Linux-Advocacy Digest #483, Volume #27 Wed, 5 Jul 00 21:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner?
Re: Linux lags behind Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux lags behind Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (sandrews)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: I hope you trolls are happy... (Michael Marion)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (sandrews)
Re: So where ARE all of these supposed Linux users? (Daniel Tryba)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (abraxas)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux lags behind Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (John Dyson)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Re: So where ARE all of these supposed Linux users? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Bob Hauck)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (Bob Hauck)
Log file says it all (sandrews)
Running Linsux on a Compaq? Good luck!!! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: Why Linux, and X.11 when MacOS 'X' is around the corner?
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:10:28 GMT
On 5 Jul 2000 20:00:52 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Tue, 4 Jul 2000 23:24:08 +0100, Alex DeLarge
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Why is it that all you LIE-nux nuts alwase clame that Windo's crashes all
>>the time when its not trew?
>>
>>I don't find that windows crashes all the time, in fact I use windows for
>>lots of things, including this post. But I do know for a fact that it slows
>>down over time because of the registry getting bigger. I do know that it's
>>memory management is awful (NT's is better but not much, and I've not had a
>>chance to test 2K's). I do know that it's TCP/IP stack is absolutely
>>diabolical.
>>
>
>Its better than UNIX. On UNIX if your downloading a file you cant evan make new
>connectian because of "host name lookup
>faleure". Windo's doesn't halve this probelm at al.
Time to ease up on the dosage you shoot up with there...
>
>>>
>>> >Downloading files with my Linux box
>>> >is about 66% faster.
>>>
>>> PPFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFT. What a nice, rownd number. How long it took
>>you to make it up?
>>
>>This is usually a configuration/driver issue. On winmodems that work on
>>linux, in some cases this can be true. On serial modems, it's usually down
>>to the serial port driver, or it's to do with different configurations as to
>>which os is faster.
>>
>>> Come across this: Windows 2000. It blo's LIE-nux away It blo's LIE-nux
>>away It blo's LIE-nux away
>>
>>Windows 2000 is hideously bloated. It is much better than NT though. I
>>wouldn't count linux out exactly on that. Linux had IP6 support before 2K
>>was out, and it still seems to benchmark a lot better than 2K.
>>(Incidentally, services on 2K servers are generally slower than on NT -
>>things like DNS etc crawl from what I've heard - why?)
>
>Because your trying to run '2K on a 586 in only 64 GB of Meg.
That should not be a problem.
[deletia]
--
It only takes a little bit of bad luck to negate the whole benefit
of "runs everything" for a particualar end user.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:18:30 GMT
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 23:48:17 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
> ...they could give as little of a hoot with NT or an iMac
> as well. There is USB hardware or PCI cards that are either
> unsupported or just "kinda-sorta" supported on either.
Every USB device I have worked on my Windows machines, all 4 of them
and also on my newly purchased iMac.
I bought them for support under Windows, the iMac was a welcome
surprise.
They all died under Linsux however.
> The V5 does not have production quality support under NT.
> Neither does the SBLive. Even under 9x, the hardware env
> audio features of the Live are buggy.
Can't say for NT5 but under 98 SBLive works fine for me.
I use it to test out my mixes on typical shit cards that the rest of
the world is using.
> OTOH, it could merely be the effect of someone who WANTS to
> fail and who is infact highly motivated to FAIL.
We don't even have to try.
Linux fails quite nicely all on it's own.
It doesn't need any help in that area although it could use a lot of
help in other area's.
> Neither you nor Jeff are at all reliable sources of bug reports.
We call them as we see them.
The truth sometimes hurts though. You don't have to take our word for
it though because you can just take a gander at any Linux group and
see the exact sam complaints over and over again.
>>
>>Mine even works under an iMac.
>> But Linux? Braindead as usual.
>>
>>> Linux supports a lot of hardware as well. To claim otherwise
>>> is simple FUD.
>>
>>Sure, it runs great on those 486/33's we all have hanging around the
>>closet.
>
> Nope, SCSI U2 cards, flatbed scanners, contemporary 3D accelerators,
> high speed cdburners and DVD's, non-trash printers, video capture
> boards.
Sure..... And what games are you going to run with that high-tech
card?
