the operating system. Even after
Microsofts's best attempts to make IE inseparable from the
operating system, the function remains quite separable, as is
illustrated by the fact that you can use NetScape (an add-on) in
its place without any negative effects deriving from the fact
that NetScape is not "integrated" (and which was also illustrated
in court, in other ways).
Nobody said that Windows shouldn't be able to adapt to the
internet. Certainly, they should be adding appropriate API's, and
should be allowed to do so. The question at hand is, should
Microsoft be able to FORCE everyone to BUY IE when all thay
really wanted to buy is an operating system, as a result of the
fact that they can and do enforce that outcome by virtue of the
fact that they have monopoly power?
To which some will counter "but you don't have to buy it. MS
gives it away free."
Let me offer some observations about the PC hardware marketplace.
The first hard disk that I bought cost me $1K and held 10MB. Now
I buy one that holds 10GB for $100. The first PC I bought, with a
4.7MHz clock and a 1 byte data path (which I bought from another
monopoly called IBM, by the way) cost me $3K. Now I buy one that
is about 1000 times faster and has 1000 times more memory for
$300.
Now lets look at operating systems. I used to buy my operating
system for $60, and it took about 3 seconds to boot up. Now I buy
W2K for $300, and it takes 3 minutes to boot on my system which
is 1000 times faster than the one where my old OS would boot in 3
seconds. On top of that, it fills up 500MB of my disk, largely
with redundant junk that I don't want, which costs me
significantly in time every time I (a) back up, (b) do operating
system upgrades/maintenance, or (c) have reason to investigate
the operating system structure for some reason. Every time I
touch my hardware, W2K spends another half hour scanning its
500MB of stuff as it says tells me that "Windows" is "searching
for" and "installing" the new hardware which it thinks it has
found. (I wouldn't mind an operating system which asked me before
encroaching on my time for a half hour..., perhaps if there were
some competition in this market, I could buy one.)
On top of that, Windows is software, with a replication cost
of nearly zero, and a market size which is about 10,000 times the
size of the market that my first operating system was priced for.
(The near zero replication cost, of course, it due to advances in
the CDROM segment of this marketplace, another area where there
is effective competition.) Do I have a choice? Not if I want to
run the applications that I want to run.
In short, while most every area of this business where there is
competition, prices have gone down (typically by an order of
magnitude) and performance has gone up (typically by 3 orders of
magnitute). In the (monopolistic) operating system marketplace,
the trends not only haven't kept pace, they have gone in the
opposite direction.
OF COURSE, I'm not paying for IE, or a ton of other junk that I
don't want. OF COURSE, the consumer hasn't been harmed by this
Monopoly. And, by the way, I have a bridge that I would like to
sell you...
>... assholes like Joel Klein
or, from your append in the "Judge aims at tripple crown..."
thread
>Mr. Klein, in his usual presumptuous gloat mode...
Lawyers often use character assassination as a technique for
winning cases, but at least they do it because they are paid to
win, and they understand what they are doing and why they are
doing it. But argument by character assassination in this arena,
by people who would wish to have others believe that they are
seeking the truth, is simple intellectual dishonesty. Joel
Kline is merely doing his job (and, I not aware of any
character assassination that he has engaged in).
A saying that I once heard, originally didn't believe, but have
come to find is true much more often than not is the following:
"We hate most in other people what we can't stand to face in
ourselves." If you are really interested in intellectual "honesty"
(as you seemed to profess in the other thread that I mentioned),
you might want to try that on for size.
Wally Bass
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
