Linux-Advocacy Digest #51, Volume #28 Fri, 28 Jul 00 03:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451736 (Tholen) (Marty)
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man! (John Jensen)
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it (T. Max Devlin)
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it (T. Max Devlin)
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it (T. Max Devlin)
Re: C# is a copy of java (Steve Mading)
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man!
Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel (Jacques Guy)
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why use Linux? (Arthur Frain)
Re: I had a reality check today :( (Steve Mading)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 01:42:22 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>Do you know how much it costs to develop a custom database application
>such as what Oracle, Informix, etc. are used?
At *least* 60% of the Oracle implementations could be supported *better*
by some Slackware, I swear.
>Plan on 2+ years, and a minimum of $10,000,000.
>
>Given those types of figures, you don't just swap one database engine
>for another on a whim.
Ah, but that's the problem. It shouldn't be a matter of switching
*engines* just to switch *databases*.
--
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: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451736 (Tholen)
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 05:42:01 GMT
tholenbot wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > tholenbot wrote:
> > >
> > > > >> > tholenbot only has one identity, Slava.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Incorrect, Eric.
> > > > >
> > > > > Prove it.
> > > >
> > > > Identity #1 - tholenbot
> > > > Identity #2 - Eric Bennett
> > >
> > > Eric Bennett is not an identity of the tholenbot, Slava. Hava you ever
> > > seen the tholenbot post as Eric Bennett? No. Only the reverse occurs.
> >
> > Incorrect. No one but tholenbot posts as tholenbot, just as Batman
> > recites Batman's lines in the Batman movie, "Batman".
>
> Illogical, Marty, given that Batman was reproducing someone else's
> script.
Illogical. The script was copied well in advance of the filming of the
movie. It need not be copied subsequent times by the actors unless they were
careless and left their copies at home. Of what relevance is this latter case
to Batman reciting Batman's lines in the Batman movie, "Batman"?
> > > Of course, it takes decent reading comprehension skills to recognize
> > > that fact.
> >
> > How ironic, coming from someone who failed to comprehend the facts.
>
> Who?
Don't you know?
> > > > I wonder how Joe Malloy would react to the news that you've been
> > > > making allegations about him giving "posting lessons", Eric.
> > >
> > > Strolling down irrelevancy lane again, Slava?
> >
> > Frankly, I don't care
>
> I see you didn't answer the question, Marty.
On the contrary, I see you have failed to comprehend my answer.
------------------------------
From: John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man!
Date: 28 Jul 2000 05:45:06 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
: On 27 Jul 2000 21:30:44 GMT, John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: >This level of information hiding attempts to more completely separate
: >"interface" from "implementation". I have a quote with some more
: >flim-flam on the subject (lots of good links from this site):
: That's already done.
:
: The problem you're describing is when that interface changes.
The problem I'm describing is how to keep the interface from changing for
greater spans of time, and to make it more tollerant of small changes.
As an example, the industry-wide fascination with XML is based upon the
expectation that a parsed-text interface will be longer lasting than a
binary one ... especially a binary one tied to specific languages or
toolkits.
: >A system structured to support "independently developed components" would
: >seem at least as favorable to the distributed development of open source
: >software as it is to commercial interests.
: Sounds like what Unix has already.
It does, within a narrow band of binary compatiblity.
: This stuff seems more like an attempt to remedy problems with
: C++ and component standards that are entirely too low level
: in terms of what the calling application needs to be aware of.
This stuff seems more like an attept to remedy problems with language
indpendant messages, and to make low level component structures irrelavent
to questions of interoperability.
John
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 01:49:03 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Drestin Black in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>hahahaah - you can't even pretend believably. trivial eh? [...]
>SQL server does it 3 times as fast for half the price as Oracle. And that's
>Oracle on it's best day...
You dig yourself deeper into the "clueless" pile with each post,
'Drestin'. There most certainly isn't *anything* that SQL server (that
bad mangle of Sybase that MS has been pretending to be a real RDBMS
contender for years now, entirely unsuccessfully outside of "true pink"
shops) is faster at than Oracle. For very trivial applications, it may
very well be half the price, but whatever RDBMS that comes with
Slackware is probably much more impressive.
