Linux-Advocacy Digest #307, Volume #30 Sun, 19 Nov 00 13:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: 10th grader com sci homework request (Edward Rosten)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? (sfcybear)
Re: Linux (Edward Rosten)
Re: It's even worse than I thought. (Edward Rosten)
Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux (Chas2K)
Re: It's even worse than I thought. (Edward Rosten)
Re: wahoo! I'm running now ("Vann")
Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux (Edward Rosten)
Re: Linux Sux (Edward Rosten)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Jim Richardson)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Jim Richardson)
Re: It's even worse than I thought. (Gary Hallock)
Re: 10th grader com sci homework request (The Ghost In The Machine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: 10th grader com sci homework request
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 18:29:17 +0000
> > microsoft :
> >
> > 1.has foot in nearly every door of all organizations on planet earth
> >
> > 2.good portion of Microsoft computer operators,
> > presently unfazed to extremely cautious regarding source code theft from
> > MicroSoft HQ.
> >
> > 3.has proven the best marketing for building a better faster product is
> > global beta testing
> > for close source software.
> >
> > 4.Security problems are common due to collaboration errors and
> > fundmental testing
> > phases,
> >
> > 5.fixes or patches are readily available and are not usually immediately
> > issued, nor
> > explained.
> >
> > 6.Has one of the monetarily wealthiest men at the helm.
> >
> > 7.Has made quite a few billioniares
> >
> > 8.Has made more then a few millionaires.
> >
> > 9.Follows what it can't develop in real time, offeres to purchase stake.
> >
> > 10.Creates mass use for dependecy.
> >
> > 11.Uses different operating systems to deliver software via the internet
> > because they run
> > faster and are more dependable.
> >
> > 12.Created a large workforce and product(s) to work on.
> >
> > 13.requires no knowledge of computers
That isn't true. if you put someone who has never used a computer in
front of one, they won't be able to use it.
> > 14.has fanatics praising its side
> >
> > ( add to list below here please)
> >
> Bug fixes and patches are usually buggy, so tend to create new bugs
> while fixing old ones.
> Both harder to learn and less stable than MacOS
> > Linux(s):
Are you saying Linux is less stable than MacOS. I'd have to disagree,
unless you're talking about MacOS X (which I don't know much about).
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold | Edward
Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? | u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies | @
| eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 16:26:46 GMT
Ahhh, I love it! Deffending NT by saying there is something wrong with
it. And I would say, that retruning a random uptime is something wrong.
In article <IFmR5.8951$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Bob Lyday" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > "Bob Lyday" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> message
> > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > Since we don't know how netcraft is retrieving the uptime
value,
> one
> > > > > must
> > > > > > > assume that it's a command sent to the web server to
retrieve
> it. The
> > > > > web
> > > > > > > server is merely returning the value of GetTickCount()
which has
> a 49.7
> > > > > day
> > > > > > > maximum value.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is that why the Starbucks NT server was being rebooted every
day,
> > > > > > Eric? Because NT stays up for 49 days? ;)
> > > > >
> > > > > Starbucks is Win2k, not NT4.
> > > > >
> > Now they are; but 6 months ago they were running NT for at least a
> > year. The NT box was being rebooted on a daily basis for at least
one
> > year straight. Look at the chart.
>
> The chart is meaningless. Again, Netcraft says categorically that NT4
SP4,
> 5 and 6 are either completley incapable of providing uptime
information or
> give completely inaccurate results. Since SP4 includes the Y2k
patches, it
> seems likely that Starbucks could have only been running SP5, since
SP4 and
> SP6 don't give uptime information at all. And SP5 gives random uptime
> results (not even counting the 49.7 day problem). Thus, you can't
draw any
> conclusions from the NT4 graph other than NT4's uptime is inaccurate.
>
> > > > > And without inside knowledge, we don't know what the problem
is
> there.
> > > > > Maybe they have power problems. Maybe they had some hardware
> failures.
