Linux-Advocacy Digest #69, Volume #29 Tue, 12 Sep 00 07:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux through the ages ("Chris Sherlock")
Re: Sherman Act vaguery [was: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?] (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! ("Christopher Smith")
Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years ("Chris Sherlock")
Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years ("Chris Sherlock")
Re: Metcalfe on Linux ("Chris Sherlock")
Re: The Government's Decision to Use Microsoft ("Chris Sherlock")
Re: The Government's Decision to Use Microsoft ("Chris Sherlock")
Re: OT American History (was Re: Computer and memory) ("Ingemar Lundin")
Re: Printing ("Chris Sherlock")
Notes Client for Linux or dropping Domino? (Jarmo Ahonen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Chris Sherlock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux through the ages
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 20:16:21 +1000
lol!
There will always be geeks :)
Chris
Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> This weekend my wife and I attended a Renaissance Faire in
> Minnesota. I've been to a few of these before, and was
> looking forward to it just for the sake of going. But
> while there, I was pleasantly suprised at something.
>
> I wore a Linux t-shirt to the faire (and no, that's not a
> misspelling). It has a penguin on the front, and a quote
> on the back from Linus, "The Linux philosophy is 'laugh in
> the face of danger'. Oops, wrong one. It's 'do it
> yourself'. Yeah, that's it."
>
> Anyway, I had several people comment on the shirt (most of
> them dressed in Renaissance garb and speaking in 'old
> English'). The first was a woman in a traditional English
> gown and cape. She just said that she liked the shirt,
> 'it meks me lawff'.
>
> The comments that caught my attention however was when I
> was looking through the swords in a shop (hobby of mine,
> sword collecting). One of the 'shop-keepers' came up and
> started asking about my shirt. Pretty soon we were having
> a big conversation about Linux (kind of interesting
> considering he was wearing Elizabethan era clothing and
> speaking in old English). While we were talking we were
> joined by a group of 'Robin-Hood' people (they were a part
> of one of the shows) and three of them started talking
> about Linux with us.
>
> The funny thing to me is the fact that here we were in a
> Renaissance atmosphere, many of the people wearing the
> ancient clothing, standing in a sword shop, surrounded by
> nothing but dust and 'old technology' and discussing
> Linux. I just thought it was an amusing story. (And my
> wife laughed because 'all of you geeks find eachother,
> even in a different time period'.)
>
>
> --
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sherman Act vaguery [was: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?]
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 05:26:17 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said 2 + 2 in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>T. Max Devlin wrote in message ...
[...]
>Let me say some things about remedies.
>
>This is the area I have focused on.
>
>Again, I think there is a good chance of a monopoly finding on the desktop
>OS.
>
>The tech tying issue is a big "if" in my mind. I don't have the famous Max
>crystal ball where he knows the outcome. In the law, there's no crystal
>ball, and only something more like a football bouncing erradically on the
>turf.
>
>But let's assume a remedy is needed.
None of this is 'crystal ball'; the legal decisions have already been
made. Barring a 'hail mary' overturning the Supreme Court, which
doesn't seem anxious to bother repeating themselves, Microsoft has
already been found guilty of monopolizing the OS, attempting to
monopolize web browsers, and tying their browser to their OS.
[...]
>Basically, the panel would determine what is fair competiton. If it is
>included and it works without interference from Windows where the Windows
>has a competing product, then fine.
We don't need a panel; we just need a free market. As long as 'market
leaders' don't act anti-competitively, then all there is is 'fair
competition'.
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/ms_index.htm
http://www.ripon.edu/Faculty/bowenj/antitrust/INTRO.htm
--
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: "Christopher Smith" <[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, 12 Sep 2000 19:36:11 +1000
"Zenin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : "lyttlec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> :> Christopher Smith wrote:
> :> >
> :> > > You and I aren't suppose to be able to do so, but, with sufficient
> :> > > effort, we can.
> :> >
> :> > Provide a shred of evidence to support your claims.
> :> Ok I have an app that will crash DOS, Windows 3.1, Windows 95, and
> :> Windows 98. But no one will let me try it on their NT machine. I am
> :> writing a new one based on a utility program provided by an OEM to be
> :> used to upgrade their Flash BIOS. It looks all a cracker would have to
do
> :> is steal administrator privaliges in order to wipe the BIOS on an NT
> :> based system. (He has to be root to do that on Linux. Same difference)
> :
> : No, it isn't the "same difference" at all. Administrator and root are
> : very different things. Stuff like security and hardware abstraction
> : actually apply to the Administrator account, whereas Unix security runs
> : along the lines of "if UID=0, allow anything" - yet another reason NT is
> : better.
>
> Hmm...so what does one do on NT when one wants to "allow anything"?
> Is it even possible then?
