Linux-Advocacy Digest #528, Volume #29 Sun, 8 Oct 00 21:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Caveman)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Zenin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Caveman)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Al Kossow)
Re: The Power of the Future! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Unix rules in Redmond ("Drestin Black")
Re: Unix rules in Redmond ("Drestin Black")
Re: Unix rules in Redmond ("Drestin Black")
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? ("Drestin Black")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Caveman)
Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-) ("Drestin Black")
Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for?
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (John Lockwood)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Bob Hauck)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Bob Hauck)
Re: RAID on Win2k Pro ("Drestin Black")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Caveman)
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 23:43:55 GMT
In article <8rf81v$ol8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
saifikhan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Kid, I hope you remember that Linux got created because of
>the fragmentation among UNIX family, high cost of compilers,
>proprietary implementations like Solaris, AIX etc.
Linux got created, like PASCAL, as a teaching tool, not as
a marketable product.
Solaris has never been very expensive until Sun stopped
supporting decent graphics on Intel and stopped making
any form of SPARC that wasn't merely a PC with a slower
CPU at 10x the cost.
I have had a fully licensed personal copy of SunOS/Solaris
on my desk at home for well more than a decade, and I have
never found Sun to be unreasonably expensive about at least
the OS. The compilers are a different story, but I can
at least work with the GNU stuff at home. I find it hard
to understand how you can complain much about a OS that
comes with a free developer copy of Oracle 8i Enterprise
and a limited version of their enterprise management toolset
for $75 USD, and is a professionally managed evolution of
the AT&T SVR4.0 source tree. I don't ever recall paying
more than about $150 USD for any version of SunOS or Solaris
even on QIT tape. And that's dealing directly with Sun as
an individual with no corporate discount.
--
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when
the need for illusion is deep."
-- Saul Bellow
------------------------------
From: Zenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 00:03:33 -0000
[ followups cut down a bit for sanity ]
Simon Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>snip<
: How do I know this? I used to work there.
Why do I not believe you? Because you used to work there.
I've had a few friends go off to Redmond... "brain washed" is an
understatement.
--
-Zenin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) From The Blue Camel we learn:
BSD: A psychoactive drug, popular in the 80s, probably developed at UC
Berkeley or thereabouts. Similar in many ways to the prescription-only
medication called "System V", but infinitely more useful. (Or, at least,
more fun.) The full chemical name is "Berkeley Standard Distribution".
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Caveman)
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 00:10:31 GMT
In article <Ko1D5.177677$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>or Be, or whatever. We kept a few Macs for the corporate publications group,
>but everyone else switched to PCs. Much of the corporate publications
>group's work now involves translating between PC and Mac formats. You might
>not want to include that cost in your Mac/PC comparison, but in a world
>dominated by PCs, it is a very real cost of Mac ownership. We now run NT on
>over 90% of our desktop systems. Win95 accounts for the remaining 10%,
>mostly on older laptops. The few scattered Macs aren't even on the radar.
I have to admit that while in 1990 or so it was best to use AppleTalk PAP
as a commonality to drive expensive dye sublimation printers, when my
wife died I gave her 1999 PowerBook to her mother and even bought her
the software to run MS Windows so she could do accounting work on it.
I hate to say this, but in terms of personal desktop use, I am starting
to like NT more and more, because it now stays up for months at a time
and I can patch it up to date in less than an hour, whereas patching
HP-UX up to date generally requires a whole weekend and Solaris is
somewhere in between the two.
W2K, however, is kind of off the map to me since they have permitted
the Microserfs to wire all kinds of crap into the kernel to the
point that its behavior is essentially nondeterministic. I don't
see myself staying with any Microsoft OS after they drop support
for NT 4.0. I will go with Sun after that. Until then I will say
that NT 4.0 is flat out the most reliable and useful desktop OS
in terms of support and reliability, though I vastly prefer UNIX.
Thus I don't mind using a NT box at work, or maintaining it on
my late wife's PC.
The point is that the computer is a tool to do work, not a tool
to create work. HP seems to have failed so far to understand
this concept. I spend at least 10x as much time on maintaining
HP-UX as anything else, but I must admit that when and if
properly maintained, it is very reliable in terms of not
doing anything that might corrupt your data. Of course that's
saying a lot, since it takes an engineer to maintain it.
With NT, you just click and walk away for lunch.
--
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when
the need for illusion is deep."
-- Saul Bellow
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Al Kossow)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 17:04:50 -0700
In article <%E7E5.342$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Caveman) wrote:
> Linux got created, like PASCAL, as a teaching tool, not as
> a marketable product.