> > > > > Maybe they've been experimenting with beta software. Who
knows.
> >
> > Are you grasping at straws here, Eric? Thought so. ;)
>
> You know the reason?
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 18:40:21 +0000
> > I wish you winvocates would quit blathering on about intuitivity. Stick
> > a newbie in front of a computer running windows and they haven't a clue
> > what to do.
>
> Funny, my Dad picked up Quicken relatively quick as well as Excel.
>
> He wouldn't know what to do with Linux. For that matter, I doubt most
> consumers would even bother running Linux because it's the *applications*
> that people want to run, and Windows has tons more quality apps. at places
> that you can conveniently buy them.
I'd disagree about these hordes of *quality* apps, but that's just my
point of view.
> > Never used a mouse before and they don't know what click and
> > drag is, never mind what they can click and drag. Windows is not
> > intuitive for this kind of person. They need to be told what to do.
> > Likewise, neither is Linux. That said, most people who are not familar
> > with computers are familiar with keyboards and can use them quite
> > happily. Under these circumstances, Linux can actually be easier for the
> > complete newbie. I've seen it.
>
> Uh huh, right. That's all you can do? You are claiming that Linux is
I certainly find Linux easier to use.
> *easier* to use than Windows?? You are *way* out there.
I'm claiming that keyboards are `more intuitive' because almost everyone
has seen/used one at some time even if they've never used a computer. I
really don't know what Microsoft and Apple have against it. I'll restate
my assertion, though: Windows is not intuitive for someone who has never
used a computer before. I would go as far as to say, that (if the person
is willing to learn) they will pick up most modern systems (including
Linux) pretty much as quickly as any other. For infrequent use, Linux is
probably harder to pick up if you don't have one of the new GUIs.
And if Windows was `so easy to use' why do you get so many people who's
desktops are still in factory-fresh condidion. All they do is run a
couple of things from the start menu. Assuming preinstals here, how is,
say, KDE harder to use under those circumstances? It isn't. Simple.
> > > Additionally, MS makes it so easy for developers to write for MS OSes.
> Take
> > > MSDN subscriptions for example.
> >
> > Have you actually done any windows programming?
>
> Only since Windows 3.1 debuted. I've programmed for a myriad of OSes
> including OS/2 Presentation Manager (as well as two drivers for OS/2),
> HP-UX, and a zillion more. Wrote a very simple C program in Linux when I
> was toying around with RedHat 6.2. (Junk).
>
> > I doubt you would have
> > writen this if you had.
> What??!?! I *rely* on the MSDN library *every day* I do development work.
> It's the one source of reference that has everything from simple HTML to
> programming complex distributed network objects. It's got it all.
So it must be pretty hard to write programs if you rely on this
resource.
> I can't believe you even stated this? I doubt *you* write Windows software
> if you aren't using MSDN.
I used to a bit, though not any more. I find UNIX programming much
easier.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold | Edward
Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? | u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies | @
| eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: It's even worse than I thought.
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 18:43:35 +0000
> >Is learning evil?
> >God forbid someone actually read!
>
> No. But having to read the equivilant of War and Peace just to
> configure an operating system, to run non-existant of half assed
> programs is a huge waste of time. Huge.
Blimey! if linux can run nonexistent programs (even if you have to read
War and Peace first) it must be THE BEST OS IN THE WORLD EVER (tm).
> >Then they may run applications on Windows to their hearts' content. No-one
> >is stopping them. If they should decide to stretch their minds a bit and
> >learn how a computer actually works - If they should decide to
> >....gasp....learn something, they may try Linux.
>
> Most of them already know how a computer works. They also know how it
> suddenly gets turned into a brick once they install Linux.
There is a big difference between knowing how a computer works and
knowing how an OS operates. Which is it (I assume it's the former).
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold | Edward
Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? | u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies | @
| eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Chas2K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 11:50:49 -0500
Uncle Fester wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > You do if you plan on converting that vinyl collection you found in
> > mom's attic to mp3's (click and pop filter plugin's) or making uncle
> > george's accordian solo at your wedding sound presentable on the
> > cassette copy you promised the guests.
