Linux-Advocacy Digest #748, Volume #27 Tue, 18 Jul 00 04:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Of Free OS's and M$ pricing a little side trip!
Re: one step forward, two steps back.. (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (ZnU)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ("Boris")
Re: I just don't buy it
Re: one step forward, two steps back.. (Pete Goodwin)
Re: one step forward, two steps back.. (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? (Rob S. Wolfram)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? (Rob S. Wolfram)
Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome! (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Of Free OS's and M$ pricing a little side trip!
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 00:18:37 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Jim Broughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> We can now turn our attention to the SERVER section of microscrews
> product line. For those of you on tight budgets now is the time to
> cover your eyes. Lets start with the SERVER version of winbloat 2000.
> The current price for the upgrade is around $399. You must own NT4. That
> is for the 5 client version. It gets worse. The retail 5 client version
> is around 899 dollars. The 10 client version 1199. The 25 Client Version
> 1799 and last but not least the unlimited version at 2000 dollars.
So THAT is why it is called Windows 2000! Because of the price it cost to
get the uncrippled version. Note in this I am only referring to being
crippled in terms of limiting concurrent users.
> If your interested in just how much its going to cost you to outfit your
company
> with microscrew software I have given you a starting point to see just how
deep
> your wallet is. Or if your like the rest of us here you can forgo the
expensive
> M$ solutions and get the LINUX solution for free.
What I would like to know is how much it would cost to have a Windows 2000
normal retail price for Windows 2000 unlimited users AND the cost for all
the addons by Microsoft and by third party developers when need to totaly
replace everything that comes with <pick the current version of a full Linux
distribution of your choice> For, lets say a network with two hundred
workstations and two file and print servers.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: one step forward, two steps back..
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 07:32:49 GMT
In article <8kt99f$gsv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) wrote:
> You must not have thrown a configured TCP/IP stack at it, because
theres
> known breakage in the irq department. Apparantly thats being 'worked
> on'.
That's news to the two machines I configured with TCP/IP.
--
---
Pete
Coming soon: Kylix!
(I do not need the destruction of Microsoft to succeed).
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 07:40:48 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "JS/PL"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ZnU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > Servers and dedicated routers are hardly relevant. Those markets
> > are tiny compared with the PC market.
>
> I hardly think so.
Hardware sold to those markets is generally more expensive that PC
hardware, but volume is very low. And dedicated routers don't usually
run operating systems (well, not what the typical computer user thinks
of as an OS anyway).
In any case, nobody is claiming MS has a monopoly in the server market.
> > > I can say this - I would rather not be using a stripped down
> > > operating system that the government gave me (*for my own good).
> >
> > If Microsoft has its way, in 3 years you'll be using a stripped
> > down operating system (or a glorified web browser, depending on how
> > you want to look at it), storing all your data on MS servers,
> > accessing web pages created with MS development tools, renting all
> > your software for a monthly fee, and probably using MSN for
> > Internet access.
>
> Who was it that said "The first company to capitalize on an
> innovation reaps the greatest rewards and most improved operating
> margins. When competitors start to use the same technologies, "your
> competitive advantage or differentiation, or your effect on margins,
> gets commoditized," Time to move to the next new thing.
Microsoft still has its monopoly. It isn't moving to .Net to fight off
competition from all sides, but rather to extend its OS monopoly into a
couple of other areas.
> Three years from now bandwidth restrictions and very cheap local
> storage will still make the idea of remote storage absurd
That's my logic. No matter how cheap bandwidth gets, local storage and
CPU time will always be cheaper and faster. We should be moving toward
heavily networked decentralized systems, not regressing back to
centralized storage and, to some extent, processing. .Net is a move in
exactly the wrong direction.
The next big step as I see it is for the personal server to become
commonplace.
> But software servers might be a deal for someone, it's just another
> of the vast choices. I'm quite sure if it eventually takes off more
> companies will be jumping on the software rental bandwagon.
If you listen to Gates, it will replace Windows. You can be damn sure
Gates isn't too interested in allowing people "vast choices." If he
thinks he can make more money like this, he doesn't care who gets
screwed over. And .Net, if it succeeds as MS wants it to, screws over
_everyone_:
1) Developers get locked into proprietary Microsoft technologies.
