Linux-Advocacy Digest #950, Volume #29 Mon, 30 Oct 00 21:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Steve Mading)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Steve Mading)
Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Help for new Linux users (JoeX1029)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Steve Mading)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Steve Mading)
Re: Why should I keep advocating Linux? ("Weevil")
Re: I fixed it (was:Can Linux cut and paste?) ("mmnnoo")
Re: Astroturfing ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Astroturfing ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Astroturfing ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The BEST ADVICE GIVEN. (Bob Hauck)
Newbie(?) Linux Question.... (Hondo)
Certification (VanPopering)
Re: Help for new Linux users ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: 31 Oct 2000 00:59:56 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:8tcsku$8g4
:> The distinction between server OSes and workstation OSes is a
:> made-up one. It's a distinction that only MS has. For everyone
:> else, they are the same OS - the only difference is the hardware
:> typically used for the task. For example, the little blue-toaster
:> SGI o2 (a workstation) runs Irix 6.5. So does a big parallel
:> processor SGI server.
: It's a license issue, not a technical one. Many companies, Including AT&T,
: SCO, Sun, etc.. have had "desktop" licenses and "server" licenses.
But Chad was implicitly using the difference between server and client
markets as an excuse for the difference between Windows flavors (for
example, Win98 vs NT) In the Unix world, the differences you speak of are
about licensing only - not a technical difference in the OS archetectures.
------------------------------
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: 31 Oct 2000 00:56:37 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy 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?
Who cares? We were talking about how hard it is to program for it.
If the program has already been developed by someone else and you are
merely a user of it, then who cares if that programmer had to do the
screen stuff and the postscript stuff seperately? This ease-of-use
argument only matters for programmers. The users don't see the
difference between the old and the new techniques.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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 19:33:48 -0500
Bruce Schuck wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Bruce Schuck wrote:
> > >
> > > "John Fereira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:8tk5ji$rf6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > In article <rGPK5.116711$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bruce Schuck"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >> Bruce Schuck wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > "Matt Kennel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> message
> > > > >> >
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >> > > :Look at Oracle. You pay for the software by the mhz of the
> chip
> > > you
> > > > >run
> > > > >> > it
> > > > >> > > :on .... as if that was any of their f**king business.
> > > > >> > > :
> > > > >> > > :Upgrade the processor and pay more money!
> > > > >> > > :
> > > > >> > > :Talk about extortion.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Why? I see no relation.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > I guess you are blind.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > > The problem with Microsoft's business practices is that they
> were
> > > > >> > intentionally
> > > > >> > > designed to thwart agreements between the Microsoft client and
> some
> > > > >other
> > > > >> > > third software maker by means other than offering a superior
> > > product.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > They were designed to strongly encourage companies that sold
> hardware
> > > to
> > > > >> > sell only Microsoft software in the same way GM, Ford, and
> Chrysler
> > > > >strongly
> > > > >> > encouraged franchisees to only sell cars made by the company that
> > > sold
> > > > >them
> > > > >> ^^^^^^^^^^
> > > > >> > the franchise.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Note the PAST TENSE, as this is *ILLEGAL*.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> A sizeable portion of auto-dealers, IN AND AROUND DETROIT--RIGHT
> UNDER
> > > > >> THE AUTO-EXEC's NOSES sell cars and trucks from multiple
> > > manufacturers...
> > > > >
> > > > >A sizeable portion? Are you trying to tell me dealers sell both Ford
> and
> > > GM
> > > > >and Chrysler cars?
> > > > >
> > > > >Never seen it.
> > > > >
> > > > >Or are you talking Ford/VW and GM/Volvo.
> > > > >
> > > > >That I've seen. And I've seen Auto Malls where multiple separate
> dealers
> > > > >sell cars.
> > > >
> > > > Are you sure they're separate? Out in the south SF bay area there is
> a
> > > > company called the "Lucas Dealership Group". It's one company that
> owns
> > > > mulitple dealerships that include almost all of the major domestic and
> > > > foreign models. I've seen the same thing in several other places.
> Each
> > > > dealership might be limited to one or two manufacturers but they're
> all
> > > owned
> > > > by the same company.