> >
> > Direct-X allows the use of all types of plugin's for programs like
> > SoundForge and it allows manipulation of the sound as well as
> > interoperability between programs (ie: the plugin appears as a menu
> > item in all programs that support Direct-X).
> >
> > Linux isn't even in the same league.
>
> I suppose you tell people in the BeOS NG's the same thing? Sorry, but I
> refuse to get entangled in all this proprietary software. Even if my
> system *were* substandard because of it, (which it is NOT), it would be
> well worth it to get the proprietary monkey off my back.
>
> Enjoy your M$ and have a nice day.
>
> --
>
> Chuck Kandler
>
> Never underestimate the power of
> Stupid People in large groups.
>
> Registered Linux User #180746
> http://counter.li.org
Beware the Microsquat trolls, M'friends. And look at the mail server
name- hotmail.com, it's a FreeBSD operating system based server that
Microsquat keeps because it's better than that crap WinBlows2000
travesty.
Don't feed the damn trolls. They live on a diet of FUD. You can never
get them to listen to reason or do more than just parrot the same crap
over and over to get just these reactions from you. I will build a kill
filter for Clair the Troll as soon as this post goes out. It will reside
along side the one for pencil-dick Rev. Kool who trolls the BSD
newgroups.
Chas2K
======== * ===== www.unixstar.com =============
- Support a free and democratic Taiwan -
- FreeBSD Rocks. Mandrake Linux is Kewl 2 -
===============================================
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: It's even worse than I thought.
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 18:44:46 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Sun, 19 Nov 2000 03:21:56 GMT, "Les Mikesell"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >It will. If it weren't for the issue of staying compatible with
> >data stored in proprietary formats by programs that established
> >their ubiquity through illegal practices, it already would be.
>
> Yawnnn.. Very old...
> It's known as competition and it leads to progress. That is why
> Windows programs are so much better than Linux ones, if you can even
> find a Linux program.
*PLONK*
-Ed
> claire
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold | Edward
Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? | u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies | @
| eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Vann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: wahoo! I'm running now
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 16:55:19 GMT
In article <8v8fgk$kgu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Todd"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
>>
>> Windows 2000 server costs a pile of money to buy and it still blue
>> screens.
>
> You keep saying this but offer little proof. Yet, I keep on hearing
> horror stories from *many* Linux users regarding what should be a simple
> application: Netscape.
>
> I've heard everything from Netscape crashes to the whole Linux system
> needing a reboot to 'clean things up'.
>
If someone is rebooting to 'clean things up' he or she doesn't know what
he or she is doing.
<snip>
>> Linux servers don't go down and they outperform Windows 2000 servers.
>
> Linux can crash simply by running Netscape.
>
First off, a server shouldn't even be using Netscape, because it is so
crash prone. Secondly, the worst that will happen is X will lock up.
Just restart X and the problem is gone. All of three seconds to do it.
FYI, I am using Netscape Communicator 4.76, and it hasn't crashed on me
once. I am suprised, personally, since <4.76 seemed to crash at least
once a day.
> Other benchmarks, including some at Tom's Hardware, concluded that
> Nvidia products run faster on Windows 2000 than on Linux with *exactly*
> the same hardware.
>
> Doesn't sound like Linux is very fast at all.
>
That is because of nvidia's drivers more than anything. The linux
drivers, IIRC, use bit blitting, whereas the Windows drivers use page
flipping. ( While the latter is faster, it is oftentimes messier and
harder to work with. John Carmack said linux should use the former, and I
figure he knows what he's talking about. ) Also, what are you expecting
from
*BETA* drivers? Yes, you get fewer fps with the linux drivers, but that
is to be expected: they are
*BETA* drivers.
