Linux-Advocacy Digest #928, Volume #28 Tue, 5 Sep 00 16:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform (abraxas)
Re: Computer and memory (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform (Eric Remy)
Re: Computer and memory (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! (Nobody)
Re: Why I hate Windows... (Mig)
Re: Popular Culture (was: It's official...) (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! (Zenin)
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! (Terry Sikes)
Re: what's up with Sun? ("Ez-Aton")
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform (Chad Irby)
Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools (Bob Germer)
Criteria in Evaluating Distributions: (Adam Shapira)
Re: The dusty Linux shelves at CompUSA (Glitch)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 18:59:02 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Eric Remy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <8p226u$brd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (abraxas) wrote:
>
>>Another anecdote. I've never seen it, and id like to know *exactly* why
>>its happening, if it is at all. Got a corefile?
>
> You know, I've never seen W2K crash due to anything other than an easily
> traced hardware problem. (I.e., bad driver, overclocked, etc.)
>
I have, but I wouldnt dare use such anecdotal evidence to support an
opposing view in an argument.
> Thus, W2K must not crash. Anyone who says otherwise is just spouting
> anecdotal evidence.
You need to take introductory logic again.
>
> My Netscape + SunOS problems were several years ago: I don't keep
> corefiles around.
Thats too bad. If you did, you would have an argument.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 19:11:15 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Christophe Ochal
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:03:55 +0200
<Z26t5.782$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
>rczs5.31954$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Perhaps you should be writing your government then.
>>
>> It's not America's fault your country(ies) are behind
>> in technology.
>>
>> -Chad
>
>It's not us European's fault that M$ *NEEDS* such big patches & SP's.
>BTW, are we being arrogant today?
He is, anyway. :-)
(Besides, the US is behind in technology to Japan, who already has
Java technology -- I think -- to have two people call each other
on their cell phones and play whatever game takes their fancy thereon.
So there, Chad :-P~ :-) )
[snip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- oh, wait, I'm Murkin too...the sky is falling!!
------------------------------
From: Eric Remy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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 15:13:26 -0400
In article <8p3fpm$2491$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(abraxas) wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Eric Remy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In article <8p226u$brd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> (abraxas) wrote:
>>
>>>Another anecdote. I've never seen it, and id like to know *exactly* why
>>>its happening, if it is at all. Got a corefile?
>>
>> You know, I've never seen W2K crash due to anything other than an easily
>> traced hardware problem. (I.e., bad driver, overclocked, etc.)
>>
>
>I have, but I wouldnt dare use such anecdotal evidence to support an
>opposing view in an argument.
You wouldn't?
You do know that *all* evidence is anecdotal at some level, right?
After all, I read all the time that W2K crashes. Who says that? Some
guys on the net. I haven't seen the crashes they claim happen.
Proof? Hmm- haven't seen any posted memory dumps. Must be anecdotal.
Even if they did, they could be faked. Lots of people have it in for
both MS and Linux: they'd be happy to fake evidence if it would prove
their point.
>> Thus, W2K must not crash. Anyone who says otherwise is just spouting
>> anecdotal evidence.
>
>You need to take introductory logic again.
Just reiterating your position, which is "If I didn't see it, it didn't
happen."
Your request for core files from years ago is just absurd: do *you* save
the core from every crash? Do you even get a core? I once locked up
mkLinux totally running from a command line. The machine died: no
pings, telnet, etc. No core either. Whoops- guess the crash didn't
occur then.
My SunOS crashes occured when I was working on my postdoc. I just
rebooted and kept working. I didn't bother spending hours on the phone
with Sun tracing the problem.
>> My Netscape + SunOS problems were several years ago: I don't keep
>> corefiles around.
>
>Thats too bad. If you did, you would have an argument.
Well, you said you'd never met anyone who'd seen it. I have, as have
others in this thread. But you refuse to believe us.
Gee, no wonder you don't know anyone with problems...
--
Eric Remy. Chemistry Learning Center Director, Virginia Tech
"I don't like (quantum mechanics), | How many errors can
and I'm sorry I ever had anything | you find in my X-Face?
to do with it."- Erwin Schrodinger |
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 19:16:19 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Christophe Ochal
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:05:31 +0200
<%26t5.783$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Grega Bremec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in berichtnieuws
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> ...and Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> used the keyboard:
>> >Perhaps you should be writing your government then.
