Linux-Advocacy Digest #939, Volume #29 Mon, 30 Oct 00 11:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Roberto Alsina)
Re: I'm sick and tired of you (was: Linux) (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Ms employees begging for food (Terje Mathisen)
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! ("Christopher Smith")
Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft? ("Christopher Smith")
Re: Ms employees begging for food (Terje Mathisen)
Re: Astroturfing (Jason Bowen)
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! (Roger Lindsj|)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...) (Chris
Wenham)
Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft? (sfcybear)
Re: Linux (Roberto Alsina)
Re: The Linux Experience (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Ms employees begging for food (Casper H.S. Dik - Network Security Engineer)
Re: Astroturfing (chrisv)
Re: Why should I keep advocating Linux? ("Eddie Dubourg")
Re: Why should I keep advocating Linux? (William Olsen)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes ("Bruce Schuck")
Re: Astroturfing (chrisv)
Font Editor? (William Olsen)
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! ("Bruce Schuck")
Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!! ("Bruce Schuck")
Re: Linux in approximately 5 years:
Re: Hullo, Claire, James? Here's another dork for you ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[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: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 13:56:50 GMT
In article <39fb5876$0$32655$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Relax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:00102717474900.20411@pc03...
>
> > Nonsense. Until the introduction of truetype fonts, at least, what
was
> that,
> > 1990?
>
> TrueType has little to do with drawing and blitting.
What, do you consider putting text on the screen and in the printer as
not drawing?
What's the criteria? Everything MS had is needed, everything else is
not?
--
Roberto Alsina
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[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: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 13:58:52 GMT
In article <39fb58d2$0$32639$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Relax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8tcsdl$8g4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> // snip
>
> > What matters is what does it come out with today. Today, Unix (or
more
> > accurately, the modern X-window toolkits) don't have the problem.
>
> Great. How many desktop apps takes advantage of it?
All that print and were developed in the last 5 years or so?
--
Roberto Alsina
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I'm sick and tired of you (was: Linux)
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 11:28:49 -0300
El dom, 29 oct 2000, MH escribió:
>> >> But both in terms of marketing and technology, I see no future for
>Linux
>> >> as a mass-market, consumer-friendly OS.
>
>You aren't the only one. But I won't say it can't happen.
>They're going to elect Bush aren't they?
>
>> >Shut up, would you? Your babbling won't do any good or bad. I've seen
>> >people make this statement again and again ever since I read this
>> >group, and magically, Linux has in the same time not shown any signs
>> >of slowing down on its way towards becoming exactly that: A
>> >mass-market, consumer-friendly operating system.
>> >
>> >Early in the eighties, we had a text editor and some odd tools. They
>> >said we'd never have a compiler
>
>OK, you've a compiler.
Actually, he said we didn't have one yet.
> Every mass-market, consumer-friendly operating system needs one.
Sure. Unless you only want to run interpreted programs. Never saw a mass-market
consumer-friendly OS like that.
>Should be one in every box. 99% of mass-market, consumer-friendly operating
>system users compile their own utilities. Uh-huh. Does it come with a punch
>card reader too?
No, but it comes with a punch card translator. It's in the bsdgames package.
>> >Late in the eighties, we had a compiler and a complete set of Unix
>> >tools. They said we'd never have a kernel.
>
>You got the compiler twice?
No, you just read wrong.
> What a deal! Unix tools? Cool! Let's all take a trip back in time.
>Something tells me that "mass-market, consumer-friendly operating system"
>and "Unix tools" don't belong in the same sentence. But, I'll go your way on
>it."
Well, Mac OSX has them.
>> >Early in the nineties, we had the complete foundation for a Unix
>> >system, including the kernel. They said we'd never have a friendly
>> >user interface.
>
>Did you get the compiler again?
I see no compiler mentioned.
[snip rather lame attempts at humor]
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: Terje Mathisen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc
Subject: Re: Ms employees begging for food
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 15:21:00 +0100
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> That would depend on what you consider "ethernet speeds". The correct
> throughput rate to measure on an Ethernet is comparable to arcnet.
> Ethernet's CSMA/CD relies on statistical access to the media, and is
> only really efficient at nominally 10% of the "bandwidth speed".
OK, please do some actual throughput tests and come back:
I'm willing to bet that you'll discover that CSMA/CD is perfectly
willing to work with 30-60% utilization, and for a simple streaming
application using maximum size packets (1500+ bytes), you'll get up to
90-99%.
> number, as in IP. But with address spaces as large as IPX, who needs
> them? IP's 32 bits hardly compares to IPX's 16 byte segment number
> *plus* 16 byte (twelve digits of hexadecimal values is 16 bytes, isnt'
> it, or is it 8?).
