Linux-Advocacy Digest #679, Volume #27 Fri, 14 Jul 00 17:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish. (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Drestin Black")
Oracle on Linux Justification ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Drestin Black")
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Drestin Black")
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Drestin Black")
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Drestin Black")
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Drestin Black")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 16:35:20 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said ZnU in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> What is bad is forgetting that the user is supposed to be in control
>> of the apps, not the other way around.
>
>The user can't control CPU scheduling manually. That isn't an option.
>The choice is either to let the apps do (CMT) it or let the OS do it
>(PMT), and the OS is much more qualified.
Not the scheduling, no, but the weighting, preference, or priority of
scheduling. My theory is that with CMT, the market handles whether the
end result is valid and useful, and with PMT, it was the engineer who
insists CMT is 'stupid' and ridicules people who question that tenet.
[...]
>> The cost of learning an interface
>> cannot be considered a component of its *use*, merely of its
>> adoption. User's don't have to "consciously remember how things work"
>> if they are going to use the software.
>
>They do if they have to constantly switch between applications that work
>in totally different ways.
No, only if they are learning new apps. Switching between already
learned sets of control features is automatic and, if I might be so
bold, intuitive. Again, that which speeds the new user up all too
easily slows the experienced user down. My brother always likes
bringing up the QWERTY keyboard whenever the opportunity presents
itself. The principle is the same, even though the keyboard's physical
(as opposed to entirely mental, since all GUIs use the same keyboard and
mouse) implementation makes it an inappropriate analogy.
>> Yes, software designed for
>> infrequent use should have a simple interface. No, software designed
>> for frequent use, should *not* have a simple interface. It should
>> have an appropriate one, but it is the *user*, not the *app*, which
>> is the determinant factor in what is appropriate, or useful.
>
>An app should have an interface as complex as it needs, and no more. I'm
>not arguing otherwise.
Well, I'm raising the ghost of Nathan Jay Lee, but, no, you just did
argue otherwise. Apparently otherwise to how I argued, as well as
otherwise to how you intended to argue. ;-)
An app should have an interface as complex as *the user decides is
appropriate*, not as complex as "it" needs.
>What I'm saying is that an app should have a
>_standard_ interface. Take a look at just about any of the KPT software.
>In some respects. that kind of interface is better than a standard UI
>for those programs. But that small superiority is totally offset by the
>fact that they use interfaces that make any experience a user might have
>with any other app useless.
Well, you're not going to find me arguing about whether apps should be
consistent in a GUI, or any other UI. But you're not going to find me
arguing for a "just make it a web page" one-size-fits-none approach,
either. It seems to me that it is self-evident that the optimal system
would have precisely one half of the interface characteristics (however
one might deign to measure them) exactly the same as every other, and
precisely one half unique to that application, because that is what
makes it an application on a general purpose computer, instead of an OS
on a special purpose computer, or a special purpose device, in its own
right.
>It isn't just a matter of learning the apps.
Yes, it is. The QWERTY keyboard is still the overwhelming standard.
Most will readily point out that alternatives are faster, and that it
was even specifically designed to slow down the action. But what isn't
often pointed out is that the edge that super-typists have with their
custom keyboards do not correlate to any specific improvements (other
than the obvious 'the frequent letters should be the home row'
guideline). The speed improvements found if an effort to change from
QWERTY to *any other standard*, such as the Dvorak layout, do not
outweigh the individual *or* the total cost of switching. If they did,
we'd have bagged the QWERTY keyboard decades ago.
>To give an example: when I
>want to copy something, I select it an hit command-C. I do this without
>even thinking, because it works like that in any app. If that worked
>differently in every app, I wouldn't be able to do it nearly as fast. I
>might not even notice that I'd be slower, but it would show up in tests.
You hit control C because it doesn't have anything to do with the app.
The clipboard is an operating system feature, available to all
applications. Sure, apps can monkey with it, but why should they? I'm
not saying it is better to switch control mechanisms that are common.
I'm saying that using that as a justification for concept that "what
makes sense" is an abstract reality that engineer's have access to by
special desire or necessity. Whatever the user learns makes sense once
they learn it, for the most part, whenever the case otherwise is not
obvious. And even sometimes when it is, like the QWERTY keyboard.
It doesn't matter how long it takes for something to become intuitive.
Once it is intuitive, it is the most correct and efficient way of doing
it, and even that something might in the abstract be better or even more
efficient is not sufficient reason to change it.
>> >This is one of my big fears about Microsoft's .Net platform: there
>> >won't be any more UI standards than there are on the web in general.
>> >Every app will work differently.
>>
>> That's already happened; MS is just trying to re-capitalize on it.
>> Almost every non-engineer in the world is entirely and completely
>> convinced that putting an interface on a web page makes it work *the
>> same* as all the others, in direct and obvious contrast to their
>> senses.
