Linux-Advocacy Digest #655, Volume #29 Sat, 14 Oct 00 14:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("James A. Robertson")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("James A. Robertson")
Re: Why does Linux have to be such a pain to install? - A speech (Zer0Oxygen)
Re: The Power of the Future! (Phil 'Guido' Cava)
Re: Astroturfing ("MH")
Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux (Gary Hallock)
Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux ("Les Mikesell")
Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux (Gary Hallock)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "James A. Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 17:18:45 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said James A. Robertson in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> >>
> >> Nobody ever said everything they create is junk because they don't know
> >> squat about designing operating systems. I said its junk because its
> >> monopoly crapware, which only has to be good enough to keep people
> >> locked in until the next version, and is therefore more profitable to
> >> Microsoft the less functional it gets. But I don't know about D'Arcy.
> >
> >The 'monopoly' here is the OS, right? However, there are other OS
> >choices:
>
> The monopoly is the OS *market*.
>
> >MacOS, Linux, BEos, OS/2, Solaris, Solaris on Intel, HPUx, AIX, Irix,
> >etc.
>
> Of the list, only four are PC OSes. They are:
That's a completely artificial separation. The competition is in OS
market, and Apple could easily have been a player there. Heck, the Unix
vendors could have been, but explicitly chose not to.
By your reasoning, I now declare Honda to be a monopoly in the Civic
market. Let's go get them, shall we?
>
> Linux - http://www.opensource.org/halloween/
>
> BEos - a niche product
>
> Solaris on Intel - a niche product
>
> OS/2 - http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm
>
> So two out of four were directly attacked by anti-competitive
> strategies. All of them are marginalized. All of them are locked out,
> generally (though Linux is making some headway, regardless) of the
> pre-load market. It is not the existence of alternatives, but the
> availability of the alternatives without disadvantage incurred to the
> consumer, which defines whether there is a monopoly.
>
Those are business decisions made by people with money to spend on
making hardware. If you think there's a market for alternatives, go
find a VC and convince them.
> Monopoly does not mean you are the only one with a product; it means you
> are the one with the ability to control prices or exclude competition
> through anti-competitive means.
>
Such as? The price of Windows is cheap. That's why it worked. The
price of the alternatives was high; that's why Apple lost. It's called
marketing.
> >There are choices, and have been for years. Consumers have made a
> ><choice> to favor Windows.
>
> Consumers have had Windows pre-loaded on 999 out of every 1000 PCs
> purchased over the last five years, and probably no more than 2% of them
> have any interest in the after-market OS products.
>
Had Apple played differently in the 1985-1990 timeframe, it could have
easily been different.
> >One can argue that it was a poor choice (I
> >would), but it was a freely made choice - mostly because other vendors
> >cheerfully allowed MS to take the high volume/low price end of the
> >market as they chose to take the high margin/low volume end.
>
> Now if only you can explain why per-processor licensing is a matter of
> consumers freely making a choice, you might have a point. By 'other
> vendors', it seems you're probably referring to other hardware
> platforms, which have little or nothing to do with PC OSes.
>
You could always buy Apple, or buy a machine from a local vendor (there
are tons of them near where I live) who will build a machine as you want
it built with whatever OS you want on it.
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
>
> ======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
>
> Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
>
> http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
--
James A. Robertson
Technical Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>
------------------------------
From: "James A. Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 17:19:52 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
>
> I understand your point, Erik. You are saying that MS couldn't have
> used undocumented APIs in older apps, and then changed those
> undocumented APIs while still having the older apps work. But I never
> indicated that it was changing the undocumented APIs which these apps
> used which was done to break other products. That is a straw man of
> your own devising. I'm merely aware of the *fact* that Microsoft a)
> uses undocumented APIs to benefit their own apps, b) has the ability to
> change undocumented behavior which any other developer might seek to
> benefit from, and c) engages in a tactic known as 'churn', which enables
> them to maintain a monopoly product without having the API vulnerable to
> competitive development.