Oh yea, you do have 3 games, I forgot.....
> This is just another element of FUD on your part.
Yawn....As far as hardware support is concerned it ain't even
close.....
>[deletia]
>
> One common example is printers. If your printer isn't a cheap
> piece of shit it will more than likely support a standard
> printer language and be quite supportable under Linux.
Yea but that cheap piece of shit prints perfectly under
Windows/Windows 2k and iMac.
Works like half assed crap under Linsux....
> Even if it is a cheap piece of shit it might be. Depending on your
> system you will simply have to be aware of what you're buying. This
> is especially true as "legacy free" systems being to propagate making
> "legacy hardware" a compatibility minefield for the novice.
None of my hardware is legacy hardware.
If I was using ancient shit I might actually consider using Linsux.
It's a match made in heaven.
simon
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:19:45 GMT
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 23:55:19 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>
> ...yeah, home users don't care about their data anyways...
>
> Who cares if some joker gets disconnected in the middle of
> his Everquest session anyways...
Oh I see you have had experience with kppp.....
>[deletia]
>>On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 23:36:29 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>
>>
>>> This would be a classical case of "buying random hardware at
>>> compusa" biting you in the but regardless of what OS you're
>>> running.
>>
>
> Besides, my criticism is just as valid for Win98SE itself.
> The V5 is simply a lesser performer. While it's certainly
> not quite at the bottom of the heap, it's hardly the card
> of choice either.
Sure blame the hardware.
Sour Grapes again...
> It's not the card you would expect the common novice to
> have in their system or the power gamer.
Sour Grapes again....
> It is however the perfect, just released, sort of card to
> demonstrate an artificial compatibility point with.
Sour grapes again....
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:17:02 -0400
From: sandrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> Let me see what does Linux not support on my system...
>
> 1. Even though Linux detects my USB ZIP 250 drive, it does not work.
>
> 2. Linux notices my scanner (HP 4200C USB) it leaves it alone; no drivers.
>
> 3. I switched to a Voodoo 5 5500 card; Linux has no drivers for this. Even
> though the card is Voodoo 3 compatible, the driver refuses to install.
>
> So now I have a console only Linux system. End of evaluation.
>
> Windows support all of these products as there are drivers available for
> them.
>
> Pete
Let me see what does windows not support on my system...
oh, the Hell with that , lets try again:
Let me see what does windows does support on my system...
1. Nothing.
hardware = MAC ;^].
So now I have a broken system. End of evaluation.
------------------------------
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, 06 Jul 2000 00:20:58 GMT
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 23:57:08 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 23:50:59 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>Madrake has this automount application that is supposed to take care
>>of that automatically, when running audio CD's.
>
> ...actually, you don't mount audio discs at all.
That's what I was trying to tell abraxas....
>[deletia]
>
> Mebbe the next time I'm ripping a disc I'll play around
> with xmms just to try and break it...
Try it and see what happens. That is exactly how it failed for me.
I was running kde also BTW..
simon
------------------------------
From: Michael Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I hope you trolls are happy...
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:22:56 GMT
Matthias Warkus wrote:
> (BTW, ReiserFS is *incredibly* fast. A find over a directory tree with
> several tens of thousands of files will be finished in less than a
> minute.)
Ouch.. you weren't kidding. I just did a find on my two linux boxes at
home on /usr. The P2-350 with UW-SCSI drives and a 720Meg ext2fs /usr
took about 2-1/2 minutes, while the Athlon 650 with EIDE (non-ata66)
drive 2.1Gig Reiser /usr took 50 seconds!
Sure the system/CPU speeds will make some difference, but that's still
quite a large margin.
--
Mike Marion - Unix SysAdmin/Engineer, Qualcomm Inc.
Sworn in by a fool, and vouched for by a scoundrel... I'm a lawyer at
last.
-- The Rainmaker.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:20:18 -0400
From: sandrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:53:27 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:44:46 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> >>Let me add to the list:
> >>
> >>1. Canon flatbed scanner. Works on Windows and on my daughters iMac.
> >>
> >>2. Canon printer. Half works. Never could make it print from
> >
> > ...this is what USB device standards are supposed to be for...
>
> Well apparently Windows and Mac got it right and Linux didn't because
> it works fine on those 2 systems.
