Linux-Advocacy Digest #126, Volume #28 Mon, 31 Jul 00 08:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux, easy to use? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark (fungus)
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark (fungus)
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark (fungus)
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark (fungus)
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Phillip Lord)
Re: Which Linux should I try? (Sorry, reposting to correct error) (Tim Palmer)
Re: Changing LILO in Mandrake? (Tim Palmer)
Re: Linux = Yet Another Unix (Tim Palmer)
Re: Can Linux Support PCMIA (Tim Palmer)
Re: Linux, easy to use? (Tim Palmer)
Re: Does VB and SQL work under linux? (Tim Palmer)
Re: Linux = Yet Another Unix (Tim Palmer)
Re: Linux can save you money on electricity! (Tim Palmer)
Re: Linux can save you money on electricity! (Tim Palmer)
Re: I dream of Indrema.... (Tim Palmer)
Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots (Tim Palmer)
Re: Linux, easy to use? (Tim Palmer)
Re: How Can I contribute? (Tim Palmer)
Re: Linux, easy to use? (Tim Palmer)
Re: Linux can save you money on electricity! (Tim Palmer)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: 31 Jul 2000 11:12:28 GMT
On Mon, 31 Jul 2000 04:44:51 -0500, John Sanders wrote:
>Pete Goodwin wrote:
> Oh, man! You mean I could be typing 'dir' instead of 'ls'? Damn!
Yep. Check your fileutils package ... (-;
What bothers me is having to type "cat". I mean, why type "cat" when I could
type "dog" instead ?
>of DOS for sure. Now I'll be able to _read_ what I type. (I always
You know, it may seem odd to us that someone wouldn't be able to read their
own typing, but after seeing Tim Palmers posts, I guess it seems like more
of a legitimate concern (-;
Cheers,
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: fungus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:13:24 GMT
Mike Byrns wrote:
>
> "petilon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > Oracle Parallel Server is the only RDBMS that supports
> > load balanced clustering.
>
> Nope sorry. Those are MIRRORS of the same db, not the same
> db distributed between. Their clustering capability only takes
> advantage of load balancing because all the data is on both
> servers
Correct. If one machine goes down, then the system can KEEP
ON RUNNING (it'll be slower until the other machine comes
back up, but it'll keep going).
...we seem to be getting somewhere at last!!!
> You're just covering up inadequacies like Ellison is.
Robustness and uptime is an "inadequacy"???
...maybe we're not.
--
<\___/>
/ O O \
\_____/ FTB.
------------------------------
From: fungus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:18:00 GMT
petilon wrote:
>
> "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Oracle Parallel Server is the only RDBMS that supports
> > > load balanced clustering.
> >
> > Nope sorry. Those are MIRRORS of the same db, not the same db
> > distributed between.
>
> What you mean to say is that data is shared by the machines
> participating in the cluster. This is how real clusters are
> supposed to work.
>
Not since Ballmer has redefined the word.
--
<\___/>
/ O O \
\_____/ FTB.
------------------------------
From: fungus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:23:25 GMT
Courageous wrote:
>
> > > > So what is wrong with dividing up your database among many
> > > > machines? If any *ONE* of those machines crash, a portion of
> > > > the database is now unavailable, so the system as a whole
> > > > becomes unavailable.
>
> Not if there's replication involved.
>
But there *isn't* - that's how Microsoft got the high
scores...they took out the replication.
It's the difference between Deep Blue and the infamous
cluster of Linux machines. Counting the number of CPUs
and multiplying by the clock frequency doesn't tell you
the speed of the computer except for very simple tasks.
--
<\___/>
/ O O \
\_____/ FTB.
------------------------------
From: fungus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:26:09 GMT
petilon wrote:
>
> "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > You might not know this but Microsoft works best when
> > threatened. And you nixers were instrumental to this
> > current Microsoft victory!
>
> The Microsoft division that includes SQL Server posted a
> negative growth in revenue for the first time in Q4 2000.
>
...and Oracle's merket capitalization has overtaken Microsoft's.
Bill Gates lost his position as the richest man in the world
(he might have it back again now, I haven't checked, but he
lost it for a while).
--
<\___/>
/ O O \
\_____/ FTB.
