Linux-Advocacy Digest #83, Volume #30 Mon, 6 Nov 00 10:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Roberto Alsina)
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. (Roberto Alsina)
Re: Chad Myers: Blatent liar (.)
Re: Ethernet efficiency (was Re: Ms employees begging for food) (Paul Repacholi)
Re: Lets try serious advocacy/discussion. ("MH")
Re: What a mess.... (sfcybear)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[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: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 14:13:31 GMT
Ketil Z Malde wrote:
>
> "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'm talking about taking a program whose intereface is written in
> > English and coverting it to another lanauge. Especially
> > non-english-characters lanaguage. This is one are where windows
> > really shines, the muilty lanaugage support.
>
> Surely you jest.
>
> I've accidentally installed a German version of some program, and
> suddenly dialog boxes from various applications started to tell me
> stuff in German.
>
> With KDE (or perhaps it was Gnome?), there's a menu choice for
> langauge, select your favorite, and voila - your applications have
> switched to that language. Different users can of course have
> different languages. And of course, there are languages available for
> KDE that aren't available for Windows.
Well, comparing the so called "nationalization" of Windows
(apparently most of the binaries are recompiled, adding a
few extra bugs, just for fun) with linux, is really trying
to crush your opponent.
What makes life really interesting is when you're in a
country and must supply a fully functional system to another
country. That's a common requirement for industrial
applications, where the PC is just a small piece of a large
system. You're in France, and must supply a system which
will be installed in Italy, or you're in Italy and must
supply a system to Egypt or Thailand (I take those because I
have direct experience). You must purchase the appropriate
Windows national version, which is only available in the
destination country, because of licencing/pricing,
anti-competition-ing etc. policies. Then the software
developer would have a system where he doesn't understand a
word and wouldn't know how to work. Usually you end up using
your national version, making the final software
installation at customer's site (which would have been
totally unnecessary), to discover that in that country the
service pack you need, because it addresses exactly a bug
which is vital for the system, has not yet been delivered,
or, even worse, has been delivered, but hides a couple of
extra bugs equally vital for system functionality.
That's why, when I hear Bill Gates raving about Total Cost
of Ownership, I'd like to send him the bills.
The situation you describe holds certainly for KDE, but from
what I've seen of Gnome it should be roughly the same. In
KDE each user has three languages, in order of preference,
plus the default. The developer uses his own language, from
time to time switches to end-user language to make sure that
application messages fit properly where intended. No need to
import nationalized version, no need of on-field
installation, no extra bugs. If end customer hires a
puertorican or a chinese operator, he just selects spanish
or chinese language for that particular user, and everybody
is happy (provided that your application has appropriate
messages, otherwise your application will resort to
second-best choice. But if you're smart and you've followed
KDE guidelines, the translation may be added on the field,
by anybody capable of using a text editor)
To say that windows shines on this respect is really
laughable!
------------------------------
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: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 14:16:12 GMT
In article <3a04b23b$0$63697$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Relax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:00110216303401.02705@pc03...
>
> > > and there is still a long way to go on several other aspects.
> >
> > Such as? Just curious.
>
> Well, to make a long story short, all unixes taken together certainly
do all
> what NT does and maybe more. But no single implementation has it all
out of
> the box and you certainly know that.
Can you be a bit specific?
--
Roberto Alsina
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
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: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 14:21:41 GMT
In article <GhzM5.2364$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8tue1d$6lr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <OxqM5.1995$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > "Roberto Alsina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:00110216263600.02705@pc03...
> > > > El mié, 01 nov 2000, Ayende Rahien escribió:
> > > > >"Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > >news:8tqi24$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.
> > >
> > > You don't think that MS has off-site storage for circumstances
like
> > this?
> >
> > I know they do. Notice how I said "the ONES where [MS stores the
> > sources]". Plural, kid.
> >
> > However, just HOW MANY off-site storage sites do you think they have
for
> > the windows sources? 100? 1000? 10000?
>
> Does it matter? If fact is, they do. You and others were ignorantly
> claiming that if Redmond got nuked (how cute, by the way), that
> Windows would be lost forever which is simply rediculous.
a) I can't quite parse your sentence.
b) You are confusing me with someone else apparently. I wrote what I
wrote, I did not write what others wrote.
