Linux-Advocacy Digest #36, Volume #30 Sat, 4 Nov 00 10:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: I think I'm in love..... (Terry Porter)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Once agian: Obscurity != security (Was: Tuff Competition for LINUX! ("Weevil")
More Certification (VanPopering)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Stefan Ohlsson)
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! (Artur Biesiadowski)
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! (Andrew Suprun)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Ayende Rahien")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: I think I'm in love.....
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 04 Nov 2000 13:56:14 GMT
On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 08:31:03 +0000, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Terry Porter wrote:
>
>> >* My sound card (still) isn't supported
>> It will NEVER be "supported" this isnt Windows, until someone writes a
>> driver (that could be you Goodwin, youve told us how you're a programmer)
>> you won't have one.
>
>OK, what I meant to say was no one has written a driver for my sound card -
>at least one that comes with Linux Mandrake. I did try the OSS one but KDE2
>didn't like it, I ended up with a blank X desktop.
Eww, nasty, sounds like something Windows would do :(
>
>> >* LILO boot keeps coming and going
>> Hmm thats a interesting phrase, wonder what it means ?
>
>Use your imagination. Sometimes I have to use a boot floppy to get into
>Linux. I use System Commander as my boot, and it occaisonally complains the
>partition I'm trying to boot doesn't have a recognisable boot block. I've
>no idea what is blowing that away.
Me neither, unf. Still at least you can boot with a floppy :)
This is not the prob it may seem, as most Linux boxes are on 24/24.
>
>> >* Fonts all got stuck on some ugly fixed font
>> Ahh you should use the electronic fonts then, they are a vast improvement
>> over the paper ones with sticky backs.
>
>Perhaps I should use Windows, after all it works!
"Works" is a interesting phrase when used by our Wintroll comunity.
>
>> >* Quite a few SIGSEGV's in KDE 2.0
>> Its a work in progress, stick to a stable package if you dont like the odd
>> SIGSEGV.
>
>I thought KDE 2.0 was supposed to be a stable package. It was released
>recently wasn't it?
So what ?
Wasnt Win2k also released recently ?
hehehhe
>
>> There are many other alternatives to KDE, this isnt *Windows*.
>
>So what? I like KDE, when it works.
Thats the beauty of Linux, I for example dont care much for KDE.
>
>> I'm just waiting for Goodwin to get a clue...
>
>I'm still waiting for Linux to be what it's being hyped to be, a
>replacement for Windows.
Linux was **NEVER** claimed to be a replacement for Windows.
Again Goodwin had his facts badly distorted by the Wintroll FUD machine.
Linux offers advantages, Windows has never had, and will never have. Windows
remains a poor subset of Linux, in terms of capability and stability.
The only area in which Windows exceeds Linux, is the price!
>
>--
>Pete Goodwin
>
>Just waiting for Linux to get there...
Just waiting for Goodwin to get a clue ..
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours 22 minutes
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
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: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 14:00:18 GMT
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> You need to configure them, of course.
> Take, telnet, for example.
> By defualt, it doesn't tell you what you write, and give you minimal
> messages (I'd a problem with my email, so I tried to login via telnet, got
> very cryptic there when you only get things like +OK or +ERR)
> You've to do SET LOCAL_ECHO, and then you get better telnet.
Strange, I've never had problems with the Windows NT telnet. It's just
slow, and doesn't handle the VT100 escape sequences quite right (e.g. it
won't show colors in the text). Anyway, I don't use it anymore. ssh is
more secure (I've gotten my server hacked when supporting telnet and ftp),
and the puTTY client for Windoze works better than the standard Windowz
telnet client.
> never had a problem with ftp client in windows. (talking about the native
> one, of course)
> it's very fast, and the only problem I've with it is that I've to remember
> all the commands (OTOH, getright can be a good reference :) )
The commands are pretty easy. A cool thing to do that I've seen (tried
it once) is to run telnet on the ftp port. I've never tried that with
the Windos telnet client, though.
>
> Sorry, that was a typo, I meant VBS
>
> You create a .VBS or .JS files, and write the instructions that you want to
> them.
> Very simply, very powerful, especially since VB & JS can call to other
> stuff. (Email, Word, Excel, ODBC, OLE, Graphics, and so on)
Oh, you're talking MIME types, then. Yeah, Windohs will ShellExecute()
nicely. Sometimes too nicely, but then, every system has holes that
you need to close yourself.
> > No, instead they have to memorize 20-step mouse-click sequences and a
> > variety of do's and don'ts. I agree Word is handy for term papers.
> > But, having mastered vi and a couple of text-processing languages,
> > I find it much faster to use vi and a good filter. GUI editors make
> > it very difficult to perform certain repetitive tasks. But, hey,
> > Word works pretty well, too, as long as you stick to one version.