Is this a trolling attempt!
An IPX address consists of a 32-bit (= 4 bytes, right) network number,
and a 48-bit (= 6 bytes, 12 hex digits) MAC address.
The total is 80 bits or 10 bytes, of which 60% is more or less
determined by the network card.
Terje
--
- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Using self-discipline, see http://www.eiffel.com/discipline
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 00:25:23 +1000
"2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Bruce Schuck wrote:
> > I've run Windows NT Server a 486 with no problem. I admit it wasn't as
fast
> > as I liked but it ran just fine.
>
> Ypu don't say whoch one. 3.5.1 will go on a 486 (if you could be arsed
> with 300 floppies).
3.51 came on CD. I've got one right here.
> I'd love to see NT4 on a 486 with ie5.
Would run pretty much the same as NT4 with IE2. You're thinking of the IE4
shell extension, which *would* make it quite slow. No slower than, say, KDE
2 on the same machine though.
NT4 will run quite usably as a workstation on a 486 with enough RAM and a
couple of fast hard disks. There's no reason to think it couldn't work in a
similar capacity as a server.
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft?
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 00:28:26 +1000
"Andy Newman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <8tildu$lbt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Christopher Smith wrote:
> >
> >"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> mlw wrote:
> >
> >> (4) Having problems in one release and making the fixes only available
> >> in the next non-free release/upgrade.
> >
> >Examples ?
> >
>
> All versions of Windows. They lump the fixes in with all the new
> whizz bang features. Sometimes new features are really fixes, sometimes
> to the architecture.
Which "fixes" are present in Win98 you can't download for free ?
Similarly with NT, perhaps you've heard of service packs ?
------------------------------
From: Terje Mathisen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc
Subject: Re: Ms employees begging for food
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 15:30:04 +0100
Les Mikesell wrote:
>
> "Terje Mathisen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > Or, it appears, certain end-user/developers. What you did was bind the
> > > software client/server connectivity to the logical packet routing (IPX)
> > > connectivity. This is essentially just what prevents Netware from
> > > dumping IPX and using IP to begin with.
> >
> > Absolutely, but it was still the correct decision, _at that point in
> > time_.
>
> Only if you think that bad design decisions are appropriate when
> supporting the correct one is slightly harder. It was a decision that
> even at the time clearly steered them toward irrelevance as soon
> as typical hardware had a few bytes more RAM available.
First of all, who is the 'them' in 'steered them toward' in the previous
sentence?
Second, I'd like know if there's anyone here who hasn't ever written any
tactical code, i.e. code to solve a problem _now_, as opposed to waiting
for a better solution to become available? :-)
(Remember, there was no tcpip stack on those Dos machines!)
Terje
--
- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Using self-discipline, see http://www.eiffel.com/discipline
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: 30 Oct 2000 14:36:08 GMT
Who's the one that is obsessed and angry? You are frothing :-). I only
mentioned this in passing when bringing up the kind of person you are in
response to the getting paid comment. You never did provide a reason why
your cheerleading is different from anybody others. You make baseless
attacks and don't like it when you are called on it. Tell me Ed, why
should anybody not believe you are petty, immature etc.. when your best
lines are grade school insults and claims of being paid because you don't
like the message?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roger Lindsj|)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux growth rate explosion!
Date: 30 Oct 2000 14:40:53 GMT
What applications do you need?
Roger Lindsjö
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (was: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split ...)
From: Chris Wenham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 14:42:25 GMT
>>>>> "letoured" == letoured <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Well you didn't get you idiot.
You left out the word "herpes".
> BTW, get into a vocabulary improvment so you don't look so stupid all the
> time.
BTW, get into proofreading so you don't look so stupid all the time.
Regards,
Chris Wenham
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft?
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 14:46:50 GMT
At this point I see no reason yo coninue with you.
First you claim:
"BESIDE, there has been some newpapers (NYT, wasn't it?) that listed
patched that would make 95 inoto 98, for FREE."
then, when I stated:
Ohhhh, So it takes NOTHINING but PATCHES to change 95 ot 98!!!! kind
proves you previous statement false!
you claimed
"No, it doesn't. You don't get a 98. You get a 95 with most of the bugs
fixed. But it's *not* the same."
Either the patches give you a 98 as you claimed in the first statement
or they don't as you claimed in the second. It is impossible for both to
be true. you have lied or you do not know what you are talking about.