>> >
>> >It's not America's fault your country(ies) are behind
>> >in technology.
>> >
>> >-Chad
>>
>> American attitude at its best!
>>
>> "Noooo, we won't tell you how to encrypt your data using 8192-bit
>> strong encryption. But it's not our fault if you can't figure it out
>> on your own..."
>>
>> DOH!
>
>Actually, encryption is tied to some very stupid laws in the States,
>basicly, if the feds can crack the encryption, it's not allowed to be used
>by the public, talk about "right to privicy"
I think you mean "can't", and that's recently changed if I'm not
mistaken -- but I agree, it's stupid. (And with our luck the
new conditions are even more confusing than the old ones.)
I can't seem to locate an exact quote, but I seem to remember that
Louis Freeh, otherwise known as the Head of the FBI, has stated that
he wishes to be able to decode and read any ciphered text, should the
courts require it. This was some months -- years? -- back.
Good luck, Mr. Freeh. You'll need it. :-)
(One might be able to get the private key of a willing party,
though, such as a bank on the other end of an (alleged!) illicit
transaction.)
>
><cut>
>
>Amon_Re
>
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- maybe if they perfect the light quantum superputer...
------------------------------
From: Nobody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!!
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 12:26:17 -0700
On Tue, 05 Sep 2000 18:32:37 GMT, "Simon Cooke"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8p3e1h$c0nft$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> Donal K. Fellows wrote in message <8p2kae$1h8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> >In article <Eo_s5.32760$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> >Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> Windows NT 4.0 has acheived C2 red and orange book security ratings
>> >> from the DoD.
>> >
>> >Has it done it with a network card connected and in use?
>>
>> You are correct, the certification is only valid for that exact install on
>> that exact hardware which did not include a net card. Installing a net
>card
>> or on a different PC or with different service packs installed will make
>the
>> certification invalid - More empty MS vapourware.
>
>Really? Wow... well, better get rid of the DoD's certification scheme
>then -- as it's obviously the biggest pile o' crap in existence.
>
>The precise certification given is MEANT to be on a system which is NOT
>network connected. It's meant to show that the system is reasonably immune
>from physical attack.
In late 1999 NT 4.0 recieved Orange Book (no network) and Red Book
(networked) C2 certification.
>
>If it's so much empty vaporware... show me some unix OSs which have this
>kind of certification *at all* -- or even better, WITH a network card.
Some Unixen have received the higher rated B1 certification.
http://www.radium.ncsc.mil/tpep/
----
Glenn Davies
------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why I hate Windows...
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 21:17:26 +0200
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> "Slip Gun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > WOW! You must have one hell of a PC! (Maybe a bit like the Love Bug). I
> > haven't been able to run 'doze for more than about 8 hours without
> > massive slowdown and crashing. Please tell me how you manage to achive
> > this.
>
> It's not that difficult. Just maintain your system. Always keep your BIOS
> and drivers up to date, make sure you prune your registry tree to remove
> cruft, delete your cache files every so often, clean out your temp directory
> every so often, and don't install hundreds of crappy utilities written by
> some kid in his basement.
Thanks for confirming my thesis that the Windows registry one of the main
problems.... This could be one reason for my system being unstable. Only
difference is that i have to install lots of apps in order to do my job,
and not many of them written by some kid in his basement.
I dont even have the sound drivers for my SB card installed.. so it cant be
the drivers.
But where is the userfriendlyness in this cleaning up thing?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Subject: Re: Popular Culture (was: It's official...)
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 19:21:25 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spoke thusly:
>
>Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spoke thusly:
>> >
>> >mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >
>> I've recently considered purchasing one of the 'guitar to
>> midi' converters so that I can 'record' some of my guitar
>> music. (I know to hard-core guitar players this sounds
>> like blasphemy). But thus far I haven't found one that
>> gets the guitar sound right. I have also considered
>> purchasing a modern keyboard to hook up to my computer,
>> but I have a piano, and probably wouldn't find much use
>> for the electronic version beyond playing 'piano' sounds,
>> so it seems kind of pointless. MIDI can be cool, I've
>> heard some people do amazing things with it. But it just
>> doesn't seem to fit with me and my playing style. I guess
>> I'm more of a 'give me something I can beat the hell out
>> of' kind of player. Hmm, that might explain why I'm on my
>> thirteenth guitar in the past few years.:-)
>
>Yikes! I am still on my first (midi) keyboard. It produces many very
>realistic intruments and can handle 24 note polyphony divided amoung 10
>voices out of a palete of 99 voices. What is great about it is that I can
>still use it inspite on my hands not being up to playing a full performance
>without causing some flub.
