Linux-Advocacy Digest #488, Volume #30 Tue, 28 Nov 00 02:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: C++ -- Our Industry... ("mmnnoo")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Mike Byrns)
Re: Major shift ("tony roth")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Mike Byrns)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Mike Byrns)
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Whistler review. ("Tom Wilson")
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Les Mikesell")
Re: The Sixth Sense (Mike Byrns)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Mike Byrns)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Mike Byrns)
Re: The Sixth Sense (Mike Byrns)
Re: Major shift (sfcybear)
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Mike Byrns)
Re: The Sixth Sense (Mike Byrns)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "mmnnoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: C++ -- Our Industry...
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 06:30:07 GMT
But Charlie, you have got it all wrong,
all you need to do to start a successful online
business is color-by-numbers with Microsoft
products. Check out the new section on
Microsoft's homepage, "Building an Online Business."
http://www.microsoft.com/business/ecommerce/build/default.asp
See the section, "Identify IT Solutions." For instance, one
thing you will need to do is "Offer a great customer experience."
To do that, simply purchase Microsoft Passport (whatever
that is). And the step, "Build and manage Web site" is all
taken care of once you buy Microsoft(R) Commerce Server 2000
and Microsoft Visual Studio(R). See? Just follow the
chart, it's as easy as 1.2.3.
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<snip>
> They had NO DESIGN! When asked how did you develop
> this crap for the last 3 years the answer was
> we assigned everybody a loose idea of the project
> in peices and had them spend 1.5 years writing it,
> then they FITTED the peices together for the other
> 1.5 years.
<snip>
------------------------------
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 06:32:30 GMT
Les Mikesell wrote:
> "Chad Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:iwcT5.5295$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > > The newer libs support the old calls even if they have to map them.
> The
> > > problem is
> > > > that 3rd-party installers have historically replaced NEWER DLLs to
> suit
> > > their own
> > > > needs thus breaking apps that depend on the NEW calls.
> > >
> > > And the historical reason that 3rd party apps had to overwrite these
> > > DLLS would be?
> > >
> >
> > None. They didn't have to if the lazy programmers either: a> Checked the
> > dates before copying or B> Wrote their programs to the published Windows
> API
> > correctly.
> >
>
> And you are positive that there has never been a case where the newer
> MS DLL broke another vendor's previously working program?
I can count one one hand. Prime examples are with the VC6 runtimes being
optimized to improve performance by a large margin and just happening to cause
apps that double freed memory handles to crash. The core problems are
generally with the apps doing something wrong.
------------------------------
From: "tony roth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Major shift
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 22:28:13 -0800
and I remember when atari st's and amiga's were the rage in europe ha ha ha!
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <8vvgfg$2af$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, sfcybear wrote:
> >In article <z5GU5.10636$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> "sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:8vv7oi$rri$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > "...a major shift continued toward non-Microsoft servers. "
> >> >
> >> > While the winvocates try to tell us what's so great about a 49 day
> >> > uptime clock, the European server market is moving to Unix/Linux...
> >> >
> >> > http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/reuters/REU20001123S0008
> >>
> >> If you read the article, it's not that they're moving away from
> >Windows,
> >> it's that they're moving to higher end RISC systems, which currently
> >only
> >> run Unix or Linux. With (until very recnetly) Intel based servers
> >maxing
> >> out at 8 CPU's, the 64 CPU systems that Sun and others offer are much
> >more
> >> attractive. That's changing though. Win2k Datacenter can support CPU
> >> configurations up to 32 processors.
> >>
> >> One datapoint doth not a trend make.
> >
> >Yeah, 43% growth rate for the Linux/Unix and risc vs 1% growth rate for
> >windows and intell Sure looks like W2K is kicking ass! Get real Funk...