Saying so doesn't make it so. Even looking at Undocumented Windows (I
forget the authors) doesn't show a whole lot going on here
>
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
>
> ======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
>
> Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
>
> http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
--
James A. Robertson
Technical Product Manager (Smalltalk), Cincom
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<Talk Small and Carry a Big Class Library>
------------------------------
From: Zer0Oxygen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why does Linux have to be such a pain to install? - A speech
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 17:10:20 GMT
In article <8s8kh3$rc7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I've been reading all these messages around the internet about how
> easily people have been setting up their Linux distributions. I'm
here
> to tell you that it is in fact, not easy at all to setup a Linux
> distribution onto an older machine. I'm a software developer in real
> life, and have been pushing my company to support more and more open
> source solutions. I don't know why I've been doing this now, because
I
> have tried over the last two months to get my RedHat 6.2 distribution
> setup on my older Compaq 133mHz machine. It took me several tries to
> get it running, and a little personal help from a linux guru. After
> that, I could never get the damn thing to talk to the internet. Why?
> I don't know why, I have a 3C509B-TPO card, I guess I have to do more
> than disable the PNP etc, blah, blah, blah. I have a Linksys firewall
> in which it can talk to, but it refuses. I'm wondering why I don't
> just set up another windows os on that machine. It's easy, and it
> works. But, I HATE WINDOWS!! I own RedHat stock, I'm pushing for
open
> source solutions, but admit it!!! Linux is NOT ready for primetime as
> far as a personal computer, desktop solution. Save the figures about
> Apache on the web, and SendMail, I'm talking about a home computer
> desktop solution!!
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
I have several older compaq systems, and they all run redhat 6.2, and
7.0 perfectly, so I don't know why you are having such trouble. I will
admit the RedHat doesn't make it easy for beginners... I recently
installed Corel Linux SE as a workstation, and it took 4 clicks to
install!!! Not to mention it installed and configured Samba with just
an IP, hostname, and workgroup name(which it got in the install) I was
Immediately on my network sharing files. Once I was up in SE I soon
realized why it was probably called that. Its excactly the same
interface almost as Win 98SE!!! If your looking for a workstation
linux distro, this might be the way to go.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Phil 'Guido' Cava <[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!
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 17:25:01 GMT
Apparently Mr Black does not read the trade press.
The issue of MS double charging corps who want to replace OEM windows images
with their own has been covered quite heavily in the last few months.
Likewise, the (very) slow migration rate to W2K Server from NT4 Server has also
been mentioned _a_lot_. Note that MS has announced no EOL date for NT4 and
continues to stock the distribution channel with NT4. These are not the signs of
mass acceptance of the product.
As for replacing UNIX networks with Lantasic.... well I'll just say: fantastic!
Dream on Drestin, happy trolling!
Guido
Drestin Black wrote:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>
> On 10/12/00, 4:47:15 PM, "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote regarding Re: The Power of the Future!:
>
> > I worked with IBM's, DECs, Magnuson's, HPs. Got really into it about
> 89 when
> > I did my first contract and thought: "Damn! This sure pays well!" :)
> FYI: I
> > never used Windows prior to 3.1 and even then it was just playing
> around. In
> > fact, I didn't get into Windows 95 much when it first came out,
> crashed too
> > much and was slow. All my work was networking offices using either
> Novell or
> > LANtastic. I was mostly programming in the early 90s. Finally scored
> big on
> > an application I sold to F500 company and opened my own and have been
> doing
> > mostly upgrades and conversions since. About 80% of what I do is
> replace
> > unix or novell networks with NT networks which is why I guess I'm the
> way I
> > am :) MAN, people are SO used to paying huge box for unix boxes and
> > UNBELIEVABLE support prices for unix personel that the profits are
> still
> > juicy in this sector. Trying making money on someone who already has
> NT and
> > wants to go to W2K and it's tough - they are already savvy to the fact
> the
> > TCO on NT is so low. Funny, I've never seen a NT to Unix migration,
> not in 7
> > years.
>
> Never seen a NT to UNIX migration? Funny, they do happen.
