Linux-Advocacy Digest #727, Volume #27 Mon, 17 Jul 00 01:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Pan)
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it ("Otto")
Re: Star Office to be open sourced ("KLH")
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Jay Maynard)
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it ("Otto")
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451743 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Thorne digest, volume 2451743 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451743 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Ray Chason)
Re: Linsux as a desktop platform ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (Peter Seebach)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 20:12:41 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In part because they need to attract developers and they realize that
the best way to attract developers without paying them is to license
under the gpl. AFAIK, Sun's SO-based star portal is the only office
software that is in any real position to compete with micros~1 office as
sgml embedded office applications. Of course, SO has the advantage of
being portable across multiple platforms and browsers whereas office
will work on one platform and in one browser.
phil hunt wrote:
>
> I've just read a news article linked from Linux Today that Sun are
> thinking of open-sourcing Star Office under the GNU GPL.
>
> Does anyone have any speculation as to why they might do this? Apart
> from hurting MS, of course?
>
> The article is at
> <http://www.zdnet.com/sp/stories/news/0,4538,2604174,00.html>
>
> --
> ***** Phil Hunt ***** send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] *****
> Moore's Law: hardware speed doubles every 18 months
> Gates' Law: software speed halves every 18 months
--
Salvador Peralta
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.la-online.com
------------------------------
From: "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 03:13:30 GMT
"Arthur Frain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: Drestin Black wrote:
:
: > I've always maintained what is obvious: Netcraft JUST counts domains and
: > doesn't discriminate between a linux/apache domain of "joesmomma.com" vs
: > W2K/IIS for dell.com - to Netcraft, they mean the same. So, all this
Apache
: > dominates the web is for those that think PURE number counts mean
: > EVERYTHING. Bullshit I say. Someone finally proved it out for me.
:
: > The companies that matter, those top companies, you know, money making
ones?
: > Companies that are concerned about their image, product, availability,
: > uptime, performance and all that matters cause their name/image on-line
: > matters - they are NOT using apache and MOST DEFINATLEY not using Linux!
:
: > +===+===+===
:
: > http://www.entmag.com/displayarticle.asp?searchresult=1&ID=6150095626AM
:
: > "The dominant position of Microsoft's proprietary IIS in the Fortune 500
: > makes Windows NT a lock for the most used operating system undergirding
the
: > Web servers -- 43 percent. "
:
: [snip]
:
: I just knew Drestin or some other Wintroll would jump
: on this the minute I saw it on slashdot. I think it
: brings up several interesting points.
:
: 1. Although Drestin regularly critcizes slashdot for
: its Linux bias, slashdot has obviously been the source
: of links for his last few anti-Linux posts. I get a
: good laugh out of that.
:
: 2. The fallacy in the article Drestin's referencing is
: that the Fortune 500 have any relevance to webserving.
: They certainly weren't there first, for example. I
: know I've spent many happy hours surfing the Union Carbide
: site, and have done tons of e-commerce with Allied
: Signal. International Paper is the first site I visit
: every day. Simply put, there is no correlation between
: a company's size or profitability and it's webserving
: needs. In fact, the article could be read as an
: endorsement of the idea that if you want to spend
: a lot of money on a very low traffic site, IIS is
: the way to go.
:
: 3. Linked with this is the idea that Apache prdominates
: on very small, low traffic sites. (Before someone
: points out again the article that says Apache is
: the preferred server for websites about doghouses,
: I'll point out that "Doghouses of the South" in
: fact runs on IIS) I have no argument with the
: fact that among the millions of sites that use
: Apache, many are small and low traffic. But the
: interesting thing is that many of these sites
: are aggregated on single servers. The people
: who run these *servers* chose Apache, and that
: seems like a good endorsement me to me - people
: who's business is hosting many web sites seem
: to have a preference for Apache, and that's more
: telling than the statistics on Fortune 500 use.
Drestin does have a point and you seem to agree with it. There is a
pronounced difference between sites, like between joesmuck.com and dell.com.
Although Dell counts as one site which is running IIS, in actuality they
probably have 20-30 web servers at least for load balancing and redundancy
purposes. In the meantime, the server which has joesmuck.com, also has
another 15-20 or more other domains similar to Joe's. That one server will
be counted by Netcraft as 20+ sites running Apache. Netcraft's survey of the
web servers is pretty useless, by any means.
: Perhaps it impresses Drestin that he can use IIS
: "just like the big guys do", but it appears that
: nearly 2/3's of the rest of world isn't so easily
: impressed.
2/3? Take the statistic, however inaccurate, which favors your opinion an
totally disregard any other data. Yeah.... you do have a point that way.
Otto
------------------------------
From: "KLH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: Sun, 16 Jul 2000 20:20:00 -0700
phil hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I've just read a news article linked from Linux Today that Sun are
> thinking of open-sourcing Star Office under the GNU GPL.
>
> Does anyone have any speculation as to why they might do this? Apart
> from hurting MS, of course?
