Linux-Advocacy Digest #207, Volume #27 Tue, 20 Jun 00 15:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: iMac: the iTelligent Choice (Darren Winsper)
Re: Windows98 (Darren Winsper)
Re: Windows98 (Darren Winsper)
Re: The Linux Challenge (David Steinberg)
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes ("Sam Morris")
Re: 1st Linux PDA !!!: (Ingmar Greil)
Re: Windows98 (Gary Connors)
Re: mind hours in development Linux vs. Windows (brian moore)
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes (Joe Ragosta)
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes (Joe Ragosta)
Re: MacOS X sceptic (Charles Kooy)
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes (Charles Kooy)
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes (Charles Kooy)
Re: mind hours in development Linux vs. Windows ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes (Joe Ragosta)
Re: Windows98 ("Rich C")
Backup Exec UNIX Agent ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: GNU/LINUX at city of Boston Public Library departments (Adam Kippes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Winsper)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: iMac: the iTelligent Choice
Date: 20 Jun 2000 17:31:49 GMT
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:52:11 +1200, Lawrence D¹Oliveiro
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> X is definitely extreme--if you thought games ran slowly under NT, you
> should try them under X. It's too complex, too unwieldy and too
> resource-hungry to make for a good game platform.
Really? Then how come, with Nvidia's GeForce drivers, Linux with X can
almost match Windows for speed in Q3A?
> Trouble is, the UNIX folks think this is a virtue. Try to suggest to
> them that the graphics engine should be integrated into the kernel for
> efficiency, and you can see their brains just switching off.
See above. DRI is at least partially in the kernel, but most of XFree
is in user land.
--
Darren Winsper (El Capitano) - ICQ #8899775
Stellar Legacy project member - http://www.stellarlegacy.tsx.org
DVD boycotts. Are you doing your bit?
This message was typed before a live studio audience.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Winsper)
Subject: Re: Windows98
Date: 20 Jun 2000 17:31:54 GMT
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 14:33:13 GMT, David Cancio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > and having my
> > personal information sent out over the internet by half a dozen
> > crapware programs?
>
> That is not a OS matter.
Actually, it is in some cases. Look up the Windows Update debacle.
--
Darren Winsper (El Capitano) - ICQ #8899775
Stellar Legacy project member - http://www.stellarlegacy.tsx.org
DVD boycotts. Are you doing your bit?
This message was typed before a live studio audience.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Winsper)
Subject: Re: Windows98
Date: 20 Jun 2000 17:32:01 GMT
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 07:04:53 GMT, David Cancio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think it is (at Intel PC world) the best multimedia platform too (guess
> it
> is the same than gaming one).
Only in that it has the codecs/apps. BeOS, from what I've read, is
much better as a multimedia OS. It's just a shame BeOS has so few
apps.
--
Darren Winsper (El Capitano) - ICQ #8899775
Stellar Legacy project member - http://www.stellarlegacy.tsx.org
DVD boycotts. Are you doing your bit?
This message was typed before a live studio audience.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg)
Subject: Re: The Linux Challenge
Date: 20 Jun 2000 17:34:41 GMT
BR ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: http://www.networkcomputing.com/1112/1112f1.html
: Read it. Reflect on it. Enjoy it.
One piece of information (just from the introduction) that jumped out at
me was this:
And Alpha Processors Inc. (API) says the focus on Linux after
Microsoft decided to stop supporting the Alpha platform has
contributed to the 45 percent increase API has seen in Alpha sales.
I had never heard that before. In fact, I've never before heard of
hardware sales INCREASING because a major software product stops
supporting it!
Although I can't figure out the logic behind it, apparently it's true: the
market sees the alpha as a more viable platform without NT than with it.
How delightful.
--
David Steinberg -o)
Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
------------------------------
From: "Sam Morris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:35:52 +0100
> If you can run 98, you can certainly run NT4. You just have to decide
> whether the extra reliability and stability are worth not being able to
play
> games.
Hey, games are the main reason why I *have* a PC and not a Mac :)
> Anyway, I'm a poor student (in Australia, even, where computer equimpent
is
> taxed up the wazoo) and I can still afford a machine to run it :). All
you
> really need is gobs of RAM, which is cheap. My Celeron 450 is two years
old
> and runs Win2k just fine - that's hardly a high powered machine today.
Even
> if I clocked it back down to 300Mhz it'd be fine.