>
> >[deletia]
> >>3. SoundBlaster Live, still is supported in an abortive manner. No
> >>Livewire, no SoundFonts, no effects, no Synth A / Synth B an so forth.
> >>Works fine under Windows and Win2k, which also has Livewire.
> >>
> >>4. USB digital Camera no work. Works under Mac and Windows perfectly.
> >
> > This is a bit vague considering that there are several USB
> > video and still cameras that work under Linux.
>
> Mine doesn't.
>
> Again Windows and Mac got it right because it works on both platforms,
> but Linux doesn't even know the camera is there.
>
Since when could you run windows on a MAC?
------------------------------
From: Daniel Tryba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: So where ARE all of these supposed Linux users?
Date: 6 Jul 2000 00:26:27 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: Yea, but I can walk into virtually any household in my town and
: chances are good that if they have a computer, it's running Windows.
If I walk into virtually any household in my town and chances are good
that if they have a computer, it's running Windows illegally.
Can that be said of Linux?
: Can that be said of Linux?
: Doubtful.
Probably not. But the marketshare is still growing.
--
Daniel Tryba
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: 6 Jul 2000 00:26:26 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 5 Jul 2000 23:31:27 GMT, abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> Mandrake 7.x (not 7.1).
>>>
>>> Load Audio CD.
>>> Play audio CD.
>>> Try to eject Audio CD.
>>> Will not eject most times even with button on drive.
>>> IF it decides it WILL eject, CD drive no longer works.
>>>
>>
>>You need to unmount it first, brainiac. Some 'filemanager' type
>>things (kde) attempt to do this for you, as well as some cd playing
>>software.
>
> No mounting should be involved actually. I don't play audio
> CD's (whole CD collection is on the fileserver) or use X11amp
> and I'm not inclined to try and reproduce these alleged errors.
> Although what of the CD players I have used: none of them have
> managed to exhibit this behaivor.
>
Fair enough. Habit I guess.
> Besides, isn't X11amp deprecated now?
>
Indeed. Its been replaced with xmms.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:37:48 GMT
The hardware.
Learn to read...
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:20:18 -0400, sandrews
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:53:27 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>
>> >On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:44:46 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> >>Let me add to the list:
>> >>
>> >>1. Canon flatbed scanner. Works on Windows and on my daughters iMac.
>> >>
>> >>2. Canon printer. Half works. Never could make it print from
>> >
>> > ...this is what USB device standards are supposed to be for...
>>
>> Well apparently Windows and Mac got it right and Linux didn't because
>> it works fine on those 2 systems.
>>
>> >[deletia]
>> >>3. SoundBlaster Live, still is supported in an abortive manner. No
>> >>Livewire, no SoundFonts, no effects, no Synth A / Synth B an so forth.
>> >>Works fine under Windows and Win2k, which also has Livewire.
>> >>
>> >>4. USB digital Camera no work. Works under Mac and Windows perfectly.
>> >
>> > This is a bit vague considering that there are several USB
>> > video and still cameras that work under Linux.
>>
>> Mine doesn't.
>>
>> Again Windows and Mac got it right because it works on both platforms,
>> but Linux doesn't even know the camera is there.
>>
>
>Since when could you run windows on a MAC?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:38:26 GMT
You'd love Linsux.
Try it sometime....
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:17:02 -0400, sandrews
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Pete Goodwin wrote:
>>
>> Let me see what does Linux not support on my system...
>>
>> 1. Even though Linux detects my USB ZIP 250 drive, it does not work.
>>
>> 2. Linux notices my scanner (HP 4200C USB) it leaves it alone; no drivers.
>>
>> 3. I switched to a Voodoo 5 5500 card; Linux has no drivers for this. Even
>> though the card is Voodoo 3 compatible, the driver refuses to install.
>>
>> So now I have a console only Linux system. End of evaluation.
>>
>> Windows support all of these products as there are drivers available for
>> them.
>>
>> Pete
>
> Let me see what does windows not support on my system...
> oh, the Hell with that , lets try again:
>
> Let me see what does windows does support on my system...
> 1. Nothing.
>
> hardware = MAC ;^].
