Linux-Advocacy Digest #876, Volume #29 Fri, 27 Oct 00 19:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ))
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Steve Mading)
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. (Perry Pip)
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! (Steve Mading)
Re: Help with system call (Clay Irving)
Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE ("James E. Freedle II")
Re: An entire morning wasted on a Linux install. (Steve Mading)
Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE ("James E. Freedle II")
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE ("James E. Freedle II")
Re: And another one, Claire, sweetie (Steve Mading)
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. (Goldhammer Goldhammer)
Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE ("James E. Freedle II")
Re: Why don't I use Linux? (Mig)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 21:42:31 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Compaq has made a significant stink of the delayed 2.4 kernel
> release.
Compaq does have a legitimate beef. They were planning to release
the Ipaq and their Internet Appliance with the 2.4 kernel.
Unfortunately, until Linus officially blesses something, the execs
at Compaq can't ship product.
Two of these devices were potential rivals to Sony's Playstation 2,
and Compaq is losing the momentum.
In the past, Linus would simply have said, "this is 2.4", and any
blood would be cleaned up in the subsequent revisions. Given that,
we've seen 2.4.1 through 2.4.9, but since many companies are counting
on a stable first release, these have been called "beta" releases.
> It's funny but I can't remember a single Windows version which wasn't
> delayed by months from the target release.
Actually what is most ironic is that it is the commercial nature of
the 2.4 release that's slowing things down. There are so many
different platforms, processors, and manufacturers involved.
In the past, the community told Linus when to freeze. In fact,
he was still calling 0.98 a "beta" nearly a year after SLS had
begun selling copies commercially. In fact, even Slackware used
0.98. It was then that Linus finally decided to call the next
release 1.0
Linus also dragged his feet with Linux 2.0 as well. He wanted to
add a bunch of new features like USB and DVD but the community
was pressing him to get something out before Windows 98 started
running away with the market.
The core features holding up the "beta" release don't have a
significant impact on the desktop, and won't radically alter
the programming interface. The remaining sticking points are
support for SMP and support for various other processors.
Most of the features that were intended to be published in sync
with the 2.4 release, such as KDE 2.0, KOffice, and USB support
were all ready to ship.
In the past, there were no "Beta" releases. There were the odd
number releases, which were the development/beta releases, and
there were the "solid" releases.
The rule of the day was "release early and often", and the
distributors would test and certify kernels and tools. Some
held back for the most stable kernel, others pushed forward
to the newest kernel with extra risks.
Red Hat 5.0 suffered from adopting too much, too soon. The Glibc
libraries weren't terribly solid and applications faltered. Red
Hat sales suffered while competitors like SuSE and Caldera gained
ground.
> Bill Gates said Windows 95 would be released almost a year
> before it actually was. Nobody said a damn thing about it.
He also announced that NT (3.5) would be out in 1992, and it wasn't
released until 1994. Windows 95 was released in 8/95, but wasn't
stable until the "B" release.
The big problem is that there are too many guys with big bankrolls
and nasty lawyers who don't want anything released that would leave
them at a disadvantage. Meanwhile they want to sneak in that extra
device driver or feature that will "blow the others away".
Eventually, someone says "Ship the darn thing". Linus needs to
bless something, and in the next few WEEKS or it will have very
unpleasant impacts on christmas Desktop sales, and commercial server
sales to companies whose fiscal year ends December 31 (at which point,
all budget items go back up for rebid).
> I think it shows that people CARE about Linux and WANT
> to see the release. If they didn't CARE about Linux
> and have a NEED to see the release then we would
> not have heard from them.
This is very important! Several companies have put some big bucks
into Linux, recovering those bucks in this fiscal year is critical
to the survival of future Linux efforts. With Linus now making
sounds about "Next year, possibly march", the impact on the annual
reports and therefore stock prices for the next year, could be
impacted.
The fact is that any of the "beta" releases could have been declared
"Official 2.4.1", and companies could have started rolling the presses.
