Linux-Advocacy Digest #451, Volume #28 Thu, 17 Aug 00 10:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: It's official, Microsoft porting applications to Linux (Mark S. Bilk)
lucky7.to - What a lucky Free URL Redirection Service! (Christine)
Re: OS advertising in the movies... (was Re: Microsoft MCSE) (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux
growth stagnating (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: OS advertising in the movies... (was Re: Microsoft MCSE) (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (rj friedman)
Re: OS advertising in the movies... (was Re: Microsoft MCSE) (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Updated Steve/Mike List -- 38 Fake Names (was: So ya' wanna' run
Linux?...I have a bridge for sale in Bklyn..... (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous
Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates) (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: The dusty Linux shelves at CompUSA ("Ryan D. Walberg (MCSD)")
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux
growth stagnating (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Marty)
Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous Wintrolls
and Authentic Linvocates) (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh (Not Me)
Re: Popular Culture (was: It's official...) (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: It's official, Microsoft porting applications to Linux
Date: 17 Aug 2000 12:50:34 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Milton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In a desperate attempt, to regain some legitimacy in the high-tech
>software arena, Microsoft is letting a an experienced 3rd party,
>Mainsoft, port it's applications to the state of the art operating
>system, Linux.
I talked to a Mainsoft representative at the LinuxWorld Expo
today. He told me two things:
o They pay Microsoft for access to the source code of
Windows.
So, buying any Mainsoft-ported software (even if it isn't
Microsoft software) puts money into the pockets of Bill
Gates.
o In comparison with Winelib, he said, the Mainsoft
libraries implement the full 32-bit Windows API, whereas
Winelib can only handle the 16-bit Windows 3.1 API.
Farther up the same aisle at the show, a Wine programmer
(from CodeWeavers) assured me that (as I had thought) Wine
and Winelib certainly do implement the Win32 API, and much
more. See http://www.winehq.com/about.html
So the Mainsoft guy had told me a very serious and self-
serving untruth.
>The results, so far, have been disappointing.
The full quote is interesting:
>http://www.wininformant.com/display.asp?ID=2874
But the process is even more complex than it sounds, since
most Microsoft applications -- especially those in the
Office suite -- use a number of proprietary interfaces,
and each application requires specific workarounds. The
results, so far, have been disappointing.
In other words, Microsoft's applications use secret Windows
system calls and facilities that it doesn't make available
to other software vendors.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christine)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: lucky7.to - What a lucky Free URL Redirection Service!
Date: 17 Aug 2000 12:53:13 GMT
lucky7.to - What a lucky Free URL Redirection Service!
If the URL of your homepage is too long and too complex,
e.g. www.free3hostingg.com/myaccount/index.html
e.g. www.uuwaterlooooo.edu/cs/~tommy/index.html
Instant Activiation!!!
After signing up, you can have a free
and a short URL and use it immediately as follow:
e.g. lucky7.to/tom
Please visit http://lucky7.to
to sign up for your own FREE URL
I hope you will enjoy using our Free service.
Thank you very much.
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS advertising in the movies... (was Re: Microsoft MCSE)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 07:54:46 -0500
Mike Marion wrote:
> I think Nathanial's was: Starship Invasions - http://us.imdb.com/Title?0076760
Actually that's not the one I was thinking of. But I can't seem to
remember.
I'll have to look at my vid collection later and see if I can spot it.
I know i still have the tape somewhere, but it's buried pretty deep:-).
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says
Linux growth stagnating
Date: 17 Aug 2000 12:57:52 GMT
In article <STIm5.4248$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Explain your purported "lack of reentrancy" and "memory protection"
> and how they affect the number of Windows NT servers required to
> service a given number of clients. I just don't see the
> correlation.
I would imagine that the lack of reentrancy refers to poorly
implemented libraries on the platform; I have heard stories
(unconfirmed by myself) that the platform uses a lot of spinlocks
instead of using something more reentrant (like context parameters
which can be stored on the local stack.)
The lack of memory protection almost certainly refers to the way that
all servers are implemented (in C/C++, languages not known for their
safety) as multi-threaded servers, instead of multi-process servers.
