Linux-Advocacy Digest #591, Volume #29 Wed, 11 Oct 00 03:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux Out perfoms Windows (Steve Mading)
Re: welcome to the world of objects ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (.)
Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop ("Les Mikesell")
Re: The Power of the Future! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
NYC LOCAL: GNU/Linux/Free OS Beginners' Meeting Wednesday 11 October 2000: Michael
Smith on the Approach to Free OSes ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Advocacy NGs == Trollvilles (Cannon Fodder)
Re: The Power of the Future! (Mike Byrns)
Re: The Power of the Future! (Mike Byrns)
Re: The Power of the Future! (Mike Byrns)
Re: The Power of the Future! (Mike Byrns)
Re: The Power of the Future! (Mike Byrns)
Re: The Power of the Future! ("Mike")
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Mike Byrns)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Out perfoms Windows
Date: 11 Oct 2000 05:54:51 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: HI,
: If you are a c++ programmer, then try this program both on windows and on
: linux and observe the time taken to display 1,00,000 numbers
: #include <iostream.h>
: main()
: {
: for(int i=0; i<=100000; i++)
: cout << i <<endl;
: return 0;
: }
: What I get is 5 seconds on Linux 2.2 and it takes 2.30 minutes to show all
: the
: 100000 numbers.
This doesn't mean much since it is totally I/O bound - dependant on
the speed of outputting to stdout. (The rest of the program will
be spending a miniscule percent of the total time.) Differences
in the output media will make a huge difference. Redirect it to a
file and it's going to be faster than it was on the screen. Do
it on a direct tty console screen and it will be faster than in
a terminal window, and so on. All you've proven is that Linux
scrolls text faster on the screen. Once you get to the point where
the text is just a blur to the eye, it doesn't matter how much faster
than that you can go. (It would matter only if the output was being
used by some other piece of software via a pipe, or if it was going
to a file. If it's out to the screen, going as fast as a human can
deal with is all that matters.)
(And no, I'm not a Windows advocate. I hate using Windows, but
I also hate to see bad arguments being used by those who agree
with me.)
Try the test again with file output, and pipe output and then it
might mean something.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: welcome to the world of objects
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 02:05:46 -0400
Steve Mading wrote:
>
> Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> Fine, whatever. There's a certain point where terms
> become so far abstracted from their real-world connections
> that communication becomes a mushy, messy sea of confusion.
> Your posts have reached that point. I'm tired of it. I'm
> done. I don't fully "grok" philosophy for the same reason.
> After a while the debates are about words whose connection
> to real pragmatic things is impossible to trace.
>
> In other words, I'm not replying to your points because I
> can't figure out what they even are supposed to be.
What we have here...is Richard is failing to communicate.
--
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.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: 11 Oct 2000 06:05:28 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." wrote:
>>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Static66 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On 10 Oct 2000 21:21:38 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>>
>> >>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>> Loren Petrich wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, STATIC66
>> >>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> > On Mon, 09 Oct 2000 05:04:05 GMT, Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >>>> > wrote:
>> >>>> > >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis
>> >>>> > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> > >> Purdue out-of-state tuition is NOT subsidized, and I wasn't
>> >>>> > >> getting anything from my parents, either.
>> >>>> > > Cry me a river. I presume that you reimbursed the government for the
>> >>>> > >cost of military training also.
>> >>>> > Yes I did, with hard work, sacrifice and months and months away from
>> >>>> > my family, whilst you enjoyed the freedoms I was protecting.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Enjoy feeling sorry for yourself. Did you pay in MONEY???
>> >>
>> >>> Loren, you owe every serviceman a LOT more than what you have paid
>> >>> them. If it was not for us, you would be the impoverished subject
>> >>> of some totalitarian regime.
>> >>
>> >>Hah. If it wasnt for you sitting in a comfortable chair in front of
>> >>some kind of 'communications' console? You arent FIGHTING, friend, you're
>> >>(if youre in the reserves, especially) wimping out. You are a coward
>> >>and an idiot.
>> >>
>> > No you sir are an idiot.
>>
>> > You do not have the faintest clue. A man with a rifle is just that. An
>> > army without logistic services and communication is worthless..
>>
>> > I happen to be what is know as an " F.O." forward observer. I (part of
>> > a 4 man team) am dropped ahead of the front line by helo (or put on a
>> > beachhead and then hike my ass and 200 lbs of gear inland) Then I sit
>> > on a hill and rain steel down upon the enemy. that is to say
>> > coordinate air strikes, call artillery strikes, adjust their fire
>> > until the target is DEAD. Call in navel guns, etc etc.
>>
>> > so do not talk to me about cowards.
>>
>> I wasnt talking to you in the first place.