>
No, that was Minix.
Linus had a long-running 'discussion' over the pros and cons
of microkernels with Andy Tannenbaum, and implemented the Linux
kernel as a result.
--
The eBay Curse:
"May you find everything you're looking for.."
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 00:20:30 GMT
Dolly wrote:
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Is of course Linux.
> > >
> > > The power of Linux is of course the GNU/GPL.
> > >
> > > Does everybody agree that Linux has the best desktop? NO, HELL NO!
> >
> > why do I think this will be the only thing we agree on?
> >
> > >
> > > Is Linux still growing? YES HELL YES!
> > You missed: Is MS still growing? YES HELL YES!
> >
> > >
> > > Are large corporate interests investing in it's growth?
> > > Only if companies like IBM and HP are large in your opinion? How about
> > > Corel or
> > > Borland. You can't expect Microsoft to invest in their own death.
> > > That's the job
> > > of the giants and the ghosts.
> >
> > MS invested in Corel - kept it outta bankruptcy court.
> >
> > >
> > > How fast is Microsoft growing on that hill top? 1%.
> > >
> > > How fast is Linux growing? 5 - 7 % per year for almost 8 years.
> >
> > Well, lesse, 5-7% growth (better ask Rex, he'll tell you it's 20% or
> > something) vs 1%. I think I would rather be part of 1% growth of $19 billion
> > than 5-7% (or even 20%) of $0. And if yer counting installed seats: 1% of
> > 100,000,000 is still kicking ass over 5-7-20% of a couple hundred thousand
> > eh? It's got a long way to go and 8 more years won't be enough. It'll be so
> > fragmented by then it'll just be another *nix variation.
> >
> > >
> > > Has Linux encroachment on the commercial Unix market finally stopped.
> > > Well, Caldera bought SCO. Rumor is Redhat is buing Novel or a chunk of
> > > Novel?
> > > So you have the mainframe companies and Sun left. And there still here
> > > as they
> > > made hardware to sell.
> >
> > Who cares...
> >
> > >
> > > Does Microsoft make hardware? Hardly, NO. That Microsoft mouse or
> > > keyboard
> > > is subcontracted out. They don't make anything but software.
> > X-box ... but, who cares...
> >
> > >
> > > Does Linux like to eat software companies? Why yes. That is the Linux
> > > monsters
> > > red meat!
> > I can't think of any software company "eaten" by linux so this is weird
> > statement...
> > >
> > > What software companies is left for us to eat? Microsoft.
> > the fly dreams of eating the elephant eh?
> >
> > >
> > > Does the Linux monster realize Bill Gates knows this and has been
> > > mouthing
> > > off in the press about it? Why yes! That's just like Gravey on your
> > > Potatoes?
> > > In fact, I'm developing an extra row of teeth which will be out by
> > > December,
> > > maybe first quater next year which are my Microsoft grinding molers and
> > > fangs!!!!!
> >
> > umm... there are drugs that can help you, you know...
> > >
> > > Won't Microsoft take notice of this and attempt to stop you from eating
> > > them?
> > > Microsoft has been pooping on my head since I was a young monster. I
> > > think
> > > they will continue to poop until we are eye to eye. Then I think my
> > > controlled
> > > growth hormones which have been set at 5 - 7% per year will go wild.
> >
> > they poop ON your head and you think eventually you'll .. and then... umm,
> > yer "controlled growht hormones" wil- um... no, stop db, don't even try to
> > understand this...
> > >
> > > It's funny, it takes a human being 20 years to get fully grown and it
> > > seems
> > > Linux will be 20 before it's fully grown as an OS in terms of Market
> > > use.
> >
> > I give up... yer nutz
>
> Only problem is, according to IDC, Windows numbers
> are slipping backward... ie: -3%, -15%, -10% (9X/ME,
> IIShit, NT/2K) or perhaps the second one was -13%
> on iDC and -15% on some web server monitoring
> and stats page... and declining.
>
> Dolly
Okay for web servers.
What about some IDC data on Workstations?
Thanks
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 8 Oct 2000 19:30:06 -0500
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8roql5$mit$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >> Where is it again? [Windows 2000 Data Center]
>
> > It's released and in use already.
>
> Where?
<snip>
did you even read further down where you replied before you wrote "Where?"
See, you KNOW it's been released but you play stupid (it's comes easily I
understand)...
> > small starting point:
> >
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/guide/datacenter/studies/default.asp
>
> Ah. Nope, microsoft/compaq can still not even come close to touching IBM
> in any way, shape or form.