What is it? is it lies of lack of knowage? I don't really care. It is
clear to me that you will say anything true or false. I simply do not
believe any thing you say at this point.
> > > BESIDE, there has been some newpapers (NYT, wasn't it?) that
listed
> > > patched that would make 95 inoto 98, for FREE.
> >
> > Ohhhh, So it takes NOTHINING but PATCHES to change 95 ot 98!!!! kind
> > proves you previous statement false!
>
> No, it doesn't.
> You don't get a 98. You get a 95 with most of the bugs fixed. But it's
*not*
> the same. At the time, you got the same functionality as 98. This is
> different now. I wasn't very clear, I'm afraid.
> Internet support, especially, has been vastly improved in 98.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 12:12:05 -0300
El sáb, 28 oct 2000, Brandon Van Every escribió:
>"Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Fri, 27 Oct 2000 22:47:03 GMT, Brandon Van Every
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> <and then depression set in....>
>> >
>> >I finished assessing Linux.
>> Really how long did you spend doing that ?
>
>About 8 hours of deja.com and current newsgroup research. I did Linux
>from 1993 to 1996 so I know what the environment is generally like.
When did you do that? Dejanews says the database before 1996 is not available.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Linux Experience
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 12:14:04 -0300
El sáb, 28 oct 2000, Tim Palmer escribió:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 09:23:56 GMT, Haoyu Meng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>Linux is not ready for the desktop. Functionality offered by KDE/GNOME is
>>>relatively imature and unstable, compared to Windows, especially Windows2000.
>>>GNOME and KDE crash way too often, is slow unless used under root account, and
>>
>> Not in my experience. Then again, neither kfm or sawmill are
>> at all required to run KDE or GNOME and get the full benefit
>> of them.
>>
>>>has almost no cross-application integration (ActiveX).
>>
>> Neither does Windows really. Typically ActiveX is merely used
>> to build the subcomponents of a particular super-application.
>> In general, the sort of vendorlock that Win32 tends to perpetuate
>> with it's file formats doesn't lend itself well to the collaboration
>> of many smaller tools.
>
>IE integraits real good with Outlook Express and Ofice. Does KDE intergrait
with Netscape? No.
Does wordpad integrate with notepad? Try to keep things consistent.
KFM's HTML component did integrate with KRN and KMail, if you care to compare
apples to some sort of fruits.
> Does VI intergrait with EMACS? No.
Does ultraedit integrate with notepad? No.
[snip things I couldn't even understand]
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Casper H.S. Dik - Network Security Engineer)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc
Subject: Re: Ms employees begging for food
Date: 30 Oct 2000 14:57:02 GMT
[[ PLEASE DON'T SEND ME EMAIL COPIES OF POSTINGS ]]
Terje Mathisen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>I'm willing to bet that you'll discover that CSMA/CD is perfectly
>willing to work with 30-60% utilization, and for a simple streaming
>application using maximum size packets (1500+ bytes), you'll get up to
>90-99%.
It works even at utiltization over 30-60%. Pretty close to 100%
actually.
Casper
--
Expressed in this posting are my opinions. They are in no way related
to opinions held by my employer, Sun Microsystems.
Statements on Sun products included here are not gospel and may
be fiction rather than truth.
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 15:12:38 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>In <8thkg4$cle$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 10/29/00
> at 04:50 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen) said:
>
>>Go to deja.com/usenet and prove that the discussion was about overall system
>>performance and that you didn't start a tangental discussion which had no
>>bearing on the topic at hand.
>
>
>I have no idea what you are trying to say with this, but just a day ago you
>took the opposite position:
No he did not. Idiot.
>You're nothing but an asshole who needs some professional help.
Sore loser. Argument lost, lashes-out with insults.
------------------------------
From: "Eddie Dubourg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why should I keep advocating Linux?
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 15:16:23 -0000
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: I'll tell you what advocacy groups are good for Brandon.
:
: They will never sway enough public opinion to change
: anything and this is NOT what newsgroups are for.
:
: What they are for is to CONFIRM in your own mind
: your core philosophy's against those of others.
:
: To find the error in your own ways.
:
: And to weed out those philosophy's which are based
: in misconception.
:
I think everyone has their own reasons for being here.
Me, I administer NT boxes, Linux Boxes, Mac Boxes, a Netware Server, and a
W2K server. I'm here because sometimes the arguments are hilarious, but
mainly because in their determination to prove one system is better than
another system, people give incredibly brilliant tips which I can then use
on the various systems I use.
E
------------------------------
From: William Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why should I keep advocating Linux?
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 11:28:01 -0500
> So I guess I have to conclude that I'm not a Linvocate that plays by the
> Linux Advocacy rules (who made these rules anyhow?). Comments?
