Linux-Advocacy Digest #484, Volume #30 Tue, 28 Nov 00 00:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Whistler review. (spicerun)
Re: Whistler review. (Curtis)
Re: Whistler review. (Curtis)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Is design really that overrated? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Tom Wilson")
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Mike Byrns)
Re: Whistler review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Whistler review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Whistler review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Whistler review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Les Mikesell")
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Mike Byrns)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Whistler review. (Charlie Ebert)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: spicerun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 22:12:26 -0600
Chad Mulligan wrote:
> What company? Just wondering, thought I bid on unscrewing your mess after
> they realize what a pig in a poke you sold them.
Our company have development programs, converted from Windows, that work fully
for the first with Linux. There is no need to have you come and screw/unscrew
around with our company computers. Besides, we don't want the vaseline you'd
leave behind.
------------------------------
From: Curtis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 23:14:10 -0500
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
[...]
| Cellular phone OS never crashed. (Yeah, I know it's much more simple than
| the simplest usable OS. Nonetheless, it can do a lot of tasks that my
| computer can do.)
| It *is* possible to write bugless code (or nearly as such).
| You might want to read "The Software Conspiracy", a really good read about
| bugs in the software industry.
A link to that document would be handy. :=)
--
Curtis
| ,__o
!___ _-\_<, An egotist thinks he's in the groove
<(*)>--(*)/'(*)______________________ when he's in a rut.
------------------------------
From: Curtis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 23:15:34 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
[....]
| I'll tell you why....
| because EVERY DAMNED ENTRY WOULD SMOKE MICROSHAFT'S OWN VERSION!
|
|
| And thus, Bill Gates would be forced to admit that the company
| should REALLY be named MACRO-SHIT.
You blow such hot air that it's not funny.
--
Curtis
| ,__o
!___ _-\_<, An egotist thinks he's in the groove
<(*)>--(*)/'(*)______________________ when he's in a rut.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 22:21:50 -0600
"Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > "Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Said Giuliano Colla in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 25 Nov 2000
> > > > > >Now look what NT does. It exposes a 32 bit value, which is
> > incremented
> > > > > >in units of one hundredth of a second, as per specs, but when it
> > reaches
> > > > > >a value 10 times smaller than the all 1's value (i.e. after 49.7
> > days,
> > > > > >instead 497) it goes back to zero. To be exact, when it reaches
the
> > > > > >binary value 11001100110011001100110011001 it goes back to zero.
It's
> > > > > >not a binary counter rolling over to zero!
> > > >
> > > > That's not the case. NT's tick counter is not in 10ms units, it's
in
> > 1ms
> > > > units, though it increments it 55ms at a time (the system tick
minimum
> > > > resolution)
> > > >
> > > > It does roll over to 0 after filling up with all 1's.
> > > >
> > > > Here's a little exercise. Calculate the largest number of days a 32
bit
> > > > value can hold if it holds 1ms units. The answer, 49.7 or so days.
> > >
> > > Here's a little exercise for you.
> > > You have an internal tick counter made the stupid way MS has
> > > done. (Don't tell me that a 1 ms resolution with 55 ms
> > > uncertainty is smart because I won't buy it, but that's
> > > another matter)
> >
> > There are multiple timers in Windows. GetTickCount() is simply one the
> > lowest resolution timers.
>
> I didn't pick any particular tick counter. You did. You described how it
> works. It is stupid. If another one is smarter, why didn't you pick the
> smart one?
> Sort of pity for the poor little stupid counter nobody takes seriously?
Because that's the counter being used by whatever method netcraft is using
for it's uptime query. That doesn't mean that every timer is limited by
this.
And GetTickCount() is fine for most uses, which would be timing how long
some activity takes. Most activities don't take more than 49.7 days to
accomplish.
> > > Now you have decided to provide a function whose specs
> > > require to expose, as a continuity indicator, a 32 bit
> > > counter which increments in units of 10 ms. Remember that
> > > you may not provide it. IBM's AIX doesn't, just to make an
> > > example. It's just a function you may have or not. But
> > > you've decided to have it.
> >
> > Gee, what spec is that? The only spec I know of that requires a 10ms
> > resolution is the SNMP spec, and we know for a fact that the method that
> > netcraft is using is not based on SNMP since this is filtered by most
> > firewalls and filtering routers. I don't know if the SNMP function
returns
> > the correct time or not, I've not tried it.
