Linux-Advocacy Digest #83, Volume #29 Tue, 12 Sep 00 22:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! (lyttlec)
Webmaster of a cool Linux/geek site? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Computer and memory ("Otto")
Re: The Test: Dial-up Connections (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: How low can they go...?
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. (Gary Hallock)
Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years ("Otto")
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! ("Chad Myers")
Re: Metcalfe on Linux (Tim Hanson)
Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years ("Otto")
Re: How low can they go...?
Re: Knight to UNC ("Moderator")
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! ("Simon Cooke")
Re: How low can they go...? ("Ermine Todd III")
Re: How low can they go...? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!! ("D'Arcy Smith")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: lyttlec <[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: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 01:28:53 GMT
Nik Simpson wrote:
>
> "lyttlec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> > There isn't anything special about flashing the bios other than it
> > provides a means to hide a program on a system such that it can't be
> > detected by normal means. For general mayhem on an NT system, any old
> > driver will do and is much easier.
>
> If you give someobdy permission to install device drivers, it doesn't matter
> whether you are running NT, UNIX or Joe's custom OS you are giving away the
> keys to kingdom. If you really think that NT is any different to any other
> OS in this respect then you are obviously more clueless than people are
> already suspecting. At least on W2K if I installed you driver, the OS would
> warn me that it came from a non-trusted source and warn me not to do it.
>
> --
> Nik Simpson
Why don't you go get "Scerets and Lies" by Bruece Schneier. I love it
when a world class author takes my position.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Webmaster of a cool Linux/geek site?
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 01:16:03 GMT
The Hardcore Linux Webring is inviting any Linux or geek site with moxie and
original content to join. I'll ensure your site is in good company and gets
the attention it deserves! If your interested, submit your site here:
http://edit.webring.yahoo.com/cgi-bin/membercgi?ring=hardcorelinux&addsiteweb
ring
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Computer and memory
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 01:31:29 GMT
"Matthias Warkus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: I know de.* from the insides, and following observations can be made,
: comparing de.* with the Big Eight:
:
: - German-language posters are very rude with respect to formal criteria,
such
: as crossposting to off-topic groups, bizarre encodings, all-capital
: or all-lowercase postings etc.
Snip...
: - German-language posters are generally better at expressing
: themselves, mastering grammar, spelling correctly and being polite
: than American English-language posters (no surprise, because a lot
: of Germans speak better English than most Americans)
To start with, which is the German poster then? Rude or generally better? To
continue, there is no argument on their English knowledge. However their
knowledge of the American-English language is none existent.
: I don't want to overgeneralise, but I suppose at least some of these
: traits are common to all European Usenet hierarchies. We've got some
: arrogant U.S. idiots in here who are probably going to argue that this
: is because only the rich and/or highly educated in Europe can post to
: Usenet due to our low ratio of Internet connections.
Tempting argument, but I pass....:)
:
: Dream on. We're not some kind of Third World country. IIRC the ratio
: of Internet-connected Germans, for one, has reached .5 many months ago
: and has since then far surpassed it.
What measurement is .5? Restraining myself to put foot in the mouth....
Otto
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: The Test: Dial-up Connections
Date: 13 Sep 2000 01:35:53 GMT
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000 17:34:54 GMT, sfcybear wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Jeff Szarka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, 06 Sep 2000 04:14:32 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >The Linux machine ALWAYS wins.
>>
>> SuSE on my machine constantly drops my dialup connection. We can make
>> "tests" prove anything and they're pointless.
>>
>
>Yeah, and you are the best at making tests that prove what you want!
>Just remember this when MS posts new "tests". As you have said, they are
>pointless!
I sure will. I was one of the first to come out bashing Mindcraft's first
test. Most of these "tests" are a load of cr*p, and the one discussed in
this thread is no exception.
( oh, and if Jeff tried to post his "test" as if it meant anything, I'd be
on to him too ... )
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: <[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: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 18:34:47 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8pkp3p$b9d$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8pkk73$uh8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > Ermine Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:u$1iqpFHAHA.316@cpmsnbbsa09...
> > >
> > > Actually you can. Alternate shells for Windows do exist and are
readily
> > > installable and usable. In fact, if you don't like the explorer shell
> and
> > > like the older program manager approach, you can enable that instead.
> In
> > > fact, there have even been shells for Windows that completely emulated
> the
> > > Mac such that a Mac user wouldn't even know that they were using a
> Windows
> > > PC (if you disguised the mouse and keyboard a little). I know this
> > because
> > > I had to set this up at a Fortune 50 company back in the late 80's -
> never
> > > ceased to amuse to watch a Mac fanatic sit down at the "beta" test
"Mac"
> > and
> > > report how much faster and better it was than their old Mac they had
on
> > > their desk. It really became a laugh when they later found out that
it
> > had
> > > been a Windows PC they were praising.
> > >
> > > Using Explorer is an option setting in the Registry.
> >
> > What is the Registry option setting?