>
Let me requote this again: "Nope, microsoft/compaq can still not even come
close to touching IBM in any way, shape or form."
OK, lets go here (you said ANY way):
http://www.tpc.org/new_result/ttperf.idc
Lets see: IBM's ultimate very best attempt ever: 440,879 tpm/C for
$14,232,696.
Wait, what's ABOVE it (in 1st place): microsoft/compaq: 505,302 tpm/C for
only $10,445,169.
Why, what's this? ms/compaq 15% faster and 36% less expensive.
Black & white: You are wrong. Period. MS/Compaq has smoked IBM's ass even
though IBM had to dump AIX in favor of Windows 2000 to get their #2 highest
score, their DB2 couldn't match SQL 2000. So, not only is their hardware
inferiour but their software too.
AND this is using Windows 2000 Advanced Server - wait until they submit some
Data Center results, 32 processors, 64 Gb memory. I expect 750,000 tpm/C at
least. But IBM/Sun has no where else to go, this was their best attempt....
how sweet.
god, it's so easy beating you - please change your name again and try
something new and fresh, it's getting boring smacking you down.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 8 Oct 2000 19:34:07 -0500
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8roqhs$mit$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8rlb8a$ko2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> Drestin Black wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> > > Drestin Black wrote:
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > > > what? WHAT?
> > hahahahhahhhahahahahhhahahahaahhahhahhaahhhahahaahhaha
> >> >> > > > <breath>
> >> >> > > > hahahahhhahhahahahahahahaaahahahahahaaahahahhahahhaha
> >> >> > > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > No you know whe he's called Dresting LACK of facts...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "No"? Perhaps you'd like to learn to spell/type before making
shit
> > up
> >> > eh?
> >> >>
> >> >> Drestin Lack of facts.
> >> >>
> >> >> Happy now
> >>
> >> > I'll be happy when you go away and stop using up bandwidth with that
> >> > self-mocking .sig of yours (hasn't anyone told you how stupid it
makes
> > you
> >> > look)?
> >>
> >> Actually, a more appropriate term for what his sig uses is "disk
space".
>
> > Actually, it's both so quite pretending to know something. Given that
disk
> > space is incredibly cheap who cares ... given that bandwidth continues
to be
> > a premium item reducing redudant transmitted data is something...
>
> You have no idea what youre talking about.
>
> Tell me dresden, how large is usenet? I'll take a GB per day figure.
>
something like 13 gigs and 350,000 articles a day or so, who knows, I don't
really keep track of such stuff. So? The facts remain that disk storage is
dirt cheap - terabytes are a yawn. But, try moving that real time -
bandwidth... there's the issue.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 8 Oct 2000 19:36:05 -0500
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8ropg7$mit$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Drestin Black wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> > news:8rfm9h$r59$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> > > > news:8rd6gr$26rc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > > >> 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?
> >> > >
> >> > > > Yup - it's what I do the rest of the time... right now I'm
laughing
> > at
> >> > the
> >> > > > sun rep who tried to sell some 10000s to one of my clients...
> >> > >
> >> > > Oh I remember you, youre the one that thinks (incorrectly) that
> > microsoft
> >> > > can compete in the heavy-server market. We've all been laughing at
> > you
> >> > > for some time.
> >> >
> >> > One name: "w2k data center"
> >>
> >>
> >> Yeah, now show us one that actually works.
> >>
>
> > start here butthead
> >
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/guide/datacenter/studies/default.asp
>
> Strange that you had nothing to say about my utter debunking of your
little
> "compaq" solution.
actually I did and I proved you completely and utterly dead wrong with
undisputable facts. Ouch, hurts when you're smacked down so hard, you must
love the pain?
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[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: 8 Oct 2000 19:37:03 -0500
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8roqb8$mit$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8rbsck$29bm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Mike Byrns <"mike.byrns"@technologist,.com>
> > wrote:
> >> > "." wrote:
> >>
> >> >> 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.
> >>
> >> > OK. You need a new video driver.
> >>
> >> Actually I did one better, I traded W2K for windowsME. That driver
works.
>
> > what you mean is you couldn't figure out a server OS like W2K so loaded
up
> > the dumbed down newbie version and now the defaults worked on your card?
>
> Actually, I used the detinator 3 driver, just like I did under w2k.
>
> > Gawd! I used to think you had half a brain cell, but now I know that was
an
> > exageration.
>
> Why exactly do I need to run w2k in a house full of BSD machines again?
why exactly do you need windows at all then eh? Do you take classes to be
this ignorant or does it come naturally?