> >and that is an ongowing trend - "a major shift continued toward
> >non-Microsoft servers." Do you understand what "Major shift
> >continued..." means? Do you know what a 43% growth rate vs a 1% growth
> >rate does for market share? Remeber that Unix was still the major
> >platform meaning that the intel market share is droping like a rock!
> >
> >Go back and play with your 49 day uptime clock!
> >
> >
>
>
> FYI - in some countries in Europe, South America, Africa,
> and Asia the Linux growth rate is over 2000% now.
> The average globally is over 200%.
>
>
> Windows will be completely devestated in Europe in just
> 2 years at this rate. There won't be enough market
> there for them to keep their doors open.
>
> And what little they had in Africa is going bye bye.
>
> Asia is going Linux at mainly over 1000% growth rates,
> which is why ORACLE hitched that BIG, BIG ride with
> TURBO LINUX.
>
> And South America is clipping along mainly between
> 200 adn 400% growth rates for Linux.
>
> But yes! In North America we are waddling along
> here whilst the world leaves us in the dust.
>
> Charlie
>
>
------------------------------
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 06:35:19 GMT
Les Mikesell wrote:
> "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > Try a RedHat 6.2 or up 'workstation' install if you want the
> > > machine not to run any services. Normally I want to use the
> > > computer so I want services enabled. However, that has
> > > nothing to do with the earlier posting about Microsoft arbitrarily
> > > moving the ports for file sharing without telling anyone. Quick
> > > now, which router ports do you block to keep netbios-over-tcp
> > > from leaking out?
> >
> > You block everything you don't know you need. I'm sure glad you don't
> setup MY
> > routers and firewalls. And on the worstations you don't run NetBios at
> all.
>
> Why do you have a network if you don't let anyone use it for network
> services?
I just don't let *everyone* use it. Segment the network into inside, outside
and DMZ if you have a web presence. Inside interfaces get LAN networking.
Outside interfaces don't. Really quite simple.
------------------------------
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 06:37:00 GMT
Les Mikesell wrote:
> "Chad Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:2QZT5.10139$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > Whereas I go to the pub and buy a pint with the money that I didn't give
> > > to Microsoft :)
> > >
> >
> > To bad you wouldn't have the time, what with all the arcane tasks needed
> to
> > keep a UNIX healthy.
>
> That's funny, considering that many of us have unix boxes that have been
> running for years with no maintenance at all.
Then they don't do anything at all.
------------------------------
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 06:38:29 GMT
"Curtis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[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.
>
> Which Windows are you referring to?
>
> On Win2k here, I use a virtual desktop manager. Once I have certain apps
> open, I don't close them. I don't see any slow downs with such a
> practice or else I wouldn't adopt such a practice.
This is win98 - I haven't tried win2k on any low-resource machine. If I
wanted to spend that much money I'd get some more RAM too (or instead...).
However, I don't see much performance difference between NT and
Win2k on a box with 384 Megs running an in-house app. It just doesn't
crash as often as it did with a pre-sp6a NT.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[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 06:42:09 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8vulpn$5pbkd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <3a228f5a$0$14371$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Conrad Rutherford
> wrote:
> > >how would you know?
> >
> > I think he knows what's run better for him, which is what he said.
> >
> > It's nothing like :
> >
> > >
> > >That's like saying you run Linux cause it kicks DOS 6.22's ass.
> >
> > at all.
> >
> > wa waaaaa.
> >
> >
> > Besides, we really don't care whether Ayende likes the colour
> > scheme of DOS7.3 or DOS8 or whatever this will be.
>
> There isn't, nor ever was, DOS in NT line.
> You are thinking 9x line.
> A very common mistake with linadvocates, it seems.
That's true.
The misconception comes from the fact that NT's CLI (cmd) is syntactically
identical to DOS. (A major weakness, IMHO)
--
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 06:43:33 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8vvd45$5u7qu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Even if they don't do it intentionally, they keep breaking things. I
> > think it was SP6 that broke Notes server wasn't it? Required all
clients
> > have admin access or something...
