Linux-Advocacy Digest #216, Volume #27 Tue, 20 Jun 00 22:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: What UNIX is good for. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The MEDIA this year! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Processing data is bad! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: I had a reality check today :( (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Linux is awesome! (Gary Hallock)
Re: The Linux Challenge ("Colin R. Day")
Re: Stupid idiots that think KDE is a Window Manager ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The MEDIA this year! (Charlie Ebert)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 21:21:18 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:37:51 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> >> No of course not. I only worked on it for about 3 years. Obviously I never
> >> learnt UNIX.
> >>
> >> NOT!
> >
> >Explain the Unix task scheduler.
>
> Which one?
>
> The task scheduler in something like Version 7 is completely different
> from the one in Solaris, which is completely different from the one in
> QNX.
>
> The "classic" Unix scheduler in something like Version 7 is extremely
> primitive and does nothing more than round robin scheduling, where a
> running process is allowed to run for a maximum time interval before
> it is interrupted, with some simplistic prioritization kludged in, and a
> preference toward scheduling processes which have just woken up from
> sleep to speed up interactive apps.
And yet, even the Version 7 task scheduler (circa 1978) is more
reliable and less likely to crash than LoseDows. Why is that?
Hint fucking hint: Keep it simple, stupid.
> Something like Solaris is more
> complicated since it has MP support, which often amounts to little more
> than adding processor affinity, so processes continue to run on the same
> processor so they follow the cache. Something like QNX is a completely
> different beast since it has real-time support.
>
> A more interesting exercise would be for YOU to explain the VMS
> scheduler, which is much more complex (it has THREE types of jobs:
> real-time, batch, and interactive), and actually takes into account which
Unix solves the same task much more elegantly, with less overhead.
Keep It Simple, Stupid.
> resources are available and schedules processes accordingly. It is much
> more involved than the Unix scheduler. The Windows NT scheduler is
> extremely similar to it also.
The LoseNT scheduler is a CPU hog in itself.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 21:21:55 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Woofbert wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Explain the Unix task scheduler.
>
> Hey, where does a Unix newbie find this kind of stuff out? (And don't
> send me to no friggin Man pages... ) Got any good books to recommend?
>
Check
"The Design of the Unix Operating System" by Bach.
> --
> Woofbert <woofbert at infernosoft dot com>
> Datadroid
> Infernosoft: Putting the No in Innovation.
> http://www.infernosoft.com/woofbert/index.html
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 21:29:16 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Woofbert wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Explain the Unix task scheduler.
>
> Hey, where does a Unix newbie find this kind of stuff out? (And don't
> send me to no friggin Man pages... ) Got any good books to recommend?
>
Oh, also
Operating Systems: Internals and Design Principles by William Stallings
> --
> Woofbert <woofbert at infernosoft dot com>
> Datadroid
> Infernosoft: Putting the No in Innovation.
> http://www.infernosoft.com/woofbert/index.html
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux MUST be in TROUBLE
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 21:30:03 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote:
>
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:37:51 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> >> No of course not. I only worked on it for about 3 years. Obviously I never
> >> learnt UNIX.
> >>
> >> NOT!
> >
> >Explain the Unix task scheduler.
>
> Which one?
>
> The task scheduler in something like Version 7 is completely different
> from the one in Solaris, which is completely different from the one in
> QNX.
>
> The "classic" Unix scheduler in something like Version 7 is extremely
> primitive and does nothing more than round robin scheduling, where a
Describe how this is accomplished.
> running process is allowed to run for a maximum time interval before
> it is interrupted, with some simplistic prioritization kludged in, and a
> preference toward scheduling processes which have just woken up from
> sleep to speed up interactive apps. Something like Solaris is more
> complicated since it has MP support, which often amounts to little more
> than adding processor affinity, so processes continue to run on the same
> processor so they follow the cache. Something like QNX is a completely
> different beast since it has real-time support.
>
> A more interesting exercise would be for YOU to explain the VMS
> scheduler, which is much more complex (it has THREE types of jobs:
> real-time, batch, and interactive), and actually takes into account which
> resources are available and schedules processes accordingly. It is much
> more involved than the Unix scheduler. The Windows NT scheduler is
> extremely similar to it also.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: What UNIX is good for.
