Linux-Advocacy Digest #691, Volume #27 Sat, 15 Jul 00 03:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Do you people really think that GNU/Linux is a great OS? ("KLH")
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Microsoft ("KLH")
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("ostracus")
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? (Jacques Guy)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Pipes (Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop (Jacques
Guy)
Re: I tried to install both W2K and Linux last night... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Some Windows weirdnesses... (Jeremy Cheng)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: 15 Jul 2000 00:48:19 -0500
In article <DvSb5.316617$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
KLH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Data processing is oftentimes best represented in the mind as
>> 3+ dimensional processes. On the average, men's brains are MUCH
>> more adept at this sort of thinking (in the same way as on the
>> average, women's brain's are much more adept at acquiring and
>> using linquistic skills)
>
>Personally, I find the differences between the thinking of men and woman
>similar to the differences between KDE and GNOME; not very interesting and
>far too slight to really matter.
Maybe you aren't paying attention. Do you really understand why
anyone would want more than 2 colors of shoes? Or how they
could spend time shopping for them without being bored senseless?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
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: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 01:50:54 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said ZnU in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>> http://www.uk.research.att.com/~dmi/linux-srt/wm.html
>
>This is just an easy interface for switching task priorities. Such
>things have been around forever, and have never gained much popularity.
Well if no one mentions them when some clueless idiot on Usenet starts
spouting off about CMT and insists that the user needs and easy
interface for switching task priorities, how come it doesn't occur to
anyone in an *advocacy* group that nobody thinks to mention that "such
things have been around forever," how the fuck are they supposed to gain
popularity?
--
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: "KLH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Do you people really think that GNU/Linux is a great OS?
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 22:45:48 -0700
Stuart Krivis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 23 Jun 2000 12:22:36 -0700, KLH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Wow. Every reply to my post said about the same thing. I feel like I'm
> >talking to a cult or something :) But I hope to reply to most of the
> >comments in one post---I hope everyone reads this.
>
>
> I think there are a large number of issues here.
>
> One part of this is the "chicken or the egg" problem. In order to come up
> with a new OS, we need a compiler and development tools. How do we come up
> with these? And they need to be "free," or the new OS won't be a
> replacement for Linux. What free development tools are available? Well,
> they're mostly GNU utilities. That kind of limits us right there, and it
> tends to push the new OS into the same design paradigm as the current
> ones.
>
> Next we have familiarity, tradition, and backwards compatibility. But you
> basically said that you don't want this. So, how will you get the good
> programmers to work on it? They're going to want the tools they are used
> to, and to be able to use clever code from previous projects.
>
> There is also the problem of trying to do everything from scratch to
> conform to your ideas. How long will this take? What new things will be
> developed while you're working on this? Will it be able to build up enough
> momentum to actually succeed? Remember, this has been tried before. Every
> few years I see someone post something almost identical to your post, and
> it never goes anywhere - no "critical mass" to get it going.
>
> A better idea is to look at what else is out there. BeOS is new and
> different. How about Plan9? GNUStep? How about MacOSX/Darwin/
> OPENSTEP? (They don't use X, so that should make you happy.)
>
> Another problem is that all of the people you will need for the low-level
> stuff, the experts on kernels and drivers, are C programmers. That's
> what's being used - like it or not. C may not be great, but it has been
> proven to work. You will need a large group of experts in whatever new
> language you decide to write your OS in. And I bet it takes 10 years of
> arguing before you even decide which language to use. :-)
>
> Maybe you should just see what can be done to improve unix?
You make a number of good points. Those of us in the GNU/Linux camp know
especially well the trials and tribulations involved in getting an OS into
the mainstream. It wasn't easy and took a lot work, a lot of talent, and a
lot management (not speaking from personal experience, just from what others
have said). But I fear that at the same time I advocate GNU/Linux, I also
don't want GNU/Linux to be the OS the future will use. GNU/Linux is among
the best there is but there are times when the best isn't good enough. We
need an OS that will provide for _all_ our needs in the future. Quite a
challenge, no?
Thank you for your considerate response to one person's flight of fancy. And
I am not ignorant of the fact that I am not the only with this wish. But if
there are many others chanting this idea that something better is possible,
then that increases our chances tenfold.