------------------------------
From: Phillip Lord <[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: 31 Jul 2000 12:31:04 +0100
>>>>> "Max" == T Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Max> The criterion for a standard spec don't seem based on
Max> engineering so much as happenstance.
Or as Ray Davis so memorably put "its a mixed up, muddled up,
shook up world".
Max> I've observed, in my work, that the chance of your favorite
Max> shell being the one you first learned are about 100% *if that
Max> was the first computer system you ever used regularly*.
Sometimes you can be forced into changing. I think that bash
is my favourite shell. The first shell that I used was tcsh, when I
was first using unix. Then I ended up on a windows system for several
years, where the best shell available is bash. I didn't really like it
at the time, so I did look for a tcsh port, but in my experience the
cygnus tools where the best.
Ironically now I am back on a unix system full time, I have
gone back to using tcsh (although I still program in sh!). This is
largely because its what everyone else uses here. It appears even in
the local environment, standardisation is more important than personal
preference.
Phil
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Which Linux should I try? (Sorry, reposting to correct error)
Date: 31 Jul 2000 07:44:35 -0500
Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tim Palmer wrote:
>
>> Tom Loach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Do yourself a favor and don't buy Corel.
>>
>> I allready did myself a favor and deleated Lienux completly. Now I halve Windo's
>and I am happie.
>
>Which half did you keep?
The Windo's half.
>
>Colin Day
>
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Changing LILO in Mandrake?
Date: 31 Jul 2000 07:44:55 -0500
Cap'n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I'll admit I'm somewhat of a newbie to Mandrake Linux,
>and this is probably a stupid question...but, I need the
>answer.
>
>I just installed Mandrake 7.1 on my system in a dual boot with
>Win98. My hard drive is in four partitions:
>
>Partition 1: Win98 system files (1.5 GB) - hdc1
>Partition 2: Win98 programs (8 GB) - hdc2
>Partition 3: Linux Swap (133 MB) - hdc6
>Partition 4: Linux Native: Mandrake Distro (2.3 GB) - hdc7
>
>After I installed Mandrake and LILO, Linux is the first
>boot option and loads Mandrake after 10 seconds,
>unless I type Windows. I want to set it up so that Windows
>boots after 10 seconds, unless I type Linux.
>
>What's the easiest way to change this in Mandrake? Or
>if someone could point me to a Mandrake HOWTO Web link
>for this, I would appreciate it.
>
>Thanks!
>
>
>*** The Cap'n ****
Eddit a text fial and recompial kernal.
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.alpha
Subject: Re: Linux = Yet Another Unix
Date: 31 Jul 2000 07:44:45 -0500
Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"." wrote:
>
>> Linux = Yet Another Unix. I think that every one of these Linux cult
>> members should be sentenced to one year of having to perform tech support
>> for end-users of that OS.
>
>I have done my own tech support for over two years, does that count?
>
>
>> Then they could explain to the average user why
>> Linux STILL does not seamlessly support common hardware, such a S3-based
>> graphics.
>
>Because the vendors haven't published the specs or mad binary drivers?
>
>
>> Explain to the end-user how to compile/install a framebuffer
>> SVGA kernel.
>
>Why?
Because they half to to make their graffics work.
>
>
>> Expain what a modeline is...Need a parallel port ZIP drive?
>> Say the magic words and type the completely cryptic commands and no
>> problem!! Right?? Red Hat vs. Mandrake vs. SuSE vs. whatever....standing
>> in MicroCenter and seeing the puzzled looks as normal people try to decide
>> WHICH Linux is better.
>
>Yes, who wants to make choices? Why can't people just use what
>Microsoft wants them to use?
>
>
>> Just bought Code Warrior? Doesn't work with your
>> X-Server because you have an S3 Trio 3D video card and have to use frame
>> buffering? Oh well....explain THAT one. Just purchased Accelerated X and
>> it also does not function, even though there is not a HINT on the box of
>> unsupported hardware? Oh well....
>>
>> Linux will NEVER succeed in the common marketplace until it can LOSE THE
>> HARDWARE COMPATIBILITY LIST!! PEOPLE DON'T CARE ABOUT HCLs!!! THEY JUST
>> WANT IT TO WORK!! MICROSOFT WORKS!! GET IT YET????