> Of course not. You're the type of idiot who thinks that field radio
> operators sit behind a "console"
You didnt say that you were a 'field radio operator' until just now.
Why arent you doing something a little more oriented toward your apparant
computer skills?
> Exactly how the fuck is an Radio-Operator supposed to lug this
> "console" around in his backback?
Depends. A family member in the airforce who was a "radio operator"
used to sit at a console on a really really really big airplane waiting
for it to tell him when he needed to swap out failed hardware.
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 06:02:12 GMT
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:ZeFE5.5054$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8rlpvj$lnc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Certainly, given a high enough network load, ANY variety of
> > webserver, be it Apache/linux or IIS/NT, or whatever, will have
> > to split out to several servers. The point is, if IIS is set up
> > this way more often than apache, and *isn't* handling more traffic,
> > then IIS is handling less traffic per server. So your point
> > originally, about multiple servers hiding behind one hostname, cannot
> > possibly make IIS look better.
>
> No, my original point was that there are no hard numbers which suggest
that
> Apache is used in more servers. As I said, it may be, but I see no
numbers
> to validate this assertion.
What is wrong with the numbers at:
http://www.netcraft.com/survey/ ?
And would you have argued with them in the not-so-distant past
when you couldn't keep IIS running for a week at a time?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 02:08:57 -0400
Drestin Black wrote:
>
> "Jason Bowen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8rvoft$nc7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <39e2aab3$0$5789$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> <snip> >
> > >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.
> > >
> >
> > I berated somebody for making an inference about Hotmail's poor
> > performance lately but now I guess maybe I was wrong. I rarely deal with
> > Hotmail addresses but of late the few I've dealt with took 3-4 hours to
> > receive mail that I sent. I guess corporate decision making doesn't take
> > into account that if something ain't broke, don't fix it.
>
> I'm not certain I got this right so if I'm wrong forgive me. Are you saying
> that hotmail is slower now that it's on W2K than before? and when you/I say
> slower here you mean in the time to deliver mail?
>
> If that is so then I think you don't realize that you have further
> reenforced the nickname for Solaris "slowaris" because it's the Solaris
> portion of Hotmail that handles the actual routing/delivery of mail - NOT
> the W2K/IIS front end server pool.
>
> yes, i would agree that the reason they are fixing the hotmail application
> is because solaris cannot scale well enough to handle the loads hotmail
> generates.
Liar.
M$ tried to migrate hotmail FROM Solaris to a wannabe M$-OS, and it
failed big time (just like on the previous attempts).
Solaris can handle the load
LoseNT can't
Lose2K can't
Hope that helps, liar.
--
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.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: NYC LOCAL: GNU/Linux/Free OS Beginners' Meeting Wednesday 11 October 2000:
Michael Smith on the Approach to Free OSes
Date: 11 Oct 2000 02:23:21 -0400
This meeting is free and open to the public.
The meeting runs from 6:30 pm to 9:00 pm.
Thanks to support of CALC/Canterbury, the meeting is in their space at
780 Third Avenue between 48th and 49th Streets on the East Side of
Manhattan. Ask at the front desk for CALC/Canterbury, which is on
Concourse Level 1.
Times:
6:30 pm General Q&A
7:00 pm Michael Smith on the Approach March to GNU/Linux and other Free OSes
Subway stops:
IND E and F, the Lexington Avenue stop
IRT 6, the 51st Street stop
If you plan to attend, please visit the Beginners web page at
www.eskimo.com/~lo/linux
and follow the attendance link so that we can arrange for the appropriate
amount of space.
<blockquote
from="Michael Smith"
edit-level="medium">
Learning GNU/Linux: Problems and a Plan
The Problems:
1. MAGNITUDE:
Unix is vast!
2. ORGANIZATION:
In general, there is no central point of contact for help and
documentation. Some GNU/Linux distributions have a command named
`documentation' that provides such a point for documentation. This only
ties together disparate sources, it does not unify them. Thus, using these
materials still requires much knowledge. There is no index in the full
sense. This talk will explicate the types of documentation including some
indices. What to do if you don't know where it is, what it's named, or how
it's spelled.
3. LEVEL:
Most Unix documentation presupposes considerable knowledge of the system
including vocabulary. Tutorials do exist, but may not be available; they
are not comprehensive. Good books do exist.
My approach:
1. Know the terrain and terminology. What types of documentation exist,
where is it stored, how to access it, what is it for?
2. Know the tools
3. Use a computer to do some of the work
A. Search
B. Active techniques of discovery
(in contrast to the bibliographic approach)
C. Storage and organization of results
D. Building your own custom aids that match your needs
</blockquote>
Jay Sulzberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Corresponding Secretary LXNY
LXNY is New York's Free Computing Organization.
http://www.lxny.org
------------------------------
From: Cannon Fodder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Advocacy NGs == Trollvilles
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 06:27:59 GMT
*sigh* Okay, I'm not getting the flames I expected, I'll stir up
some more 'stuff':
Has anyone tried out the new M$-bought Corel Linux OS and Do.
