Linux-Advocacy Digest #674, Volume #29 Sun, 15 Oct 00 16:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web! ("Dave Anderson")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("JS/PL")
Re: Real Linux Advocacy ("Joseph T. Adams")
Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux (Gary Hallock)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("JS/PL")
Re: The Power of the Future! ("Drestin Black")
Re: The Power of the Future! ("Drestin Black")
Re: The Power of the Future! ("Drestin Black")
Re: The Power of the Future! ("Drestin Black")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Dave Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web!
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 18:32:29 GMT
I don't buy that "easy to use" stuff for technical types. If you factor in
how much effort that goes into keeping "MS-Windows" going, and compare it to
learning a real OS, they are about the same. But the payback comes two
ways, first - you have time to move your business ahead instead of doing
"reboot", "patch" and "security" while loops and second: you can use Linux
knowledge on HP-UX, Sun, UnixWare, SCO, Iris, AIX, and a host of others.
>From a career perspective, it is vendor independent knowledge and pays
better. McWindows, like McDonalds burgers, are quick but you get less.
I would rather spend my time learning and moving the business ahead than
fixing and futzing. From an end user perspective, there are far less
problems with stable versions of Linux than with McWindows. As the techi's
crunch out better and better software for Linux, more and more end users
will use it.
It is inevitable as the industry matures to shift to a xNIX as the real
professionals will learn more... and our clients will like the reliability
and stability. The only thing that keeps NT afloat is that where else do
you know you can flip burgers on Tuesday and be a NT admin on Friday. As
the market matures, this will occur less often.
"Otto" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:OviG5.26890$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> : And this might be where RED HAT comes in.
> : RED HAT helps to keep you from having RED ASS.
> :
> : http://24.94.254.33/Linux/intro.html
>
> Interesting point of view at the above link, not to mention your
> interpretation of the article. However, there are some perspective which
> isn't mentioned on the site and you might've drawn the wrong conclusion.
> The masses rather have "RED ASS" than "RED HAT" for the time being. This
> might change by year 2005, but that would require couple of things to
> happen, they are actually related to one and other and somewhat overlooked
> in the article.
> Linux need to become as easy to use as Windows, or the masses will be
> proficient to use Linux. The former one already started, to the dismay of
> hardcore Linux advocates, Linux will be controlled by the GUI instead of
the
> CLI. Only time will tell how successful this will be, anyone's guess is
> valid on this subject at this time, including the author of the article.
> As for the masses becoming proficient in the present form of Linux, good
> luck. The masses have no interest in the inner working of the OS.
Microsoft
> built, or exploited their business on this fact.
>
> Otto
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 14:37:02 -0400
Reply-To: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> [...]
> >Next time you buy a new car bring your own carburetor in and plop it on
the
> >counter, and say "Put this in it will you" to the salesman.
>
> Umm, carburetors in cars aren't third party components, as OSes on PCs
> are. You misunderstood the analogy. Not that any car dealer is going
> to have any trouble with your request; they certainly don't have any
> 'per car licensing' agreements on carburetors.
Since nearly ALL OEM systems with Windows installed are built around the OS
it's a semi-valid anology, just like the new car motor was engineered with
the specific carburator in mind.
All included software needs Windows to run, the modem needs Windows to run,
a large percentage of the on board video only has drivers for MS Windows
written, many sound cards only support Windows, especially on board sound.
That's a big reason why the savings in hardware more than pays the $40-$80
charge to OEM's for the Windows license. Everyone wins in that situation,
hardware mfg's win because they sell (in huge volume) equipment which only
needs to interact with one OS, OEM's win because they get the hardware much
cheaper, and thus the consumer wins because they can get a complete PC for
prices starting at about $400.
AND in spite of the anology, the consumer is STILL free bypass Dell, Gateway
& Co. outlets and buy whatever system they like with any OS or equipment
desired, and always have had that freedom, unlike the carburator/new car
anology.
The whole "lack of choice" lie is made up, schemed, devised by competition
in hopes that someone might actually believe it. The funny thing is, the lie
is immediately exposed by perusing through the advertised hardware offerings
in computer mag archives over the past ten years.
------------------------------
From: "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Real Linux Advocacy
Date: 15 Oct 2000 18:41:34 GMT
rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: 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.
I've always used a variety of OSen, advocating those that meet my
needs excellently, and generally criticizing those that do not.
