Linux-Advocacy Digest #833, Volume #26 Fri, 2 Jun 00 15:13:10 EDT
Contents:
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Bob Germer)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Alan Baker)
Re: How Pete Goodwin Can Fix "The sad Linux story" (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (R. Tang)
Re: IBM finally admits OS/2 is dead, officially. ("Stephen S. Edwards II")
Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000 (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: History revision 1.27a (was Re: There is only one innovation that matters...)
(R. Tang)
Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals. (daelin)
Re: Linux vendors (Salvador Peralta)
Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals. (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? (Dowe Keller)
Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals. (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day (herodotus)
Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals. (daelin)
Re: if you dislike Linux ... (clyde)
Re: Coherency (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: IBM finally admits Drestin Black may not have a clue... (M.P. van Dobben de
Bruijn)
Re: Stuff you cant do with windows (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? (Mark Wilden)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north ("Erik Funkenbusch")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 18:01:11 GMT
On 06/02/2000 at 05:33 PM,
poldy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> What would be the incentive for Canada? Corporate tax collections?
> Bringing in a big employer?
Not to mention the animosity it would get from both the US Government and
many, many US Citizens.
> But I think a lot of MS employees, especially those vested, would not
> move to Canada. Don't think the commute from Seattle to Vancouver is
> that feasible either. Would MS be the same if they had to replace a
> large portion of its work force with the natives?
The commute from Seattle to Vancouver would suddenly become a nightmare
requiring at least 4 hours on the return each day. The moment MS moved to
Canada, every vehicle entering the US would be subject to a complete and
thorough search. Instead of a few perfunctry questions as it is today,
there would be forms to fill out, identity to be verified, briefcases and
packages to be inspected, trunks of cars to be searched, seats to be
removed and searched, etc. We would just have to enforce the entry
regulations to the "T" to make a trip from Vancouver to the US side of the
border a four hour jaunt. How many people would put up with that for long.
> The EEC regulates Microsoft on anti-trust matters. US would still apply
> anti-trust laws to foreign entities. But MS would be kind of like an
> outlaw, skipping the country to try to avoid prosecutions, even though
> it would probably lose a lot of talent and pay higher taxes to boot.
Not to mention the lost sales in the US. We have in the United States a
statute called RICO. While it was originally aimed at organized crime, it
has been extended with the blessings of the Supreme Court far beyond the
original Congressional intent. Once an organization has been declared a
RICO (Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization), its assets can be seized
anywhere they are found.
We wouldn't even have to formally ban imports of MS products. We would
just sieze them at their landing point on US soil.
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 12
MR/2 Ice 2.19zf Registration Number 67
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
From: Alan Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 11:08:43 -0700
In article <8h8rmh$mq6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg) wrote:
>Alan Baker ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>: Hey, I live in BC. Believe me, the current government is so desperate to
>: get some activity going in the economy up here that I wouldn't put this
>: past them.
>
>Yup. This same government whose only economic policy this decade has been
>hating corporations is now ready to lay down the red carpet for one of the
>world's nastiest.
>
>And look who's leading the charge. The biggest two-face of them all,
>Gordon Wilson.
It's what has always scared me most about the righteous do-gooders: they
think that what they are trying to do "for our own good" is so important
that they violate any principle if it lets them retain power. Jump in
bed with big business? Sure. As long as we can win the next election,
because we know best for everyone.
Very scary.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall to that
wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you sit in the
bottom of that cupboard."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: How Pete Goodwin Can Fix "The sad Linux story"
Date: 2 Jun 2000 13:00:30 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>This is where the geeks have had a field day. Most shells are
>>>incomprehensible. Commands like 'ls', or 'cat', 'more' or 'less'. They make
>>>sense once they've been described to you, but otherwise you're sunk.
>>
>>Note that names of Microsoft Windows programs like Excel,
>>Powerpoint, Outlook, Quicken, etc., make even less sense.
>>They aren't even abbreviations or terse descriptions.
>
>Walk up to 100 people on Wall Street in NYC and say "Excel" what it
>is? and see what they say.
Most of the ones that know would also know what 'regedit' is for,
and that the help desk always says 'reboot, reinstall, and re-format'.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (R. Tang)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: 2 Jun 2000 17:49:01 GMT
In article <3937a2aa$2$obot$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 06/02/2000 at 08:00 AM,
> Donavon Pfeiffer Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
>> Maybe they can get Bill and Paul to take over the Canucks as part of
>> the deal.