I'll bet Microsoft expected their SQL "engine" to de-commoditize (or
re-commoditize, as the debate may be) enterprise databases, and probably
also expected to use it to "integrate" the OS into the database or the
database into the OS to entirely kill the SQL (which *isn't* an MS
acronym) market.
The fact that they could only produce a rather pathetic version of
Sybase, the bottom-feader of enterprise level databases (Ingress is
still in there, but losing ground; we need *innovation*) is evidence of
their sorry position in the RDBMS field. Except, of course, for the
truly pink.
--
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.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 01:57:57 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>Open Glance is a resource hog. If I had HPOpenview running even just
>during working hours, I would put an extra CPU in the machine.
That's the value of OpenView, despite the mangling that HP has given it.
It would depend on your "implementation". Are you actually discovering
an enterprise network of over three sites, seventy routers, or three
hundred nodes? Then, yea, you would want another CPU. But it really
runs just fine, even still, as a simple little "my workstation
monitoring these systems with this handy graphic display" single-user
system. That other's can connect to of course, and you can broaden to a
multi-server interconnection filtered display system that a hundred
people can use (and only three or four to administrate). Not bad for
such a "special purpose" product. Its the licensing, not the code,
which swamps you at that scale. A desktop system could easily handle
three or four ovw sessions (and you'd use just one, no matter how wacky
you wanted to get). And the network monitoring is *far* more trivial
than most pretend. I could efficiently "manage" at least two hundred
nodes (non Windows) on a desktop system without seeing any major impact.
It would, I fear, require "proper administration". But that's specialty
knowledge of the application, not general system admin stuff at all.
Of course, they can only sell it in "NOCs" these days, so they have to
charge an arm and a leg. Not that they aren't profiteering, but there
*is* value in the *maintenance* of that code. That they've made a
horrible spectacle of its *development* is simply the nature of the
industry. Really good code (OpenView, even NerveCenter, Network Health,
in my own specialty) can survive even corporate marketing, at least to
some extent.
--
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.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 01:59:30 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said abraxas in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>Sorry, im used to 65,000 node + networks containing hundreds of subnets.
>A couple of days to discover the entire thing, couple more days to get
>enough stats to build a tweak-strategy (not my term), then 2 or 3 weeks
>to implement that. And then an absolutely dedicated machine for management,
>and an entirely separate one for compilation.
>
>And thats on a humungoid sparc w/ 4 hme's.
>
>You're obviously used to something smaller.
>
>-----yttrx
You sound like you got a *right* fine job, dude. Where do I sign up?
--
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: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: C# is a copy of java
Date: 28 Jul 2000 05:54:08 GMT
David Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: He did say "my" first proper programming language, not "the" first. Given
: that Pascal *is* a proper programming language (and you would have to have a
: pretty wierd definition of a p.p.l. to exclude Pascal while retaining more
: than a small handful of seldom-used languages), Donal is expressing a purely
: personal memory. It is hardly something that could be argued with.
The problem I've always had with Pascal was that it exhibited extreme
arrogance on the part of the compiler maker. The compiler was allowed
to form constructs that a lowly programmer in the language was not
deemed worthy enough to have access to himself. For example, some
built-in functions like "writeln()" could do varying numbers of
arguments, yet this feature was not open to the programmer using
Pascal. Why? Because it was deemed too "confusing" for our poor
little minds to handle, what with the lax type-checking that is needed
to let you make your own. Pascal seemed to have this holier-than-thou
attitude that really got on my nerves.
I think one of the biggest advances that C brought to the world was
the notion that the code compiler and the standard call library should
not be integrated tightly. In fact the standard call library should
be something that could theoretically have been programmed in the
language itself. (Although for speed it sometimes drops down to low
level assembly, if speed weren't an issue the entire libc could be
written actually in C.)