AFAIK (I am not a programmer at this level, this is based on reading books
like "Inside Windows NT"), if you want to do things like hardware access you
would have to write a driver and go through the HAL. Similarly, it's
possible to make files that, ostensibly, the Administrator cannot access
(set permissions to Administrator to "DENY ALL") - the Admin must actually
take ownership and reset the permissions to be able to access the files.
This is _much_ better than (most) Unix's security, which, as I said,
essentially boils down to "if UID=0, allow anything".
> I'd also like to know the details of what you call "stuff like
> security and hardware abstraction". Honestly, it sounds like you're
> using big words to sound impressive, but have no idea what they
> really mean.
I only know the principles/theory, I've never actually programmed it.
------------------------------
From: "Chris Sherlock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 20:29:05 +1000
[snip]
> Linux strives to be more like Windows in every iteration.
>
> Case in point?
> http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/previews/2285/1/
>
> Let's look at the screenshot up in the upper-right
> corner of this web page.
>
> - At the top of the screen, we have a MS Win95-ish
> task bar, completely with pop-up menus, shortcuts
> on the bar (like IE4 shell integration or Win98),
> a SYSTRAY-like program notification area on the
> right-hand side. It's bad enough they copied everything
> lock, stock, and barrel, but they even had to put it
> in the same positions. Linux developers are copying off
> of the $millions of research Microsoft did to develop the
> Win95 interface to make it efficient and conducive to
> productivity.
A lot of this interface looks more like the Mac interface to me...
> - We have Icons on the desktop that look remeniscent of
> Win95. Of course, with the icons on the left-hand side.
Again, these look like a lot of Mac icons that I've seen. A trash can? Gee,
that's so much worse than the "recycle bin" that MS stole of Apple...
> - We have another Win95 taskbar knock-off on the bottom of
> the screen complete with clock.
You have a point here... still, this is pretty functional. I don't see MS
jumping up and down that the GNOME project "stole" their idea!
> - We have a web-browser file navigator just like the IE4/
> Win98 "View as Web Page" function that so many Linux
> idiots make fun of Microsoft for, yet try so hard to
> immitate (KDE, Gnome, and now Eazel)
I actually quite like the Windows Explorer, but I don't think that it is
such a good idea to have the web-browser to closely tied in with a
file-manager. The first version of Windows Explorer did the job very nicely
thankyou.
> - We have the ability to "view as icons" which is a
> direct knock-off of Windows 2000's "View as Thumbnails"
> option
>
> Shall I go on?
>
> It's sad, really. It's sad that they bash on Microsoft for
> the same things they try to emulate (and do a shitty job
> of, BTW).
>
> -Chad
I don't think that the GNOME project is doing such a bad job as you make
out. now if only they could make a decent interface to configure hardware. I
really don't like Linuxconf very much. For now, I'll stick to editing config
files in vi :)
Chris
------------------------------
From: "Chris Sherlock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 20:39:37 +1000
I think that it is amusing that you not only didn't provide one bit of
evidence to back up your claims that Linux advocates tear down other
people's opinions, but you then proceeded to do the thing that you were just
complaining about!
I know many Linux users. They are definitely malcontents. I think that it is
pretty sad to actually call someone a malcontent based on what O/S they
decide to use!
Chris
MH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8pg143$8e0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >It's sad, really. It's sad that they bash on Microsoft for
> >the same things they try to emulate (and do a shitty job
> >of, BTW).
>
>
> Yes, that's the current state of Linux advocacy. Tear down your
opponent(s)
> instead of singing the virtues of what you are advocating. Makes
absolutely
> no sense what so ever, does it?
> But then I suppose that is all they can do, given that when trying to
> convert new users they must have compelling reasons for those users to
> switch. Which they don't, and never will. Most users simply have what they
> want in their computer already. A reason to make that sort of switch will
> require more than "winbloze", Gates bashing, and Navy warship stories
going
> on over a year. Not to mention that these advocates twist the facts (more
> often than not they are not facts) as much as MS does. My theory on this
is
> that I think most of COLA regulars are malcontents, bent on finding some
> area of their life in which they can feel superior. Being fringe and
bashing
> the 90% mainstream user is one way to do just that. The group really
should
> be named:
>
>
"comp.os.linux.user.who.hates.windows.and.has.nothing.better.to.do.than.say.
> so"
>
> Sorry state of affairs. Not Linux itself, I rather enjoy using Linux.
> It's Linux advocacy I think is a complete mess.
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Chris Sherlock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Metcalfe on Linux
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 20:58:49 +1000
Try it and see!
Chris
Marshall Price <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8p9560$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Bob Metcalfe, a columnist at www.infoworld.com who's resigning soon --
> and one of the leading figures in Internet history -- said on "The Diane
> Rehm Show" recently that Linux "doesn't do much" besides running Internet
> servers on PC's, if I heard correctly.
> I've spent many long and frustrating hours trying to figure out what
> Linux is all about, and might have gone on indefinitely if I hadn't heard
> this bit of information.
