Linux-Advocacy Digest #998, Volume #26 Fri, 9 Jun 00 20:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Canada invites Microsoft north (LEBLANC ERIC)
Linux JDK 1.3.0 Updated ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K ("John W. Stevens")
Re: Linux & Winmodem (Jody Lowes)
Re: Where are all the astroturfers? ("Francis Van Aeken")
Re: IE for Linux (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Linux faster than Windows? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451705 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K ("John W. Stevens")
Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K ("John W. Stevens")
Re: Window managers ("John W. Stevens")
Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day (Gary Heston)
Re: Linux is so stable... (Nic)
Re: MacOS X: under the hood... (was Re: There is only one innovation that
matters...) (Shice Beoney)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 22:20:12 GMT
Bob Germer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: On 06/09/2000 at 07:54 PM,
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (LEBLANC ERIC) said:
:
: > : 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.
:
: > So to hell that one of them can't communicate to 70% of your clientele?
:
: > Your priorities aren't right imho.
:
: In Philadelphia, New York, many other cities, someone who speaks Spanish
: only is eligible for Civil Service employment because a sizable minority
: of residents speak Spanish and our supervisors, etc. are intelligent
: enough to speak both English and Spanish. But in Quebec, an anglophone who
: speaks no French is not even if the area where he seeks work is primarily
: Anglo. That is not a free country.
Name me one such region of Quebec where an Anglophone will only deal with
English speaking residents. Can you? And please document your claim that an
anglophone is bared from a civil service job when he has to deal with only
english speaking residents.
It makes more sense to hire somebody that can speak both languages. Anyway, in
most large city of Quebec an unilingual English speaker can and will find
him/herself a job.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Linux JDK 1.3.0 Updated
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 22:06:30 GMT
Linux JDK 1.3.0
The IBM Developer Kit for Linux(R), Java(TM) 2 Technology
Edition, Version 1.3.0 Early Release (Early Release Developer
Kit) is a software development kit that can be used to build
Java applications on Linux. The Early Release Developer Kit
includes development tools, the IBM Java Runtime Environment
for Linux, sample code and Java source files.
Update:
Refresh includes bug fixes for many of the problems reported
on the Discussion page.
Download here:
http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/tech/linuxjdk?open&l=cola,t=ljdk2
===============================================================
Linux developerWorks Tutorials (www.ibm.com/developer)
Rebuilding the old alliance between schools and open source
http://www-4.ibm.com/software/developer/library/schools.html?
open&l=253,t=gr,p=skl
Bash by example, Part 3
http://www-4.ibm.com/software/developer/library/bash3.html?
open&l=253,t=gr,p=bash3
COBOL in an open source future
http://www-4.ibm.com/software/developer/library/cobol/?
open&l=253,t=gr,p=cobl
Running TopPage on Linux using Wine
http://www-4.ibm.com/software/developer/library/toppage/?
open&l=253,t=gr,p=tpwine
================================================================
developerWorks and alphaWorks goes wireless
Get access to information about new developerWorks Java and
Linux resources wirelessly with a Palm VII. dW has a growing
collection of free developer resources consisting of developer
articles, sample code, news stories, case studies, and tools.
In addition you can also keep informed about new and updated
technologies added to the alphaWorks website.
Download the aW-dW.pqa at:
http://www.alphaworks.ibm.com/aw.nsf/about?
readform&/aw.nsf/html/dW+aW+wireless?open&l=cola,t=wrls3
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "John W. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 16:24:04 -0600
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> > Now, perhaps I'm being a bit naive here, but sticking a floppy
> > into an otherwise C1- or C2-compliant system breaks a lot
> > of assumptions. Similarly for CD-ROMs.
>
> Unless access to these devices is controled, which it has to be and is (for
> NT).
So . . . NT will override the reset and power switches?
Wow. NT has some capabilities that no other OS in existence has!
;->
--
If I spoke for HP --- there probably wouldn't BE an HP!
John Stevens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Jody Lowes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux & Winmodem
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 13:20:51 -0600
On Thu, 08 Jun 2000, KLH wrote:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8hp4k7$la6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Hi all
>>
>> A quick question: I'm thinking of trying out Linux (probably SuSE), but
>> I have a US Robotics Winmodem. I know it is incompatible, but is it
>> still worthwhile running a dual Windows (for internet) and Linux
>> system - or does that kind of miss the point?