My first posts regarding Linux (circa 1996 or thereabouts) were mildly
negative, of the form "Linux has great potential but needs to overcome
problems X, Y and Z before I will be able to make much use of it for
my needs." Very often, I'd learn that these "problems" either
reflected a limitation of my own understanding, had already been
solved, or were in the process of being solved.
Today Linux represents by far and away the best OS (out of the ones
I've used) for most of my needs. The free *BSDs are almost as good
(and in some instances better). The greatest part of their value to
me stems directly or indirectly from their being free (aka
open-source). Hence, it is extremely unlikely that any closed-source
OS, no matter how could, could replace it.
But because many of my present and past employers and clients believe
that proprietary OSen better meet their needs, I'm often forced to use
them. This actually is a plus for my advocacy work. Familiarity with
other (and sometimes spectacularly horrid) OSen helps me to better
appreciate the strengths of the ones I use when I have the choice.
Joe
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 14:50:07 -0400
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A classic example of unfriendly Linux
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
>
> Thanks for the information. I think it's a bit unintuitive to have it in
> some directory called mini, which I would (and did) assume was for something
> called a mini which I wasn't using. I don't claim to be a Linux expert. I
> only learn enough to do what I need it to do. This is certainly no points
> for ease of use. If I'm looking for a howto it should be in the howto
> directory, not buried in several subdirectories.
>
There is only one subdirectory in /usr/doc/HOWTO/other-formats/html. It is
called mini. And it shows up on top if you use kfm or gmc to view the
directory. One click and you are there. I would think, when you couldn't
find anything for IP masquerading in the top level directory you would be
curious to check mini. That's what I did. You said you looked at the IP
chains howto. But here is the first paragraph in the intro for that howto:
==========
This is the Linux IPCHAINS-HOWTO. You should read the Linux NET-3-HOWTO as
well. The IP-Masquerading HOWTO, the PPP-HOWTO, the Ethernet-HOWTO and the
Firewall HOWTO might make interesting reading. (Then again, so might the
alt.fan.bigfoot FAQ).
==========
I would think that might give you a clue to go read the IP-Masquerading HOWTO.
Then there is the top level html file (HOWTO-INDEX.html). The table of
contents contains the following:
==========
3. Index
3.1 HOWTOs
3.2 mini-HOWTOs <---------------------
3.3 Special HOWTOs
3.4 Unmaintained HOWTOs and mini-HOWTOs
==========
Gary
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 15:14:01 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> [...]
>> >There was never a requirement to sign a per processor license agreement.
>Get
>> >your facts straight. [...]
>>
>> Perhaps you misread the facts presented, which was that there was a
>> requirement to agree to ppl, or MS would make Win/DOS too expensive for
>> the OEM to remain competitive for those large number of customers that
>> currently use Windows (not realizing how crappy a system it is, and
>> believing MS's hype-machine/marketing).
>
>Name the price difference and I'll explain to you the significance of your
>ignorance.[...]
Been there, done that. These discussions were carried out a good few
years ago. Your inability to comprehend the issue notwithstanding, you
are a fool to think you could enlighten me on the matter. Why don't you
provide the price differences *and* the argument, to make it that much
easier to ignore your pointless confusion?
IOW, state your case or hit the road, troll-boy.
--
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! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 15:18:25 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said James A. Robertson in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>>
>> Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> [...]
>> >Next time you buy a new car bring your own carburetor in and plop it on the
>> >counter, and say "Put this in it will you" to the salesman.
>>
>> Umm, carburetors in cars aren't third party components, as OSes on PCs
>> are. You misunderstood the analogy. Not that any car dealer is going
>> to have any trouble with your request; they certainly don't have any
>> 'per car licensing' agreements on carburetors.
>
>They aren't? Just how useful is the PC without the OS?
What do you mean, 'the' OS? Any PC OS will do just fine for a PC.
>Are you of the
>belief that the acerage consumer is capable of loading and configuring
>an OS all by themselves? if so, you haven't actually seen a neophyte
>attempt this.
Quite the opposite. It is the very facts which you naively use to
pretend there is no monopoly which provide the evidence of the monopoly.
The fact that carburetors are, in some similar fashion, manufactured by
third parties, contrary to my original context, which is that you don't
purchase a carburetor with a car, but merely the car, supports the point
that Microsoft has committed crimes in order to control the sale of cars
by manipulating the price of carburetors. The connection will most
probably escape you, but nevertheless that's the way it works.