>
>I seriously doubt that you could get Bill and Paul to agree on what time
>of day it is at this point. Look at the SEC filings. A not insignificant
>cause of the decline in MS stock price is due to dumping of millions of
>shares at a time by Paul. He appears to be getting out while the getting
>is still good.
No, it's going to fund Allen's extensive diversification efforts.
Paul Allen is the one to look out for, not Gates.
--
-Roger Tang, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Artistic Director PC Theatre
- Editor, Asian American Theatre Revue [NEW URL]
- http://www.abcflash.com/a&e/r_tang/AATR.html
-Declared 4-F in the War Between the Sexes
------------------------------
From: "Stephen S. Edwards II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM finally admits OS/2 is dead, officially.
Date: 2 Jun 2000 18:17:54 GMT
Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: "abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:8h8ljt$pgc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[SNIP]
: > Ill say this again, once again, very slowly so that you can be sure to
: > understand:
: >
: > If W2K is exactly the same as NT5, why wasnt it publically released until
: > two years later?
: Perhaps because it wasn't finished ? I was using NT5 betas 2 years ago,
: they weren't even close to being done.
If you're attempting to have an intelligent discussion with abraxas
Christopher, I would suggest that you put on your industrial-strength
waders. He's worse than Matt.
--
.-----.
|[_] :| Stephen S. Edwards II | NetBSD: Free of hype and license.
| = :| "Artificial Intelligence -- The engineering of systems that
| | yield results such as, 'The answer is 6.7E23... I think.'"
|_..._| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: alt.lang.basic,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: QB 4.5 in Win 2000
Date: 2 Jun 2000 13:14:06 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
budgie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>I don't agree. Particularly because Windows' popularity is
>>*demonstrably* not based on customer selection, but on OEM bundling.
>
>What a load or crap! Most people on this side of the planet CHOOSE to
>bundle or CHOOSE NOT to bundle. I CHOSE to have the P133 fitted with
>6.22/3.11. Choice! Not the OEM's selection - MINE.
What year was this, and did you pay attention to what happened
afterwards? Did you buy a PC from a major vendor in (say)
1997 without paying for Win95? How many people did?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (R. Tang)
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: History revision 1.27a (was Re: There is only one innovation that
matters...)
Date: 2 Jun 2000 17:55:37 GMT
In article <8h88pu$917$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>R. Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>: In article <8h49c8$n3p$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>: Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: >R. Tang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>: >
>: >: In article <8h38fi$hvg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>: >: Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: >
>: >: >Alan Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>: >: >: Microsoft lucked into the sweetheart deal of the century: it's
>: >: >: verifiable fact. And you were aware that IBM only came to Microsoft in
>: >: >: the first place because of family connections (Gates' mother on the same
>: >: >: board as the president of IBM, or some such) aren't you?
>: >: >
>: >: >Huh? This is completely wrong. Bill's mother was a homemaker,
>: >
>: >: And also the first woman to sit on the boards of directors for
>: >: Seafirst Bank, Pacific Northwest Bell and a number of other corporations.
>: >: (Her father, and Bill's grandfather, was a major banker in the Puget Sound
>: >: area).
>: >
>: >And do you have proof of this claim?
>
>: Yes.
>
>: Try the proxy statements for Seafirst and PNB circa 1980s.
>
>: Also, consider my mailing address. Consider that I work in the
>: fundraising department. Consider that Mary Gates was a Regent when I
>: started working for UW. Consider that the files on our Regents are very
>: extensive.
>
>: Now don't be a typical Comp Sci dweeb with no experience outside
>: of silicon.
>
>Hmmm... it seems I struck a nerve.
No, just a bad day on the *.advocacy groups.
>I smell bull cookies.
Better change your pants.
>: >I would, if I cared at all.
>
>: Then keep your yap shut.
>
>I'll get you at recess. THHHHP!@#
Well, I gave you the benefit of the doubt that you, at least,
completed high school.
But, really.....this is all very well known information about Mary
Gates. Check her obituaries on it, for a small fraction.
--
-Roger Tang, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Artistic Director PC Theatre
- Editor, Asian American Theatre Revue [NEW URL]
- http://www.abcflash.com/a&e/r_tang/AATR.html
-Declared 4-F in the War Between the Sexes
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (daelin)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals.
