Linux-Advocacy Digest #137, Volume #27 Sat, 17 Jun 00 03:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes ("Rich C")
Market share 99Q2 (WhyteWolf)
Re: An Example of how not to benchmark ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Processing data is bad! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Number of Linux Users ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Microsoft Stocks and your sanity... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux....The Cold Hard Truth.... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: How many times, installation != usability. (david parsons)
Lynx Net's Most Powerful Browser? (Salvador Peralta)
Scripts are User-Agent(s): too! (Salvador Peralta)
Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner? (James Stafford)
Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner? (James Stafford)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: 17 Jun 2000 00:17:47 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>I see the future as thin clients using technology like Microsoft
>>>Terminal Server. With a fast network (100BT, but soon gigabit
>>>ethernet will be affordable) it becomes more and more difficult, for
>>
>> You mean like Unix has been doing with X since the 80's?
>
>Yes, something like that. Except everyday people can set it up, use
>it, and work with it.
>
>What other security is there besides XHost +hostname for limiting who
>can redirect your X server or plug into your X server?
There is the Xauthority mechanism, but the easy way is to
only allow ssh connections in, letting ssh handle the
X redirection back to the connecting machine over the
encrypted and optionally compressed connection.
Les Mikesell
[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: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 00:23:51 -0500
On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 23:04:55 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Try installing Mandrake and selecting anything other than Paranoid
>(selecting this option causes virtually non of the installed programs
>to function) and see what happens.
>
>Check how many open ports you have.
>
>Even Windows is not that bad....
I've run Satan/Saint/Nessus & such against the Linux and PC boxes.
Negligable returns - mostly my NFS, which I leave wide open for my
private network; that's about it. What should I worry about?
>On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 17:50:55 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 21:12:31 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:47:02 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 19:42:52 GMT, John Bode <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>wrote:
>>>[deletia]
>>>>>The general purpose desktop box won't go away completely, but I do think
>>>>>that it will be less prominent in many people's lives as dedicated
>>>>>information appliances become more common. People who just want email
>>>>>and Web access and games can now get it without needing a PC.
>>>>>
>>>>>I don't see the PS2 as the future of surfing per se, but I think it
>>>>>represents a major step in the evolution of this kind of appliance.
>>>>>
>>>>>I freely admit that my crystal ball is very hazy, and I may just be
>>>>>misinterpreting some random patterns.
>>>>
>>>>I see the future as thin clients using technology like Microsoft
>>>>Terminal Server. With a fast network (100BT, but soon gigabit
>>>>ethernet will be affordable) it becomes more and more difficult, for
>>>
>>> You mean like Unix has been doing with X since the 80's?
>>
>>Yes, something like that. Except everyday people can set it up, use
>>it, and work with it.
>>
>>What other security is there besides XHost +hostname for limiting who
>>can redirect your X server or plug into your X server?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: 17 Jun 2000 00:20:20 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> You mean like Unix has been doing with X since the 80's?
>>
>>Yes, something like that. Except everyday people can set it up, use
>>it, and work with it.
>
> X has been that way for quite a while. The relevant parts of
> the interface are all the same and rather derived from the
> Apple original.
X is just a protocol. Do you mean motif?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: 17 Jun 2000 00:21:45 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >Of course, I'm running as root.
>>
>> Here: have some chainsaws to juggle while you're at it... '-ppp
>
>But that's the sport of it!
Remember that on win95/98, everybody is always root.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Rich C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 01:54:42 -0400
"Quantum Leaper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:RqD25.5338$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Sam Morris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:3az25.3816$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > /me screams and clutches at eyes...
> >
> > I had no idea it was _this_ bad... I just assumed it would do the
> > semi-sensible thing and have C, D, E, etc as partitions 1, 2, 3 on
> > IDE0/Master, then F, G, H as 1, 2, 3 on 0/Slave, and then follow in a
> > logical manner with 1/Master and 1/Slave. Silly me... :)
> >
> > I'm not even going to ask about SCSI, Firewire, Zip/Jazz or the other
> > multitude of storage formats... ;)
> >
> The rules are simple, Primaries first no matter what, extended partition
> and then removable media drives, excluding Floppies. What so hard about
> that??? My real question is why would anyone need more that ONE Primary
> partition, other than for Dual booting? Which 95%+ of users never do...
>
>
I think a lot of it is that most people DON'T REALIZE they can partition a
drive WITHOUT a primary partition.
-- Rich C.
"Great minds discuss ideas.
Average minds discuss events.
Small minds discuss people."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (WhyteWolf)
Subject: Market share 99Q2
Date: 17 Jun 2000 06:00:03 GMT
according to infotech trends on the free
section of there database this was the market share for web
servers in Q2 of 1999
Windows NT 26%
Linux 21%
Solaris 16%
BSDI 11%
SGI(IRIX) 9%
FreeBSD 8%
this hardly seems the 0.3% that simple simon keeps
going on about {most likely optanded from a post earlyer
about counter hits}
http://www.infotechtrends.com/cgi-bin/cif/sub_read.pl
?ux=00&quar=99Q2&99253006.htm=on
--
-=-=-=-=-
"Darling," she whispered, "will you still love me after we are
married?"
