Linux-Advocacy Digest #425, Volume #29 Tue, 3 Oct 00 14:13:09 EDT
Contents:
Re: Windows+Linux+MacOS = BeOS (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Dedicated Linux Employment Site (Dan)
Re: Windows+Linux+MacOS = BeOS (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: GPL & freedom ("Jon A. Maxwell (JAM)")
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? ("JS/PL")
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? (Brian Langenberger)
Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time? (Perry
Pip)
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? (.)
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? (.)
Re: Unix rules in Redmond (.)
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? ("Christopher Smith")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Subject: Re: Windows+Linux+MacOS = BeOS
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 16:39:46 -0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Matthias Warkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spoke thusly:
>It was the Mon, 02 Oct 2000 16:09:35 -0000...
>...and Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Um, I think you are mixing up rock guitarists and 'modern'
>> guitarists. I play hard rock/metal/hardcore/punk type
>> music and believe me, I'm not a fan of the 'computerized'
>> guitar sounds. I'd much rather have a guitar jacked
>> straight into a loud tube amp, which is in fact one of the
>> reasons my neighbors aren't too fond of me ;-). I have
>> yet to find a 'computerized' guitar amp that sounds any
>> good, although some of the really, really high-end (read,
>> too damn expensive for me) pre-amps get close to the tube
>> sound, but I think they incorporate tubes to do it (and
>> there's no power tube distortion from a FET amp).
>
>Same for me. I'm a pianist learning to be a keyboarder. The latest
>keyboard I've played has a colour screen, a GUI, online help and
>full-motion video. Really good Hammond emulation (virtual drawbars).
>
>Nevertheless, what I'm dreaming of is a fully electromechanical,
>tube-amplified Hammond B-3 or L-100 without any electronics whatsoever
>and a mechanical Leslie cabinet, of course. Only a rock organ that
>needs lubricating is a good rock organ.
>
>Oh well. As you said, "enough of the rock talk". I've been rehearsing
>"House of the Rising Sun" too much.
>
I'm glad to see there are still some of us 'old school'
instrumentalists interested in rock 'n' roll. It would
suck to see everything go to digital samples and other
non-real instruments.
BTW, in my relaxing time I also enjoy the sweet tone of a
genuine wood, hand built violin. Some people tell me that
my preferred guitar tone sounds an awful lot like a
violin. Interesting how close the two actually do sound.
Of course, it's a lot harder to play a violin 'agressively'.
:-). Maybe I should move this sub-thread to one of the
rock groups.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: Dan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Dedicated Linux Employment Site
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 16:41:38 GMT
If you're looking for a job where you can utilize your skills in Linux
or open source software, check out http://www.mojolin.com?usenet
Mojolin is FREE. For everyone. Period. Because of this, you will see a
greater number of the small, growing Linux companies posting their jobs
here. Yes, you will also see recruiters searching for the big firms.
My thought was, "Why penalize a company for trying to get me a job" ?
You can post resumes and open
positions if you're registered. You can search either without being
registered. I will be adding more features like email notification and
international job postings in the near future.
Check it out and let me know what you think!
thanks,
Dan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Subject: Re: Windows+Linux+MacOS = BeOS
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 16:41:52 -0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Matthias Warkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spoke thusly:
>It was the Sat, 30 Sep 2000 15:16:37 +1000...
>...and Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Perhaps it's because computer geeks don't make cool music.
>
>Hm... I play in a little band which makes arguably cool music. That
>either means that your statement is wrong or that I am not a computer
>geek.
>
>Probably it's the latter. Hell, I shower regularly and I even get laid :)
>
Shit, I guess that means I lost my computer-geekdom the
day I got married (or the day I started dating the woman
that is now my wife). Of course, you couldn't tell that
by looking at my 'play-room' (something like 15 different
computers, and spare parts enough to probably build
another 5). ;-)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: "Jon A. Maxwell (JAM)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: GPL & freedom
Date: 3 Oct 2000 17:12:21 GMT
Simon Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: (comp.lang.java.advocacy)
| "Jon A. Maxwell (JAM)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
|> Frank McGrath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: (comp.lang.java.advocacy)
|> | [...] If GPL is the right approach, then all music should be
|> | free, all books and writing should be free.
|>
|> Who says music and text should not be free? Copyright is to
|> protect the creator from other people taking the profits made
|> from copies of the product. But when anybody can copy it for no
|> cost, charging for copies is morally bankrupt since there
|> wouldn't be any profits in the first place if not for the
|> copyright. IOW, copyright shouldn't be about *creating* profits
|> but *protecting* them.
|
| OK... let's see. I spend 4 years creating something (say a piece
| of software). That software costs nothing to copy - it could be
| made available over the net. So what you're saying is that
| because it costs nothing to copy, I shouldn't receive any
| compensation for my 4 years work?
No, you should not receive compensation simply for copies of the work
because the copy itself has no value. If you want to raise money
off it you should charge admission or offer it as a service. You
will also get royalties from companies earning money off it by doing
the same. They would earn that money in the same way Red Hat does:
by providing a service and convenience -- not from the copy itself,
which everybody has free thanks to the GPL.