>
>I can't wait for the first productivity studies....
You've already seen the last productivity studies that mean anything.
On the old toy Mac desktop, you could abstract from the
oversimplifications of productivity studies. I don't think that's true
anymore, except for the broadest statistical issues.
>> >This is also a big problem under the Unix OSes, of course, where
>> >nobody can agree on a toolkit.
>>
>> Nobody should agree on a toolkit; innovation requires diversity. But
>> I understand your point.
>
>Innovation might require diversity, but usability requires consistency.
Similarly to the glitch that tripped Nathan up, and makes a cheese
sandwich the best thing in the universe, you are confusing a sample with
an instance. Market innovation requires diversity. User usability
requires consistency. These are not conflicting goals; they are merely
why software engineering is a valued, and often difficult, profession.
>It seems to me that the innovation should be kept off the users'
>desktops until its ready to become the standard. Of course, the open
>source development model doesn't work like that.
Neither does any other development model, definition of "standard", or
consideration of users' desktops! ;-)
Innovation occurs on user's desktops. That is its rightful home. Give
me three ways to do it, if I want them, and then I'll be happy to tell
you which one is best. And you can be sure I won't always pick the same
one everyone else did, but sooner or later some turn out to be more
"popular" than others. This shouldn't be confused with what they call
'marketable', today. I think the two are related only in theory.
[...]
>> That is a valid reason not to put the apps in charge. In PMT, the
>> apps are in charge (via the consistent and algorithmic rules of the
>> scheduler.)
>
>No. The scheduler is part of the OS. Apps don't get CPU time unless the
>OS determines they "deserve" it, using extremely efficient algorithms
>that have been refined over the course of several decades.
The scheduler is not an island unto itself. When discussing its
function, I'm not referring merely to the one block of code which
handles the chore of switching from one app to another a million times a
second. I'm discussing its implementation in the system. The apps have
to at least know if they're PMT or CMT, don't they? (Aside from the
fact that apps can't "know" anything.) I would assume, in fact, that the
difference might be crucial in the architecture and development of the
application, or at least it should be. How the scheduler works inside
is irrelevant; the issue of PMT or CMT is outside that box.
>> In CMT, the user is in charge, not the apps. If the app
>> I bring to the foreground doesn't yield sufficiently and stops my
>> download, then I will get rid of that app and get one that works.
>
>I don't see how that puts the user in charge. You're not choosing where
>the CPU time is going, the app is. If an app yields to CPU too much, it
>takes a performance hit.
And its a slow app, and bombs in the market.
>If it doesn't yield it enough, other apps take
>a performance hit.
And is a problematic app, and bombs in the market.
> Any given app has no idea how much it should be
>yielding, because it has no idea what else is running on the system.
But the user does, and with a different, though not necessarily as
important, perspective than the OS.
>There's no way to write an app that is "friendly" under all conditions
>in a CMT system.
Yes, I'm sure there is, you just haven't figured it out, yet. ;-)
Innovation comes from diversity, not taking only one out from a problem
because any alternative is "stupid" and not worth considering.
>Again, putting the user in charge is not an option here. The closest you
>could come would be a PMT OS that provided a very easy interface for
>setting priorities. But I suspect a good scheduling algorithm would be
>better at it than any user could be in the vast majority of cases.
And it is that suspicion, not the fact that PMT is more robust, less
problematic, and better suited for a modern computer. I encourage all
engineers to *fight* the people telling you that users want to remain
ignorant and out of control. They may be right, they may be mistaken.
But then, considering they can make more money off of clueless users
than ones that understand "priority", even if they don't understand
scheduling algorithms, it is also worth considering that they're just
plain lying. And lying loudly and often (and sometimes subtly) enough
to even convince the users themselves!
I have been teaching people how to use PCs for more than a decade,
easily, and I have yet to have one remark to me after learning a new
feature "Wow, that's *way* more control and efficiency than I really
want to have." Not to say they haven't ever mentioned they'd like the
interface to be simpler. But they just meant "easier to learn", not
"less powerful or capable". And everybody knows that as soon as a more
complex interface becomes familiar to you, you scoff at people who still
use the "toy GUI" simple version, in most cases.
[...]
>I'm not sure what you mean by "mimic a CMT system." You mean it will
>become unresponsive under load?
You're going to deny again that CMT puts the user in charge, I know it.
I also suspect I know why it is, but I've had enough of pointing out
others' conceptual glitches for the next few days. So just assume you
don't know what I mean and leave it at that. There's no need for veiled
ridicule. I meant one which doesn't assume an algorithm is the answer
to everything.
[...more, but its getting a tad repetitive...]