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Caveman)
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 00:37:47 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Al Kossow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <%E7E5.342$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>(Caveman) wrote:
>> Linux got created, like PASCAL, as a teaching tool, not as
>> a marketable product.
>
>No, that was Minix.
>
>Linus had a long-running 'discussion' over the pros and cons
>of microkernels with Andy Tannenbaum, and implemented the Linux
>kernel as a result.
Excuse me while I gack at this revisionism, but as I recall
Linus essentially reimplemented what Bach published. At the
time I was engaged in a battle with Andy DiGiralamo to get
at least a RTU for those files which "encumbered" BSD, so
it could be released as a usable OS. As I recall the whole
microkernel thing came out of CMU and MIT.
--
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when
the need for illusion is deep."
-- Saul Bellow
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-)
Date: 8 Oct 2000 19:41:04 -0500
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8ropm3$mit$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8rle1r$ko2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >
> >
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> On Wed, 04 Oct 2000 17:41:18 +1300, Adam Warner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >Hi all,
> >> >> >
> >> >> >I've just set up two dual-processor Redhat GNU/Linux 7 computers
both
> >> >> >booting with RAID1 for high reliability. I am also making use of
the
> >> > newly
> >> >> >GPLed MySQL on both computers.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >One computer provides NAT and IPChains firewalling services. Both
also
> >> >> >provide an Apache/PHP development environment.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >To set this all up has cost $0 for the software. Knowing that
> > Microsoft
> >> >> >provides a lower total cost of ownership ;-) I'd be interested to
know
> >> > what it
> >> >> >would cost to move these computers to a full Microsoft solution.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >It appears I would need this software:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >1) 2xNT4 or Window 2000 Server licenses to provide RAID1 on both
> >> > computers.
> >> >> >2) 4xCPU licences for MS-SQL.
> >> >> >3) 1xMS Proxy Server(?)
> >> >> >4) 1xOffice 2000 Premium for Mail client, Frontpage, etc.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Don't forget to include biyearly complete replacement of all your
> > software
> >> >> frequently necessitated to use MS's latest'n'greatest operating
system.
> >> > Nobody
> >> >> would seriously consider using win31, win9x or even winNT software
with
> >> > W2K
> >> >> production environment.
> >> >>
> >>
> >> > Not win3x or win9x for servers, duh. But NT/W2K for production? I
can't
> > even
> >> > find the strength to type out my laughter and your pathetic stupidity
> > and
> >> > ignorance of the 10s of thousands who are doing just that very
> > successfully
> >> > and less expensively than oracle or ibm solutions.
> >>
> >> 9 million dollars for the compaq solution. 3 million dollars for the
> > equivalent
> >> IBM solution, and that comes with an engineer who will relocate to your
> > city and
> >> work for you for a year.
> >>
>
> > #1) where the fuck do these figures come from?
>
> The compaq figures are from the url that you provided. They were very
clear,
> all in black and white on a pretty pdf.
>
> > #2) you provide nothing to explain the IBM figure so ignoring that
vaporware
>
> You have to get a quote from a rep for that kind of thing. I.e. you have
to
> have a reason to want to run something more capable than windows. :)
>
> Go ahead. Call and get a quote.
>
> > #3) what makes you think compaq hasn't done the same? or unisys?
>
> They havent.
>
> > #4) we understand that IBM systems NEED vendor support on-site to get
up,
> > running and stay running... how sweet...
>
> Actually you dont, if you have a qualified mainframe operator or two.
>
> Just like you need a qualified windows "mcse" or something with your
solution,
> dresden. They make a similar salary.
>
> >> My god, you are a huge idiot.
>
> > funny, I was just thinking that of you
>
> Funny, I totally debunked your little "solution" with clear logic and
> numbers, and you still believe your fantasy that compaq makes something
> other than toy computers for toy applications.
ahhh, see... this is why it's futile replying to your crap. You provided no
figures, no facts, no documents, nothing. You just made up some scenario, I
presented a solution, you dismised it out of hand and provided NOTHING in
exchange and then proclaim victory? You are delusional. I still haven't seen
your cheaper/faster IBM quote. What I DO see is MS/Compaq beating the pants
off IBM's best benchmark for less money (even with IBM dropping AIX for W2K
to improve performance). Until you overcome that you'll forever be
discounted.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for?