Music will work the same way. Musicians will earn money from their
songs being played on the radio (service) and from concerts
(admission). You'll still get the copy free from Napster and the
artist will still make 'plenty' of money. Mp3.com is good example of
how this can work well.
| Nice philosophy.
Yes, and you have even more options for making money with software;
you can keep the actual algorithm and work on your server (service)
and charge admission (per use fee).
Jam (address rot13 encoded)
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000 13:13:55 -0400
"Jeff Szarka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sun, 1 Oct 2000 21:50:25 -0400, "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > But I had a bitch of a time playing mp3's in
> >Linux.
>
> I don't understand this part. My Linux mp3's play like an audio slide
> show. It seems like even older distributions were better at this. My
> mouse movement gets extremely jerky and windows don't redraw properly.
Yes whatever the stock mp3 player is in Mandrake 7.1, (and I forget the name
of it) freezes up and after playing an mp3.
I have to literally kill the process, go deep into the file where the app
resides and delete something else just to get the program to resart.
Admitedly I'm practically clueless.
And as a side note, for some reason Linux only sees 64mb of my 224mb of ram
which is a whole other issue and probably has to do with the abit bp6
motherboard not being set up properly.
It's a nice package though.
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: 3 Oct 2000 17:37:11 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy JS/PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip!>
: And as a side note, for some reason Linux only sees 64mb of my 224mb of ram
: which is a whole other issue and probably has to do with the abit bp6
: motherboard not being set up properly.
This is remarkably common. Putting "Linux 64 RAM" into google brought
up this link with the cause and solution:
http://sdb.suse.de/sdb/en/html/maddin_memory1.html
It would be a good idea for distributions to either find a way
to automate RAM finding or ask the user how much he/she has
at install time.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: alt.windows98
Subject: Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 17:40:02 GMT
On Tue, 3 Oct 2000 14:46:38 +0100,
Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spewed this
>> unto the Network:
>>
>> >I would not say I am constantly installing/uninstalling programs. As for
>> >TSR's, they went out yonks ago - this is Windows 98, it doesn't need DOS
>> >style TSR's anymore.
>>
>> It still needs HIMEM.SYS.
>
>No it doesn't...
>
Just goes to show that some Windows advocates don't even know shit
about Windows. Remove the himem.sys file from your windows directory
and reboot your system.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: 3 Oct 2000 17:49:06 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8rbrug$29bm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:8r8t5t$1e70$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> > news:8r8nv2$1e70$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> >> Would you believe....Under the extreme stress of winamp, a nice
>> > windowed
>> >> >> 3d visualization and putty (ssh client), my windows 2000 machine
>> >> >> bluescreened on my first attempt to reply to this post.
>> >>
>> >> > No. Unless you told me you were overclocking your CPU or you had some
>> >> > odd hardware with poor drivers.
>> >>
>> >> My cpu is not overclocked currently (it was, I had some problems with
> it)
>> >> and is a PIII 666. I have a hercules TNT2 ultra (great card, one of
> 500
>> >> made) which is not overclocked, and im using the most recent stable
>> > drivers
>> >> from www.nvidia.com. The voltage on both processors is nominal, and
>> > neither
>> >> one ever tops off 118 degrees farenheit.
>> >>
>> >> I do not have this problem with BeOS, XFree86 4.0.1 or windows
> millenium,
>> > oddly.
>> >>
>> > I love the way abracadabra pretends he knows what any of those things
> means
>> > (one of 500 made, you believed that story?)
>>
>> Look it up. I bought it from a coworker and managed to confirm his story.
> They
>> didnt sell well, but theyre incredible cards.
> They sold FANTASICALLY but the company closed down. THAT'S why there was a
> limited run and the figure wasn't 500.
What was the exact figure then?
>>
>> > PIII-666? How about 667 you
>> > yutz, no such thing as a PIII666
>>
>> Clock the chip yourself. 2 third party applications were nice enough to
> tell
>> me that it was running at 666mhz. Besides, its much more fun to type 666
>> instead of 667. Talking with the guy who sold me the video card (who used
> to
>> work in R&D for motorola), it would seem that intel is pulling more of a
> marketing
>> ploy than anything else.
> http://support.intel.com/support/processors/sspec/p3p.htm - show me the
> PIII666 on that list?
You have misunderstood what I typed, dresden. I'm not naming the chip,
im describing it. It runs at 666mhz. It does not run at 667 mhz, and in
fact it CANNOT run at 667mhz. The fact that it is called a 667mhz chip by
intel is obviously a move to disassociate it from spooky evil columbine
type hacker idiots.
> yes, I know what your applications tell you - 666 is closer to it's real
> speed but that's not what you've got. Does your mustang have a 5.0 liter
> engine or 4.87?
I dont have a mustang. But if I did, it would be 4.88. (4.877)
>>
>> > check Intels site if you are about to
>> > further embaress yourself. "voltage on BOTH processors?" Oh really?
>>
>> Yes, the core voltage on both the pIII and the video proc is a steady
> +2.02.
>> > So, you
>> > are implying you have ANY control WHATSOEVER over the voltage on your
> 1/500
>> > TNT2 card?