>
> To do what?
> If you are talking about email.
> I just open Outlook (from the quick launch menu bar, really conveniant), and
> it automatically connects to my mail servers and download all my mail for
> me.
> Assuming this is a new computer, I open outlook, it ask me to provide things
> like name, email, pop & smtp server, username & password and then go and
> fetch my mail for me.
> One click to check my mail, a wizard to set it up.
I'm talking about copying a file using NT Explorer. Click... wait for it
to open and refresh some of the network drives. Click and find the right
drive. Click to get to the next level, and wait while Explorer thinks about
it. Etc.... Then do the same thing to get to the destination directory.
Then drag'n'drop. Can be very tedious. Sometimes its just easier to use
the command line. Of course, for particular cases, you can write a little
batch file or make a short-cut.
I'm also talking about trying to configure Outlook. At first, trying to
find the right option-setting can be quite trying. It is no fun to navigate
a nest of tab-pages (property sheets), hierarchical dialogs, etc. to find
an option you only set once in a blue moon. Of course, the command line
has equally frustrating situations.
>
> Can you please inform me what you can do in Vi that you can't in Word.
> Or even what you can do much more easily in Vi than in Word.
Edit source code. For that task, vi is the best. You barely have to move
your fingers... no need to stretch for the Alt key (just the Shift and Ctrl
keys)... no need to leave the home position to find the mouse. Quick
context searches, repetition of edit operations, very slick and fast.
No waiting for the WSIWYG to catch up, no bugs because you're using the
newest version of Word.
Edit HTML (a special case of the above). You can do that with Word,
but you end up with unsatisfactory HTML.
Of course, you have to run you vi-edited text through a converter (groff,
tex, for example) if you want nice word processing.
> Actually, I wasn't talking about themes, I was talking about litestep (just
> one example, there is one more, I think) it gives windows a whole new look.
> Basically allowing you to skin it.
> And if you don't care about custom window themes, why do you complain about
> it?
Because this is a forum for gratuitous bitching <grin>.
> For that matter, what do you complain about the single windows manager in
> windows.
Because it is painfully slow to use.
> Pardon? Run has a list of 25 or 50 last commands, including variable promts,
> btw.
I didn't know that -- I tend to go straight to the CMD in Wind-ohs.
> CMD has the same, you can enable it in DOS/Win9x by typing doskey (I think,
> no too sure as it's been awhile since I used it)
Yes, very nice, and it is automatic in the NT command-line window.
> > Still, I will grant that Windows can be useful. Also very frustrating
> > and clumsy compared to Linux.
>
> How?
Very very slow to respond to the user while performing other tasks.
It allows client apps (e.g. the Borland C++ Builder compiler) to up
their priority, causing the rest of the machine to be nearly unusable while
the compile is running. That's Borland's fault, but you can't affect
Builder's priority even in Task Manager (I've tried).
It is also very easy to lose files using the NT Explorer GUI.
Too many prompts, too, in places where you can't configure them out.
Poor selection of utilities. You have to buy a Resource Kit to get
many items that come standard with Linux.
Chris
--
[ ] Encrypt Microsoft.
------------------------------
From: "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Once agian: Obscurity != security (Was: Tuff Competition for LINUX!
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 08:01:48 -0600
Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:zYLM5.121755$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Earlier, you claimed that they said "they are at least 6 months ahead of
> the
> > other Linux/BSD sites in closing security holes." You lied about this.
>
> You may try the "sutpidity" defense. You are stupily loyal to Linux.
>
> Anyone with half a brain knows OpenBSD is trashing the open by default
Linux
> distros.
Not only did they not mention Linux like you claimed they did, they also did
not claim to be 6 months ahead of ANYone. But you knew that. You just
decided to lie about it.
By the way, I agree that OpenBSD's default installation choices lead to a
more secure system than the default choices for the Linux systems I've
installed. There may be distros that have other defaults, of course.
Nope, I'm not "stupidly loyal" to Linux. I consider it to be significantly
superior to anything I've ever seen from Microsoft, but I'm not really
"loyal" to it, stupidly or otherwise. If I see a need or even a compelling
enough curiosity to try another OS (such as OpenBSD), I will. If I like it
better, I'll use it with no regrets.
No, it really just boils down to this -- I don't like blatantly dishonest
characters, in Usenet or elsewhere. I don't always respond to something I
know is a lie, but sometimes I do. In your case, I did.
jwb
------------------------------
From: VanPopering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: More Certification
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 14:06:15 GMT
> I'm not a big advocate of certification. If you've got extra money that
> you want to throw away on classes, then get your ass into college. A
> degree doesn't expire, it can't be arbitrarily withdrawn by a vendor,
> and it will qualify you for far more positions than a certification.
college is a waste of time as far as computer go. go look at the computer sci. list.
