Linux-Advocacy Digest #576, Volume #29 Tue, 10 Oct 00 14:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Unix rules in Redmond ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It....
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop platform
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Re: The Power of the Future! (Dolly)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Darin Johnson)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Steve Holdoway)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Bill Johnson)
Re: Real Linux Advocacy (2:1)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux Sucks ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It.... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Real Linux Advocacy (rich)
Re: Real Linux Advocacy ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Bob Hauck)
Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform ("Paul 'Z' Ewande©")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 12:54:33 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8rr80l$17l2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > "." <[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.
> >
> > Huh. That time you were off by nearly a factor of 5, including binaries.
>
> >
> > > 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.
> >
> > And how much ingress do you think a news server that carries a full feed
> > is doing?
> >
> > I'm watching one right now. Lets see how close you can get.
>
> I wrote my reply to the wrong sentence. I believe the INGRESS is 13 gigs and
I'm sure you'll have no problem introducing MS pollutions into it,
and turning it into 350,000 articles/day of REGRESS.
> 350,000 articles a day OR SO. As I wrote, I really don't keep track of such
> things, but a guy I know who works at an ISP mentioned that figure some time
> ago. I don't work at an ISP nor do I spend time watching news servers. Do
> you fetch coffee for the system administrator too?
The only coffee-fetcher on this newsgroup is you, Drestin.
>
> You do know the larger the number you produce the stronger you make my
> argument right?
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
H: "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"
I: 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
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 16:54:45 -0000
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 02:39:12 -0000, Zenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Joseph T. Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: In comp.lang.java.advocacy Chad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >snip<
>: : What's to prevent Linux from one day having incompatible distributions?
>:
>: The GPL.
>
> LOL...it hasn't helped yet...
Details please.
The L/GPL makes things compatible across diverse Unixen, nevermind
mere minor or major revisions of a particular Unix distribution.
--
Disk crisis, please clean up!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It....
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 16:58:12 -0000
On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 23:04:50 GMT, Bob Hauck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 15:41:30 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Does having a BSEE and 25 or so years in IT count?
If you have one of those, why are you bothering with IT?
[deletia]
--
"See - the thing is - I'm an absolutist. I mean, kind of ... in a way ..."
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 12:58:54 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> http://www.wininformant.com/display.asp?ID=2944
>
> Making a modern operating system isn't that easy after all: Linux creator
> Linus Torvalds announced the third major delay in the release of the next
> Linux kernel last week, placing the release of Linux 2.4 in late 2000 or
> early 2001 at the earliest. The Linux 2.4 kernel, which was original due to
> ship in October 1999, has now been in the works for almost two years
>
> ...Linux is a different beast altogether, and proponents have argued that
> the open source development model is superior to the closed, monolithic
> models used by Apple and Microsoft. But the public failure of both Linux and
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
When you pulled that out of your ass, were you careful to lick
it clean before spewing forth onto USENET?
> Netscape, with its Mozilla/Netscape 6 project, to deliver upgrades on
> schedule is now casting doubts on the entire open source process.
>
> "...But today, Linux is not very useful beyond simple Web, mail, and DNS
> services on small Intel-based servers, she says. Linux is "not for database
> servers or online transaction processing. The independent software vendor
> support [is not there]"
I guess the people who did all of the digital renderings for "Titanic"
were just reading E-mail on Linux.
And why were they using Linux? Because fucking NT was ***FAILING****
and NT was causing them to fall behind schedule.
Converting over 75% of the rendering farm allowed them to catch up
and meet the production deadline.
Oh, by the way ORACLE has been ported to LINUX, but not NT.
Why is that?
>
> <yawn>
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
H: "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"
I: 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
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 17:00:14 -0000
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 18:35:48 +0200, Paul 'Z' Ewande© <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message news:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> >> ...all real world experience aside as well.
>> >
>> >You have examples of Win2K failures while dealing with databases ?
>>
>> Sure. However they're all covered by NDA's.
>
>Of course. :)
>
>> >> >You may wave hands all you like, but the NT toy seems quite
>competitive
>> >next
>> >> >to the 'real' OSes.
>> >>
>> >> ...except for that little catch about possibly needing to
>> >> change the structure of the data.
