Linux-Advocacy Digest #781, Volume #26 Wed, 31 May 00 07:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: The Linux Fortress (Pete Goodwin)
Re: The Linux Fortress (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Let's whine about wine (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Bill Gates Famous saying! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: What the hell is Linux? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Thorne digest, volume 2451691 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: What is a Tholen? cola cooa?? ("Tommy Sjögren")
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: There is only one innovation that matters... (was Re: Micros~1 (Clem Clarke)
Re: The Mainframe VS the PC. ("2 + 2")
Re: There is only one innovation that matters... (Trapped)
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? (Rob32@nospam)
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 (Keith T. Williams)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: The Linux Fortress
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 06:58:37 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roberto Alsina) wrote in <8h1fjv$18e$1
@nnrp1.deja.com>:
>> Have you seen the Windows 2000 version of sharing?
>
>No. Can you describe?
There's a permissions button which then lets you set the level of access,
for everyone or for specific users.
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: The Linux Fortress
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 07:05:19 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )) wrote in <8h1hac$2kd$1
@nnrp1.deja.com>:
>Keep in mind that if you are searching the documentation for
>all 1300 packages, all 8000 applications, and all 10,000 library
>modules, it's nice to have enough document body to be able to have
>a sensible qualified search. If you broke up the document, it
>would be easier to read, but harder to search and manage.
And that's my point. Everything is done to make it easier for the developer
but not the user.
>The How-To's are primarily intended for people who are intent
>on accomplishing a specific goal, that isn't generally available
>from tools like Linuxconf or netconfig. Historically, the function
>is implemented first, brought to a stable state, and then graphical
>interfaces are added once the system is relatively stable. It
>makes the whole process much simpler.
I went looking through the samda documentation on how to use smbfs. There
is very little about it, so it's unusable as far as I can see.
>The key difference being that you are using Windows 98 to share
>with other Windows 98 machines in an unprotected environment.
What unprotected environment? At home what do I need protection for? Who
else is going to get on the machine?
At work, I usually use Read protection.
>The big difference of course is that you would have to set up
>the trust relationships in a separate GUI, set up user ids in
>yet another GUI, set up shares in another GUI, and if anything
>went wrong, you'd have to try and fix it using another GUI.
You're talking about domains perhaps. I'm talking about workgroups.
>Since the last GUI is regedit or regedt32, not exactly the
>most delightfully friendly application Microsoft has ever built,
>all "ease of use" claims lose their legitimacy. When the registry
>goes south, your choices are to try and do a walk-through that
>makes the /etc files seem trivial, or to reinstall and reconfigure
>your system (or at least restore a previous saved registry putting
>the system in an unknown state).
I've never needed to resort to regedit to solve security problems on
Windows, but then I avoid Domains like the plague.
>You are comparing motorcycles (Windows 9x) to Motorcars (Linux &
>Windows 2000). NT 4.0 is more like a Harley Trike, more stable
>and secure than 9x, but not as stable or secure as Windows 2000.
>Windows 2000 might be secure and stable if it weren't for the
>Back-office applications and the trojan horse web browser.
I don't use any Back Office applications or IE5. I have worked for a
company that used SQL Server but that was it.
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Let's whine about wine
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 07:07:50 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in <8h1r92$9vi$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>I've got two games that I can't get rid of (well, I can get rid of mine,
>but the wife would divorce me if I dumped hers). Anyway, I just loaded
>a new version of Caldera, and thought I'd give it a try "one last time"
>to install her game, just like I've done every time for the last three
>Caldera releases. Unbelievable as it seemed, InstallShield under Wine
>finally loaded it successfully this time. And it runs. There's a
>slight performance problem mainly with sound, but this PeeCee is an
>older low-end system. I'm gonna order some more memory and a slightly
>newer CPU and see if that helps.
What games?
>Wine's come a long way in a year. First time I tried this,
>InstallShield couldn't even load itself. Congratulations are due; bitch
>and whine somewhere else.
Wine does not handle COM, Type Libraries, DirectSound and presumably
DirectDraw. Like most emulators for Windows it falls down somewhere.
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Bill Gates Famous saying!
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 07:10:06 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>"640 K is enough for anyone!"