Date: 2 Jun 2000 14:26:21 -0400
On Fri, 02 Jun 2000 12:12:53 -0400, Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tim Palmer wrote:
><snip>
>> UNIX does have a DOS command mode i've sean it! It looks just like
>> a DOS box and you half to leave "X" Windows alone and just tipe
>> commands into the DOS box.
>Actually,, one can use a console without X at all. Even in console mode,
>one can have virtual displays, so that one can multitask. Also, you can
>invoke xterms without leaving X. In fact, at four xterms a desktop (at
>1024 x 768) and eight desktops, you could have 32 xterms.
By minimizing xterms, you can have a great deal more than four per
desktop (at any resolution), but eventually you would run out of
memory or pttys (I'm not sure which would go first on most Linux
systems).
>Also, can one resize DOS boxes, or scroll along them, or have color
>text?
You can resize them, but the text changes size so you have the same number
of character cells, and some DOS programs output color text. The default
DOS commands don't change the text color, so if a QBASIC program sets
the text to be blue-on-grey (you can't have a white background), then
the DOS shell and supporting programs would continue to print blue-on-grey
text.
>> >[Thack!]
>> >The "imitation [sp corrected] Windows" as you call it is actually
>> >MUCH older than Windows. Windows stole the idea from Apple, which
>> >in turn stole it from Xerox. Windows is the VERY LAST company to
>> >have implemented a GUI!
>>
>> They sad themselves that X Windows is supposed to make UNIX look
>> like Microsoft Windows.
>The X Windows System predates Microsoft Windows. Also, when did MS
>Windows support multiple desktops?
Oh, that feature was included in Microsoft Windows 2000 Vapourware Edition.
>And can you activate icons on your desktop by a single left click
>on a two-button mouse as you can on KDE?
On versions of Windows that use IE for a file manager, you can turn on
a feature that puts the FM portion of IE in "Web-browser mode", which
causes the program to work in a fashion similar to KFM.
>> Old versions of X even looked just like
>> Windows 3.1. Today's X looks like Windows 95. It's a bad immitation.
>
>X doesn't look like anything. It's KDE, GNOME, fvwm, Afterstep, etc,
>that looks like something.
Raw X actually does look like something. It doesn't look like much,
and you can't even move the windows, but it is possible to run X without
a WM or GUI suite.
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux vendors
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 11:30:48 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You make some great points. For all of my past criticism of IBM, they
support RedHat (and SuSE?) on their entire line of servers, and have
done great work (better than I ever gave them credit for) in moving
tools (perl, for example) that developers will be able to use to help
their customers integrate existing business infrastructures with gnu /
linux.
iirc, they have contracted Caldera to handle their customer response and
redhat and storm linux to do development on their architectures.
--
Salvador Peralta
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.la-online.com
Craig Kelley wrote:
>
> Doubtful as well. SGI is skating on thin ice; it almost seems like
> their giving away all their software to Linux as a last-ditch effort
> to either save them selves or to spite Microsoft. Hopefully SGI will
> survive, but IBM is now involved:
>
> > This may come as a surprise, but IBM is getting seriously into Linux as
> > well.
> > http://www.upside.com/Open_Season/39344b490.html
>
> This is the killer. Suits really love IBM. They *really* *really*
> *really* love IBM. Once people see that they can run Linux on
> everything from a palm-top all the way up to an s/390, I believe it
> will gather more market penetration. Microsoft has been trying to
> enter the low-end market with CE (and Windows for Pen Computing, if
> anyone remembers that awful product), but has failed every time. They
> haven't even attempted to get the big iron market yet.
>
> So far, IBM has been genuinely involved in the open source movement;
> we just have to be careful that they don't coopt it somehow.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals.
Date: 2 Jun 2000 13:21:25 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]%-3>,
Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Jorge Cueto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this unto the Network:
>>> Windos blos UNIX aways. Windos is a compleat systum. UNIX is only
>>haff-built and still neads DOS
>>> command mode to do things.
>>
>> No comments. Have you heard about GIMP ? ;-) They call it the Linux
>>proud.
>
>The GIMP SUXXX!! It only has one brush size and you half to use it with fuzzy edges
>not like
>programs on Windos where you can edit with big brushes or even one-pixel-at-a-time.