--
T. Max Devlin
Manager of Research & Educational Services
Managed Services
ELTRAX Technology Services Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-[Opinions expressed are my own; everyone else, including
my employer, has to pay for them, subject to
applicable licensing agreement]-
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.sad-people.microsoft.lovers,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Linux is blamed for users trolling-wish.
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 15:32:39 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Better yet, make up something absurd and describe how you feel the
> failure/problem is related to it.
>
> Ex:
> I feel the BSOD's are coming from the "double-flush" buffer in
> the ball-cock module. I've seen this happen before when a new memory
> simm is installed and the user doesn't re-install Windows so it can
> recognize the dual piping system now.
>
> Or something along those lines.
>
> It's kind of like the "muffler bearings" joke amongst auto mechanics.
>
> You have to be convincing though and do it with a straight face :)
>
> DP
Sadly, this happens enough that it is no wonder some people remain
scared of computers. With the administrators/help desk people saying
things like (your above quote DP) people will never understand computers
(the general population). Unfortunately too many youngsters are exposed
to computers through the MS paradigm with the tendency to show them how
"unpredictable" it can truly be and it is assumed that all technology is
unreliable. Sad.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: 14 Jul 2000 15:38:13 -0500
ahh, the laugh of the "elite" eh?
hey, VB is easy to use. And it is fast and I dare say you won't find a
language more universaly recognized than basic. It does the job quickly -
when you need a quick job done. Prototype, RAD or even some smaller
client/server projects, VB has it's place. *I* laugh at the ignorance of
anyone that would choose to ignore a tool and prefer to do something the
harder way every time ... just because.
"David Steinberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8klh88$f8n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> : I am not a big fan of C++, Java or PERL - that leaves quite a bit... I
> : tend to favor VB (in it's variations) becuase it's easy, fast and
> : universally understood and available. And cause I have little time to
> : code like I used to.
>
> Thanks, Drestin, for the best laugh I'll have all week!
>
> <wiping coke off my monitor...>
>
> --
> David Steinberg -o)
> Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Oracle on Linux Justification
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 20:31:43 GMT
I'm looking for case studies to justify to our management why we should
go with Oracle on Linux. We have the Oracle part nailed down, they
just aren't so sure about Linux. If anyone knows of any big names or
are themselves running this combination in a production environment, I
would be interested to here about their/your environment. Any links to
web sites or white papers would be appreciated as well.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: 14 Jul 2000 15:40:18 -0500
oh, grow up and get a life child. You couldn't possibly know how much code
I've done and copyrighted in my life. Yep, as in registered at the copyright
office, not just a little (C) in some remarks somewhere.
"abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8klgcv$me$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> >
> > I am not a big fan of C++, Java or PERL - that leaves quite a bit... I
tend
> > to favor VB (in it's variations) becuase it's easy, fast and universally
> > understood and available. And cause I have little time to code like I
used
> > to.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> You dont KNOW C++, java or perl. You like visual basic because of all
those
> nice point-and-drool programming tools. "Programming" tools.
>
> Uh huh.
>
> You've never actually writen a lick of code in your life, dresden. Stop
> pretending you know what youre talking about.
>
>
>
>
> -----yttrx
------------------------------
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: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 15:41:17 -0500
On Fri, 14 Jul 2000 16:19:58 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> [...]
>>Yes, really, it is. The concept of only have one application that you
>>care about on the computer running at any given time is archaic - as
>>is the expectation that it would be the frontmost app.
>
>The technical relationship between these two are no longer as they once
>were. Obviously, the concepts are archaic, as they are still
>universally implemented.
Not at all.
>>>"user-oriented tasks" which need to be accomplished in the background,
>>>but its still the background. Its not *what I'm waiting for right now*.
>>
>>However, "what you are waiting for right now" only rarely would stress
>>the CPU and more frequently would just be waiting for YOU, so it's
>>wise to have a more efficient way to distribute CPU cycles. PMT
>>offers that. CMT doesn't.
>
>But what is "rare" at 60 seconds a minute might turn out to be extremely
>frequent at millions of cycles a second, don't you think?
Can you give an example of whatever it was you just wrote, please?
Right now, it makes no sense - in fact, I don't see why you typed it
after my text, because it really has nothing to do with my text.
Illustrate with examples, please.
>CMT doesn't
>all by itself offer anything near what you know the technical
>requirement are, and I recognize that. But CMT never purported to. It
>is CMT plus the implementation of scheduling, *cooperatively*, the apps,
>which is of value, and can indeed, as proven in the marketplace, provide
>effective solutions which end users can benefit from, even if engineers
>want to insist they're "stupid".
That's nice. Unfortunately, it's never been done, you've not proven
it can be done, and it would require so much "fore-knowledge" on the
part of both the OS designers and every single app-writer in question
(that being everyone who wrote a part of the currently running suite
of programs) that it is impossible on all but a 'closed' (i.e.
terminal, point of sale, monofunctional or similar) system.