>
>Charlie
>
"UNIX is Snake Oil"
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: What the hell is Linux?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 07:17:51 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Anyone who's tried Mandrake 7.0 {Air} or Suse 6.4 or even Caldera's
>latest,
>and can still say Linux is 5 years behind W2k must own Microsoft stock
>to be
>that biased.
I have Linux Mandrake 7.0 Deluxe. I don't own Microsoft stock and I still
believe Linux lags behind Windows 2000. There's no bias there, it's my
humble opinion.
>I'll say that the KDE desktop on my edition os Suse 6.4 is superior to
>W2K in any respect you care to debate.
ROFL
X does not have anti aliased fonts as yet.
Cut, copy and paste do not exist on the KDE terminals.
Drag and drop is a little on the shaky side - I managed to end up with an
icon stuck on the background. The only way I could get rid of it was to
restart X.
The file manager is pretty slow at displaying a long list of files (I know
what's causing this one!).
These are the ones I've found so far, I'm sure there a quite a few more...
oh yes, the theme manager. The sticky desktop lost track of the edge of a
window on certain themes. Oops!
KDE is still evolving, it has a way to go as yet.
Pete
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Thorne digest, volume 2451691
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 07:45:48 GMT
Bob Hoye writes:
>>>> Bob Hoye writes [to Eric Bennett]:
>>>>> Don't you know? How ironic coming from the most prodigious Tholen
>>>>> emulator.
>>>> What makes you think that Eric Bennett is emulating me at all?
>>> Posting for entertainment purposes again, Tholen?
>> Obviously not, Bob.
> Common sense makes a cameo appearance.
On what basis do you call it a "cameo appearance", Bob?
------------------------------
From: "Tommy Sjögren" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What is a Tholen? cola cooa??
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 09:46:52 +0200
Bob Hauck wrote:
>
>
> For some reason cola seems to have acquired a number of cooa regulars of
> late.
Err...in sweden "cola" is some kind of soft drink, but I guess that's
not make much sense here?
Cola?
Cooa?
/Tommy
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 31 May 2000 00:01:26 -0700
In article <8h28tb$oen$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Peter says...
>He makes to attempt at a semantically meaningful reply.
>
Please learn how to write good English first before you criticize others.
Jim
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 31 May 2000 07:58:48 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: In article <8h28tb$oen$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Peter says...
:
:>He makes to attempt at a semantically meaningful reply.
: Please learn how to write good English first before you criticize others.
s/to/no/. Be aware that not everybody is sitting at a comfortable
keyboard with instant response times. I am typing across a modem link
with pauses of up to 30s between character strokes and screen refresh.
And my n key is stuck. And the 5 key.
I expect a native english speaker to be able to cope with single point
errors. You're supposed to be able to cope with 90% noise.
Are you the jerk/robot in question, by the way?
Peter
------------------------------
From: Clem Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy
Subject: Re: There is only one innovation that matters... (was Re: Micros~1
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 18:04:19 +1000
Have we all forgotten Digital Research? The guy - Gary Kildall - that started
it all?
Who had his Operating System CP/M converted to run on the 8086, and was sold by
Microsoft as Dos 1.0?
Who was chased through the courts by Microsoft for daring to produce GEM (and
other products)?
Who died a broken man a few years ago?
Clem
Christopher Smith wrote:
> "
> > > > > Microsoft's main innovation is quite obvious: putting lots of
> > > > > computing
> > > > > power into the hands of general consumers. Who else, besides,
> > > Commodore,
> > > > > Apple, IBM, or Atari has even attempted this? The beloved UNIX
> > > > > weenies
> > > > > at
> > > > > Sun? Silicon Graphics (officially renamed to "SGI")? Yeah...
> > > > > _right_.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Maybe IBM? HP? Compaq? Dell? Packard Hell?
> > > >
> > > > Heck, Microsoft never put ANY computer power in the hands of
> consumers.
> > >
> > > That's right, computers would be just as useful if you had to flip
> > > switches
> > > to use them.....
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Oh.
> >
> > So you're saying that if MS hadn't existed, that we'd still be flipping
> > switches today?
>
> Nope. But *someone* had to be there. It just happened to be Microsoft.
>
> >
> > That's an even stupider statement than the one before.
--
------------------------------
From: "2 + 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Mainframe VS the PC.