You. Like. It.? Do you dare let this NG know? Are you afraid to
try it out, because it may exceed your wildest expectations about
Linux? How do do we advocate linux now that M$ is selling it?
hehehe,
C.F.
On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Cannon Fodder wrote:
>
>'Nuff said
>
>--Trolling about trolling,
>From A Troll
>hehehe
>
>
>
---Sig Msg---
All spam is saved to
/dev/null to admire
marketing ingenuity.
---End Sig---
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[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: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 06:34:38 GMT
Dolly wrote:
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "Dolly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Ah yes... MS says they will stop doing something.
> > > They dont. MS lies and says they did stop. They
> > > didnt. MS finally publicly admits they never did,
> > > and the answer is... "ooh, just turn it off" by which
> > > I presume you mean the machine - good answer for
> > > a server... and since if you install TCPIP and NOT
> > > NetBIOS, it still installs NetBIOS code that is
> > > hard-coded into the stack I know it's not NetBIOS
> > > you mean I should turn off.
> > >
> >
> > Dolly - we have all challenged you - respond please: Document this NetBIOS
> > vulnerability you are talking about. I say it doesn't exist and challenge
> > you to prove your silly claim. DO it or shut up.
>
> Damn - I think I already provided a DOZEN websites
> that indicate the vulnerability - a number of which
> state that it's installed irregardless of whether
> NetBIOS is bound to TCPIP.
You have not. You've only stated your opinion. No point.
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[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: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 06:37:51 GMT
Dolly wrote:
> Mike Byrns wrote:
> >
> > Dolly wrote:
> >
> > > Mike Byrns wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Dolly wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Sam wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sat, 07 Oct 2000 15:03:43 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >Is of course Linux.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Exclusively ? I think not!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >The power of Linux is of course the GNU/GPL.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It may also be it's weakness.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >Does everybody agree that Linux has the best desktop? NO, HELL NO!
> > > > > > >Is Linux still growing? YES HELL YES!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From zero it's all up from there
> > > > > > <snip>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >How fast is Microsoft growing on that hill top? 1%.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If Microsoft kept growing at the rate it did for the last 5-10-15-20
> > > > > > years (pick one) it would soon be, not only the total IT industry,
> > > > > > but the entire economy. Obviously not sustainable
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >How fast is Linux growing? 5 - 7 % per year for almost 8 years.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From zero it's all up from there
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <snip>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >Does Microsoft make hardware? Hardly, NO. That Microsoft mouse or
> > > > > > >keyboard is subcontracted out.
> > > > > > >They don't make anything but software.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > AMD don't own a fab shop, does that make them not a threat to Intel ?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Really? That's weird... AMD has MADE chips for
> > > > > Intel when Intel couldnt keep up... what do you
> > > > > think the little M AMD meant? MANUFACTURED by
> > > > > AMD. I have a bunch here they made for Intel.
> > > > > It's part of what gained them access to the
> > > > > Intel x86 architecture - making a bunch for
> > > > > Intel when they were in the bind.
> > > >
> > > > Christ are you going to be one of those Kulkis, Devlins and Blacks that
> > > > make these wild ass statements that stretch credibility and then post no
> > > > evidence to back it up? When the hell was this momentus event supposed to
> > > > have happened? AMD did make 386 and 486 chips but they were NOT Intel
> > > > designs. BTW, I agree with you that AMD do own fabs, in Texas and Germany
> > > > but I, after having been a Intel and Microsoft systems engineer and
> > > > programmer for over a decade have no recollection of AMD EVER making chips
> > > > for Intel.
> > >
> > > You want evidence? How about a picture of one? Or perhaps you
> > > are one of those people who believes if a tree falls on your
> > > house but no one is there to see it, then it didnt happen.
> > >
> > > I'll send you an AMD Chip with the (M) AMD imprint
> > > and an Intel chip with the (M) Intel imprint.
> > >
> > > Would you be satisfied then? Just because you
> > > dont know something doesnt mean it's not
> > > true. Actually, apparently from your posts, just
> > > because YOU *think* you know something generally
> > > is proving that it isnt true.
> >
> > Miss, I tire of you. Post the pic and prove your point. I have a feeling that
> > I've been around this block more than you.
>
> OK, if you want... though others here have supported
> my claim already and I thought you had
> agreed with it finally.
No one has supported you that I've seen. No I don't agree. AMD never fabbed Intel
chips with the Intel brand. Period.
