Linux-Advocacy Digest #996, Volume #26 Fri, 9 Jun 00 18:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux faster than Windows? (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Dissecting Microsoft -- Where are all the astroturfers? (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (LEBLANC ERIC)
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Bob Germer)
Re: IBM finally admits OS/2 is dead, officially. ("Kim Cheung")
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (Mike Stephen)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Pascal Haakmat)
Re: Just Installed Win 2K and it ROCKS!!!!!!! (Cihl)
Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux faster than Windows?
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 16:00:42 -0500
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> Someone here in this group claimed Linux is three times faster than
> Windows. I question this figure so I did my own crude test. Here's the
> program I wrote and ran on both Windows 98 SE and Linux Mandrake 7.0 on the
> same dual boot system:
>
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <stdlib.h>
> #include <time.h>
>
> int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> {
> int i;
> FILE *file;
> time_t t;
>
> time(&t);
>
> printf("Started: %s\n", ctime(&t));
>
> file = fopen("test.dat", "w");
>
> if (file)
> {
> for (i = 0; i < 1000000; i++)
> {
> fprintf(file, "The lamb lies down on broadway\n");
> }
>
> fclose(file);
> }
>
> time(&t);
>
> printf("Finished: %s\n", ctime(&t));
>
> return EXIT_SUCCESS;
> }
>
> The file it generated is 30MBytes long, and from reading the timings these
> are the results I got:
>
> Visual C++ 6.0 6 seconds
> Borland C++ Builder 6 seconds
> GNU C++ 6 seconds
>
> Now, this test can't be said to be any good kind of benchmark - after all
> I'm testing multiple things: compiler optimisation, disk file access etc. I
> do find it interesting that they all roughly run at the same speed.
>
> Except... Linux exhibited very interesting behaviour after running this
> application. I ran the test again, and to my surprise, my system had hung!
> It unblocked after a second or two - so I ran it again, then I noticed the
> disk light was permanently on after running the app. What's it doing after
> this? Why should my system grind to a halt for a few seconds - hardly a
> good feature of a system claimed to faster than Windows!
>
> Pete
You probably have that nasty little IDE bug that causes temporary
lock-ups while it resets the bus. Check you /var/log/messages file for
references to IDE or hd* drives. One of my machines at home had this
problem. Unfortunately I don't have the document in front of me that I
used to fix it. I do know that SuSE documents it quite well on thier
web site (but I would have to dig a bit to find it). If that isn't it,
you can make disk access much faster (nearly double it, or more) if you
add the following lines to your boot scripts (or just run them as root
at the command line)
hdparm -c 1 -d 1 /dev/hd*
hdparm -k 1
(Change hd* to hda or hdb or whatever your drive is)
To test your performance, before you run it, run hdparm -t /dev/hd* then
run those lines and run hdparm -t again on the same drive. On my laptop
that doubled my performance (drive read/writes) and on my desktop it
nearly tripled. That will show you much greater performance. Also,
when you compile using GCC, what are your flags. You can get better
performance (not always, but mostly) by adding the -O2 to your options.
Just a couple of things that will help your systems
stability/performance and increase your little program's effectiveness.
Nathaniel Jay Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Dissecting Microsoft -- Where are all the astroturfers?
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 16:03:23 -0500
Tim Kelley wrote:
>
> "Mark S. Bilk" wrote:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Bobby D. Bryant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >Why is it that every time Microsoft has a big setback, the
> > >steady-state level of astroturfing here drops almost to
> > >nothing for a few days? Do they all get called back to
> > >Redmond for a strategy meeting or something? Did Bill
> > >fire them for failing to influence the outcome? Are they
> > >hurriedly trying to learn something besides VB to put on
> > >their resumes?
> >
> > Microsoft is actually one enormous organism, like a huge
> > jellyfish. The astroturfers are poisonous stinger organs
> > on its surface, that try to kill anything in the environment
> > that it regards as a threat. They obviously haven't any
> > intelligence of their own; they just say what the brain
> > tells them to.
>
> Nice. Actually, remember that horrible movie Starship Troopers?