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 01:29:47 GMT
Because you are a geek.....
And I can produce 100 secrateries that can produce fantastic
presentations, embedded video/audio and so forth with Powerpoint while
you are still figuring out how to get latex to work with the overhead
projector.
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 21:13:45 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:40:34 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >The last thing I want to do when editing is remove my fingers from the
>> >keyboard.
>>
>> And exactly the reason why you will go the way of the dinosaur...
>
>Yet, I can edit faster with vi then you can with any GUI editor.
>
>
>Why is that?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The MEDIA this year!
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 01:30:15 GMT
Sources?
Sources?
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 01:19:05 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Oh crap! Pick up any computer magazine at your local office they have.
>
>I want other people to post to this and give him your side of it.
>
>Charlie
>
>
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> You are so incredibly full of shit it is unbelievable.
>> You never provide a source for any of these grandiose predictions of
>> yours..
>>
>> How about some sources?
>>
>> On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 00:45:15 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >I have to write this.
>> >
>> >I've never seen so many big name magazines having editorials
>> >about Linux before! We must have 6 times the media coverage
>> >Windows has in the editorials this year. Magazine after
>> >Magazine, some editor is prodding your company to consider
>> >the Linux jump this year.
>> >
>> >They are taking polls.
>> >They are toughting the benefits.
>> >They are drawing networking diagrams of how they did it.
>> >They are showing the benefits of doing it.
>> >
>> >They are ENCOURAGING it THIS YEAR!
>> >
>> >I wonder what next year's magazines will be like.
>> >I mean I've NEVER seen the kind of media coverage
>> >for Linux that I've seen in the first 6 months of this year!
>> >
>> >They are pointing out the few advantages of Windows 2000 and
>> >their merits as opposed to Linux and saying this year is
>> >the year to move to Linux in the office.
>> >
>> >In polls, I've seen 10 reports showing something like 35% of
>> >business's polled said they would be starting a Linux movement
>> >within 2 years. Another 30% said they are considering it within
>> >the next 5 years. These are polls from corporate America.
>> >The balance say's they are not sure or won't.
>> >
>> >Those are some pretty serious figures. With those kinds of figures
>> >it seems that 60% of corporate America will be under the Linux umbrella
>> >by 2005.
>> >
>> >Some of the magazines have multiple editorials and even profile stories
>> >about Linux in the office place.
>> >
>> >I see these magazines at my office and the offices of others.
>> >They are targeted at commerical users. They have ad's for
>> >Windows Back office server, and mini-computers, ATM networks,
>> >high powered copier/printers, so on and so forth. Not residential
>> >magazines.
>> >
>> >But now that we are on the subject of Computers in the residential
>> >section, took a trip to the grocery store to view some of the stories
>> >in the magzines on the shelf. It was a virutal replay of the same
>> >story.
>> >Appearently here, you see the big write-ups about Mandrake 7.1.
>> >About Suse 6.4, Redhat 6.2 all the majors were in there in stories.
>> >
>> >The typical residential magazine is quickly becomming a linux variety
>> >magazine.
>> >
>> >There WERE some windows stories in there, about 1/2 of the magazine was
>> >filled with Windows stories.
>> >
>> >But Linux is rapidly taking over the media's attention.
>> >And there is apparently some kind of massive effort on the Media's part
>> >to have Linux moved in everywhere this YEAR.
>> >
>> >My question is WHY this year after all these years?
>> >Has Kernel 2.2.15 with Gnome 1.2 or Kde 1.0 finally convinced them
>> >it's ready for everybody's desktop.
>> >
>> >Are the media experts finally in alignment with what I've been
>> >saying for 3 years now?
>> >
>> >I'm not against the push. I just wonder why so much right now after
>> >all this time.
>> >
>> >I remember Microsoft's birth in the 80's and I don't remember hardly
>> >the press pushing then as it's pushing now. The emphasis back then
>> >was towards touting Apple's and Mac's capabilties. Microsoft was
>> >mentioned as a back door player at best then.
>> >
>> >Something large is happening THIS year I hadn't expected.