I am glad that I am not the only one who does not have the belief that even
if GNU/Linux is the best there is, it is not the best there ever could be.
This is not an announcement for any type of project.
But stay tuned
> --
> Stuart Krivis
>
> *** Remove "mongo" in headers for valid reply hostname
Best Regards,
Kevin Holmes
"extrasolar"
------------------------------
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: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 01:51:42 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Christopher Smith in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said void in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >On Thu, 13 Jul 2000 23:05:40 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>us who are ignorant of the technical details to
>> >>wonder what difference it makes what kind of multitasking the OS uses,
>> >
>> >Stay ... right ... there.
>> >
>> >OK -- now that you're ignorant, and wondering, why don't you ask all of
>> >the non-ignorant people around here why things are done the way they
>> >ware, AND LISTEN TO THE BLOODY ANSWER.
>>
>> Because I'm not the least bit interested in why things are done the way
>> they are. All I'm concerned with is why things aren't done the way they
>> aren't. No wonder you are confused and can't figure out how to answer.
>> LISTEN TO THE BLOODY QUESTION.
>
>This has been answered already, *multiple times*. Things "aren't done the
>way they aren't" ("aren't" presumably referring to CMT) because "things"
>were already tried like that decades ago and replaced by a superior system.
Until they weren't again, and now they are? What are you, junior
acolyte moron?
--
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: "KLH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 22:48:56 -0700
RealCea <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<snip everything>
Aren't you posting to the wrong newsgroup? I beleive there are Newsgroups
for bashing Microsoft. This isn't one of them.
Your post had nothing to do with GNU/Linux whatsoever.
Best Regards,
Kevin Holmes
"extrasolar"
------------------------------
From: "ostracus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 01:02:00 -0500
In article <4YKb5.7612$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Drestin Black"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
> 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.
<snip>
I think a note should be made here. You have it a bit backwards (by
implication). Pseudocode predates Basic. The fact that Basic is
"english-like" was intentional (borrowed if you will). Therefore
pseudocode can't be used as proof of the viability of VB.
But more the effectiveness of pseudocode (for the beginner).
Thanks for your time.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 06:04:12 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Drestin Black wrote:
> 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.
"Registered at the copyright office" *sigh*. You don't even *need*
to
put "a little (C)" somewhere. Any original work carries copyright, (C)
or no (C). Address of the "Copyright Office" where you registered your
code, pretty please? Copyright registration numbers, pretty please?
Quel con, ce mec.
------------------------------
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: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 02:05:09 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>On Fri, 14 Jul 2000 17:30:08 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>>Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>>On Thu, 13 Jul 2000 23:20:19 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>wrote:
>> [...]
>>>And that's the problem with CMT. What if you put a rendering job in
>>>the bg? It dies, basically. It's a PITA on a modern computer - you
>>>can run one thing, and everything else is suspended. Oh, it isn't
>>>nearly that bad, and modern CPUs have smoothed over some of the
>>>problems, but still, it's a horrid method of MT'ing.
>>
>>But my question then becomes "why does the rendering job die?" The PITA
>>for all modern technology, I have found, usually rests on
>>connection-oriented demands that were formerly necessary due to
>>technical restraints and lack of ingenuity. All the really cool
>>technology is the stuff that abandons those assumptions, and points out
>>that sometimes building the system to tolerate unreliability is WAY more
>>powerful, and even easier at the same time, then continuing to build
>>systems that mandate reliability, but are just as ineffective,
>>ultimately, at providing it as the connectionless alternative.
>
>That's touching. Please try to address what I said and stay on topic.
I did. What's wrong with you? Why does the rendering job die? Can't
you answer?
--
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: 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: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 02:04:01 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Gary Hallock in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>>
>> Can I say "renice this every time it runs?" Can I say "renice this if
>> this other program is running?" Can I say "nice this as long as these
>> aren't trying to get that done?" I know the discussion is on technical
>> scheduling of the CPU resource. But what I am saying would be useful,
>> and that CMT approximates and that is why it was successful on the Mac
>> though scoffed at by engineers, is something with a higher abstraction.
>> Something which deals with the performance of the *system*, as opposed
>> to the "efficiency" of a component.