Right now, there are Linux machines that can't be rolled out of the
warehouse (or built) until Linus makes that declaration.
Some companies, like Caldara, Corel, and Red Hat, have simply started
shipping 2.2.xx kernels with pre-built ready to install 2.4.bx kernels
which can be installed even though they aren't "blessed". Red Hat 7
is a good example.
I'm hoping this isn't some "sweetheart deal" between Paul Allen
and Bill Gates. Officially, Transmeta doesn't control Linux, but
if Linus is being told not to bless it yet, this could violate the
trust of the developer community.
> Further,
>
> People keep forgetting what Linux is all about.
> They have this BIG corporate picture painted in
> their heads as if it were anything like Microsoft
> in structure and needs. The GNU/Linux model
> is nothing like the business model found in Microsoft.
Very true. One of the problems right now is that OEMs are
assuming that once 2.4.1 comes out, that will be "it" for
the next two years. In reality, all software and kernels
can easily be upgraded (kernel upgrade requires a reboot).
The new components can easily be obtained via the net (the
kernel binary and compressed patches each only take a few
minutes to download on a 56k modem).
In addition, the average Linux release is upgraded every 4-6
MONTHS, not every 2-3 YEARS.
I'm not sure what it will take to convince the OEMs that just because
the kernel doesn't support every possible configuration and unique
feature of this release, that everything should be held up for another
3-6 months.
Linus Torvalds, if you get a chance to read this,
MAKE THE DECLARATION TODAY!!!
There are two many people betting too much for you to wait
another 3 months for "perfection". You can clean up any minor
leaks with the next few revisions.
> Millions will NOT be made or lost to Linus if he was
> a year or two late with a kernel. It doesn't bother
> the man one bit. He's not under somebody else's
> gun. And he never will be either.
Actually, Linus stands to gain a great deal if he gets 2.4
out by the first week of November (assuring availability of
Linux based consumer products by Thanksgiving weekend) and
risks losing control of the kernel (forks or mutiny) if banks,
investors, venture capitalists, mutual fund managers, and
CEOs are left "Holding the bag" because Linus was trying
to get the last tweak on 32 processor SMP to work.
The 2.4 kernel (beta) is already much faster, much more reliable,
and much more versatile than anything else on the market, including
some of the commercial UNIX versions. The key SMP features don't
HAVE to be fully debugged until early next year (tax season).
Meanwhile, the 2.4 kernel, with the accompanying companion software,
could be released THIS WEEK, with no severe loss of market.
In the worst cases, a fall-back to 2.2.xx could be available just in
case.
> And in this fact, you can see why people are
> in anticipation and WAIT for the new Kernel.
>
> They like his work.
Again, 2.4.b9 is more stable than 2.2 or any version of MS-Windows,
especially on single processor and 4 processor SMP environments.
If they releas 2.4.1 today, with a focus on consumer desktop models,
and come up with 2.4.2 or 2.4.3 in a month or so, with the
understanding that another 2.4.6 release will come out in January
or February that has full support for 32 processors in SMP, and
support for everything from palm-pilots to S/390 G5 processors.
> People just have to understand that Linux
> isn't like Microsoft where they just slap
> layers together and QA the product until
> they have it 1/2 running. It's not like
> that at all.
But I think there is an expectation that most of the development
was already done in the 2.3.xx release and that the 2.4 release
was pretty much ready.
The rule, up until 2.4 has been "release early and often". What
changed? I'd almost suspect some "dirty tricks", a little foul-play,
or a "fox in the hen-house".
Given what's at stake in the next 2-3 weeks, this is not a good time
to decide "I'm not declaring until next year".
> Microsoft has to turn out Operating Systems
> in order to make money to pay salaries.
Keep in mind that IBM, Compaq, Gateway, Dell, HP, Sony,
Toshiba, LinuxCare, Red Hat, Caldera, Corel, Inprise,
and about 10 other companies, both public and private,
have the potential to make, or lose, as much as $1 billion
over the next 3 months from Linux systems and Linux related
revenue.