>>
>> Any advice gratefully received.
>
>Go for it. If you find something you need to download for GNU/Linux, you can
>always download in Windows and then grab it from your Windows partition in
>GNU/Linux. I did that for a long time until I got a compatible modem.
>
>There is a lot in GNU/Linux that doesn't rely on an internet connection.
Agreed. You are better off to dual boot and download with windows if that's
the only option. I do, however, suggest that you pick up a real modem.
I haven't used my USR winmodem since I installed Linux. You wouldn't believe
how much that particular modem slows down the whole system. It's aweful. I
have a PII 350 that used to get bogged down in windows if I had a few IE
windows open. I originally thought it might just be windows but I had no such
problems, in windows, when I hooked up my external modem. It really is a bad
modem to buy.
BTW, I picked up my external modem for around 20 bucks on eBay. It kicks ass
too. :)
------------------------------
From: "Francis Van Aeken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Where are all the astroturfers?
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2000 19:46:55 -0300
Bobby D. Bryant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> 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 there
> resumes?
You miss them, don't you?
Francis.
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IE for Linux
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 22:46:30 GMT
On Fri, 09 Jun 2000, Pedro Coto wrote:
>I'd like to have IE 5.0 (and above) for Linux, do you think it
>will be available if Microsoft splits ? If it is free I have nothing
>more against using it that against using Staroffice or Netscape.
While we're on the subject:
I wouldn't count on any more free IE for Microsoft users.
It just wouldn't pay-off like it did before.
Accordingly, I wouldn't expect a free IE for Linux either.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux faster than Windows?
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 22:49:27 GMT
On Fri, 09 Jun 2000, 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
AH CRAP! I'm speaking to a freaking genius here! I didn't realize that sir.
Damn sorry anybody ever said anything bad about you.
This is about as analytical as they come. It reminds me of the CBS coverage
of Viet Nam during the 60's.
Pete,
A six second test doesn't prove shit.
Charlie
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451705
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 22:50:20 GMT
Here's today's Malloy digest. Note how he continues to avoid the
matter of him allegedly reciprocating when I ignored him for over
a year. Yes, he's too embarrassed to admit that he, in fact, did
not reciprocate.
74> Tholen tholes an attempted digestification of me;
I succeeded, Malloy. Ten of your postings were condensed into one.
74> what he actually does is simply try (and fail) to present my
74> excerpted quotes in as bad a light as possible.
Incorrect, given that your quotations were retained intact. But it's
rather ironic that you should talk about "excerpted" quotes, considering
how you deleted selected portions of what I wrote. For example, when I
pointed out to Brad Wardell that Windows users attack each other, and
that therefore using his reasoning, one could conclude that Windows has
"few users", you chose to leave that part out.
74> Note how he avoids the issue
What issue did I allegedly avoid, Malloy? That's also rather ironic,
coming from the person who continues to avoid the issue of your alleged
reciprocation when I ignored you for over a year.
74> and instead tries to pin the blame on me.
You are to blame for avoiding the issue of your alleged reciprocation
when I ignored you for over a year.
74> He doesn't realize that if he never posted here (cooa) I'd never say
74> anything about him,
What interesting conditions he places on participation in a newsgroup!
Obviously he doesn't like to see me countering the FUD, illogic, bias,
and unfairness that people (including himself) have posted here. He
seems to think that he can hound me into silence. He doesn't realize
that it won't work.
74> in fact, I'd have little reason to even frequent these precincts.
Illogical, Malloy. I post in other newsgroups, yet you don't frequent
those precincts. Clearly, there is something special about this OS/2
newsgroup to you.
74> Talk about dumb.
Like your previous statement.
74> And he's surprised that I continue to comment on his useless
74> comments!
What allegedly useless comments, Malloy? I don't find it useless at
all to point out the illogic of your reasoning.
74> O the irony!
Namely yours.
------------------------------
From: "John W. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 17:11:00 -0600
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> you konw, all anyone has to do is read the exchange.
>
> they can see what I wrote and what you wrote and conclude you are an
> inflammatory rash little trollster.
>
> NT 4 *has been* C2 certified. That's what I said, that is what is true.
Nope. Sorry, but NT cannot be C2 certified . . . certification is based
on a complete environment, which includes hardware.
Since NT cannot control the hardware it is placed on, then that fact
alone proves that NT cannot be certified C2.