>>
>> No, but I do have control over the core voltage of the PIII. I
> overclocked
>> the video processor and have been watching its statistics carefully with a
>> nifty hardware monitor application; its tending toward the hot side; its
>> clocked currently to 195mhz. I think I can get it to go faster.
>>
>> > AND only an idiot would buy a hercules ultra and not overclock
>> > it, THAT'S the only reason they were cool.
>>
>> Indeed, thats why I am.
> But you said you didn't.
Actually, I said that I did. Youve entirely misconstrued every one of
my posts in this thread. I overclock it with the aid of the nifty
windowsME drivers offered by NVIDIA.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: 3 Oct 2000 17:52:37 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8rbsei$29bm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>>
>> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:8ra29a$14af$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy MH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> > Anyone with any experience knows that you either have a
> hardware\driver
>> >> > problem, or you're lying. Why perpetrate such BS? Does this help your
>> >> > precious Linux? It only serves to denigrate the weight of any
> assertion
>> > you
>> >> > make, relegating you to irrelevant. Get a clue.
>> >>
>> >> 1. I'm not lying.
>> >> 2. I gave my specs in detail, and the problem in moderate detail.
>> >> 3. Its not my "precious" linux. If youd been paying attention, you
> would
>> > have
>> >> seen that I dont particularly like linux any more than I like
> windows.
>> > My
>> >> tastes go beyond both.
>> >> 5. The NVIDIA driver *may* be a problem, I never said this was
> impossible.
>> > I just
>> >> find it interesting that the W2K version of their driver would
>> > therefore be less
>> >> stable than their windows ME version. And beyond that, (for a
> little
>> > added detail)
>> >> it is only *one* winamp 3d visualization which causes this problem.
>> > The rest work
>> >> almost unbelievably well.
>> >> 6. Shut the fuck up, you stupid asshole.
>>
>> > 1. Liar
>> > 2. who cares, you're lying.
>> > 3. ha!
>> > 4. you can't count or number a list
>> > 5. Being as how the exact opposite has been reported by every hardware
> site
>> > out there, I find again that you are full of it. AND beyond that,
> obviously
>> > it's the winamp plugin that's the problem you uneducated moron.
>>
>> You havent been reading much about NVIDIAs W2K drivers.
> Oh puhlease - I have been using them religiously since 3.64, you haven't a
> clue. I contribute news to one of the most popular nvidia fan sites too. You
> haven't a clue. They are solid.
Brandon says hes never heard of you, by the way. And NVIDIAs bug tracking
system itself seems to disagree with you.
>>
>> Tell me, dresden, could NVIDIA or microsoft possibly have any flaws at
> all?
> of course. I would never claim otherwise - but I'll point to real flaws
> instead of made up ones. Example: The nvidia driver do not properly set
> monitor refresh rates in DirectX or OpenGL. You can fix the DirectX problem
> though registry patches but the OpenGL needs to be driven by the software.
> The fault lies either with nvidia or MS but both point fingers at each
> other - so, that's not cool.
This has nothing to do with any of my posts.
> Also, in Q3A, for the longest time everyone thought there was a bug in the
> nvidia drivers under W2K regarding "brightness" - turns out it was in Q3A
> itself, the overbrightbits toggle was incorrectly implemented. it's been
> fixed in version 1.25. No one is perfect, but I don't make shit up just to
> put something down - I use the facts - much more effective that way.
And neither does this. In fact, I wasnt looking for an argument in any
of my posts in this thread, but as usual you came stomping in and made
one anyway---where there wasnt one at all to begin with.
The upside is that despite your best efforts, NVIDIA seems to have a pretty
good idea at this point of exactly what is happening with my card and its
drivers. I'll happily give details to anyone who wants them with the exception
of dresden and any of his previously identified flunkies.
=====.
--
"It's natural to expect there might be people doing stupid things
with computers"
---Michael Vatis, director of the FBI's national infrastructure
protection center commenting on Y2K concerns about hacker attacks
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 3 Oct 2000 17:54:35 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm sorry dude, but sometimes you hear something so silly you can't stop
> from laughing...
> I'm sure he'll post the tux results ... it's all they've got...
Dont you have something better to do?
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 04:56:31 +1000
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8rd66i$26rc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > http://support.intel.com/support/processors/sspec/p3p.htm - show me the
> > PIII666 on that list?
>
> You have misunderstood what I typed, dresden. I'm not naming the chip,
> im describing it. It runs at 666mhz. It does not run at 667 mhz, and in
> fact it CANNOT run at 667mhz. The fact that it is called a 667mhz chip by
> intel is obviously a move to disassociate it from spooky evil columbine
> type hacker idiots.
Actually it runs at 666.6666666666 <etc> Mhz. Obviously intel has better
math than whoever wrote your monitoring program.
> > yes, I know what your applications tell you - 666 is closer to it's real
> > speed but that's not what you've got. Does your mustang have a 5.0 liter
> > engine or 4.87?
>
> I dont have a mustang. But if I did, it would be 4.88. (4.877)
So why is a CPU that runs at 666.666666666 <etc> not 667 ?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
