Linux-Advocacy Digest #99, Volume #27 Thu, 15 Jun 00 14:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: WHICH LINUX??? (David Steinberg)
Re: Alpha vs Intel (Mark Rafn)
Re: MS Windows WM ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Alpha vs Intel ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: ApplixWare? More Build It As You Go Along Linux.... (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux faster than Windows? (Jim Richardson)
Re: Microsoft Stocks and your sanity... (Jim Richardson)
Re: What else is hidden in MS code??? (Jim Richardson)
Re: iMac: the iFormation Appliance (Jim Richardson)
Re: Linux Tast Test (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Number of Linux Users (Cihl)
Re: MS Windows WM (Brian Langenberger)
Re: What UNIX is good for. (Cihl)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux Tast Test (Cihl)
Re: What UNIX is good for. (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: G4 in space! (Rick Tan)
Re: Why not West Papua ? was: Canada invites Microsoft north now we are really waya
way OT ("Christopher Smith")
Re: What UNIX is good for. (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg)
Subject: Re: WHICH LINUX???
Date: 15 Jun 2000 17:12:43 GMT
Juha Siltala ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: However, the only distro that will make your system a little different is
: Slackware, the differences between the rest are relatively small in the
: end. The point is to get linux up and running, after a while your machine
: won't look like "Redhat", "Corel", or whatnot, but like _your_ system with
: the applications you like, the desktop you like and your own
: configuration.
If I may go off on a tangent...
I've heard that often, and I must admit that my desktop is starting to get
there -- it's starting to look more like "my" Linux than the Linux-Mandrake
7.0 system I installed 5 months ago.
Last night I downloaded and burned the iso's for Mandrake 7.1, and I'm a
little bit worried. If I do an "upgrade" of the system, what will happen
to all the customization that I've done? Will it survive, get replaced by
defaults, or cause the install to choke and die? I'm seriously
considering just backing up all the RPM's and source I've used to install
programs, as well as key configuration files, nuking all my partitions
except for the one mounted as /home, doing a fresh install, and
re-applying my changes.
Is this a wise idea, or am I likely to have a good experience upgrading
over my customized system?
--
David Steinberg -o)
Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Rafn)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.admin,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix,linux.redhat,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: Alpha vs Intel
Date: 15 Jun 2000 17:13:01 GMT
Ben Chausse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I build a Intranet WebServer on Linux with Apache 1.3.12, mod_perl 1.49
>and PHP4 and I would like to know what will the best between a server
>with 2x667 MHZ Alpha Processer and a 4x700 MHZ Xeon Processer ??
Lordie! What are you doing on your intranet that you need such power?
Unless you've got a pretty specific task that's very processor-intensive,
you'll bottleneck on I/O long before CPU on either of these platforms.
In general, for webserving, you'd rather have multiple
load-balanced/redundant machines over one monster machine.
--
Mark Rafn [EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.dagon.net/>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MS Windows WM
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 17:08:38 GMT
Well, when I said flexible, I meant in and of itself. Being able to
scrap one window manager and use another does not make THAT window
manager flexible. Remember I'm talking about window managers, not the
X-Windows system itself. There's no single WM that is as intuitive and
configurable. But again, that's just MY opinion. I grew up in an MS
environment, and have just recently started using Linux, and I still
haven't quite adjusted to the spartan nature of most X-Windows front-
ends. I miss a lot of the bells and whistles I had with MS. Sure,
some of it was crap, but a lot of them were nifty little timesavers
too. All you've got to do is compare the dran-n-drop method of
creating a shortcut to the manual creation of launcher icons in Gnome
to see what I mean.
Don
> I don't agree with most of what you say, but those are just my
opinions.
> But as to flexibility, surely you are joking? The range of WMs for X
> provides far more flexibility for an interface than Windows does. I
> don't care much for bulky featureful WMs - I prefer lightweight ones
> that get in the way as lillt as possible (which is why I like FVWM2).
> Under an X system, you can configure it to be a nuce bulky featureful
wm
> (like Gnome), or a lightweight one like Fvwm. You don't have that
> flexibility under windows.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.admin,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix,linux.redhat,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: Alpha vs Intel
Date: 15 Jun 2000 10:21:52 -0700
Ben Chausse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi,
>
> I build a Intranet WebServer on Linux with Apache 1.3.12, mod_perl 1.49
> and PHP4 and I would like to know what will the best between a server
> with 2x667 MHZ Alpha Processer and a 4x700 MHZ Xeon Processer ??
>
> Also, except the 64-bits, what's the big difference between Alpha and
> Intel CPU ?
>
> Thanks ...