>
> The article is at
> <http://www.zdnet.com/sp/stories/news/0,4538,2604174,00.html>
>
This is one of the times that I think they are doing it precisely for the
publicity. Notice the qualifiers, hence: "Sun is *considering* GPLing
StarOffice" not that they are actually doing it. I think it is part of some
half-baked though probably successful strategy to increase mindshare for
StarOffice. Just wait and see: they will not go through with it. Sun is one
of the most propietary companies there are. And Sun knows all about
marketing.
Remember, you heard it here first ;)
Best Regards,
Kevin Holmes
> --
> ***** Phil Hunt ***** send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] *****
> Moore's Law: hardware speed doubles every 18 months
> Gates' Law: software speed halves every 18 months
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jay Maynard)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: 17 Jul 2000 03:26:32 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000 01:11:29 +0200, Stefaan A Eeckels
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>May I accept that you agree with my previous post, seeing that you
>only had problems with the quoted paragraph?
By no means. I simply feel that others have answered the other parts as well
as I could, and am trying to not be *too* duplicative.
------------------------------
From: "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 03:29:40 GMT
"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: This is all well and good, however, you are missing some very important
: facts when dealing with Microsoft.
:
: The "support" you get as a fortune 500 company is hell and away far
: better than anything one could hope for in a mere regular sized company,
: and using Windows NT as a solution, you WILL need that tech support.
Versus Linux, which doesn't need tech support? Get real....
:
: Fortune 500 companies make "strategic partnerships" for technology, i.e.
: they do not pay full price Microsoft for technology and support, and
: Microsoft gets to claim the fortune 500 company as a "customer." There
: is usually a stock exchange involved as well.
Care to substanciate this claim with actual data?
:
: There is a HUGE and important gray area between someplace like dell.com
: where MS and Dell have strategic business dealings, and someplace like
: valinux which does not. It is also arguable that between "joes web site"
: and the fortune 500, exists a vast area of the economy which employs 99
: percent of the working people in the USA.
I just disagree with the 99% share....
:
: To simply say that the fortune 500 use NT, so it's good, is false. The
: fortune 500 companies can pay for the huge expenses that an NT
: environment will incur in exchange for the "strategic" business
: opportunities which the monopoly Microsoft provides. For the merely
: normal sized companies that do not have the clout to grab Microsoft's
: attention and good graces, NT is a disaster of unreliability and poor
: cost/performance.
You are contradicting yourself. In one hand you claim that "Fortune 500
companies make "strategic partnerships" for technology, i.e. they do not pay
full price Microsoft for technology and support", in another you claim that
"The fortune 500 companies can pay for the huge expenses". Make up your
mind....
Disregarding unsubstantiated claims about NT.
Otto
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451743
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 04:07:04 GMT
Here's today's Tinman digest:
1> Not at all, what you mean is quite a mystery.
Of course, as I expect from someone like you.
1> What alleged "meaning"?
See what I mean?
1> You really don't know what that word means, do you Dave?
I do know what the word means, Tinman. That's how I'm able to determine
that you're engaging in it.
1> On the contrary.
Typical pontification.
1> In what sense?
Still missing the meaning, despite there only being one. No surprise
there.
1> Why should I any more than you?
You entered the discussion before I did.
1> Unclear, as you haven't specified what response you mean.
Your first one in this thread, as should be obvious.
1> How so?
Read it again.
1> What alleged "lies"?
The ones you snipped from your follow-up.
1> I always seek not only truth,
Incorrect.
1> but entertainment.
Obviously.
1> Which newsgroup, Dave?
The one I'm reading.
1> You're posting on four in this thread.
I'm only reading one of those.
1> Then why do you persist in responding to my posts?
As I already told you, to counter the FUD, bias, illogic, and
unfairness.
1> In that I am currently emulating you, of course. ("
Incorrect.
1> But CSMA doesn't want you to go away, you are a source of great
1> entertainment.
On what basis do you speak for the entire newsgroup?
1> Illogical.
Incorrect.
1> Dave, you fail to recognize that your actions fan the flames.
What flames? It's all entertainment to you.
1> If you didn't respond to virtually every post with your name in
1> it, this game wouldn't be any fun.
So, you want to spread your lies with impunity. No surprise there.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Thorne digest, volume 2451743
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 04:09:06 GMT
Today's Thorne digest:
1> The Tholy Thole Tholenated:
1>
1> Sorry, I can't reveal my sources.
You're erroneously presupposing that you have a source, Thorne.
1> What haven't I learned?
See what I mean?
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Malloy digest, volume 2451743
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2000 04:20:25 GMT
Here's today's Malloy digest. Now he's lying that I'm ignoring the
issue that he's been avoiding, but note how he still hasn't produced
any evidence to show that he recirpocated as claimed. Meanwhile, he
persists with the bizarre claim that I haven't learned to read. At
least he finally brought up the matter about frequenting "these
precincts", but attempts to revise history by suggesting that the
issue was about my reasons, rather than his. It was his claim, not
mine.
He also persists with his lie about a nonexistent "chat with TPTB at
UofH". No such group exists there. "Fighting" was Malloy's word, not
mine, which it a pretty good indication that he's simply playing parrot.
