Linux-Advocacy Digest #2, Volume #30 Thu, 2 Nov 00 09:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: More on Megashit security (Tom Wilson)
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! (Tom Wilson)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (gm)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft? ("JS/PL")
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. (2:1)
Re: Why Linux is great (Michael Szczuka)
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. (2:1)
Re: More on Megashit security (2:1)
Re: Why Linux is great (2:1)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Tom Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More on Megashit security
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 12:15:12 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> ... Bill isn't interested in hiring
> competant developers who actually know what the fuck they
> are doing...No...it's more important that they know
> how to write like this:
>
> goto FUCKED_UP_AGAIN_CRASH_NOW.
Personally, I blame their hungarian notation fetish for a lot of it.
------------------------------
From: Tom Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux growth rate explosion!
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 12:46:28 GMT
"Nils O. Selåsdal" wrote:
> > Do you have any idea how much damage an average user can cause
> > when they try to build a database app in days or weeks without
> > understanding database concepts? I don't think anyone wants to
> > encourage that.
> Then why isnt there such tool, for profesionals?
There are two
1. A Compiler
2. A Cranium
>
> > Why do you need an integrated package for that? Don't your standalone
> > tools work well enough? Why would you want your source control
> > tied to a single language, let alone a single vendor's platform?
> Ehh.. because its EASIER to youse, and you get more productive?
You also get uncorrectable memory leaks and other such nonsense from
the PROPRIETARY libraries these platforms link to.
The Microsoft Foundation Classes come to mind...
> And...
> i'd please like to access the public folders,address book,calendar on our
> Exchange server
> from my linux box...
> And a faster web browser.
> and some real filemanager(with Konquerer it helps but...)
I'll have to side with you there...
Particularly where the browser is concerned
Tom Wilson
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 14:52:37 +0200
"Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:bxbM5.268$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > I don't think so. X + Gnome/KDE are much more resource hungry in my
> > experiance than windows.
>
> That could be because you are trusting the numbers you see in Windows.
> Windows lies to you about your resources. Microsoft changed the way it
> counts "free memory" beginning with Win95, because Win95 itself consumed
> such a shocking amount. Each successive version of Windows gets worse.
> When you see:
Perhaps, I don't know anything about this, I do know that X +Gnome/KDE is
slower on lower system than window (98se) is.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 15:04:41 +0200
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3a014882$8$yrgbherq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:3a00b948$4$yrgbherq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> The Yorktown is a non-combat vessel. But it's irrelevant since the
> >fault
> >> >> was in the database software. The Database vendor even said that
the
> >> >> problem would have never happened if the navy had not been running a
> >beta
> >> >> version of their software.
> >>
> >> >I'm not familiar with the details of this case. Did NT crash or not?
If
> >so,
> >> >then surely you're not blaming an application for it. If the OS
crashes,
> >it
> >> >is the fault of the OS. A buggy application should have no effect on
the
> >OS,
> >> >beyond perhaps keeping it busier than it should.
> >>
> >>
> >> NT not only crashed, but Erik M$. Funkenbusch is such a complete
> >nincompoop
> >> that he thinks a guided missile cruiser is a "non-combat vessel."
>
> >No, the Yorktown was taken out of combat to be an experimental prototype.
> >While it's indeed a guided missle class (specifically Ticonderoga or
Aegis
> >class) cruiser, it's job is a non-combat one, since it is expected to
fail.
>
> Your really twisting what you don't know to prove your point. What you
really
> mean is that vessels in sea-trials are not combat ready. That is a given,
but
> you're asshole if you think that it will make me think you have any idea
of
> what you are talking about.
>
> Now tell us how the mighty M$ didn't design a system capable of recovering
> from this error? I mean I know that they have trained the world to recover
> from failure by rebooting, and all the dunces think its the way it suppose
to
> be, but do you guys really think, er, believe that is the best method
during
> combat?
I don't think that MS design the system.
They made NT, but the system that failed was the DB. And the reason it
failed was because the clients weren't built to handle "no-server" mode,
which is stupid in the army. where the server might be killed.
And I don't think MS designed the clients either.
------------------------------
From: gm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 13:18:55 GMT
On Wed, 01 Nov 2000 23:51:41 -0500, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>gm wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 29 Oct 2000 18:58:15 -0500, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >> If you think Microsft could sneak hidden TCP/IP traffic past all the
>> >> Microsoft haters masquerading as security experts you are dummer than a bag
>> >> of hammers.
