Linux-Advocacy Digest #768, Volume #29 Fri, 20 Oct 00 21:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: Microsoft kicked off the Web! ("Lance Togar")
Re: Why I hate Windows... (Bloody Viking)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Surendar Jeyadev)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Gallup site down, Call Microsoft support (sfcybear)
Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Why I hate Windows... (Bloody Viking)
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 I hate Windows... (Bloody Viking)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Lance Togar" <[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: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 19:50:13 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 00:04:00 GMT, Otto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >"Dave Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:1LmG5.2924$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >:
> >: 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.
> >
> >Wether you buy the "easy to use" stuff or not, it does not change the
facts.
> >I can't comment on the "McWindows", never heard of such an OS. However,
to
> >build up and learn a Linux system does take considerable amount of time,
not
> >to mention the software installation routines on Linux.
>
> ./setup
> ./install
> configure;make;install
> gnorpm
>
> None of these are terribly taxing and aren't that hard to remember
> after you've done them 10 or 20 times. They just might look different
> or scary (with all those icky compile commands) relative to what
> someone's been indoctrinated into.
>
>
> [deletia]
> >: 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.
> >
> >The industry started out with Unix and along came NT beating the crap out
of
> >the "xNIX". When the 64-bit version of NT becomes available sometimes in
the
> >next year, it'll be lights out for the "xNIX". All of the "real
> >professionals" will be flipping burgers somewhere and they can keep
> >wondering about what hit them.
>
> Sun doesn't really have to worry. By your own admission, DOS
> is still trying to play catchup to where even free unix was
> years ago.
>
> Nevermind the fact that for a serious server, intel based machines
> aren't going to be very price competitive anyways. That's not even
> getting into the scaling and HA options that RISC vendors have
> been delivering for years already.
>
> Even today, the systems that NT can run on are relative toys.
..
AS/400 smoke is bad for the eyes and from this post it obviously don't do
much for clear thinking either. Get some fresh air pal.
..
..
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Subject: Re: Why I hate Windows...
Date: 20 Oct 2000 23:59:30 GMT
Chris Sherlock ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: And far, far more expensive.
And Linux, even OLD Slackware, is more stable than NT. Once set up, Linux is
amazingly stable. It's almost like the difficulty of setup is a reverse
amortisation of time spent! I leave my Linux box running 24/7 and it ALWAYS
works. Linux is stable enough that I would use it for a mainframe. For a
system like the "car computer" of a spacecraft, I'd use redundancy... no
matter what OS I used. (and I'd likely use Linux)
--
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Surendar Jeyadev)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: 20 Oct 2000 15:27:38 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <TwJH5.698$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Matt O'Toole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 19:25:05 GMT, Haoyu Meng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> >U need to read a whole book to understand how to use Latex. I am in the
>business
>> >of writing books using computers. I don't want to have to learn
>programming to
>> >do that.
>>
>> You have an exceedingly unprofessional attitude regarding your tools.
>
>I agree. Wait until you have to manually chop an extra blank line out of
>each page of 1000 pages, or manually renumber 1000 pages worth of headings,
>etc. This is the kind of crap that drives people nuts with Word. It's a
Yes, that is what I should have added in my previous note. Sometime back
we had an 25 page article with figures and graphs and captions ....
While going through the 'final' version, we noticed a missing comma. So
we put it in and BANG, the entire layout went to smithereens!! Captions,
figures, graphs and text flew all over. We ended up with a totally
scrambled document. That was the last time we have used it for anything
meaningful! Of course, lots of life is meaningless and so there is a
place for Word -- rather large one, actually. :-)
>turbocharged time waster. If you really need to format your documents,
>you're far better off learning to use "real" tools like LaTeX, or even
>Framemaker, which, BTW, is the industry standard for professional writers
>(most of whom are employed as technical writers). If you don't want to
>bother with that, then for heaven's sake stick with *.txt files, so the
>person in charge of formatting can manage the content without wasting hours
>or days udoing Word turds.
>
>For shorter documents like magazine or journal articles, it doesn't take as
>long to undo the garbage. So most editors and designers don't care as much,
>if the writer is comfortable using Word (for the spell checker, dictionary,
>etc.)