>
> W2K migration from NT is slow due to customer fatigue and the high
> costs associated with deploying unproved software. Gartner et al
> advised waiting and the customer base is - waiting.
>
> BTW There's been a revolt over high Windows prices - enterprise
> customers refused to pay MS for the privilege of writing over the OEM
> Windows image with their own configuration. Mid and small sized
> customers lack the clout so they're paying.
>
> ==========
>
> Funny - you say that but I have seen none of it. Waiting? Not the thousands
> of seats we've converted. Revolt? What revolt? Sorry - I don't see any facts
> supporting your claims.
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 13:27:40 -0400
"Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:39e7dac5$0$42775$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > The black helicopters are coming for you right now.
> > >
> >
> > It's well known that Microsoft pays people to post FUD to this
newsgroup.
>
> Prove it. Document "well known"
The only time I ever see 'Kulkis' is when I run into 'it' second hand in a
thread.
Two things strike me when I do.
1). His rambling diatribes are completely repulsive
2). He's a copious waste of time, which is why I had to kill file him months
ago.
He'll never document this assertion. He has no proof. He hasn't a clue.
If everyone kill filed him he would be banished to the bit bucket where
useless bits belong.
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web!
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 17:27:50 GMT
"R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Microsoft has such a small grip on the WEB you could functionally
> > declare their bid for the market over.
> >
> > I think they just keep it open to say they have one.
>
> Two things happening here. Microsoft is getting a smaller and smaller
> share of the server market (but still growing slightly), but they are
> targeting strategic servers, such as the front-end web server.
>
> > Linux kicked Microsoft's butt in 1999 on server sales in general.
>
> Actually, between Linux and BSD (FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD), these
> two pretty much dominated the market. Sun's Solaris got the bulk of
> the Big Ticket Revenue, and IBM and HP were behind Microsoft. Of
> course, this year, both HP and IBM are offering Linux on everything
> from their micro-laptops to their top-line mainframes.
> Linux on S/390, seems to already have a market.
This is true, IA64 - HP-UX.....
This is true LinuxPPC, Debian....
http://24.94.254.33/Linux/intro.html
>
>
> > This year proves to be little different.
> >
> > When it comes to WEB serving or just general office file serving,
> > Microsoft is disappearing from the scene.
>
> Many companies are switching their existing NT servers over
> to Windows 2000, simply because they need the extra speed
> and capacity. Even then, most of them are switching very slowly
> since applications need to be redesigned to exploit the Windows 2000
> features (and the market doesn't seem to be there).
>
> Meanwhile, many customers are asking for UNIX flavors. It's
> easier to put an older UNIX version on a Solaris or AIX box
> and front-end it with Linux/Apache than it is to develop
> custom software for Windows NT server. Many companies are
> even beginning to offer BSD and Linux versions of their vertical
> market packages. This will be good news to many doctors, lawyers,
> and farmers who switched to Windows or Windows NT in the 1990s and
> are ready to go back to web-enabled UNIX systems.
Even Microsoft has admitted they have lost the war.
Corel. Corel. Corel.
http://24.94.254.33/Linux/intro.html
>
>
> > The boxed server software is still there for sale, but companies
> > are just not buying it anymore.
>
> Ironically, Microsoft has been killing it's own market. They
> created checks that now make it impossible to develop server
> software on workstation editions. This makes Windows 2000 very
> unpopular with consultants who must to either get access to
> their own server or actually fly to the client location and
> fight for time on the server console.
>
> Meanwhile back at the ranch, Linux is making it very easy
> to develop, not only for other Linux systems, but for other
> UNIX systems as well.
>
> It's actually interesting how quickly people make the transition
> from Windows NT/2000 to Linux to Solaris or AIX (no experience
> observing the transition with HP_UX yet).
There are several companies now who are specializing in doing just that.
Microsoft is interested in Linux. They see the impact of the GPL.
The GPL is frankly our bible. It's the power behind Linux.
It's more than just the idea of GNU/Linux. Much more.
