Linux-Advocacy Digest #49, Volume #30 Sun, 5 Nov 00 02:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! ("Bruce Schuck")
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! (Goldhammer)
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! (Goldhammer)
Re: Why Red Hat is as bad as Microsoft (Tim Hanson)
Re: Chad Meyers: Blatent liar (sfcybear)
Re: Chad Meyers: Blatent liar (sfcybear)
OpenGL and GNOME (Bill Kocynjski)
Re: Chad Meyers: Blatent liar ("Boris Dynin")
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Ethernet efficiency (was Re: Ms employees begging for food) ("Les Mikesell")
Re: More Certification ("Les Mikesell")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Bruce Schuck" <[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: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 21:23:36 -0800
"Goldhammer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Lo5N5.36197$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 19:09:40 -0800, Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >"Goldhammer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:%N3N5.35894$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 11:27:15 -0800,
> >> Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> >Access is a great starting point.
> >> >If you get busy you can upgrade later
> >> >to something robust like SQL Server.
> >>
> >>
> >> Are you trying to suggest that Access isn't robust?
> >
> >Not for 1000's of users.
>
>
> I am glad that you admit the truth about
> Access.
>
>
> >> Many experienced individuals would agree with you.
> >
> >>
> >> So Access is a toy,
> >
> >Never said that.
>
>
> I am saying it.
For what reasons?
>
>
> >In fact, it is a great tool for small to medium databases,
>
>
> No, it isn't. Access does not even meet the
> challenge of medium sized databases.
It does a great job on database of many sizes depending on the number of
users.
>
>
> > as a front end to
> >SQL Server and Oracle, and as a tool to learn about RDBMS.
>
> Schuck, do you remember when I mentioned ODBC? Do
> you understand why I mentioned it? Do you recall the context
> of our conversation? Let me remind you. Some moron
> said that there does not exist software on *nix which has
> the functionality of Access. I disputed this.
Before we waste anymore time with your drivel, name the *nix tools that
matches the feature list of Access.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Goldhammer)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux growth rate explosion!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 05:28:06 GMT
On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 20:51:08 -0800, Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Goldhammer:
>> Then why is Schuck reccommending a migration path from
>> Access to MS SQL server?
>
>You know why.
Perhaps you overestimate me. I'm not a mind-reader.
>Access is both a great database development tool for small to
>medium applications,
But I was told by you and Myers that Access has more functionality
than anything available under *nix workalikes. If this is so, why
do I have to migrate to a more expensive product from MS, to achieve
the same functionality that I had to begin with from a free
product like Postgres?
Do you understand this question, Bruce?
>and a very good front end for Oracle,
Access is not a front end for Oracle. Access can
connect to foreign databases via ODBC like those created by
Oracle or Paradox, and even it's own garbage like Jet
or DAO. But Access is not a front end to Oracle. Neither
is Access a front end to Dbase or MySQL or any other
database management system. Try to understand
this rather subtle point.
>SQL Server and
>other RDBMS designed for thousands of users.
So is any system that supports ODBC. By the way, you should
stop saying that Access is a "front end to other RDBMS". It is not
the first time you have said this, and, if taken literally, this
statement of yours is gibberish. Access can be a front end
to foreign database fromats via ODBC, just like MySQL and a
whole host of other products. But strictly speaking, to say that
Access is a front end to a third party relational (or otherwise)
database management system, is pure drivel. There is a difference
between a database and a database management system.
>There is no such equivalent tool for Linux.
So far, you have no explained how Access is any
better in functionality than MySQL, exept for some
nonsense about Access's pedagogical value, and the
wonderous superiority of it's gui buttons and menus. Neither
of which has anything to do with database management functionality.
>Plus, you can design a small database using Access, and then migrate the
>database part to SQL Server with little or no changes to the forms or
>reports.
So? I can make a small database in MySQL, and I don't have to
bother migrating it anywhere to achieve SQL server functionality.
--
Don't think you are. Know you are.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Goldhammer)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux growth rate explosion!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 05:38:13 GMT
On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 21:23:36 -0800, Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Goldhammer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:Lo5N5.36197$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Sat, 4 Nov 2000 19:09:40 -0800, Bruce Schuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >"Goldhammer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:%N3N5.35894$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>Before we waste anymore time with your drivel, name the *nix tools that
>matches the feature list of Access.
You must have not been paying attention
when I said MySQL or Postgres.
--
Don't think you are. Know you are.
------------------------------
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Red Hat is as bad as Microsoft
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 05:38:48 GMT
Roberto Alsina wrote:
>
> El mié, 01 nov 2000, . escribió:
> >Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >>>Its not semantics actually, its legalities. They changed the kernel
> >>>without either Cox's or Torvald's approval; therefore it is not
> >>>linux.