He considered this for a moment and then replied, "I think so.
I've always been especially fond of married women."
-=-=-=-=-
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: An Example of how not to benchmark
Date: 17 Jun 2000 14:12:52 +1000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) writes:
>Now I ran this version and it does run slower, it generates the image in 26
>minutes and 36 seconds.
>Um, except, that's still faster than the 686 version on Linux which runs
>for 32 minutes and 36 seconds.
BTW, you probably could have saved yourself the recompile --- see the README
file in the download directory:
The file pve-vc6.zip contains a Visual C++ v6 compile of PVENGINE.EXE.
Under most circumstances, this compile is noticably faster than the
Watcom compile provided in the standard distribution, as the expense of
slight less stability.
I don't think I'd like my ray tracer to have stability problems. Do you?
>Now, I've no idea why we should differing results, but it still looks like
>Windows is a bit faster than Linux!
Well, that would be because you went and recompiled the "ENTIRELY UNSUPPORTED"
(from the same README) source code with a compiler that, according to the
Pov people, creates code with some stability problems, instead of the
official, supported version.
Comparing the official, supported linux version (I downloaded it in the
meantime) to the official, supported Windows version, on my Celeron400,
gives times of 19:20 and 20:58 minutes, respectively, with linux being
the faster one.
Bernie
--
A kind word and a gun can do more than a kind word alone
Al Capone
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Processing data is bad!
Date: 17 Jun 2000 14:35:17 +1000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>Sounds like par for the course.
Funny --- I read that comment on an 80x27 console, with a 9x32 charcell,
displaying on an Apple 21gs two page greyscale fixed frequency monitor,
at 75Hz refresh. And it was trivial to set up, too ;-)
Of course, I could do all sorts of other widths and heights, but by and
large, I have found that 80x27 is a nice size --- and it stops me from
using overlong lines that other people on 80xWhatever screens can't
read properly.
Bernie
--
The aging process has you firmly in its grasp if you never get the
urge to throw a snowball
Doug Larson
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Number of Linux Users
Date: 17 Jun 2000 14:41:50 +1000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"John Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>As I remember NT had 70% and Unix went from 31% to 33% which was not
>expected for Unix.
For a total of 101 to 103% of the market being served by NT and UNIX alone ;-)
Bernie
--
Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value
Marechal Ferdinand Foch
Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Microsoft Stocks and your sanity...
Date: 17 Jun 2000 15:10:30 +1000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) writes:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne) wrote in
>>If the system is waiting around for the disk to spin to the right
>>spot, it is hardly suffering from the code not being optimized well
>>enough.
>Um, well, Linux is installed on the newer and faster of my two disks. So...
>shouldn't it benefit from this slight speed advantage?
Pete, *please* get it through your thick skull that your "print one million
31 character strings to a file" test (I use the word loosely) has nothing
to do with the disk, and in fact not even with the OS itself.
All you are really testing is the speed of the fprintf implementation
(which is absolute overkill, given that you are not actually printing
anything formatted, but rather a simple string.
Nothing will ever hit the disk until well after the "benchmark" is over.
Oh, and there is another intersting tidbit --- my Celeron400 will execute
the following program (equivalent to yours) in 1.6 seconds.
#include <stdio.h>
int main(int argc, char** argv)
{
int i;
FILE* f=fopen("/tmp/bla","w");
for (i=0;i<1000000;i++) {
fprintf(f,"123456789012345678901234567890\n");
}
return 0;
}
That's roughly 1/4 of the time your P2/400 needs. Huh?
Bernie
--
My own view is that taping of conversations for historical
purposes was a bad decision
Richard M. Nixon
US President 1969-74
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux....The Cold Hard Truth....
Date: 17 Jun 2000 15:21:04 +1000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>Question #1. Do you intend to try Linux in the next year? 78 percent
>said yes.
So 78 percent *intend* to try linux, despite the fact that...
>Question #2. Have you tried Linux in the past year? 97 percent said yes.
.97% already *have* tried linux (can you hear me say "huh?"), and of
those 97%...
>Question #3 If you HAVE tried Linux in the past year, have you
>continued to use it? 99 percent said no.
.99% (i.e. 96% of the total) did not continue to use it, and that of
those 96%...
>Question #4 If you said no to question 3 what is the reason? (This was a write
>in)
>72 percent said "Linux Sucks"
.72% (i.e. 69% of the total) think "Linux sucks".
Now, assuming maximum non-overlap, that would still mean that 47%, or almost
half of the people who answered the questionaire, intend to try linux
despite already knowing that it "sucks".