Why doesn't FreeBSD take off like Linux. Again, GPL.
The GPL is the major power behind all of this. It's the TRUSTED
agreement which keeps developers and contributors from getting
screwed!
http://24.94.254.33/Linux/intro.html
This is why HP had a major hand in helping code the IA64.
This is why the were ready a year ago.
The time is rapidly comming for Linux.
Whether it be embedded.
Whether it be on an IBM PC clone.
Whether it be on a Mac.
Whether it be on a
cluster which replaces a mainframe.
Linux is becomming the Globally dominate operating system with
interconnectivity
for everything. No more incompatibilites. No more expensive development
project.
The World will be changed by Linux. The world will take off in
directions it simply
couldn't under standard copyrighted software.
If somebody want's to develop and copyright an application in the future,
it
will definitely have to be something incredibly brilliant and incredibly
new!
It's funny how we live in an age where we DEMAND more from our computer
software and our vendors still clinged to old Copyright notions which
caused
them to sit on software as if it were some kind of OIL FIELD.
The stagnation is comming to an end. Microsoft has seen this.
They realize the truth of the GPL. They understand they can't afford to
compete with a globally developed entity.
>
>
> > I wonder how much workstation Linux will get in 2000.
>
> An interesting new metric has popped up. As you may have
> read in other "Linux Browser market" surveys, Linux has often
> been undercounted because it uses signatures that aren't easily
> distinguished as Linux. Recently, as more people are using squid
> to cache proxy requests, squid is suddenly showing up (it's signature
> is CGI) at about 2.5% Given other known phenomenon, such as ipchains
> (makes dozens of linux systems look like one), and "IP counting"
> (assumes that each IP address has only one browser or browser type),
> that cuts the market estimate to about 1/4 to 1/2 the actual count,
> Linux could have anywhere between 5% and 10% of the market. It looks
> like growth is still strong, with many companies still reporting
> year-over-year growth of 250-270%.
>
> Given an estimated 350 million web users, this would put Linux at
> anywhere between 17 and 40 million. Given that this is only a
> count of web browsers, and would not include Linux browsers
> directly connected to the web, Linux systems that are dual-booted
> to run Windows when browsing, or Linux systems that share memory using
> VMWare or Wine, it's very likely that there could be as many as 50
> million Linux users, with an additional 50 million likely to arrive
> within the next 7-9 months.
>
I still feel the count is 200 million world wide.
The public count for Windows users was 1.2 billion world wide.
But size has nothing to do with this.
http://24.94.254.33/Linux/intro.html
You also have this factor of embedded which doesn't seem to count
in anybody's statistics. Yet you see dozens of $100 firewall boxes,
thermostats, Car devices, Cell phones, dedicated internet devices,
and the list just seems endless...
Motorola's digital DNA is linux. Go see their web site.
>
> > That's Microsoft's final frontier!
>
> Microsoft is by no means dead in the water. On the other hand,
> they only sold 1/2 million copies/day in their first week. That's
> about 1/2 the sales volume of either Windows 95 or Windows 98.
>
> Given the softer demand for Windows ME, OEMs and Retailers will
> need something else to "jazz up the market". Sure, some companies
> will upgrade workstations to Windows 2000, but there's no hurry
> (and many reasons to stick with NT).
>
> Meanwhile, Linux now comes to the forefront as the "great hope" of
> something "new and different" to get the market excited. It's quite
> likely that Linux will give the consumer something interesting,
> something to play with, to want, to buy. Maybe they'll still keep
> their Windows 95/98/NT boxes, but they'll want to try Linux too.
>
> The only question left is "who will be the first"?
Microsoft raised some crap in the form of a proposed law which
would force computer manufacturers to quit selling PC's without
an operating system.
The PC manufacturers like IBM reponded on the 10th.
IBM will make Red Hat their BASE install on all their
servers and make it available on their mainframes. Not just a FEW
but their entire product line from the smallest server to the
largest mainframe they make. If you want WINDOZ you will
have to pay for the privalege in the future.