>
> Fixed within days.
> Microsoft withdraw SP6 and released SP6a, which fix this problem.
> Gee, if you wanted a story about how MS break other companies'
applications,
> it's about the worst you could pick.
> Lotus didn't use the API the way the should've, and they messed up with
the
> NTLM.
> MS went out of its way to fix this. Did it very fast, too.
Note that this was at a time that MS had legal problems over
anti-competitive
practices. I remember having to upgrade many applications over the years
because they quit working with some particular MS version change or service
pack, but can't remember the details. Did anyone keep records of which
app broke at each change?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[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 06:46:39 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> Giuliano Colla wrote:
> >
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > > The NT4.x and 9x EULAs specifically prohibit ANY customer statement
> > > > which is damaging to Microsoft in any way.
> > >
> > > Can you point me out to where those statement are?
> > > I can't see how this is true, because when ME came out (and 95/98 too, for
> > > that matter) a lot of magazines said something like: "You buy a new
> > > computer, get it, otherwise, keep your own OS" Which is clearly damaging MS
> > > http://www.iarchitect.com/shame.htm is taking apart several of MS
> > > application.
> > >
> > > Two examples out of the millions I could've given.
> >
> > EULA binds customers, not journalists or net sites, hopefully!
>
> But most journalists are ALSO MS customers.
Most users are MS customers.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[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 06:52:21 GMT
"Curtis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
>
> | > Because I know that I've alternatives.
> | > I've within reach at least 5 or 6 dist of linux, three of BSD.
> | > If MS gets too annoying, I will switch.
> | > I always had this option, and I'll always will.
> |
> | What would you have used in 1996? Which major vendor could have
> | sold you a PC without paying for a copy of Windows?
>
> How does bringing the past into this really help your argument of
> whether or not alternatives to Windows exist TODAY?
There are, but the available applications (and thus the desirability of
using each platform) have been very much determined by the numbers
of each in the past. I don't see the 'have you stopped committing
illegal activities' form of the question as being very interesting.
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 06:53:46 GMT
mark wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Byrns wrote:
> >mark wrote:
> >
> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Byrns wrote:
> >> >Les Mikesell wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> > On Tue, 21 Nov 2000 07:03:36 GMT, Mike Byrns
> >> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > >Bullshit Les. Show some proof. My default install of Pro didn't even
> >> >> > >have
> >> >> > >NetBIOS over TCP enabled so the port was rejecting connections. When I
> >> >> > >uninstalled the Workstation service it was stealthed. I've NMAPed my
> >> >> > >box and
> >> >> > >nothing is open that I don't want and that's OUT OF THE BOX. BTW I'm
> >> >> > >not "blocking" anything. Windows does not respond when the services are
> >> >> > >not installed on the interface. Never has.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I just went through this EXACT scenario installing SuSE 6.4 as well as
> >> >> > Win2k in default installs.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > With SuSE 6.4 I took the "Almost Everything" option because as a
> >> >> > newbie, I don't want to miss experiencing Linux to it's fullest. With
> >> >> > Win2k I did a standard default install.
> >> >>
> >> >> Try a RedHat 6.2 or up 'workstation' install if you want the
> >> >> machine not to run any services. Normally I want to use the
> >> >> computer so I want services enabled. However, that has
> >> >> nothing to do with the earlier posting about Microsoft arbitrarily
> >> >> moving the ports for file sharing without telling anyone. Quick
> >> >> now, which router ports do you block to keep netbios-over-tcp
> >> >> from leaking out?
> >> >
> >> >You block everything you don't know you need. I'm sure glad you don't setup MY
> >> >routers and firewalls. And on the worstations you don't run NetBios at all.
> >> >
> >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >>
> >> Doesn't that defeat having it at all?
> >
> >Why should it be loaded on your outside interfaces when it's not going to be used?
