Linux-Advocacy Digest #860, Volume #28 Sun, 3 Sep 00 17:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: How low can they go...? ("Nigel Feltham")
Re: Why I hate Windows... ("Anthony Wilson")
Re: How low can they go...? (Reality is a point of view)
Re: Why I hate Windows... ("Uncle Meat")
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Courageous)
Re: How low can they go...? (Bob Hauck)
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! (Kent Friis)
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! (Kent Friis)
Re: How low can they go...? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: How low can they go...? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: How low can they go...? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools (Steve Hix)
Re: Windows stability(Memory Comparison) (Kent Friis)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) ("Joe R.")
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools (Steve Hix)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ("Joe R.")
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools ("Joe R.")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 20:43:34 +0100
>And that was one option that's always been available, but about 60% of the
>OEM's chose to negotiate on a per processor agreement. What's the problem?
>And what does OEM's deal with Microsoft have anything to do with you? Do
you
>really care? I don't go into Mc Donalds and ask to see all the contracts
>with suppliers before ordering a #5, do you?
>
Well, you wouldn't like it if you ordered a big-mac (computer) and had to
pay for fries (or operating system) if you wanted them or not just because
the potato supplier (microsoft) did a deal to get mcdonalds to pay a
per-burger licence to supply fries to the customer.
Mcdonalds would then have to charge a lot extra if the customer wanted
crinkle cut fries (OS2 / Linux / FreeBSD) because the customer would still
be paying for the standard fries he didn't want or get due to the stupid
licencing agreement.
Most customers would go for the cheap option and have the standard fries as
they would have to pay for them anyway and the potato supplier would then
claim to make the most popular fries available when most of the sales of
their product were forced onto the customer who didn't want them. Sound
familiar?
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Anthony Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Anthony Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why I hate Windows...
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2000 20:27:38 +0100
look's like I stirred up a few wintroll minds oh well. Here's my answer to
their claims.
Erik:- if you advocate windows & getting work done, why are you browsing a
linux group. Is this a bizarre new form of Sado-Masochism?
Also, how can I properly configure a machine when the OS decides FOR ME how
everything should be set up - and then leaves me to correct it's errors with
basic and non-descript tools (namely Control Panel)
i await extra flaming...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Reality is a point of view)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 19:26:46 GMT
+---- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (Sun, 03 Sep 2000 16:35:28 GMT):
| Reality is a point of view wrote:
| > +---- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote (Sun, 03 Sep 2000 14:56:42 GMT):
| > | "T. Max Devlin" wrote:
| > | > Said James A. Robertson in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
| > | > >"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
| > | > [...]
| > | > >Left to their own devices, markets correct themselves. Individual
| > | > >companies don't stay focused long enough to stay on top long term.
| > | <snip>
| > | That was a really nice soliloquy, but you didn't come up with an actual
| > | example
| > +----
| > OBJS?
| That's called a correction. The company was stupid, and died
+----
Nice soliloquy, but you ignored the point, which is especially
comical as the 'actual example' you sought was under your very
own exOBJS nose.
--
Gary Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Privacy on the net is still illegal.
<a href=http://www.squeak.org>Tired of selfish technology monopolies?</a>
------------------------------
From: "Uncle Meat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why I hate Windows...
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 15:33:38 -0500
In article <ZUqs5.2417$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Anthony
Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> After using Linux for many months now, I have recently had to use
> W*ndoze for a couple of days. These are just a few things that made me
> realize why I started to use Linux in the first place
>
> 1. I have had to reboot many more times in one day of W*ndoze use (4)
> than many months of Linux use (0)
I use both Linux and Windows98 - I prefer Unix variants :) - but anyways,
and I hear the compliant among linux user that windows requires multiple
reboots in a day. I don't experience that at all, and I use my windows box for things
like multitrack digital music recording while surfing the net, a decidely resource
intensive
computer session, and when doing so I rarely require a reboot. I don't know where all
this
comes from really.
> 2. Linux does not crash when you attempt to browse your OWN hard drive -
> let alone a network one
Occasionally this has occured.