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 02:01:39 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Aaron R. Kulkis in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>When I was a *NOVICE* admin, I thought OpenView was great.
>
>Then I discovered how to use sar, netstat, etc.
It *is* supposed to work the other way around, you know. But obviously
you've concentrated on just the hosts. Those who use OpenView (that
certainly doesn't include 'Drestin', though he may play with it) are
normally dealing with all the routers and hubs and switches, too.
--
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.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Yeah! Bring down da' man!
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 06:08:09 GMT
On 28 Jul 2000 05:45:06 GMT, John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>: On 27 Jul 2000 21:30:44 GMT, John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>: >This level of information hiding attempts to more completely separate
>: >"interface" from "implementation". I have a quote with some more
>: >flim-flam on the subject (lots of good links from this site):
>
>: That's already done.
>:
>: The problem you're describing is when that interface changes.
>
>The problem I'm describing is how to keep the interface from changing for
>greater spans of time, and to make it more tollerant of small changes.
>As an example, the industry-wide fascination with XML is based upon the
>expectation that a parsed-text interface will be longer lasting than a
>binary one ... especially a binary one tied to specific languages or
>toolkits.
Again: just sounds like Unix.
>
>: >A system structured to support "independently developed components" would
>: >seem at least as favorable to the distributed development of open source
>: >software as it is to commercial interests.
>
>: Sounds like what Unix has already.
>
>It does, within a narrow band of binary compatiblity.
>
>: This stuff seems more like an attempt to remedy problems with
>: C++ and component standards that are entirely too low level
>: in terms of what the calling application needs to be aware of.
>
>This stuff seems more like an attept to remedy problems with language
>indpendant messages, and to make low level component structures irrelavent
>to questions of interoperability.
Yeah, as I said: it's an attempt to solve the problems cause
by C++ an the insistence on having your components interact
in terms of a relatively low level internal structure.
IOW, it's attempting fixing the mess caused by the last batch
or two of OO 'trend followers'.
--
Unless you've got the engineering process to match a DEC,
you won't produce a VMS.
You'll just end up with the likes of NT.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 06:13:28 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel
"Serge J.Luca" wrote:
> http://www.microsoft.com/solutions/ecommerce/lycoscs.htm
And don't forget to click on "Office File Viewers" on the
top right-hand corner of the page. Converters for Word 2
are missing, the list stops at Word 6, the one with
built-in virus-friendly features. When I receive a Word
document, I save it and use a binary editor to read it.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 02:16:19 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said KLH in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>[...]But a statistic I heard in class once was
>that Men and Women are greater than 90% alike (sorry, I do not recall the
>exact percentage) .
I believe it is 96%, and I am married to a molecular biologist. I
recall I was startled that it was so large a difference.
Nevertheless, the reality is that we are different in average character.
Variations between men and women are not greater than variations amongst
either alone, but there are fundamentally different patterns of behavior
amidst populations.
>So attempting to classify a person's ability at linguistics or math based
>upon gender seems to be an act of futillity---or segregation.
It is, but that is *not* the same as recognizing diversity, and even
characterizing it. Of course all men and all women share various
graduations of the same characteristics; we're the same species. But
trying to say that the typical neurobiological nature of the feminine
mindset is not ascertably different than the masculine mindset seems
stretching the point, to me.
>My feeling is that the trend of women not taking up occupations in computers
>is because of enviroment rather than any sort of inherent capacity.
Almost certainly. The difference would be much less if the environment
allowed pure choice. But there would still be a difference, I think.
There might well be, though, more women than men, AFAIK. I guess it
depends on whether you think of it (programming, which is your meaning,
although it isn't all "occupations in computers") as a
mathematical/engineering pursuit, or a artistic/intellectual pursuit.
Just to add my own 2 dollars worth of inevitable bias into the mix.
--
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: Arthur Frain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why use Linux?
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:04:53 -0700
(Sorry, this is copied here from another newsfeed,
as the feed I post from didn't get this message)
John Stevens wrote:
> The end user can do some things that a reseller cannot do. The EULA,
> for example, is not the same document as the contracts signed by a
> reseller.