>
>Matt O.
>
>
>
--
Surendar Jeyadev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 17:01:15 -0700
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> But they aren't lies; they're supported by evidence proven in federal
> court. On the same note, I am not now nor have I ever been, nor claimed
> to be, a Linux admin. Even your supposedly biting comments are nothing
> more than attempts at straw-men and redirection of the argument. Why
> don't you join your pal Simon, and give it up, already. The only 'fear'
> that motivates posting anti-MS information is fear that the illegal
> activity will continue to be defended by morons, or that MS will
> continue to rip off millions of people for billions of dollars.
You know... I agree with Max. You'll have a much happier, fruitful life if
you don't argue against people who it's impossible to have a structured,
logical debate with, Mike.
Simon
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 00:06:05 GMT
Truckasaurus wrote:
> In article <55CH5.13009$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > What I stated about Linux not being able to detect RAM properly is a
> simple
> > fact, check it.
>
> Maybe on your planet, Chad. But here on earth, Linux has always
> detected my RAM just right. And my partitions have also been detected
> right, not like Windows 95, which once detected my Linux partition as
> being an "audio CD"...
>
> --
> "Hello, everybody!"
> - Doctor Nick
> Martin A. Boegelund.
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
Planet Chad.
The only planet in the galaxy where memory can not be detected!
HA! That's hillarious.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Gallup site down, Call Microsoft support
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 23:57:00 GMT
In article <My4I5.193$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Mentzer) wrote:
>
> >
> > Error Type:
> > Microsoft OLE DB Provider for ODBC Drivers
> > (0x8007000E)
> > [Microsoft][ODBC SQL Server Driver]Memory
> > allocation failure
> > /include/e2000testdsn.inc, line 8
> >
>
> umm... yeah, this really says alot about how unstable and poorly designed
> NT/2000 is.
>
> Do me a favor. On your favorite linux box, compile and run the following.. Tell
> me what happens.
>
> int main(int argc, char *argv[])
> {
> unsigned long l;
> char *p;
> l = 0xFFFFFFFF;
> p = (char*) malloc(l);
> if (!p)
> printf("Memory Allocation Failure... The Linux OS Must Suck\n");
> else
> printf("Linux r00lz\n");
> return 0;
> };
>
Don't get all huffy just because the OS you like can't hack it in the real
world.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Pros and Cons of MS Windows Dominated World?
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2000 00:12:18 GMT
Ari wrote:
> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...>
>
> <snip>
> > Software is the #1 budget item in every company in the world today.
> >
> > http://24.94.254.33/Linux/intro.html
> >
> > Charlie
>
> Hosting a web site on your home machine...brilliant idea :) Hope you have
> everything configured correctly.
I would have used a Windows box for my WEB service but their
security sucked and besides, NO WEB SERVER...
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Subject: Re: Why I hate Windows...
Date: 21 Oct 2000 00:13:20 GMT
Chris Sherlock ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I pay hardly anything for Linux and I have an *extremely* stable O/S! I
: guess that *I* got what I paid for.
No shit, Sherlock! Linux can run for MONTHS at a crack with no hint of
dropping the load. I've seen my own flaky hardware run Linux for months
straight without ANY problems. In fact the only times I shut down Linux is for
the rare time I want to use Windows 95 or for computer maintenance.
One thing I don't do is use 2.<odd number>.* kernels preferring the "proven"
2.<even number>.* kernels. I do this as I'm not a kernel hacker and I choose
reliability over new added features. It's not that I have anything "mission
critical" at all. Instead I like reliability for its own sake. Linux delivers
great. I'm also wary of beta apps of all types. I'll choose an older one that
is "complete" like how I choose kernels.
With Linux, you definitely get your money's worth with a reliable stable OS.
What I'd like to know just for fun what the record is for _continuous_ uptime
for a Linux box. It could be in the YEARS!
--
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
------------------------------
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: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 20:27:07 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:D%pH5.85$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Wait a minute, here. You worked at Microsoft and you believe that Windows
>> 95 was a genuine operating system that only needed DOS to load?