>
>So now I have a broken system. End of evaluation.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:39:46 GMT
On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:18:30 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 23:48:17 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>
>
>> ...they could give as little of a hoot with NT or an iMac
>> as well. There is USB hardware or PCI cards that are either
>> unsupported or just "kinda-sorta" supported on either.
>
>Every USB device I have worked on my Windows machines, all 4 of them
>and also on my newly purchased iMac.
So? The second USB device a colleague of mine tried under NT5
failed to be supported. It was a webcam.
He could have bothered to check the vendor for support first but
then again he could have done the same thing for Linux or even
amigaOS PPC.
[deletia]
See the sig.
--
It only takes a little bit of bad luck to negate the whole benefit
of "runs everything" for a particualar end user.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:43:22 GMT
On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:19:45 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 23:55:19 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>
>
>>
>> ...yeah, home users don't care about their data anyways...
>>
>> Who cares if some joker gets disconnected in the middle of
>> his Everquest session anyways...
>
>Oh I see you have had experience with kppp.....
I haven't used anything so primitive in quite a while now.
>
>
>>[deletia]
>>>On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 23:36:29 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> This would be a classical case of "buying random hardware at
>>>> compusa" biting you in the but regardless of what OS you're
>>>> running.
>>>
>>
>> Besides, my criticism is just as valid for Win98SE itself.
>> The V5 is simply a lesser performer. While it's certainly
>> not quite at the bottom of the heap, it's hardly the card
>> of choice either.
>
>
>Sure blame the hardware.
That's certainly what Ars Technica or any of the local
Windows gamers would do.
[deletia]
As a "random end user vidcard" the V5 is peculiar in that
it's both bleeding edge while being less than thrilling
in terms of performance and features.
Beyond the fact that the Linux driver will be fully open,
I would have no motivation to use it myself and the windows
users I know are all buying GeForce's.
Now, if the shill in question would have decided to rant about
the GeForce instead he would have been quickly refuted.
--
It only takes a little bit of bad luck to negate the whole benefit
of "runs everything" for a particualar end user.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: John Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 19:45:08 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 18:12:41 -0500, John Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 17:19:28 -0500, John Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >Jay Maynard wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On 05 Jul 2000 12:38:02 -0400, Hyman Rosen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> [deletia]
> >> >It is wrong to call GPLed (or GPV'ed :-)) software free, and then demand
> >> >some behavior that takes alot of that 'freeness' away. My position has
> >> >changed on this (now disagreeing with you) ONLY because I have come to
> >> >the conclusion that the mistake that I have made is in the assumption
> >> >that the truth was being told about the GPL describing a 'free'
> >> >license.
> >>
> >> No, you are just confusing anarchy for liberty for the benefit
> >> of your own little rant in some hope that common misconceptions
> >> regarding such terms will allow your misrepresentation to slide by.
> >>
> >Actually, I am not talking about 'liberty', I am talking about the GPL.
> >You
> >continue to create straw-men by adding in superfluous notions. Lets
>
> ...and the GPL speaks of freedom as in Liberty.
>
Freedom in the sense of Liberty isn't 'free' software. You confuse
human
rights with the fact that 'free' software isn't alive. Liberty for the
majority can be tyranny for the few.
>
> Liberty, as in the case of that commonly abused notion of the
> enlightenment implies a rule of law or an order that must be
> necessarily imposed in order for freedom to exist. This order
> ensures that those that would abuse others would be hindered.
> Otherwise, the ensuing anarchy would allow for those with the
> ability and inclination to be more at liberty than others at
> those "others" expense.
>
Nice, feel good statement.
>
> Such is classically the case with commercial, proprietary
> vendorlock software. Those that would chose not to expose
> their code and their data formats to the light of day are
> exactly the sorts that would use both to trap customers and
> prevent them from fully exercising their liberty int the
> free market during subsequent purchase.
>
You want Liberty for buyers on the slave labor of add on developers.
Please don't argue Liberty, when 'free' software implies a non
discriminatory, fair and open license. GPL is a discriminatory
license (as admitted to by various individuals who advocate it.)
You could have LOTS of LIBERTY, if you owned slaves, but that is
illegal and immoral. Avoid these silly straw arguments that try
to excuse the misuse of the term 'free' in association with the
GPL.