>
> We don't know for a fact the method used by Nectcraft. But I have much
> less pain thinking that netcraft has devised a way to obtain an
> information from a function which is exposed to the network, than
> thinking that netcraft has devised a way to perform remotely, through
> firewalls and routers, a call to the GetTickCount() API!
It's definately not the SNMP counter. Likely, there is some little known
HTTP request that retrieves the uptime, considering that netcraft only seems
to operate on sites that have web servers, that seems reasonable.
Now, if you can point me to a standard which states that this little known
HTTP uptime request requires a specific resolution, I'll gladly admit that
the function doesn't follow standards.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Is design really that overrated?
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 22:23:31 -0600
"Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:f1AU5.5374$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> > Mandrake, however has some very goofy things. For instance, the
> > MandrakeUpdate utility uses a scrollbar as a progress indicator...
moving
> > back and forth like a Cylon eyepiece... ugh. Whoever did that should be
> > shot.
>
> Doesn't Netscape do that on Linux? On Windows it leaves a fading trail.
It doesn't use a scrollbar for it. It paints into a window.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 04:25:13 GMT
"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <8vsjnl$5ffj4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> >"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > My windows version of Netscape 6 (release) has never run. It
always
> >> > > crashes with a DLL error message. Based on experience with other
> >> > > programs under windows, I interpret this as a windows problem, not
> >> > > something Netscape-specific.
> >> >
> >> > How can it be a windows problem?
> >> > If Netscape crashes, it's Netscape problem.
> >>
> >> Not necessarily. I wrote an app that worked fine, sent it to a
customer,
> >> who complained that it crashed when he moved the mouse over a toolbar.
> >> I felt bad, until I discovered that Visual C++ had updated
COMCTRL32.DLL
> >> on my machine. I sent him my version (who knows if I violated some
> >> MSFT law?), and that fixed his problem... a Windows problem. There
have
> >> been other similar examples of broken DLLs, if I recall. How wuz I
> >supposed
> >> to know that all my clients had to install IE 4 for my code to work.
> >> Yeeeesh!
> >
> >No, that is *not* windows problem.
> >That is *your* problem.
> >You application used updated DLL, which you didn't bother to check.
> >If you'd an *older* version of COMCTRL32.DLL, they you'd a case, but not
> >when it's an updated version.
> >
>
> Yes, you were supposed to know, you fool. Don't ever write any
> code for windows again, foolish mortal. Keep your hands of
> anything from Redmond, because if it goes wrong, it *will* be
> your fault, and we'll tell you the reason later. Maybe.
>
> >> > And, for what it worth, MS didn't release anything lately that can
break
> >> > Netscape, so this arguement is pointless.
> >>
> >> And how do you know that, my friend? Does Netscape not use any Windows
> >> DLL's?
> >
> >If it run on windows, it use windows API.
> >A common anti-ms arguement is that it change the API without bothering to
> >tell anybody and thus breaking competitor's applications.
> >
> >
> >
>
> And we all know that this never happens, don't we children.
>
> Mark
Gasp! Such heresy!
--
Tom Wilson
A Computer Programmer who wishes he'd chosen another vocation.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 04:26:22 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8vsa1i$5grsc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> > > Win98 will fly on 32MB (I used to work on 16 win 98)
> > > And I'm running a server on a 64MB which is also used as a desktop
> > machine.
> >
> > You have a strange idea of flying. My 32MB machine crawls if you
> > open more than a couple of windows.
>
> What are you doing on it?
> What windows? What services run on the background?
A P133 - the office quickstart is the main thing running automatically and
it
can't run Media Player 7 playing an mp3. Other players work OK.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 04:28:11 GMT
mark wrote:
> In article <8vpjug$5autc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Chad Mulligan wrote:
> >> >
> >> > "Chris Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >
> >> > > Even if Mcrosoft gets off in the US court, the EC is going to fry
> >> > > them.....
> >> >
> >> > Wooo. There goes 1/100th of the world market.
> >>
> >> You have ZERO grasp of world economics.
> >>
> >> Europe has several times as many people as the US, and total
> >> economy of WESTERN Europe alone is bigger than the US economy.
> >
> >Argh. I actually agrees with Aaron on this.
> >But why would the EC "fry them" ?
> >
> >
> Breaking the law.