>>
>
>So buy from a Linux VAR, such as VA Linux.
>
>
>>
>> Unix has been around for 30 years and has not "revolutionized" the computer
>> world. It never will because the Unix world is run by cultists rather than
>> business people.
>>
>
>And what revolutions has Microsoft made?
Window's 98.
>
>>
>> What a JOKE!!
>>
>> --
>> Identity is of no importance
>> or relevance. Get over it.
>
>But what would relevance or importance be if identity were irrelevant
>or unimportant? Your metaphysics is as bad as your OS advocacy.
>
>Colin Day
>
>
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Can Linux Support PCMIA
Date: 31 Jul 2000 07:45:06 -0500
Christopher Fardell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Can Corel Linux support the PCMIA ports on a Pioneer Notebook?
>If if can would it support an ethernet card inserted in that port?
>
No you hafe to have Window's.
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: 31 Jul 2000 07:45:26 -0500
John Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Pete Goodwin wrote:
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bart Oldeman) wrote in
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> >Readability? I don't see much of a difference.
>>
>> 'ls' is less readable than 'dir'
>> 'cat' is less readable than 'type'
>> 'grep' is definately less readable than 'find' or 'search'
>>
>> I seem to remember the UNIX shells were designed to be cryptic; I can agree
>> with you in that the DOS shell is not much better, but I still think IMHO
>> that 'dir', 'type' or 'find' is a bit more readable than the UNIX
>> equivalents.
>>
>> --
>> Pete Goodwin
>> ---
>> Coming soon, Kylix, Delphi on Linux.
>> My success does not require the destruction of Microsoft.
>
>
>
> Oh, man! You mean I could be typing 'dir' instead of 'ls'? Damn!
>That settles it. I throwing this lame Linux out and getting me a copy
>of DOS for sure. Now I'll be able to _read_ what I type. (I always
>wondered what the hell I was typing).
>
>
Or you can get Windo's and not half to ty[e annything at all.
>
>--
>John W. Sanders
>---------------
>"there" in or at a place.
>"their" of or relating to them.
>"they're" contraction of 'they are'.
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does VB and SQL work under linux?
Date: 31 Jul 2000 07:45:16 -0500
YAWN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>hi all:
>
>i am thinking of putting Linux on my laptop (32MB RAM, P200, 2.0GB),
>and i am wondering if i can run Visual Basics and SQL in Linux.
All LIE-nux have is MY-SQL, which is like a MS-SQL Jr.
>the
>reason being that i have classes in school that require the usage of
>these softwares. i am aware of that i can run VMWare, but i don't
>think my hardware can handle it.
>
>please direct answers to my email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>TIA
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux = Yet Another Unix
Date: 31 Jul 2000 07:45:36 -0500
The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Jeff Sturm
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
>on Fri, 21 Jul 2000 00:03:10 GMT
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> Linux is for folks who would rather spend all day
>>> RTFM instead of setting up their computer and
>>> actually doing some productive work.
>>
>>And just what else would you recommend (that runs on my ALPHA
>>processor)?
>
>Well, you could run that ultra-new technology NT on it,
>which is supported on no less than 3 platforms.
>It's officially supported by Microsoft and Compaq...
>
>*noise in the back of the room*
>
>Hmm...hang on a second...
>
>*more noises, one that suspiciously sounds like "Telegram"*
>
>...OK, I'm back (opens envelope)...oh no...NT not supported
>on Alpha? *And* the PPC??
>
>Dang. I guess you'll just have to go back to that
>extremely sucky zero-cost solution that scales from
>a tiny 386 to an IBM S/390, has robust multitasking,
>uptimes measurable in terms of years, an industry
>standard set of GUIs,
Windo's is tghe industry standerd not KDE.
>and millions, if not billions,
>of lines of source code freely available.
>
>On both of them.
>
>Doesn't that just suck rocks? :-)
>
>>(Newsgroups trimmed to comp.os.linux.advocacy.)
>
>--
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- 100% recycled sarcasm
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux can save you money on electricity!
Date: 31 Jul 2000 07:45:46 -0500
B'ichela <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 29 Jul 2000 19:00:13 -0500, Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> As someone on this newsgroup said quite snidely. Linux can use
>>>the old style of computer equipment called terminals.