> Is it true?
>
> --
> Marshall Price of Miami, Florida I'm voting for John Hagelin
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] : "Oh, to unfree one's heaven!"
------------------------------
From: "Chris Sherlock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Government's Decision to Use Microsoft
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 20:55:44 +1000
I always thought that MS engineers were pretty smart (hey, MS gets the
smartest graduates, don't they?) I always presumed that it was a combination
of poor management, and some bad design decisions influenced my marketing!
Chris
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Tim Smith wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 08 Sep 2000 01:24:13 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > >> Since the *EXACT* same thing would have happened if they had been
using
> > >> Linux, what's your point? (Hint: Linux and Windows NT behave exactly
the
> > >> same way when an application divides by zero: they terminate the
> > >> application. If that application is critical to the functioning of
your
> > >> ship, your ship is screwed).
> > >
> > >Wrong. In Linux, you can write a signal handler for any signal (other
> > >than 9--SIGKILL), ***INCLUDING*** mathematic exceptions (which is what
> > >is produced by a div_by_0 error.
> >
> > Irrelevant, since you can do the same thing on Windows.
>
> Of course, the Windows programmer was an uneducated boob (who woulda
> thunk it),
> who failed (who woulda thunk it) to safeguard against such an occurance
> (who woulda thunk it).
>
> Microsft and usage is all about being uneducated.
>
> >
> > --Tim Smith
>
>
> --
> 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: "Chris Sherlock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Government's Decision to Use Microsoft
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 20:58:18 +1000
Universities? Why would they have the source code? For research in O/S
technology? Wouldn't they then have to publish portions of the code? I don't
think MS would allow for that!
Chris
Anthony D. Tribelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8pja94$tia$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Moderator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > If Microsoft creates backdoors in their closed source
> > software, (not that I'm saying such, but it *is* closed-source
> > and such a trick wouldn't be hard to pull off), wouldn't
> > Microsoft have more power than our own government?
>
> The military and various Universities have access to Microsoft source
code.
>
> Tony
> ------------------
> Tony Tribelli
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Ingemar Lundin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: OT American History (was Re: Computer and memory)
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 10:11:24 GMT
Eh?
Well excuse the hell out of me..but arent something like 75% of todays
americans european descendants?
(i maybe misspeling it, but i think you know what i mean)
/IL
> I never said that the Americans were without fault. The assertion
> was made that we killed all the NA's, which is false. The Europeans
> did most of the damage before we came along. They killed off the
> majority of the NA's.
>
> -Chad
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Chris Sherlock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Printing
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:19:43 +1000
Sorry for the delay in getting back to this thread. Thanks for the URL, this
is very useful!
Chris
Nigel Feltham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8p66ip$c6gou$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Chris wrote in message
> <39b61b59$0$17751$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >Hi everyone,
> >
> >I've just begun working for a rather well known printer company and I was
> >wondering what support Linux has for printers. And I am not just talking
> >straight postscript-in-ghostscript and pipe to the printer, but for
support
> >for other things like printer-head cleaning and other specialised
> >printer-functions.
> >
>
>
> Standard Linux has very limited support for specialised printer functions
> (most of these are usually available on the printer itself though) and
> doesn't support windows GDI printers (lexmark for example).
>
> A commercial print manager addon is available though which seems to
support
> almost every available printer (see http://www.easysw.com/ ) and is
included
> with mandrake on the application CD if you have the multiple CD version
(not
> sure if this is full registered version or just demo though). This may
> support more specialised features.
>
> Hope you can persuade your bosses to provide proper linux drivers for
their
> hardware though (preferably open source).
>
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: Jarmo Ahonen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.groupware.lotus-notes.misc
Subject: Notes Client for Linux or dropping Domino?
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 13:47:53 +0200
Hi all,
I thing that it may be interesting to read why we are considering the
possibility
of stopping our use of Lotus Domino R5.
We have been using Domino and Notes for some time and now we are
considering the possibility of upgrading from Windows NT 4.0 to
something else.
The upgrade cost to Windows 2000 and related MS software would be
about 1000 USD for a single workstation. The upgrade cost to Linux and
necessary commercial software would be less than 400 USD for a single
workstation.
Now our finance-people find it very difficult to understand why we
should upgrade to Windows 2000 due to the cost. We are actually making
technical evaluations and estimations of costs if we go for Linux,
drop Domino and get something instead of it. The reason to drop Domino
is that there is no native client for Linux and some functionality just
cannot be done in a working way through the www-interface.
The opinion of our financial people is that if Lotus forces us to use
Windows despite that it is more expensive, then we should stop using
products which force us to spend more than necessary.
I like Domino and would like to see it used in the future also. If
there are other people who would like to see a Notes client for Linux,
please let Lotus and IBM know of it. Get your CEO or somebody else to
write a nice letter to both IBM and Lotus... :-)
Best regards
Jarmo Ahonen
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