(And please don't post that URL again, as that URL simply illustrates
the fact that NT is not C2 certified . . . NT, in a particular
configuration, running on a specific set of hardware . . . was
certified.)
--
If I spoke for HP --- there probably wouldn't BE an HP!
John Stevens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "John W. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft migrates Hotmail to W2K
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 17:15:40 -0600
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> p.s., it is impossible for an operating system _alone_ to be C2 certified.
> It is ALWAYS a complete system that's evaluated and certified. NT enjoys
> another advantage in that it's C2 certification can be achived through
> software alone, not requiring any special hardware.
Don't sentences one and two contradict each other Drestin?
--
If I spoke for HP --- there probably wouldn't BE an HP!
John Stevens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "John W. Stevens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Window managers
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 17:23:09 -0600
"Donal K. Fellows" wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Terry Porter <No-Spam> wrote:
> > BlackBox forever dudes!
> > http://www.wa.apana.org.au/~tjporter/Blackbox_desktop_big.jpg
>
> Cute. I'm not sure it is practical, but definitely cute. (I use CDE;
> I don't like it, but it isn't so bad as to annoy me into committing to
> switching to something else. And some of the accompanying applets are
> quite neat and useful. As long as it runs emacs, I'm happy! :^)
But . . . Donal . . . Emacs *IS* a window manager!
;-)
--
If I spoke for HP --- there probably wouldn't BE an HP!
John Stevens
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gary Heston)
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, 09 Jun 2000 23:26:48 GMT
According to EdWIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gary Heston) wrote:
>> According to EdWIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> > [ ... ] So what is so "painful"
>> >about Windows?
>> 1) Administering it;
>Why is it "painful" to administer? Specifics, please.
It's inconsistent in many ways. In particular, remote administration
of NT servers/workstations is particularly scatterbrained; in some
things, you run the same application (Event Viewer, for example) and
select the remote system from it (under File > Select Computer). For
others, like services, it's totally different--you do Settings > Control
Panel > Services locally. Remotely, it's Start > Programs > Administrative
Tools > Server Manager, select the server, then Files > Services.
Intutitve? Consistent? Only if you're on drugs.
Another remote admin issue with NT is that I can't just sit down at the
nearest Win box and log into the NT box to work on it; I have to install
a stupid package of incomplete "tools" *locally* first, or find another
NT Server, or an NT Workstation with tools installed.
Under Unix, I can sit down at virtually *any* computer--Windoze included--
telnet to the system I need to work on, and run whatever "tools" I need to
ON THAT SYSTEM without installing *anything* locally. (Aside from the minor
detail that the Windoze telnet app is junk.)
Speaking of event logging, that's another farce. It can't tell the difference
between a bad password or an unknown user; it logs a user login/logout cycle
for a share access (which can't be differentiated from the real login/logout
pair); there's no way to work with the files to extract parts of it for
analysis; the domain activity isn't coordinated or localized in any way (we
have people in one building with two BDCs validating on a BDC in another
building!); most of the log entries are useless (log an access violation
without telling me what file/directory the access was attempted; give me
a transient 15-character handle I can't track down) or outright stupid
("Error formatting error message", "Run nbtstat -n to find the conflicting
address", "Unable to access profile, contact your system administrator"--
which was on my *own* account!).
No virtual consoles. To change from my regular account to a supervisory
account when I need to fix something or look at something, I have to log
out, wait for it to finish, three-finger to get a prompt, log in, wait,
start whatever admin tool I need, then finally do what I need to--and go
through the same lengthy sequence to get back to what I was doing. On Linux
or Unix, I can use a virtual console to keep both logins open and switch
between them with a alt-function key sequence.
I can't start a process, put it in the background, and log out without
killing the process. It's hard as hell to automate anything, as well.
And that's just a couple of small examples I can reel off. The networking
bizarreness, slow performance, and dozens of other issues have just as
many problems and deficiencies.
>> 2) Using it.
>What's "painful" about using Windows? Again, specifics please.
Response. Slow, loses keystrokes, loses mouse clicks, forces inefficient
motions moving between keyboard and mouse. Have to wait between each step
instead of telling it what to do and getting on to other things. Having
to go through lengthy sequences over and over and over and over and over.
The waste of hardware resources. The constant bloating; Windoze always
gets bigger, never cleaning up properly when something is removed. Things
opening unwanted, not staying open when wanted, generally never doing
what is needed in an efficient manner, doing lots of things that aren't
needed or wanted (and with no way to turn the crap off).