>> >There is some critical mass mandate from the people I hadn't
>> >forseen going on right now.
>> >
>> >Linux is rapidly breaking out and gaining new ground.
>> >And the media blitz is extraordinary. I've never seen this
>> >much endorsement for any one OS.
>> >
>> >I'm pleased and I wonder why all now...
>> >
>> >Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Processing data is bad!
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 01:31:07 GMT
On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 21:14:34 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Yea but Windows GUI looks and works well.
>
>You've obviously never used X11
Sure have and it looks like shit and is slow as shit.
This applies to both Intel platforms and RS 6000 platforms.
it makes my eyes tear.....
>>
>> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:43:05 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> There is a reason why the rest of the world has moved mostly to GUI.
>> >
>> >Unix has had a GUI since, oh... 1983 or so... that makes 17 years.
>> >
>> >By comparison..windows is.. what... 10 years old?
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I had a reality check today :(
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 21:32:40 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> If that's the best reply you can muster, you are a moron...
>
> You are an ostrich hiding in the sand and refusing to face the
> reality.
>
Evidently, Simon is unaware of Judge Jackson's ruling.
And the fact that Microsoft's testimony was frought with so many
lies that, even M$'s courtroom supporters were appalled at the
level of perjury.
> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 18:36:18 -0400, Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >Edited to correct false innuendo and implication of terms.
> >
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> Daughter graduating middle school this week and going into high school
> >> and I thought a nice desktop computer system would make a worthwhile
> >> graduation present.
> >>
> >> I have ALWAYS built every single one of my systems in the past all the
> >> way from DTK motherboard based PC clones up to the Abit based system I
> >> have now. Never, ever,ever, bought a pre-load.
> >>
> >> This time, possibly due to laziness or just a wearing down by all of
> >> the glossy advertisements in the Sunday NY Times, I decided to go out
> >> and look at all of these "ready made" systems that the typical Joe 18
> >> pack will buy.
> >>
> >> BTW my daughter wants an iMac. Anybody know anything about them?
> >>
> >> Anyway, I went to CompUSA, Staples, Electronic City and several local
> >> places, the kind of places I would avoid like the plague on my quest
> >> and here is what I found.
> >>
> >> 1. LOSE Hardware is EVERYWHERE!!!!!!!
> >> Motherboards have built in modems, Ethernet, SoundChips, video
> >> and so forth. Much of this is LOSE hardware.
> >>
> >> 2. The included printer is usually some POS LOSE printer. Same for
> >> scanner and USB devices are sometimes included as well.
> >>
> >> 3. The operating system is always LOSE 98SE and no credit is given for
> >> not getting it.
> >>
> >> 4. Internet bundles (you are hostage to Compu$erve for 3 years) are
> >> typically used to lower price.
> >>
> >> 5. You get a bunch of low priced software and nothing of real
> >> substance. The exception was MS Works which is pretty decent.
> >>
> >> The iMac is starting to look better all the time :)
> >>
> >> Anyway, my point is that this is the typical way that a user buys a
> >> computer. They are not like you and me who build our own, they walk
> >> into a chain store and buy what seems, to them, to be the best value.
> >>
> >> My question is, how is Linux going to realistically overcome this?
> >
> >Destruction of "per CPU" licensing schemes is the first step.
> >
> >>
> >> Looking at the specs for Compaq, HP, Sony VIAO and others, absolutely
> >> NONE of these would run Linux and support all the I/O devices the
> >> person paid for.
> >>
> >> This IS the computer hardware market, like it or not. And I for one
> >> DON't like it.
> >>
> >> Comments?
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 21:32:28 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awesome!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> But I wasn't addressing you, your credentials speak for themself :)
>
Yes, they do. And you can verify my credentials. The same can not be said of
you.
Gary
------------------------------
From: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Linux Challenge
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2000 21:33:03 -0400
David Steinberg wrote:
> 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.
But was NT 64 bit on alpha?
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Stupid idiots that think KDE is a Window Manager
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 01:34:11 GMT
You lose asshole.
The majority of the population is not interested in writing programs.
They USE programs....
You show how much of an idiot you are with every post.