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 04:47:39 -0400
Charlie Ebert wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>2 + 2 wrote:
>>
>> Linux runs on PCs.
>
>True.
>
>>
>> The PC is a term that really includes desktops, workstations and low end
>> servers.
>
>True.
>
>>
>> And with clustering, far beyond that.
>
>Yes! P.C. and Mainframes seem to have switched sides in the last couple
>of
>years. Now, if you want to build the largest super computer in the
>world,
>you will do it via P.C. clustering!
>
>If you want the cheapest and most reliable office system for say 500
>employee's,
>it will be a mini mainframe computer running either Unix or OS400.
>
>>
>> PC generally means Intel compatible hardware, although it doesn't have to
>> have Intel in it.
>
>Nope! You forgot the Alpha's, Mac's, Amiga's... None of these are
>really INTEL
>compatible devices.
Well, you can define PC various ways. Generally, there has been a rivalry,
PC v. Mac, etc. (until the Mac adopted USB, etc.)
The important point is off-the-shelf, ie mass produced hardware, that is
compatible.
The mass market has brought hardware prices down the greatest in the Intel
compatible world. Simply because of the vastness of this market.
Now this is happening in the server markets, to the extent that the hardware
components vary from those used in the "desktop" PC. As mentioned, there is
less and less of a difference, although some high throughput hardware, etc.,
may be exempt from the economics of mass production.
If fact, the market, say, for disk drives, is so vast, that a single vendor
in a market segment will be making millions of disk drive units itself.
This is one of the keys to Linux's success.
<snip>
>> Right now, a lot of companies are protected by the internet bubble.
>
>Internet bubble? Are we saying mainframes can't server out webpages?
>Are we saying other os's not discussed can't do same?
>
>What are we saying here by an internet bubble?
I'm talking about the common used term for a boom era. When that boom ends,
then price becomes much more central. And the market shakes out. Only the
most "efficient" survive, depending on their exact market placement.
We have not seen this intense competition on "price alone," in the server
market.
Basically, what happens is that companies compete to sell enough units for
enough time to get through the downside in the market. Prices drop sometimes
to below costs for some period of time.
These prices may never go back up, and companies may have to create
efficiencies to stay in business. All down the supply chain, prices drop.
The Wintel world has enforced this kind of brutal market competition on
price alone in the PC world.
Linux will not be affected. In fact, Linux will prosper while all around are
the moans of dying companies, as the party is over.
And the internet bubble may be the biggest of all the historic bubbles. Many
people believe it will be different this time.
No one can predict this. The book, Irrational Exuburance, says nothing has
changed from the past. Who knows?
2 + 2
<snip>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Trapped)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: There is only one innovation that matters...
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 10:54:04 +0200
Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> : Apple was selling millions of computers before MS released their first
> : OS.
>
> Millions? I do not believe that number is quite correct. Could you post
> proof of this statement?
That's a bit of an overestimate. The Apple II was introduced in
April '77 and had sold 50,000 by September '79, a further 78,000 by
September '80, and I'd estimate another 100,000 by the time DOS was
released in August '81. I make that around 228,175 (inc. 175 Apple I's)
The Apple II did sell in excess of 5 million by the time Apple canned it
in November '93.
MS have this interesting nugget on their History of MS Timeline..
"Microsoft's flat fee of $21,000 for what becomes Applesoft BASIC seems
like a good idea at the time, until Apple sells more than a million
machines with BASIC built in. Put your calculators away; it works out
to 2 cents per copy."
http://www.microsoft.com/MSCorp/Museum/timelines/microsoft/timeline.asp
------------------------------
From: Rob32@nospam
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 31 May 2000 02:17:32 -0700
In article <8h2dc6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>Please learn how to write good English first before you criticize others.
>
>Jim
Jim; peter seems to be some moron who thinks he knows something,
when in fact he is clueless. I would just ignore the kid.
Rob
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 31 May 2000 10:48:26 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc Rob32@nospam wrote:
: In article <8h2dc6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
:
:>Please learn how to write good English first before you criticize others.
:>
:>Jim
: Jim; peter seems to be some moron who thinks he knows something,
: when in fact he is clueless. I would just ignore the kid.
