Linux-Advocacy Digest #46, Volume #27 Tue, 13 Jun 00 00:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux (Jeff Szarka)
Re: Linux faster than Windows? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux (Jeff Szarka)
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux (mlw)
Microsoft Stocks and your sanity... (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Whoops you screwed up! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Thorne digest, volume 2451707 (EdWIN)
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux (Charlie Ebert)
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux (mlw)
Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451708 ("Joe Malloy")
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Hardware and Linux - Setting the Record Straight ("Michael Guyear")
Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451708 (Marty)
Re: Boring ("Francis Van Aeken")
Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux (David M. Cook)
Re: No need to take sides ("Francis Van Aeken")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 22:53:29 -0400
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:13:26 -0400, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I've said it before and I'll say it again. Installation is not usability
>or reliability.
>
>Yes a user may find installing these particular devices easier, but the
>fact that the OS hangs all the time, has to be rebooted constantly. The
>first words out of the mouth of the help desk is to reboot.
That's simply not true of a well configured NT system.
>Usability and reliability are far more important. For every example of
>"easy" you can present, I can post examples of where installations screw
>up the box and programs previously functioning correctly cease to do so.
>
>If the only thing you can point out are installation issues, that's
>great! 99% of users do not add devices to their computer and simply use
>it as delivered or bring it back to the store to have the upgrade added.
>When you can speak about a "usability" issue of a working system, I'd
>like to hear it.
He mentioned the fact that once installed the software doesn't provide
the features of WinFax and other Windows software.
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux faster than Windows?
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 02:57:29 GMT
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Pete Goodwin wrote:
>bobh{at}haucks{dot}org (Bob Hauck) wrote in
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>>I did say VC didn't I?
>>
>>You didn't make the same change on both. GCC does have time() so you
>>could have. So the two programs weren't exactly the same. This is
>>basic error #1 in benchmarketing.
>
>Ah but I did. I used the same source code on both machines. They both used
>time(); I didn't allow the Linux version to use times().
>
>>I thought I saw six zeros in your number (meaning I read "five
>>million", not seven. Sorry if I misread it. The fact that it came out
>>to a nice round number and the Linux one didn't seemed suspicious too.
>
>I'm not responsible for your suspicious. They're yours. You deal with them.
>
>>>Your 68331 or 68hc11 are irrelevant to my Intel box.
>>
>>The fact that one compiler is very portable and can generate code for a
>>huge number of platforms, and the other isn't and can't, _is_ relevant
>>to a fair comparison. Especially since your test is cpu-bound and
>>makes no system calls except to get the time. It is really testing the
>>compiler rather then the OS.
>
>I'm testing on Intel hardware. How is multiple platform support relevant to
>that?
>
>Yes, you're right, I'm testing the compiler. The same compiler that builds
>the OS, right?
>
>>It is very hard to show that one OS is "faster" than another,
>>particularly since there are lots of ways to interpret that. Is it
>>faster at task switching? Interrupt response? Interactive response?
>>What? If some fanatic said that Linux is "3x faster" without any
>>qualification as to _what_ is faster, well, nobody with a clue is going
>>to pay any attention to that. It is just so much sales talk.
>
>Somebody did say Linux is three times faster than Windows. Someone else
>here in this thread has said they've demonstrated an industry standard
>insurance test running twice as fast on Linux as on Windows.
>
>I did my own tests based on my own interests, and I find Linux is slower
>than Windows. Not one test, but three seperate ones. How many more do I
>need to do before I can make the conclusion "Linux is NOT faster than
>Windows"?
>
>--
>------------
>Pete Goodwin
Pete,
I'm going to say you don't need to do any more tests to prove this to yourself.
I think you've done a remarkable job of proving to youself you don't like Linux.
Now explain to all of us why your here?
Is it just to be a mindless asshole?
Charlie
------------------------------
From: Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 22:54:52 -0400
On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 01:32:52 GMT, Michael Marion
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>You know how the winvocates have been touting the livewire drivers for
>w2k lately? Well it turns out that if I install the new "livewire"
>drivers for my sblive in w2k I get my first taste of the w2k protection
>program (the one that's supposed to save us from "dll hell"). It gives
>you the option of replacing the system files that changed with the
>proper ones, or allowing them to be replaced.. which equates to: you can
>have system stability but not full functionality of your SBLive, or full
>SBLive drivers but not the stability you're used to. If I do let it
>install livewire and replace those files.. I get many other odd things.
>If I install the drivers for my Hollywood Plus DVD card after installing
>livewire, the machine BSOD's with a short message, but proceeds to
>reboot before I can read it. Yipee!
Didn't happen when I tried it.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 21:59:18 -0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus) wrote:
> It was the Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:26:48 GMT...
> ...and Tiberious <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Subject:
>> Installing a printer, scanner and Fax program on a Win98SE
>> system.
