Linux-Advocacy Digest #6, Volume #30 Thu, 2 Nov 00 15:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. ("Chad Mulligan")
Re: $1,000 per copy for Windows. ("Chad Mulligan")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: so REALLY, what's the matter with Microsoft? (mlw)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Chad Mulligan")
Re: which distribution is best??? (Frank. N. Puppenstein)
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Why Red Hat is as bad as Microsoft (Roberto Alsina)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply-To: "Chad Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Chad Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 18:46:47 GMT
Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:W07M5.12638$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Chad Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:Si5M5.17296$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > >
> > > No new software installed? No IE update? What was the machine
> > > doing. The one I posted was a busy webserver. Before sp6a I
> > > couldn't keep an NT box running more than a month or so at a time
> > > even when I wasn't forced to reboot for some simple change.
> > >
> >
> > This was a server running NTLM, IIS and it sat and span on it's own.
Even
> > though many software installs request a restart most often they will run
> > fine without it. Being a server it didn't need IE updated. IIS Can be
> > restarted without stopping the system. As a newbie on NT Server in 1995
I
> > restarted often, once I started to understand the system, restarts
become
> > less and less often.
>
> You were right to reboot at the first hint of trouble back then. Before
> service pack 3 NT was so unstable as to be mostly unusable. It has
> gotten better to the point that after sp6 even I have to admit that it
> isn't likely to crash unexpectedly any more unless triggered by hardware
> problems. But how much trouble have people had to deal with to
> get to that point? And it is still annoying to have to reboot just to
> change a machine's name.
>
Back then it was 3.51. The amount of trouble referred to is, IMO part of
the learning curve needed with any OS. Many of the restarts are
precautionary rather than necessary. Learning somethng new isn't much
trouble for me and I tend to experiment on testing systems then implement
the changes that both work and are beneficial in a group on the production
systems.
Just a question, why is changing a systems name so important to you?
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Chad Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Chad Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: $1,000 per copy for Windows.
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2000 18:51:59 GMT
Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:vq6M5.12633$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Chad Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:VY%L5.17040$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > >
> > > Read the question - it shouldn't be a problem replacing *SOME* servers
> on
> > an
> > > NT network with Win2K. W2K works fine (by all accounts - I have not
> tried
> > > it) with W2K, but how well do W2K servers co-operate with NT4 servers,
> or
> > > Unix servers, and with different clients (w2k, Win9x, NT4, unix)?
> > >
> >
> > Fairly seamlessly. They are backwards compatible. NT4 workstations log
> in
> > fine. The only issue I had is the domain controllers need to be
upgraded
> > first.
>
> Which means you have to pay for client licenses for everything
> that authenticates against them, a change in policy from NT
> pricing. And if you were using the samba NT domain controller
> emulation, as you might expect, win2k clients are incompatible.
That is only because Samba doesn't support true NTLM Authentication. The
W2K clients, with some minor registry changes, can be configured to
authenticate to Samba. But you are right that they won't do it out of the
box.
>
> Les Mikesell
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[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 12:53:58 -0600
"Perry Pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Wed, 1 Nov 2000 23:28:26 -0600,
> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:3a00b5cf$3$yrgbherq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >Look, NT was as much at fault in the yorktown as the OS that was used
in
> >the
> >> >Arianne 5 was responsible for it's crash.
> >>
> >> REALLY! I'm sure this is going to be good --- And the reason the
database
> >> kept the crew from restarting NT and get underway was?
> >
> >Can't use your brain can you? Once the tech entered the data into the
> >database, applications all over the ship started crashing as they
performed
> >illegal calculations. When the applications were restarted, the first
thing
> >they do is read the data out of the database, causing it to crash again.
> >The only way to fix the problem is to fix the database, and without the
> >application to enter the data into, it has to be done by hand.
> >
>
> Get your facts straight. There were multiple incidents on the Yorktown
>
> http://www.gcn.com/archives/gcn/1998/july13/cov2.htm
Get yours straight. I have multiple sources which contradict this news
article in many places. You have one source, which doesn't have any
legitimacy.
------------------------------
From: mlw <[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, 02 Nov 2000 13:54:18 -0500
JS/PL wrote:
>
> "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?
>
> >
> > > Windows.Net (Whistler) due out in the spring isn't a fix for WinME or
> Win9x.
> > > So you are wrong. All versions of Windows aren't fixes to the previous
> one,
> >
> > No, but often the only fix to a Windows problem is to purchase an
> > upgrade to a new version.
>
> Give an example of a fix that was only available by purchasing an upgrade,
> c'mon back up you fud with a fact.
>
http://support.microsoft.com/support/kb/articles/Q175/6/29.ASP
Note that the downloadable fixes are not regression tested, and are
dated 1998, and the fixes do not apply to Windows 95, only SR2 and
higher.
The only "tested" fix is to purchase Windows 98
> >
> > --
> > http://www.mohawksoft.com
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: 2 Nov 2000 19:52:15 +0100
In article <39ff4414$0$26259$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Relax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Well, that's a matter of preference. Dumb terminals are an heritage of the
>past. It seems that the current landscape is HTML/XML based, no?
I normally throw such garbage away instantly.
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
sign the Linux Driver Petiton: http://www.libranet.com/petition.html
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Chad Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Chad Mulligan" <[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 19:03:23 GMT
Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> 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.