>
> HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\Current
> Version\Winlogon\Shell=Explorer.exe (default)
That is a Windows NT registey entry I was asking about Windows 95 Retail
>
> >
> > Does this do more than just run the Program Manager while the start menu
> is
> > still there? Does this make say Windows 95 interface a dead ringer for
> the
> > Windows 3.0 interface and does the user get the came control over the
> > appearance including the size of the windows borders?
> >
> AFAIK, the Start menu disappears, and you get whatever shell you have
> specified - perhaps IE ( kiosk applications?)
> >
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:44:21 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> > You are just making this up. I never told anyone to use the KDE
> > website's
> > search engine.
>
> You *have* this very day.
>
> You told Max in relations to www.kde.org: 'There is such a thing as "search
> in page", you know.'
>
You are sounding more and more like Max every day. Read Roberto's post
again. He was not talking about using a search engine. He was talking about
using Edit->Find in Page in Netscape, or the equivalent in your browser of
choice. Only an idiot would use a search engine to look for the word
"Credits" in the current page being displayed.
Gary
------------------------------
From: "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 01:45:26 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: Some of us Linux users will quite willingly criticize KDE
: for going down that "buggy uber app as default user shell"
: garden path...
Well put, although that is exactly what Linux needs to gain acceptance from
the masses. Some of the Linux users will complain no matter what, anyway :).
Bring on the "garden variety" pack....
: Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy
grail.
:
: That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
Arguable.... especially for capitalism. Competition, which provides
alternatives to a product, tends to be bloody. Anything goes for the goal of
controlling the market.
Otto
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[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: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 01:47:51 GMT
"lyttlec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Nik Simpson wrote:
> >
> > "lyttlec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Meet me face to face and we will discuss it. I live in Arizona, but can
> > > meet either here or in Las Vegas.
> >
> > Chicken, consider your bluff well and truly called! Why on Earth should I
> > travel to Arizona to obtain a mysterious piece of software that you believe
> > will trash my system. If it exists at all, zip it up and email it to me, it
> > can't be that big.
> Because I don't know you and I have seen too many script kiddies who
> might use the code to do damage. If you can satisfy me that you are only
> going to crash your own system, I will give you the name of the book
> where the code has been published. It caused a big flap six or seven
> years ago when it was first published. Nice to see nothing has been
> fixed in all that time.
n1/<, Ph33R h1Z l33Tn355. h3'Z 4 m4s3t3R H4x0R 4nD j0o B3tTa pH33R
h1S l33t B10S h4x tH4t 0nLy m4g1c4llY w3rx 0n NT.
Remember, PCs running Linux don't have a BIOS, so they're not
vulnerable to the types of BIOS problems that mere regular
PCs have.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Metcalfe on Linux
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 01:48:47 GMT
Marshall Price wrote:
>
> 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!"
Eh. Consider the source. He's been flaming Linux for years now. His
last little bit on Infoworld was just a little name-calling, the "open
sores" movement, etc. I don't know what got him going or why. He hates
us.
--
"She said, `I know you ... you cannot sing'. I said, `That's nothing,
you should hear me play piano.'"
-- Morrisey
------------------------------
From: "Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux to reach NT 3.51 proportions in next 2 years
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 01:51:41 GMT
"sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8pg1kf$blu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: Only SOME of the GUI's are trying to be like windows. MS has been
: striving to be more like Linux/Unix for YEARS! i.e. as secure as Unix,
: as stable, mutli-user.... Unix had all this and MORE years before MS.
Hmmm... Maybe MS should be as expensive as Unix to level the playing field.
Don't come back with the line "But Linux is free...". AFAC, you can keep
it...
Otto
------------------------------
From: <[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: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 18:43:24 -0700
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Seán Ó Donnchadha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2000 23:23:09 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> Using Explorer is an option setting in the Registry.
> >
> >What is the Registry option setting?
> >
>
> On NT it's the Shell value in the following key:
> {HKLM|HKCU}Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon
>
> In Win9x I don't know what the registry setting is, but the old Shell
> value in SYSTEM.INI is still supported.
>
> >
> >Does this do more than just run the Program Manager while the start menu
is
> >still there? Does this make say Windows 95 interface a dead ringer for
the
> >Windows 3.0 interface and does the user get the came control over the
> >appearance including the size of the windows borders?
> >
>
> The Start menu wouldn't still be there; it's provided by the first
> instance of EXPLORER.EXE run on behalf of the logged-in user. The
> appearance of the buttons and such wouldn't change as it's provided by
> the USER subsystem. The border size has always been adjustable in the
> control panel.
Which is just what I suspected, while you can use the program manager the
appearance will *not* be as it was with WIndows 3.0 and before. Unix on the
other hand can permit this with its older interfaces. The border size,
which control panel applet of WIndows 95 can control that? Which tab if
appropriate?
------------------------------
From: "Moderator" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Knight to UNC
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 21:55:27 -0400
How'd that end up here?
Outlook Express sucks.
