Linux-Advocacy Digest #484, Volume #27 Wed, 5 Jul 00 22:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451731 (Pascal Haakmat)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (sandrews)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux lags behind Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (sandrews)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux lags behind Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Log file says it all ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (sandrews)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Re: So where ARE all of these supposed Linux users?
Re: Linux lags behind Windows (sandrews)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Roger)
Re: Linux lags behind Windows
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pascal Haakmat)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,nl.scouting
Subject: Re: Haakmat digest, volume 2451731
Date: 6 Jul 2000 01:10:00 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Why do you resist providing one, Pascal? It was, after all,
>my question.
Still no answer.
--
Rate your CSMA savvy by identifying the writing styles of
ancient and recent, transient and perdurable CSMA inhabitants:
(35 posters, 259 quotes)
<http://awacs.dhs.org/csmatest>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:06:24 -0400
From: sandrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
simple [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> The hardware.
>
> Learn to read...
>
Read what?
> On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:20:18 -0400, sandrews
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>
> >> 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 01:13:17 GMT
On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:59:13 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) wrote:
>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.
They would never sell a single piece of hardware unless they had
drivers for Windows or Mac depending upon the platform.
That is why Linux has to reverse engineer everything. Manufacturers
put their money where they can make money.
Linux has absolutley no installed user base in the home/desktop
market.
>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.
Server yes, home /desktop Linux is a non issue. Nobody on any great
number is using it and until it can prove it is better than
Windows/Mac nobody will.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 01:15:11 GMT
On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:39:46 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>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.
My hardware worked under Win98 and 2k without any checking at all. I
simply bought it. The iMac support was a bonus since I just bought
that machine last week. great machine BTW. Blows Windows away....
> 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.
Amiga is dead just like OS/2 and soon to be Linux....At least in the
desktop market.
>[deletia]
>
> See the sig.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:12:54 -0400
From: sandrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
simple [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> You'd love Linsux.
>
> Try it sometime....
What`s Linsux???? a ms ripoff from Linux? Only ms could break something
like Linux.
I run Linux, versions:
Redhat 5.0, 5.1, 5.2, 6.0, 6.1, 6.2.
Suse 6.2, 6.3, 6.4.
TurboLinux Server 6.01
TurboLinux Workstation 6.01.
on as many machines. That would be 11 machines if you can`t count.
Notice no windows. Windows are only good when cut into walls, otherwise
windows are of no value.
--
Linux verses windows is a NO-WIN situation.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 01:17:09 GMT
On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:43:22 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>>Oh I see you have had experience with kppp.....
>
> I haven't used anything so primitive in quite a while now.
Yea, but guess what gets automatically setup, well sort of, when you
install Mandrake? And guess what the average Joe is going to use?
You actually believe these folks are going to screw with ppp-up and
ppp-down scripts?
Get real....
Linsux in and of itself is primitive...
>>
>>
>>>[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.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 01:18:27 GMT
Why should he?
Is he hitting a nerve or something?
Does the truth hurt?
This is so much fun, watching you Lino- yo-yo's try and squirm out of
arguments.....
On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:59:53 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) wrote:
>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?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Log file says it all
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 01:19:23 GMT
Could you translate for the non-geek speaking population please?
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:03:12 -0400, sandrews
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>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: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 01:20:28 GMT
On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:47:11 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>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.
...and something else. After a quick perusal of some of the
common storage sales sites it's become rather obvious that
you have to be somewhat of a fool to bother with ZIPdrives
to begin with.
First there is the compatibility issue. ZIP being a highly proprietary
format is likely to NOT be available on some arbitrary workstation.
Even if that machine does have a zip drive there is considerably
likelihood that it would be only a 100M drive.
Then there is the cost of media: ~ $20 a pop. CDRW's and CDR's while
perhaps slightly more inconvenient (although that really depends on
the UI) are only ~ $1 or $2 for nearly 3x as much storage.
Now, back to that compatibility issue. Considering that you likely
can't expect a random target to have a zipdrive you will likely need to
take your entire subsystem with you rather than just the media. This
also presumes that the workstation you will be targeting is infact
running an OS and version that even supports USB.
Now, once you go to all that trouble now what's the point of having
removable media? For as much as a 250M zipdrive will set you back
(not even getting into the cost of disks) you can have yourself a
10G external fixed disk in a USB chasis.
