Linux-Advocacy Digest #508, Volume #30 Tue, 28 Nov 00 18:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Major shift (.)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (.)
Re: Netscape review. (Spicerun)
Re: Ok, putting money where my mouth is... (Robert Kiesling)
Re: Statistic about this bigot group ("David Findlay")
Re: The Non Sense: people who are clueless about the WindowsNT registry... (was Re:
The Sixth Sense) (Tim Smith)
Re: Statistic about this bigot group ("MH")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Curtis)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Curtis)
Re: The Sixth Sense (.)
Re: The Sixth Sense (.)
Re: Things I have noticed................ ("MH")
Re: Why Java? (Donn Miller)
Re: The Sixth Sense (.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Major shift
Date: 28 Nov 2000 21:18:59 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:900ne5$lvl$[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.
>>
>> Neat. Half as much as the worst of its competition. And on compaqs yet.
>> Yes, im sure all the high-end engineers out there who are currently
> building
>> gigantic unix systems are going to be very happy to switch to compaq/w2k.
> Worst of it's competition? 64 CPU's seems to be the max most commercial
> systems can do.
Actually, no. ONE sun starfire NODE can have 64 CPUs. You can have many
hundreds all running parallel in an install. IBM makes machines with
many multiples of 64 CPUs per node. Solaris, AIX, HP/UX, etc. can all
recognize many hundreds of CPUs actually.
Windows absolutely, positively, one hundred percent CAN NOT.
And it never, ever will be able to; because compaq will never make a
machine that big.
>> No, really.
>>
>> And this datacenter beast has been on the burner for how long now?
> What are you talking about? DataCenter has been a released product for
> about 4 months.
Neat. Is anyone using it on machines which contain more than 8 processors?
Which ones?
>> Its never going to happen.
> Already has.
Its not running on 64 processors, and never ever will.
=====.
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:33:31 +1300
> So if I buy an AIX from IBM, I won't get OS?
AIX is the OS, but anyway, if you decided to purchase AIX, there is
nothing illegal about that. It should be illegal for IBM to provide you
with a machine and tell you you MUST run AIX on it though.
"You must buy the latest version of AIX, or you can't have the machine"
should also be illegal.
I can't help but notice that a lot of places wanted to charge me for
Win9x/NT even when I asked for it to not be included... Our supplier
doesn't even have an option on their website for "No operating system".
We have to select one and put a note on the order and manually
recalculate the price.
------------------------------
From: Spicerun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Netscape review.
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 21:16:06 +0000
Matthew Soltysiak wrote:
> spicerun wrote:
>
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > > Well, I've tried netscape. (6, windows version. On Whistler 2296 machine)
> > > Just as a note, Whistler being a beta release of windows might skew the
> > > results, but I don't think it would do such a degree as to nullify the
> > > results that I post.
> > > Even if you half the numbers I give, it's still *bad* for Netscape.
> >
> > I DON'T CARE!!!
>
> Then why are you responding/?? Go away. Haha....the same over again.
You first. Get out of the linux and mac newsgroups Wintroll!
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Ok, putting money where my mouth is...
From: Robert Kiesling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 21:56:02 GMT
"the_blur" <the_blur_oc@*removespamguard*hotmail.com> writes:
> > Great, Fred. So instead of "improving" the operating system, I
> > can waste time reading your message. I don't particularly give
> > a good goddamn either, what the KDE or GNOME projects' perspective
> > is about the penguin. AFAIK, they simply went ahead and devised
> > their own logos, which is just fine with me. Linux is the work
> > of the people who wrote it, and so is KDE, GNOME, etc., ad
> > infinitum, not yours...., and I could almost guarantee you that
> > they don't care what you think. But I don't speak for them, as
> > you've presumed to do here.
>
> Hehe, you were gonna read my message anyway, and you know it =) Otherwise
> you could just put me on your killfile and never have to hear my inane
> arguments again. I invite you to do so now.