Meanwhile, Linus is announcing get more "beta" releases.
Linux 2.4 has been is "Beta" since the day the 2.3 source
hierarchy was opened up, over 2 years ago.
If Linus can't handle the job, he needs to hand it off to someone else
until whatever it is that seems to be taking him away from Linux
is resolved.
> In the Linux camp, nobody HAS to make money
> and there are NO SALARIES TO PAY.
Again, Linux revenue is a function of support. In this case,
that support take the form of providing the latest software,
preinstalled by the OEM, with everything customized for the
end-user. This is the biggest barrier to Linux right now,
and the revenue collected during the Holiday season will
determine how much more will be available next year.
> --
> Charlie
>
> By 2005 Microsoft will be displaced by
> LINUX - THE POWER OF A GNU GENERATION!
>
>
--
Rex Ballard - VP I/T Architecture
Linux Advocate, Internet Pioneer
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 60 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 9%/month! (recalibrated 10/23/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[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: 27 Oct 2000 21:46:12 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Relax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: We are going into a circle here. The G in GDI means "Graphical". Displaying
: and printing is essentially the same and requires GDI.
Wrong. I agree that both can be done with the same high-level calls,
but once you percolate down to the low-level code of the GDI, they
are not the same anymore at that point. The whole point behind
putting the GDI in the kernel is to reduce kernel/user mode swaps.
But such swapping is ONLY needed if you are doing something protected
like talking to the video hardware. If you are still operating at
the level where printing and video are the same, then that means
you are still operating in the area where everything cab be done
just as fast in user mode - all you are doing at that point is still
mathematical virtual stuff.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 21:48:59 GMT
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000 15:27:52 -0400,
John Arebir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Fri, 27 Oct 2000 13:09:46 GMT, "Chad Myers"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>But the problem with this... you guys always say that's why Linux is
>>better because there are no hard and fast deadlines, but it doesn't show.
>>Linux now exceeds NT 4.0 on hacked sites list, it's taking over on the
>>number of bugs list, and the response time for patches is worse than
>>Microsoft in most cases. This just doesn't hold up.
>
>1) There's a difference between a patch and a major release.
>2) 2.2 -> 2.4 is not a patch. Was Win3.1 => 4.0 (95) a patch?
>3) Linux exceeds NT 4.0. This is the only fact you state above.
Nope. Not for the current month of October, up to 10/25
NT 4.0: 160
Linux: 119
Perry
>4) Are you a Idiot Savant?
--
Show the code....or hit the road.
Perry Piplani [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: 27 Oct 2000 21:50:36 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: You're honestly comparing detecting something as basic as the RAM count
: on a box to something that's vendor-specific like a CDR and CDRW?
: The OS doesn't require the difference between a CDR and a CDRW to
: function properly, or faster.
You forgot that he's comparing something FIXABLE BY THE USER (linux
memcount) to something that's not.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Clay Irving)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.perl.misc,comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Help with system call
Date: 27 Oct 2000 22:00:35 GMT
On Fri, 27 Oct 2000 21:02:01 GMT, guest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi, I am trying to execute couple of linux commands from this little
>script, but the rpm part
>doesn't work. The output is a small table with date and version of the
>rpm package.
>Any input will be greatly appreciated.
>Reply to email, please.
>Thanks.
>
>#!/usr/bin/perl -w
>
>require "html.pl";
>require "table.pl";
>
>my $version = `cat /opt/product/bin/product_VERSION`;
>my $date = `rpm -qi product | grep Install`;
>
>&ch_start_html();
>&ct_start_table(2, 'About Product', 'Date Installed', 'Product
>Version');
>&ct_table_row($date, $version);
>&ct_end_table();
>
>#debugging lines
>print $version;
>print $date;
>print "rpm is " . `rpm -qi product`;
>
>&ch_end_html();
Does it run from the command line? If so, you probably have a problem
related to paths, permissions, etc.
--
Clay Irving <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Half of the people in the world are below average.