>
>He didn't say that, he said that once loaded, Windows 95 was it's own OS,
>which it is. Whether or not that OS relies on some functionality of a
>client program is irrelevant to that. Make no mistake, When Win95 is
>running, DOS (even the DOS that Win95 depends on) runs as a client of
>Windows.
Make no mistake; when running, Win95 runs on top of the DOS operating
system. Confusing this with the "DOS box" shell program which Windows
supports is a mistake made by rank amateurs exclusively.
[...]
>> I've never heard of a "DOS bootloader" before. Has Microsoft resurrected
>> their phony claims about DOS not being present in Windows 95 or something?
>
>Linux has (but does not require) a DOS bootloader, called LoadLin. Netware
>uses DOS as a bootloader as well. It's a common practice.
Yes, but it is not, quite absolutely, the same as Win/DOS, which loads
Windows *on top of* the DOS OS, and therefor is not the same at all as
Loadlin or Netware.
>> The real purpose of the error message was Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt
>with
>> regard to DR DOS. There was never any error. The message didn't pop up
>> because something bad had happened and the system was just notifying the
>> user about it. The message popped up when Microsoft secret, encrypted,
>> self-modifying, debugger disabling, ofuscated code detected DR DOS.
>
>Untrue. The message actually came up on any non-completely conforming DOS.
"You never sent me a response on the question of what things an app
would do that would make it run with MSDOS and
not run DR-DOS. Is there any version check or api they fail to have? Is
ther feature they have that might get in our way? I
am not looking for something they cant get around. I am looking for
something their current binary fails on."
Bill Gates, September 22, 1988
"Bill Gates ordered to all application business units to include
checking routines of operating environments and if it is
Microsoft DOS, nothing will happen. But if it is non MS-DOS (such as
DR-DOS), application will display messages saying
that 'This application has been developed and tested for Microsoft
MS-DOS. Since you use different environment, this
application may not work correctly . . .' "
B. J. Bahk, August 9, 1989
"On the PR side, we have begun an 'aggressive leak campaign' for MS-DOS
5.0. The goal is to build anticipation for
MS-DOS 5.0, and diffuse potential excitement/momentum from the DR DOS
5.0 announcement."
DR DOS 5.0 Competitive Analysis, May 2, 1990
"We are engaged in a FUD campaign to let the press know about some of
the bugs. We'll provide info a few bugs at a time
to stretch it out."
Brad Silverberg, July 22, 1991
"Who at Microsoft gets up every morning thinking about how to compete
with these guys in the short term -- specifically
cut their revenue. Perhaps we need more focus on this. . . . After their
behavior in this FTC investigation I am very keen
on this."
Bill Gates, July 21, 1993
"This really isn't that hard. If you're going to kill someone there
isn't much reason to get all worked up about it and angry
-- you just pull the trigger. Angry discussions before hand are a waste
of time. We need to smile at Novell while we pull the
trigger."
Jim Allchin, September 18, 1993
========================================
georga:
What can we tell a customer about compatibility or non with DR DOS 6? .
. . Can we give them a workaround, or tell them to buy
MS-DOS 5?
Hill:
The standard response is: Windows is only tested with MS-DOS operating
systems. DR-DOS claims to be 100% compatible
with MS-DOS, so if that is true, then the user shouldn't have any
problems.
There is really nothing we can do.
========================================
windows is designed and tested for ms-dos. not dr-dos. it says MS-DOS on
the box, not MS-DOS or DR-DOS . . . this is what to
tell the world (in a nice way). using a system other than ms-dos puts
the user at his own risk. it says this very clearly first thing in
the readme.
there is another "fix" for them: use ms-dos. that should be mentioned in
addition to telling them that digital research is
providing them with a new version.
========================================
Detection for the absence of MS-DOS will be in the Final Beta Release
(AKA beta 3) but the message will not. Instead, the
message will say: Non-fatal error detected: error # (Please contact
Windows 3.1 beta support)
This will allow us to widely test our detection scheme, but not cause
undue PR problems.
========================================
Janine has brought up some good questions on how we handle the error
messages that the users will get if they aren't using
MS-DOS.
-- The beta testers will ask questions. How should the techs respond:
Ignorance, the truth, other?