>
> Huh, great. So there's a printer that ships with Windows drivers and
> software, but without any Linux drivers and software.
>
> How does this give anyone any information about whether Windows is
> superior to Linux or not?
Its not a question of superiority...
Its about $$$$: M$ && all their
swiftgrazers are rich.
*nix...a college-punk os?
(...I hada use an I---- MDS210 x286, no GUI...
guess I made it... ;)
>
> mawa
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 23:07:08 -0400
Jeff Szarka wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 01:32:52 GMT, Michael Marion
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >You know how the winvocates have been touting the livewire drivers for
> >w2k lately? Well it turns out that if I install the new "livewire"
> >drivers for my sblive in w2k I get my first taste of the w2k protection
> >program (the one that's supposed to save us from "dll hell"). It gives
> >you the option of replacing the system files that changed with the
> >proper ones, or allowing them to be replaced.. which equates to: you can
> >have system stability but not full functionality of your SBLive, or full
> >SBLive drivers but not the stability you're used to. If I do let it
> >install livewire and replace those files.. I get many other odd things.
> >If I install the drivers for my Hollywood Plus DVD card after installing
> >livewire, the machine BSOD's with a short message, but proceeds to
> >reboot before I can read it. Yipee!
>
> Didn't happen when I tried it.
Of course not. Windows is very inconsistent.
--
Mohawk Software
Windows 9x, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com
Have you noticed the way people's intelligence capabilities decline
sharply the minute they start waving guns around?
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Microsoft Stocks and your sanity...
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 03:08:05 GMT
I think it's funny to see all these investors flooding the Linux Advocacy.
It just proves a very strategic point that Linux is INDEED a threat to
Windows...
Why else would all these magnificent jerkwads be here on our advocacy
posting if it weren't a threat.
They BOAST linux is hard to install, Windows 98 runs faster, there's more
hardware support for Windows, Windows has more applications, Windows
runs better.
When in reality it doesn't do any of these things.
And by posting to this group, they intend to SUPPORT their failing OS
by posting weird untrue articles as if Linux Advocacy were hooked
to QVC of the Home Shopping channel....
The more they post, the closer to the end for Microsoft in their own words,
emotions, and comments...
They are living in fear of the future right now. They know it doesn't look
good for Microsoft.
They are our barometer for Microsoft's death.
As time progresses on, it will get worse for the Linux Advocacy.
The diareah of the Wintrolls will continue until the Federal Judge
pulls the handle of that majic toilet and it will all be over.
Don't forget to wipe.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Whoops you screwed up!
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 03:08:19 GMT
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:40:15 GMT, Cihl
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Tiberious wrote:
>>>
>>> Subject:
>>> Installing a printer, scanner and Fax program on a Win98SE
>>> system.
>>>
>>> Specifics: Canon FB630P scanner. Parallel port version.
>>> Canon BJC 4400 Printer.
>>> Software including Winfax and what ever came with the
>>> scanner and printer.
>>>
>>> Install printer with CDROM supplied. Nice CanoCraft programs and
>>> Greeting Card Designer included. Add's all kinds of menu options to the
>>> standard print menu so that resolution, paper size, diagnostics and so
>>> forth are easily accessible to the user.
>>>
>>> Install scanner, including Adobe Photoshop (Home version, almost the
>>> same as pro version) and Canocraft software plus a large selection of
>>> other software.
>>>
>>> Install Winfax. Surprise, surprise, it recognizes the printer and
>>> scanner and adds a fax option to all menus.
>>>
>>> Super easy.
>>>
>>> Try out all options and there are wizards to guide the user through all
>>> the operations of scanning/printing and faxing and most importantly ALL
>>> FUNCTIONS WORK TOGETHER, meaning you don't have to scan a printed
>>> document in order to fax it. You can just do it from the scanner menu.
>>>
>>> Linux on the other hand?
>>>
>>> 1. Doesn't support the scanner.
>>> 2. Barely supports the printer.
>>> 3.Gimp vs Adobe? Need I say more?
>>> 4. You are on your own trying to figure out how to make things work.
>>> Assuming of course you CAN make things work.
>>> Integration between programs like in the Windows world? You'll be
>>> lucky if the programs put an icon in the menus let alone work together.
>>>
>>> This person walked into Staples, presented a problem and walked away
>>> with a solution for $225.00 that was a breeze to install and worked from
>>> the getgo.
>>>
>>> Switch from Windows to Linux? Why?
>>>
>>> Why should someone take a step back in time to a half supported system?
>>>
>>> What advantage does the person above gain running Linux?
>>>
>>> I have yet to se a valid reason to do so except for cost, and running a
>>> desktop system kills that reason.
>>>
>>> Sorry but Linux loses again.
