Linux-Advocacy Digest #912, Volume #28 Tue, 5 Sep 00 03:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform (abraxas)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating (T. Max Devlin)
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Re: Why I hate Windows...
Re: Computer and memory
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! ("Ingemar Lundin")
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform (Jeffery Priddy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform
Date: 5 Sep 2000 06:08:53 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> abraxas wrote:
>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Eric Remy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > In article <8oou48$1917$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > (abraxas) wrote:
>> >
>> >>You're wrong, Netscape doesnt ever crash systems running X. It has never,
>> >>ever
>> >>happened to me, and it has never, ever happened to anyone I know, with any
>> >>version of netscape and any version of XFree, accelleratedX and metroX.
>> >>You are
>> >>completely incorrect.
>> >
>> > No, he's not. You can now say you've met someone that this has happened
>> > to. I've had Netscape crash X+SunOS multiple times.
>>
>> I dont think so.
>
> Your opinions don't really factor into this. OSs crash. Denying it won't help :-)
>
Yet you continue to not come up with any solid evidence that its happened. I
would very much like to know the actual mechanism behind this "OS crash". In
detail.
>> > (Yes, locked up
>> > bad enough to have no option other than a STOP-A reboot.)
>>
>> Stop-A reboot? Did you not even try to diagnose the problem? You know, you can
>> change init levels from inside the eeprom prompt, brainiac. :P
>
> Probably wouldn't work. Prove otherwise.
The burden of proof is on you, you made the claim. Back it up.
> Either way would your mom know how to do
> that?
Actually she just might; shes been running linuxppc on an imac for some time
now. :)
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 02:11:57 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Donovan Rebbechi in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>On Mon, 04 Sep 2000 21:32:04 -0400, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>Said Donovan Rebbechi in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
>>OK, I'm going to assume (since you're too much of a PUTZ to just say it)
>>that these are all libraries and APIs.
>
>I assumed that you'd either know it, or you'd be intelligent enough
>to deduce it. It's pleasing to see that I didn't overestimate your
>intelligence in this instance.
>
>>So, why, if each of these is not considered a monopoly, but merely a
>>product, regardless of how the licensing or ownership is arranged in
>>each case, is QT even potentially considered a monopoly? Why would QT's
>>API suddenly be considered separately from the library code, and the
>>tool product which Troll Tech sells, which might raise questions of
>>whether the sole library for a tool API might have a monopoly on the
>>API?
>>
>>Because the market wants it that way.
>
>I don't understand this comment.
You didn't understand that you'd underestimated my intelligence, either.
>>model which has never been tried before; licensing the same library as
>>both GPL for 'free' software developers *and* still licensing it under
>>more typical tool licensing, so that they don't discourage development
>>by scaring away commercial development.
>
>They embraced a very similar strategy when they used the QPL.
That's true, but it was decisively different.
>>The market caught this one. But had Troll Tech been stubborn, and
>>demanded a right to use network effect to give them an excuse to
>>monopolize their API simply because an 'accident of history' made it a
>>crucial commodity for Linux GUI software developers...
>
>They demanded no such thing.
That's what I said. You understand "But had...," don't you? Its called
"a learning opportunity".
[...]
>Well, I disagree with this. APIs are widely regarded as part of the
>development tool. This is true with QT and it is true with every other
>shared library. It is *not* the norm for several competing versions of
>the same API to exist, and when they do exist, they never compete on
>equal terms.
I know, and I agree with your market assessment almost completely. The
issue comes up because APIs are *legally* considered separately from the
development tool. The efficiencies of the marketplace don't support
having multiple tools for every API, or almost any. I'm not trying to
second-guess how this stuff "should" work, despite appearances. I just
don't want to make an false assumptions. Products in the same market
often don't compete on 'equal terms'. They compete nonetheless.
>I challenge you to name a single API in existence where there is a
>competitive market for differing implementations.
Well, at this point, QT, but I'm not sure if multiple licensing options
counts as 'differing implementations'. And Win32 has Windows and WINE,
but I'll admit they don't compete on 'equal terms'.
>>The market recognizes something that you might not want to. One of them
>>support a functionality that the other cannot commercially match. Its
>>necessary for KDE development.
>
>"Necessary for KDE development" is an artificial requirement. GNOME is
>a perfectly viable option to KDE.
There is no such thing as an artificial market requirement, unless
you're trying to second guess somebody. There is not one definitive
reason to make either choice, as you indicate, and therefore there may
well be conflicts in preferences for various reasons. A preference is
another name for "artificial requirement".
>One could equally argue that "GTK is necessary for GNOME development".
Yes, one could. I believe GTK is GPL, is it not?