> 3.Linux does not kill itself when you try to run an old console app,
> unlike w*ndoze with DOS
DOS apps are inherently buggy under windows, but dos apps have always sucked pretty
much compared to Linux console apps.
> 4. Linux dialup connections do not mysteriously stop working whilst in
> use.
not a problem with my windows/linux boxes, sure it happens, but I don't care, anything
done online can always be redone, rarely are internet tasks critical operations anyways
> 5. Linux does not suffer massive disk fragmentation in basic non
> demanding use
Windows does blow in this regard.
>
> need I say any more...
>
> Anthony Wilson (happy Linux user)
>
But you know to each their own. I like Linux because it is fun as hell to use, and
decidely
more stable than windows, but there are things windows does well enough for me,
simpler
things checking email, writing letters, and multitrack digital recording, surfing the
web, graphic
manipulation, etc, that I am willing to keep it around along with Linux.
------------------------------
From: Courageous <[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: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 19:39:21 GMT
> Who, me? Surely you jest.
Yes, you. Although I'm taking liberties with language
here; as I said previously, I view most *everyone* as
extraordinarily selfish. Since most everyone doesn't
feel that way, I have a fairly loose definition of the
word. To paraphrase Ambrose Bierce:
Cynic, n. Someone who sees the world as it really is,
instead of as it ought to be.
> >Or isn't it true that you've elected to purchase
> >luxury goods in lieu of providing support to your fellow suffering
> >citizens of the world?
>
> My support wouldn't end their suffering, dude.
Your support could certainly prevent their dying. And
you could certainly *ease* their suffering.
> You've got to be realistic if you're going to talk ethics;
What you mean, in this case, by "realisitic" is "out of sight,
out of mind," right?
> I don't have to be a monk to consider ethics in a reasonable framework.
You'll have to better define "reasonable" before we can talk about
it, Mr. Devlin.
> >I look at things differently; human misery is an opportunity for
> >*charity*. While charity is a wonderful indicator of our human
> >empathy, and a laudable thing, I condemn neither myself nor anyone
> >else for withholding charity.
>
> Well, I'd hardly be so convoluted in my self-justification as to
> consider human misery to be a good thing, ...
??!?!?!!?
Are you attributing this thought to *me*?
> I don't condemn myself for withholding charity because I'm
> not 'withholding' it. Charity is a luxury.
Precisely right. However, suppose you're passing an accident
scene, and no one else is helping. Stopping and helping is,
in my opinion, charity.
C//
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 19:43:40 GMT
On Sun, 3 Sep 2000 18:49:32 +0100, John Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>We have had 5 distrubutions in our office and all have been crashing
>on the first day.
Same machine? My experience differs greatly.
>They were also not anywhere near as easy and productive to use as
>W2k.
For what?
>So stop the FUD and hype, put your religious bias to one side and YOU
>get a clue!
Good idea.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux.sucks,comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!!
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 19:45:17 GMT
"Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8ou3ls$bjadc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >I posted here that something I did to my NT setup meant that
> >whenever I did an "empty recycle bin" it deleted all the files
> >on drive C of my machine.
> >
>
>
> There is (or at least was) a similar bug in frontpage - saving a temporary
> webpage to the root of a drive and then deleting temporary webpage would
> delete every file on the drive without any warnings being displayed, it
was
> reported as being the worst software bug ever but microsoft seem to have
> hushed it up as usual.
It warned you that doing that would be stupid, and warned you that deleting
it would be stupid, and then deleted it.
Where's the lack of warnings?
It wasn't hushed up -- it was a PEBKAC bug. And there *WERE* warnings.
Simon
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kent Friis)
Subject: Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!!
Date: 3 Sep 2000 19:49:17 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Den Sun, 03 Sep 2000 16:15:22 GMT skrev Ingemar Lundin:
>No, im not a MS employee.
>
>And second..*any* new version *is* more stable than the previous coming from
>MS.
Maybe somethings different over here, but it wasn't until installing
NT 4.0 that I found out how stable win95 had been. And 3.11 was
even more stable. However, w2k has already managed to stay alive
for over a week (except for at least 8 reboots (3 hardware related
- ram and harddrives are not supposed to be hotplugged), and two
because our NT-guy was trying to get Unreal Tournament to
run full screen[1] with Direct3D).