Again:
/dev OPEN IT WITH KFM AND SEE HOW LONG IT TAKES...
Try a 20k directory under Windows 2k and it is INSTANTANEOUS!!!!!
YOU CAN SCROLL FROM SECOND ONE......
What is so hard about this for you to comprehend?
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 01:16:33 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Okay, I'll play....
>I think you actually mean business here so I'm going
>to entertain you personally.
>
>Go into C or Cobol or what you have there and write me out
>a large serial file with say 80 Byte or what ever length record
>you want.
>
>Write out 20 megs worth.
>
>Then read it in.
>
>Repeat the read several times.
>
>From raw re-boot, the NT box shows no speed difference from
>the first read to the last.
>
>Now, go try it on any Linux. You will find that disk caching
>has been observed and subsequent read's are faster.
>
>This is why you wanted me to do it from a re-boot and I complied.
>Then I did it again, point well taken. It is quicker the second
>time around.
>
>And you admitted this being a factor.
>
>And by admitting that as a factor, you have proven to all of us
>that you agree NT IE Microsoft isn't worth it's weight in shit
>as it cashes nothing from the drive.
>
>
>And that's true. NT cashes nothing.
>It is the most resource abusing operating system I've ever seen.
>
>I think it takes every meg you have of memory and committe's it
>to program memory for working storage issues.
>
>NT doesn't even know what a disk cache is.
>
>But I want you and the other's to re-read what you and I've said
>so they can see the comments for themselves.
>
>You make a point of proving Windows is superior and by doing so
>show us you know of it's deficiencies...
>
>That's sort of defeatest on your part, isn't it.
>
>Charlie
>
>
>
>
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Open /dev via kfm and time how long it takes for the gear to stop
>> spinning.......
>>
>> On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 00:11:02 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Typical LinoNut semantic argument designed to take the focus off the
>> >> original point that KDE sucks compared to Windows as far as the
>> >> consistancy and speed of the gui is concerned.
>> >>
>> >> The point is like I said above. Who cares what the cause is?
>> >
>> >
>> >You idiot. The KDE is several clock cycles ahead of Windows anything.
>> >You can also have more sessions open.
>> >
>> >You know nothing about X or KDE or Gnome.
>> >And you know damn little about OS's like NT.
>> >
>> >Charlie
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, 20 Jun 2000 02:07:00 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher
>> >> Browne) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Jeff Szarka would say:
>> >> >>On Mon, 19 Jun 2000 09:58:07 +0100, 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >> >>wrote:
>> >> >>>> The UI IS the OS for desktop users. Command line or GUI, it doesn't
>> >> >>>> matter. An ugly mess of a UI makes the OS an ugly mess to use. Sums up
>> >> >>>> Linux as a consumer grade OS almost perfectly.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>Simple. If you don't like KDE use something else. The chioce is yours,
>> >> >>>no on is forcing KDE on to you...
>> >> >>
>> >> >>The sad part is... KDE is the best window manger for Linux.
>> >> >
>> >> >The sad part is... Clueless idiots that think KDE _is_ a window
>> >> >manager, despite _vast_ quantities of evidence to the contrary.
>> >> >
>> >> >How many times do you need to be told that KDE is not a window manager
>> >> >until it will penetrate deep enough into your pea brain to take
>> >> >sufficient hold that you might feebly wonder: "Is KDE a window
>> >> >manager? Maybe not..."
>> >> >
>> >> >KDE is _NOT_ a window manager.
>> >> >
>> >> >When you state that it is, you simply make evident your ignorance, so
>> >> >as to demonstrate that what you say is based on ignorance and
>> >> >apparently complete apathy to educate yourself.
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The MEDIA this year!
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 01:35:26 GMT
You have to own Microsoft stock don't you.
That's the only answer I have.
You failed in your KDE VS Windows bid, didn't
even come back to argue that point again with me.
As I said before!
Pick up ANY COMPUTER MAGAZINE from your office or
your grocery store and you will find it chalked full
of stories about Linux and even more surprising, "EDITORIALS"
from the EDITORS proposing your office switch to Linux this year!
Now, be a BIG BOY and go do that for me.
Do that as you didn't finish your KDE VS Windows argument with me.