> > >
> > > Sounds like a way around the Big 3's attempt to keep one dealer from
> selling
> > > cars from multiple manufacturers.
> > >
> > > I found this link
> > > http://www.openhere.com/shop1/automotive/dealers/dealership-groups/.
> > >
> > > It seems dealership groups are just groups of companies -- each company
> > > having a dealership for one brand of car.
> > >
> > > I think Aaron is running a con when he says Dealerships can offer
> different
> > > brands from the Big 3.
> >
> > Come to Detroit....and LOOK.
>
> Post a URL. Then I'll look. You've lost. Admit it.
why would I admit that you're lying
> Quit whining.
Define whining in a way OTHER than "contradicing you"
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029)
Subject: Re: Help for new Linux users
Date: 31 Oct 2000 01:02:46 GMT
>What I trying to say is that people needs to realize that Linux is UNIX and
>NOT Windows.
<snip>
>Most users could benefit from reading a Linux book BEFORE venturing into
>Linux lands. There a multiple exellent books available that would be
>beneficial for the 'new' Linux user.
Speaking of reading books, you too could beneifit from the reading of a good
book. GNU/Linux is not UNIX nor will it ever be UNIX. Calling GNU/Linux UNIX
is not the biggest mistake it does none the less create confusion and can
result in flame wars.
------------------------------
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: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:08:37 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Weevil in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Weevil in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>> >T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> [...]
>> >Maybe, but I don't feel confused. :)
>> >
>> >When Win95 was launched, most people had never even heard of the
>internet,
>> >and the WWW was in its infancy.
>>
>> Thus, the point. The hype which surrounded the release of Win95 would
>> be as convincing today of the supremacy of the solution as the original
>> PlayStation, for all practical purposes. Win95 is only perceived to
>> have been in any way a motivating facto in putting Win95 on everyone's
>> desktop because the WWW happened, immediately after that. You see how
>> you can be mistaken, and yet not confused?
>
>Certainly. But that turns out not to be the case. No statistical analysis
>is necessary. You only need to understand that advertising works, and MS
>put on an advertising blitz for Win95 like the computer industry had never
>seen (except for those cool Macintosh Super Bowl commercials).
Without statistical analysis, and a more rigorous definition of
concepts, it is merely a presumption that "advertising works" in the way
you obviously mean. Sorry, I know it sounds like I'm being
argumentative, but that's because I am. :-)
>This is the way the world works. It is why Super Bowl commercials cost
>magnitudes more than commercials for an afternoon game show. If the world
>didn't work that way, advertisers wouldn't be lining up to pay hundreds of
>thousands for 30 seconds during a football game.
Let's just say that the only presumption I can make is that companies
that can afford to buy Super Bowl ad time are the ones which will see an
identifiable bump in sales. Yes, there is a correlation. But saying
that people use products because they see them on TV, while certainly a
valid perception, can't be presumed to be the cause of any particular
market activity, unless you have done some specific statistical analysis
with rigorous and pre-assigned definitions. I just wanted to point out
that when I say I'm not making any assumptions, I'm serious. :-)
>You are welcome to argue the point all you like, of course, but you'll just
>be wrong over and over. :)
Alas, why am I always wrong, but everyone else is only mistaken?
>> >I got a personal connection to the net in
>> >1994, but it was through a shell account using a plain text comm program.
>>
>> I first connected to the Internet through MILNET, but that was a whole
>> different thing, back before DNS was a user interface type of system,
>> and most of the thing was still mini-computers. Then I figured out the
>> difference between X.25 and Internet (no "the", back then) playing with
>> CompuServe dial-up in 1992.
>
>CompuServe was unrelated to the Internet.
In many different ways, yes, it was. In many other ways, it wasn't.
:-)
>> And yet, it was because of the Internet, not Win95, that people were
>> buying computers. Isn't that odd?
>
>It was both, of course. MS's massive advertising campaign, and the
>Internet's word-of-mouth popularity.
How can you, who seems quite aware of the extent of Microsoft's
shenanigans, possibly attribute to a "massive advertising campaign" what
can more easily be accounted for by anti-competitive exclusionary
preload contracts?