-- This will no doubt raise a stir on Compuserve. We should either be
proactive and post something up there now, or have a
response already constructed so we can flash it up there as soon as the
issue arises so we can nip it in the bud before we have a
typical CIS snow-ball mutiny.
Cole:
Let's plead ignorance for a while. We need to figure out our overall
strategy for this. I'm surprized people aren't flaming yet,
maybe they won't.
========================================
i am wondering if we should change the detection words to say we failed
to detect ms-dos, rather than say we detected an os
other than ms-dos. the latter words would make people think we are
looking for drdos . . . .
========================================
what the guy is supposed to do is feel uncomfortable, and when he has
bugs, suspect that the problem is dr-dos and then
go out to buy ms-dos. or decide to not take the risk for the other
machines he has to buy for in the office.
========================================
http://www.drdos.com/fullstory/factstat.html
Ultimately, your position is ludicrous to begin with: DR-DOS was the
only clone of MS-DOS that had any real presence in the market.
>It's just that DR-DOS was the one that was known by most people at the time.
Yea. Specifically, it was the competitor that Microsoft was interested
in destroying because it threatened their monopoly.
>There were a few others at the time as well, such as what eventually became
>FreeDOS and russian made DOS that I can't remember the name of.
>
>See:
>http://www.ddj.com/articles/1993/9309/9309d/9309d.htm
There is no indication in that article that either of these were
complete enough clones to actually be compatible, and run Windows.
>"Similarly, the AARD code fails under the Windows NT beta, where the DPB
>pointer in SysVars is null. Finally, the code fails in an OS/2 DOS box,
>where the DOS version number is 10.0 or greater (for example, OS/2 2.1
>masquerades as DOS 20.10).
Preceded by:
"Any moderately self-respecting DOS workalike should pass unscathed
through this gauntlet of tests. Interestingly, however, when this code
is incorporated in a device driver such as HIMEM.SYS, it fails under DR
DOS 5 and 6. These versions of DR DOS do not contain a genuine CDS, and
the simulated CDS is apparently not set up until after device-driver
initialization time. Thus, the Windows 3.1 beta HIMEM.SYS produces a
non-fatal error message under DR DOS 5 and 6."
>Additionally, there WAS legitimate bugs in DR-DOS that Novell acknowledged
>which caused problems with windows. (from the same article)
>
>"So whenever I've heard accusations that Microsoft practices so-called
>"cruel coding" to keep Windows from running on DR DOS, I look at the facts:
>Windows 3.1 Enhanced mode does run on DR DOS. Standard mode does not run,
>but that's because of a DR DOS bug acknowledged by Novell (see Undocumented
>DOS, Second Edition)."
>
>Also note this statement:
>
>"(It wouldn't be the first time company N's bug has been misinterpreted as
>company M's "deliberate incompatibility.")"
The author followed up on this thought later by saying:
" The AARD code has no relation to the actual purpose of the five
otherwise-unrelated programs into which it has been dropped. It appears
to be a wholly arbitrary test, a gratuitous gatekeeper seemingly with no
purpose other than to smoke out non-Microsoft versions of DOS, tagging
them with an appropriately vague "error" message."
>> If you see nothing wrong with that, you shouldn't even be in this
>> discussion.
>
>Microsoft checked only for legitimate MS-DOS or PC-DOS, it did not check
>specifically for DR-DOS. I think that's far more interesting.
What's far more interesting is that, after reading the page you cited
(and I quoted), you don't believe this was a check for DR-DOS; Microsoft
most definitely introduced this code with the specific and predatory
purpose of killing DR-DOS's market with FUD.
"Who at Microsoft gets up every morning thinking about how to compete
with these guys in the short term -- specifically
cut their revenue. Perhaps we need more focus on this. . . . After their
behavior in this FTC investigation I am very keen
on this."
Bill Gates, July 21, 1993
--
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: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 20:29:55 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Chad Myers in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>
>"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:MiwH5.2068$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:D%pH5.85$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Wait a minute, here. You worked at Microsoft and you believe that Windows
>> > 95 was a genuine operating system that only needed DOS to load?