> win98 users-astroturfers are like those icky spider things, where
> NT users are like those big hulking bugs that shot enormous
> plasma bombs out of their butts. M$ is like the brain bug, win32
> programmers are like the bugs that mothered, tended and herded
> the other bugs. The whole movie I'm convinced was a metaphor for
> the PC industry.
>
> OK I'm in a weird mood but I thought the bug analogy was
> appropriate.
That's actually pretty good. Personally, I like the BORG Collective
analogy a little better myself (all the little Windows users obey the
central brain, you will be assimilated because Windows is the only way
to compute, resistance is futile, because Billy Boy says so), but I'm a
StarTrek freak.
Nathaniel Jay Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> --
>
> Tim Kelley
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (LEBLANC ERIC)
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 21:08:10 GMT
Jack Troughton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: bob Germer wrote:
: >
: > On 06/08/2000 at 06:36 PM,
: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric Leblanc) said:
: >
: > > When 70% of your clientele is French, if you had the choice betwen two
: > > equally competent men and one of them only speak english and the other
: > > speak both french and english. Which one would you hire?
: >
: > In a free country, I would choose the one who had the highest test score.
: > If they were identical, I would choose the older. But in your province, I
: > do not have that choice because your overbearing goverment requires
: > bi-lingualism for employment.
:
: Seeing as Bob has stated that I'm killfiled, I wonder how he'll take
: this one...
If he hasn't killfiled me. He'll see it. :-)
:
: When I arrived in Quebec in 1997, I spoke maybe a dozen words in
: french, and couldn't put together any sentence more complicated than
: "Une biere, s'il vous plait," in a bar. I had a job within three
: months of arriving here.
:
: Bob is completely full of shit, and has killfiled me because he's
: having a hard time dealing with a unilingual anglophone who grew up
: in Kingston, Ontario, who moved to Montreal speaking almost no
: french, telling him that he has no clue on the subject of french and
: english in Quebec.
It's a typical case of misinformation. Lots of Anglophone never read the
charter of the french language of Quebec and make an opinion of this law
by way of a third party erronously talking about it. i
I'll admit there is region of Quebec that don't have many English speaking
citizens and by consequense it will be difficult for a non-french speaking
person to get a job in this region. Montreal and suburb are not such a region.
: Somehow I'm sure that Bob would be enraged by someone from Ghana
: telling him that New Jersey was not free because tribal assembly is
: both frowned upon by the dominant culture and banned in public
: places without a permit for public assembly, but it seems he likes
: to dish out that which he cannot take.
If Bob would have gripped about stuff that are not right about this law
instead of putting strawmen up. There is stuff that are not right about
the charter. But it is not the commercial aspect of it.
:
: As a side note, I also will say that I have more respect for him
: than some of the other posters on advocacy because I've seen him
: help out others in the real newsgroups, like .apps, .misc,
: .setup.system, and so on. But he's got a serious blind spot about
: life in other places, and likes to make pronouncements on that life
: based on a dilettante's knowledge of those places. It's very easy to
: criticize other cultures from the comfortable armchair of the
: dominant culture; I have very strong doubts that Bob has ever had
: the experience of living in a minority community. He should try it;
: it's very illuminating.
:
: Bien sur, d'avoir habité ici pour plus de trois ans maintenant, je
: comprende beaucoup plus de français que quand j'arrivaient en
: Montréal. Mon français est loin de parfait, c'est sur, mais je peut
: te dire qu'apprendre une nouveau langue est vraiment heureux.
C'est tout a votre avantage d'apprendre plusieurs langues. Malheureusement,
beaucoup de personne semblent ne pas comprendre cela. Il y a des anglophones
qui habitent Montreal depuis plus de 30 ans qui refusent toujours d'apprendre
quelques mots de francais. Pour cela, je vous felicite.
E.
------------------------------
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, 09 Jun 2000 21:09:53 GMT
On 06/09/2000 at 08:59 PM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) said:
> I dont run windows by the way, or OS2. In case you thought you were
> getting my goat or something. :)
Then there are only 2 possibilities. You are running a MAC which is
nothing more than a glorified Playstation or you are running some form of
unix which makes your machine virtually useless for 99.98% of business
customers.