>
> Although, the only reason the GPL has as much popularity as it
> does is because corporate boot lickers such as yourself have
> allowed intellectual property to be so skewed in the favor of
> potential monopolists as it is now.
>
You don't know me: I am not a corporate boot licker (but are you an
RMS toadie?) :-). Please note that, unlike most reading this, I don't
have to answer to any sort of organization with an agenda (that includes
the FSF, or corporations.) I do own LOTS of stock, but certainly avoid
the valueless ones that have (in their corporate charter, formally or
informally) an intention to avoid gaining assets.
John
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:47:11 GMT
On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:38:26 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>You'd love Linsux.
>
>Try it sometime....
>
>On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:17:02 -0400, sandrews
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Pete Goodwin wrote:
>>>
>>> Let me see what does Linux not support on my system...
>>>
>>> 1. Even though Linux detects my USB ZIP 250 drive, it does not work.
My 250M+ external storage technology works just fine in Linux.
It won't put undo burdens on anyone who might want to actually
read that data either.
(although, as others have already stated: others seem to be
a bit luckier than you when it comes to this particular hardware).
>>>
>>> 2. Linux notices my scanner (HP 4200C USB) it leaves it alone; no drivers.
My flatbed scanner works fine.
>>>
>>> 3. I switched to a Voodoo 5 5500 card; Linux has no drivers for this. Even
>>> though the card is Voodoo 3 compatible, the driver refuses to install.
My voodoo 3 works fine, even while running Quake III or Heavy
Gear II. I'm not sure I would be able to say the same for NT5
and the aforementioned V5.
[deletia]
--
It only takes a little bit of bad luck to negate the whole benefit
of "runs everything" for a particualar end user.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: So where ARE all of these supposed Linux users?
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:56:15 GMT
On 6 Jul 2000 00:26:27 GMT, Daniel Tryba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>: Yea, but I can walk into virtually any household in my town and
>: chances are good that if they have a computer, it's running Windows.
>
>If I walk into virtually any household in my town and chances are good
>that if they have a computer, it's running Windows illegally.
Maybe, but with the abundance of pre-loads I would say that at least
the primary pc in a given household is legal. The others are probobly
pirated though.
>Can that be said of Linux?
Can't say because I have yet to find a single person I know that has
stayed with Linux after installing it.
Pirating only works for items that people want to own, not items that
cannont even be given away for free.
>: Can that be said of Linux?
>
>: Doubtful.
>
>Probably not. But the marketshare is still growing.
It is growing big time in the server area and rightfully so, but on
the desktop it is not growing at all..
Sure people are trying it, but nobody is actually sticking with it
unless you count geeks and programmers.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:59:13 GMT
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:58:35 GMT, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Linux will always play catchup to Windows for device drivers - why? -
>because there's no money to be made in writing device drivers for free,
>so there's no incentive to write them.
By that logic there is no incentive to write drivers for Windows
either. After all, they don't sell the drivers, they sell the hardware
and give the drivers away on Windows too. The drivers are just a cost.
The real answer is that drivers are written to make the hardware
usable. Operating systems with larger market share get drivers first,
because the hardware company wants to get the most sales possible. As
Linux increases market share, driver support will improve (has been
improving) because having Linux support will add additional incremental
sales of the hardware. This is already evident in the server market,
where all sorts of high-end scsi and nic products are well supported.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.bobh.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:59:53 GMT
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 19:16:31 GMT, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>So now I have a console only Linux system. End of evaluation.
So you'll be leaving us then?
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.bobh.org/
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:03:12 -0400
From: sandrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Log file says it all
>From my log file:
Jul 5 23:13:37 anniehasit named[237]: Lame server on
'www.microsoft.com' (in 'microsoft.COM'?): [207.46.138.11].53
'DNS4.CP.MSFT.NET'
I can`t argue with THAT!
Must be running windows.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Running Linsux on a Compaq? Good luck!!!
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 01:08:52 GMT
Typical Linsux......
And what was that about great hardware support of Linsux?
http://infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/00/07/03/000703oppetreley.xml
And this from a Linvocate, shame, shame.
Well at least he is honest but based upon his history you have to
wonder if he is really a Winvocate....
He doesn't seem to have anything positive to say about Linsux.
That's pretty much par for the course though.
simon
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