[...]
>Not at all. Market reaction to Microsoft's media blitz only lasted slightly
>longer than the blitz lasted. They only did it for a few months, after all.
>Their advertising resulted in a spike in the number of new computer buyers.
You mean the number of new Windows buyers. :-)
>I don't have to see numbers to know this. The same thing would happen no
>matter who spent the millions for the advertising. It's pretty much a law
>of nature. :)
So it would appear. Assumptions look that way, a lot, as well. ;-)
--
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: 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: 31 Oct 2000 01:04:37 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Relax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "2:1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:> [x86 fairly slow context switching]
:> (another reason why W2K can't make a
:> great server--poor hardware)
:>, whereas (again, IIRC) SPARCS are much
:> faster.
: Apparently, people testing database speed found otherwise. Currently, the
: fastest 64 CPU, $48M SPARC based computer holds the 9th rank while an Intel
: based computer, for 1/4 of that price, goes more than three times faster.
: Incidentally, Intel based computers running Windows 2000 currently hold the
: top four positions. Even if the benchmark is crap etc etc, CPU context
: switch doesn't seems to have such a dramatic effect on final server
: performances.
Unless they've drastically changed their model in W2K from WinNT,
Most of the windows server type programs (like webservers) don't
actually operate by forking processes, but instead they just fork
threads. Threads have less context to switch (the runtime stuff
has to switch, but the memory space doesn't change). So without
knowing exactly what it was that you are talking about here, we
can't tell whether the benchmark in question involved lots of
context switching. Windows context switching sucked, and so MS
tried to avoid designs that involve lots of small server processes
like Unix has.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: 31 Oct 2000 01:06:30 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: If you have 10,000 users on at once context switch speed becomes one of
: the most importent things.
Do you seriously believe those 10,000 users are actually running
seperate processes on the Windows machine? Having a server process
do things *for* them by proxy doesn't count as having 10,000 users
on the machine at once.
------------------------------
From: "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why should I keep advocating Linux?
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 19:21:14 -0600
Eddie Dubourg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8tk3aq$au7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "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
I started reading this group (COLA) a couple of weeks ago in hopes of making
a decision on what distribution to upgrade to. I'm using RedHat 6.1 right
now, and I thought I'd give one of the others a try. I thought this would
be a good place to look.
Ha.
I was shocked to find that this group is utterly infested with Windows fans
whose only purpose seems to be to bash Linux, no matter what. They also
spend a lot of time insulting Linux advocates.
It turns out that this is a one-way street. I checked out
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy and the only windows bashing I saw there was
from cross-posted articles. No articles that were confined to COM-WA
contained any Windows bashing. There *are*, however, quite a number of
COLA-only threads, started by Windows fans, that do nothing but bash Linux.
In other words, some Windows users, for whatever reason, camp out in COLA
and spend hours and hours bashing Linux and insulting its users. Maybe they
do it in macintosh and os2 groups, too. Haven't looked in there.
What this says about hard-core Windows fanatics, I will leave to the reader
to determine.
jwb
PS: I finally decided on my own to get the first distribution I saw with
the 2.4 kernel. That turned out to be Caldera's "Technology Preview"
release. 2.4 kernel, KDE 2.0, XFree86 4.0.1. I'll install it some time
this week, but I'll probably keep reading COLA. Some of it is entertaining,
some informative. Most of it is bullshit, of course, but most of everything
is bullshit.
------------------------------
From: "mmnnoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I fixed it (was:Can Linux cut and paste?)
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 01:25:26 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> The problem turned out to have 2 causes.
>
> 1. Although 3 button mouse was selected in XF86Setup, Emulate 3
> buttons was not. Changing and applying it partially fixed the problem.
<snip>
Watch it, you're bordering on helpful.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:26:44 -0500
In <8tk10o$ib4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 10/30/00
at 02:36 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen) said:
>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?
No I'm not frothing at all. I just say what I mean and I mean what I say --
You're a complete asshole. I could use other words, but there is nothing else
in the English language that quite means the same thing when one is trying to
break through to a moron who refuses to listen to reason. The other problem
is that you're just like the other asshole who chimed in. You think direct,
accurate and concise words that point to your personality defects show anger
-- when in fact it only means I can express the reality here. Even though you
are too dense to understand it.