>>
>>Yeah and all you cando is tipe in them.
> Might do you some good, you might learn how to spell for once!
Your dum.
>>
>>>This can be a very big deal in a larger environment were
>>>the system administration needs to not only maintain the hardware
>>>including the Uninteruptable Power Supply (UPS) or the backup
>>>generator(s)).
>>
>>So give all the work to the usors.
> Any one in the business world of management will tell you that
>leaving people to their own devices (not nessarly computer hardware)
>in a business will result in a mess.
> Remember your little Linux piece. you made wisecracks about
>all of those Linux Electricians? In the corporate world. having every
>user creating and modifiy his hardware results in all kinds of
>disasters!
Same gos for the Linux kernal. What a dissaster!
>That means that the System Administration has to know not
>only how to run the main servers but how to modify and install umpteen
>numbers of video, sound and speciality hardware that may probally be
>used by one person!
>>> [1] at one time a lan was a buss type topoligy that would have
>>>allowed several clients/servers to connect to one wire. This was in
>>>some ways where a LAN was conenient. With the use of 100/10baset this
>>>is no longer the conveience that it once was. Like the dumb terminals
>>>mentioned above you need one drop for each. Now a lan really is not
>>>such a compettive system vs a set of terminals plugged into a terminal
>>>server. The same wire used for a 100/10baseT system can be used with
>>>terminals. In the wiring closet one still plugs them into a central
>>>box. Only its a terminal server instead of a hub or switch.
>>>
>>> Your comments on this piece are welcome.
>>
>>I'll replay to this: Your idea is dum. A terminnall is dum because it cant have GUI.
> For many people a GUI is NOT required. I am typing this using
>Vi under Slrn, right now on my main box. A gui often slows people
>down!
In the coperite world, you nead more than VI and SLRN.
>
>
>--
>
> B'ichela
>
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux can save you money on electricity!
Date: 31 Jul 2000 07:45:56 -0500
Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tim Palmer wrote:
>
>
>>
>> > On the Linux/unix server side, all the storage devices can be
>> >located at one location with all environmental controls in that one
>> >location. connected to the terminals in the offices of the people who
>> >need them.
>>
>> ...and what programmms wuold they run? VI? HA-HA! You cant' run Ofice on VT-100
>terminnal, you know!
>>
>
>And this is a disadvantage of VT-100's?
Yes. People want to run Ofice, and they nead a GUI for it not a crappey VT-100.
>
>
>
>>
>> > While for a small home or business environment some would say
>> >"Big Deal".
>>
>> Deffinnately. Big deal.
>>
>> >This can be a very big deal in a larger environment were
>> >the system administration needs to not only maintain the hardware
>> >including the Uninteruptable Power Supply (UPS) or the backup
>> >generator(s)).
>>
>> So give all the work to the usors.
>>
>
>The users should not be doing system administration.
and they shouldunt half to memmerize dum UNIX command's iether.
>
>
>>
>> > On my system here all I have are terminals. I was going to try
>> >a lan, a 10base2 system (still have the card in the 486 for it). But
>> >when I sat down and looked at the configuration of several clients
>> >that would not be on 24x7 to save power or the tendency of users to
>> >turn the machines OFF improperly I just said "screw this topoligy!"
>>
>> ...I doesant wan't too work! I;ll let the users due it!
>>
>> >Setting up NFS and NIS on both the server and clients and maintaining
>> >backups across my planned 3 node network would have been an excersize
>> >in frustration. (If thats bad for a 3 node, what about 40 node?)
>>
>> ...the problem migte be your using UNIX. UNIX is dum. You half to forst it too due
>everything.
>>
>
>As opposed to Windows, where even forcing doesn't always help.
In Windo's you don't half to force it works through the GUI. UNIX just sais NO I DONT
WANT TO DUE IT YOU HALF TO 'make' ME!
>
>
>> >such a compettive system vs a set of terminals plugged into a terminal
>> >server. The same wire used for a 100/10baseT system can be used with
>> >terminals. In the wiring closet one still plugs them into a central
>> >box. Only its a terminal server instead of a hub or switch.
>> >
>> > Your comments on this piece are welcome.
>>
>> I'll replay to this: Your idea is dum. A terminnall is dum because it cant have GUI.