>
> Ben0iT
There was a thread in comp.os.linux.misc that seems to have just wound
down called "Sun Sparc faster then intel pentium: (What about the
compiler?)" that talked about the relative merits of Sparc vs x386 and
pentium style processors. You might want to back up through your
newsreader and follow that. (I "cough cough" started that thread as a
branch off from the thread "Sun Sparc faster then intel pentium: is
this true????" which carried on in parallel). In my post I brought up
the Alpha because there was a URL with some benchmarks:
http://www.aceshardware.com/Spades/read.php?article_id=145
The big architectural difference between Alpha and Intel CPU besides
the 64 vs 32 bits is that Alpha is a RISC and the Intel a CISC design.
A simple web search will provide ample discussion of the meaning of these
acronyms and their relative merits.
----Remove "UhUh" and "Spam" to get my real email address----
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ApplixWare? More Build It As You Go Along Linux....
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 12:24:12 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Mistype, I had several browsers open at once. Netscape let me down
> again....
>
> Netscape, one reason why I don't run Linsux.
>
> At any rate, you found it so how about some constructive dialog
> instead of slamming my typo's....
>
> ??????????????????????????????????
Oh yeah, you would be the FIRST person I would expect to hear asking for
constructive dialog. Let's see, this is the same idiot that is
constantly posting shit that says "Linux sux, Windows roolz and you
can't do anything about it." They you go on to say such wonderfully
thought out things as, "Microsoft is a monopoly, therefore Linux must
suck."
Your critiques are always so thought provoking. I still say you are one
of two things:
1. Some asshole idiot that bought a copy of slack about five years ago
and gets it out once a month to install on his latest machine. Then you
compare it to Windows 2000 and point out every shortcoming of the five
year old OS versus the relatively new (rewritten my ass) OS.
Or...
2. A paid MS employee. I can't think of any other way you could have
enough time to be in here posting all day long. I spend about an hour,
maybe two in here a day and get maybe three posts a day in. How do you
manage your staggering amounts of posting if someone isn't paying you do
to it?
It's obvious you think of Windows as superior, so why not just use it
and shut the hell up. Some of us use Linux because in our opinion we
feel it is better suited to what we want to do. You keep coming in here
and trying to tell us that it can't be better suited to what we want to
do because we should only want to do with our machines what the majority
wants. Well, some people want more. It will always be that way. Deal
with it and get on with your life. If it's something more deep rooted
than that (severe god complex springs to mind) then I suggest you get
some therapy.
There are always going to be people that don't agree with you. Rather
than spend all of your time telling them what fucking idiots they are,
why don't you either leave them alone, or just sit back and listen. It
is much more interesting to listen in on people that you consider THE
ENEMY and try to learn from them than it is to come screaming down the
hill in a battle rage over every single positive statement you see
here. I personally hate Windows, but I also know that it is suited to
certain tasks. For me it's wrong, but for most of my friends it's
probably OK. I don't spend all of my time trying to tell them what
fucking idiots they are for using it. In fact, I am usually the one
that helps them out when they have a computer problem. But that doesn't
mean I have to use Windows.
You use Windows. Great, use it, live it, love it, be well, and fuck
off. Although it was entertaining to watch you lie and scream and cry
like a damn baby every time someone says something positive about Linux
and jump up and down like a clown on speed when someone says something
negative about it for a while, now it's just reduntant idiocy. So shut
up already.
Is it just me, or does this guy seem like the dude that runs naked
through the middle of the park screaming that the aliens are coming and
we must worship thier god if we hope to survive. I don't know, maybe
I'm just having a bad day. But it's just too much to see the same guy
posting as five different people saying "Linux sux", "I couldn't agree
more", "It's such a piece of shit", "Nobody uses it". No matter how
many aliases you have, the more you spout forth, the more stupid and
idiotic you seem.
Nathaniel Jay Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 17:22:00 GMT
> > suddenly been tasked with setting up Linux boxes
> > for web-hosting, newsgroup serving, routing, NAT
> > translation, and firewalling. I spent more than
> > 100 hours just trying to comprehend httpsd.conf.
>
> Did you at least get through the httpd.conf fairly quickly?
Not really. In addition to being on Linux, it was also the first web
server I've setup on ANY platform. Took forever to comprehend what all
those obscure directives were doing. Plus, since there's no GUI to
lean on, even if I got a directive right, I might've had a bit of
punctuation out of place or something. Plus I was trying to setup an
SSL server, so that added another layer of complexity to it. Finally,
after I did all the hard work, I stumbled across Webmin. What a
lifesaver that thing is. Course, now I know what all that stuff means,
so I could do it manually now, but Webmin still makes it a lot easier.