>>
>> He didn't say that, he said that once loaded, Windows 95 was it's own OS,
>> which it is. Whether or not that OS relies on some functionality of a
>> client program is irrelevant to that. Make no mistake, When Win95 is
>> running, DOS (even the DOS that Win95 depends on) runs as a client of
>> Windows.
>
>Specifically...
>
>Win95 has its own scheduler, virtual memory manager -- a "kernel" if
>you will.
>
>Win95 does not rely on "msdos.sys" (which is actually filled with
>pound characters in Win95 just so that if you wish to boot into DOS,
>it will still be backwards compatible).
Win95 relies on msdos.sys being a certain size, because DOS relies on
msdos.sys being a certain size, and Win95 is a bundle of DOS 7 and Win
4.0. "If you wish to boot into DOS, it will still be backwards
compatible", indeed. You *have* to boot into DOS to load Win95,
remember?
>Win95 only relies on io.sys being there. I believe command.com is
>optional.
Because command.com is merely the shell, and io.sys is part of the DOS
operating system.
--
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: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 20:32:31 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Mike Byrns in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
[...]
>Of course USENET existed. It was one of the first applications of ARPANET after
>email. It predates TCP/IP.
USENET predates APRANET, as well, or is at least contemporaneous.
USENET is a descendant of UUCP-based bulletin board systems, which did
not use ARPANET, but dial-up lines.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Subject: Re: Why I hate Windows...
Date: 21 Oct 2000 00:30:39 GMT
James Stutts ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: If you think NT is somehow expensive, I suggest you look at commercial Unix
: prices.
This is a case of comparing apples, oranges, and bananas. NT has the definite
advantage of esoteric engineering apps while Linux of course does not. Linux
is, however, more stable than NT in a server config. You can use Linux both as
a server AND a workstation at the same time albeit at the cost of slowing the
server side. Commercial UNIXes are rock-solid and have esoteric engineering
apps. Like Linux, you can use it for the workstation and server at the same
time, but of course commercial UNIXes are extremely costly.
As far as pricing, anyone can go to a Best Buy and get Linux for $20. NT
Workstation is $400, the price squared. For either NT Server or commercial
UNIX, it's BIG BUCKS. Looking at it that way, unless you are using an esoteric
engineering app, Linux looks good. For a file server, Linux is an awful good
bet.
In your case, it's that esoteric engineering app that forces you to use NT. I
have played with NT Workstation, but all it is to me is a Blue Screen of Death
server. Total junk. I'm sure others can make it run, but that's not the point.
I've gone to a friend's house years ago and in only minutes crashed his NT
box. It takes quite a fuck-up to crash a Linux box. I have done it, but it was
always from my not knowing what to do, and it was only a few times since 1994
when I first fired up a Linux box.
--
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
------------------------------
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: Fri, 20 Oct 2000 20:34:44 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Mike Byrns in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
>> Said Mike Byrns in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >Weevil wrote:
>> [...]
>> >The code was there. The error messages were not bogus. The message simply
>> >warned the DR-DOS was not supported and that bad things *might* happen if you
>> >used it. It was just there so Microsoft would not have to support other
>> >people's software.
>>
>> Well, you got that right.
>>
>> "Microsoft intended to scare OEMs and users, and thus eliminate DR DOS
>> as a competitive threat. Microsoftıs intentions were clearly stated by
>> Brad Silverberg. David Cole sent Silverberg an e-mail asking, "what is
>> the guy is supposed to do" when he sees the false error message?
>> Silverberg responded:
>>
>> "What the guy is supposed to do is feel uncomfortable, and when he has
>> bugs, suspect that the problem is DR DOS and then go out to buy MS-DOS.
>> Or decide to not take the risk for the other machines he has to buy for
>> in the office."
>
>That's right. Absolutely. There's nothing wrong with that.
If you're an idiot, maybe.
>Microsoft is not
>obligated in any way to support competing products.
Nobody is *obligated* to do anything in the commercial world. They do
things because their customers find it valuable. Are you trying to tell
us that using the Windows 3.1 beta to FUD DR-DOS out of the market was
valuable to Microsoft's customers?
--
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! ======
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