> >
> >> Dear ".", that's pretty much bullshit.
> >
> >> No distribution, except for perhaps SOME of the mini-on-floppy ones ships a
> >> as-released-by-Alan-or-Linus kernel.
> >
> >Actually, quite a few do. Mandrake is simply the most hacked up version.
> >
> >> You can check it out.
> >
> >I've been doing this a long time.
> >
> >> [snip]
> >
> >>>> So what if it isn't true Linux, or if the elitist users look down
> >>>> their nose at you for running it.
> >>>
> >>>Theres nothing wrong with running it; it simply shouldnt be included
> >>>in a conversation about LINUX, since it isnt. :)
> >
> >> If Mandrake ain't Linux, Then no distro is Linux.
> >
> >Slackware, Stampede, SuSe, etc.
>
> You say SuSE ships a non-patched kernel? What Suse would that be?
SuSE does indeed ship a non-patched kernel as a choice for the user from
YaST. It is one of several kernels including one with support of
various EIDE drivers, another with APM support, one for '486/'386, etc.
Additionally, one always has the choice to compile one' own.
>
> >You dont know what youre talking about.
>
> I may be wrong about slackware (after all, I have not looked at it in 3 years),
> but Suse, Red hat, Mandrake, Dbian and most others do ship patched kernels.
>
> --
> Roberto Alsina
--
What this country needs is a good five cent nickel.
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Chad Meyers: Blatent liar
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 05:39:58 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Bruce Schuck wrote:
>
> > How about this one:
> >
> > It lets remote users shut down a workstation on RedHat 6.0, 6.1, and
6.2.
> >
> > http://www.redhat.com/support/errata/RHSA-2000-044-02.html
> >
> > Or this one that allows root access:
> >
> > A security bug in wu-ftpd can permit remote users, even without
> > an account, to gain root access.
> >
> > http://www.redhat.com/support/errata/RHSA-2000-039-02.html
> >
> > Etc etc.
> >
> > Too many to list.
> >
> > Just read through the RedHat security advisories. You'll find dozens
... or
> > hundreds.
> >
> > It appears every package on RedHat is -- at some time or another --
some
> > kind of trojan that allows root access.
>
> How does this contradict Perry or confirm what Chad said? Here is
what Chad
> said:
>
> > Particularly the ones where Red Hat was compromised and trojan code
was
> allowed
> > to be inserted and was released as final product by Red Hat
themselves.
>
> He said nothing about possible holes in security of code released by
Redhat.
> He said the code released as final product by Redhat had trojan code
inserted
> in it.
>
> Gary
Bruce does not know what "trojan code" is.
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Chad Meyers: Blatent liar
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 05:38:38 GMT
In article <6z5N5.123198$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8u2m4o$g5g$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <8c1N5.123098$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > "Perry Pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >
> >
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > On Fri, 03 Nov 2000 13:51:22 GMT,
> > > > Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >"Perry Pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >
> >
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >> On Fri, 03 Nov 2000 03:33:10 GMT,
> > > > >> Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >Particularly the ones where Red Hat was compromised and
trojan
> > code
> > > was
> > > > >allowed
> > > > >> >to be inserted and was released as final product by Red Hat
> > > themselves.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> As usual, you are a blatent liar.
> > >
> > > How about this one:
> > >
> > > It lets remote users shut down a workstation on RedHat 6.0, 6.1,
and
> > 6.2.
> > >
> > > http://www.redhat.com/support/errata/RHSA-2000-044-02.html
> > >
> > > Or this one that allows root access:
> > >
> > > A security bug in wu-ftpd can permit remote users, even without
> > > an account, to gain root access.
> > >
> > > http://www.redhat.com/support/errata/RHSA-2000-039-02.html
> > >
> > > Etc etc.
> > >
> > > Too many to list.
> > >
> > > Just read through the RedHat security advisories. You'll find
dozens
> > ... or
> > > hundreds.
> > >
> > > It appears every package on RedHat is -- at some time or another
--
> > some
> > > kind of trojan that allows root access.
> >
> > Do you know the differance between trojan code and a bug in the
> > software? ???? There is a big differance! Can you tell me what it
is???
> >
> > Hint: think trojan horse. Then think trojan horse code. You should
now
> > have an image of code that has something hidden in side. The items
that
> > you have posted are indeed bugs, but they are NOT trojan code. Get
it?
>
> If it lets you break root so easily -- and I can't believe how many
such
> exploits are possible on Linux -- it is a trojan.
>
> Now, if it propagated itself, it would be a worm.
>
Buzzz wrong! Judging from the other things you have said I did not think
you would know!