------------------------------
From: "James E. Freedle II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 18:08:56 -0400
"sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8sv3eh$5nr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <WiDI5.336$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "James E. Freedle II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "James E. Freedle II" wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have not spent that much, and a lot of what comes with linux is
> > > > duplication. Eventually I will learn Linux, but it will take time,
> but I
> > > > have to get my lab reports done, and my drawings finished. Now I
> may
> > have
> > > > software that will do with what I have on Windows 2000, but I do
> not
> > know
> > > > what I have installed under linux. I do not know half of the
> 1,500+
> > > > applications that came with my linux distribution. BTW what comes
> with
> > Linux
> > > > that Windows does not have on the CD?
> > >
> > > TeX, emacs, gcc, xbill, perl, python,
> > And they are used for what?
>
>
> You do not know what these are used for and you make sweaping claims
> about the usefullness if Linux? Sorry, but your credibility just went
> into the toilet.
So did your's
>
>
>
> > >
> > > Colin Day
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: An entire morning wasted on a Linux install.
Date: 27 Oct 2000 22:03:12 GMT
Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Why is it called the world series when only one country is involved? Do
: the majority of Americans dispute the claim there are other countries
: besides theirs on this earth?
Hmm - so what country are the Toronto Blue Jays from again?
What nations *have* professional baseball teams other than the
US and Canada? Seriously, who's out there begging to be let
in to the "World Series"? (Japan has pro baseball, but under
different rules, so cross-competition would take quite a bit of
rules negotiation.)
Oh, and it's called "World Series" because it was orignally
named for a newspaper called "The World", that sponsored it,
(Not because it was meant to be worldwide.)
------------------------------
From: "James E. Freedle II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 18:15:59 -0400
I like choice, and the duplication is not bad, just that the install program
is not descriptive except to someone that knows about Linux and knows all
the packages available. Since I am just stepping into Linux, I do not. This
is why I removed the native partition, and reinstalled it under VMWare, so
that I could get a feel for the OS. As yet I can still not watch DVDs, and
use my internal modem. I can only get the very basic functions out of my
printer, never mind printing to 11×17 from it. I would also like to be able
to sync my Handheld PC with it, but no apps to sync to or with. I want my
choice of hardware, and my choice of software. Right now I use what I can to
get the work done, and then once the work is done, I play with the other to
learn about Linux. I was just saying that duplication leads to confusion
with a newbe. I believe that all operating systems should be free to manual
maintaince if the user is learned enough to maintain the system.
"sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8sv373$5kq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Duplication means choice! Do you have a problem with giving users
> choices??? Not only that, linux comes with about all the tools I'll ever
> need!
>
> Just because you have not leaned Linux does not mean that linux can not
> meet your needs. It only means you do not know if it does.
>
>
>
> In article <Q%1I5.10493$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "James E. Freedle II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I have not spent that much, and a lot of what comes with linux is
> > duplication. Eventually I will learn Linux, but it will take time, but
> I
> > have to get my lab reports done, and my drawings finished. Now I may
> have
> > software that will do with what I have on Windows 2000, but I do not
> know
> > what I have installed under linux. I do not know half of the 1,500+
> > applications that came with my linux distribution. BTW what comes with
> Linux
> > that Windows does not have on the CD?
> > "Haoyu Meng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > You have a valid point. For people on a budget, Linux could seem
> > attractive.
> > > Shelling out $200 for Win2k and another $500 for office might be
> > prohibitively
> > > expensive for some if not many. I was never conscious of this issue
> > because the
> > > university I went to had a lisence agreement with Microsoft, so I
> got my
> > copy of
> > > Windows2000, Office2000, and DevStudio7 for only $5 a piece.
> > >
> > > KDE 2.0 is definitely a significant step in the right direction for
> > populating
> > > Linux onto business desktop. On balance, I would much prefer
> Linux/KDE2
> > over
> > > Win98/95. But the overall rating combining stability, usability, and
> > software
> > > support, Win2k edges out over Linux -- that's my personal opinion.