--
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! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 15:19:57 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> [...]
>> >Next time you buy a new car bring your own carburetor in and plop it on
>the
>> >counter, and say "Put this in it will you" to the salesman.
>>
>> Umm, carburetors in cars aren't third party components, as OSes on PCs
>> are. You misunderstood the analogy. Not that any car dealer is going
>> to have any trouble with your request; they certainly don't have any
>> 'per car licensing' agreements on carburetors.
>
>Since nearly ALL OEM systems with Windows installed are built around the OS
>it's a semi-valid anology, just like the new car motor was engineered with
>the specific carburator in mind.
No, nearly all OEM systems are built around the PC standard, and nearly
all OEMs are under threat by MS to be sure to design their systems so
that Windows cannot be replaced. Again, more evidence of the illegal
monopoly which you wish to deny the existence of.
--
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! ======
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 15:24:53 -0400
Reply-To: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Said JS/PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >> [...]
> >> >There was never a requirement to sign a per processor license
agreement.
> >Get
> >> >your facts straight. [...]
> >>
> >> Perhaps you misread the facts presented, which was that there was a
> >> requirement to agree to ppl, or MS would make Win/DOS too expensive for
> >> the OEM to remain competitive for those large number of customers that
> >> currently use Windows (not realizing how crappy a system it is, and
> >> believing MS's hype-machine/marketing).
> >
> >Name the price difference and I'll explain to you the significance of
your
> >ignorance.[...]
>
> Been there, done that. These discussions were carried out a good few
> years ago. Your inability to comprehend the issue notwithstanding, you
> are a fool to think you could enlighten me on the matter. Why don't you
> provide the price differences *and* the argument, to make it that much
> easier to ignore your pointless confusion?
>
> IOW, state your case or hit the road, troll-boy
Your the one claiming that if an OEM didn't agree to the per processor
license agreement that MS would make licensing too expensive, remember.
Sounds like avoidance on your part. What was the price difference? It's your
claim not mine. What was it liar?
And if the price difference was so great, how come less than 40% of the OEM
customers ever went for the deal?
As usual Tim, you exibit no credibility in your absurd claims.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[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: 15 Oct 2000 14:48:05 -0500
"joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
>
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > 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.
>
> You beg a question, "Where is your head stuck?"
>
> The revolt was covered in the standard IT press. Gartner Group blasted
MS for
> raising fees on users by chargeing them a windows fee to erase an OEM
windows
> seat and reinstall a corporate defined disk image of the same windows OS.
For
> a guy in the know - well we know you're not and this is just another
example.
>
>
Oh, I saw that reports from Gartner and understood just how they had their
heads stuck up their arses. I know that actual end users didn't "revolt" and
that there hasn't been a single peep about it since it's been explained and
clarified. The one report you read about isn't enough to make it a revolt...
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[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: 15 Oct 2000 14:53:07 -0500
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 10/13/00, 6:43:56 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) wrote regarding
Re: The Power of the Future!:
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2000 06:21:35 GMT, Mike Byrns
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> MS would not let a kook like you near any corporate site and give
> >> details on the usenet.
> >Drestin has been much better behaved in recent posts. Kook is an ad
> >hominem attack on his credibility.
> Yes, it was ad hominem, but "Drestin" has a long history of posting in
> comp.os.linux.advocacy. He much predates your posting here, so you
> have seen only the most recent "Drestin" posts. A number of long
> timers have a history with "Drestin".
"Ad hominem: Appealing to personal considerations rather than to
logic or reason: Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that
question their opponents' motives."
I suppose the question is, Is Drestin a factual authority on Hotmail?
MS, like any large company, is NOT going to allow someone to post
corporate info on a sensitive migration in a public newsgroup so they
can banter about Windows and Windows 2000. If that's an Ad hominem
attack then it is - to me it's really about credibility of facts and
the illogical premise that this guy is going to have detailed
information about MS's hotmail architecture and performance AND be
allowed to post it on USENET in the format and context that he uses.
Lesse, if I worked for MS or Hotmail then I guess what you wrote might be
true. But I don't. Instead, I know those that do. And they have told me what
I am writing. Others I've met confirm this as it's a "really big thing" in
the world of W2K migrations. Obviously hotmail going over to W2K is
something we've been waiting for and welcome the news of. That this
information is available to someone outside of NDAs is not suprising.