2) Hardware makers won't make as much money (selling thin clients won't
pay too well, I'd imagine).
3) Consumers will end up paying more.
4) ISPs will be driven to distruction.
Maybe Apple will benefit if Microsoft truly does destroy Windows,
leaving Mac OS XII as the only remaining viable desktop platform ;-)
> If MSN put a DSL line to my house for the low prices that MS is known
> for I'd be at least getting internet access through MS.
> >
> > Is that really what you want? Because that's what Gates says is
> > coming.
>
> Just because MS is unvailing something doesn't mean the consumer will
> choose it.
>
> MS tries out these kinds of things every so often , few actually take
> off and are quickly dropped by MS. I never thought anyone would
> subscribe to MSN from day one, yet it was supposed to kill AOL and
> all the other National Service Providers when it was unveiled, wasn't
> it? At least that was the talk from the Anti-MS crowd back then.
I do hope you're right about this. I'm not a fan of Windows, but no OS
deserves the fate Microsoft is planning for it.
--
The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected.
-- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
------------------------------
From: "Boris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 00:44:08 -0700
> Visual J++ was a nice IDE - however it generated Java that didn't work
> with anything other than Internet Explorer. I rebuilt the code with
> Sun's Java compiler and then it worked with Internet Explorer and
> Netscape, and it worked on Digital UNIX.
>
> Microsoft tried to derail Java by adding their own extensions to it
> that locked you onto the Windows platform. Not a bright idea for a
> language expressly created for multiplatform support.
I only meant Visual J++ for Windows. I've seen reviews (~ 1.5 - 2 years ago) naming J++
the best Java environment for Windows; they were comparing it with Symantec and Borland
solutions. I must add that I don't know Java and never used it. I'm C++ person.
Boris
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I just don't buy it
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 00:34:34 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ian Pulsford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi,
>
> There has been some discussion about M$ .NET. I just don't see the
> advantages of it from a home user perspective or a business perspective.
>
> 1. Is a home user really going to want to store private documents on
> some remote server?
> 2. Why would I want to log onto the internet everytime I want to write a
> short letter or note?
> 3. Why clog up internet bandwidth more with stuff that really belongs on
> the home PC/business file server?
> 4. What company would trust strorage of information to a server on the
> internet?
> 5. Hard drive capacity gets bigger every year, no need for
> 'internetwork' disk space.
> 6. Intel, AMD, etc want to sell faster expensive processors, not cheap
> thin client gear.
> 7. Everyone already has an office suite of some sort
> 8. What can .NET do that an intranet + an internet gateway cannot do?
>
> Plus probably loads of other reasons.
>
> Of course, in the future internet bandwidth will increase with
> technology, and everyone in a modern country may have a permanent
> connection via cable just like a phone service or TV aerial, but where
> is the advantage of keeping information/applications remotely as opposed
> to retaining them locally?
>
> The only 'advantage' I can see is tricking the PHB tools of microsoft
> into buying M$ .NET and making extra cash for M$. Of course SUN et al.
> have to push their equivalent technologies. So everyone rushes towards
> an idea that seems to have little real merit.
When I read these kinds of things I think of just two words "Big Brother".
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: one step forward, two steps back..
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 07:37:44 GMT
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Everyone always says Microsoft prevents people from buying
> non-Microsoft products. What is stopping anyone from buying non-MS
> hardware/software? Nothing at all. There never has been.
>
> If you don't want to buy a computer with Windows... don't. There are
> hundreds of vendors willing to sell you a machine with no OS. I don't
> even think I've bought a system with an OS.
I thought if Microsoft descovered an OEM selling a PC with anything
other than Microsoft Windows, Microsoft used to push the price up to
them (like IBM for example, trying to sell OS/2 instead of Windows 95).
That's changed since the court case found Microsoft to be a monopoly;
OEM's feel happier to sell other things as well.
And if you did buy a PC with Windows on, how easy is it to get a refund
if all you really want to do was run Linux, say?
--
---
Pete
Coming soon: Kylix!
(I do not need the destruction of Microsoft to succeed).