>
> But, where did I presume to speak for anyone but myself (aside from the
> little HID bit) ?
>
> Gotta love that Linux community spirit eh? =)
>
> Cheers!
Not a problem, Fred. And thanks for the penguin logos. :)
--
Robert Kiesling
Linux FAQ Maintainer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.mainmatter.com/linux-faq/toc.html http://www.mainmatter.com/
---
Tired of spam? Please forward messages to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Reply-To: "David Findlay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "David Findlay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Statistic about this bigot group
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 07:58:14 +1000
Well for me I like to keep all my news messages on my work machine, which
unfortunately runs Windows. However at some stages I have had Outlook
Express running under Wine and working!
David
"Gerson Kurz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I evaluated 1335 mails including the heavy traffic threads "Of course
> there is a downside" and "The sixth sense". This is a list of the top
> ten newsreaders used to post messages. If you're interested I can post
> the source, or a complete list for this group (my server currently
> holds ~4100 messages but I didn't care enough for downloading them
> all).
>
> 34 Users - MicroPlanet Gravity v2.30
> 34 Users - slrn/0.9.6.2 (NetBSD)
> 36 Users - Mozilla/4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17-21mdksmp i686)
> 44 Users - Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
> 82 Users - Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
> 90 Users - slrn/0.9.6.2 (Linux)
> 91 Users - Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
> 121 Users - Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
> 126 Users - Mozilla 4.5 [en]C-CCK-MCD {TLC;RETAIL} (Win98; U)
> 268 Users - Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
>
> Of course, you're all on WINE, right ? Yeah sure.
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Non Sense: people who are clueless about the WindowsNT registry...
(was Re: The Sixth Sense)
Date: 28 Nov 2000 14:01:18 -0800
Reply-To: Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Before speculating about how the Registry might or might not be
implemented, go to www.wotsit.org and poke around. They've got documents
there describing the on disk format of the Registry, for both 9x and
NT/2K. Knowing how the data is stored on disk should give valuable
clues to how it is accessed.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Statistic about this bigot group
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 17:30:56 -0500
No, because as has been bandied about ad naseum, linux != decent end user
internet platform due to second & third rate browsers, news readers, mail
clients,..on and on and on and on....
These stats just prove it again. --and again and again and again and
again...
"sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:90135n$asm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gerson Kurz) wrote:
> > I evaluated 1335 mails including the heavy traffic threads "Of course
> > there is a downside" and "The sixth sense". This is a list of the top
> > ten newsreaders used to post messages. If you're interested I can post
> > the source, or a complete list for this group (my server currently
> > holds ~4100 messages but I didn't care enough for downloading them
> > all).
> >
> > 34 Users - MicroPlanet Gravity v2.30
> > 34 Users - slrn/0.9.6.2 (NetBSD)
> > 36 Users - Mozilla/4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17-21mdksmp i686)
> > 44 Users - Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
> > 82 Users - Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
> > 90 Users - slrn/0.9.6.2 (Linux)
> > 91 Users - Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
> > 121 Users - Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
> > 126 Users - Mozilla 4.5 [en]C-CCK-MCD {TLC;RETAIL} (Win98; U)
> > 268 Users - Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
> >
> > Of course, you're all on WINE, right ? Yeah sure.
> >
>
> No, the MS supporters have many Email address! Ever notice the joke
> about clare?
>
>
> >
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Curtis <[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 17:29:21 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark) posted:
[..]
| >Too bad for you. The thread isn't that long and what's worse, I requoted
| >it all in this very message to which you're replying. This is how bad
| >things are with you and the fact that you will not read, comprehend and
| >remember.
|
| Pointless stab, so far as I can see?
Not at all. Well deserved at this stage.
| So why did you mention it?
I felt like?
| What's BeOS got to do with what context these apps were used in?
| A paragraph and a sentence can be co-incident, this is simple
| grammar.