I don't particularly care if linux is better than Windows, or not. But
please, at least gets your facts straight. There are many areas where
linux is lagging, and many areas where it is ahead, but none of these are
it
--Vann, the intellectual honesty policeman.
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I have had it up to *here* with Linux
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 18:51:26 +0000
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Edward Rosten) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> The original poster said:
>
> "code runs faster on Linux"
>
> yet I found POVray ran slightly slower on Linux.
>
> That's what I was commenting on. And you've just demonstrated it too.
I apologise. I didn't read the whole thread.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold | Edward
Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? | u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies | @
| eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Sux
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 18:59:31 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> DOESN'T SUPPORT HARWARE.
> WON'T INSTALL ON MODERN SYSTIMS.
> DOESN'T WORK WITH PRINTORS OR MADAMS.
> SKANNERS DONT WORK.
> CAMRAS DON'T WORK.
> HAS NO SOUND.
> DOESN'T RUN GAMES.
> HAS 100 DIFFERNT EDITERS BUT NO DECENT BROWSER.
> IS BUILT BY LUSERS FOR LUSERS.
>
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!
>
> LINUKS SUKX.....
>
> LEE
This isn't a patch on one of Tym Parma's posts.
editers is spelt with 2 t's (edditers)
linux is spelt lixnu
games is spelt gaims
built -> bilt
etc etc.
not enough speeling errurs.
D for atainment
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold | Edward
Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? | u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies | @
| eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 21:47:04 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 18 Nov 2000 20:18:03 GMT,
Chad Myers, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>
>"Jim Richardson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >
>> >It's the design philosophy that counts, not the attempts of individuals
>> >to correct the original poor design that matters.
>> >
>> >-Chad
>> >
>>
>> You have yet to give abn example of where ugo perms falls down in a real world
>> way.
>
>ugo (a.k.a. permission bits) are not flexible. You don't have the ability
>to deny specific users or groups (a requirement of DAC and, consequently TSEC).
They are denied by being not allowed...
>
>You don't have the ability to assign permissions to a group but exclude a
>single user (which does and can happen frequently).
Sure you do, pull them from the authorised group.
>You don't have the ability to assign several groups to a permissions list.
>In UGO, you'd have to create yet another group which just leads to increased
>complexity.
which is where scripts come in. Python is a wonderful language.
>You don't have the ability to control access to certain parts of the OS or
>app configuration, only the ENTIRE conf file for that particular resource
>(as opposed to the Registry in Windows which allows fine-grained access
>control to atomic sections)
red herring, in Linux and other unix likes, the user has a local conf file for
the app, any changes from the default general conf file are handled there.
>Typical UGO implementations only allow a limited number of rights assignments
>for the trustees (such as Read, Write, Execute, etc). WindowsNT, 2000 and many
>other DAC implementations allow much more fine-grained access control levels
>for trustees.
such as?
>ugo doesn't have a clear inheritance scheme other than cascade. Windows NT 4
>SP4+ and Windows 2000 allow for controlled inheritance and filtered inheritance
>with controlled cascading.
>
>Shall I continue?
You could at least start...
>> You blather about poor design, but don't back it up with examples. ugo is
>> far from perfect, but it's a good working system,
>
>Works for very simplistic implementations, but not in a high security
>implementation where DAC is an absolute necessity.
beyond check a box on a form, (Like NT's posix) how is DAC a neccessity?
>> about the only thing I'd like to see is tha ability to add groups to groups
>> instead of just users.
>
>NT and 2000 have this ability. Another advantage of DAC.
It does make it easier to change groups, but for now, I'll settle with some
python scripts I have that give me all of the above, with ugo. Also, pam can be
used to do some pretty cool things too so I understand.
>
>-Chad
>
>
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2000 21:58:00 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 22:56:28 GMT,
Chad Myers, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>
>"Tim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Chad Myers wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:1dMQ5.154$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > >
>> > > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > > news:MCIQ5.8699$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> > > Hmmm.... rpm -qilp wine*.rpm
>> > >
>> > > four
>> >
>> > Oh that's MUCH better.