Snap - I run a C450 (don't use that abreviation near Joe though ;) ) with a
Voodoo3. It's only barely fast enough to run Quake 3/Unreal Tournament. My
experience is that Win2k is as fast as, if not faster, than 98 when you have
at least 128 megs of RAM. I had 64 when I switched to Win2k and boy was
everything slow! Then I bought another 128 megs, giving me 192, after which
Win2k became really really fast - until I ran Quake 3, Half-life or Unreal
Tournament that is. Under 98 I get framerates in the high thirties for Q3
timedemos - this dropped to the low twenties under Win2k. This is the
difference between playability and a slide show ;)
--
Sam Morris
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
...7/6/00: 3rd installation of Windows since March took 6h30m, and that's
without a working modem...
...you can have my Mac when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers...
------------------------------
From: Ingmar Greil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.palmtops.pilot
Subject: Re: 1st Linux PDA !!!:
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 12:08:24 +0200
f'up2 c.o.l.a
Thus spake Mr.B. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Nope. My point was that Linux is only of use if you have applications
> that you want to run on it. If a user _wants_ to run Windows apps
> then Linux is bugger all use.
Not quite, no. 1.) There are very few programms who cannot be replaced
by an Linux Application. (DTP Programs come to my mind, and such.
Officesuites certainly aren't, there's WP, Staroffice, Applixware --
all of which read and export MS formats)
2.) There's always VM.
--
Ingmar Greil.
"These opinions are my own, though for a small fee they can be yours too."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gary Connors)
Subject: Re: Windows98
Date: 20 Jun 2000 18:06:17 GMT
"Robert L." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Win98 is a good OS. If well configured, it may be bug less.
> I mean, habitually, it take 3-4 month before i have to reinstalled it.
Do you realize how silly this sounds? Okay, I'm may be going out on a
limb here, but is TOTALLY unacceptable to have reinstall an OS every "3-4"
months. It's TOTALLY unacceptable to have to reinstall it at all. In the
almost 3 years I've worked with SGI's, I have NEVER seen a single one of
them crash. I have NEVER seen a single of them "break". The ONLY time
they ever get rebooted is when new hardware in installed or when it
necissary to apply security fixes. That's it. In the 6 years of owning
and using Mac's at home, i have NEVER in my entire life needed to
reinstall the OS to make it work. It may crash, but at least on reboot it
works still and I assume as long as you don't run your Linux box as root
24/7, it won't need to be reinstalled either thanks to Unix File
permissions preventing the user from messing with critical system files.
I still don't understand how the Registry gets corrupted and futhermore I
dont get why on Earth MS still uses the Regitry if one corruption can
bring down the OS in such a big way as to require a OS reinstall.
That's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: mind hours in development Linux vs. Windows
Date: 20 Jun 2000 18:16:43 GMT
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 17:20:22 GMT,
Oliver Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> zerr wrote:
> >
> > You sound and even said that you know about nothing about linux. How do
> > you suspect to write a good article if you know nothing about the
> > subject matter. If I were you I would read a thick book on linux install
> > it, play around with it for 3 months then you might be able to write a
> > well informed article about it. But until you know your subject matter
> > the article will basically suck.
>
> Maybe I should have said what this article is about. Anyway it's not
> going to be very technical. It's more to do with an instance of
> corporate culture being "infiltrated" by Linux culture. I just happen to
> be curious and technically minded and don't mind asking stupid
> questions.
Well the reason for the infiltration is simple. Linux Works. The usual
directives given to IT are "build us a web server" or "connect these
two networks" or "Bob keeps turning off his computer with the shared
printer -- make the printer available even when Bob isn't"
The quick-n-easy solution for many IT people is to put together
yet-another-linux-box and deploy it. It's quick and easy because unlike
other methods it doesn't require boatloads of paperwork ("okay, for this
printer sharing, we'll need NT Server and 30 client licenses as well as
a new machine") and can often be done with recycled hardware. (We have
a couple routers here built that way, as well as mini-file-servers.)
Once installed, the machine is trivial to maintain (don't even have to
waste a monitor on it, since Linux is quite happy with remote
administration).
Initially, such projects were somewhat hidden from The Boss. With the
good Linux PR in the past couple years, at most places, such deployments
are no longer stealth projects and a "okay, we can do that with Linux"
is acceptable to say publically. You can even get away with "well, the
old 486's we have lying around aren't up to that sort of usage, but a
new system would handle it" for the right projects.