Had something to do with a Sun complaint last I heard.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 06:00:54 +0200
"Bennetts family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:ApDU5.47$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8vurj2$5ja56$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Bennetts family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:zmBU5.22$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > Because I understand nerdboxen well enough to know that, unless I do
> > > something stupid like leaving a bootable CD in the drive between
> restarts,
> > I
> > > doesn't do anything except pause for about 1/2 a second during the
boot.
> >
> > The Whistler CD was in the CD-ROM, and it's a bootable one.
> > That is why I thought it's strange.
>
> I know the 98SE CD defaults to booting off the hard disk after a timeout.
AFAIK, it boot from the rescue disk image on the CD-ROM.
> > > No, install one driver, forced into a reboot, install the other 5
> drivers
> > > with associated reboots. Install apps (even f***ing Acrobat Reader
needs
> a
> > > reboot), upgrade Internet Exploiter...
> >
> > No, why would you install one driver and then reboot?
> > Install one driver, say no when it asks you to reboot, install another
> > dirver, continue doing so until you run out of drivers.
> > Then reboot.
> >
> > This work on win98.
>
> I know you can do that, but it leaves unimplemented changes around, which
> other drivers can step on and prematurely bring the installation down.
I used to do it all the time, no problems.
> > > Sorry, it can't.
> >
> > No, you never bothered to find out how to make windows tell you how to
do
> > it.
> > Windows will quite willingly gives you a list of what it does while
> booting.
>
> Either a) in the log, if you tell it to, or b) keep hitting Escape to get
> rid of the damn clouds.
That is one way to do this.
And I've also mistaken about the progress bar in Whistler, it does give you
one.
I just didn't noticed it.
> > > In this day and age where PCs are spending more and more time on the
> > > Internet, and more cases where people share the same computer,
security
> is
> > a
> > > necessity at all levels.
> >
> > I *agree*.
> > And I've expressed my displeasure about it already.
> > It's a Beta 1, so I think it will get fixed in the following releases.
>
> It does show you where M$ priorities lie, when security, a core function
> that should be tight from the git go, is left lax on even an early beta.
No, it shows that the defaults on a workstation release, on a beta1, are
overly lax.
It would take me roughly ten minutes to put the settings back to high alert,
about half an hour to turn the computer to a paranoid.
> > > You don't have the faintest idea about even basic security. What about
> > > keypad doorlocks? They don't give feedback like that. You don't need
it.
> >
> > I know this, and I agrees that this is a very good security measure, but
> > windows is supposed to cater to much larger (and largely more ignorant)
> user
> > base. (this is likely to change in the next five years, due to china's
> > decision, I wonder when we will first hear "one billion chiense can't go
> > wrong" sentense.)
> > But you don't know the kind of users that windows has to deal with.
> > If I take a 9x user and gives him this, he would think that the OS froze
> and
> > reboot.
> > I've seen it happen! Twice!
> > I would've prevented the second time but I was too busy laughing.
>
> Blinking cursor? I think that Windows should ship with a tutorial
guidebook
> to try and increase the proficiency of new users, and get them to at least
> partially understand how things work and why they are the way they are. A
> section on nettiquette would be nice, too.
Well, Whistler apperantly has it, after the OS boots, it try to explain me
*how to use the mouse*!
I stopped there, but I don't think you can *get* any more basic than that.
It was with pictures and movies and all of that, too.
It make me wonder exactly *who* MS has in mind when they put this in.
I mean, even the worst users I've seen knew what a mouse is.
> > > No, the only things M$ can do with Exploiter is make it standards
> > compliant,
> > > and fix the pig ugly default toolbar settings. And that print
preview...
> >
> > What about the print preview?
> > And how would you suggest to fix the "pig ungly default toolbar
settings."
> > (btw, have you seen MSN browsers? I've only seen screenshots, but it
looks
> > like the designers thought very hard about the term pretty and none at
all
> > about the term usable. {To counter the obvious retort, Whistler is very
> > usable by what I've seen so far} )
>
> Narrow them down, ditch the text beneath them (tooltips, people). I've
seen
> the MSN browsers, and I won't be touching them with a barge pole.
As a rule, it's bad to use ISP browsers.
> > About the standards, I fully agrees with you.
> > That was the reason I mentioned IE 5 on Mac, it's the most standard
> > complaint browser.