This would be another good example of being bit in the butt by
buying "the first random piece of crap you find at compusa".
>
> 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).
[deletia]
With the advent of a standardized external expansion bus for Kludge
Klones, removable harddisks are making less and less sense.
--
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 01:23:16 GMT
On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:59:13 GMT, Bob Hauck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>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
...thus the potential that there might be a Win95/98 driver for
a bit of hardware and not a an NT4 or NT5 driver.
>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,
[deletia]
...a potential problem for those of us who might find NT
acceptable but Win9x completely intolerable...
Once one is out in the cold, or one's hardware is a PITA to
deal with under ones monopolysoft of choice, the leap to a
completely AltOS isn't quite so vast anymore.
--
It only takes a little bit of bad luck to negate the whole benefit
of "runs everything" for a particualar end user.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:26:45 -0400
From: sandrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Bob Hauck wrote:
>
> 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/
Bob, I think that`s wishful thinking..... sigh ONLY if it were true.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 01:35:27 GMT
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 19:45:08 -0500, John Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[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
Free Software is a pool of software that ensures that the
rights of end users to share and extend the software will
always remain.
The right that does not remain is the right to use other
people's unpaid work to then exclude others and quite
possibly force others to pay for what could potentially
be mostly the effects of their own labor.
>majority can be tyranny for the few.
Warlords, Aristocrats and Robber Barons do tend to be
'tyrannized' by such situations much like the Family
Research Council isn't completely at liberty to form
the theocracy they so obviously want to.
>
>>
>> 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.
That is simply how the world works. "total freedom" will
end up in despotism. That is simply an aspect of human
greed and selfishness.
The whole point of the rule of law in a republic or
democracy is to prevent selfish people such as yourself
(or rather those that aren't merely wannabes) from abusing
everyone else with impugnity.
>
>>
>> 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.
You have the trappings of being a capitalist yet you expect
to be able to use other's work for free. That is simply
absurd.
>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.)
No it isn't. It applies to everyone equally. While it certainly
complicates the activities of would be robber barons, it does
not completely rule out profiteering. It just makes it a bit
harder for some lazy slob like yourself from adding that last %1
to a product and then extracting a kings ransom from everyone
else.
>
>You could have LOTS of LIBERTY, if you owned slaves, but that is
>illegal and immoral. Avoid these silly straw arguments that try
Except that would violate the liberty of the slaves and would
do so in a more dire fashion than would preventing the slavehold
from owning a certain sort of property.
The FSF make it quite clear what is they are trying to perpetuate
and what values they are trying to foster.
>to excuse the misuse of the term 'free' in association with the
>GPL.
The lexicon isn't quite as simple as you would make it out to be.
>
>
>>
>> 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
Nope. I've flamed him quite intensely on occasion and would
shout him down in certain circumstances if I happened to be
in the same room with him.
[deletia]
Infact, my outlook on the GPL as a market correction for copyright
abuses quite explicitly indicates that my viewpoint on the situation
is dramatically different than that of RMS.
Although I can at least understand where the man is coming from
and not try to misrepresent his position by exploiting commonly
held over simplificiations.
--
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 01:37:33 GMT
On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:56:15 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On 6 Jul 2000 00:26:27 GMT, Daniel Tryba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[deletia]
>>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.
Actually it's geeks and programmers that make the product for the
rest of you "real end users". Much like DOS, you might find that
you have no choice in the matter, or at the very least that your
rhetoric is not going to stop anything.
Those "geeks and programmers" also include original members of
the Macintosh and NeXT development teams.
--
It only takes a little bit of bad luck to negate the whole benefit
of "runs everything" for a particualar end user.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:34:25 -0400
From: sandrews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:47:11 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
> >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.
>
> First there is the compatibility issue. ZIP being a highly proprietary
> format is likely to NOT be available on some arbitrary workstation.
> Even if that machine does have a zip drive there is considerably
> likelihood that it would be only a 100M drive.
>
> Then there is the cost of media: ~ $20 a pop. CDRW's and CDR's while
> perhaps slightly more inconvenient (although that really depends on
> the UI) are only ~ $1 or $2 for nearly 3x as much storage.
>
> Now, back to that compatibility issue. Considering that you likely
> can't expect a random target to have a zipdrive you will likely need to
> take your entire subsystem with you rather than just the media. This
> also presumes that the workstation you will be targeting is infact
> running an OS and version that even supports USB.