>> >
>> >That what makes NT a toy OS ?
>>
>> Sure. Unix and AS/400's actually can support enough hardware
>> in a single machine to run in the tpc-c top 10 without the
>> need to indulge in loosely coupled clustering.
>
>Well, the loosely coupled cluster nevertheless embarrassed IBM enough for
>them to set up one and grab first place, to be later beaten by a Compaq
>cluster.
Do you really think IBM is that coherent?
[deletia]
There is still no compaq that can do 160K TPM.
--
There is no TRUTH. There is no REALITY. There is no CONSISTENCY.
There are no ABSOLUTE STATEMENTS. I'm very probably wrong.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 17:06:03 -0000
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 18:44:06 +0200, Paul 'Z' Ewande© <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message news:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
><SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
>
>> >Well, there are things as installed user base to support, capabilities of
>> >the hardware current at the time to take into considerations. Of course
>you
>>
>> The 386 dates back to 1985.
>
>Were they the majorities at the time ?
Do you plan your own life with this level of foresight?
That doesn't matter. The point is that Microsoft had quite
a few years to prepare for the inevitable dominance of the
IA32 architecture in their little niche.
Windows itself was a dog on anything less than a 386, so
targeting anything less was fairly senseless. Although
they could still abstract the system enough to make that
not an issue anyways.
>
>> >can write the greatest OS ever starting with a clean slate, but in the
>real
>> >world, things are rarely that simple.
>>
>> Why are you excusing "the world's greatest software vendor".
>
>It is ? :)
>
>> If they're so great, why didn't they do better. Why didn't they
>
>Stop putting things in my mouth Jedi. I don't recall ever calling them that.
>
>> do more than just what was barely necessary? Why couldn't they
>> be forward compatible as well as backward compatible planning
>> for the inevitable when Moore's law would catch up to what would
>> be their ambition if they had any.
>
>Sorry, since I don't recall calling them "the world's greatest software
>vendor", I'll leave this rant paragraph alone.
>
>> >Do you beleive that Linux would be where it is today if it was not that
>> >compatible/similar with UNIX ?
>>
>> That compatibility doesn't require treating the machine as if
>> it were a PDP/8. This is what sound engineering gets you.
>
>Can Linux run pre 386 apps ?
Yup. Although, legacy support doesn't require turning
the OS into anther element of that legacy that has
to be dealt with.
>
>> It is obscene to require an applications programmer using a high
>> level language to be concerned about what legacy addressing mode
>> the microprocessor is using.
>>
>> The whole point of operating systems is to abstract such things.
>
>If you say so.
Crack open a book.
--
If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you
really make them think they'll hate you.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 17:07:56 -0000
On 10 Oct 2000 16:39:22 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:8ru4kt$1du$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[deletia]
>> Spare me the sarcasm. Please answer the question. Why hasn't IBM
>> enterered their top-o'-the-line into the TPC race and annihilated the
>> competition? What reason would they have not to?
>
>Obviously because they have no hope of competing, chad.
>
>> It's simple logic, there should be a simple answer. What is it?
>
>There is a simple answer, as jedi was nice enough to detail, but by the
For all we know, that division of IBM might be engrossed in
underwater basket weaving. IBM is like that...
>content and tone of your posts in this thread, it would have gotten nothing
>but blind argument had I posted it.
[deletia]
--
Real Users know your home telephone number.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:09:27 -0400
From: Dolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [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!
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Jason Bowen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8rsmtb$5nj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <0rcE5.120448$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Mike Byrns <"mike.byrns"@technologist,.com> wrote:
> > >joseph wrote:
> > >
> > >Actually many are but not the masses of "mom and pops" that cut costs by
> using
> > >Linux. Lycos and several others can be found to be using Windows 2000 if
> you
> > >check them with the Netcraft tool.
> >
> > Netcraft is hardly a infalliable tool and you don't know much about
> > networking if you believe the front door is representative of everything
> > behind it. www.hotmail.com reports Win2k, it must be all Win2k right? It
> > is common knowledge that it is FreeBSD doing most of the serving there
> > even though Microsoft has started to roll out Win2k their.