All the computer classes
required - Great. but the prerequisites you have to take before them (all the math,
calculus, etc) has ABSOLUTELY
NOTHING to do with computers, networking, etc. THAT is a waste of time and money.
I've asked many Unix/Linux sys admin
and in every case they agreed. In a certification study on my own, Im spending 100%
of my time learning what I came
there for. Not taking Gym, Art, or Trig.
Certification is a very good thing. Separates the big-mouth-know-it-alls (who don't),
from the people who really know
their stuff. Ah but then those who oppose certification because they claim their real
world experience is better and
all they need - why not go get it and prove it? take the tests, get certified. Hell,
they wouldn't even have to study
I bet.
Anyway, I wasn't looking to get into this, all I asked was a simple question on
whether LPI or Sair was the way to go.
Based on an overwhelming response, it seems that LPI is the way to go and not Sair.
-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] (Stefan Ohlsson)
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: 4 Nov 2000 15:11:18 +0100
Bruce Schuck wrote:
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>>And all the other Unix/Linux exploits that let one take root.
>>Yes, yes...against improperly managed systems.
>Nope. All Unix/Linux systems have vulnerabilities.
>Especially buffer overflow vulnerabilities that Aaron claims were taken out
>of Unix 12 years ago.
>
Potenitally, yes. But provided you run an up to date system, those are
most likely plugged. Especially with Linux and even more so OpenBSD
plugging of holes like that is very fast.
/Stefan
--
[ Stefan Ohlsson ] · http://www.mds.mdh.se/~dal95son/ · [ StrICQ# 17519554 ]
------------------------------
From: Artur Biesiadowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux growth rate explosion!
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 15:10:52 +0100
Roger Lindsj| wrote:
> >Star Office. And it's only $40.
>
> Isn't it free if you want to download it? I think it is even open source now.
Yes it is free. Don't know about open source at the moment - but it is
not very important.
Anyway, you can buy StarOffice if you want - some people prefer having
CD then downloading it from net (could be also helpful for OEMs etc).
I'm not sure about books - maybe there are also help books bundled
inside ? Look at
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00004U9LR/staroffice/002-1456523-3352042
Artur
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux growth rate explosion!
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Suprun)
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 14:23:05 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Myers) wrote in
<IyMM5.2795$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[...]
>ASP is the leading pre-processor and has many advantages
>over competitors in rapid development, multi-tiered app
>design, speed, flexibility, etc.
>
[...]
That is why Microsoft is replacing it with ASP+ which is
modeled after JSP, isn't it?
Andrew.
------------------------------
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: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 16:05:12 +0200
"Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > "Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > > > runas command.
> > >
> > > Could you give some details? There's no trace of runas in NT on-line
> > > doc, I tried help runas and I got sort of " no help available for
runas,
> > > try runas /?". I tried runas /? to be told that /? is neither an
> > > executable nor a batch file. Maybe it does a lot, but documentation
> > > appears a bit concise!
> >
> > Start>Run>Help>Index
> > Write "runas", and it will take you to the runas CLI & GUI explanations.
>
> That's exactly what I've done in a couple of boxes (one
> running NT4 sp4, the other NT4 sp5), but I didnt't get
> anything between "Run" and Running". The same holds true for
> Start>Help>Find. Then I tried "help runas" and "runas /?"
> and only discovered that runas was there. That's why I was
> asking.
Who is talking about NT?
I'm talking about windows 2000.
Here is what the help says about 2K Runas CLI:
____
Runas
Allows a user to run specific tools and programs with different permissions
than the user's current logon provides. It is good practice for
administrators to use an account with restrictive permissions to perform
routine, nonadministrative tasks, and to use an account with broader
permissions only when performing specific administrative tasks. To
accomplish this without logging off and back on, log on with a regular user
account and use the runas command to run the tools that require the broader
permissions.
runas [/profile] [/env] [/netonly] /user:UserAccountName program
Parameters
/profile
Specifies the name of the user's profile, if it needs to be loaded.
/env
Specifies that the current network environment be used instead of the user's
local environment.
/netonly
Indicates that the user information specified is for remote access only.
/user:UserAccountName
Specifies the name of the user account under which to run the program. The
user account format should be user@domain or domain\user.
program
Specifies the program or command to run using the account specified in
/user. For examples of the use of the runas command starting other Windows
2000 commands, see Related Topics.