: Rob
Is this person REALLY posting under all these pseudonyms! I wouldn't
mind, but I can't help feeling that he really must be posting from
inside some sort of medical tratment center. The symptoms are clear:
mechanical insult based on the last phrase extracted from a posting,
with no reference to any other part.
My my my.
Peter (really)
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 31 May 2000 10:54:43 GMT
In article <8h2qlq$t60$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
: In comp.os.linux.misc Rob32@nospam wrote:
: : In article <8h2dc6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
: :>Please learn how to write good English first before you criticize
others.
: :>Jim
: : Jim; peter seems to be some moron who thinks he knows something,
: : when in fact he is clueless. I would just ignore the kid.
: : Rob
: Is this person REALLY posting under all these pseudonyms! I wouldn't
Out of mild interest, I took a look at a few of the headers. All these
Eliza-like posts seem to come from the same source, irrespective of the sig:
Path: news.inf.uc3m.es!news-2.rediris.es!news.rediris.es!news-ge.switch.ch!
bignews.mediaways.net!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!
diablo.theplanet.net!newsfeed.skycache.com!Cidera!152.163.239.129!
portc01.blue.aol.com!logbridge.uoregon.edu!pln-w!spln!
extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!drn
The last bit is the source.
I tried to avoid saying "this person needs help". Instead I'll suggest
he needs a few core files sent his way, after a quick search for his
real address on deja!
Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Keith T. Williams)
Crossposted-To: alt.lang.basic,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 11:13:32 GMT
On Tue, 30 May 2000 21:59:44 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
|Quoting Eric J Pearson from alt.destroy.microsoft; Tue, 30 May 2000
| [...]
|>To put things in perspective, the 8087 coprocessor for the XT chip was
|>released in December of 1981, and the first 286 was released the next
|>year. According to Intel, the 286 could access up to 16 meg of RAM and
|>up to 1 gig of virtual memory. That limitation was 100.00% independent
|>of the operating system being used.
|
|So was the 1 meg limit for the 8088, and why none of this has anything
|to do with the 640K limit, which is a product of the memory model that
|DOS used, *not* the hardwiring of any expansion cards and *not* the
|architecture of the CPU.
|
|>Anyway, guys, I think you're taking me wrong. I am not a Microsoft
|>apologist. I have made no statements whatsoever about Bill Gates'
|>incompetence/boneheadedness/etc. or his lack thereof. But if you argue
|>using incorrect "facts" you don't really win points, and "the other side"
|>gains an advantage. That's all I was saying, nothing more and nothing
|>less.
|
|I'm just trying to get the facts straight. Can you explain why every
|time we start talking about DOS's 640K limit, everyone wants to talk
|about the 8088's 1Meg?
because the 640K limit was a result of the 1 meg limit. When IBM
designed the PC, they needed to put the IO somewhere, so they used the
address space above 640K for their addressing (I've heard the "who's
gonna need more than 640K" attributed to an IBM engineer.) After all
Video and Floppies have to have memory too. A lot of machines came
with 64K or 128K of memory, I remember the first time we actually got
a machine with 1M of memory, it took forever to boot since it had to
POST it all. Adding memory was a serious thing since you had to
insert individual chips, or buy something like a combo Hercules card
(once the LIM/EMS was available(which wasn't the only standard, but I
don't remember what the other one was) which implemented memory
management in the software, ie, 1-2-3) which combined memory and
Video. You set the memory address range with dip switches.
As is explained in another post, the 8088/86 couldn't address more
than 1M, so LIMS/EMS did the same thing for the PC as Dynamic Address
Translation did for the 370
|
|>I thought I was posting on alt.lang.basic but I see now that by replying
|>to an earlier message I've inadvertently cross-posted somewhere else,
|>where certain opinions are... unusually strong. No offense intended,
|>honest. I'll bow out now.
|
|Sorry if I jumped at you. I'm usually very nice, though I'm sorry about
|the cross-posting. I really would like some objective information.
|Just not about chips; about OSes. Is there something I'm missing about
|the "flat versus segmented memory" issue, and why the 640K barrier
|wasn't easily overcome?
|
|--
|T. Max Devlin
|Manager of Research & Educational Services
|Managed Services
|ELTRAX Technology Services Group
|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
| my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
| applicable licensing agreement]-
|
|
|-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
|http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
|-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