Kent
[1] However, UT runs perfectly in full screen on my Linux box at
home.
--
What was your username?
<Clicketyclick> - B.O.F.H
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kent Friis)
Subject: Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!!
Date: 3 Sep 2000 19:51:56 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Den Sun, 03 Sep 2000 19:07:36 GMT skrev Ingemar Lundin:
>None of that you say contradicts what i have posted before except for one
>thing...wich *ide* cd-rw:s do Linux support and *how*? (not counting
>cheating like scsi-emulation)
So, just because something works, it's cheating?
AFAIK, ATAPI is a SCSI lookalike, so why not run it as such?
Kent
--
What was your username?
<Clicketyclick> - B.O.F.H
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 19:56:53 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8osv70$j7g$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> That is why it is important to write programs to be as portable as
possible.
> This again is nothing new, that is how it was before Windows took over.
> Software companies have thrived in that environment. Remember when there
> were Apple's ][, PET, CBM, Atari 400 & 800, Cromemco, and latter Vic 20's
> and IBM PC, S100/IEEE696 software all being sold side by side. AND those
> were not even for the same hardware platforms.
The average app back then was 20,000 lines of code, tops.
The average app today is approximately 350,000 lines of code.
Simon
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 16:02:31 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >Some oems
>> >went for that particular deal, but none were ever forced to do it, it was
>> >one of three options OEM's could choose to negotiate.
>>
>> You're full of sheep-dip, as usual. Economic realities forced them to
>> do it,
>
>How so?
How not?
[...]
>Since you know there was "cliff edge" pricing between the per processor
>license deals and the several other deals MS offered, (e.g. per machine, per
>windows copy)and since the operating system was/is about 3% of the total
>price of a system, what was the difference in prices between the various
>deals Max? And what effect did those differences impose on the final price
>of a system?
Monopoly.
>You don't even know do you, yet your using it.
It doesn't matter what the price of the deals were; what matters is what
was the competition, and did they bring down the price of the deals.
Most problematically, ppl *raised* the price of *supplying* Windows for
the OEMs, and *raised* the price of non-Windows alternatives. Do you
know how?
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== 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: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 20:02:27 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >Tell it to the developers showcased here: http://download.cnet.com/ who
are
> >thriving BECAUSE there's one main standard.
>
> Tell it to Blue Mountain. Tell it to Real.
Blue Mountain refused to work with Microsoft on the problem and took it to
court instead after repeated offers of help from MS. As a result, there's no
more junk mail filters *by law*. I had to hack my own into Outlook
Express -- but that only catches 60% of all junk mail. Not bad, but not
great.
Microsoft didn't do anything anti-competitive in this case -- their own card
service was *equally* affected. But did Blue Mountain just add a few changes
to their headers to fix the problem as requested by MS? No. They went to
court.
I'll tell it to Blue Mountain. Fist outstretched, with middle finger erect.
Thanks for nothing, guys.
Simon
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 16:04:52 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >Service packs are the "quarterly updates" you're asking for, and they're
>> >free.
>>
>> No they aren't. They're incomplete.
>
>They're complete updates. They update everything that needs updating.
Are you at all familiar with the word "complete"? That would be
'everything'. No qualifiers. Service packs are patches.
--
T. Max Devlin
-- Such is my recollection of my reconstruction
of events at the time, as I recall. Consider it.
Research assistance gladly accepted. --
====== 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 Hix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 13:08:56 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 08:36:46 -0400,
> Rick, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>
> >"Joe R." wrote:
> >> >
> >> > No, they dont. Private schools have MORE $/student than public
> >> > schools.
> >> > Public schools have always done more eith less, especially K-12.
> >>
> >> I think you'd have to back that up.
> >
> >Well... Im not going to go do all the research for you... but I'll tell
> >you what to look for.
> >
> >Check the tuition prices for the private schools. Then check your local
> >schoolboard budget. You will see that the private schools have more
> >money.
>
> for comparisons of private school costs, with public, see
> http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp-025.html
> for details. Please note that they offer sources and references, which
> you seem unable (or unwilling) to do.