> > >
> > > sfcybear wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > > Haoyu Meng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Windows 2000 is rock solid. I have used it for almost half a
> year.
> > Only
> > > > > had to reboot twice, both times due to conflict from newly
> installed
> > > > > hardware devices.
> > > > >
> > > > > Windows 2000 is stable, powerful, and easy to use. So does
> anyone see
> > it
> > > > > as seriously challenging the relevance of pushing Linux to the
> > desktop?
> > > > >
> > > > > Personally, I had been a Linux fan since Kernel version 1 with
> > Slackware
> > > > > floppies downloaded over 28.8k modem. While in college I used
> Linux as
> > > > > my main workstation OS, with Win95/98 relegated to secondary
> role. But
> > > > > Win2k changed all of it. Right now, all the workstation
> frontends I
> > use
> > > > > at home at work is win2k boxes with the headless Linux servers
> tucked
> > > > > away on a network link to do only number crunching and code
> comping.
> > > > >
> > > > > Any similar stories?
> > > > >
> > > > > Haoyu Meng
> > > > >
> > > > > Telpic Internet Solutions
> > > >
> > > > Let's see, pay $$$$ for the OS, PAy $$$$ for an MS office.......
> > > >
> > > > Or download a free OS that has every thing most people would need
> and is
> > rock
> > > > solid. I'm using the new KDE that is due out on the 28th. It comes
> with
> > an
> > > > Office suite that does MORE than I need. I can take a trip to
> Tahoe for
> > the
> > > > money I saved! So I get a free trip to Tahoe every time a new
> version of
> > NT
> > > > comes out!
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > > > Before you buy.
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 17:26:30 -0400
Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 10/23/00
>> >> at 06:37 AM, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>> >>
>> >> 1. I wouldn't know your unit, because I don't read all the drivel you spill
>> >> out. -- You really are full of yourself to think anyone with a brain is
>> >> interested in your line of crap.
>> >>
>> >> 2. Haven't seen one person anywhere else who believes you either.
>> >>
>> >> 3. Its time for you shut up. You're a useless loud mouth that no one wants to
>> >> be around.
>> >>
>> >> 4. Will there ever be an end to your bullshit?
>>
>> >Do you have a point?
>>
>> Certainly -- You are a total, complete asshole who is also too stupid to
>> understand that no one wants you here or anywhere on the usernet, because we
>> don't give a crap about what trolls like you have to say.
>>
>Sure thing, Letard. now...please refrain from posting while under the
>influence of Thunderbird or other cheap intoxicants.
I knew you weren't bright enough to understand. Thanks for confirming your
idiotic single-cell brain. -- Your service in the armed forces could be used
to prove they have gone down hill. Its down right scary to me, because I sure
as hell wouldn't want to be in combat that might depend on your brain power.
Now its time to put you in the twit filers with the rest of the assholes.
--
===========================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
From: "James E. Freedle II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 18:17:44 -0400
"Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "James E. Freedle II" wrote:
>
> > "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "James E. Freedle II" wrote:
> > >
> > > > I have not spent that much, and a lot of what comes with linux is
> > > > duplication. Eventually I will learn Linux, but it will take time,
but I
> > > > have to get my lab reports done, and my drawings finished. Now I may
> > have
> > > > software that will do with what I have on Windows 2000, but I do not
> > know
> > > > what I have installed under linux. I do not know half of the 1,500+
> > > > applications that came with my linux distribution. BTW what comes
with
> > Linux
> > > > that Windows does not have on the CD?
> > >
> > > TeX, emacs, gcc, xbill, perl, python,
>
> >
> > And they are used for what?
>
> TeX (and LATeX) typesetting. Granted, I'm a math teacher and not everyone
> wants to print math stuff.
I can see the usefulness of this, as I am in school for Computer/Electrical
Engineering.
>
> Emacs. Text editor of the gods. Includes modes for TeX/LATeX, C, C++
Maybe I will check this one out.
>
> gcc. Handy if one needs a C/C++ compiler
Sounds like a winner there, but what version of C/C++, ANSI?