>> >
>> >Then why did Microsoft suffer 3+ months of unauthorized access from Russia?
>>
>> MS did not sneak hidden TCP/IP traffic past the MS haters. TCP/IP
>> traffic was snuck past MS -- do you see the difference?
>
>Pretty funny, isn't it.
Not really. Nor is it surprising, but I think it has little to do with
Windows and much more to do with individuals. It could have
happened anywhere, as long as you have users who are willing
to run untested executables that (unknowingly) contain trojan code.
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,alt.linux.sucks
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 13:21:29 GMT
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> No, please read what I said.
> I didn't say that windows doesn't has
> problems/crash/incompatibilities/lockups and so on, what I said is that
> windows 2000 has by far less problems than NT.
Unfortunately, it still has many of the same problems.
Also, although it works better, it is an incredible
resource pig. You cannot run it satisfactorily on, say,
4-year-old equipment.
> FTP & Telnet are hard to find on a non 2000 windows machine, very easy if
> you've them.
Wrong. They are standard tools on any machine that's meant to be
networked. Also, the NT 4 versions of telnet and ftp are pretty
bad, in the sense that they don't match the UNIX standard, and are
slow. Don't know about 2000 -- have only used the ftp built into
Internet Excruciator.
> Scripting support? Vbscript, JScript, WSH, batch files (why doesn't they
> count?)
The first two are for browsers (although, HA HA, they do give you
and all your friends and enemies access to the operating system itself).
I haven't seen wsh, but I'd guess up front that it's a half-assed
implementation, unless a third-party wrote it. Batch files...
useful, but very very week.
> Automation? Scheduled tasks, you can get that in 95 if you install IE 4.
> In win2000 you get this as weel as AT, which is a cli tool that gives you
> even more power.
Again, nothing like cron.
> The lack of command line tools is not because most people like GUI much
> better.
Most people only know about the GUI. They never experience the command line.
But the command line is indispensable if you need to go deeper than the
typical user.
> Talk about bloatware.
I agree, a lot of this GUI stuff is bloatware, Gnome/KDE included.
However, in Linux you have a wide variety of window managers, including
some with fairly low overhead. With Windoze, you're stuck with one
window manager. Even in Win 3.1 you could at least find other choices
(from Norton, for example).
> If it's customization that you want, you can make windows look like anything
> that you want with a little work.
That's true if you load Active Desktop (more bloatware by far) or if
you use Win 2000. However, it seems like this customization is limited
to the client area of the windows, the colors of the non-client area, and
the fonts. Also, this customization is done via HTML with script embedded
in it, so it is powerful, but potentially dangerous.
The biggest impediment to the Windows GUI is that hardware abstraction
layer. A nice concept that hasn't worked out too well.
> If you don't know how to change the windows colors then you really need some
> lessons in windows.
True. It is easy to lambast features you've never used.
> Oh, really?
> The best GUI for linux that I've found was the one that came with Corel
> Linux 1.2, it was KDE, and felt very much like windows.
You mean it was slow and caused much disk thrashing?
> As for GUI consistency, it goes against OSS principals, isn't it?
> KDE, Gnome, Heliz, Enlightment, AfterStep - on the top of my head, GUI for
> linux.
> I can find you people that will swear in the names of either of them.
> How do you make them choose a standard?
> When programming for windows, I can make my own GUI, which is tiresome task
> most often, or can use windows own GUI, giving the user familiar feel.
> Pick up any programming book and read the part about UI, you will find
> consistency mentioned time and time again. OSS never head about it.
Wrongo jocko. You're making up some principles here. In any case, there
is such a thing as a foolish consistency. Consistency can cost speed,
and I think consistency is overrated, because the human is intelligent,
and quickly gets used to any inconsistency. What the human finds difficult
to get used to is slowness. To look at a file in Windoze (or in the Gnome
file manager), you have to click once for each subdirectory, and usually wait
at least 1/2 second for each one to pop up and position itself.
If you're a fast typist, and know where you are, you can type the
command "vi /dir1/dir2/dir3.../myfile.cpp" about as fast. And,
if you want to do that command again, with a GUI you have to go through
the same steps, if you haven't left the window open. With the command line,
you just hit an arrow a few times and press Enter. In any case, you
can optimize both methods by using OS tools such as shortcuts, scripts, etc.