>>
>
>Yes, you could use renice in all of these situations if you really wanted
>to. The more I read your posts the more I dislike you.
Sorry.
> You seem to have a
>tremendous dislike for engineers.
Apparently the feelings mutual. Or is this the only reason you've found
to dislike me? I find that improbable.
> You use the word "engineer" as if it is
>some 4-letter word.
Sometimes it seems appropriate, what can I say? I teach these guys. I
love 'em, honestly, I do. If I could get my shit together, I'd be one
of them. But you gotta admit..., I mean, cmon. ;-)
> Engineers do indeed deal with the performance of the
>entire system. I am an engineer, a programmer and an end user. And I can
>tell you, from all three perspectives, that CMT has no place in an OS.
Sure, fine. If you say so? Seriously, I'm not really doubting you.
But there have been times....
>There are some highly specialized areas where CMT is appropriate, but not in
>an OS and not for the reasons you claim.
Well, only an OS would have any kind of multi-tasking, I assume. And
what would be the reasons? Can any of you engineers who "deal with the
entire system" (I have heard that *so* many times before; I'm sure
you're sincere, and all, but there have been times...) competently
explain to me why it is *not* a very similar issue to 802.5 versus
802.3?
--
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! ======
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 06:09:02 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Pipes (Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop
Jacques Guy wrote:
> Yoo ort 2 bo two mie soupeerier speallignk!
> (I'm only doing a stand-in for Tim--eye sore toe
> missed him)
Look, folks, it's not that I went ga-ga and am
talking to myself, but, reading this post of mine,
I couldn't at first figure out what "eye sore
toe missed him" could possibly be. Then, I
remembered. Before I forget again: "I sorta
miss Tim" Whew!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I tried to install both W2K and Linux last night...
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 06:00:30 GMT
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Jul 2000 01:46:19 GMT, "Jeff Hummer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >Here's some irony for you. A knowledgeable friend and I installed
both
> >Windows 2000 and Gentus Linux 6.2 on an HDD last night. Windows took
5.5
> >hours to install and it still crashes during boot, despite much
tweaking at
> >the command line level. This is supposed to be easy?
>
> Just curious... How do you "tweak it at the command line level" ?
>
> Shoulda booted the CD and not run WINNT.EXE from DOS. If it took you
> anywhere near 5.5 hours that's probably what you did.
This coming from someone who never seems to be able to get Linux
running.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 02:11:32 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Leslie Mikesell in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>>Do you have some more specific description of how patents preclude GPL
>>>>implementation?
>>>
>>> The compression code used in GIF's is probably the
>>>best-known example
>[...]
>
>>Demanded very small and almost un-noticable to the end user licensing
>>fees, as a matter of fact. So I guess you've answered your own
>>question. Software which uses patented technology will require a small
>>fee.
>
>Yes, that's the point. The restrictions applied by others may
>be entirely acceptable for the end user, and many such things
>are already buried in commercial packages that we take for
>granted. However, no GPL'd component can ever be used
>with these things in a way that makes a derived work. Or
>at least it can't be redistributed, even to people who
>already have the other parts.
Yes, again, we're very happy the GPL is incompatible with commercial
software trade secret exploitation as current users find "entirely
acceptable". We do, in fact, and I think I speak for everyone here at
the Free Software Foundation chapter in Lebanon, PA, think we know
better than them. But we're not stupid, and we don't believe that we
could possibly even consider forcing our views on the consumer. So we
do not require anyone who wishes to not use GPL software to possess,
use, distribute, or understand GPL software if they do not wish to.
--
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: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 02:12:11 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Leslie Mikesell in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>>No, you misunderstand. They *don't*. It is not a "practical" issue.
>>>>It is a legal issue.
>>>
>>>In what way is that not a practical issue as well.
>>
>>In the way I was using in the context of my statement, obviously.
>>
>>I would point out that its up to you to provide reason to believe it is
>>a practical issue. You have attempted to do so and have found fault
>>with your reasoning because of your assumptions that one must be free to
>>profiteer in order to earn profit.
>
>I've said no such thing. I've said you can't give away GPL'd
>code in many contexts.
Which?