>>
>>So? Is it Linux' fault for not having all the hardware drivers? OEM's
>>deliver drivers for Windows, Microsoft hasn't much to do with that.
>
>Tell that to an end user. It's all about results.
>Getting from A to B in the easiest, most cost
>efficient manner possible.
>
>Is it Fords problem for not having built in baby
>car seats while Chrysler does? Guess what van the
>typical soccer mom drives? Guess why, in part...
I read this with much amuzement!
Operating systems are not going to make the comparison so cut and dried here.
Microsoft's operating system has went from $65 to $350 in just 10 years time.
Mom & Dad both better have good paying jobs to pay the estimated
$1,000 pricetag of this car seat projected for 2005.
See, when Microsoft get's broken up, that's when the RIDE WILL END...
Do you understand now.
I think most American's will give up P.C. for WEB appliances before
they buy into this gig.
>>Are you paid by Microsoft for this, or what? Advocating
>>Windows/Microsoft doesn't seem very logical to me. They already have a
>>big commercial marketing department. Your whining doesn't do shit.
>
>So in reality you have failed to address any point
>made, which makes YOU a LinoSHILL...
>
I don't know what LinoSHILL is but I encourage you all
to write the Tonight Show on NBC and find out.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (EdWIN)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Thorne digest, volume 2451707
Date: 13 Jun 2000 02:59:29 GMT
Tholen tholed:
<LNF05.32606$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Today's Thorne digest:
Yet another example of your pontification.
>1> Another of Tholen's Assteriods.
>
>What alleged "Assteriods", Thorne?
>
Don't you know?
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 03:11:04 GMT
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Jeff Szarka wrote:
>On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:13:26 -0400, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>>I've said it before and I'll say it again. Installation is not usability
>>or reliability.
>>
>>Yes a user may find installing these particular devices easier, but the
>>fact that the OS hangs all the time, has to be rebooted constantly. The
>>first words out of the mouth of the help desk is to reboot.
>
>That's simply not true of a well configured NT system.
HA. What planet are you from?
What do you use NT for anyway? A nightlight to find the pottie?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 22:09:50 -0600
> If the only thing you can point out are installation issues, that's
> great! 99% of users do not add devices to their computer and simply use
> it as delivered or bring it back to the store to have the upgrade added.
> When you can speak about a "usability" issue of a working system, I'd
> like to hear it.
Use it as a sever d---f---,
Its not a BillDOS desktop/gaming/family
(
we're a happly family (x3)/
me mom 'n daddy!!!/
)
DOS shell)
--
My C-128 routinely
BSOD'd whilst working
with 64Forth.
Why did M$ choose blue?
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 23:17:51 -0400
Jeff Szarka wrote:
>
> On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:13:26 -0400, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >I've said it before and I'll say it again. Installation is not usability
> >or reliability.
> >
> >Yes a user may find installing these particular devices easier, but the
> >fact that the OS hangs all the time, has to be rebooted constantly. The
> >first words out of the mouth of the help desk is to reboot.
>
> That's simply not true of a well configured NT system.
You can't really believe what you have just written, can you? Call a
support service, any support service, with a problem with Windows (any
bastardized version you choose) and the first thing they tell you to do
is reboot.
>
> >Usability and reliability are far more important. For every example of
> >"easy" you can present, I can post examples of where installations screw
> >up the box and programs previously functioning correctly cease to do so.
> >
> >If the only thing you can point out are installation issues, that's
> >great! 99% of users do not add devices to their computer and simply use
> >it as delivered or bring it back to the store to have the upgrade added.
> >When you can speak about a "usability" issue of a working system, I'd
> >like to hear it.
>
> He mentioned the fact that once installed the software doesn't provide
> the features of WinFax and other Windows software.
Not really.
--
Mohawk Software
Windows 9x, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit http://www.mohawksoft.com
Have you noticed the way people's intelligence capabilities decline
sharply the minute they start waving guns around?
------------------------------
From: "Joe Malloy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451708
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 23:17:35 -0400
Tholen tholes:
> I've been advocating the use of the right tool for the job for some
> time.
If that's so, why are you doing it in an advocacy group whose charter
embraces both praising and flaming a specific OS? No answer but your usual
posturing, eh Tholen? Why are you here?
--
"USB, idiot, stands for Universal Serial Bus. There is no power on the
output socket of any USB port I have ever seen" - Bob Germer
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 22:18:50 -0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Michael Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> mlw wrote:
>
>> Usability and reliability are far more important. For every example of
>> "easy" you can present, I can post examples of where installations screw
>> up the box and programs previously functioning correctly cease to do so.
>
> AAMOF: Here's one for you...
>
> I finally plunked down the cash for the W2kPro upgrade (I feel dirty
> now... like I've betrayed the cause or something :) ) because I want to
> do some large mpg captures using my TV tuner card and WinVCR. It works
> under 98 but 98 has a habit of blue screening a little too often during
> captures.. thus wasting my time. This is on a fresh reinstall with
> nothing but the drivers for what I need to capture installed
> nonetheless.