I'd say this eithe reveals a whole lot about the kind of people who fill
out those questionaires, or the people who evaluate the answers.
Bernie
--
You have not converted a man, because you have silenced him
John Morley
British Liberal politician, 1838-1923
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (david parsons)
Subject: Re: How many times, installation != usability.
Date: 16 Jun 2000 22:36:06 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>NT can handall 2 network card. All Linsux fools have to say about that is "one
>network card
>ought to be enough for anybody!"
Are you trying to discredit the anti-linux fishermen here as a
counterweight for the T*rry P*rt*r's, R*x B*ll*rd's, and J*d*'s who
infest this group with patently stupid linux ``advocacy''? This
might be a noble battle, but it's a losing one; the idiots have you
way outnumbered.
____
david parsons \bi/ The anti-Linux fishermen are amusing -- at their
\/ own expense, of course, but this is .advocacy and
part of the fun is watching people make fools of
themselves.
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Lynx Net's Most Powerful Browser?
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 23:29:03 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
How many browsers allow their user a choice of whether or not to follow
the following directive:
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Refresh" Content = "1; URL=http://www.foo.com">
Lynx will dutifully follow that link if the user tells it to, but won't
so so without orders. Does IE provide the user with this choice? Does
netscape?
--
Salvador Peralta
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.la-online.com
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Scripts are User-Agent(s): too!
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 23:37:39 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I was thinking about using the following in my linux http scripts:
User-Agent: Lynx/1.0 (compatible; Pan 0.11; Linux Mandrake;)
Where Lynx/2.0 is a generic token for a text User-Agent: (as opposed to
Mozilla's graphical variants) and the rest refers to relation;
script-name; and os distro; respectively.
Does anyone have better suggestions? I didn't see any in the rfc's Not
that I looked too hard. ;^P
--
Salvador Peralta
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.la-online.com
------------------------------
From: James Stafford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner?
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 06:59:46 GMT
Default wrote:
>
> Having just gotten through reading over 7,000 Linux posts in one sitting,
> I *still* fail to see the advantages of Linux over Apple's forthcoming OS
> 'X'.
>
> Okay, Steve is still an Assh**e, and Apple Inc., leaves much to be
> desired. And Apple's present operating system stinks compared to what it
> replaced (8.6 vs. 9.04). Sort of like Windows 95 vs. 98/2000.
>
> And yes, there's PPCLinux for the PowerPC processor (a.k.a. Mac) -- but why???
>
> I fail to see why anyone, other those that want to make a living via
> Linux, would want to be involved in Linux?
>
> Disregarding the monetary aspects of this issue, why do those here feel
> that Linux is better than the other operating systems, and more
> importantly, why do you feel it will succeed when Apple finally releases
> 'X'? {And I'm no great fan of Chuckle's forthcoming 'X' either.}
>
> Look, I'm *not* trying to start a flame here. I'm merely asking this in
> light of everything that I've read here about Linux and all its various
> problems with drivers, fonts, utilities, kernal changes, video cards,
> mice, etc., etc., etc., and how "forgiving" Windows and the other
> operating systems are with these items.
>
> Care to enlighten me and everyone else who reads this post?
> I wanted the simplest computer possible -- one that wouldn't break down.
> I now have a pen and lots of writing paper.
>
Well to start out, Linux is here now, MacOS X is still around the
conner. To get to the main point; Linux is the best OS I've ever used as
far a stability goes. Turn on my Windows 98 machine and the more I use
it the slower it gets, and crashes. Downloading files with my Linux box
is about 66% faster. If I didn't think that Linux was the best I
wouldn't use it, I just haven't come accross anything better.
I would like to give MacOS X a spin, if it doesn't cost $1,000 or $500,
money I don't have right now. I will admit I do have a Mac and I love
it. If Linux wasn't here I would be using my Mac more.
keep on computin',
jamess
--
"On the side of the software box, in the 'System Requirements' section,
it said 'Requires Windows 95 or better'. So I installed Linux."
-Anonymous
------------------------------
From: James Stafford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner?
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 07:07:33 GMT
Chad Wesley Armstrong wrote:
>
> But if you have the chance to use a Mac for awhile elsewhere, try that and
> see if you like the mac at all. As long as your aren't a big computer
> game player, Mac can do pretty much anything else, I've found. Plus it
> doesn't seem to degrade like Windows does. I've had my Mac for well over
> a year, and with a PC I would have had to had reformat my hard drive or
> reinstall Windows by now, most likely.
>
> Chad Armstrong
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
He could always go to a computer store and try 'em out there. I've been
in computer stores for many hours trying out the Macs. ;0
jamess
--
"On the side of the software box, in the 'System Requirements' section,
it said 'Requires Windows 95 or better'. So I installed Linux."
-Anonymous
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