Besides, how much "insider" info does it take to use netcraft to determine
that they've stopped using bsd/apache and are now using w2k/iis. My
"insider" scoop, if you will, is the not at all suprising fact that work on
migrating the application itself from the slowaris platform it's wheezing
under to a W2K solution is not something I can point to an "official" URL
and document, true - but it comes from sources I've deemed reliable. Now, if
in the future it's determined that this never happened, well, then I guess
my sources and I are wrong. So be it. I'd own up to that, sure. However,
given that I predicted when hotmail would move from bsd to w2k accurately,
why suddenly doubt me now? Again, nothing incredibly sensitive of the
migration of hotmail to w2k - it's been long anticipated and talked about in
the circle of w2k proponents.
..and, NO ONE dictates what I choose to post where or in what format or
context I want - I'm not under a NDA re: this matter nor in the employ of
any party mentioned.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[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: 15 Oct 2000 14:57:06 -0500
"Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
> >
> > On 10/13/00, 6:43:56 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) wrote regarding
> > Re: The Power of the Future!:
> >
> > > On Fri, 13 Oct 2000 06:21:35 GMT, Mike Byrns
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > >> MS would not let a kook like you near any corporate site and give
> > > >> details on the usenet.
> >
> > > >Drestin has been much better behaved in recent posts. Kook is an ad
> > > >hominem attack on his credibility.
> >
> > > Yes, it was ad hominem, but "Drestin" has a long history of posting in
> > > comp.os.linux.advocacy. He much predates your posting here, so you
> > > have seen only the most recent "Drestin" posts. A number of long
> > > timers have a history with "Drestin".
> >
> > "Ad hominem: Appealing to personal considerations rather than to
> > logic or reason: Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that
> > question their opponents' motives."
>
> You called him a kook. It indicates you felt personal enough to call
names
> in order to question his logic or reason. BTW where did you get that
> definition? I like it :-) Is is available online for reference? BTW,
given
> your superior position on this by virtue of my admission that I value your
> definition, I expect to lose the ad hominem point.
>
> > I suppose the question is, Is Drestin a factual authority on Hotmail?
>
> I doubt it too :-) But I do know a few things about his work and I can
> vouch (if his testimony can be trusted) that he understands UNIX to
Windows
> migrations. In fact it is his work by his own admission.
An "authority on Hotmail"? I am not certain what it would take to be such a
person. If I worked at hotmail would that make me an authority (think: if I
worked at Ford, would it automatically make me an authority on the Mustang
racing projects future plans?). I don't claim to be a 100% trusted insider
of all information on Hotmail - but I do speak to those that are senior
level decision makers and technologically in the know. I only passed on what
was not given in any confidence. No secrets spilled. Hell, an e-mail to
hotmail would confirm most of what I wrote....
(thanks for your post mike)
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[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: 15 Oct 2000 15:03:07 -0500
"Phil 'Guido' Cava" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Apparently Mr Black does not read the trade press.
sigh...
>
> 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.
So, savey corps have their images shipped to their systems builders for
installation during build time and they do not pay double. I have heard
little noise about it..
>
> Likewise, the (very) slow migration rate to W2K Server from NT4 Server has
also
> been mentioned _a_lot_.
Care to quote any RECENT news documenting this for discussion? I don't know
what their benchmark is to determine slow (let alone very slow) - I would
like to read more about such a phenomenom - I've seen a pretty steady rate
of W2K upgrades and (mostly) fresh installs.
> 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.
Um... no, why would they? NT4 continues to be a solid reliable product,
there are 1000s of vertical applications writen for it and why should MS
force anyone to upgrade? Why is it I imagine that if MS had announced their
EOL for NT4 to be this December, instead your kind would be whinning that MS
is FORCING people to upgrade. No, you are right, the lack of an EOL date for
NT has nothing to do with the mass acceptance of W2K. The increasing sales
of W2K, faster than those of NT4 for the same periods, do though...
>
> As for replacing UNIX networks with Lantasic.... well I'll just say:
fantastic!
I didn't write that I replaced Unix with LANtastic (although I did once). I
sold LANtastic ages ago, it was a fine network at that time (for it's
size/price - I consider it the linux of it's time (small, cheap, fast,
reliable - perfect for a small office) but doomed to be replaced by
enterprise level offerings eventually.
>
> Dream on Drestin, happy trolling!
Not nice "Guido"
>
> 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.
>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