>
> You know how the winvocates have been touting the livewire drivers for
> w2k lately? Well it turns out that if I install the new "livewire"
> drivers for my sblive in w2k I get my first taste of the w2k protection
> program (the one that's supposed to save us from "dll hell"). It gives
> you the option of replacing the system files that changed with the
> proper ones, or allowing them to be replaced.. which equates to: you can
> have system stability but not full functionality of your SBLive, or full
> SBLive drivers but not the stability you're used to. If I do let it
> install livewire and replace those files.. I get many other odd things.
> If I install the drivers for my Hollywood Plus DVD card after installing
> livewire, the machine BSOD's with a short message, but proceeds to
> reboot before I can read it. Yipee!
Gawd, you must have one h---
of a setup...
So complex! ;)
Mebbe mom/dad/bro/sis
can help. Yes?
>
> --
> Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc.
> "The Tuxomatic 2200(TM) with patented Gates-Be-Gone(TM) gets rid of blue
> screens in a flash! It forks! It blits! Look at those fantastic pixels!
> It surfs the web! You could even host an ISP with it!"
> -- Matthew Sachs on
> Slashdot
------------------------------
From: "Michael Guyear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Hardware and Linux - Setting the Record Straight
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 15:34:12 -0500
True surround sound and 3d enviromental mapping are the reasons to use a SB
live card. For DVD and games a SB live card makes a big difference. For
listening to an MP3 or CD audio a SB 16 id just as good.
JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 12:40:04 +0200, Nico Coetzee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [deletia]
> >
> >The hardware I used was anything from a P166 to PII333 and AMD K6-3.
> >
> >So... Am I just lucky or what is this about hardware?
> >
> >O, before I forget - if you want to reply negatively - just keep in mind
> >that these are *training* PC's and therefor don't need DVD and all these
> >fancy stuff. In fact, I still don't understand why people use
> >SoundBlaster Live except if they are in the music industry. I just
> >coupled my ESS card to my hi-fi and I think I have pretty good sound.
>
> ...a SB16 is certainly sufficient to expose the distortions
> in an mp3 encoded at 128K (vs. 192K) despite some claiming
> that you need more "expensive" hardware to detect such
> "subtle differences in sound quality".
>
> [deletia]
>
> --
>
> |||
> / | \
>
> Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451708
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 03:35:17 GMT
Joe Malloy wrote:
>
> Tholen tholes:
>
> > I've been advocating the use of the right tool for the job for some
> > time.
>
> If that's so, why are you doing it in an advocacy group whose charter
> embraces both praising and flaming a specific OS? No answer but your usual
> posturing, eh Tholen?
Said posture is, of course, a slouch in this case.
------------------------------
From: "Francis Van Aeken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Boring
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 01:03:49 -0300
Jorge Cueto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:u7815.1240$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> This newsgroup is starting to be bored ... I guess GNU/Linux has finally
> won and Windows advocates can't just debate anymore :-)
Well, it might be a concept hard to grasp for a Linux advocate, but not
everybody in the world is obsessed with MS.
The OS of the future will need to be hard real time. Multimedia and
embedded applications need a real time OS to be any good. For example,
serious audio work on standard Linux is impossible. Extensions exist but
Linus doesn't want to incorporate them (they are too messy - Linux is not
conceived as a real time OS).
This is only one issue. There are others. For example, unix-like systems
are not deadlock-free. In certain situations, any unix- like system will
deadlock.
Still, given enough government control of the market, I'm sure Linux
will survive... for a while.
Francis.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David M. Cook)
Subject: Re: An Example of the Superiority of Windows vs Linux
Date: 13 Jun 2000 04:02:56 GMT
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:26:48 GMT, Tiberious <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Specifics: Canon FB630P scanner. Parallel port version.
AFAIK, there is no standard parallel port interface for scanners. These
devices are a hack, and usually proprietary to boot, i.e. noone could write
Linux drivers even if they wanted to.
Why the hell should linux support every goddam crackhead piece of hardware
that manufacturers come up with?
If you want a scanner that will work with Linux, get one that uses a
standard interface like SCSI.
> Canon BJC 4400 Printer.
Apparently supported only at 360x360 (I don't know what the story with that
is; probably crackhead firmware in this case), but otherwise reported to
work fine:
http://www.picante.com/~gtaylor/pht/show_printer.cgi?recnum=62240
Dave Cook
------------------------------
From: "Francis Van Aeken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: No need to take sides
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 01:14:49 -0300
JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> Use the Robber Baron's product or "become Amish" is no choice at all.
To use MS products or not to use MS products is "no choice at all"?
Pretty lame for a linux advocate.
Francis.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