--
==============================================================================================
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
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: "Kim Cheung" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: "Kim Cheung" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IBM finally admits OS/2 is dead, officially.
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 14:20:21 -0400 (EDT)
On Mon, 29 May 2000 23:33:06 -0700, Jim Richardson wrote:
>>I figured it was news to everyone - linux users hate OS/2 as well but don't
>>bother chasing it cause even they knew it was dead already...
>
>I am a linux user, I don't hate OS/2, I have no feelings one way or the
>other about it. So your broad generalization is again, shown to be flawed.
I don't use Linux but I certainly don't hate Linux. As an avid OS/2 user,
OS/2 ISV, and a businessman making living off OS/2, I am sorry to hear such
extreme view such as "linux users hate OS/2". The Linux community has
contributed tremendously to the OS/2 comminity - through open-source
projects.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Stephen)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Canada invites Microsoft north
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 21:21:22 GMT
On Sun, 9 Jun 3900 12:36:01, Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On 06/08/2000 at 12:05 PM,
> Jack Troughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > Sure you did. I'd refer you to another post in this thread from Alan
> > Baker, a Vancouverite. You are talking bullshit about which you know
> > nothing again, Bob.
>
> No need to reply to the various nonsense you posted. This one alone proves
> what you are.
>
> Three other Canadians have refuted what you post. The signs along the
> Trans-Canada Highway are indeed bi-lingual from Vancouver all the way to
> Calgary.
They are NOT bi lingual. I live in the southwest of Canada, and
all my life I have seen one stop sign in Mallardville that was in
French. No where on the trans Canada or any other highways in
British Columbia is there french signs. I travel to Calgary now
and then, and I have not ever noticed a bi lingual sign. From
Calgary till you get to Winnipeg, I know there are no bilingual
signs. There might be city markers that have a french name, but
that does not in itself make a bi-lingual sign.
However I don't know why anyone would believe the people who live
here, over your bigoted statements as an under educated boorish
American. You fit the American stereotype perfectly.
My apologies to all other more "normal" Americans. I have many
friends in America and value them greatly. I assure you that
they are not at all like Germer. However if a unflattering
caricature were to given of a American, it would be a picture of
you. You seem to fit the Boorish American model to a T.
You really should try NT to replace OS/2. You will find the
people in the NT newsgroups more to your taste. Could you also
take Tim Martin with you? Hmmmmmm With both of you gone, this
area would flourish....
>
> You are now in my killfile. You join a very unsavory group which includes
> only Tim Martin, Eric Funkenbusch, and Steven Akins.
>
> --
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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 the Desk of Mike Stephen
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pascal Haakmat)
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: 9 Jun 2000 21:28:33 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Daniel Johnson wrote:
>"Pascal Haakmat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Daniel Johnson wrote:
>[snip]
>> >> No, I'm more or less indifferent to proprietary. What is important to
>me
>> >> is
>> >> (hate that word) interoperability. Proprietary systems often fail to
>meet
>> >> my standards in that respect, though.
>> >
>> >Microsoft's stuff is unusually good, as proprietary stuff goes.
>>
>> Maybe. I suppose I don't use the stuff that makes it unusually good.
>
>Well, they are pretty good about supporting their competitors protocols
>and formats.
You must mean they are very good at bait-and-switch!
Seriously, some of their compatibility efforts are so badly executed that
you have to wonder about Microsoft's intent in creating them in the first
place.
Take for example NT's "Services for Macintosh". The promise is: buy NT
Server and interconnect your existing systems. So you do just that and hook
your existing Macs up to the NT machine. But then performance proves abysmal
and a host of printing problems ensues. This has management conclude "Macs
suck. We must move everything to Windows".
Or take the telnet client that ships with Windows. The promise, again, is:
buy Windows and connect to your legacy systems. So you do just that; but
not surprisingly, the client's VT100 emulation is so abominable that many
applications refuse to work correctly or at all. Leaving management to
conclude, again, that "Unix sucks. We must move everything to Windows".
>It's just that realistically, Unix *isn't* a competitor to Windows 98.
Is Windows 98 a competitor to Unix?