Charlie
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Sources?
> Sources?
>
> On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 01:19:05 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >Oh crap! Pick up any computer magazine at your local office they have.
> >
> >I want other people to post to this and give him your side of it.
> >
> >Charlie
> >
> >
> >
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> You are so incredibly full of shit it is unbelievable.
> >> You never provide a source for any of these grandiose predictions of
> >> yours..
> >>
> >> How about some sources?
> >>
> >> On Wed, 21 Jun 2000 00:45:15 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I have to write this.
> >> >
> >> >I've never seen so many big name magazines having editorials
> >> >about Linux before! We must have 6 times the media coverage
> >> >Windows has in the editorials this year. Magazine after
> >> >Magazine, some editor is prodding your company to consider
> >> >the Linux jump this year.
> >> >
> >> >They are taking polls.
> >> >They are toughting the benefits.
> >> >They are drawing networking diagrams of how they did it.
> >> >They are showing the benefits of doing it.
> >> >
> >> >They are ENCOURAGING it THIS YEAR!
> >> >
> >> >I wonder what next year's magazines will be like.
> >> >I mean I've NEVER seen the kind of media coverage
> >> >for Linux that I've seen in the first 6 months of this year!
> >> >
> >> >They are pointing out the few advantages of Windows 2000 and
> >> >their merits as opposed to Linux and saying this year is
> >> >the year to move to Linux in the office.
> >> >
> >> >In polls, I've seen 10 reports showing something like 35% of
> >> >business's polled said they would be starting a Linux movement
> >> >within 2 years. Another 30% said they are considering it within
> >> >the next 5 years. These are polls from corporate America.
> >> >The balance say's they are not sure or won't.
> >> >
> >> >Those are some pretty serious figures. With those kinds of figures
> >> >it seems that 60% of corporate America will be under the Linux umbrella
> >> >by 2005.
> >> >
> >> >Some of the magazines have multiple editorials and even profile stories
> >> >about Linux in the office place.
> >> >
> >> >I see these magazines at my office and the offices of others.
> >> >They are targeted at commerical users. They have ad's for
> >> >Windows Back office server, and mini-computers, ATM networks,
> >> >high powered copier/printers, so on and so forth. Not residential
> >> >magazines.
> >> >
> >> >But now that we are on the subject of Computers in the residential
> >> >section, took a trip to the grocery store to view some of the stories
> >> >in the magzines on the shelf. It was a virutal replay of the same
> >> >story.
> >> >Appearently here, you see the big write-ups about Mandrake 7.1.
> >> >About Suse 6.4, Redhat 6.2 all the majors were in there in stories.
> >> >
> >> >The typical residential magazine is quickly becomming a linux variety
> >> >magazine.
> >> >
> >> >There WERE some windows stories in there, about 1/2 of the magazine was
> >> >filled with Windows stories.
> >> >
> >> >But Linux is rapidly taking over the media's attention.
> >> >And there is apparently some kind of massive effort on the Media's part
> >> >to have Linux moved in everywhere this YEAR.
> >> >
> >> >My question is WHY this year after all these years?
> >> >Has Kernel 2.2.15 with Gnome 1.2 or Kde 1.0 finally convinced them
> >> >it's ready for everybody's desktop.
> >> >
> >> >Are the media experts finally in alignment with what I've been
> >> >saying for 3 years now?
> >> >
> >> >I'm not against the push. I just wonder why so much right now after
> >> >all this time.
> >> >
> >> >I remember Microsoft's birth in the 80's and I don't remember hardly
> >> >the press pushing then as it's pushing now. The emphasis back then
> >> >was towards touting Apple's and Mac's capabilties. Microsoft was
> >> >mentioned as a back door player at best then.
> >> >
> >> >Something large is happening THIS year I hadn't expected.
> >> >There is some critical mass mandate from the people I hadn't
> >> >forseen going on right now.
> >> >
> >> >Linux is rapidly breaking out and gaining new ground.
> >> >And the media blitz is extraordinary. I've never seen this
> >> >much endorsement for any one OS.
> >> >
> >> >I'm pleased and I wonder why all now...
> >> >
> >> >Charlie
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