> >
>
> Maybe I'm missing something there, but the line says 'workstations', it
> doesn't say 'outside interfaces'. I don't understand how your
> question relates to the previous post.
You should. It was clearly a typo. Only the "inside" interfaces have any business
running "inside" protocols like Windows Networking or NFS. Segment your LAN/WAN
properly, use properly configured firewalls and grep your logs (yes Windows too) and
you'll be OK.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[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 06:58:01 GMT
"Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > 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.
Yes, the thing they almost universally have trouble doing under Linux
is interoperating with the proprietary file formats that Microsoft has
used to lock you in. It's your data, but you have to pay for a software
license to access it on another machine.
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 06:58:13 GMT
mark wrote:
> In article <wWZT5.10145$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Chad Mulligan wrote:
> >
> >"Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Chad Mulligan wrote:
> >>
> >> > "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >
> >> > > But it really is very simple to install wine. If you can't do it,
> >then
> >> > you
> >> > > have no brain:
> >> > >
> >> > > rpm -Uvh wine*.rpm
> >> >
> >> > This assumes you use a distribution that supports RPM, not all do.
> >> >
> >>
> >> The other major choice is deb. Just get the deb package and install. It
> >is
> >> easy.
> >
> >Also an assumption. Ever looked at Slackware????
>
> It's not an assumption, it's a fact. 'The other major choice' means
> exactly what it says. This is not a Microsoft world with a one
> true way defined by some people in Redmond, it's a world of choice.
>
> The major choices are deb and rpm, but tgz is also available, as
> well as undoubtably other methods which people use because they
> can.
>
> You can install the source and compile. Oh yeah, you don't get
> that option from Microsoft at all, do you.
This argument is used only when the Linux folks choose to ignore the government
anti-trust cases that claims otherwise. Yet they support that too. Inconsistent
and convoluted just like their OSs.
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 06:59:32 GMT
mark wrote:
> In article <qyZT5.10122$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Chad Mulligan wrote:
> >
> >"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In article <vrST5.5567$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> Chad Mulligan wrote:
> >> >
> >> >"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> In article <J4cT5.5264$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> >> Chad Mulligan wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Try publishing an "unhappy Microsoft experience" on company letter
> >> >> >> head, and watch how quickly Microsoft has your company in court
> >> >> >> for violating the EULA, which specifically states that the
> >corporation
> >> >> >> MAY NOT publish *anything* disparaging about Microsoft's products...
> >> >> >> EVEN IF IT'S TRUE.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Not true, I published a letter to the editor of PC week some 6 years
> >ago
> >> >> >with a minor complaint about Microsoft and received a call from MS
> >asking
> >> >> >what they could do to fix the problem, I told them and it was done,
> >both
> >> >> >retroactive and made policy in their next release.
> >> >>
> >> >> I thought that the EULA was not enforcable 6 years ago, but might
> >> >> be now? Related to UCITA or DMCA or something?
> >> >>
> >> >> Would be interesting to see what happened now.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >Most likely the same, MS saw this as a PR/Marketing problem and did what
> >> >they do best, give the customer's what they want.
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >> Chuckle. I'm still waiting for any of the things I want. Still,
> >> I'll assume you were joking here.
> >
> >Not exactly, They do try to meet marketing requests. Little things like the
> >Terminal Server addition to Win2K Server for remote adminstration originated
> >from an e-mail sent to tech support at MS by myself.
>
> Does that mean that if I want something fixing in windows,
> you can ask for it on my behalf and it'll get done?
>
> This just seems kind of doubtful.
>
> But I won't look a gifthorse in the mouth. Can you
> get my Win98SE to shut down properly - an email to
> tech support?
How about going to the root of the problem and updating your BIOS?
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Major shift
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 06:46:54 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <8vvgfg$2af$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, sfcybear wrote:
> >In article <z5GU5.10636$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> "sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:8vv7oi$rri$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > "...a major shift continued toward non-Microsoft servers. "
> >> >
> >> > While the winvocates try to tell us what's so great about a 49
day
> >> > uptime clock, the European server market is moving to
Unix/Linux...