Chris
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[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: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 08:27:44 -0500
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8trcci$7di$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > JS/PL wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Andy Newman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > In article <8tk12f$614$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Christopher Smith
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Which "fixes" are present in Win98 you can't download for free ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >Similarly with NT, perhaps you've heard of service packs ?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > You didn't get it did you. All versions of Win are fixes
> > > > > to the previous one. It's only recently with Win2K that
> > > > > they're getting the complete set of functions together in
> > > > > a package that's half-well implemented. It's taken long
> > > > > enough.
> > > >
> > > > Win2k isn't just a fix of NT4.
> > >
> > > True, this time they broke more than they fixed ;-)
> >
> > What are you talking about? What's broken? I've been using it since the
> > final betas and havent had a single system crash. What is broken in
> > Windows2000?
>
> My bank account after getting it?
Sorry about your luck. Try http://www.amway.com , they may be able to help.
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 15:41:00 +0000
"Colin R. Day" wrote:
>
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> >
> > Which will run a data center for at most, a few hours. What happens if an
> > earthquake hits, or a plane crashes into the data center, or any number of
> > other natural catastrophies that might occur to a single site.
> >
>
> Great. And what happens if a nuclear missile hits Redmond?
There's always hope...
-Ed
> Linux, on the other hand, you'd have to nuke half the planet.
>
> Colin Day
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Szczuka)
Subject: Re: Why Linux is great
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 13:37:05 GMT
On 01 Nov 2000 02:55:16 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
wrote:
>On Tue, 31 Oct 2000 23:57:37 GMT, George Richard Russell
>>Every few years, Unix gets another GUI. Its a shame the cli isn't
>>replaced / improved as often.
[...]
>There are reasons for the cli George, low overhead making the remote
>admin of Unix easy, is one.
Full agreement here.
>Your lovely high overhead GUI's will always be less effective that way, (in
>os's where remote admin is possible at all, this naturally includes any Windows
>os except NT and Win2k, and the Mac) until we are all using 2000mhz cpus and
>have fibre everywhere.
I'd even like to go a little bit further here:
I think for many tasks a GUI will _always_ be less effective than a CLI.
And that includes whatever speed you might imagine.
GUIs handle complexity - they don't make it go away (although they tend
to take it away from the user). However they add layers of management to
the complexity and that might make it harder to effectively deal with a
problem.
Guess I should be reading less Neal Stephenson ...
-msz
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 15:44:30 +0000
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > microsoft.com alone transfers 6 Terrabytes of data day. Executes
> > millions
> > > > of queries, and creates dynamic content by the 100's of millions. I'm
> > > > sorry, but a mainframe can't deal with that kind of data throughput on a
> > > > single machine.
> > > >
> > > > Even if it could, you're putting all your eggs in one basket. What
> > happens
> > > > if you have a power outage,
> > >
> > > The same way financial businesses do: a HUGE lead-acid battery (often
> > > consisting of dozens of car batteries) as battery backup AND a big old
> > > diesel-engine-powered generator activated by the battery backup.
> >
> > Which will run a data center for at most, a few hours.
>
> What part of diesel-engine-powered generator do you not understand?
>
> Hey, shit-for brains....the fuel-tank CAN be topped off without shutting
> the thing down.
No: the generator is run on windows. Therefore, even to do the most
trivial change (such as adding fuel) the thing has to be stopped and
started. The only way around this is to pile on resources---ie have a
10,000 gallon fuel tank and 2 generators, so that one can run when the
other is stopped to add fuel.
-Ed
> > What happens if an
> > earthquake hits, or a plane crashes into the data center, or any number of
> > other natural catastrophies that might occur to a single site.
>
> Who ever said the redundant system is on the same site?
>
> You really are a dipshit, you know that?
>
> >
> > > > a failed router,
> > >
> > > simple redundancy.
> >
> > Not so simple, especially if it's the main trunk that dies. A few years
> > back, some bums were lighting fires under a bridge to keep warm and cut off
> > the entire internet access to the state of MN due to heat melting the
> > fiber-optic lines.
> >
> > > > or any number of other failures
> > > > that can cause a localized failure.
> > >
> > > simple redundancy
> >
> > Simple redundancy doesn't solve the problem of a localized failure (plane
> > crash, earthquake, etc..).