>> >
>> > Why not just rpm -l wine*.rpm?
>> >
>> > Why do I need FOUR, count them FOUR, arguments just to list the contents?
>>
>> Because, Chad, you are an unimaginative idiot as usual.
>>
>> Maybe you are querying a FILE; maybe you are querying an ALREADY INSTALLED
>> PACKAGE, maybe you are querying WHAT PACKAGE OWNS WHAT FILE on the
>> filesystem, or any other numerous query options you COULD use IF your OS
>> had a DATABASE DRIVEN SOFTWARE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. WHICH windows DOES NOT
>> HAVE.
>
><sigh>
>
>Listen, moron, I've said three times now, what if I just want
>to list the contents of the RPM package?
>
>Four command line arguments?
no, to list the contents of an installed package, then rpm -ql packagename, if
it's not installed, then rpm -qlp packagename, What's tough about that? course,
you could use kpackage, or the gnome equiv, clicky pointy, or mc, an xtree like
thingy that can easily descend into non-installed rpms.
>
>This just typifies the obscurity and lack of any thought to usability whatsoever
>in Linux development.
this just typifies the typical windows zealot, trying to ignore half the
options available, trying to wedge a nice and versatile system into the
crippled windows paradigm.
>Your response only polarizes this position, throwing Linux into the ever
>downward spiraling through process that any user who can navigate through
>this endless web of inconsistent and hopelessly unusable loosely associated
>utilities is not worthy of using a computer in the first place.
>
>It's that arrogance which will guarantee that Linux will never succeed.
Guarantee is a strong word Chad, many many people and companies are using Linux
in every niche nook and cranny. Servers for every service available, get used
to it, there's a new kid on the block, and the Penguin is here to stay. So get
out of the way, or get run over.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 13:02:37 -0500
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: It's even worse than I thought.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Nov 2000 23:28:22 -0500, Gary Hallock
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >If CompUSA is really that bad then why do you keep hanging out there and
> >telling your poor stories here. I think you protest too much.
>
> Two reasons: They had a good sale there, and I needed something now
> and couldn't wait.
>
> claire
Sorry, that just doesn't fly. You are constantly telling horror stories
about CompUSA and Linux. The only way you would be in a position to hear
all of this is if you spend much of your time there. When I go to a
computer store, I know what I want and am in and out in a few minutes
time. No chance to ease drop on other customers. Clearly, you are
either making all of this up or you work at CompUSA as one of a clueless
salesperson. Which is it?
Gary
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: 10th grader com sci homework request
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 18:04:21 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Tina Wyndham
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sun, 19 Nov 2000 12:10:11 GMT
<8v8fv5$7j6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hello,
>
>I have to write a large paper for Computer Science class.
>I have written whatI know and what I have found in the internet
>that i know is true. would you add to the list.
>
> It is simply the differences between the four major O/S's.
>It doesnt have to be in sentences or anything I will do that later,
> but at least so I can understand it, that would be great. thanks.
>
>
>Thank you,
>
>Tina Wyndham
>
>----
>
>
>
>microsoft :
>
>1.has foot in nearly every door of all organizations on planet earth
>
>2.good portion of Microsoft computer operators,
>presently unfazed to extremely cautious regarding source code theft from
>MicroSoft HQ.
Do you mean:
A good portion of computer operators using Microsoft software are
presently unfazed to extremely cautious regarding a cracker
stealing source code from Microsoft's HQ?
A good portion of Microsoft employees who operator computers are
presently unfazed to extremely cautious regarding a cracker
stealing source code from Microsoft's HQ?
A good portion of Microsoft employees who operator computers are
presently unfazed, and a good portion are extremely cautious regarding
a cracker stealing source code from Microsoft's HQ?
You might want to clarify this sentence.
>
>3.has proven the best marketing for building a better faster product is
>global beta testing
>for close source software.