Hehe -
I came to this newsgroup looking for a Fontographer-like font editor for
linux - what I found is some refreshingly coherent discourse on this
industry - thank you people.
I agree with you spicerun - advocacy of anything can be an exasperating
use of one's time. I go through this with Mac people - god what a bunch
of fanatics they are. A rumor of anything new at a Macworld show is like
smuggled nachos at a Pritikin conference. But at least these people have
something solid to support. And increasingly, though I am quite new to
Linux, I am finding that it's advocacy is definitely worthwhile.
We have to look, however, at what it is that we are advocating is really
revolutionizing. I of course am impressed to hell by Linux's stability
and power. But it's real contribution to the computer industry lies in
the way it offers a viable alternative to the way software is written
and distributed. Taking the real creativity in this business out of the
hands of huge companies is extremely compelling. Not to mention it's
value to education. In addition to learning programming in a classroom,
students can participate in a real live development process, along with
just about anyone else in the world who has something to contribute.
Just my 2 cents. Thanks again people
Bill Olsen
------------------------------
From: "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 07:37:50 -0800
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Bruce Schuck wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Bruce Schuck wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Bruce Schuck wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No one could stop an OEM from selling a retail copy of Windows
Me.
> > But
> > > > it
> > > > > > would be a lot more expensive.
> > > > >
> > > > > Look, when the OS license cost more than the profit margin of a
PC,
> > > > > then DOUBLING the OS licence cost effectively forces the OEM to
raise
> > > > > prices.
> > > >
> > > > Yes. Discounts do allow companies to sell their products for less.
> > > > Sometimes.
> > > >
> > > > Sometimes they just pocket the difference as profit.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Regardless--PUNISHING a company for offering a competitor's product
> > > is OBSTRUCTION OF TRADE and it is illegal.
> >
> > You don't get it. "Punishing" would be if they told Dell they had to pay
> > more than retail for Windows Me and Office 2000 if they sold products
> > Microsoft didn't want them to.
> >
> > "Rewarding" is where Dell gets Windows Me and Office 2000 real, real
cheap
> > for doing what Microsoft wants.
>
> Since Microsoft doesn't require any other vendor to pay retail
> price, then that's not a discount.
By retail I meant the stand, no discount price. And lots of vendors pay that
price.
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 15:37:12 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>Ummm why don't you go to deja.com/usenet and prove this Ed. The whole
>>discussion was about the hardware caching and nothing more, any other
>>tangents were irrelevant. We weren't talking about a whole system and only
>>dishonest assholes that lost on that point tried to take it somewhere else.
>>Now weren't you going to put me in you're "twit filter" or are you lying
>>again?
>
>
>I decided to hang around and see how mad you get. Looking at your last message
>you are so angry that you can't see straight
You're the one who looks angry.
You're the one who is wrong.
You're the one making a total ass of himself on front of all readers
of this thread.
------------------------------
From: William Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Font Editor?
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 11:34:38 -0500
Does anyone here know of a font editor for Linux?
Would appreciate any info greatly - recently switched to Linux from Mac
and I have a huge font collection I would like to make available to
Linux - and to continue editing them.
------------------------------
From: "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 07:47:19 -0800
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Bruce Schuck wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Chad Myers wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Shannon Hendrix" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:8t2458$15a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > In article <WGgI5.32396$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > > > Otto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Linux does detect the memory correctly, although it uses only
the
> > first 64
> > > > > > MB of it until you change some configuration files. Chad
might've
> > meant
> > > > > > that. The only distro I've seen which detects and uses all of
the
> > memory was
> > > > > > Caldera 2.4.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is not true. Sigh...
> > > > >
> > > > > The problem is that when Linux is being loaded, a check was made,
> > > > > basically a BIOS call for memory (can't remember which one), and
it
> > > > > often returned 64M at the most. If you knew you had 128MB of RAM
then
> > > > > you added a boot parameter to Linux to tell it how much RAM you
had
> > > > > since your BIOS/motherboard combination couldn't get it right.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is a PC/BIOS bug, not a Linux bug.
> > > >
> > > > No, it's a linux bug. Windows detected it just fine.
> > >
> > > Can you even get Lose98 to INSTALL on 386 or 486 machine?
> > >
> > > A) yes, you can keep old hardware in production
> > > B) NO, YOU MUST THROW AWAY YOUR OLD MACHINES.
> >
> > I've run Windows NT Server on a 486 with no problem. I admit it wasn't
as fast
> > as I liked but it ran just fine.