This is a direct consequence of the sheer cost of process creation on
NT, and it results in servers where a crash of a service[*] that is
handling a client causing the whole server (not the thread, but the
process) to fall over because the individual services are not
partitioned from each other. Now the likes of MTS focus on
connectionless services, resulting in a situation where in the face of
the loss of a service you can (assuming the crash didn't damage
something) just retry and have it work, but for all that, it is still
preferable to not have a particular service go down in the middle of a
transaction. Unix servers tend to have more memory protection ('cos
it is much cheaper to use processes, and they offer much more
isolation) so the problem bites far less.
Given that you have a system that is less reentrant (forcing more
spinlocks to avoid trouble) and less stable (due to reduced levels of
memory protection) you reach the inescapable conclusion that you need
more hardware to serve an equivalent load. That's just plain obvious.
Most of these things are not required to be necessarily so on NT; they
could be fixed. It just hasn't happened yet AFAIK...
(Another factor that makes NT less capable at serving heavy loads is
the degree of OO technology used. The problem with OO (particularly
where you have all your methods virtual, as is necessary with COM for
good technical reasons) is that it has poorer code and data locality,
which makes both disk- and RAM-caching less effective, degrading
performance. Sure, OO has loads of advantages but locality of
reference isn't one of them. Unix uses more procedural C, and that is
easier for hardware to speed-boost.)
Donal.
[* Overloading this word horribly. ]
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Actually, come to think of it, I don't think your opponent, your audience,
or the metropolitan Tokyo area would be in much better shape.
-- Jeff Huo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS advertising in the movies... (was Re: Microsoft MCSE)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 07:57:53 -0500
Mike Marion wrote:
>
> Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
>
> > I liked Starblazers, haven't seen Captain Harlock. I think I'm biased
> > towards Robotech because I remember coming home from school to catch
> > them when they were new in the states. I watched them religiously at
> > that time, and I always loved, LOVED the models that came out of the
> > series. Anybody else remember those models? You could work on them for
>
> I didn't have any models, but I did have one of the planes that transformed.
> It was pretty big too.. about a foot long when in plane mode.
Was it perhaps the Transformer called Jetfire? It was white with red
stripes on it and had 'battle armor' that was red and black. I had that
particular toy, plus about fifteen of the really little ones that they
released as actual Robotech toys. I don't remember any Robotech toys
that were of that size, but Jetfire was huge. And he's still my
favorite toy:-). It took my months to save up the $35 I needed to buy
him back then. Ah, for the good old days.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (rj friedman)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: 17 Aug 2000 13:03:34 GMT
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 00:56:40 T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
¯>Most people are content with the concept that companies make software in
¯>order to make money and that the company has an obligation to maximize
¯>its profit.
¯A *corporations* supposed 'obligation' to maximize profits is hearsay,
¯at best...
I agree - no corporation is under any alleged obligation to
maximize profits. This is another of those myths - much like
the myth of the 'free market' and the 'invisible hand' -
that believers in predatory capitalism foist on the
unknowledgeable public. Actually, *maximizing* anything is
self-destructive in the long run - it's like a virus that
eventually kills off its host by expanding unchecked.
What a they should be seeking to do is *optimize* their
profits, rather than maximize them - engage in symbiotic
rather than parasitic behavior. Unfortunately, that
responsible style of capitalism is honored more in the
breach than in the practice in this day and age.
________________________________________________________
[RJ] OS/2 - Live it, or live with it.
rj friedman Team ABW
Taipei, Taiwan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To send email - remove the `yyy'
________________________________________________________
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS advertising in the movies... (was Re: Microsoft MCSE)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 08:00:36 -0500
Mike Marion wrote:
>
> Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
>
> > Yeah, it's kind of interesting to watch the same cartoons you watched as
> > a kid and pick up some dirty little side joke that made no sense to you
> > ages ago. Or even references to historical figures and such. It makes
> > it a lot more funnier when you remember your thought as a child, and
> > then put it together with what you know now.
>
> No kidding. I think they do that so that parents wouldn't be driven nuts by
> the Saturday morning cartoons as the kids watched them.
>
> At least they used to.. I see my sister's kids watching stuff now that just
> plain sucks if you're over the age of 8 or so.