> >> >
> >> > http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/reuters/REU20001123S0008
> >>
> >> If you read the article, it's not that they're moving away from
> >Windows,
> >> it's that they're moving to higher end RISC systems, which
currently
> >only
> >> run Unix or Linux. With (until very recnetly) Intel based servers
> >maxing
> >> out at 8 CPU's, the 64 CPU systems that Sun and others offer are
much
> >more
> >> attractive. That's changing though. Win2k Datacenter can support
CPU
> >> configurations up to 32 processors.
> >>
> >> One datapoint doth not a trend make.
> >
> >Yeah, 43% growth rate for the Linux/Unix and risc vs 1% growth rate
for
> >windows and intell Sure looks like W2K is kicking ass! Get real
Funk...
> >and that is an ongowing trend - "a major shift continued toward
> >non-Microsoft servers." Do you understand what "Major shift
> >continued..." means? Do you know what a 43% growth rate vs a 1%
growth
> >rate does for market share? Remeber that Unix was still the major
> >platform meaning that the intel market share is droping like a rock!
> >
> >Go back and play with your 49 day uptime clock!
> >
> >
>
> FYI - in some countries in Europe, South America, Africa,
> and Asia the Linux growth rate is over 2000% now.
> The average globally is over 200%.
>
> Windows will be completely devestated in Europe in just
> 2 years at this rate. There won't be enough market
> there for them to keep their doors open.
>
> And what little they had in Africa is going bye bye.
>
> Asia is going Linux at mainly over 1000% growth rates,
> which is why ORACLE hitched that BIG, BIG ride with
> TURBO LINUX.
>
> And South America is clipping along mainly between
> 200 adn 400% growth rates for Linux.
>
> But yes! In North America we are waddling along
> here whilst the world leaves us in the dust.
>
Not all of us are being left behind!
> Charlie
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
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 07:00:14 GMT
"Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Question: Is Terminal Server the rich man's X-Windows server?
>
> Again. Linux is only free if your time is worth nothing.
But paying much more for an alternative is likely to result in more
wasted time.
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 07:03:56 GMT
mark wrote:
> In article <8vqs5v$5e16i$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> >"Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >
> >> 2. Why have another OS just to run the one or two Windows programs that
> >you
> >> might need to use. I have been down this road. It's a real PITA to have
> >to
> >> log into Windows just to get my mail. All of my real work is done on AIX
> >and
> >> Linux.
> >
> >Aren't there email programs for linux? Why do you've to use windows to check
> >your mail.
> >
> The thread was referring to Lotus Notes, a proprietary solution, and
> how much better it runs with wine+linux than on windows.
>
> It was not referring to email, but as you so correctly say, there are
> stacks of email solutions for linux.
Hallock's headers implied that we was using Windows to post.
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[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 07:06:49 GMT
Giuliano Colla wrote:
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > > Netscape 6 supports multiple POP severs, but I've not yet tested it
> >
> > According to a review from one of the more known computer reporters in here,
> > it sucks.
> > Of personal experiance (beta, though) it has the stability of a dove in a
> > hurrican.
>
> I gave a quick test (under linux) of beta's. Until PR3 they were just
> for fun. PR3 appeared to be a reasonable beta (a little buggy, something
> not implemented, but usable).
> You may have different behavior under Windows, because the application
> must handle a lot of issues which under Unix are handled by OS.
Is that why about all previous versions of Netscape about all Unices are widely
regarded by Unix folks as unstable too? Windows Netscape has always been the
flagship for obvious reasons. Perhaps you should read up on all the problems with
Netscape UNIX development at www.jwz.org. "Building a GUI with these toolkits is
like building a bookshelf out of mashed potatoes."
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