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: one step forward, two steps back..
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 07:40:03 GMT
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Right and neither does Microsoft. The roads, in this case an x86 PC,
> allows one to choose many different OS's.
>
> I guess I just don't consider it shocking that MICROSOFT wants
> everyone to use MICROSOFT products.
There's nothing shocking about that. When I was at Digital, we really
wanted the world to use our products.
What Microsoft did was to make sure you had no choice in the matter,
with discounts to favoured OEMs who were selling _only_ Windows. Once
the court case found Microsoft to be monopoly, that changed.
--
---
Pete
Coming soon: Kylix!
(I do not need the destruction of Microsoft to succeed).
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 09:45:50 +0200
In article <AMRc5.399521$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"KLH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jay Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> Unix is certainly more suited for mission-critical work than Windows
>> of any stripe, but that doesn't make it necessarily the best.
>
> Sometimes I don't understand how anything as complex as UNIX can be as
> stable.
The point is, as operating systems go, UNIX isn't all that complex,
at least not as far as its innards, and the API are concerned.
>
> It's complexity is one reason I think it should be killed.
Do you mean the plethora of commands? Just delete those you
don't need.
Do you mean the convoluted SysV startup procedure? --it's all in
user space, so make it simpler.
Do you mean the shell? --write an easier one.
Do you mean the API? --it's got a few warts, but the core API
is amazingly small and effective (don't forget X isn't UNIX).
> Not that I know
> of any suitable replacement for a general-purpose operating system, but I
> don't think it is the OS I want the future to use.
You'd need to come up with a fundamentally different approach
to organizing CPUs and bytes than process + hierarchical file system.
--
Stefaan
--
Ninety-Ninety Rule of Project Schedules:
The first ninety percent of the task takes ninety percent of
the time, and the last ten percent takes the other ninety percent.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 03:52:57 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Mark Kelley in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>As bad as Microsoft is, though, and as lousy a job as they did on this, there is one
>group
>who would do worse: the government.[...]
But all your argument is for naught, Mark. The government isn't making
business decisions. Its making legal decisions. Microsoft (both of
them) still get to make all business decisions regarding their products.
The government is going to ensure that Microsoft does not maintain an
illegal monopoly by a) restricting the negotiations Microsoft can pursue
with their customers, and b) ensuring application developers have equal
access to Windows.
The last requires a breakup of the company so that Office developers and
Windows developers cannot use trade secrets to lock out application
developers. The government is not designing software. The allusion to
this which confuses some people would be that the government insists
that the market designs software, and the developers merely do as the
market dictates.
--
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] (Rob S. Wolfram)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: 18 Jul 2000 06:18:11 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sitaram Chamarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 9 Jul 2000 22:20:36 GMT, Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[ triggering a dialup remotely]
>
>Too complex :-) Use xringd and set up a pattern that triggers
>(after a delay to let xringd reset itself) a ppp-on. This is what
>I do. I then ssh in from outside.
Thanx, I had didn't know of that yet. Looks promising, but it's not an
option for me yet. It is when I get back ;-)
Cheers,
Rob
--
Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OpenPGP key 0xD61A655D
Mr. Cole's Axiom:
The sum of the intelligence on the planet is a constant; the
population is growing.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob S. Wolfram)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Date: 18 Jul 2000 06:15:29 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Rob S. Wolfram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Fair enough, but frankly I already expected this would be possible. What
>> does interest me, is how you would handle erroneous messages and
>> security. How would you prevend me from sending you a similar email that
>> would keep your line open for two days?
>> I think the question boils down to: is PGP scriptable in Windows?
>
>Honestly, I do not know. I've never tried it and do not know what functions
>PGP for Windows exposes. Would you HAVE to use PGP specifically. You just
>need a digital signature to make sure it's really the right message.
No, not necessarily PGP, any open PGP compliant program would do. AFAIK
GnuPG (which I use) has not been ported to Windows. Of course I could
also use symmetric encryption since I am sending a mail to myself (so
the key exchange is secure ;-)), but then I would have to decrypt the
thing first and parse it after that. With a cleartext OpenPGP signature
the text is already parsable.