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 00:44:39 GMT
"Gardiner Family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skrev i meddelandet
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Professional level Digital Audio recording and restoration done under
> > Win98se which despite all it's technical on paper design flaws (most
> > of which are real), has been absolutley flawless for me. Each version
> > has improved the stability and features, at least for what I use.
>
> you can do this on an old atari, amiga, mac any plaform, why windows?
>
> >
> >
> > I would use Win2k or better still Linux (I could save a fortune using
> > Open Source) but the programs are not there for Linux, and the Win
> > NT/2k programs are actually not as good as their Win98 versions.
> >
>
> What a load of rot, there is tonnes of applications such as StarOffice,
> Netscape, the 1,000s of GNU applications being/have developed, and games
> for Linux, Simcity 3000, Quake, Doom and other verious titles. I think
that
> the old wives tale that there is not enough apps or games for linux has
run
> its course!
if think she ment USEFUL apps!
/IL
>
> Matt
>
>
> >
> > claire
> >
> > On 06 Oct 2000 10:19:44 -0700, Aaron Ginn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >Okay, here's an opportunity for some real advocacy. The debates about
> > >how Linux or NT/W2K provide a better desktop than the other are
> > >neverending in COLA (I don't read COMNA, so I can't comment there). I
> > >want to hear what you all use your desktop OS of choice for and why it
> > >is a better solution for you than the alternatives. I'll start...
> > >
> > >I do IC CAD design on Solaris at Motorola. Linux provides me with a
> > >free OS and networking tools to allow me to work from home on a cheap
> > >Pentium II. I have a real X-Windows implementation in XFree86 instead
> > >of a slow emulator like Exceed on NT, and I have all the tools at my
> > >disposal to allow me to run and monitor jobs remotely just as I would
> > >if I was in front of my terminal at work. All these tools were
> > >available to me for the cost of the bandwidth used to download my
> > >distro of choice, which is actually nothing since my employer pays
> > >for my cable modem. No Microsoft OS of any variety offers me anything
> > >of similar functionality in terms of ease of use or cost.
> > >
> > >Not that I don't use Windows at all; I have a dual-boot Win98 box. I
> > >actually do most of my browsing under Windows. Linux, OTOH, is what I
> > >use for real work, not play.
> > >
> > >Now it's your turn. What do you use your desktop for, and why does
> > >you OS do the job better than the alternatives?
>
------------------------------
From: John Lockwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 17:44:57 -0700
On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 00:03:33 -0000, Zenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[ followups cut down a bit for sanity ]
>
>Simon Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >snip<
>: How do I know this? I used to work there.
>
> Why do I not believe you? Because you used to work there.
>
> I've had a few friends go off to Redmond... "brain washed" is an
> understatement.
Well, I never worked there, but as a Windows programmer, I used MSDN
all the time. But perhaps the MSDN brainwashed me into thinking I
used it, possibly by beaming thoughts into my head using undocumented
Windows APIs...
ROTFLMAO,
John
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 00:43:48 GMT
On Sun, 08 Oct 2000 20:23:45 GMT, Mike Byrns <@technologist,.com> wrote:
>John Lockwood wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 08 Oct 2000 09:53:11 -0000, Zenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > The *documented* parts of Win32 are well covered...it's the
>> > *undocumented* parts which have caused WINE developers extreme
>> > pain.
>> Undocumented features in notepad? Like what? All it is is an edit
>> control in a window with a menu.
>The older Windows API documentation even had source code for it and
>WordPad if I remember correctly.
While the documentation may have had the source for Notepad, that's not
the point. WINE must clone the text edit control that Notepad uses,
not Notepad itself.
So are you saying that the documentation for the text edit control is
both complete and error free? In the sense that you can read the docs
and figure out a way to implement it such that it will be compatible?
Is this true for the other 3000 API calls too? I don't think it is,
since if it were WINE would be done.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2000 00:43:49 GMT
On Sun, 08 Oct 2000 14:32:52 -0700, John Lockwood
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On the contrary, Win32 is easy enough for even a fairly junior
>programmer to master after a reading of Petzold.
Where he learns how to leak memory and resources <g>. Petzold is good,
but leaves out a lot, particularly wrt error handling.
>I know because I started my career programming in Win16, and Win32.
Me too. I'm glad to have got away from it.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: RAID on Win2k Pro
Date: 8 Oct 2000 19:50:06 -0500
"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On 7 Oct 2000 21:50:10 -0500, Drestin Black
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >> And how much extra does this cost?
> >
> >what is your data worth? what is losing your data going to cost you?
>
> If all you need is RAID, a hardware controller is probably going to be
> cheaper than W2K Sever.
exactly!
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