Yeah, I think they focus waaaaay too hard on keeping the children
mindlessly enthralled without giving them anything to think about now.
Ever seen a Pokemon cartoon? What the hell is that about?
I also think another factor is that the original Looney Tunes (way back
when) were written for adults, it wasn't until much later that it was
decided they were good kid's entertainment.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Updated Steve/Mike List -- 38 Fake Names (was: So ya' wanna' run
Linux?...I have a bridge for sale in Bklyn.....
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 08:14:47 -0500
"Mark S. Bilk" wrote:
> * Bylaws of the Usenet Committee To Take Steve/Mike
> To Fire Island In Drag And Get Him Laid
*LOL*!
Of course, that won't help with the multiple personality disorder, but
if we can get him tired out maybe he would quit posting for a few days.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 09:25:43 -0400
rj friedman wrote:
>
> On Wed, 16 Aug 2000 17:10:17 "Christopher Smith"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ¯> ¯...since I disgree with the law in principle and consider
> ¯> ¯most of the evidence to be irrelevant, it's hardly surprising I have a
> ¯> ¯different opinion to you, no ?
>
> ¯> The United States of America - and the European Common
> ¯> Market - and China - and Japan - and India - all say that
> ¯> your 'different opinion' is full of shit.
>
> ¯You mean, their legal systems. I sincerely doubt everyone in those
> ¯countries agrees on that point.
>
> The case before the courts was between the United States of
> America and MS. The United States of America won - live with
> it.
>
> ¯I fear I've been too subtle in trying to say arguments along the line of
> ¯"but they broke the law" don't carry too much weight with me.
>
> You haven't been too subtle - you have been downright
> stupid. The law is the law and when you break the law and
> get convicted of breaking the law you get punished. Live
> with it.
>
> ¯> Face reality sonny boy. It is not a case of the whole world
> ¯> being wrong and you being right.
>
> ¯Indeed, there are a lot of people who agree with me.
>
> Too bad for all of you. In a democracy not everybody likes
> every law - but they still have to abide by them - like it
> or not. MS broke the law; they got caught; the United States
> of America took them to court; the United Statesa of America
> proved they were guilty. Whether or not *you* like the law
> has nothing to do with it. Live with it.
Actually, MS is lucky. The Justice department rolled up 40 SEPERATE
lawsuits into one suit. If they had been forced to go to trial in
40 seperate suits, they probably wouldn't even exist any more,
and some states would have arrest warrants issued for racketeering.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
J: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous
Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 08:27:27 -0500
"Stephen S. Edwards II" wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aaron R. Kulkis) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> 8<SNIP>8
>
> >> No, it wasn't. It was meant to replace Novell, not Unix (something at
> >> which it has done exceedingly well - now Microsoft have decided to
> >> take aim on Unix).
> >
> >
> >HAR! HAR! HAR!
> >
> >Back in the days of Neutered Technology 3.X, Bill was claiming that
> >Neutered Technology 4. would be "a better Unix than Unix"
> >
> >So, from that statement, one can ONLY conclude that M$ already tried to
> >"take aim on Unix" and thus far, has failed miserably.
>
> Hmmm...
>
> - Every argument he makes never has any facts in it.
> - Has a smug and condesceding attitude.
> - He has a very long and annoying .signature.
>
> I dunno about you Christopher, but I've run out of
> reasons to keep this guy viewable any longer.
>
> *PLOINK!*
Whoah, it's starting to look like one a day. Pretty soon the only
people reading Aaron's posts are going to be me and the trolls (unless I
decide to finally get off my lazy ass (figuratively) and get a different
news reader).
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: "Ryan D. Walberg (MCSD)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The dusty Linux shelves at CompUSA
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 13:39:10 GMT
Isn't it possible that CompUSA added more Linux boxes, and by some freak
of randomness, those sold, instead of the highlited boxes?
Ryan
Mikey wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > A couple of weeks ago I did a little experiment at one of the NYC
> > CompUSA stores, I counted the Linux boxes on the shelves and marked
> > each one with a fluorescent high lighter to track them.
> >
> > In 4.5 weeks a grand total of 3 Linux boxes have been sold. This
> > includes, RH, SuSE, Corel, Mandrake and the associated "Power Packs".