>
> xbill. A popular game among Linux sysadmins. The object of the game, to
> stop bill from converting your network to toasters.
Actually pretty fun.
>
> Perl and Python are scripting languages.
>
>
> Colin Day
>
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: And another one, Claire, sweetie
Date: 27 Oct 2000 22:19:11 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: I know...I forgot for a moment where I was reading :)
: I'm used to using Lotus Notes where messages are sorted by date,
: although you can change it, most people don't.
Uhm - same here - tin sorts first by thread, second by time within
the thread. I was referring merely to what was happening in your
one message, not how it sorted with the other messages.
------------------------------
From: Goldhammer Goldhammer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 22:21:19 GMT
R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Compaq has made a significant stink of the delayed 2.4 kernel
> > release.
>
> Compaq does have a legitimate beef. They were planning to release
> the Ipaq and their Internet Appliance with the 2.4 kernel.
> Unfortunately, until Linus officially blesses something, the execs
> at Compaq can't ship product.
That's compaq's problem. The linux kernel developers (in their capacity
as such) are neither employees of compaq, nor subcontractors to compaq.
--
Don't think you are. Know you are.
------------------------------
From: "James E. Freedle II" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 challenges GNOME/KDE
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 18:21:50 -0400
"David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8t65kq$56s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Colin R. Day wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >> > > applications that came with my linux distribution. BTW what comes
> with
> >> Linux
> >> > > that Windows does not have on the CD?
> >> >
> >> > TeX, emacs, gcc, xbill, perl, python,
> >
> >>
> >> And they are used for what?
> >
> >TeX (and LATeX) typesetting. Granted, I'm a math teacher and not
everyone
> >wants to print math stuff.
>
> I use LaTeX all the time for technical documentation - even for simple
> letters or faxes it produces much better output than any word processor,
and
> for longer or structured documents it is vastly superior. On linux, LyX
(or
> KLyX) makes it much easier to use - and LyX is *not* ported to Win32 (a
> pity - I use NT at work).
>
> >
> >Emacs. Text editor of the gods. Includes modes for TeX/LATeX, C, C++
> >
> >gcc. Handy if one needs a C/C++ compiler
>
> And the gcc suite also includes Pascal, fortran, assembly, a debugger, and
a
> whole range of other tools to suit your fancy.
>
> >
> >xbill. A popular game among Linux sysadmins. The object of the game, to
> >stop bill from converting your network to toasters.
>
> Linux CD's generally also include a range of other games (more than
> solitaire, minesweeper and hearts).
>
> >
> >Perl and Python are scripting languages.
> >
>
>
> What about all the other stuff that Windows users normally buy at vast
> expense (if they need them)? Like mail servers, database servers, web
> servers, firewalls, routers, SMP support (for lots of cpus, at no extra
> cost), clustering support (on some distributions), and unlimited client
> access? Or for desktop use, word processors (of varying quality),
> spreadsheets (like gnumeric), maths and statistics programs, the GIMP
> (roughly equivilent to PhotoShop on Windows)?
>
>
>
Or Personal Finance programs. As for the mail servers, I don't have one.
Windows 2000 supports my Dual 600 MHz System just fine, as does Linux (the
kernel). Don't need clustering support, I have only my one computer (two if
you count my Handheld PC, or four if you count the HP 48GX and TI-92 Plus
that I have. I have no idea what comes with my Linux distro, and what
applications that they would match up to on Windows. I have no use for
Photoshop.
------------------------------
From: Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why don't I use Linux?
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 00:21:58 +0200
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> Why haven't I switched from Windows to Linux?
>
> In a word: Software.
[CUT]
Lets make it simple Pete. Stick with Windows. I get the feeling that you
wont be happy with Linux. Fair enough.. it cant suit everybody.
Win9x is a pain as you noted.. so buy, install,use and be happy with
Windows 2000.
Cheers
PS. There are other alternatives: FreeBSD (and other BSD's), BeOS, MacOS
etc.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