> >
> > > > Even if you have redundancy in the
> > > > mainframe, it might not be enough. If you need 24x7, you need
> > distributed
> > > > servers with load balancing run across multiple data centers.
> > >
> > > simple redundancy
> >
> > What exactly are you answering here?
>
> Machine A meet your twin Machine B.
>
> Complicated, isn't it.
>
> >
> > > > On top of that, Mainframes don't run as a single fast server. An IBM
> > > > mainframe typically runs as something like 500 seperate servers
> > virtually.
> > > > That means no single subsystem can gain anywhere near the kind of
> > > > performance the full machine is capable of.
> > >
> > > But much of the load is off-loaded onto smart disk-cabinets like EMC.
> >
> > Oh yes, the disk cabinets are capable of executing a SQL query. Right.
>
> Actually, they are quite intelligent.
>
> They understand the database formats. They can do data transfers between
> databases.
> They understand multiple filesystem formats. IF you have an IBM mainframe,
> and a Sun, and an HP, and a Losedows NT box all sharing parts of the same
> EMC box...the EMC box itself can do file transfers between the various
> disks.
>
> >
> > > > A single IBM mainframe costs millions of dollars. That's not counting
> > the
> > > > proprietary maintenance agreements you need to sign, and the cost of the
> > > > periphials. You have to add disk arrays, network arrays, etc.. And
> > they
> > > > cost a pretty penny. Microsofts tpc cost is much much lower than a
> > typical
> > > > IBM mainframe, which tells me that mainframes aren't as cheap as you
> > claim.
> > >
> > > You're fucking on drugs, you know?
> > >
> > > It takes a couple THOUSAND NT-machines to imitate an IBM mainframe.
> > >
> > > Not to mention the administrative headings of that fucking mess.
> >
> > Not if they're 32 processor boxes. It would only take 15 or so to equal the
> > power of that mainframe.
>
> --
> 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.
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More on Megashit security
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 15:47:11 +0000
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Jacques Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Actually...I find that M$ deliberately cripples parts of
> > its software. On comp.windows.misc a chap was asking how
> > to get help on the DOS commands under Win95 -- HELP COPY
> > doesn't work as it did under DOS6 and earlier.
>
> Copy /?
>
> > I was
> > wondering why DOS7 could see my CD-ROM only _after_ I
> > fired up the GUI. Simple: the relevant lines in
> > AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS have been _commented out_
> > by Win95 during its installation. Oh, I can think of
> > reasons all right, but they are all lame. The true
> > reason, it seems to me is the old "DOS ain't done
> > until Lotus won't run".
>
> No, the reason is that real-mode CD-ROM drivers often interfered with the 32
> bit buffered driver, causing the CD to either not be detected under Windows,
> or causing the CD-ROM to run in "compatibility mode", which is as much as
> 10x slower. It depended on the real-mode driver though. Some did not not
> interfere, some did. MS made the assumption that most people will only use
> the CD-ROM in windows, and if they want to use DOS, they'll use the "Boot to
> MS-DOS" option which will install the cd-rom driver.
When win95 installs itself it comments out the CD lines. therefore, if
you boot to dos the CD rom won't work (this is personal experience). I't
is trivial to uncomment the lines or to add a config.sys menu.
-Ed
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux is great
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 16:00:15 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [snip]
> > I've memorized the syntax. I've found I use sed so much, I know it
> > pretty well now. It is extremely useful and powerful once you learn
> it.
> > Besides, it's nice having a language that auto-obfuscates.
>
> My last job was decommissioning UNIX systems and porting DBMS's to MSFT
> Access. "sed" was the tool of choice to generate importable MSFT quoted
> comma-separated fields from Informix pipe-separated export files.
After I learned sed, I wondered how I ever lived without it.
-Ed
>
> In my current job, I'm still using "sed", but this time it's to convert
> MSFT CSV export files into something I can load into MySQL for serving
> up webpages with PHP.
>
> It doesn't seem to matter which way the OS pendulum swings with the
> PHB's, I still keep getting to use my favorite OS to do the same things
> with the same tools over and over again. Maybe next week the
> powers-that-be might decide on using an IIS webserver; and it'll get
> populated using Linux, not that anyone will care or know.
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
Konrad Zuse should recognised. He built the first | Edward Rosten
binary digital computer (Z1, with floating point) the | Engineer
first general purpose computer (the Z3) and the first | u98ejr@
commercial one (Z4). | eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