And anyway, you are ignoring what I *did* write. Even if the windows
sources survive, almost all knowledge about said sources is concentrated
in Redmond. I doubt that if all that knowledge disappeared, the
remainder would be enough to keep developing windows further, at least
without a very long hiatus.
> > Linux has in excess of 10000000 geographically separate storage
sites
> > for the sources, on every continent including antarctica.
>
> So? You're switching the subject.
Actually, I am not. I am expanding on something I already wrote, as a
reply to something you wrote, so if I did switch, I did it earlier,
and you followed.
> Can't you guys keep your attention for more than a few minutes?
Sure. Say something interesting.
> > > Geez... how'd you guys make it through college, or better yet,
high
> > school?
> >
> > Well, looks like you failed 3rd grade math, to me ;-).
>
> No, it's common sense. Something you guys have proven time and time
> again that you lack.
Common sense: if all windows knowledge concentrated in Redmond was
unavailable, all the windows source copies will do you little good.
Which is what I said before you replied to me with your nonsense.
--
Roberto Alsina
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Chad Myers: Blatent liar
Date: 6 Nov 2000 14:33:24 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8u5rbq$1obt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:8u5aq0$1obt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Yeah, but you should here the writer of Samba talk about the security
>> >> > problems with MS's SMB. What the rest of the world would consider a
>> >> > serios bug, MS put in as a feature! At one point when MS wanted to start
>> >> > sending encrypted passwords they put that in the protocol and when you
>> >> > selected encrypted passwords (thingking you were safer) the encypted
>> >> > password was indeed sent, but for backword compatability, so was the
>> >> > plain text file! Yeah, it's a feature!
>> >>
>> >> One of the things worth mentioning at this point is that microsoft
>> >> traditionally waits until a "bug" is found by enough people to warrant
>> >> fear of a lawsuit before they fix it. Conversely, linux bugs are
>> >> confirmed quickly and acted apon without any "we dont think its an
>> >> issue" damage control bullshit. :)
>>
>> > Speaking of bullshit...
>>
>> > Several of MSs patches were released within 24 hours of first posting.
>>
>> Neat. *ALL* of linux's have.
> *BZZZT* Wrong, thanks for playing though. Several of Red Hat's patches,
> for example, took several days.
Actually, you're wrong chad. Redhat bugs are traditionally patched by
the OS community within a day of being announced.
Youd understand that if you knew anything at all about linux. But you
dont, you only pretend to.
> Last statistic I saw showed that Red Hat had an on-average time of
> releasing patches of about 3 days.
Redhat isnt the only body writing linux patches.
> MS was like 5, but MS does much
> more testing because they affect much more systems.
Oh, I see. Like all the testing that went into each IIS patch.
> Some of their
> patches also must be fully regression tested which also slows down
> the delivery.
That must be very difficult.
> However, consistently, any privelege-escalation exploit (which there
> haven't been many, recently) have been released in under 48-hours,
> if not 24.
See www.l0pht.com for details.
=====.
------------------------------
From: Paul Repacholi <[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: 06 Nov 2000 22:43:20 +0800
4ms2u$[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Salem) writes:
> By the way, is there any way to force dual-speed 10/100 NICs to run
> at 10Mbps? For any NICs, and under any operating system?
Alphas can do this, for VMS, DU, or Linux. And any of the BSDs for
a guess.
set ewa0_mode <stuff> in SRM for a tulip card.
--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lets try serious advocacy/discussion.
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2000 09:51:07 -0500
This is rich..
> > Let's avoid getting into a pissing war about applications. Lets talk
> > about real serious (technical) limitations or problems with Linux.
We really can't address the main problems if we're not going to include
applications, now, can we Sir?
Besides, this is impossible to do in here. Any rational discussion on what
linux may need only results in knee jerk defense. Read my recent post on
cola. You've an inherent problem with linux in its almost completely
malcontented, and fragmented user base. If the 'end lusers' main reason to
be here is out of disdain for windows, then they are fringe to begin with.
In the real world, people use their computer to get work done, not as an
excuse for a holy war. You've got a real communication problem here. You'll
agree on nothing, and you listen to nothing. The real world just don't wanna
hear that shit. And furthuremore, in the great majority of cases, it is the
linux user who will start the pissing war. Just read the posts in here for
all the evidence you need. If you want serious discourse then physician heal
thyself. Quit threatening to sue people on usenet because they question your
authority as a spokesman for Pete's sake. Either you walk the walk and talk
the talk, or, as Tony Kornheiser would say. "Shutup. No, really, just
shutup".