>
>What if one doesn't need a GUI?
>
Then your probly a UNIX nerd.
>Colin Day
>
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I dream of Indrema....
Date: 31 Jul 2000 07:46:06 -0500
Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> With all the talk and hype about information appliances, it is
>worth noting that there is only one type of really successful one to date
>-- the game console, a specialized computer for playing games on.
Shutt up, commy.
>
> And so far, most of them have been built on very proprietary
>hardware and operating systems, even the Playstation 2. But some new
>entries are based on hardware and software that is much more
>off-the-shelf. M$'s X-box is a clear example; it seems like a
>stripped-down PeeCee (Intel-x86 CPU, Nvidia video card) running a
>stripped-down version of Windows NT and using familiar API's such as
>DirectX and OpenGL.
>
Shutt up, commy.
> But there is one interesting new entry, the Indrema L600
>(www.indrema.com). It seems suspiciously like an X-box clone (Intel-x86
>CPU, Nvidia video card), but with one interesting difference: it will run
>a version of Linux. And also OpenGL, OpenAL, and OpenStream. OpenGL should
>need no introduction; OpenAL (www.openal.com) is a recent open-source
>audio API, and OpenStream is an open-source streaming-media format being
>worked on by Indrema, among others.
Shutt up, commy.
>
> There is not much released about the Indrema L600 and its
>software, but this is what has come out so far:
Shutt up, commy.
>
> Most of its software will be open-source, such as its web browser
>(Mozilla), but there will be a closed-source "gatekeeper" module that will
>handle security and authentication. Software must be certified by Indrema
>in order to run on the console; the payment for this certification process
>will be a flat fee for freeware, but will involve royalties for payware.
>This parallels typical game-console business arrangements.
>
Shutt up, commy.
> There are supposed to be 30 or so games lined up for it; Loki's
>catalog may be a big source of Indrema games.
>
> Prospects?
>
Shutt up, commy.
> One problem is that Indrema is a small company without a
>pre-existing apparatus for marketing and brick-and-mortar distribution,
>like the one that Sony had had when it entered the game-console field with
>its Playstation. So it may be difficult for the Indrema L600 to get started.
>
> On the plus side, it uses mostly readily-available API's, which
>make it (and the X-box) relatively easy to develop games for. It will
>apparently be *very* easy to port a working Linux version of a game. Most
>other game consoles, however, require rather specialized development
>software.
>
> So it will be interesting to see how this contender fares.
>--
>Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
>My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
Commy.
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Dream World of Linux Zealots
Date: 31 Jul 2000 07:46:17 -0500
Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Slava Pestov wrote:
>
>>> The reason for the men -vs- women disparity is that people who share your
>>> ignorant views are still around.
>>I base my opinions on the latest RESEARCH in the field.
>
> I wonder if Mr. Kulkis would accept research that suggests that
>the sexes are fundamentally alike in some important psychological areas;
Men are bettre than wommen.
>something that would be contrary to his "men are from Mars, women are
>from Venus" views.
>
> However, given that he believes that the loss of the Soviet
>Union's Eastern European empire was some devious plot, I suspect that he
>will continue to be ideologically dogmatic on this issue.
Shutt up commy.
>--
>Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
>My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: 31 Jul 2000 07:46:27 -0500
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Palmer) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>And xterm is a Lie-nux DOS box, but Lie-nux loosers insisst on calling
>>it "xterm", probly to avoid traidmark infridngement.
>
>xterm existed long before DOS boxes, and comparing an xterm to a DOS box is
>a bit of a joke.
Their both the same thing- you tipe commands in them and stop using GUI.
>Any of the UNIX shell's easily beat the crap out of DOS
>boxes - apart from readability.
Tha'ts why Windo's has a GUI. DOS box's sucks.
>
>--
>Pete Goodwin
>---
>Coming soon, Kylix, Delphi on Linux.
>My success does not require the destruction of Microsoft.
>
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How Can I contribute?
Date: 31 Jul 2000 07:46:37 -0500
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tim Palmer wrote:
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Hello,
>> >
>> >I am working for a company which already have open sourced device
>> >drivers and applications for linux. We have certain kerna patches
>> >and device driver enhancements that we like to contribute to Linux
>> >community in general. Who should we contact? Thanks for any
>> >pointers!