Ever hear about the "trojan horse"? It was a gift with an unplesant
surprise in it. The same can be said for trojan code! The code is
designed to look good on the inside but it has an unplesant suprise
inside. Since most windows code in NOT available to look at, no one
outside of MS know for sure if any trojans are in the MS code. With open
source, it is a bit harder to slip a trojan past without someone knowing
about it! BTW, window problably has as many or MORE exploits that Linux.
MS just hides them so you can never fix them thus you remain vunerable.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Kocynjski)
Crossposted-To: redhat.general,linux.debian.devel
Subject: OpenGL and GNOME
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 06:06:03 GMT
Can you use OpenGL with GNOME, as you can with X and Motif? Are there
any books on this, like "OpenGL Progamming for the X Window System" by
Kilgard?
Are there any issues about drivers or graphics hardware support under
GNOME and OpenGL?
Thanks
Bill
--OpenGL and GNOME
------------------------------
From: "Boris Dynin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Chad Meyers: Blatent liar
Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2000 22:22:55 -0800
You are liar yourself (according to responses in this thread). Another
liaring Linux fudster. Asshole.
As for Chad, I'm amazed that he even bothered do look in slash.dot: why
waste time on garbage called Linux.
Boris
"Perry Pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 03 Nov 2000 13:51:22 GMT,
> Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >"Perry Pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> On Fri, 03 Nov 2000 03:33:10 GMT,
> >> Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >Particularly the ones where Red Hat was compromised and trojan code
was
> >allowed
> >> >to be inserted and was released as final product by Red Hat
themselves.
> >>
> >> As usual, you are a blatent liar.
> >
> >What? Ah... denying the truth again I see, Perry. Perhaps you should
consult
> >a psychologist as this is, in fact, truth. About 3 months ago or so Red
Hat was
> >under fire (in fact there was a mention on Slashdot about it).
>
> Lies. There's no mention on slashdot. Provide a URL.
>
> >Search the news archives, you'll find it.
>
> Nothing. No such news. You're a blatent liar and FUDster.
> Nearly all you post on Usenet is nothing but lies.
>
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 06:28:23 GMT
"Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:aY3N5.123126$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > You also seem to want to pretend that ASP on IIS and Perl on Apache are
> > comparable technologies. They aren't. One is handled in the server
> > process, the other launches a separate interpreter for each use. The
> > latter, however, is not inherent in Apache, which supports loadable
> > modules for in-process scripting just fine. If you want to compare
> > in-process scripting, then compare ASP to PHP4 or mod_perl. If you
> > want to compare CGI, then compare plain Perl on both.
>
> I'd be glad to compare benchmarks of comparable systems do comparable
> transactional processing.
OK, find something using mod_perl or php with persistant database
connections to compare some similar database activity with ASP.
> I think there is large difference in cost per transaction as the TPC-C
> benchmarks show.
The backend database is irrelevant as far as the web server goes.
Do your comparisons with the same backend database.
> Writing ISAPI plugins for the extremely fast IIS 5.0 is relatively easy
too.
> And you get your own source code.
Using mod_perl you get all of the CPAN code for free.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 01:39:18 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft;
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Chris Ahlstrom in alt.destroy.microsoft;
>> >Ayende Rahien wrote:
>> [...]
>> >> Please check pre-win95 days, there wasn't a registery then, see how
>much fun
>> >> they had those days.
>> >
>> >Yeah, just as much fun as they have now. Moving INI file entries
>> >to a hierarchical database is no real improvement that I can see.
>>
>> Actually, Ayende is mistaken. Windows 3.1 had a registry. It wasn't
>> used for very much, and didn't work precisely like the Win95/NT
>> registry, but it was there.
>
>It had? I wasn't aware of it.
Not surprising; it was generally ignored, even by Microsoft.
>Anyway, it doesn't matter, most programs didn't use it.
>INI files where the way it went.
>And it went *badly*
In comparison to the registry, it was a piece of cake. In some minor
respects, even better than Unix resource files, though by no means
anywhere near as extensive. The registry gets nearly as complex as
resource files (especially X stuff) but shouldn't.
--
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: "Les Mikesell" <[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: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 06:38:54 GMT
"Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:fa4N5.123132$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > and move up to MS SQL server, where you finally
> > see a semblance of functionality which was available under
> > *nix workalikes for free in the first place.
>
> Come now. Nobody in their right mind would put something like mySQL in the
> class of SQL Server or Oracle.
MySQL has its place where the object is remarkably fast lookups that
aren't likely to conflict with updates (table level locking). But
postgreSQL
has a pretty good shot at Oracle territory as long as you don't need BLOBs
yet.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 01:44:54 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Chad Mulligan in alt.destroy.microsoft;
>
>Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8tqocl$t78$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Said Chris Ahlstrom in alt.destroy.microsoft;
>> > >Ayende Rahien wrote:
>> > [...]