>
HUH! I'm running it quite efficently right now on a four year old Compaq
Deskpro. BTW, please elaborate on which problems and your resource
problems. What are you trying to run it on a 386?
> > 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.
>
First Vbscript and Jscript aren't just for browsers, those scripts can be
executed by an Administrator to reconfigure systems remotely. Dos batch
files are weak but NT .CMD files can be fairly complex. The writer left out
PERL.
> > 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: Frank. N. Puppenstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: which distribution is best???
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 12:05:52 -0800
Alan Shiers wrote:
> Hi there:
> I'm am in the process of getting familiar with a distribution of
> Linux from Corel. While it is my understanding that Linux itself is
> regarded as one of the most stable of OS's, I am having a particularly
> difficult time liking this particular distribution of it. No matter how
> hard I try, the installation of software is near impossible. There
> doesn't seem to be a standard way to install new software! So far I've
> encountered three file types: *.sh, *.bin, *.deb. Lord knows how many
> others there are. Compared to installing software in Windows, Microsoft
> definitely has this procedure sewn up real pretty. Just one file type:
> *.exe
> Double click on it and it runs a setup wizard.
> Not the case with Corel Linux!
> I've tried to install the JDK1.3 from Sun, Forte developers IDE from
> Sun, WordPerfect from Corel, PKZip from PKWare, all with a different
> file type and instructions as to how to install, none of which work, at
> least, not with Corel Linux.
>
> Now, all this frustration leads me to these questions...are all
> distributions of Linux in the same boat? Is everyone else having the
> same difficulties I am having with Corel Linux?
> Does anyone out there have experience with working with other differing
> distributions and have found one particular distribution better than the
> others, particularly in the area of consistant reliability of software
> installation?
>
> Regards,
>
> Alan
>
>
>
uSE SuSE. Take it from a fellow newbie ho has tried out a couple distros.
SuSE is pretty easy to install (uses RPMs). Its a solid distro.
--
"Poof. You're a puppeteer."
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 16:25:44 -0300
El mié, 01 nov 2000, Ayende Rahien escribió:
>"Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8tqi24$amr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:8tql1c$rqu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >
>> > "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > 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?
>> > > Linux, on the other hand, you'd have to nuke half the planet.
>> >
>> > I don't think so, all you need to do is to kill one man, Linus, and then
>> the
>> > linux compunity is going to be:
>> > A> In shock
>> > B> Un-unified.
>> >
>> > Very soon there will be no official kernel, no one with the autority to
>> > release it, Linux will split up to various groups which will be totally
>> > incompatible. Reasonable people will move to BSD.
>> >
>> > (Yes, that is the worst case scenario, but a lot of people has already
>> > expressed worry about Linus being the center on Linux.)
>>
>> I think you'd probably have to knock off a few of the other maintainers
>like
>> Alan Cox to get that sort of reaction.
>>
>> For the zealots, a quick visit to kt.linxcare.com to determine who the
>most
>> voluminous posters to the kernel mailing list are should aid you in
>> assembling a suitable hit list[1].
>
>Okay, didn't check, just in case something would happen to them and the
>finger would be pointed at me.
>But still, you don't have to kill nearly as many people to kill linux as
>you've to kill windows.
>(You've to nuke more than just Redmond for this, you've to nuke every
>Microsoft <nation> in the world, as they have the localized source for MS
>prodcuts.)
They have the sources, but they don't have anyone who understands it.
If having the source is all that mattered, you would have to destroy every city
where a sunsite or kernel.org mirror is, and that's quite a bit more than the
ones where MS has stored the sources.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
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: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 16:29:07 -0300
El mié, 01 nov 2000, Relax escribió:
>"Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:00110109511200.06904@pc03...
>> El mié, 01 nov 2000, Relax escribió:
>>
>> >One thing is for sure, there is no such things as asychronous I/O for
>> >application use in Unix as of today and threads are still an application
>> >thing in most implementations (i.e. the OS's scheduler has no clue about
>> >them). This is why this particular database application had to resort to
>> >tricks to simulate the functionality it needs, some degree of parallel
>I/O.
>> >Also, I suspect that other server apps do the same kind of tricks.
>>
>> You mean, today as in, any day since 1997? Then you are wrong.
>
>Oh well. Solaris and Mach-based kernels are not all of Unix.
Nor are they the only unixish kernels where threads are supported in that
fashion.
> Beside that, NT 3.1 was released in 1993 so four years is a long time for
(some) Unix to >catch up with Windows NT on threading stuff (I don't believe
any really did, >actually),
You should check when Solaris introduced threads (not posix threads). You might
be surprised.
Feel free to believe whatever you want.
> and there is still a long way to go on several other aspects.
Such as? Just curious.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Red Hat is as bad as Microsoft
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2000 16:31:53 -0300
El mié, 01 nov 2000, . escribió:
>Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Since I had not mentioned headers, and I was replying to something that
didn't >> say headers, how the fuck is one supposed to guess you actually mean
HEADERS, >> when saying KERNEL? If you are too stupid to write coherently,
spare the world >> your idiocy.
>
>Because I said "headers" in my first post in this thread on the subject. I
>suspected that context would last, but I guess I underestimated you.
Perhaps you should recheck the thread. The first mention to "mandrake is not
linux" came from you and contained zero instances of the word "headers".
Read it, see what a stupid fuck you are, then come back.
I'm not going to bother replying to any more crap from such a prick.
Welcome to my killfile, you are the second in it.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