>
> W2K is running 100% of the web servers at Hotmail but the application itself
> has not yet been ported. Look for that to change before the year is out.
www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2610894,00.html
Here's a far older message that MS keeps changing the
date on and revamping...
www.microsoft.com/ntserver/web/news/msnw/Hotmail.asp
If you do a web search on Google, you'll
find much older earlier versions of
the same statement (the latest seems to be where
someone got your scalability better than Solaris
statement).
Odd, huh? Oh - an earlier one already stated the
transition was in progress for a full transition.
There's also an MSNBC link that suddenly doesnt
exist - ooops, guess MS was upset about that
article. You can find a link to it through
google still. Just not the page... pulled
the whole story and didnt even redirect to
their fancy page not found message - just a simple
404 error.
Dolly
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
From: Darin Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 17:28:03 GMT
Zenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The *documented* parts of Win32 are well covered...it's the
> *undocumented* parts which have caused WINE developers extreme
> pain. You'll note that from small (notepad) to large (MS Office),
> MS applications are of course the most common abusers of such
> undocumented "features"...which is why MS applications have
> traditionally been the hardest to get running correctly under tools
> like WINE.
Yep, my first thought when I saw all this was "Hmm, Wine has problems
with the apps written by Microsoft itself."
One big snag is that emulating Win32 isn't enough. You also need all
those DLL's. Undocumented DLL's may even be "illegal" to reverse
engineer (illegal meaning someone with bigger pockets than you will
sue). Other DLL's may only be provided with copyrighted materials.
Etcetera. Note that Office 97 actually "upgrades" several DLL's also,
which is sure to cause headaches.
Win32 is relatively small in a strict sense (the Win32 DLL itself).
But the "OS" necessary to run common applications is huge. Office is
a whole OS in itself.
(and of COURSE Notepad is going to give headaches, it's a Win3.1
application with minimal changes for Win95. It's not the "simplest
sort of windows app".)
------------------------------
From: Steve Holdoway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.lang.c,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 19:34:58 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 08 Oct 2000 02:46:43 -0400, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>>"2 + 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:8recrj$kmf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> >That's a laugh. Ever seen some of the source to the original MacOS? It
>>> was
>>> >all written in Pascal. What good would that do MS, who write everything
>>in
>>> >Assembler at the time. Besides, Windows 1.0 was absolutely nothing like
>>> >MacOS. If they had used the MacOS source, it would have been much much
>>> >better.
>
>
>No, I think he was right. Windows 1.0 was nothing like MacOS. It was
>Windows 3.0 which 'copied' the MacOS desktop presentation.
Windows 2.0. 3.0 almost had some individuality
Steve
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Johnson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 17:41:06 GMT
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:57:09 -0400, "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>"John R. Mashey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8rua3d$1ur$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Sigh, I'm not sure why this dicussion is deemed useful for 7 newsgroups.
>> Can any of the posters explain why this has
>> anything to do with comp.arch, comp.protocols.tcp-ip,
>comp.lang.java.advocay,
>> and especially alt.conspiracy.area51?
>
>Go ask someone named "unicat"
>http://x69.deja.com/threadmsg_ct.xp?AN=677304871.1&mhitnum=0&CONTEXT=9711857
>30.1475543081
>
>It looks to me like he started the thread and crossposted it to some of his
>favorite groups
>http://www.deja.com/profile.xp?[EMAIL PROTECTED]%3e&ST=PS
>
>And as quick as he came, after post #1 he left.
>
>
....and so.....everyone else continues to ruminate.......perhaps it is
time to swallow.......the thread has lost its flavor!
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Real Linux Advocacy
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 19:34:20 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> You mean you have been posting Linux advocacy here for months and you
> just got Linux online?
>
> Or is that a different "2" ?
>
> I leave headers to Bilk....
>
> claire
I have been running Linux for nearly 2 years. I have just moved in to a
college room with an ethernet connection, so yes, I have been running
linux for 2 years, posting about how good it is for months and have been
online less than 24 hours.
Do you have a problem with that?