Constant reboots needed. Reinstalls. Self-reconfiguring on every boot,
whether or not I want it to--and usually I *don't*. Even if I've changed
the hardware, that doesn't mean I want to trash a (marginally) working
configuration. No way to test things and revert cleanly back to the
previous configuration (other than ghosting an image of the hard drive).
Everything's in a database which corrupts frequently and can't be fixed;
reinstall everything (and lose all the stuff that was customized and
working) to fix what broke. Tools that don't work many times, that won't
fix problems; correct settings that don't work until after the app, driver,
or whatever is removed and reinstalled.
Bizarre behavior when making changes--I spent a week trying to get a "plug-
and-play" modem working in a computer; it kept plugging it into the wrong
COM device. I finally got it working by physically moving it to a different
slot! Device Manager wouldn't *let* me correct the settings.
>> Those who have never tasted cake are satisfied with bread...
>I've used other platforms such as the Amiga and the Mac, yet I'm
>satisfied with Windows, and I feel no pain. Go figure.
Using != administrating.
Gary
--
Gary Heston [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"We in the government knew when we got an email titled "ILOVEYOU" that
something was wrong." Senator Fred Thompson quoted by ZDNet
------------------------------
From: Nic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is so stable...
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2000 11:31:16 +1200
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> BTW when I next rebooted the LINUX system, fsck checked the drive. I did
> the same as before, and the error did not repeat itself. If it doesn't then
> I can only put this down an unrepeatable error; however if it does, is
> there a shutdown log?
Generally by the time the shutdown scripts are unmounting drives, the
log daemons (syslogd and klogd) have already been stopped, so there
won't be a log.
If you got a stack trace it was probably what's called an "Oops", which
is pretty much the equivalent of a segfault in kernel space. If you have
the kernel source installed, check
/usr/src/linux/Documentation/oops-tracing.txt for a bit more information
on them, and how to decode and report them.
Oopses do happen, but they are generally quite rare (the only time I've
had one that wasn't directly related to buggered hardware was an obscure
multicast networking bug... which got fixed pretty soon after I reported
it).
Regards,
Nic "Advocacy Via Truth" B.
--
J. Random Coder < sky at wibble dot net >
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Shice Beoney)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: MacOS X: under the hood... (was Re: There is only one innovation that
matters...)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 09 Jun 2000 23:37:48 GMT
Alan Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <HuZ%4.10315$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Quantum
>Leaper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>"John C. Randolph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>
>>>
>>> Trevor Zion Bauknight wrote:
>>> >
>>> > In article <8h8jrn$a3m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Stephen S. Edwards II"
>>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > : Microsoft already got its lucky break and had purchased from a
>>> > > : third party what basically amounted to a pirated copy of the
>>> > > : source
>>> > > : of CPM/86 for $50k.
>>> > >
>>> > > "Pirated"? I hardly think so. Tim Patterson, QDOS's author stated
>>> > > that he had used a CP/M manual as a guide for coding QDOS.
>>> >
>>> > It was said that disassembly of QDOS revealed Digital Research
>>> > copyright
>>> > strings. Not sure whether I believe that or not, but...it was said.
>>>
>>> IBM sure believed it. They paid DR millions to keep it out of court.
>>>
>>Paying a settlement, doesn't prove anything. IBM could have want to cut
>>legal fee or didn't what to look bad to the press, for all you know.
>>Alot
>>of companies settle, even if the beleive they are right. Settling the
>>case
>>now can be cheaper in the long run.
>
>I would say the relatively few defendants settle if they have deep
>enough pockets to stay the course in court _if the expect to be
>exonerated_. They fight it out to avoid precisely what we see here:
>people believing them guilty of wrongdoing because they settled.
>
>If Microsoft could have gone to trial with Digital Research and could
>have expected the verdict to be unequivocaly in their favour why
>_wouldn't_ they have done so?
>
>Fear of the truth coming out appears a likely candidate. <G>
If I might interject, I'd like to ask:
Why the hell is this being X-Posted to comp.sys.be.advocacy?
--
SHICE MAEKS A HAET LSIT!!!!! Official loony UPM
http://www.demolitioninc.com/vampi/lamerlist.html
Current uptime, BeOS R5 Professional:
Fri Jun 9 20:30:00 2000, up 2 days, 34 minutes
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