><snip>
>> >
>> > Actually, Ayende is mistaken. Windows 3.1 had a registry. It wasn't
>> > used for very much, and didn't work precisely like the Win95/NT
>> > registry, but it was there.
>>
>> It had? I wasn't aware of it.
>> Anyway, it doesn't matter, most programs didn't use it.
>> INI files where the way it went.
>> And it went *badly*
>>
>
>The Win3x registry was very rudimentary and used almost exclusively by File
>Manager to associate file types.
Nobody used the Win3.1 registry to setup file extensions or types.
Those were done in Win.ini, and you could do some things loosely
associated with extensions in Filemanager's ini file.
The registry had that ability, yes, and lots more, but IIRC, the only
things that were in there were a few rudimentary "deep magic" windows
controls which never changed or got modified. That's why nobody ever
paid any attention to it. MS originally intended it to be just as
capable as the Win95 registry. But by using win.ini and system.ini for
all their own stuff, the registry was little more than a snare waiting
to be sprung. Of course nobody paid attention to it, and probably MS
more than anyone else. Until Win95, when MS needed "innovations" to
justify saying this was "Chicago", and more than just DOS 7 bolted into
Windows 4.
--
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: "Les Mikesell" <[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: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 06:43:14 GMT
"Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:O76N5.123431$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Before we waste anymore time with your drivel, name the *nix tools that
> matches the feature list of Access.
None of them match the non-portability, vendor lock design goal of Access
if that is what you mean. But several things match the functionality
especially if you are working toward a web-accessible database.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 01:47:06 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft;
>"Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> Actually, Ayende is mistaken. Windows 3.1 had a registry. It wasn't
>> >> used for very much, and didn't work precisely like the Win95/NT
>> >> registry, but it was there.
>> >
>> >It had? I wasn't aware of it.
>> >Anyway, it doesn't matter, most programs didn't use it.
>> >INI files where the way it went.
>> >And it went *badly*
>
>The registry in Windows 3.1 was used primarily for COM/OLE. It was limited
>to 64K.
>
>> Oh I dunno, at *least* one could alter the .ini files without rendering
>the
>> OS unbootable (usually) :)
>>
>> I know cause I had to alter many of them when ugrading Win3.1 hard disks
>> for approx 30 users back in 1990.
>
>Wow, that's amazing, since the Registry did not apear until Windows 3.1,
>which came out in 1992.
<*Smirk*> His comment was on altering ini files without causing Windows
to be unbootable, not on alternating the registry and causing that
result.
--
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: "Les Mikesell" <[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: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 06:45:41 GMT
"Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:uR3N5.123123$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I never argued Access is a replacment for a full blown RDBMS. But it is a
> great tool for developing small to medium systems and a great tool for
> learning an RDBMS for very little money.
Learning? Or vendor lock? In what way does it teach or encourage
you to write standard DBMS code?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc
Subject: Re: Ethernet efficiency (was Re: Ms employees begging for food)
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 06:56:41 GMT
"Timothy A. Seufert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <A9KM5.12881$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Les
> Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Actually putting in any 10/100 switch can shake out cable problems
> >in systems that ran fine at 10M. You really want cat 5 everywhere,
> >including the jumpers from the wall to PC. Apparently some
> >noise that would be ignored by 10M equipment confuses them.
>
> In my experience, a common cabling mistake that gets caught by this is the
> one where the cables were made assuming that the mapping between twisted
> pairs and RJ45 pins is (1,2) (3,4) (5,6) (7,8) instead of the correct
> (1,2) (3,6) (4,5) (7,8). 10M will sort of run on such cables if they're
> short enough, 100M will fall flat on its face.
Yes, the cat 5 spec is very particular about twists per inch of the
relevant pairs. If you don't match you will have too much crosstalk,
and using pairs that aren't twisted with each other is bound to cause
trouble.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More Certification
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2000 07:07:23 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:gu92u8.4vl.ln@gd2zzx...
> In article <tLWM5.12994$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I don't consider learning the basic techniques of thinking to be a
waste.
> > One of the things you need most in a technical vocation is the ability
to
> > solve what appears to be a new problem and this is a skill that develops
> > independently of the thing you are studying.
>
> I couldn't agree more. I have found that people who have studied
> science or engineering at university often become very good software
> engineers. What I do find surprising is that people who have studied
> computer science often don't become good software engineers. Of course
> these are not hard facts, just my general impression. One of the best
> software engineer's I ever worked with had a degree in music!
I don't think that is unusual at all. There seems to be some elusive
connection between software, music and motorcycles that no one
can precisely pin down.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