_________
I'm not sure what the runas in NT is that you're talking about, try doing:
runas notepad
If it's what I think it is, it would ask you to enter administrator
password, and then launch notepad with administrator privileges.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[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: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 16:47:36 +0200
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > You create a .VBS or .JS files, and write the instructions that you want
to
> > them.
> > Very simply, very powerful, especially since VB & JS can call to other
> > stuff. (Email, Word, Excel, ODBC, OLE, Graphics, and so on)
>
> Oh, you're talking MIME types, then. Yeah, Windohs will ShellExecute()
> nicely. Sometimes too nicely, but then, every system has holes that
> you need to close yourself.
What does MIME types has to do with VBS/JS?
> > > No, instead they have to memorize 20-step mouse-click sequences and a
> > > variety of do's and don'ts. I agree Word is handy for term papers.
> > > But, having mastered vi and a couple of text-processing languages,
> > > I find it much faster to use vi and a good filter. GUI editors make
> > > it very difficult to perform certain repetitive tasks. But, hey,
> > > Word works pretty well, too, as long as you stick to one version.
> >
> > To do what?
> > If you are talking about email.
> > I just open Outlook (from the quick launch menu bar, really conveniant),
and
> > it automatically connects to my mail servers and download all my mail
for
> > me.
> > Assuming this is a new computer, I open outlook, it ask me to provide
things
> > like name, email, pop & smtp server, username & password and then go and
> > fetch my mail for me.
> > One click to check my mail, a wizard to set it up.
>
> I'm talking about copying a file using NT Explorer. Click... wait for it
> to open and refresh some of the network drives. Click and find the right
> drive. Click to get to the next level, and wait while Explorer thinks
about
> it. Etc.... Then do the same thing to get to the destination directory.
> Then drag'n'drop. Can be very tedious. Sometimes its just easier to use
> the command line. Of course, for particular cases, you can write a little
> batch file or make a short-cut.
Use two explorer windows and switch between them.
Or use command line.
> I'm also talking about trying to configure Outlook. At first, trying to
> find the right option-setting can be quite trying. It is no fun to
navigate
> a nest of tab-pages (property sheets), hierarchical dialogs, etc. to find
> an option you only set once in a blue moon. Of course, the command line
> has equally frustrating situations.
True for anything, but outlook has better help than 99% of the cli tools.
> > Can you please inform me what you can do in Vi that you can't in Word.
> > Or even what you can do much more easily in Vi than in Word.
>
> Edit source code. For that task, vi is the best. You barely have to move
> your fingers... no need to stretch for the Alt key (just the Shift and
Ctrl
> keys)... no need to leave the home position to find the mouse. Quick
> context searches, repetition of edit operations, very slick and fast.
> No waiting for the WSIWYG to catch up, no bugs because you're using the
> newest version of Word.
For editing source code, an IDE is the best, period.
But I've used Word to edit source code, it does the work.
If you use shift/ctrl, you don't need to stretch your fingers to the alt.
And word can be fully functional without a mouse.
Define quick context search?
Define repetition of edit operations?
WSIWYG? Do you mean WYSIWYG?
> Edit HTML (a special case of the above). You can do that with Word,
> but you end up with unsatisfactory HTML.
HTML editing in Word?
Editing HTML in WYSIWYG is usually a bad thing.
You can turn off the unneccecary HTML, (I believe that you can do it in
Word. I know that you can do it in FP2000)
Although, if you want full control, write the HTML in word, and later copy &
paste the code to a txt file, and save it as htm/html
> > For that matter, what do you complain about the single windows manager
in
> > windows.
>
> Because it is painfully slow to use.
Slow how?
You mean in response time?
Or the way you do things?
> > Pardon? Run has a list of 25 or 50 last commands, including variable
promts,
> > btw.
>
> I didn't know that -- I tend to go straight to the CMD in Wind-ohs.
Well, you live and learn.
> > > Still, I will grant that Windows can be useful. Also very frustrating
> > > and clumsy compared to Linux.
> >
> > How?
>
> Very very slow to respond to the user while performing other tasks.
> It allows client apps (e.g. the Borland C++ Builder compiler) to up
> their priority, causing the rest of the machine to be nearly unusable
while
> the compile is running. That's Borland's fault, but you can't affect
> Builder's priority even in Task Manager (I've tried).
I don't use Borland C++ Builder, but I find that even under fairly heavy
load, the system is quite responsive.
(10 - 15 explorer windows, playing music, Outlook express, word, acess,
surfree, babylon, getright, NAV, and several server services in the
background)
> It is also very easy to lose files using the NT Explorer GUI.
How?
> Too many prompts, too, in places where you can't configure them out.
Examples?
> Poor selection of utilities. You have to buy a Resource Kit to get
> many items that come standard with Linux.
You've a point.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