>
>Maybe I should take up jazz, then if I flub it will just be my syncopathic
>style. ;-)
>
>
If you flub enough you should take up guitar. Then you
could be in an 'alternative' band and play on the radio.
Of course, unless you are between the age of 13 and 28 you
probably wouldn't get far (and something about looking
good in tight leather pants fits in there too, male or
female).
BTW, was anyone else bothered when 'alternative' meant
'popular'?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: Zenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!!
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 19:22:23 GMT
Simon Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>snip<
:> You are correct, the certification is only valid for that exact install
:> on that exact hardware which did not include a net card. Installing a net
:> card or on a different PC or with different service packs installed will
:> make the certification invalid - More empty MS vapourware.
:
: Really? Wow... well, better get rid of the DoD's certification scheme
: then -- as it's obviously the biggest pile o' crap in existence.
Well, lets just say for any form of "client" or "server" this
particular certification is completely meaningless, as either pretty
much requires a NIC installed and in use.
: The precise certification given is MEANT to be on a system which is NOT
: network connected. It's meant to show that the system is reasonably immune
: from physical attack.
:
: If it's so much empty vaporware... show me some unix OSs which have this
: kind of certification *at all* -- or even better, WITH a network card.
What would be the point? Unix has been a "network" centric
operating system since day one. Certifying a system for a condition
that is unlikely to ever have much if any practical use would simply
be stupid.
Perhaps that's why MS wanted the certification...as MS is great at
building things with no practical use. :-)
--
-Zenin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) From The Blue Camel we learn:
BSD: A psychoactive drug, popular in the 80s, probably developed at UC
Berkeley or thereabouts. Similar in many ways to the prescription-only
medication called "System V", but infinitely more useful. (Or, at least,
more fun.) The full chemical name is "Berkeley Standard Distribution".
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Sikes)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!!
Date: 5 Sep 2000 19:22:39 GMT
In article <9%at5.50425$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Simon Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The precise certification given is MEANT to be on a system which is NOT
>network connected. It's meant to show that the system is reasonably immune
>from physical attack.
Nope, "physical attack" has nothing to do with it. Anyone with a
Linux floppy can walk up to an NT box and read any file on the NTFS
filesystem (further anyone with physical access to the system can
simply remove the drive and take it away to their data recovery
center).
This type of certification simply has to do with how well the OS
insulates the information owned by different users from each other,
and the system administrater. I believe there are different levels
for network environments vs. non-networked.
>If it's so much empty vaporware... show me some unix OSs which have this
>kind of certification *at all* -- or even better, WITH a network card.
Sure. A 30-second net search yielded:
http://secinf.net/info/misc/boran/it15-os-overview.html
Note: Many of the Unix systems have a B level certification, much
tougher than C.
Terry
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Ez-Aton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: what's up with Sun?
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2000 22:51:36 +0200
Well, the first models of the IA-64 are on beta/alpha testings, as well as
M$ systems for them, so it will not be long, I believe.
Sun is better then Pee-Cee. It's a fact, but:
a) Part of the Sparc/Sparc ultra machines today include IDE drives, and ATI
video card, which reduces their price, but also decrease their performance.
b) Sparc, whatever Sparc you can think off, is yet very expensive. I'm
talking about Ultra and Netra, where their price can exceed the 10K$, 20K$
or even the 30K$, depands upon their configuration.
Both Intel and AMD should stick to the home-office computers, and leave the
servers to the real tough computers, since they will never reach the Sun
stability and power.
My oppinion.
Ez.
"Christopher Browne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:1%Xr5.330387$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when David Steuber would say:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rasputin) writes:
> >
> >' One important difference between Sun and M$ is that Sun make hardware.
> >' They have less to lose in a world where software if Free.
> >
> >But they have a lot to loose where hardware becomes a commodity.
> >However, I think Sun, SGI, et al, can beat Intel for bang for the buck
> >if they continue to make servers that can beat large clusters of IA32
> >machines in terms of raw performance.
> >
> >Also, not all servers are doling out web pages.
> >
> >AMD and Intel are heading upmarket, and they have a lot of money and
> >a huge legacy hardware base to get them there.