[...]
>How do you "encourage" a project that does not even put a working
>product on the table ? Anyone can make an announcement.
Well, in a blue sky way, it being entirely academic at this point, I'd
say by helping them put a working product on the table, somehow. As for
how, I wouldn't really have any particular suggestions. Making
announcements that you 'support the effort' may be quite a help in
itself, don't you think?
>>This is what Jackson meant about it may seem prior to reason if you
>>consider only the abstracts, like what the role of a tool and a GUI are.
>>In examining the commercial realities involved, there was a market
>>demand for the QT API, separate from the QT library that Troll Tech
>>owned and licensed,
>
>I don't believe that there was. Where is your evidence that such demand
>existed ? The fact that some people announced the Harmony project does
>not in itself show that there was a great deal of interest.
Not a great deal of interest to one person is a marketing opportunity to
another. Yes, the harmony project was part of that demand; the stir
over the hiring of Matthias was another reason for the demand.
Eventually, the demand led to TT GPLing QT, in response to market
demand. A competing library would not have actually provided any
competitive efficiencies, in the end. Troll Tech may feel that they
were a victim of 'religious extortion', to some extent, but they did
react appropriately to market demand.
[...all right, enough, its over...]
--
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: T. Max Devlin <[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: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 02:15:54 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Courageous in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
>> >> It's much a matter of money; halving the class sizes requires doubling
>> >> the number of teachers, for example.
>> >
>> >If you believe that class size is the only thing wrong with the schools,
>> >of course.
>>
>> Mother of perl, Joe... You are the... *stupidest* troll I've ever seen.
>> Why do you do this?
>
>*shrug*
>
>His remark was apropos enough. There are certain issues with
>dumbing-down curricula; that doesn't require money to correct.
>Likewise, perenially disruptive students can be removed.
>
>I recall classes in college with *hundreds* of students per
>instructor. I learned well enough.
>
>So perhaps he has a point...
Well it wasn't very well said, but thanks for catching me. You don't
have to believe that class size (which was simply an example) is the
"only thing wrong with schools" in order to recognize that saying you'll
improve schools but not if it costs more is an empty proposition. "Of
course".
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
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: <[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: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 22:35:20 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 4 Sep 2000 21:21:52 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> >Does the KDE project accept cash or equivelent donations, if so were are
> >they stored until used?
>
> Actually, it looks like they do. They have an account number on their
> page that you're supposed to wire money to.
>
> Note that this doesn't make them "commercial".
>
No it does not mean that is commercial, but it does mean that it does have a
bank account or an equivalent to a bank account. This refutes the claim
that it does not have such an account.
Unless that account is in the name of an individual rather than that of the
project, but that would open a real can of worms, would it not?
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why I hate Windows...
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 23:25:24 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:OKYs5.8781$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8p1bh2$5hq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:h6Cs5.8726$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "Mig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8oug5k$ne7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Oh comeon Ingemar. Not even NT that i use stays up two days without
a
> > > > reboot.... it just gets slower and slower and slower and finally i
> have
> > to
> > > > reboot to make it faster.
> > >
> > > I posted some screenshots of my task manager a few days ago. It
showed
> > that
> > > the distributed.net client on my machine has been running for 707
hours
> > (or
> > > about 30 days). It's now 798 hours. And this is an NT4 machine, the
> >
> > Once your NT box has been up for 33,732.367 hours as Linux boxes have
been
> > for me, then you will have something interesting to say.
>
> Why is it that when someone says "NT can't stay up for 2 days" nobody says
a
> thing. But when someone says "that's not true and I can prove it. My NT
> system has been up for over a month" you have to say "so what, it's not up
> as long as my <blah> system."?
>
> However long your Linux box has been up is irrelevant to the claim that NT
> can only stay up for 2 days.
We have all heard promises reguarding Windows and we have all experienced
the reality of it falling far short of the promises. Linux and other unixes
have quietly proven their reliability, dependability, and stability, in the
field.
I for one have never encounter or even heard of any NT box with any
respectable uptimes approaching what I have encountered in every Linux and
FreeBSD and other unix that I have worked with. So, once you box has been
up and has been providing dependable services running multiple networking
services and providing interactive logins to permit compilations and
installation and upgrade of software on the fly for a period of over 3 years
and 10 months. Only then would Windows NT be worthy of consideration along
side of Linux and unix. Incidently if it had not been for an extended
blackout early this year by now my Linux boxes would have been up and
running for a period of 1653 days, 7 hours, 26 minutes, that would be more
than 4 years and 6 months; or in the term that you report your up time
39,679.43 hours. I have also had another Linux box up for over 5 years, but
I don't have a uptime report from that box.