None. I never said it had anything to do with it.
| What is this list of apps? That's all I want to know.
| These apps which you say run on all these different OSs,
| or at least have functional equivalents. What are they?
Covered that before.
| I have no idea what you're talking about here at all now.
You never did really know.
| I've been requoting and rewriting and representing the *very* same
Nooooooo!!!! ***I'm*** the one that has been doing that!!
| So how long is OS/2 to NT transition - 5 mins? 1 year?
It doesn't matter. Never mind. I won't add another piece of info to the
mess that confuses you so much.
| 4=1? Help!
I'm afraid helping you is beyond me.
| I don't know what you're arguing about here,
<cough> I beg you're pardon?!!
| Ah - so why didn't you say in the first place :)
I've been saying more or less the same thing over and over again. Just
like your question. This whole thing has been colossally circular.
| Not all that, since you said yourself you had Beos for 2 days. The
| transition period for that must have been << 2 days.
What transition period? He introduces yet another strawman here and I
certainly won't bite this time around.
| Graakkk.
|
| That just seriously dented my concentration.
Concentration?
| No, I guess not, but it means that you're requiring me to
| search several different posting just to get *your*
| chronological list, in order to discuss something with you
| which you raised and posted here in the first place.
You're joking right?
| I don't actually wish to paint you at all, let alone as rational or not.
|
| I'd be worried if I were worried about that at all.
You're joking right?
| I didn't say I cut anything. I really think you're having trouble
| following this thread.
Now that's it. Have a nice day Mark. It was NOT good.
[...............]
PS// Despite all the trimming everything is fully within context.
--
Curtis
| ,__o
!___ _-\_<, An egotist thinks he's in the groove
<(*)>--(*)/'(*)______________________ when he's in a rut.
------------------------------
From: Curtis <[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 17:29:30 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert) posted:
| >The people benefit, not the software developer who's sole reason for
| >developing the software is to make some money so that he can put food on
| >the table and buy his home.
| >
|
| Well again. Feed those kids from the maintenance contract.
| The day's of SELLING CD's aren't over anyway. Look at
| RedHat and Suse and the others. It's up to $65 a box now.
They aren't profiting doing this.
| >| I really don't know why people get so damn hung up on free
| >| software cost anyway. When I worked for HBOC we would GIVE
| >| away software if they would sign the maintenance agreement
| >| with us. We'd even give them hardware to boot! It's all
| >| in the marketing. And that was copyrighted software also.
| >
| >How much general purpose software out there carries a maintenance
| >requirement that users would be willing to pay significantly for. They'd
| >rather ask there neighbours or go to the nearest newsgroup rather than
| >pay for tech support.
| >
|
|
| For the Linux operating system the typical home user will sometimes
| do this. Or they buy RedHat and get the 90 days support from them
| then end up paying for annual blocks from then on out.
|
| I don't feed my family with money made from stuff sold at COMP USA.
That's *you*. Are you aware of the amount of commercial developers that
earn a living selling licenses for their general purpose apps.
| I write software used by large commerical institutions mainly
| in the insurance industry. This is where the money is in being
| a programmer. And we make our money yesterday and today via
| the maintenance.
|
|
| >| The GPL just takes that step and makes the software open
| >| source and FREE for use. But the market really hasn't
| >| changed from the day's when copyrighted material was
| >| the norm.
| >
| >However:
| >
| >The users benefit, not the software developer who's sole reason for
| >developing the software is to make some money so that he can put food on
| >the table and buy his home.
| >
|
|
| The GPL doesn't say a damn thing about you not being able to
| SELL those CD's you make. It just says you WILL make the
| source code available.
I never said anything about not *selling* the CD's. Is OSS free? Yes.
Who charges for the OSS itself that they develop. They charge for
packaging the code or delivering the code or providing support services.
This is profitable in some areas but certainly not on the wide scale
being promoted by the linux community of freeness seekers.
| You can download Debian for FREE right now. It doesn't cost
| you a GD thing.