>>
>> Contact you're butholl.
>Is that how they do it at Microsoft?
No thats how thay do it at Linu's butholl party.
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, easy to use?
Date: 31 Jul 2000 07:46:47 -0500
Courageous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Pete Goodwin wrote:
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Palmer) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> >And xterm is a Lie-nux DOS box, but Lie-nux loosers insisst on calling
>> >it "xterm", probly to avoid traidmark infridngement.
>
>Gawd. Either you're, what, 12? Or you simply flunked English.
>And it's clear you have no idea, really, what an Xterm even
>*is*.
>
I alreaddy told you its a DOS box on LIE-nux.
>
>
>C/
------------------------------
From: Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux can save you money on electricity!
Date: 31 Jul 2000 07:46:58 -0500
Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> ...and what programmms wuold they run? VI? HA-HA! You cant' run Ofice on VT-100
>> terminnal, you know!
>I'm not sure why I care anymore, but just in case ...
>Are you aware that a vt100 terminal is what they nowadays call
>`thin client' that *doesn't* run vi?
You meen VT-100's can't even run VI?
>
>>> While for a small home or business environment some would say
>>>"Big Deal".
>> Deffinnately. Big deal.
>It is. For such places as computerized grocery stores or libraries or
>hospitals, cheap terminals are a good choice.
Just what a hospital nead's. The secertarys ca'nt even use them.
>
>>>This can be a very big deal in a larger environment were
>>>the system administration needs to not only maintain the hardware
>>>including the Uninteruptable Power Supply (UPS) or the backup
>>>generator(s)).
>> So give all the work to the usors.
>Can't do. That requies the users be trained and that,
Exact;y. Terminnal's make users tipe UNIX command's and they half to be traned. A GUI
let's user work without traning them.
>in some industries
>that try to use as cheap workforce as possible (junk food chains come to
>mind), is too expensive. Also, what about a library of *public access*
>terminals? The practice has shown that it's better *not* to let Joe
>Sixpack do any maintenance on a system more complicated than a wooden
>hammer.
So why do you wan't too give him UNIX?
>
>>> Terminals also don't break down often or require a special
>>>reconfig if terminal needs to be replaced. Terminals are generic
>>>enough that replacements or repairs are very standardized. Because any
>>>wyse 75 is a wyse75 and the configuration is not likely to change from
>>>one wyse 75 to another. The users don't have the ability to physically
>>>add a soundcard or a fibre channel card to a terminal.
>Correct.
>
>> ...not to mentian graffics!
>whatd'ya mean?
>in relation to a grocery store?
Eaze of use. Ever herd of it?
>
>>> On my system here all I have are terminals. I was going to try
>>>a lan, a 10base2 system (still have the card in the 486 for it). But
>>>when I sat down and looked at the configuration of several clients
>>>that would not be on 24x7 to save power or the tendency of users to
>>>turn the machines OFF improperly I just said "screw this topoligy!"
>> ...I doesant wan't too work! I;ll let the users due it!
>I've administrated a ``let the users do it'' network in a high school
>environment and it's an experience that I wouldn't want to have again.
Thats' why the adminnistrater has to do the work not make the user's work that is what
UNIX terminnals does.
>
>>>Setting up NFS and NIS on both the server and clients and maintaining
>>>backups across my planned 3 node network would have been an excersize
>>>in frustration. (If thats bad for a 3 node, what about 40 node?)
>It can be done, but you're correct--it's generally hard to do and quite
>pointless.
>
>> ...the problem migte be your using UNIX. UNIX is dum. You half to forst it too
>> due everything.
>I don't even want to comment on this.
>
>>>Never mind that Windows or Linux/Unix workstations need to bootup and
>>>proper shutdown is required, or a possible file system corruption can
>>>happen thus a UPS would be required to protect against a mains power
>>>failure (not good agains doofus users however).
>There are the thin clients and diskless workstations, so that wouldn't
>actually be a problem.
>
>> I'll replay to this: Your idea is dum. A terminnall is dum because it cant have
>> GUI.
>That could possibly convince a suit looking at a ticklist but it's
>certainly not an actual issue.
>
>--
>Andres Soolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Been through hell?
>What did you bring back for me?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