>To NT, sure. This is, in part, why Windows 2000 suddenly
>learned to speak Kerberos. It already knew NetWare,
>but increasingly its competitors wasn't speaking that.
Can you explain to me what all the fuzz was about with MS' implementation of
Kerberos security?
[snip]
>> >It's when you have *different* systems that interoperability
>> >becomes a problem.
>>
>> That is the whole point of interoperability ..
>
>Yes. That's why I don't think mandating a standard technology
>that everyone must use is a real answer to the problem of
>interoperability.
>
>"Everyone should use (say) TeX format" is no better than
>"everyone should use Word format".
Yes, it is.
It's approximately the difference between "all cars should use gasoline" and
"all cars should be Fords".
To slip out of hypothetical generalities and into reality for a moment, I
would not require either TeX or Word to be used by everyone. Use the best
tool for the job, and sometimes that may be Word.
The difference between human readable text files and binary data in a
proprietary format remains.
[snip]
>> The problem is that I can say Windows sucks (which I think it does for
>> reasons that I don't expect anyone else to share), and you can say that
>> Windows is top notch, but it's all just bunk as long as there is no viable
>> substitute to compare it to. And that's a bit sinister.
>
>Don't read conspiracy into these things too easily; Microsoft Windows 98
>has no equal in its market, but it doesn't automatically follow that this is
>due to Microsoft perfidy.
Maybe you are familiar with the image of the elephant in the porcelain
cabinet. Every time it makes even the slightest of movements, something
breaks. Reasonably we shouldn't attribute that to any perfidy on behalf of
the elephant. It's not like the intent really matters anyway, when the best
option is simply to remove the elephant.
>> What I mean is that the influence of the network effects that Windows
>enjoys
>> is so great that no other OS compares to it.
>
>I think these are overestimated. There are very few things that
>network effects *don't* apply to, after all, so why is the effect
>so much greater in operating systems?
Is it?
>> For example, if you claim that
>> DanielCoke is much better than Coca Cola, I'll want to know where I can
>get
>> it. But most likely, I won't be able to get it in Europe. That fact alone
>> makes DanielCoke incomparable, as a substitute, to Coca Cola.
>
>I think you are holding the bar of substitutability that no product
>could ever acheive it with respect to any other product.
[Usenet economist speaking:]
Not really. If I take an example like Coke or Microsoft, the bar of
substitutability is so high not because of my standards, but because of
their dominance in their respective markets. This is why monopolies are
generally bad -- they hurt substitutability.
>> Now in operating systems, availability may even be the least of problems.
>> Other factors, like functionality, cost, compatibility, support and
>> interoperability are much more important. It's impossible to satisfy all
>of
>> these demands simultaneously so as to provide an alternative to Windows,
>> especially if the dominant player (Microsoft) can actively obstruct the
>> alternative in attaining (say) full interoperability.
>
>Well, bear in mind that less dominant players can also obstruct
>interoperability in the same way; and they can do so without
>monpolies.
They could, but for less dominant players, interoperability is a _benefit_.
To monopolies, it is a _threat_.
>But it *is* true that making a product with all the capabilities
>of Windows is very hard to do. I'm not sure this says anything
>*bad* about Microsoft.
Look, it's also very hard to make a car that has all the capabilities of
another car, or a VCR, or even a good spaghetti. Still people seem to
manage. With operating systems, nobody seems to manage. Either everybody is
incompetent, which is what you often end up saying, or there is some other
force involved, which is of course the position that I, in my infinite
wisdom, tend to procure :)
>> It is of course always possible to invent something completely new and
>> simply supercede Windows. But that's not the point. One might as well say,
>> "here is an alcoholic beverage, throw away your sugarwater". The point is
>> that I want to compare different sugarwaters.
>
>I'm not sure you have an inalienable right to have different sugarwaters
>manufactured just so you can sample them.
No, but you do have an inalienable right to make money selling me
sugarwater.
>There are good reasons
>why people *don't* favor variety in their OSes, and they have nothing
>to do with Microsoft.
It's hardly surprising that people don't favor variety in their OSes
considering that a part of the Microsoft strategy is to penalize such
variety ("decommoditization").