>
> I _suppose_ that I2O _arguably_ represents the way for Intel to head
> "upmarket" by introducing functionality traditionally associated with
> mainframes to "Pee-Cee" hardware.
>
> It's "arguable" because it doesn't seem to have taken the world by
> storm.
>
> --> "Pee Cee hardware" is associated with being "cheap;" that
> generally leads to things like using enormous but slow IDE drives,
> and trying to share RAM with the video board.
>
> --> Drivers are needed, and the purported merit of I2O was that it
> would make for "portable, tuned" device drivers.
>
> Unfortunately, NDAs discourage participation amongst the free
> software community, and the "deaths" of so many Unixes in the wake
> of the oncoming IA-64 "train wreck" has not led to there being a
> "juggernaut" of I2O drivers demolishing all alternatives.
>
> There's a _potential_ for Intel to do very well on this, but it looks
> like they've squandered a whole lot of potential.
>
> Maybe there is a vast IA-64 juggernaut about to hit us; with the
> reports of upcoming "Pentium 4's" with _HUGE_ heat sinks and of IA-64
> boxes with immense heating capabilities, this does not appear to bode
> very well.
>
> It just doesn't look like Intel has stuff that is as readily scaled
> for Heavy Duty Processing as the stuff that Sun sells.
> --
> (concatenate 'string "cbbrowne" "@" "ntlug.org")
> <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
> Perhaps there should be a new 'quantum' datatype; you would be able to
> take its address or value, but not both simultaneously.
> -- Michael Shields
------------------------------
From: Chad Irby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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 19:54:44 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Mike Zulauf <[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.
> >
> > You obviously don't get out much.
> >
> > I haven't seen it for a few years, but netscape used to _regularly_
> > bring down the Suns in my department. It usually happened when it
> > was being run at the same time as a meteorological analysis program
> > called GEMPAK, but not always. I even have posted about this in
> > the past, if you'd care to check out my story. It got so bad that
> > we were forbidden to run the two programs at the same time.
> >
> > More often (and more recently) it would bring down X, but leave
> > everything else running fine. I've seen this on Linux as well.
>
> Yay, more anecdotes. Do you have a core analysis or something handy?
Okay, here's the drift of it, as I remember it (it was two or three
years ago, BTW).
Some SunOS systems are vulnerable to buffer overflows, and will crash
the whole machine if exposed to some types. Some versions of Netscape
would accidentally commit the sort of buffer overflow that would kill a
Sun machine. It's been fixed in later versions of Netscape, AFAIK.
--
Chad Irby \ My greatest fear: that future generations will,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \ for some reason, refer to me as an "optimist."
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: Bob Germer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] Public v. Private Schools
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 19:58:08 GMT
On 09/05/2000 at 03:17 AM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Phil B) said:
> In any event, given such a highly decentralized and indirect linkage
> between Quaker Meetings and Quaker schools, at least in terms of local
> 'sponsorship' and direct financial support at the parish (or
> equivalent...) level, it is clear that Quaker schools must rely on other
> sources for funding, as Bob suggests. And yet, to the best of my
> knowledge, it is not the case that Quaker schools rely entirely on
> student tuitions for that funding.
> See the fiscal information for one of the NJ district Quaker schools
> that Bob mentioned in the original post, for example, at:
> http://www.mfriends.org/alumni.html
I omitted much good information none of which I disagree with to any
meaningful extent.
However, I do wish to point out that the Annual Sustaining Fund is used in
part for scholarships for needy students who would not otherwise be able
to attend Moorestown.
Having a friend who had two children graduate from MFS, I know that less
than 10% of the annual costs are received from other than tuition. My
buddy is an accountant and he tells me that were they to drop the
scholarships and the ASF tuition would rise only about 5%. Moreover, much
of the funding raised by MFS is raised from the parents who are paying
tuition!
>From my own Alma Mater, I know that much of what is raised by our annual
appeals to parents, alumni, and others goes into the fund raising itself.
While the school is rather close mouthed about it, from having served on a
committee, I know that we spent nearly 70% of what we raised on printing,
postage, and salaries. To this must be added the cost of the space
occupied by the Alumni office, the telephone bills (which are substantial,
I know I spent more than 40 hours making long distance calls one year),
the meals for alumni dinners, etc., etc..
BTW you made one other point which needs elucidation. You stated that you
believed (felt?) that the majority of the students were not members of a
Quaker Meeting. In the case of MFS, the largest denomination is Jewish,
second is Episcopalian. And the scholarships are largely awarded to Black
residents of Moorestown.