--
"Hellfire rages in my eyes
Blood will fall, not rain this night
The coming curse, your anti-Christ, I am the Watcher's eye
I vindicate and cleanse the Earth of all mankind."
-Iced Earth
Moderator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8pmjjr$glb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Wow, if Knight had resigned in May when he claims he wanted too, UNC
> could have ended up with Bobby Knight. Then there would be two Coach
> K's in the triangle.
>
> --
> "Hellfire rages in my eyes
> Blood will fall, not rain this night
> The coming curse, your anti-Christ, I am the Watcher's eye
> I vindicate and cleanse the Earth of all mankind."
> -Iced Earth
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun cannot use Java for their servers!!
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 18:56:22 -0700
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:b1Bv5.167$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "lyttlec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Nik Simpson wrote:
> > >
> > > "lyttlec" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Meet me face to face and we will discuss it. I live in Arizona, but
can
> > > > meet either here or in Las Vegas.
> > >
> > > Chicken, consider your bluff well and truly called! Why on Earth
should I
> > > travel to Arizona to obtain a mysterious piece of software that you
believe
> > > will trash my system. If it exists at all, zip it up and email it to
me, it
> > > can't be that big.
>
> > Because I don't know you and I have seen too many script kiddies who
> > might use the code to do damage. If you can satisfy me that you are only
> > going to crash your own system, I will give you the name of the book
> > where the code has been published. It caused a big flap six or seven
> > years ago when it was first published. Nice to see nothing has been
> > fixed in all that time.
>
>
> n1/<, Ph33R h1Z l33Tn355. h3'Z 4 m4s3t3R H4x0R 4nD j0o B3tTa pH33R
> h1S l33t B10S h4x tH4t 0nLy m4g1c4llY w3rx 0n NT.
>
> Remember, PCs running Linux don't have a BIOS, so they're not
> vulnerable to the types of BIOS problems that mere regular
> PCs have.
Uh... yes they do. PCs running Linux use the BIOS to run LILO.
Simon
------------------------------
From: "Ermine Todd III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How low can they go...?
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 19:00:53 -0700
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Here's a reference to get you started.
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q156/0/92.asp
--ET--
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8pkk73$uh8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Ermine Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:u$1iqpFHAHA.316@cpmsnbbsa09...
> >
> > Actually you can. Alternate shells for Windows do exist and are readily
> > installable and usable. In fact, if you don't like the explorer shell
and
> > like the older program manager approach, you can enable that instead.
In
> > fact, there have even been shells for Windows that completely emulated
the
> > Mac such that a Mac user wouldn't even know that they were using a
Windows
> > PC (if you disguised the mouse and keyboard a little). I know this
> because
> > I had to set this up at a Fortune 50 company back in the late 80's -
never
> > ceased to amuse to watch a Mac fanatic sit down at the "beta" test "Mac"
> and
> > report how much faster and better it was than their old Mac they had on
> > their desk. It really became a laugh when they later found out that it
> had
> > been a Windows PC they were praising.
> >
> > Using Explorer is an option setting in the Registry.
>
> What is the Registry option setting?
>
> Does this do more than just run the Program Manager while the start menu
is
> still there? Does this make say Windows 95 interface a dead ringer for
the
> Windows 3.0 interface and does the user get the came control over the
> appearance including the size of the windows borders?
>
>
------------------------------
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: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 18:58:06 -0700
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8pmmhq$1o0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Seán Ó Donnchadha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Mon, 11 Sep 2000 23:23:09 -0700, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >>
> > >> Using Explorer is an option setting in the Registry.
> > >
> > >What is the Registry option setting?
> > >
> >
> > On NT it's the Shell value in the following key:
> > {HKLM|HKCU}Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon
> >
> > In Win9x I don't know what the registry setting is, but the old Shell
> > value in SYSTEM.INI is still supported.
> >
> > >
> > >Does this do more than just run the Program Manager while the start
menu
> is
> > >still there? Does this make say Windows 95 interface a dead ringer for
> the
> > >Windows 3.0 interface and does the user get the came control over the
> > >appearance including the size of the windows borders?
> > >
> >
> > The Start menu wouldn't still be there; it's provided by the first
> > instance of EXPLORER.EXE run on behalf of the logged-in user. The
> > appearance of the buttons and such wouldn't change as it's provided by
> > the USER subsystem. The border size has always been adjustable in the
> > control panel.
>
> Which is just what I suspected, while you can use the program manager the
> appearance will *not* be as it was with WIndows 3.0 and before. Unix on
the
> other hand can permit this with its older interfaces. The border size,
> which control panel applet of WIndows 95 can control that? Which tab if
> appropriate?
He already answered this:
Control Panel -> Display -> Appearance -> select "Active Window Border"
under item and change the value in the Size spin control.
Simon
------------------------------
From: "D'Arcy 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: Wed, 13 Sep 2000 02:08:19 GMT
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:b1Bv5.167$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Remember, PCs running Linux don't have a BIOS
?!!? Try again ?!!?
What exactly do you think the BIOS is?
What Linux PC are you talking about?
..darcy
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