>
> Bottom line, get help! Find someone who's been there. If you
> ask about Linux in a room full of 30 people, at least 5 will know
> enough to be helpful.
Well, I've been trying to do just that, but I think your estimate is a
little off. I've been in this business for 10 years, and I'm the only
guy I know with ANY Linux experience. Hell, I'm the company's "linux-
guru" now, and I've only been doing it for 3 months. To somebody who's
been in this world for a while, there're resources, but for a new guy
just breaking in, it's hard to know where to look for a helping hand.
Thank god for Barnes and Noble. They actually have a whole section
devoted to Linux now.
> The point is that it's completely unrealistic to expect to be fully
> proficient with ANY operating system in 20 hours. And I've seen too
> many WinTrolls posting in this group, on ZDNet boards, and
as "experts"
> with less than 10 hours of real experience (barely enough to set the
> silly thing up), who claim that they are qualified to make comparisons
> between Windows NT and Linux. I suppose that since they've carved a
> turkey a few times, they're qualified to do heart surgury too.
>
Ouch! That's a little harsh. I'm fairly new to this stuff, but I like
to crow a little about my accomplishments, meager though they may be.
Course, I try not to be obnoxious about it, but the bottom line is, I
can't tell anybody else around me about it, because they don't have the
faintest idea what I'm talking about. Besides, nobody starts out an
expert.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: Linux faster than Windows?
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 15:20:41 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 13 Jun 2000 13:47:49 GMT,
Pete Goodwin, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
<stuff I have no comment on, snipped for brevity>
>>An interesting test would be to run 4 or 5 (or more) concurrent povray
>>sessions and see how good the systems are in the taskswitching
>>department.
>
>That's not how you would normally run POVray!
Maybe not how *you* normally run POVray, but it is how I do. I like
to have it in the BG, rendering away, and not noticing any slowdown in
responsiveness on the desktop, them CPU cycles were going to waste, I
put 'em to work Dammit! :)
OTOH, I understand why you'd prefer to run W9X that way. It's multitasking
is awful in comparison to Linux.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: Microsoft Stocks and your sanity...
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 15:38:17 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 13 Jun 2000 16:28:29 GMT,
Pete Goodwin, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Salvador Peralta) wrote in
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>Linux is faster than windows. Unless the micros~1 sponsored benchmark
>>has changed, Linux still serves nt clients faster than nt. Apache is
>>still more stable with lower overhead, higher scalability, and more
>>customizability than iis.
>
>If that were true, then why are the benchmarks I've run slower on Linux
>than Windows? I'm not talking about apache or web servers, I'm talking
>simple applications.
>
>>Linux is a much better system than nt for whole classes of functions and
>>comes with a much stronger core environment for developers than windows
>>nt.
>
>Then why are there more development tools for Windows than Linux? How is it
>I can buy a RAD tool on Windows but can't on Linux (not yet anyway).
>
With all due respect, have you looked?
Or are you simply saying that the particular RAD you like isn't avaialble for
linux? (Not that that isn't a valid issue, but it's not the same as no Rad
available.)
I am still curious as to why you only post this to c.o.l.a? and not to the
linux help groups.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What else is hidden in MS code???
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 15:45:35 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 12 Jun 2000 20:20:14 -0400,
Colin R. Day, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Jim Richardson wrote:
>
>
>> >
>> >First of all, English is not my native language. What does "anty up"
>> >mean? I couldn't find it in Webster or Wordnet...
>>
>> Well, he misspelled it. Ante up is the phrase, and it is from poker,
>> where an "Ante" is the money put in to be in the game in the first
>> place. Don't know the etymology further than that. Ante up means basically
>> "pay up", "put up or shut up", etc.
>>
>
>The word "ante" means "before" in Latin.
>
Doh! of course it does! damn, how'd I miss that?
<peers suspiciously at the cup of tea>
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: iMac: the iFormation Appliance
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 12:34:53 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 13 Jun 2000 22:22:28 +1200,
Lawrence DčOliveiro, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>
>Ah, you're accustomed to a system which treats CDs as something
>fundamentally different from hard drives. On the Mac, a CD is just
>another kind of filesystem volume, and you can have HFS- and
>HFS-Plus-formatted CDs, in a way that you _cannot_ have FATnn- or
>NTFS-formatted CDs under Windows, or UFS-formatted CDs under UNIX.
Sure you can, it's just a filesystem. give it the -t UFS flag and
it mounts fine (If you have UFS support in kernel or modules of course.)