I do think that MFS is closely related to the Moorestown Meeting. The
Meeting House and Friends Cemetary predate the School which is on the same
ground as the Meeting House and directly across Kings Highway from the
burial grounds.
--
==============================================================================================
Bob Germer from Mount Holly, NJ - E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Proudly running OS/2 Warp 4.0 w/ FixPack 14
MR/2 Ice 2.20 Registration Number 67
Finishing in 2nd place makes you first loser
=============================================================================================
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 16:02:23 -0400
From: Adam Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Criteria in Evaluating Distributions:
My dad has a joke that all distributions of Linux
feature easy installation ... but when you want to
go online ... what? You actually want to use the
*Internet* with Linux?
Everywhere I read a review on a Linux distribution,
they discuss how easy it is to install that
distribution, how easy it is to turn on a machine
that runs that distribution, and sometimes even
how easy it is to set up X-Windows. They tell you
how powerful that distribution will be once you
*do* connect to the Inernet ... but I have yet to
see a review that tells you how easy it is to
connect a distribution to the Internet.
When I read a review on a Linux distribution,
my biggest question is, "how easy is it to configure
the IP connection from the vague info given my my
ISP?"
The only two distributions that I have myself made
attempts to get online with are Corell and Red Hat.
For the benefit of whoever is reading this and wants
to know, I'll say how it went.
My first ISP was rather anti-Linux (which is why I'm
not with that ISP any more). What I mean is that their
helpdesk people would walk you through the getting
online process if you were using MacOS, or Micro$oft
Windows. But if you mentioned the "L"-word, "Linux",
they would do no such thing. They'd just dump you
with the information, and not even *try* to help.
So, I dumped that ISP. It was OK with me that they
couldn't guarantee success in connecting with Linux,
but the refusal to even *try* and work with me with
the OS that *I* the *customer* was using was IMHO
un-acceptable.
So, I got a new ISP that was willing to at least
*try* to work with me.
First we tried getting online with Corell Linux.
Everything seemed to be moving on just fine and
dandy ... only just at the end, the system refused
to complete the connection. All the troubleshooting
we tried to do was just to no avail.
Then we tried with Red Hat. Within half an hour,
I was browsing the WWW through my new ISP.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 16:08:44 -0400
From: Glitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The dusty Linux shelves at CompUSA
Steve Martin wrote:
>
> Glitch wrote:
>
> > The first year of the first millenium was 1, not 0. There never was a 0
> > year. This means the first decade was *over* *after* the 10th year, not
> > the 9th. Therefore the 2nd millenium will be over at the end of the
> > 2000th year, not the 1999th. So based on this MS has indeed 4 months to
> > cough up whatever they are currently choking on.
>
> ...which brings up an interesting point. Remember Y2K? Remember how all
> the
> computers were going to choke because "stupid" programmers and "stupid"
> computers all used a two-digit year? Any of this sound familiar?
>
> Well, here we are, all breathing a sigh of relief. Civilization didn't
> end,
> the bombs didn't drop, our cars still run, the can-openers still work,
> aliens didn't land, and all's right with the world, right? So how many
> of
> you are now using four-digit dates, eh??? Dropped right back into our
> old
> habits, didn't we? We didn't learn a damned thing from all that hooraw.
> Take a look; even Microsoft is calling their newest little attempt
> "Windows 98ME" instead of "Windows 1998ME". Well, I put a four-digit
> year
> on everything I write, software as well as things like the date on a
> check.
> Guess it doesn't matter now, right?
The same thing is going to happen in 2038 when in Feb., on the 19th I
believe at 3am sometime, all 32 bit date fields will overflow since we
will have surpassed the number seconds in a 32 bit wide field starting
from Jan of 1970 ( I forget the day, possibly the 1st). WE dragged our
feet with y2k and we will drag our feet with this problem. Given that
Intel is finally releasing a 64 bit chip that will help somewhat but a
lot of programs I assume use 32 bit data fields to hold the time and
date.
btw, there are situations that did actually occur b/c of y2k, most of
them occurred before the rollover but some things did occur b/c of
devices not recognizing the roll over correctly. I've seen a lot of
websites (AT&T being one of them) that had as their date variations such
as 19000, 21000, 1900!, etc. Some devices had the same problem, but not
all.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