> > (I've not checked netscape 6, though, I'm going to very soon, test it on
> > whistler, see whatever it works. I also haven't checked the WaSP site,
to
> > see what they've to say about netscape 6, so this info might be slightly
> > outdated)
>
> NS6 isn't worth looking at, try it's OS cousin, Mozilla. Much more stable,
> and better compliant with standards.
One reason I take Netscape 6 is that I do web development sometimes.
Apperantely it's going to be the next-big-thing (I hope so, maybe we would
see some retaliation again, the browsers war were good to the surfers)
So far it looks nice.
I'm on new application tour right now, so it seems.
> > > I thought getting things done was what computers are for. I am
obviously
> > > wrong...
> >
> > Yes, and allowing to computer illetirate people to get things done is
> > largely what Whistler appears to be doing.
> > I'm not computer illiterate (of course, now there would be several who
> would
> > jump up and say I'm. If there would be, I'm going to answer them with
> > "Predictable"), so I can't really comment about this.
> > I'm going to test Whistler on a computer illiterate very soon, though.
>
> Why not help people become literate, and then ditch the fluff. I could
quite
> easily see a "learning" shell to replace Explorer for users without
> extensive experience, building them up to proficiency. Literate users
could
> then use a cleaned up, more functional shell.
Actually, I think that this is what whistler is doing.
You get the pro shell (misnamed) which is friendly and nice and goes *out of
its way in annoyingly cute degree* to help you.
And the normal shell, which is probably very much like the usual windows
look.
You can also turn all the bell and whistes off once you stop finding them
amusing.
> > > Spent time on NT, and it isn't as bad as 98, but certainly not crash
> hot,
> > > either. I haven't used 2k, because it is just NT5, with a new paint
job.
> > And
> > > that *matters*.
> >
> >
> > No, it isn't.
> > There are a lot of things that are different in 2K.
> > Try installing a new video card in NT and then in 2000 and then
understand
> > what I'm talking about.
> > NT can be a nightmare in this regard, 2000 is a breeze.
>
> PnP, and DirectX (I think). Easily explainable. And good.
Very good.
Install hardware on NT, blue screen.
Install hardware on 2K, true PNP.
> > That is just one point where 2k surpass NT on many levels, including
speed
> > on comparable hardware.
> > The 2k interface is nice, but it's the least of the things that they
> > changed.
> > If you think that 2K is NT with a paint job, you really need to spend
some
> > time with 2000.
>
> It is NT5, a full version number ahead of NT4. I'd expect some major
changes
> and improvements, and 2k has delivered. IE5, OTOH, doesn't deserve more
than
> 0.2 over IE4.
You consider the best standards complaince at the time to be a minor change?
The look has remained, but a lot of things had changed.
> > This is what I'm doing with Whistler right now. (As a note, doing
exactly
> > that on RH6 was very bad. It's my fault, of course, but I still think
that
> > it's impolite of the installer not to ask me before it deletes all my
HD)
>
> Huh? I never heard nor seen anything like that before.
Redhat 6 (for that matter, AFAIK, all versions of RH) would erase every bit
of HD that they can reach if you do an install as a server.
Ever since RH6, I pull the power cable off any HD I want to keep and do
custom installs.
It's more trouble, but at least that way I won't get my data erased.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 06:05:15 +0200
"Curtis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Bennetts family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
>
> » Why not help people become literate, and then ditch the fluff. I could
quite
> » easily see a "learning" shell to replace Explorer for users without
> » extensive experience, building them up to proficiency. Literate users
could
> » then use a cleaned up, more functional shell.
>
> THAT!! .... I could deal with. Many sensibly designed apps have adopted
> this approach, ie, offering a novice interface as opposed to an advanced
> user interface.
Whistler would appeal to you then.
It gives a newbie interface, misnamed as pro, and the classic windows shell.
There will be others, of course.
> I'm annoyed by this damned wizard that I have to use to make a new
> dial-up connection. Anyone know how to bypass it.
Try dialers, it's possible to create a DUN entry without using the wizard.
> I don't use the recycle bin. I use <SHIFT><DEL>. This is as deliberate
> as it gets and still I'm getting this "are you sure ..." confirmation
> dialog. Anyone knows how to disable that as well?
Go to Recycle bin properties, check "Don't store files in the recycle bin"
Uncheck "Display confirmation"
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 06:07:30 +0200
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> They said W2k was stable and it proved to NOT
> be stable. They claim Whistler is stable but
> they have done this before with W2k and NT
> before it.