It costs the Debian packagers a lot to maintain that server from which I
downloaded Debian. Nothing is free. This is my point.
| Why is it that RedHat just keeps selling
| more and more of essentially the same software in boxes
| for anywhere from $65 to $189 a box.
Why is it that they have been operating at a loss for years?
| You need to use your brain here.
I am using my brain. None of the linux distro distributors operate
profitably. Why is this. I *am* using my brain instead of just looking
on and saying OSS ..... Kule!! ..... tha future!! Down with commercial
software.
| >| Except with the GNU/GPL model, the enhancement is shared by
| >| all. It isn't just for the benefit of one entity.
| >
| >The software developer, who's sole purpose for developing software is to
| >make a profit doesn't really care that much about the benefits of the
| >entire community.
| >
|
| That's too bad.
Huh? That's a reality one cannot hand wave away in that manner.
| >Have you ever heard of the triangle of needs. We attend to our needs in
| >a triangular fashion starting from the wide base up to the tiny apex.
| >The desire to help others is at the apex. You cannot help others or
| >think of others until you first help yourself. The software developer
| >looking for a means of income to help himself through developing
| >software doesn't care about the noble cause of OSS. This is why
| >commercial software will !!!!!!DWARF!!!!! OSS software in terms of scope
| >and variety.
| >
|
|
| In the past this was certaintly true.
This is still true. OSS software numbers have increased but the reality
still exists.
| It doesn't seem to be shaping up to be that way in the future.
| OSS is really GNU/GPL'ed by the way.
Java seemed as if it would have taken over the world by now. It's called
HYPE!!!!!!
| No, the trend for the last 6 straight years has been an
| ever increasing GPL'ed base and a push by the large manufacturers
| to get this to market. I don't think they are going back
| to the other bankrupt way of software development.
Bankrupt? Who's profiting? IBM marketing commercial NT solutions or
RedHat marketing Linux distros?
| It's very lossy for the consumers.
Nope. You generally get what you pay for unless who you purchase from is
a monopoly. This will pan out when Linux stops playing catch up and the
OSS community really has to start innovating. This is a general
statement in refute to the mantra that OSS is going to take over the
world. I'm not saying that open source efforts have not and will not
continue to be innovative in some areas.
| >Oh. Tell me now. Are any of these distributors for Linux distros and
| >technical services making a profit? Nooooo.
| >
|
| Of course they are. RedHat isn't laying off people.
| I think your putting too much into stock price crap.
That's your problem. You think it's crap.
| You need to be thinking in terms of CASH FLOW.
| Not stock market doo-doo. If it we'ren't for our
| brilliant friends at IBM the RedHat stock would
| still be UP THERE.
|
|
|
| >| We would sell a hospital a software package for $110,000.
| >| But we would get an annual maintenance fee after the first
| >| year of $90,000 a year for every year the product was licensed
| >| to be maintained by us. 80% of our companies revenues is
| >| in the maintenance contracts. Very little is in the sales
| >| of software. They have actually been GIVING the software
| >| away for FREE if they sign 5 year contracts.
| >
| >A number of things here.
| >
| >a) This is highly specialised software for which technical support is
| >not readily available.
| >
|
| This is true. AGAIN, it's where the money is baby.
This is a limited area and every developer cannot flock to it baby.
| >Contrast this to Linux or any popular general purpose apps where the
| >help may be used or the user may take to a newsgroup, the internet or
| >discussion lists to get technical support. This is the problem with
| >support returns. The bulk of users are parasites. They don't help with
| >development and they don't help by contributing through purchasing tech
| >support.
| >
|
|
| NOPE. Companies are not going to CRUISE the newgroups for
| their support as you say. They are too lazy for that.
That's companies. What about the other users who are the life's blood of
so many developers of general purpose apps. You're wishing the software
industry to go back in time where it's *only* pushed and guided by the
needs of companies.
| Trust me. I know from where I speak.