Have you ever heard of a Windows Box staying up and functional while doing
real work for 39,679.43 hours? Your NT box is only a litle more than 2% of
the way to doing it.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 23:54:25 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Grega Bremec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > ...and Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> used the keyboard:
> > >
> > >...there's an ancient Japanese proverb that
> > > says,
> > >
> > > "Don't give the beggar the fish he wants - teach him how to catch them
> > > instead."
> >
> > I have never hear that proverb, but I have heard this Chinese one that
may
> > be the source of the Japanese one.
> >
> > "Give a man a fish and you have fed him for a day; but, teach a man how
to
> > fish and you have fed him for life."
>
> Oh mighty fortune cookie! Sun Tsu's "Art of War" was much more
compelling.
Yes, the "Art of War" does contain much wisdom if you can see past the
idioms of its age. Your point is?
------------------------------
From: <[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: Mon, 4 Sep 2000 23:52:19 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Donovan Rebbechi in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >I challenge you to name a single API in existence where there is a
> >competitive market for differing implementations.
>
> Well, at this point, QT, but I'm not sure if multiple licensing options
> counts as 'differing implementations'. And Win32 has Windows and WINE,
> but I'll admit they don't compete on 'equal terms'.
OK then may I offer a couple?
The Standard C Library and the standard iostreams classes of C++. On many
platforms there are multiple implementations of those libraries, each
implementation may extend the API in some ways but the standard base API is
invarient (although there are some standards violation as to which headers
define which constants and prototypes). The precise behavior of a
particular function call may vary from platform to platform or even from
implementation to another on the same platform, but the API is still the
same.
------------------------------
From: "Ingemar Lundin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!!
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 07:04:35 GMT
> Early 30's.
As young as me then...
> I moved out of the house at age 17.
Thrown out of the house 'cause you told your dad that evil resided in his
MS-DOS PC ?
>
> My gf is a size-3 beauty who is speaks 7 languages fluently and is
> gorgeous as hell...
Dont you think its rather disgusting talking about your mother like that ? ;
/
>
> And I'm a university-educated computer systems engineer who specializes
> in Unix systems.
eh, hum... yeah! sure you are Aaron (...poor bastard <SNIP>)
/IL
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeffery Priddy)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 07:06:19 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (D. Spider) wrote:
>"Shocktrooper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>"D. Spider" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>> comp.os.linux.advocacy "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> >> > Apps don't "run" on the taskbar. The taskbar is just a button bar with
>>> >> > process names. It makes no sense to drop icons on buttons.
>>> >>
>>> >> Apps don't run in Explorer. The right pane is just a directory list
>>> >> with file names. It makes no sense to drop icons on file names.
>>> >>
>>> >> I always thought you should be able to drop a file onto a task bar
>>> >> button and it should react the same as dropping it on the program name
>>> >> in explorer.
>>> >
>>> >So what should the behaviour be when I drop a file onto the Word button on
>>> >the taskbar ?
>>> >
>>> >Should it open the file in a new window ?
>>> >Should it insert the contents of the file in the currently open document ?
>>> >At the beginning or at the current cursor position ?
>>> >Should it link to the file being dropped ? At the beginning or at the
>>> >current cursor position ?
>>>
>>> The best solution would be the default behavior, i.e. the same thing
>>> as dropping it to the program name - open (in a new window.)
>>
>>Which is what it does.
>
>No, that was the whole point. It doesn't. It pops up an error message
>instead.
The message explains it-- Drag to the app icon on the taskbar,
hover there a brief time, and then the app will pop forward so
you can drag directly to it. This drag-hover-drag-drop UI is
kinda like spring-loaded folders. The way it actually works is
better than just opening the dropped file into the app-- because
it works with other objects than files, and because having the
app pop forward allows you to drop with locational context, in
a particular place in the app, which can be very useful. For
instance, you can make a chart in Excel, and then drag the chart
(not the file, but the chart itself) to the Word taskbar icon,
hover, wait for Word to pop up, and then drop the chart into a
*particular location in Word*. There's no way dropping directly
on the icon can carry that locaional context. You can use this
to drag-hover a file to an app as well. As another example,
if you drag-hover-drag a file to an icon of an Explorer view,
you can drop the file into any of the subfolders visible in the
window, instead of only being able to copy the file to the
folder Explorer is looking at.
This is much better than just being able to open a file into a
running app-- it improves window-to-window dragging for the
entire system. You no longer have to fiddle with both your
source and destination windows to make sure you can drag the
item. As long as the destination is running, you can bring
it forward to receive the drop as part of the drag and drop
itself.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