Hope this isn't too complicated for you but (a) the difference between using
a brush and a pencil is supposed to be that the pencil has sharp edges
and the brush is fuzzy, and (b) there is a rather featureful dialog
box to control the brush properties.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dowe Keller)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 2 Jun 2000 11:54:42 -0700
On Fri, 02 Jun 2000 07:44:52 +0100, Mark Wilden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Robert J Carter wrote:
>>
>> REMOVE EVERY DAMN COMMENT IN IT.
>
>There is a school of thought (Martin Fowler is a don) that says that
>commenting indicates that the code is too complicated, and needs to be
>refactored.
>
>I don't go that far. I do like to see a brief comment at the top of each
>function expressing its contract with the outside world. There's only so
>much meaning you can include in a single function name, after all.
Yea, I get pretty tired after about 100 lines of code with comment's in
this vien:
print "\t$header\n"; # Print the header.
This probibly comes from people who had programming instructors like mine
that would take points away if you didn't have a comment for every
instruction.
There are situations however where a comment can help one figure out what
a particular algorithm is doing.
My meathod FWIW is to put a comment at the start of the program telling
what the program is supposed to do, and how to get ahold of me. A comment
at the beginning of every function explaining what the function does and
how it fits into the general scheme of things, and a comment or two about
any particularly nasty or clever crocks (This comment is usually followed
by a plea for someone to fix this please :).
BTW: I use perl, and I happen to think that perl can be just as readable
as any other programming language.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
I wanted to emulate some of my hero's, but I didn't know thier
op-codes.
--dowe
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals.
Date: 2 Jun 2000 13:37:39 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]%-9>,
Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>The "imitation [sp corrected] Windows" as you call it is actually
>>MUCH older than Windows. Windows stole the idea from Apple, which
>>in turn stole it from Xerox. Windows is the VERY LAST company to
>>have implemented a GUI!
>
>They sad themselves that X Windows is supposed to make UNIX look
>like Microsoft Windows.
Then we should all be impressed by the designer's ability
to copy something that didn't exist yet.
>Old versions of X even looked just like
>Windows 3.1. Today's X looks like Windows 95. It's a bad immitation.
You seem to be more than a little confused.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day
From: herodotus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,talk.bizarre
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 11:40:16 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, EdWIN
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>herodotus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Many Windows users show the classical signs of Stockholm
>>Syndrome. They become ardent defenders of their captors. If
>Gates
>>sodomized them, they would thank him for the colonic massage.
>
>These are just the kinds of remarks that turn casual Windows
>users into ardent Mac bashers. Too bad you didn't get the
>intent of the orginal post. :-P
>
Anyone who bases their judgement of OSs on Usenet posts deserves
the special capsaican ointment after their next colonic
treatment.
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (daelin)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K BSOD's documented *not* to be hardware (Was: lack of goals.
Date: 2 Jun 2000 14:41:25 -0400
On Fri, 02 Jun 2000 12:26:03 GMT, Jorge Cueto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It used a DOS command mode and it dident even have its immitation Windows
>yet. If you wanted to do
>> anything you had to type in command and all the commands did was give you
>more commands.
>
> I can choose to use either console (at 132x48 and 85Hz) or X11 (at
>1024x768 at 100Hz) and do all of
>these things at both of them (with console or GUI tools), can you ?
>
> - windowed environment (yes, there is a text windowing UI for
> console to let you several terms, anyway, no needed because
> GNU/Linux have the smart virtual text mode terminals)
But some Linux systems have old serial terminals plugged into them, so
GNU screen still does have a place on some Linux systems.
>What's more, you can launch more than one X server and on it you
>can have several desktops, each of one being virtual in some window
>managers (yes, there is choice)
The X servers would all have to be on separate machines, or else they
would compete for access to the mouse. Unless that part has changed
since Linux 2.0 (hey, fuck upgrades) and the mouse is now connected to
the console in some way. In Linux 2.0, the mouse is a character device
that should only be read by one process at a time.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 14:40:10 -0400
From: clyde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: if you dislike Linux ...
(snippege)
him funny BWHAAAAAAAA!!!!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Coherency
Date: 2 Jun 2000 13:43:59 -0500
In article <q3SZ4.2743$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jorge Cueto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It's different across distributions. Debian has KDE using
>> /usr/share/icons/ as does Red Hat I think.
>
> Yes, Redhat does that so. I do not like it mixing KDE with
>system binaries ... but ...