This has been explained to you several times. You wave your arms
quite a bit, but when it comes to giving concrete examples to support
your thesis or beliefs, you haven't done so. Please, do so.
For an example of supporting my beliefs, one only must look around
you. Does any current major (consumer or business) OS maker out there
offer a CMT system, except Apple, which is going to PMT as quickly as
they possibly can?
> [...]
>>>And it doesn't provide the mandate of cooperation that CMT does to
>>>benefit the market, either.
>>
>>Err...huh?
>
>Yea. That's what I mean.
Please explain.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: 14 Jul 2000 15:44:14 -0500
"Mike Marion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
>
> > I am not a big fan of C++, Java or PERL - that leaves quite a bit... I
tend
> > to favor VB (in it's variations) becuase it's easy, fast and universally
> > understood and available. And cause I have little time to code like I
used
> > to.
>
> Last I saw VB only existed for windows. That's _not_ universally
> available.
when I included variations I meant Basic in general. I've found a basic
language or something very similar to it on most platforms, in scripts or
proper languages
>
> From the experience I've had with VB, it sucked. Perl is much more
> powerful IMO (and I can use perl on almost every platform out there).
More powerful? Perhaps. But is it as easy to use as VB? I use VB cause I can
crank out code in a hurry and with very little debugging and the tools and
3rd party support is fantastic.
>
> "Universally understood?" Hah! There's no computing language (or any
> written/spoken either) that's "universally" understood. If there were,
> programs (and translaters for written/spoken) wouldn't be needed.
show a programmer some VB code and I'll bet he can figure out what it's
doing quickly and usually pretty close to accurately. Show a programmer some
C++ or Perl and not everyone one them could figure it out nearly as easily
or quickly and perhaps not as accurately. THAT"S what I was getting at. I
mean, be serious, whenever I see anyone writing "pseudocode" they typically
write it in a short-hand of BASIC. Gee, it sure is easy to get that
"pseudocode" up and running in VB... I can tell you that from repeated
experience. And, I can use full VB for this, or VBscript for WSH or ASP or
VBA for controlling other MS products. My time invested in learning VB is
tranferable from App to app to type of application and need to another. I
use one language to get all the things I need done, from the lighest weight
to most anything out there. I'm not trying to represent VB as any ultimate
anything - it's just that it's a perfectly valid tool IMHO.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: 14 Jul 2000 15:45:26 -0500
see the definiton of "universal" I wrote to mike in the previous message. I
didn't say "portable to all operating systems" so why critisize it/me for
that failure?
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > I am not a big fan of C++, Java or PERL - that leaves quite a bit... I
tend
> > to favor VB (in it's variations) becuase it's easy, fast and universally
> > understood and available.
>
> VB is ONLY available on LoseDOS systems and is ONLY understoond my M$
> droids.
>
> Pretty strange definition of "universal" you have there.
>
> Java and Perl are MUCH closer to being available and understood.
>
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> ICQ # 3056642
>
> I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
> premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
> you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
> you are lazy, stupid people"
>
> 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.
>
> H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: 14 Jul 2000 15:47:03 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> abraxas wrote:
> >
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > >
> > > "abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:8kefaj$3p2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote:
> > >> > Rob:
> > >> >
> > >> > I didn't read the code because I have a few questions before I even
> > > begin to
> > >> > think about how to do this in windows.
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> You didnt read the code because you CANT read the code, dresden.
> > >
> > > and again, you provide nothing but an attempt at insult. go mutilate
> > > yourself some more...
> > >
> > >
> >
> > You dont know how to read code, because you are an IT professional. You
> > know how to hook up printers, and thats about it. Now stop trying to
> > fool everyone and go back to changing toner.
> >
>
> No..he also replaces big, ORACLE databases servers on Unix with
> Microsoft
> Exchange running on LoseNT....
>
> NOT!
>
let me paraphrase H. from your overlong sig: Aaron you are an idiot.
Exchange for a database eh? god you are ignorant.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: 14 Jul 2000 15:48:23 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8kefaj$3p2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > > Rob:
> > > >
> > > > I didn't read the code because I have a few questions before I even
> > begin to
> > > > think about how to do this in windows.
> > > >
> > >
> > > You didnt read the code because you CANT read the code, dresden.
> >
> > and again, you provide nothing but an attempt at insult. go mutilate
> > yourself some more...
>
> It's only an insult because it's TRUE!
oh really? prove it. How do I know you are a "unix systems engineer" - cause
your overlong sig says so? I mean, it's obvious abracadabra is a lying sak
without computer skills beyond peck and pray - but you are even more
undocumented...
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