Who proved it and how?
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 06:26:21 +0200
"Curtis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
>
> [...]
> | Cellular phone OS never crashed. (Yeah, I know it's much more simple
than
> | the simplest usable OS. Nonetheless, it can do a lot of tasks that my
> | computer can do.)
> | It *is* possible to write bugless code (or nearly as such).
> | You might want to read "The Software Conspiracy", a really good read
about
> | bugs in the software industry.
>
> A link to that document would be handy. :=)
Sorry, it's not a document, it's a book.
The Software Conspiracy: What You Don't Know About the Software Industry and
How It's Taking Control of Your Life -- Mark Minasi; Hardcover
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0071348069/o/qid=975385673/sr=8-1/ref
=aps_sr_b_1_3/106-6835028-8918858
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 04:33:04 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8vv5cp$5nime$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >
> >
> > Yeah - don't *run* anything, that'll slow it down.
>
> Naturally, if you run anything, on any OS, it will take resources from the
> system.
> Therefor, there will be fewer resources to hand around to other programs
> (assuming multi tasking OS)
> Do you know of a way to avoid this?
> If you do, please learn some engineering, because we need perpetual motion
> machine.
Under Linux, things take as long or longer to start up, but there is no
particular slowdown from having a lot of windows open at once
when the others are not doing much cpu work. On windows things
slow down just because more windows are open.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 04:32:14 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8vv5cp$5nime$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <8vsa1i$5grsc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien
wrote:
> > >
> > >"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:hxdU5.25015$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >>
> > >> "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >> news:8vqs63$5e16i$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> > Win98 will fly on 32MB (I used to work on 16 win 98)
> > >> > And I'm running a server on a 64MB which is also used as a desktop
> > >> machine.
> > >>
> > >> You have a strange idea of flying. My 32MB machine crawls if you
> > >> open more than a couple of windows.
> > >
> > >What are you doing on it?
> > >What windows? What services run on the background?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Yeah - don't *run* anything, that'll slow it down.
>
> Naturally, if you run anything, on any OS, it will take resources from the
> system.
> Therefor, there will be fewer resources to hand around to other programs
> (assuming multi tasking OS)
> Do you know of a way to avoid this?
No, but efficient multi-tasking and resource management helps a lot. Unix
was been refined in these areas since the 1970's and has an obvious and
understandable advantage.
> If you do, please learn some engineering, because we need perpetual motion
> machine.
>
Al Gore and his lawyers in a hamster wheel...Chasing chads.
--
Tom Wilson
A Computer Programmer who wishes he'd chosen another vocation.
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 04:34:43 GMT
Giuliano Colla wrote:
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > "Curtis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > > Rant off, I'm having a bad day with linux & its users.
> > >
> > > Windows and their users are typically worse.
> >
> > I'm holding Linux users to higher standards.
>
> Don't mix up OS merits with user merits.
>
> I'm forced to use for a portion of my time Windows, but this doesn't
> necessarily make of me an incompetent amateur.
I love how virtually all Linux lovers say they are forced to use Windows
at least sometimes. Usually end up that they just plain can't do
something the need to in Linux and have to go back to Windows to do it.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 06:30:13 +0200
"Chad Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:VRFU5.484$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8vr0id$5fqd9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In article <8vqs5v$5e16i$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >"Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > >
> <snip>
> >
> > I don't use lotus notes (and probably should be grateful for it,
Interface
> > hall of shame has a dedicated page for it) but don't they use IMAPI?
> >
>
> IMAPI?????? I think you concatenated two standards there, IMAP the
Internet
> Mail Access Protocol and MAPI Mail Applications Programming Interface.
> Notes uses IMAP and some bastardized virtual directory structure which
> explains it's 60MB client.
IMAP, I was thinking IMAP.
Sorry for the mistake.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 04:41:31 GMT
In article <8vvcd7$5e9qk$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
>"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
>> They said W2k was stable and it proved to NOT
>> be stable. They claim Whistler is stable but
>> they have done this before with W2k and NT
>> before it.
>
>Who proved it and how?
>
Very simple.
Just use it like the other 10,000 people did in
a business environment or with napster and
just watch that peice of shit bluescreen.
Or you can read it in the reviews.
But if I have to explain to you this, you've
probably never used the product for anything
other than an expensive screen saver.
Charlie
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