And he's still ignoring one of my oft-stated reasons for being here,
which he could have seen again in the last couple of days by simply
reading my responses to Tinman.
115> Here's today's Tholen digest, part 1,659,333. He's back to ignoring the
115> issue about this alleged reciprocation, choosing instead to make a
115> complete fool of himself by demonstrating that he hasn't learned to read,
115> yet he pontificates about my alleged misinterpretation. And he's
115> continuing to ignore the issue about his reason for frequenting "these
115> precincts". Figures. Typical Tholen, typical claptrap.
115>
115> To the digest proper!
115>
115> [Nope, still nothing!]
115>
115> Thanks for reading.
116> Here's another Tholen digest, in which Tholen continues to ignore the
116> issue about his alleged understand of reciprocation, choosing instead
116> to make a complete fool of himself by claiming that he would know a
116> useful answer if it walked up to him on the arse, and lying about his
116> chat with TPTB at UofH. Such a lie is one of the things I'm "fighting",
116> to use his word for it. He's continuing to ignore the issue about his
116> reason for frequenting "these precincts" -- after all, he's a
116> self-proclaimed non-advocate. What's he doing here? Inquiring minds
116> want to know!
116>
116> The digest:
116>
116> [Oops, he's failed to address anything seriously!]
116>
116> Thanks for reading.
------------------------------
From: Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Date: 17 Jul 2000 04:11:02 GMT
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>And thus can be implemented by a convention of having the active process
>yield at an appropriate interval, without the necessity of pre-emption.
>Not as easily as pre-emption, true, but it can be done.
This is indeed a necessary condition for a responsive CMT system. Most
likely a sufficient condition as well, if the OS is properly designed.
Yes, it can be done. At least in theory. Where this falls apart in
practice is that a given stretch of code may take wildly different times
to execute, depending on its input. The user may also have a slower
computer than the developer. This creates the problem of just where do
you put the yields.
I'm sure you can see, furthermore, that one is more likely to get the
Right Thing from a small number of OS developers than from God alone knows
how many applications developers.
--
--------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
Delenda est Windoze
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 16 Jul 2000 15:02:02 +1000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>In other words, both came out _well_ before the Amiga 1000, with 256k
>of RAM. Thanks for proving my point.... (no offense to you; the
>original poster who answered "The Amigas had more RAM" or somesuch was
>wrong, though)
No, no, David, you know better than *that*. Don't you remember that the
Amiga predates the Mac? Steve Giovenella told you so, you should really
just say "thank you" when you are being taught something.
Bernie
P.S.: ;-)
--
Thomas --- Jefferson --- still surv--
John Adams
2nd President of the US
Last words, 4 July 1826
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Seebach)
Date: 17 Jul 2000 05:05:00 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said Peter Seebach in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Said Peter Seebach in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>>>It depends an awful lot on the software. Windows has been sold to tens of
>>>>millions of people, many of whom didn't want it or need it. Niche market
>>>>software often sells for a fixed 25% cut over what it costs to write.
>>>Only for creative values of "what it costs to write it".
>>I dunno. If I have to pay a guy $N/hour to write a piece of software, and
>>I sell it to the one customer for $N*1.25/hour, I think that's a 25% markup.
>And what is the markup when you sell it to the next customer, without
>having to re-write it. The customer after that? The thousand later
>customers? The million customers over a three year period?
Yes. But, often "niche market" means "one customer development of a one-off
thing". I've done a lot of that, and I don't really like it, but it pays the
bills. :)
>Because you have to continually come up with *new* software to stay in
>business; not just re-sell the old ones over again to the same customers
>as an "upgrade". Most game companies that "fail routinely" were
>startups. We aren't talking startups - we're talking about established
>companies with established products.
Yes, and game companies go under fairly frequently even if they're otherwise
"established". It's a very tough industry to be competitive in.
>They were, until Microsoft changed the rules, I've heard. I don't know
>the specifics, but I have been told by accountants, who would be the
>ones who know, that the IRS allows software developers to treat fixed
>costs as variable costs. Essentially, they say that the five hundredth
>customer still required $N/hour, because they're still paying
>developers. But the developers are coming up with *new* products, so
>the company is essentially capitalizing on the margin.
Uh-huh. Accounting is still trying to figure out how to model products
that have a huge up-front cost, and no measurable marginal cost.
>>However, video games have never done very well on that, and it may not be
>>possible to make certain kinds of software viable under such a model.
>Games will *always* be different; they're entertainment, not
>functionality. I heartily agree that certain kinds of software are
>different then others. Magazines are different then books, but they're
>both "publishing", and they follow the same laws. And neither of them
>require trade secret licenses to be forced on their customers.
Okay, if you'll grant that some kinds of software are different, I'll happily
agree with you about the majority of the cases. :)
-s
--
Copyright 2000, All rights reserved. Peter Seebach / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
C/Unix wizard, Pro-commerce radical, Spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon!
Consulting & Computers: http://www.plethora.net/
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