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 01:12:45 -0500
On Sat, 15 Jul 2000 01:50:54 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Said ZnU in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> [...]
>>> http://www.uk.research.att.com/~dmi/linux-srt/wm.html
>>
>>This is just an easy interface for switching task priorities. Such
>>things have been around forever, and have never gained much popularity.
>
>Well if no one mentions them when some clueless idiot on Usenet starts
>spouting off about CMT and insists that the user needs and easy
>interface for switching task priorities, how come it doesn't occur to
>anyone in an *advocacy* group that nobody thinks to mention that "such
>things have been around forever," how the fuck are they supposed to gain
>popularity?
Was there a question in there? That wasn't a complete phrase, or at
least it was one heck of a run-on - can you re-phrase that for us?
------------------------------
From: Jeremy Cheng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Some Windows weirdnesses...
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 06:14:24 GMT
Curious how no winblows users have responded with anything intelligent?
Jeremy
------------------------------
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: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 01:13:23 -0500
On Sat, 15 Jul 2000 01:48:04 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>>That's not good. Add to the fact
>>that the entire computing industry disagrees with you (for general use
>>systems) and *explicitly* disagrees with you for desktops, and I would
>>think even you would realize you have an incredibly weak case.
>
>The "computer industry" when Apple decided to use CMT I trusted, and had
>a reason to trust, and it was valid.
What changed from 1988 or so to now? Back then there was Atari,
Amiga, Apple, and IBM in the industry; now there's Apple, Windows, and
Linux. The PC world has gotten better, easier to use, faster, and
cheaper. What's the problem? Or is this more vague handwaving and
signaling? You sound more and more like Terry Pelfrey of
c.s.amiga.advocacy with every post... vague repetitions of the same
tired phrase, each time throwing out a few "code words" that really
don't mean anything to anyone else, with references to those words as
if you've proven something.
>Today's computer industry, I
>wouldn't bet a dime on whether a single one of them had a clue. No
Rest assured, they're significantly more clued in than you.
>doubt they simply mirror the knee-jerk reaction in this group. Not a
...to common sense and logic and proven results?
>one of them could probably even comprehend how CMT could really work,
>because they'd trained themselves not to consider such heresy. At least
Let me assure you that the people writing for/with Apple, Windows, and
Linux know *EXACTLY* how all of this stuff works. They are *very*
familiar with the advantages and disadvantages of CMT and PMT. And
they choose PMT.
>from the general experience I've had with the entire IT world so far.
>We're all just human, after all. Its probably what I'd do, if I could
>possibly manage to be a software engineer.
What problem did you encouter as a child that caused you to hate (or
at least, emphatically deride) engineers so much? Are you
math-challenged? It's beginning to be obvious that you are logic
challenged, as most of these topics have been explained to you over
and over again, and you've yet to give any examples to back up your
own statements....
>But then I keep thinking about that Ethernet....
Would you like to lead a discussion comparing ethernet and PMT/CMT?
Please start by discussing how the comparison is at all material to
this discussion of which is the superior multitasking method - CMT or
PMT.
>>So, do
>>more to support it - look up a few things, give some concrete
>>examples, or do *something* to lend some strength and weight to your
>>case.
>
>Where the *hell* could you possibly look up good things about CMT,
>without even a pass to the junior wizard school library? What do you
>think I've been doing? Do you recognize the concept of "autonomous
>authority" and know how CSMA/CD works? Do some research, dammit;
>they're concrete examples.
I'm familiar with Ethernet. But you basically just did more
handwaving while completely ignoring my request. Why can't you look
up a few things, give some concrete examples, and/or do *something* to
lend some strength and weight to your case? As it is, it seems you
are suggesting CMT is better...well, I'm not sure why - perhaps
because you say it is, and as a source, so far, you've shown us a nice
AT&T (Bell Labs? I donno) interface for re-doing niceness levels via
the mouse button, and you submitted that as if it proved you were
correct in your statement, when in fact nothing could be farther from
the truth.
So, if you want to prove something, do so. Stop the handwaving and
CSMA/CD verbiage and dig deeper with some real-world examples. I know
what CSMA/CD is and why we'd use it, so if that's what you're
comfortable talking about, and you can build a serious case with it
<boggle>, do so.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