--
Brian Moore | Of course vi is God's editor.
Sysadmin, C/Perl Hacker | If He used Emacs, He'd still be waiting
Usenet Vandal | for it to load on the seventh day.
Netscum, Bane of Elves.
------------------------------
From: Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:22:12 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Craig Kelley
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Lawrence D¹Oliveiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > In article <8igon7$2us$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Christopher Smith"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >...when you move up to NT or Win2k and can set the drive letters
> > >yourself, it becomes just like the Mac system, albeit with only one
> > >letter
> > >volume names.
> >
> > Except that configurable drive letters are still drive specifications,
> > not volume specifications, right? If, say, I have a CD-ROM drive called
> > X:, and a CD-Writer called Y:, and I have a CD called "My Photos",
> > there's no way I can refer to the CD by its volume name, only by its
> > drive letter, and the drive letter depends on which drive I put the CD
> > into, right?
> >
> > Not like the Mac system, where I can refer to the CD by its volume
> > name,
> > regardless of which drive it's in.
>
> Yes, but on the other hand, there's no easy way to say "Access the CD
> in the third CD-Rom drive" under MacOS.
There isn't? Please be specific. I have no problem accessing the CD in
any of the CD-ROM drives on my Mac.
------------------------------
From: Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:24:25 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 15:53:58 GMT, Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:43:11 +1200, Lawrence D¹Oliveiro
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> You've still yet to demonstrate what's really "so modern" about
> >> >> the way MacOS does things...
> >> >
> >> >Robust filesystem object references, that don't depend on which drive
> >>
> >> ...which are also fail if you should be unlucky enough to
> >> decide to name your volume something someone else has.
> >
> >Huh?
> >
> >Please be more specific. I can easily change my Mac's hard drive name
> >and nothing breaks.
>
> What does it do when two volumes have the same name?
> This possibility has already been discussed and the
> solution didn't sound elegant at all.
Not elegant?
MacOS doesn't care if you change the name.
Here-let's put out a specific example.
I have 3 partitions on my drive: System, Applications, VM. I create an
alias for the System and Applications drives and put them in my Apple
Menu. That allows me to access any file on those partitions with a
single click.
Now, I change the name of all 3 partitions to: "drive".
Everything still works. VM still works on the partition formerly known
as VM. The aliases still work.
What could be more elegant?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charles Kooy)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: MacOS X sceptic
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:28:43 +0100
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Craig Kelley
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Lawrence D'Oliveiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >> Who uses POSIX any more?
> >
> >MacOS X, of course.
> >
> >> >We certainly wouldn't like it if critical utilities like Sendmail,
> >> >XFree86, and such suddenly would stop working.
> >>
> >> Why not fix those programs to work with a more modern filesystem? I
> >> know--because they would then break on UNIXes still using the old
> >> filesystem.
> >
> >But MacOS X will *use* UNIX conventions... Seems Apple has seen the
> >light. :)
>
> If they had, they wouldn't be trying to produce yet another MacOS/UNIX
> combined Frankensystem. Let me see: first there was A/UX from 1988 or
> so, then Apple bought NextStep/OpenStep, turned it into Rhapsody/Yellow
> Box, and now is calling it Cocoa in MacOS X--I make that four attempts
> in all, not counting those short-lived AIX servers. None of them have
> been successful, and I don't think the latest effort will be either. Mac
> users just don't see the point in UNIX on the desktop. (Nor, it appears,
> does anybody else, for that matter...)
I have to disagree with you. I think people, especially Mac users want
and need the stability, multitasking and (hopefully) speed that
switching to Unix brings.
Also, the fact that it is a Unix won't be obvious to users, unless they
particularly want to use horrid things like a command line.
MacOSX client will be a good thing, once they get a few of the HI things
sorted, just like NextStep was. Trust me.
ck
--
¡Hasta la Victoria Siempre! - Ernesto "Che" Guevara.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charles Kooy)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:28:44 +0100
Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
>
> I didn't install a floppy drive. I figure--who needs one nowadays, but I
> did order an LS-120 drive. Unfortunately, it's not here yet. No problem,
> you can boot from a Windows CD, right?
>
> I set the BIOS to boot from CD.
>
> Install Win2K CD. Boot. It boots OK from the CD (other than the
> silliness of asking me if I really want to boot from a CD). Win2K loads,
> and asks if I want to install. I hit 'enter'.