You only speak from one perspective.
| >b) When they give away the software, is the source also given away. Can
| >the hospital to which the source be given, give it to another developer
| >to be enhanced or further developed? This is another deterrent to OSS.
| >After 5 years of hard work and investing, I create my breakthrough
| >software that greatly improves my companies efficiency. If anyone else
| >is going to get their hands on this software, they'd have to pay dearly
| >for it.
| >
|
|
| In the past, NO. Today, YES.
|
| But again. Our clients don't write software.
| And the average linux USER doesn't either.
| If they could READ C code then they wouldn't be on the GD
| newgroups to begin with.
|
| So the whole point here is rediculous.
| The shipping of the source code is a GPL requirement and
| also a MARKETING HYPE thing in the balance.
|
| But if you CAN read source code, it's a good deal for you.
|
|
| >| >An economic one exists. When you develop the software, people need to
| >| >buy it so that it can be worth your while to develop it. This is the
| >| >reason behind the collapse of the OS/2 software market. Not enough OS/2
| >| >users exist to maintain the market. Developers invest a lot into
| >| >creating apps, employing other developers in the process and then no-one
| >| >buys the application. This is a serious barrier.
| >| >
| >| >This is why MS markets Win2k only for the PC platform. It's not
| >| >economically viable for them to do otherwise because there's not enough
| >| >demand for it.
| >| >
| >| >Before you develop an application, you need to have a target population
| >| >to market it to.
| >
| >| Well, again. Your talking about the days of when people will
| >| be selling OS's and those day's are comming to a close.
| >
| >My arguments are not by any means confined to just OS's.
| >
|
|
| Then you should not have just been talking about OS's.
The fact that my arguments are not confined to just OS's doesn't mean
that I cannot talk about OS's. I used the OS issue to make a broader
point.
| >Even then, there's the very disturbing fact that in the midst of the
| >linux boom, none of the distributors can admit to be working with a
| >positive profit margin but in fact at a loss.
| >
|
|
| Again, this simply isn't true.
| Every one of them are indeed profitable.
| And they will be in business for several years to
| come. To sit there and pick butt about this on
| the newsgroup isn't going to change that situation
| either.
|
| You either adapt FARMER BROWN or we will run
| the tractor over your dead body.
|
| Understand.
Can you provide proof of this profitability?
Take a look at this stuff on VA Linux:
http://www.nasdaq.com/asp/quotes_sec.asp?symbol=LNUX%60&selected=LNUX%60
Excerpt:
» ||WE HAVE A HISTORY OF LOSSES AND EXPECT TO CONTINUE TO INCUR NET LOSSES FOR
» ||THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE. We incurred losses of $89.8 million for the
» ||Company's fiscal year ended July 28, 2000, primarily due to expansion of our
» ||operations, and we had an accumulated deficit of $109.6 million as of July
» ||28, 2000. We expect to continue to incur significant product development,
» ||sales and marketing and administrative expenses, particularly as a result of
» ||expanding our direct sales force. In addition, we are investing considerable
» ||resources in our professional services organization and our Internet
» ||operations. We do not expect to generate sufficient revenues to achieve
» ||profitability and, therefore, we expect to continue to incur net losses for
» ||at least the foreseeable future. If we do achieve profitability, we may not
» ||be able to sustain it. Failure to become and remain profitable may
» ||materially and adversely affect the market price of our common stock and our
» ||ability to raise capital and continue operations.