>
> That means that they sold better than Win2K. :)
>
> > Pretty dismal if you ask me.....
>
> Nah, about as dismal as a troll's life. :P
>
> --
> Since-beer-leekz,
> Mikey
> Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam
> possit materiari?
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says
Linux growth stagnating
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 08:33:33 -0500
fred wrote:
> Ahh, here is the marvelousity of every conspiracy theory. The fact
> that no documentation exists supporting the theory implicitly proves
> that the theory is in fact correct!
Um, what the hell does 'marvelosity' mean?
Do you watch WWF? A big Edge and Christian fan?
They are the only people I've seen that use words like:
Hienosity, riteiousity, fortiuitosity, and yes 'marvelosity'.
Get your education somewhere other than TV. You may be amazed at what
you can learn.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 13:36:38 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said Marty in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >Chris Wenham wrote:
> >>
> >> >>>>> "rj" == rj friedman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >> > On Tue, 8 Aug 2000 15:04:02 "Christopher Smith"
> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > ÿ...since I disgree with the law in principle and consider
> >> > ÿmost of the evidence to be irrelevant, it's hardly surprising I have a
> >> > ÿdifferent opinion to you, no ?
> >>
> >> > Face reality sonny boy. It is not a case of the whole world
> >> > being wrong and you being right. Stick your head in the sand
> >> > and pretend all you want - but deep in your heart you have
> >> > to face the fact that you are 100% full of shit.
> >>
> >> And why are you so full of coprolalia?
> >
> >Either you're talking *way* over his head or you just misspelled "crapola".
>
> I think he meant "coprophilia", actually.
Turns out it was *way* over RJ's head.
"Full of what?"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is the GDI-in-kernel-mode thing really so bad?... (was Re: Anonymous
Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates)
Date: 17 Aug 2000 13:44:14 GMT
In article <8ng0ul$l8p$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Stephen S. Edwards II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aaron R. Kulkis) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[worthless stuff elided]
> Hmmm...
>
> - Every argument he makes never has any facts in it.
> - Has a smug and condesceding attitude.
> - He has a very long and annoying .signature.
>
> I dunno about you Christopher, but I've run out of
> reasons to keep this guy viewable any longer.
>
> *PLOINK!*
I ditched him for his stupid .sig ages ago. Most people round here
seem to be guilty from time to time of fact-free argument and bad
attitude, but very few hand out a (long) page full of canned diatribe
with every post...
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Actually, come to think of it, I don't think your opponent, your audience,
or the metropolitan Tokyo area would be in much better shape.
-- Jeff Huo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: Not Me <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 08:45:00 -0500
On Thu, 17 Aug 2000 14:06:32 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew J.
Brehm) wrote:
>D. Spider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> >I do _not_ agree than an unalienable right can be forfeited.
>> >
>> >If rights must not be violated, they can also not be forfeited.
>> >Otherwise the right is worth nothing.
>>
>> So you are an absolute pacifist?
>>
>
>Not really.
>
>But I would not believe I had a right to kill somebody under any
>circumstances.
Even if someone is holding a gun to your head. ready to pull the
trigger?
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Popular Culture (was: It's official...)
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2000 08:45:24 -0500
Bob Hauck wrote:
>
> On Wed, 16 Aug 2000 14:11:05 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >In other words, Dad was right when he said, "These are the best days of
> >your life."
>
> Oh, no, he wasn't. Or at least, he doesn't have to be. I'm going to
> be 40 soon and wouldn't trade my life now for my life at 20. I'm much
> happier with my life, have a lot more money, and even feel better
> physically now compared with then (no more partying plus a good workout
> regimen made a huge difference in that last).
>
> Given that, I can stand not being up-to-date with "popular culture".
Actually, mentally and financially I am much, much better off now than I
was at 20 (and that's only six years for me :-). But physically?
Yuck! At twenty I was working on a dairy/beef/crop farm and busting my
ass day in and day out. I would love to do that for a month a take off
a few of the pounds I've put on in the interim. I don't do well with
pointless exercise. But I would love to have something to 'do' that
made me exercise. I suppose when I get a nice house with an unfinished
basement I can 'exercise' by building the rooms I want. At least that
gives me something to look forward to in the physical fitness area.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