> Dell, Compaq, IBM . . . they all complain about the same thing. We
> pretty much get to do a few (VERY few) cosmetic tweaks (which are almost
> all limited to changing a few graphic files, and some theme stuff), and
> some very simple configurations chosen off a list that MS allows, and
> very little else.
> Believe me, we'd *LOVE* to get more control over how Windows runs on our
> hardware . . . we're in the business of selling quality products, and
> having users such as SPUD complain about stuff that we, for the most
> part, cannot change is just galling. I hear about this kind of stuff,
> and I get a nervous twitch about not being able to fix it . . .
> Still, remember why MS wants this: they want to have a know starting
> point for their technical support staff to work from, and to a certain
> extent, it is better to be working on an install that is configured or
> installed in a known-broken-way, than to be starting totally in the
> dark.
> Obviously, MS doesn't want to sell you problems, either, but the simple
> fact of the matter is that with a separation between hardware and
> software manufacturers, discrepancies occur that cannot be fixed easily
> due to inflexible business agreements.
The problems I've had have never been with
the setup, and never with the HP hardware.
The problems are exclusively with the operation
of Win98SE. I can't imagine why anyone would
find this surprising.
>> So tell me:
>>
>> 1. What specifically is this dross?
> Me, too. I want to know details, if you have any.
Sorry, John. There are no details to have. This
is purely a fiction Spud made up to avoid
admitting he's been lying about Windows quality
and HP problems.
The response I got was "I already explained that',
which of course is untrue and obvious to anyone
who looks at the thread. He's just inventing
mythical problems and then weaseling out of
admitting it. I'm not surprised. He already
got caught misquoting posts by cutting the
parts that weren't convenient for him.
>> 2. How do I locate it and identify it?
>> 3. How do I remove it?
>> It must be really easy, because this is
>> an "ease of use" OS - should be something
>> the average user could do, but maybe
>> it requires superior knowledge like yours.
> And if it can legally be fixed, believe me, I'll do everything I can to
> make sure that the right people find out and fix it.
This is exactly the reason I had no qualms
about buying HP comnputers to run my business.
This is exactly the response I've gotten from
HP people any time I've had a question or
problem.
I've dealt with HP for over 30 years using
a whole host of test equipment, desktop
calculators, IEEE-488 stuff, pocket calculators,
plotters, and more recently computers and
printers. Other than the cheap oscilloscopes
HP made for a few years in the 70's, the
products have been innovative in design and
reliable in use. If anybody had a reason to
hold a grudge against HP, it would be me,
since they were smart enough not to hire me
in the early 70's.
It's *my* computer we're talking about here,
so I know the facts. Although I don't use
Windows much any more, it is fairly easy
to tell if networking is set up correctly,
and Win98SE makes it nearly impossible for
the user to set it up incorrectly. Only
Windows itself could have caused the networking
and PnP problems I had.
If PnP worked correctly, I wouldn't have had
the problems I had, and there's no way that
any imaginary 'dross' would cause a problem
either.
Thanks for your concern and honesty. The latter
has been lacking in the responses I've gotten
in this thread.
Arthur
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I had a reality check today :(
Date: 28 Jul 2000 06:10:08 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Jim Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:>
:> *BZZT*
:> Under linux at least, a serial port can be your "console" so you can
: compile,
:> boot, tinker and play all you want at the other end of that serial line,
:> wherever in the world you want that to be.
: Serial ports don't have more than a few hundred feet of distance on them at
: best. I suppose if you attach hardware that converts it to ethernet with a
: terminal server of some sort it could work, but then you're off into 3rd
: party solutions, which similar solutions exist for NT.
By that standard, hooking a DEC VT220 up to the serial port
also counts as a "third party solution", since DEC didn't
make my Unix. By that standard, using a Sony Trintitron
monitor on a Windows NT box is a "third party solution" too.
I think that's taking the notion of a "third party solution"
a bit too far.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