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[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: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 06:43:17 GMT
Dolly wrote:
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "Dan Howard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Hi Drestin,
> > >
> > > If she's refereing to the fact that a hacker can easilly use any share
> > > on windows if you have netbui installed, check this link:
> > >
> > > www.grc.com
> > >
> >
> > thanks Dan... I know steve's site well. It's actually not if you have netbui
> > but if you have windows shares and your sharing is bound to TCP/IP - the
> > nearly effortless 100% solution to this problem is to unbind Microsoft File
> > & Printer sharing from TCP/IP - bingo, problem solved better than a
> > firewall.
>
> Hmmm... isnt it still enabled though for
> MS logon? (which is installed by default)
No. Sorry. Windows logon is Windows 9x. Do the homework.
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[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: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 06:47:03 GMT
Drestin Black wrote:
> "Mike Byrns" <"mike.byrns"@technologist,.com> wrote in message
> news:5azE5.125728$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> <snip well written reply>
>
> > My position exactly!!! Keep it up but realize that to beat the opponent
> you
> > must ARGUE better not only have the best position. Many campaigns have
> been
> > lost by better opponents with lesser debate skills.
> >
>
> Thank you for your time and reply Mike. I have taken your comments to heart.
Thanks Drestin and I hope ther are no hard feelings. You are obviously just as
much an experienced professional as I am. Maybe moreso. I just want to make
sure the Dolly's in the crowd get rebutted. PS how much you wanna bet s/he's an
out of work Linux admin?
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 06:50:12 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "Jason Bowen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8rvoft$nc7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In article <39e2aab3$0$5789$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > <snip> >
> > > >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.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I berated somebody for making an inference about Hotmail's poor
> > > performance lately but now I guess maybe I was wrong. I rarely deal with
> > > Hotmail addresses but of late the few I've dealt with took 3-4 hours to
> > > receive mail that I sent. I guess corporate decision making doesn't take
> > > into account that if something ain't broke, don't fix it.
> >
> > I'm not certain I got this right so if I'm wrong forgive me. Are you saying
> > that hotmail is slower now that it's on W2K than before? and when you/I say
> > slower here you mean in the time to deliver mail?
> >
> > If that is so then I think you don't realize that you have further
> > reenforced the nickname for Solaris "slowaris" because it's the Solaris
> > portion of Hotmail that handles the actual routing/delivery of mail - NOT
> > the W2K/IIS front end server pool.
> >
> > yes, i would agree that the reason they are fixing the hotmail application
> > is because solaris cannot scale well enough to handle the loads hotmail
> > generates.
>
> Liar.
>
> M$ tried to migrate hotmail FROM Solaris to a wannabe M$-OS, and it
> failed big time (just like on the previous attempts).
>
> Solaris can handle the load
> LoseNT can't
> Lose2K can't
>
> Hope that helps, liar.
Why don't you just threaten to shoot him, Rambo?
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[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: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 06:52:15 GMT
"Dolly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Mike Byrns wrote:
> > Christ are you going to be one of those Kulkis, Devlins and Blacks that
> > make these wild ass statements that stretch credibility and then post no
> > evidence to back it up? When the hell was this momentus event supposed
to
> > have happened? AMD did make 386 and 486 chips but they were NOT Intel
> > designs. BTW, I agree with you that AMD do own fabs, in Texas and
Germany
> > but I, after having been a Intel and Microsoft systems engineer and
> > programmer for over a decade have no recollection of AMD EVER making
chips
> > for Intel.
>
> You want evidence? How about a picture of one? Or perhaps you
> are one of those people who believes if a tree falls on your
> house but no one is there to see it, then it didnt happen.
>
> I'll send you an AMD Chip with the (M) AMD imprint
> and an Intel chip with the (M) Intel imprint.
Ummm.... huh? Don't _most_ AMD chips have an AMD copyright, and _most_ Intel
chips have an Intel copyright? Am I missing something here? Why on earth
should seeing the Intel logo on an Intel chip convince me that AMD designed
it?
BTW, I am also unaware of AMD ever designing processors for Intel. I say
designing, not manufacturing, because the chip designer places the logo and
copyright. If an Intel chip was designed by Intel, you can bet they aren't
placing AMD's logo, much less their copyright, on it.
-- Mike --
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[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: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 06:53:39 GMT
2:1 wrote:
> > Actually, it's not. Win2K is way more stable than Linux. FUDsters like
> > to bash NT for stability and then claim that Linux is stable, which in
> > and of itself is a joke.
>
> Chad, you're talking horseshit again. Win2K hasn't been around long
> enough to proove if it is more stable than Linux. The longest Linux
> uptimes are longer than the total life of Win2K.
Where are those numbers? We're not talking peak are we :-) I've had an NT
3.51 box running for 3 years. We decommissioned it.
And that's just as anecdotal as you your crap.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