>
>4.Security problems are common due to collaboration errors and
>fundmental testing
>phases,
Please clarify; this is an interesting charge but probably needs
to be more specific.
>
>5.fixes or patches are readily available and are not usually immediately
>issued, nor
>explained.
>
>6.Has one of the monetarily wealthiest men at the helm.
No kidding. :-)
>
>7.Has made quite a few billioniares
>
>8.Has made more then a few millionaires.
>
>9.Follows what it can't develop in real time, offeres to purchase stake.
Examples?
>
>10.Creates mass use for dependecy.
>
>11.Uses different operating systems to deliver software via the internet
>because they run
>faster and are more dependable.
?
>
>12.Created a large workforce and product(s) to work on.
Some of which fix deficiencies in the OS, or in flagship
applications -- e.g., mail virus checkers.
>
>13.requires no knowledge of computers
At least initially.
>14.has fanatics praising its side
You noticed. :-)
>
>( add to list below here please)
15. May have forced competing vendors of browsers, through a variety
of practices (some of them illegal, some of them questionable),
to either go out of business or come near bankruptcy.
(Two examples: intimidating computer sellers to not include
Netscape on their desktop, and subsequently "integrating" IE 4.0
with Win95 by having IE 4.0's installation program replace a number
of system DLLs).
>
>
>
>
>
>Linux(s):
>
>1.was developed by guy who didn't like licensed software.
Actually, I think he developed it for multiple reasons, and Linus
isn't the only one developing it; he now oversees a large number
of incoming patches, including only the ones he likes. (I think
he has a partner, too, for the stable tree, but I can't remember
his name...)
One of his stated reasons (IIRC) was to experiment with the 386's MMU,
which was state of the art back then, and another was to replicate
in part and expand upon Minix, a bare-bones Unix lookalike.
And then he released 0.01 under GPL or LGPL, and the rest
is history.... :-)
>2.making solid progress in the name of computing
>3.Cannot be stolen, source can be purchased if not downloaded for free.
>4. runs well for months at a time.
In some cases, years. Depends on various factors, of course.
>
>5. Security problems are common due to collaboration errors and
>fundmental testing
>phases,
? Please clarify.
>
>6.fixes or patches readily available and usually immediately issued and
>explained.
>
>7.has fanatics praising its side
You noticed that, too. :-)
>can emulate operating systems
Actually so can Windows NT, and both require additional software.
Some of that software is free (e.g., CP/M emulators). Some
of it is shareware or "tryware" (e.g., Win4lin, VmWare -- although
VmWare might have gone GPL). There is also Bochs, which addresses
a different type of emulation; VmWare does not emulate all of the
x86 processor, merely those instructions that need privileged mode
to operate, whereas Bochs emulates most, if not all, of the
(documented) x86 instructions. (It's available at http://www.bochs.com,
and is probably shareware, though it might have gone GPL, too.)
I've not tried VmWare under Win98; I doubt it would work, but
it is possible. It should work fine under NT.
>
>8.Created a large workforce and product(s) to work on.
>requires knowledge of computers
>
>9.Runs microsoft ftp servers.
?
>
>
>( add to list below here please)
>
>
>BSD(s)
I don't know a lot about 'em, myself; heard good things about FreeBSD's
stability, though. Would make a "superior Linux", in some respects.
>
>1. variants have collaborated.
>
>2. Quietly making solid progress in the name of computing
>
>3. Security problems are few due to collaboration errors and fundmental
>testing phases,
>
>4. fixes or patches readily available and usually immediately issued and
>explained.
>
>5. has fanatics praising its side
>can run binaries of other operating systems
As can Linux, with the iBC2 patch.
>
>6. Created respectable workforce and product(s) to work on.
>
>7.requires advanced knowledge of computers
>Runs microsoft ftp servers.
??
>
>
>
>apple : ( i dont't know anything about them.) yet.
Are you referring to the ancient MacOS, or the new MacOSX?
>
>--
>
>--
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
Good luck with your paper.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