Others have followed suit.
Microsoft has just shot it's thingie off.
http://24.94.254.33/Linux/intro.html
>
>
> > Charlie
>
> --
> Rex Ballard - I/T Architect, MIS Director
> Linux Advocate, Internet Pioneer
> http://www.open4success.com
> Linux - 50 million satisfied users worldwide
> and growing at over 5%/month! (recalibrated 8/2/00)
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
You went from 90 million to 50 million.
How is it I can go to the insurance industry folks to perform statistics
on
all kinds of things,,, and they tell me the impact of Linux is 200
million
world wide?
I think there's enought SLIPPAGE in what falls thru the cracks on
downloads
and people taking their neighbors old box of Mandrake 6.5 to merit their
claims.
They are just basing it on what they know people do with software.
They have to have good statistics to merit the reserves they have to
carry
to insure everybody in America.
It's 200 million world wide.
Charlie
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 13:31:42 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> "Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:00101318293500.28373@pc03...
> > Allow me to give you the idiot-proof version of how to make a masquerading
> > firewall between a LAN and the internet through a dialup link using Linux.
>
> ...
>
> > Step 2: Configure a masquerading firewall.
> >
> > The command for this is as follows
> >
> > ipchains -A forward -s 10.0.0.0/255.255.255.0 -j MASQ
> >
> > Replace 10.4.0.0 with your real network and netmask. Simpler syntax:
> >
> > ipchains -A forward -s 10.0.0.0/24 -j MASQ
>
> You know, not once does it mention in the ipchains how-to this command line.
> It took many hours of frustration and fiddling the first time I set up a
> masq box. The documentation on this just plain sucks and is years out of
> date.
I had no problem finding it. Section 3.3 "Configuring IP Forwarding Policies"
in IP-Masquerade-HOWTO.
Gary
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 17:33:57 GMT
"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I know someone in a remote office that has
> >spent ages trying to make winproxy and RRAS on NT act as a
> >VPN for several other machines. Last week he tried to put
> >in a local mail server and ended up with a loop that bounced
> >everything.
>
> Errrrumm.....how does a local mail server relate to winproxy,
> RRAS, and VPN??
They are all things you need for a remote office connecting over
the internet through a slow link. The local mail server is to
reduce the user wait when sending and receiving. And they
are all things easily done for free with Linux.
> Ow, my brain hurts.
Yes, Winproxy and RRAS are not fun.
> >> It's not that it "can't" be done under Linux, it's just figuring out
> >> where the documentation is that explains HOW to do it.
> >> And then, being able to understand how to implement the changes.
> >
> >Linux stuff is pretty straightforward compared to getting something
> >to actually work under Windows. I've dropped Linux boxes in other
> >remote offices as mail servers (among other things) that have run
> >unattended for years.
>
> I hope you don't mean that literally. :-) But I'll admit, Unix
> is like the Energizer bunny -- it keeps going and going and going and ....
> Linux, too.
Yes, literally. One office was a company owned by the same parent,
then sold after I had dropped in a Linux box as a mail/file server. I
managed it through a transition while we shared some equipment
but they are still using it now and I doubt if anyone there even knows
how to log into it directly. About once a year someone calls me to
remind them how to run a custom web/sql program they use for a
survey they run (they enter a bunch of data samples through web
pages and can summarize several ways). It was done in php and
postgress and this summer was the 4th year they have used it.
Another one is in London, but it is only a couple of years old and
I think someone there knows how to log in. Now that DSL
connections are fast and cheap we are probably going to replace
several frame relay connections with VPNs through Linux boxes.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 13:33:48 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I was waiting for some to mention that. The original person did his
> home work reading the documentation and still could not set it up
> which was my original point.
>
> But as usual when the Linvocates run out of useful rebuttals, which in
> this case didn't take long, I get called a whore.
>
> Now you know why I posted under the name "Steve" for a year or so.
>
> claire
It is in plain site in section 3.3 of IP-Masquerade-HOWTO. You should try
reading the docs before commenting on them.
Gary
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