> Oh, quick summary is, private schools cost about half what the public
> schools do per student.
It may be related to the (apparently federally required) administrative
overhead of public schools.
--
--
Steve Hix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kent Friis)
Subject: Re: Windows stability(Memory Comparison)
Date: 3 Sep 2000 20:15:26 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Den 31 Aug 2000 11:04:09 GMT skrev Steve Mading:
>
>(Side note: this is why if you have a bad bit somewhere in your
>RAM chips, and it is in the high addresses, Linux is affected
>by it more than Windows is - Linux is always making use of all
>memory you have behind the scenes.)
Not necessarily true. On a webserver with 512MB RAM, I was unable
to get the amount of RAM used above 190 or so. Even after a few
find / -type f | xargs cat >/dev/null, to force it to use the
cache.
Turned out, that only 170MB or so of the hard drive was in use,
and after that find, nothing required disk access (eccept for
writes). When everything is cached, there is simply nothing
left to use the RAM for :-)
Kent
--
What was your username?
<Clicketyclick> - B.O.F.H
------------------------------
From: "Joe R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 20:15:58 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> C Lund wrote:
> >
> > Btw; when are you going to tell us how you got out of poverty?
> >
>
> Every job is a stepping stone to a better job.
>
Except for those jobs that are a stepping stone to retirement. ;-)
--
Regards,
Joe R.
------------------------------
From: Steve Hix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 13:12:48 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] () in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
> > US Welfare programs specifically discourage upward mobility.
>
> How?
If you do anything to move up, the benefits are cut such that
you end up worse off by working some than by working not at all.
(It has worked that way out here in the past.)
--
--
Steve Hix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: "Joe R." <[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: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 20:22:46 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris Wenham
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>> "Joe" == Joe R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > wrote:
>
> >> Said Chad Irby in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> All I want to know is, if its illegal to *monopolize*, and its
> >> >> illegal
> >> >> to *attempt to monopolize*, just how is it legal to have a
> >> >> monopoly?
> >> >
> >> >Because even though they have the same root and derivation, they
> >> >have
> >> >different meanings in a legal sense.
> >>
> >> Strictly speaking, you have a minor point.
>
> > But then you go ahead and post several hundred lines showing that
> > you
> > don't grasp the concept at all.
>
> Why don't you show why he doesn't grasp the concept, instead of just
> being lazy and saying so?
Because I do. Over and over.
Others (Courageous, Eric Bennet, Christopher Smith, JS/PL come to mind
as just a few examples) have destroyed what Max calls arguments over and
over, too, but he's too dense to understand.
--
Regards,
Joe R.
------------------------------
From: "Joe R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 20:29:29 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 08:36:46 -0400,
> Rick, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brought forth the following words...:
>
> >"Joe R." wrote:
> >>
> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rick
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >At the present time, public schools are massively under-funded.
> >> > > >Class
> >> > >
> >> > > Yet those private schools seem to do more with less.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > No, they dont. Private schools have MORE $/student than public
> >> > schools.
> >> > Public schools have always done more eith less, especially K-12.
> >>
> >> I think you'd have to back that up.
> >>
> >
> >Well... Im not going to go do all the research for you... but I'll tell
> >you what to look for.
> >
> >Check the tuition prices for the private schools. Then check your local
> >schoolboard budget. You will see that the private schools have more
> >money.
>
>
> for comparisons of private school costs, with public, see
> http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp-025.html
> for details. Please note that they offer sources and references, which
> you seem unable (or unwilling) to do.
> Oh, quick summary is, private schools cost about half what the public
> schools
> do per student.
>
Even a quick glance shows that this page is misleading.
While I agree that private schools are often more cost-efficient than
public ones, distorting the figures doesn't fix that.
First, this page counts the public school money obtained from all
sources against the private school tuition only (ignoring the other
sources of funds).
Second, their stated tuition figures seem far too low. I can only guess
that it's because Catholic schools make up such a large percentage --
just those schools which are receive much of their expenses from sources
other than tuition.
--
Regards,
Joe R.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