Besides this is just a very weak argument. Most people don't even know what
an OS is, let alone whether they want variety in it. I think the popularity
of eye-candy software (considering that to most people the GUI _is_ the OS)
casts further doubts on the validity your argument.
>> To sort of get back to what you were saying, I don't think that a raft of
>> OS/2 specific applications would have made any difference. What is
>required
>> for an operating system to succeed is the blessing of Microsoft; or
>they'll
>> FUD you, buy you, cut off your airsupply, or pressure your partners into
>not
>> doing business with you.
>
>I don't agee; Microsoft has no magical powers, and OS/2 failure
>came from several sources. Microsoft's leverage over IBM was, at
>that time, limited to its ability to woo IBM's OS customers away from
>it.
I agree that the OS/2 failure came from several sources. That said, I don't
hold it above Microsoft to prevent e.g. Compaq from preloading OS/2 or some
other OS by threatening to raise licensing cost.
Of course I don't know whether that happened -- it's a mere speculation
showing how hypothetically, Microsoft's "ability to woo IBM's OS customers
away" can be brought about using plain old bribery.
>[snip]
>> >That isn't really what I was saying: I was saying that they lack critical
>> >features and they don't seem to be getting them.
>>
>> Well, you talked about printing, where your experience doesn't mimic mine,
>> and about game peripherals, which didn't do anything for the adoption of
>the
>> PC until the early nineties.
>
>Middle nineties. Win3's support for games was totally inadequate.
>
>But that was then, this is now.
In the past, if people wanted to play games, they bought consoles. They may
do so again in the future: the PC that people bought three years ago to play
games on might be replaced by a console next year. The lifetime of most
gaming products is so short that the adoption of a new hard- and software
simply falls straight into the upgrade path.
Moreover it was not necessary for the PC to be a great gaming platform
because consoles and machines like the Amiga and the C64 sufficiently met
the demand. Should a Windows competitor arise without great gaming support,
that situation may return within a couple of years.
IOW, looking at the past and seeing how the Windows didn't need games to
become "the standard", and looking to the future and seeing how games
consoles/stripped down PC's could rapidly expand to meet popular gaming
demand, I don't think gaming is the "critical" component you've made it out
to be.
>> >They *do* seem to be getting- slowly- a user interface.
>>
>> Yes, well. A buggy piece of shit many Gnome GUI tools are. Bit immature
>when
>> compared to the CLI tools. KDE's a bit better but looks horrible.
>
>Nevertheless, they show some awareness that this is an issue.
>I prefer to think of that as promising.
Then you prefer to think of low-quality good-looking crap as promising :)
>[snip]
>> >I would agree with that. I would *not* agree that the most of the
>> >users out there have been duped into buying a bad product.
>>
>> It might not have been a bad product at the time. I liked Win NT 3.51 for
>> example. But I think it is getting worse every day. Have you read the
>media
>> lately?
>
>Sure. I have also used Win NT 3.51, and Windows 2000: Windows 2000
>is a very large improvement. It isn't getting worse every day.
In large part this is a matter of feeling and taste. Common wisdom has it
you cannot argue those. So if you are happy with W2K, that is great.
>> Now when I say that I don't use Word and Excel, people offer to translate
>it
>> into some other kind of format or to fax or mail me a print-out. Suddenly,
>> for some dark mysterious reason, not using Word and Excel has become
>> "professional".
>
>Fashion. Gotta love it. :D
A friend of mine wields the theory that everything is fashion, but I've not
yet been sufficiently detached that I can go along with that. Still he has a
point.
>> Does the trial have something to do with it? The many security alerts?
>Solar
>> wind? The position of the stars? I don't know. But something is changing
>> [insert music].
>
>Twilight zone music?
Something like that, yes.
[snip]
>[snip]
>> >I think that if you see 'merit' in narrow technical terms, this is true.
>> >
>> >But yet 'dominant' firms do get displaced in this business. It happens
>> >when a new product comes along that is different, not just better.
>>
>> This is what I addressed above. I'm not looking for someone who tells me
>to
>> get an airplane instead of a road vehicle when what I want is a road
>vehicle.