Redhat's approach seems to be that if it comes as part of the
distribution, it is a system binary and should go in the
usual place. It is an acquired taste.... If you do most
of your upgrades by sticking in the next release and
saying 'upgrade' it is nice that it doesn't mess with the
smaller set of things that you may still install elsewhere.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (M.P. van Dobben de Bruijn)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: IBM finally admits Drestin Black may not have a clue...
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 20:49:30 +0200
> "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> are you the clone or the real dolly?
Are you the real DrestInBlack or not?
In other words are you the real idiot who
popped in here last year to utter all kind of
nonsense? To a point that someone offered
to pay the expenses for you to come clean and
come over to set up a real test to prove that you
were dead wrong? Only to find that you even did
not have the courage to answer, you simply disap-
peared. Now you have the "guts" (stupid ignorance
would be a better description I think) to drop in again.
Get a life and go play somewhere else with your toys.
Regards from Leeuwarden
Peter van Dobben de Bruijn
---
usethenet.at.the-net-4u.com (.at. becomes @)
----
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Stuff you cant do with windows
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 18:53:07 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on 2 Jun 2000 14:00:56 GMT <8h8emo$pgc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>JC Nieukoop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
>> According to the article Google used Linux because of costs and in-house
>> Linux expertise. They could have done it using Windows, Solaris or whatever.
>> The decision was about costs not capability.
>
>You cannot build a 6,000 node cluster with windows, period.
Why not? According to the Winvocates, Win2k is very much more
scalable than Windows NT 4 was -- if I'm not totally mistaken
anyway (I could be very wrong here), and the only limitation is
a peculiar 150-node one which is easily sidesteppable by using
multiple domains, IIRC.
I would be curious as to the size of Microsoft's NT web farm.
Obviously, they're doing something along these lines.
Don't get me wrong, I like Linux. And a 6,000 node Windows cluster
would probably cost $300K-$600K in (Windows) software alone, never mind
the hardware. :-) A Linux solution would be far cheaper and able to
use things like NFS, rdist, NIS (NIS+?), and a large number of
enterprise-level, business-tested solutions.
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Linux. It gets done cheaply and reliably.
NT/W2k. It gets done. Maybe.
Win95/98. It plays games real well :-)
------------------------------
From: Mark Wilden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2000 19:53:53 +0100
Dowe Keller wrote:
>
> My meathod FWIW is to put a comment at the start of the program telling
> what the program is supposed to do, and how to get ahold of me. A comment
> at the beginning of every function explaining what the function does and
> how it fits into the general scheme of things, and a comment or two about
> any particularly nasty or clever crocks
This is just about exactly what I do (except I don't rely on the mercy
of strangers. :)
> BTW: I use perl, and I happen to think that perl can be just as readable
> as any other programming language.
I agree. I especially like its terseness, since if it's properly
idiomatic, I find terse code more readable than wordy code (though I use
descriptive identifiers).
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm moving from England back to Oakhurst in about a week, and I'll be
using sierratel.com myself then. :)
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 14:03:46 -0500
Brad BARCLAY <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Besides which, there are major legal and logistic problems. First,
Funny how massive surgery of a company with more arms than a mutated
millipede is a job so simple it can be accomplished in a few months, yet
moving a company without any restructuring is suddenly a major logistical
problem.
> Microsoft already has a Canadian arm. Secondly, I don't think that the
> Canadian Federal government would grant work visas to all of the
> American Microsoft employees - which would mean that if MS were to move
> they would need visas for their managers and other key personel, and
> then hire all new employees from the Canadian talent pool. And I can't
> imagine any high tech company doing something like this.
Most countries will grant visa's if there are not enough employees to meet
the load. Microsoft already has an employee deficit of several thousands
(last I looked, over 3000 open positions). If they could guarantee those
jobs to canadians, all the better.
> Besides which, any US presence they continued to have could still be
> levied whatever punishment the DOJ decides to dish out.
How does the US government "split up" a marketing and distribution office?
They could asess billions of dollars in fines, but then those would be owed
by the US company and not the canadian. The US company goes out of
business, sells it's assets, and MS opens a different company or
subcontracts one to distribute in the US.
> I don't see any logical way in which this can be done. And I can see a
> wide variety of legal problems that would make such a move either
> impossible, or tantamount to corporate suicide. MS can't just entirely
> pull out of the US as a market.
They don't have to. Unless the US assessed tarrifs so high that customers
couldn't afford the software, but then I doubt those officials will get
re-elected.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