-Ed
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 17:41:24 GMT
Name calling again..
claire
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 16:06:02 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
wrote:
> You are saying this to someone who prefers VMS when the
> load gets really interesing. You are just another Lemming
> fool that thinks that the whole world is just as stupid
> as you are.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux Sucks
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 17:44:55 GMT
So SuSE has offices in God knows how many countries just out of the
goodness of their heart and the spreading of that joy we all know as
Linux?
It's all about money and making the real big money means taking market
share from Microsoft on the desktop.
claire
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 15:29:01 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
wrote:
>On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:57:55 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>It seems to matter to the folks that think they are going to make a
>>fortune off Linux, Like Redhat, SuSE etc.
>
> Actually, the sorts of things your talking about have little
> to no relevance to Suse. They're more relevant to the likes
> of SGI or IBM.
>
>>Do you honestly believe they are not trying to take market share away
>>from Windows?
>>
>>Your head is up your *** if you do..
>>
>>claire
>>
>>
>>On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:12:48 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias
>>Warkus) wrote:
>>
>>>It was the Tue, 10 Oct 2000 02:15:47 GMT...
>>>...and [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> And if it doesn't get it's ass in gear it will remain a niche' system.
>>>
>>>And nobody gives a damn about whether it will or won't except for a
>>>certain sad git without a real name.
>>>
>>>mawa
>>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: You Linux folks Just Don't Get It....
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 17:46:57 GMT
Never liked EE much and there is far more money in I/T.
claire
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 16:58:12 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
wrote:
>On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 23:04:50 GMT, Bob Hauck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 15:41:30 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>Does having a BSEE and 25 or so years in IT count?
>
> If you have one of those, why are you bothering with IT?
>
>[deletia]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (rich)
Subject: Re: Real Linux Advocacy
Date: 10 Oct 2000 17:42:26 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Also schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>You mean you have been posting Linux advocacy here for months and you
>just got Linux online?
You can be an advocate for something and yet not do it. I'm sure that
you advocate brain surgery, and it's quite obvious you've never done
that.
--
Catch the cluetrain. http://www.cluetrain.com
ALL programs are poems, it's just that not all programmers are poets.
-- Jonathan Guthrie in the scary.devil.monastery
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Real Linux Advocacy
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 17:48:06 GMT
At least I run the operating system I am advocating, as well as the
one I am exposing.
claire
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:13:47 -0500, Spicerun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> You mean you have been posting Linux advocacy here for months and you
>> just got Linux online?
>
>Hey, you're the person who has been advocating Windows for months in the
>Linux advocacy group; yet you still haven't found the correct windows
>advocacy groups to post into. All this time and you still haven't
>figured out how to make Outlook Express find the windows advocacy
>groups?
>
>HINT: Linux advocacy groups is for advocating LINUX!
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 17:43:42 GMT
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:24:13 -0400, Jeff Sturm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Win32 seems like a reasonably well documented API.
>
>But Wine is trying to accomplish more than that: binary compatibility.
They are trying to do both source and binary compatibility I believe.
Source compatibility is the reason for "winelib". But even that seems
hard to do. There are lots of products that purport to be source
compatible with Win32, none of them seem to be 100% so. Bristol
claimed in court that they needed access to NT source to be able to
provide a Win32-on-Unix API.
>I don't know if Microsoft's ABI is fully documented anywhere.
Well, it must be documented somewhere, since the VC++ folks would need
such. However, the fact that it may exist inside of MS doesn't help
would-be cloners.
>Full binary compatibility is much more difficult than source compatibility.
Oh, certainly. And I think even source compatibility with Win32 is
fairly hard, just from the size of if alone.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: "Paul 'Z' Ewande©" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Inferior Engineering of the Win32 Platform - was Re: Linsux as a desktop
platform
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 20:00:04 +0200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message news:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
> >Well, the loosely coupled cluster nevertheless embarrassed IBM enough for
> >them to set up one and grab first place, to be later beaten by a Compaq
> >cluster.
>
> Do you really think IBM is that coherent?
To speak the truth, IBM did some really strange things. Who know ? :)
> [deletia]
>
> There is still no compaq that can do 160K TPM.
Agreed, but there is *currently* no other offering that tops that Compaq
cluster's 500K TPM.
PAul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