Does Win2K load properly from CD nowadays? i.e. a fully useable system
with networking etc, or do you just get some cheesy install screen?
ck
<snip>
--
¡Hasta la Victoria Siempre! - Ernesto "Che" Guevara.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charles Kooy)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 19:28:46 +0100
Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Shock Boy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8ijdec$trh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > > "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > I dare you to change the drive that your system root resides on to a
> > > > > different letter.
> > > >
> > > > What do I win if it works ? :D
> > >
> > > Yea.. mine is not on C:\ as well :-)
> >
> > Of course you can *install* it on any letter, but *moving* it after
> > the fact is a different story.
> >
> > I use NT on a regular basis, and anyone else who does has probably
> > experienced the letter-shuffle that goes on with new devices and
> > partitions.
>
> Erm, nope. Once you've assigned letters in NT, that's where they stay. Any
> new partitions are added *after* the existing drives.
What if you are being obtuse and name it Z - how does it handle any
other partitions then - does it cycle back to C:/?
ck
--
¡Hasta la Victoria Siempre! - Ernesto "Che" Guevara.
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: mind hours in development Linux vs. Windows
Date: 20 Jun 2000 18:15:10 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc Oliver Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: zerr wrote:
: > You sound and even said that you know about nothing about linux. How
: do
:> you suspect to write a good article if you know nothing about the
:> subject matter. If I were you I would read a thick book on linux install
:> it, play around with it for 3 months then you might be able to write a
:> well informed article about it. But until you know your subject matter
:> the article will basically suck.
: Maybe I should have said what this article is about. Anyway it's not
: going to be very technical. It's more to do with an instance of
: corporate culture being "infiltrated" by Linux culture. I just happen to
: be curious and technically minded and don't mind asking stupid
: questions.
Interesting. But surely you must know that computing has been going on
for, uh, 40 years now? And that unix sprang into being sometime about
30 years ago, and all that jazz? And that the world's scientists have
all been using unix for years and years, what with Sun working to
provide them workstations at preferential cost in the 80s using SunOS
and then Solaris (the system "V" variant of the basic Unix operating
system). I remember setting up my first SOlaris syetm about the same
time as msdos and the IBM PC came out. And then there are the Silicon
Graphics machines.
You probably need the basic background on the development of unix, the
attempts at free "unices" (the freeBSD, the netBSD, the openBSD, ..)
and Linus' publication on the net of an independently coded unix kernel
for the IBM PC about 9 years ago, resulting in its rapid development and
deployment by hordes of expert programmers worldwide - an effort and a
style that continues to this day.
Search for "history + linux" on the net. Also look at the linux FAQs.
You also need "impending rumours and facts". Such as that the new macOs
will be unix-based and that people in the companies concerned are
actively working on getting linux working for the intel 64bit platforms.
And then there are the contributions from ibm, sgi, ... and the history
and meaning of the opne source movement, and GNU and the Free Software
Foundation (FSF, of course) and one Richard Stallman.
: Oliver Baker
Peter Breuer
------------------------------
From: Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dealing with filesystem volumes
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:31:07 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charles Kooy) wrote:
> Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> <snip>
> >
> > I didn't install a floppy drive. I figure--who needs one nowadays, but I
> > did order an LS-120 drive. Unfortunately, it's not here yet. No problem,
> > you can boot from a Windows CD, right?
> >
> > I set the BIOS to boot from CD.
> >
> > Install Win2K CD. Boot. It boots OK from the CD (other than the
> > silliness of asking me if I really want to boot from a CD). Win2K loads,
> > and asks if I want to install. I hit 'enter'.
>
> Does Win2K load properly from CD nowadays? i.e. a fully useable system
> with networking etc, or do you just get some cheesy install screen?
Just the install screen.
------------------------------
From: "Rich C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows98
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:39:18 -0400
Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Spot the contradiction.
>
When one defines failure as acceptable behavior, there is no contradiction.
--
Rich C.
"Because light travels faster than sound, many people appear to be
intelligent, until you hear them speak."
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Backup Exec UNIX Agent
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:31:27 GMT
I am preparing to install the Backup Exec UNIX Agent on my RedHat 6.1.
Does anyone have any pointers prior to my installation?
Jeannie
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Adam Kippes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: GNU/LINUX at city of Boston Public Library departments
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 14:52:29 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew Miller wrote:
> But this is way off-topic. Followup to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
Where it definitely belongs, thank you. Have fun, guys.
-- AK
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PGP keys available from servers
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