>
>On the Mac, ISO 9660 is just another installable filesystem. If I put
>in, say, a Zip cartridge that was in ISO 9660 format, it would mount on
>my Mac exactly as though it were a CD. The Zip driver doesn't need to do
>anything special to support this: it's handled at the filesystem level,
>not the disk driver level.
So how is that different from Unix/Linux? You can even mount your
iso image as a filesystem via the loopback device to check for
errors before burning.
>To clarify the partition-versus-session issue, consider the cover CD
>from the latest issue of Future Music magazine. This has an ISO
>partition for Windows users, an HFS partition for Mac users, and some
>audio tracks. When I put it in my drive, I see two volume icons appear
>simultaneously on my desktop: one is the HFS partition, containing all
>the Mac-specific goodies for this issue, and the other is the audio
>partition, where I see each audio track appear as a file. I can access
>either or both, depending on what I want to do with the CD.
I don't know how Linux would deal with this, I have no disks like this
to play with.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Tast Test
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 12:33:13 -0500
Salvador Peralta wrote:
>
> This may be the most intelligent thing Simon777 has ever said in this
> group.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > For $1.99 you can try any distro you wish and draw your own
> > conclusions.
>
> --
> Salvador Peralta
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.la-online.com
I was thinking that too. Carefull
Simon/Steve/Mike/Whathisfuckingnametoday, this one could backfire and
send people running to Linux for salvation.
Nathaniel Jay Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Number of Linux Users
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 17:36:37 GMT
John Hughes wrote:
>
> As the number of Linux users BOOMS to 0.3%. Is Linux taking over??!!
>
> http://websnapshot.mycomputer.com/systemos.html
>
> http://bbspot.com/News/2000/4/linux_distros.html
Just you wait! In a few more years we'll have 0.4%! HA!
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS Windows WM
Date: 15 Jun 2000 17:38:25 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: Well, when I said flexible, I meant in and of itself. Being able to
: scrap one window manager and use another does not make THAT window
: manager flexible. Remember I'm talking about window managers, not the
: X-Windows system itself. There's no single WM that is as intuitive and
: configurable.
<snip!>
Whoa there. You haven't tried Sawfish yet, then. With its GUI-driven
configuration menus, you can configure practically everything to
taste - even to the point of giving windows different behavior
on an individual basis. And if you're really daring, adding a bit
of Lisp-like code here and there can give Sawfish virtually limitless
capabilities. And if you want it intuitive, just do what I did and
spend some time making its features do what your intuition
prefers - like reassigning which mouse button does what and so forth.
Check out more info at:
http://sawmill.sourceforge.net
and
http://sawmill.themes.org
And for the lazy (like me), up-to-date RPMs are always available.
------------------------------
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: What UNIX is good for.
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 17:39:16 GMT
Could somebody please translate this?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 17:30:29 GMT
> Point is you cannot provide even one valid reaon for someone to
> abandon Windows and switch to Linux.
>
Well, it crashes a helluva lot less. Windows, especially the 9x kernel
versions, seems to slowly dissolve over time. It seems like even if
you defragment your hard drive every night, run REGCLEAN all the time,
do everything you're supposed to do, a Windows system will still
degenerate to the point of uselessness after a year to 18 months.
GPFs, hangs, blue screens, etc, etc. Every computer I've had with a 9x
kernel system on it has had to be reformatted and reinstalled about
every other year. Most of the time, it doesn't run that great even
right after I re-do the whole thing. I still get crashes,etc every
once in a while, just not so frequently that I can't even use the
system.
The ONLY reason I keep a Windows partition around anymore at all is so
I can use the help desk database on our network, which is in Access
2000. There are Linux apps that will let you read Word and Excel
files, but I have yet to see one that reads Access databases properly.
(Forms and all. For this particular DB, it would be useless without
forms support) If it wasn't for that, I'd gladly dump Windows forever
and never look back.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 17:33:31 GMT
> >
> >
> >That's what helpdesks were invented for....
> >Every company worht it's salt has one, contracted out or not....
>
> Yup, and they have better things to do with their time than
> run around to every machine in the company to effect upgrades.
>
Amen to that! I worked 2 years as a helpdesk guy, and about 80% of my
time was spent dealing with Windows 9x stability issues. Explaining
over and over again: "Why does Windows crash? It just DOES!"
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Tast Test
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 17:43:34 GMT
Salvador Peralta wrote:
>
> This may be the most intelligent thing Simon777 has ever said in this
> group.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > For $1.99 you can try any distro you wish and draw your own
> > conclusions.
>
> --
> Salvador Peralta
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.la-online.com
Does this go for new versions, too? Or only older versions, like
RH5.2, or something.
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: What UNIX is good for.