>
> Now, once you go to all that trouble now what's the point of having
> removable media? For as much as a 250M zipdrive will set you back
> (not even getting into the cost of disks) you can have yourself a
> 10G external fixed disk in a USB chasis.
>
> This would be another good example of being bit in the butt by
> buying "the first random piece of crap you find at compusa".
>
I second that!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 01:44:35 GMT
On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 01:13:17 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:59:13 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) wrote:
>
>>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.
>
>They would never sell a single piece of hardware unless they had
>drivers for Windows or Mac depending upon the platform.
Considering the marketshare that the Mac currently enjoys,
that's a rather dubious assertion. Most hardware vendors
can quite well "get away" with not making Mac specific
drivers.
Infact, some vendors can "get away" with not even making
NT drivers.
>
>That is why Linux has to reverse engineer everything. Manufacturers
>put their money where they can make money.
That's Odd, I can get Quadro drivers straight from the
manufacturer. Although that reverse engineering at least
means that support isn't restricted to "the most popular
variant available".
Where were the Hauppauge WinTV drivers for NT Alpha?
What will happen to device drivers for Merced if it doesn't
take off as quickly as Intel might like? Or might support for
x86 be deprecated instead.
>Linux has absolutley no installed user base in the home/desktop
>market.
The game device manufacturers seem to disagree with you.
[deletia]
--
It only takes a little bit of bad luck to negate the whole benefit
of "runs everything" for a particualar end user.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: Roger <roger@.>
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 01:48:41 GMT
On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 17:14:06 GMT, someone claiming to be jedi wrote:
>On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 03:35:19 GMT, Roger <roger@.> wrote:
>>On Mon, 03 Jul 2000 23:28:04 -0700, someone claiming to be Peter Ammon
>>wrote:
>>>When I experience my worst IRQ conflict, I eventually found a
>>>configuration that worked. But it was essentially trial and error.
>>>Surely Windows could do that?
>>
>>Assuming Plug and Play hardware (that is to say, hardware designed
>>specifically to allow Windows to reconfigure it,) Windows does.
>>
>>Or are you expecting Windows to be able to change jumpers for you, or
>>have a version of * everyone else's * configuration util.
> Yup. Most hardware in a system is going to be flexible with
> respect to it's XT resources. IOW, an OS that chooses to take
> control of the hardware at that level should know well enough
> to work around hardwired IRQ's.
And how, exactly, does Linux change the jumper settings on an ISA
card? Source code will do...
>>Again: a hardware thing, not a software thing.
> Hardware only adds some additional constraints.
... that software is incapable of making changes to.
> Unless you would
> like to claim that WinDOS is no more PnP than Linux 2.0.x, then
> it is indeed a Windows problem when IRQ conflicts occur.
So, I have built in Comm ports, and install a modem jumpered for IRQ
3, and this is a * Windows * problem? How exactly does Linux handle
this?
> When the OS insists on overriding ISA hardware that's been explicitly
> put out of pnp mode and place that card on a well known and standard
> IRQ for standard hardware, that is indeed an OS failing.
Nope. Sounds like the hardware isn't really out of PnP mode. You
have information on a specific instance where this is not the case?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 01:48:07 GMT
On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 01:15:11 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:39:46 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>
>>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.
>
>My hardware worked under Win98 and 2k without any checking at all. I
So? You are not the last word in NT5 support. Just because
you managed to be lucky it doesn't mean that others will.
Your arrogance is imply astounding.
>simply bought it. The iMac support was a bonus since I just bought
>that machine last week. great machine BTW. Blows Windows away....
>> 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.
>
>Amiga is dead just like OS/2 and soon to be Linux....At least in the
Actually, new game titles are in development for the Amiga.
Although it doesn't matter. As long as you can hook up devices
and get good use out of them, such pronouncements are meaningless
FUD.
>desktop market.
>>[deletia]
>>
>> See the sig.
>
OTOH, Linux will allow you to exploit modern printers, contemporary
3D hardware accelerators, consumer grade video overlay boards, pro
grade video capture boards, network and scsi cards of various kinds,
SCSI and USB peripherals and even the odd DVD decoder or two.
--
It only takes a little bit of bad luck to negate the whole benefit
of "runs everything" for a particualar end user.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