>
>Yes, I know. But what you are looking for is not really
>the determining factor.
No, the determining factor is whether it makes money. And if I'm looking,
that means there is a market. The question is whether the market is
profitable enough.
>> Is this really what you want to be suggesting, Daniel?
>>
>> "I want to see your PC operating systems."
>> "We have quantum computers."
>> "PC operating systems please."
>> "Wearable PC?"
>> "Desktop PC operating systems please."
>> "Brain implant?"
>
>:D
>
>This is reality. I know you'd *prefer* to get a desktop OS
>that is tailored to your tastes- or at least more or less
>matches them- but current software engineering
>practices simply cannot deliver this.
A nice round thought in closing but I'm afraid it doesn't quite address what
I had in mind. Current software engineering practices cannot deliver (say)
an .AVI, .MOV or DVD player for (say) Linux?
>> >The classic example is the mainframes->minis->micros thing,
>> >but closer to home Windows was able to take over from DOS despite
>> >having to overcome the classic product lock-in problems: Users
>> >of Windows had to upgrade their hardware and buy new applications
>> >with new data formats.
>>
>> I've addressed this above, too. Windows could triumph because it had
>> Microsoft's blessing.
>
>Microsoft isn't the software fairy- they have no magic.
This is the second time you're confusing "magic" and "power".
>In particular, they didn't manage a seamless DOS->Windows
>transition; it *cost* and it had all the disadvantages you'd expect
>from a platform switch.
And Microsoft got away with it -- an example of their power.
>It's quite different from, say, Apple's transition from 680x0 to
>PPC. They made that dang near seamless; you could hardly
>tell you were doing it, and they were able to leverage developers
>onto the new platform because they could make it clear (with
>credibility) that 680x0 *would* die.
Had Apple made a clean break with the past, most everybody would have left
the platform and went with Microsoft.
Microsoft doesn't need to worry about these things very much -- they have
more power.
>You can argue that Microsoft should have been able to do this,
>but they *did not* do it when switching from DOS to Windows.
They did not have to. Power.
>> >They did so because Windows offered them stuff they couldn't
>> >get with DOS, period. Not even with improved DOSes, like DR-DOS.
>>
>> Digital GEM?
>
>GEM was like Windows, but it didn't deal with the memory problems,
>so it was next to impossible to write non-toy software for it.
Atari was able to deliver a nice (for the time) desktop environment based on
GEM for their hardware. Why didn't that catch on?
For the Mac, one could make the argument that it was too expensive. But for
the Atari?
>Same problem killed Windows 1 and 2, too. You just can't
>do the stuff that needed doing in 640k on an 8086.
>
>GEM is about the closest thing out there to Windows that
>didn't have a Microsoft brand name.
Which is what killed it.
[never mind the validity of that sentence, I'm just saying it so as to give
this message a powerful line in closing :)]
--
Rate your CSMA savvy by identifying the writing styles of
ancient and recent, transient and perdurable CSMA inhabitants:
(35 posters, 259 quotes)
<http://awacs.dhs.org/csmatest>
------------------------------
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Just Installed Win 2K and it ROCKS!!!!!!!
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 21:31:24 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snippy-snippy]
> Livewire is the software that allows the SBLive card to perform up to
> it's full potential instead of being degraded to a SB-16 on steroids
> like Linux does to the card.
>
> Linux has had basic drivers for the card long before (at least 9
> months) Win2k was even released, but yet you can go to the Creative
> site and download Livewire for Win2k but not for Linux.
>
> This tells me something about Creative's priorities here.
Creative *does* have other priorities as far as Linux is concerned.
Together with Lokisoft they're creating an open AEX-like standard,
called OpenAL. (Open Audio Library)
Creative are postponing release for their Live-drivers until
development is this standard is stable.
If you're really interested, more information can be obtained at
http://www.openal.org. I hope this will clear up some of the questions
you keep repeating.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 23:29:16 +0200
EdWIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message :
>
> My employer moved to NT years ago, and it doesn't "fall over
> several times a week."
>
hmm, even ms admits the poor mean uptime of a NT server to sell 2000,
may be you should prenvent them, you have no problems with it.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