> > What can Windows or Win2K do that Linux can not?
Bottom line. Walk into any store that sells software, anywhere, and take a
good look.
Same thing with any school. What do you see? That's what windows does that
linux can't.
It is an open source problem with no easy solution. People want to get paid
to stand behind something for years to come. Kids writing tight binaries, or
a group of college students with a good application don't have those
worries, and with good reason. Your problems here are obvious. You want
linux to be something it's not and will never be while it's completely open
source. Open source is fascinating, I'll grant you that. I liken it to Jack
Nicholson's line in "As good as it gets" when asked how he writes "women so
well". Same thing applies to open source. -- Think of commercial software
then take away reason and accountability. How on earth can you expect to
manage projects that are going to compete with the windows market with this
very management spread out over the internet with no central controlling
authority? I think what 'linux' has done is incredible. What redhat has
done? Don't think so. What Corel has done? Nah. What KDE has done? Pretty
cool. But......
If I'm paying nothing for something, I know what I'm ultimately getting. You
just can't very easily change this capitalist way of consumer thought
because you tell them it's better. Linux's only inroads to the desktop for
as long as I can see are the same as they ever were. College geeks, hackers,
and windows haters.
> > What can Linux do that Windows or Win2K can't?
Post very high uptimes due to the fact that it's still only being asked to
do what it was very well designed to do.
You folks in here act like the sort of applictions you're complaining about
(and one minute want, the next minute don't, I might add) are trivial to
write.
You'll be the first to say something like "I saw Word's source code. What a
mess! it's full of GoTo's", without ever taking a moment to realize the
complexity of what this application is doing. You just know that it indeed
will crash eventually, so you use that as the ulitmate litmus test for
worthiness. I won't use another car analogy, but there a million of them to
illustrate just how silly this stance is. Ask yourselves: how often does
Notedpad or Wordpad crash? Now, how many GUI editors for Linux are there
that provide the same functionality? Plenty, for sure. They don't crash
either. Now, how many full-featured word processors are there for windows?
Plenty. Look at that functionality, forget your opionion of whether a
'luser' needs that much is true or not.
Now, where is that same application on linux? Is it as stable? Does it offer
a programmable interface without requiring a 'luser' to have a CS degree?
Will it interoperate properly with what (like it or not) most people use?
Can it be extended, customized, and or embedded?
> > Why isn't Linux suitable for the desktop?
Should be self explanatory. Linux is really only a little closer to a usable
desktop solution than it was this time two or five years ago. I don't mean
desktop for a hacker. I mean a desktop that can compete for users of windows
& mac. Even with a really good desktop, we can't discuss any further because
you've excluded applications from the mix. BeOs is a great example. Great
os, no apps. It will die as sure as the sun will come up tomorrow. Linux is
surviving on price and price alone. If linux was $89 a box, you think people
would have taken a second look? If so, you're dreaming. I came across redhat
somewhere the other week for $19.95
That's not a bad price, considering. __end luser thinking in Office Depot
after stumbling across redhat for above price... "Now, where is that
encyclopedia, dictionary, math tutor...oh , and my kid needs Word for
school,...Mr. Salesman...could you help me find....."
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.graphics.api.opengl,comp.os.linux.x,comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: What a mess....
Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2000 14:49:02 GMT
Might I suggest you go to the developers news groups for each of the
desktops you are interested in and ask you questions of the developers.
You will get much more reliable answers there than you will here.
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeff Jeffries) wrote:
> I have been trying to figure out what windowing setup to use to
develop a
> C++ and OpenGL application under Linux that will be portable to other
> *nixs.
>
> I am totally confused. There is Motif, GTK+, Qt, xwXwindows, FLTK, and
> several others.
>
> I have no idea any more how to evaluate what I need.
>
> Is there any way out of this besides trying my application with each
and
> every window manager?
>
> My career doesn't have that much time. I'm inclined to just give up
and
> use Motif, but by now I've heard lots of bad things about it, like
the
> difficulty of using it in an OO program....
>
> Sigh....what do I do?
>
> Ready to give up....
>
> --J
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