>
> Tell us another lie.
I leave the lying (and threatening to kill) to ignorant Unix geeks like you.
------------------------------
From: "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM to BUY MICROSOFT!!!!
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 07:49:59 -0800
"2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Bruce Schuck wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Chad Myers wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Shannon Hendrix" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:8t2458$15a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > In article <WGgI5.32396$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > > > Otto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Linux does detect the memory correctly, although it uses only
the
> > first 64
> > > > > > MB of it until you change some configuration files. Chad
might've
> > meant
> > > > > > that. The only distro I've seen which detects and uses all of
the
> > memory was
> > > > > > Caldera 2.4.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is not true. Sigh...
> > > > >
> > > > > The problem is that when Linux is being loaded, a check was made,
> > > > > basically a BIOS call for memory (can't remember which one), and
it
> > > > > often returned 64M at the most. If you knew you had 128MB of RAM
then
> > > > > you added a boot parameter to Linux to tell it how much RAM you
had
> > > > > since your BIOS/motherboard combination couldn't get it right.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is a PC/BIOS bug, not a Linux bug.
> > > >
> > > > No, it's a linux bug. Windows detected it just fine.
> > >
> > > Can you even get Lose98 to INSTALL on 386 or 486 machine?
> > >
> > > A) yes, you can keep old hardware in production
> > > B) NO, YOU MUST THROW AWAY YOUR OLD MACHINES.
> >
> > I've run Windows NT Server a 486 with no problem. I admit it wasn't as
fast
> > as I liked but it ran just fine.
>
> Ypu don't say whoch one. 3.5.1 will go on a 486 (if you could be arsed
> with 300 floppies). I'd love to see NT4 on a 486 with ie5.
It was NT4. And NT4 installs just fine from a network folder. You don't need
floppies.
------------------------------
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux in approximately 5 years:
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 15:54:55 GMT
"Vann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skrev i meddelandet
news:6o4L5.10342$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <o13L5.15$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bennetts family"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "javaduke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> You're right. I remember Linus saying that, after the 2.4 kernel, there
> will be a jump right to kernel 3.0.
and judging by earlier history, that will take approximately 5 years ;)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Hullo, Claire, James? Here's another dork for you
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 15:53:58 GMT
On Mon, 30 Oct 2000 12:57:04 +0800, "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>Please. I used to use and advocate OS/2 since version OS/2 2.0 beta. OS/2
>was not destroyed by MS. It was destroyed by IBM.
I was a user since 1.0 EE when it came on 40 diskettes. Went up
through the ranks of 1.2 and 1.3 (Os/2 "lite") and so forth. While
IBM's inept marketing and stupid decision to be backward compatible
with Win3x (a better Windows than Windows), MS sucked them in and then
dropped the boom.
They claimed they were behind OS/2 100 percent with IBM and then when
IBM was in over their heads (which was most of the time) they bailed
out.
Ever wonder why there wasn't an HPFS to FAT converter program (a legal
one) early on?
MS owned a lot of the code in HPFS and wouldn't let IBM release such a
program.
So it was a combination effort that killed an excellent OS.
claire
>IBM failed to fix many of the problems that its very own users (including
>myself) identified. For example, the infamous SIQ problem (no, don't tell
>me that Warp 4 fixed it because it *did not*.)
>
>There are so many other examples as well. IBM gave up. MS pushed on.
>
>If you want to compete with MS, you need to be determined, aggressive, have
>good people talent, etc. Of course, today, many people hire lawyers since
>they can't complete with MS.
>
>Oh well.
>
>-Todd
>
>
>>
>> claire
>>
>>
>> On Sun, 29 Oct 2000 00:47:11 GMT, Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Windows is SOOOOO GOOOOD Claire_Lynn that
>> >they stole the whole W2K code base.
>> >
>> >It's good to the last byte.
>> >
>> >And it makes a wonderful communist operating system.
>> >
>> >
>> >Charlie
>> >
>> >
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >
>> >> I know that. No OS is immune and there will always be somebody who can
>> >> come up with a better mouse, despite state of the art mousetraps.
>> >>
>> >> claire
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 19:43:48 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On Sat, 28 Oct 2000 16:51:38 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>You post an entire YEARS worth of security problems with Windows.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>I post ONE WEEKS worth with Linux, and my list is still longer than
>> >> >>yours.
>> >> >
>> >> >If you were to subscribe to BugTraq for a period of time, you would
>> >> >quickly discover that Windows does not have significantly fewer
>> >> >security problems than Linux. To think otherwise is to stick one's
>> >> >head in the sand.
>>
>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