I didn't expound on your asinine cheerleading whine, because its the only
thing you can point to that even resembles cheerleading (and then its only in
your mind). It was close to year ago, and not a cheer. It was a salient point
that ou just happen to not like, because it made the little game you were
playing essentially moot. I also mentioned this before -- but you are too hot
headed to read or perhaps your pea brain just didn't get it.
The rest of your stuff is simply bullshit and you know it -- or if not, then
you have a genetic defect. Now, I think the Boys section is in another
newsgroup. You and the other fool should go there and play. When you get a
full set of working brains and stop carrying grudges around, comeback.
===========================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 19:53:11 -0500
chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>[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.
Listen up asshole; he either changed his point or he can't write clearly.
>>You're nothing but an asshole who needs some professional help.
>Sore loser. Argument lost, lashes-out with insults.
I'm not sore at all and I didn't lose anything. This jackass is complaining
that I interfered with his point by enlarging the argument -- and he has been
whining about it for close to year now. I dropped it, he keeps bring it up --
and I'm tired of assholes like you and he, who want to whine and whine without
having anything of substance to say. Now its time to put in the twit filter.
--
===========================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 20:03:44 -0500
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 10/30/00
at 03:37 PM, chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>[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.
Really. I repeat, he is the asshole who keeps bringing up the same point time
after time after time, in conversation with other people -- now like or not,
what is going on here is that Jason is not a rational mind at work -- he is
petty little asshole out to get even because he has a grudge.
You are also stupid, since you mis-interpret direct, accurate and concise
words as anger. Furthermore I could care less what you wintrolls think, and
the fact that have assumed that I do, also points to your stupidity -- again.
Now I think you and Jason should take you whining elsewhere, since I don't
have anymore time to play with adolescent's in arrested development.
--
===========================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The BEST ADVICE GIVEN.
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 01:43:43 GMT
On Sun, 29 Oct 2000 22:10:16 -0800, Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:5e7L5.12291$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> What does open source have to do with this capability? Rename the
>> original, replace it with a trojan of the same name that does some
>> dirty deed, then runs the original and you are all set.
>The difference is that the functionality is much, much harder to duplicate
>if you don't have the source.
I think you need to re-read what Les wrote. Your trojan does the dirty
deed, then *runs the original binary*. You do not need to duplicate
the original functionality.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: Hondo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Newbie(?) Linux Question....
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 19:49:34 -0600
I question my status as newbie since I don't even have Linux yet but
am seriously considering a change.
I've made the progression (regression?) through Windows 3.11, 95, 98,
Me and am fed up with MS Crashware.
My question is this. I need suggestions on which commercial Linux
version would be best suited for learning the OS? I just use my
computer at home for the entertainment value. I derive my
entertainment from researching on the web, email, mp3's and the most
important value comes from learning new computer skills. I'm looking
at either Linux Mandrake or Corel Linux as a starting point. Any
suggestions would be most helpful.
Ken McFelea
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: VanPopering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Certification
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 01:51:58 GMT
Which Linux certification is better?
Sair or LPI?
Im kind of leaning toward LPI. Their book got far better reviews than the Sair books
and it seems less
"comercialized". I dont know - I'm asking you.
-David
______________________________________________________________________
David van Popering An analysis of the hacker culture reveals
[EMAIL PROTECTED] it as a 'gift culture' in which participants
Running Linux compete for prestige by giving time, energy,
Slackware & Debian and creativity away -Eric S. Raymond
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Help for new Linux users
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 01:49:53 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JoeX1029) wrote:
[snip]
> GNU/Linux is not UNIX nor will it ever be UNIX. Calling GNU/Linux
UNIX
> is not the biggest mistake it does none the less create confusion and
can
> result in flame wars.
>
You should maybe recommend that Scott McNealy (Sun Microsystems) brush
up on his reading as well, since he just recently referred to Linux as
"just another flavour of UNIX" in one of his latest public appearances.
http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2616416,00.html
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