>> Because with Windows you either have to telnet in (and we all know that
>> the functionality of a Windows system is quite limited with just CMD.EXE
>
>um, CMD is not exactly what I'd call limited. Honestly, there is a LOT you
>can do from the CLI but most people do not spend any time learning cause
>it's slower and more complicated than from the GUI and becuase some of the
>tools you might require have been moved to the Resource Kit (but are freely
>available). I think you'd be suprised just how powerful the CLI is in
>Windows, especially W2K.
Functionality is more than just the availability of some tools. E.g.,
AFAIK the pipes are not parallized in CMD.EXE. I could easily uncompress
a 100MB compressed textfile, sed away unwanted text patterns and count
the distribution of the various characters in one command line without
even one temp file getting created. This implies that I could do this on
a SUN E10K with 16GB internal just as well as I could do this on a 16MB
486SX running Linux, only the latter would take a lot longer ;-)
>> >p.s., thanks for reminding me why I hate perl - YUCK!
>>
>> You're welcome. But... is there any [1..3]GL language that you do not
>> hate?
>
>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.
Many people have already argued on the "universal availability" of VB.
You are right to notice that it's available in "all countries of the
world", but so is Perl and so is Java. The suggestion you are trying to
wake here is incorrect, though.
But I have objections to VB as a language when you need to do anything
more than build pretty screens. E.g., implement me any recursive
algorithm without the need to invent your own stack, and we'll talk
again.
Then again, I know a couple of software companies that have written
_very expensive_ applications for quite a few clients (hotels come to
mind) using 3GL BASIC with the full spectrum of spagetti code,
non-maintainable and non-reusable code, squeesing as many statements as
you can in a single 255 character line etc. *YUCK*! I was orking for a
company that sold the programming environment (Toroughbred BASIC) and
they could not appreciate my critisism against the fact that a
self-respecting software company does not program in 3GL BASIC....
Cheers,
Rob
--
Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OpenPGP key 0xD61A655D
Anyway the :// part is an 'emoticon' representing a man with a
strip of sticky tape across his mouth.
-- R. Douglas
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just curious, how do I do this in Windows?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 18 Jul 2000 15:31:57 +1000
"Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >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.
>>
>> Then how come searching for "Drestin" at locis.loc.gov (that's a telnet
>> address) does not reveal a single entry with your name on it?
>because smarty, the copyright isn't under the name "Drestin" - sheesh...
Sheesh --- so what name *is* it under? I mean, if you are willing to
register your stuff with the copyright registrar, you surely aren't
ashamed to own up to it, are you?
Bernie
P.S.: And PLEASE get a newsreader that manages to do decent quoting. These
extra linebreaks in quoted stuff are really annoying.
--
Older man declare war. But it is youth who must fight and die
Herbert Hoover
US President 1929-33
At the Republican National Convention, 27 June 1944
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman's Politics (was: Linux is awesome!
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 04:07:40 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Christopher Browne in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>>Quite convenient when you don't have the answer to the other question,
>>don't you think? I'm sorry; nobody is discussing custom-developed
>>single-use software, AFAIK. A single customer is not a niche market.
>>The progression to a million customers is not necessary, several hundred
>>make the point just as clear.
>
>Nobody?
>
>Based on the attributions up above, Peter Seebach is. And I am. And
>with you as the third person with attributions, that means that two
>out of the three people _are_ discussing custom-developed single-use
>software.
>
>I suppose that makes two of the people "nobody."
No, it makes one person who used the word 'one', and another who pointed
out that "nobody" develops a commercial software product and then sells
it once, and then develops a whole new one, and then a third person to
troll in and pretend that single use software is a common phenomenon.
That makes two people having a conversation and one person who came in
late.
[...]
>"treating fixed costs as variable costs" is just so much nonsense
>outside the scope of management accounting, which is an _INTERNAL_
>matter that doesn't get reported to the government.
True, but its still a con game. Management accounting is a pretty big
scope in public corporations these days. Treating variable costs as
fixed costs allows money spent on them to be treated like investment in
capital assets instead of cost of goods sold. That's what I meant by
"capitalizing on the margin".
--
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! ======
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