Date: 15 Jun 2000 17:43:45 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Could somebody please translate this?
I think the short version is:
"I'm very stupid and I'd like everyone on usenet to know it."
Too bad we can't bring him up on charges for his continued
willful and malicious abuse of the english language...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 17:37:39 GMT
>
> Also, the desktop market is going to undergo a sea change in the next
> few years. Internet appliances are becoming more common, and
platforms
> like the PS2 will combine bitchin' games with network access. The
> desktop machine as we know and love it today may not be so common in
the
> next few years. Desktop OSes may become irrelevant altogether.
>
Let's not get psycho here. Anybody remember the hype a few years back
about how "thin client" were going to eliminate PCs in the office?
Nobody seemed to remember that what they were basically talking about
was bringing back mainframes and dumb terminals. Didn't work then,
won't work now.
And sure, I-Appliances will have their place, but they'll never replace
computers. Neither will the PS2. You ever try web-surfing at 800x600
with a gamepad?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Rick Tan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: G4 in space!
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 10:42:35 -0700
In article <8i8uj7$irm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Eugene Fan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If they're sending up an entire PowerMac G4 (I assume G4 chip +
> Mac mother board minus the unnecessary graphite case), then what
> will they run as the operating system for the satellite?
> It can't possibly be MuckOS itself, can it?
> In space, there's no one to press Reset
> or poke a straightened paper clip into a hole. :)
Sooo many comedians... so little acts in Vegas. ;)
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not West Papua ? was: Canada invites Microsoft north now we are
really waya way OT
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 03:54:19 +1000
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8ib01s$o7g$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> <stan> writes:
>
> >Lets make it to US $0.02 worth being AUD $0.028
>
> You don't really follow financial news, do you? It's been a long time
since
> the Aussie dollar was anywhere near US$0.70 (as would be indicated by the
> above numbers). Currently, it seems to be quite convincingly below
US$0.60,
> meaning that $US0.02 is about A$0.035. Sad but true ;-)
Didn't it break through $0.60 for the first time in several months this week
?
Interesting to note it's *still* cheaper to order computer parts from the US
and get them shipped over than buying them locally (assuming you
*cough*circumvent*cough* customs).
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: What UNIX is good for.
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 12:50:32 -0500
The Winvocates get more and more intelligent every day here don't they.
While this guy looks new, I'm wondering if it isn't
Simon/Steve/Mike/Whatshisfuckingnametoday with some sort of spelling
scrambler to add in spelling errors. Yeah, maybe that will convince
people that it's now two people that hate Linux and not just one.
Whatever dick.
Nathaniel Jay Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tim Palmer wrote:
>
> UNIX is very good at shuffelling text aroumd. LinoNuts call that "powerfull". I call
>it
> "pointless".
>
> However, doing annything else with UNIX is a chalange. It's not fast enough to be
>any kind
> of server, so if you realy want to shuffel text around and then send it out to
>Windows 2000
> sevrer where it can be axcessed by users, you still nead 20 UNIX boxes just to keep
>up with the
> servor. You can save the money you would spend on the 20 UNIX boxes (and the days it
>would take
> just to figure how to make it shuffall text and send it to Windos) just by doing
>everyting on
> the Windos 2000 server.
>
> You can barely do anything with graffics in UNIX. The Gimp is a joke when you
>compare it to Adobe
> PhotoShop (by it and see for yourself if your not to chepe), or even a good LOGO
>interporator.
> And if you do anything with grafix, you can only save a JPEG or PNG (forget GIF's!
>their
> "pollitacolly incorrect", like everything ealse that doesn't work on UNIX!) and
>immbedding or
> intergrating anything is a no-no (un-P.C. again), so you halve to have the text in
>one file and
> the graficks in another fial, or use HTML (another joke excuse for what you can do
>in Windows
> with Office, or even WordPad, and the text and graffix still half to be in different
>fials),
> and NO ANIMATIONS OR ANYTHING THAT CANT BE REPARSENTED BY TEXT OR A BITMAP!!
>
> So what is UNIX good four? Prettending its' the 1970s, i gess. Look mommy, I'm the
>Sysadmin! You
> can be my user. Type "elm" if you wan't to rede your e-mial, e-mails you write get
>sent once a
> week thru UUCP, and look at this it's real kewl! If you want to chat, with the other
>users you
> can type "write", but you'll always be the only user logged in anyway. Oh, and the
>CD drive,
> sound card, scanner, printer, modem, graffics card, and floppy drive arent' working
>annymore
> like they did when we had Windoas, but thats' only because they were all propietrary
>and bad
> and stuff. We just half to get new ones, thats' all.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