Red Hat RHAT:
http://realtimefilings.nasdaq.com/edgar_conv_html/2000/10/16/16/0000950168-00-002190.html
3 months ending 8/31, net loss of $15.7 million.
| >| You are living in the PEAK of commerical OS sales in human
| >| history. After Microsoft fades away you will probably never
| >| see computer OS's for sale again.
| >|
| >| With Linux and the BSD's around there is little incentive
| >| to buy Windows anymore. Even the Mac X croud is getting
| >| a free ride.
| >|
| >| Your talking about the market at the turn of the century
| >| and you should be thinking of the market of tommorrow.
| >
| >As I said, my arguments do not apply only to OSS's as the OSS movements
| >mantra does not only apply to OS's.
| >
| >
| >--
| >Curtis
| >
| >| ,__o
| >!___ _-\_<, An egotist thinks he's in the groove
| ><(*)>--(*)/'(*)______________________ when he's in a rut.a
|
|
| I think this signoff says it all.
|
| Think about it.
You should as well. It all depends on ones perspective. :=)
--
Curtis
| ,__o
!___ _-\_<, An egotist thinks he's in the groove
<(*)>--(*)/'(*)______________________ when he's in a rut.
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:33:22 +1300
In article <901094$6664c$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
> I don't comment about the rest as I'm tried of talking to fanatics.
> The obivious resort to this would be that I'm fanatic as well, which may or
> may not be the case (and this will also encounrage people to post saying I
> am a fanatic, no may abou it), but at least I am willing to talk to the
> other side and listen to what they are saying.
Fucking fanatic.
;)
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:34:43 +1300
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> For that matter, why do people buy "toy" lawn mowers when perfectly good
> tractor size models are available? (Hint: because the former type is
> cheaper and more appropriate for small lawns.)
That's your idea of a hint? =)
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Things I have noticed................
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 17:39:01 -0500
"kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I know the post I did was very "wintroll like", however, I am only
> trying to stir a bit of shyte in this newsgroups :) with the absence of
> Claire Lynn and co, things have been getting pretty boring, needed to
> post something to liven up the atmosphere.
Someone admits that cola is based on BS and trolling. It's about F'n time!
> Here are the proper things I have noticed:
--snip--
> Here are the main three main OS's I have tried:
>
> Windows 2000: (from my experience), fairly stable, pretty good hardware
> support. However, the hardware requirements of Windows 2000 are pretty
> steep when compared to it's competition. Also, whether Windows 2000 is
> more secure than previous NT releases, this has yet to be proven. For a
> dedicated Wintel user, yes it is a defininate upgrade, however, for
> Linux/UNIX users, Microsoft is still playing catch-up in terms of
> realibility, stability and scalability.
More Shite. w2k runs as well on most boxes that were equipped to run NT4.
This is fact. I've tried it and I've seen it. Get over it, please.
> UNIX/Linux: (from my experience), very stable, average hardware support.
> The minimum hardware requirements are not as steep as Windows 2000,
ye.....snip..
Really? Then maybe you can 'splain why running a standard install of redhat
with only NN & X running consumes 25 more mb than w2k with IE?
>Although the reliability of Windows NT has improved, it
> still has a way to go to reach the same level of respect UNIX has in
> large corperatio....
Which is it folks? Make up your minds here. End user? Or corporations?
Pick a group, and group.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 17:37:47 -0500
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Java?
mlw wrote:
> It is a proprietary API put out by Sun.
Sun proprietary >>> MS proprietary. But most of all, it's based on a
non-proprietary language (C++).
> It is an interpreted language that pretends to be a compiled one, thus
> having all the problems of a compiled one as well as an interpreted one.
It IS compiled - it gets compiled into bytecodes before being run. It
just doesn't run in the native machine format. Never fear - Java
compilers and VM's, I'm sure, are getting better.
As I said before, the main strength of Java is the ability to code
internet apps very easily w/ a C++ like language. Also, it's perfect
for e-commerce apps, because Java apps run inside a web browser. VB
doesn't do this.
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:38:24 +1300
> I'm not talking about Telnet, though that's been available on NT for years
> as well.
The telnet client maybe...
Or did you mean commercial third party addons for NT that allowed telnet?
MS's one never appeared to make it out of beta until 2k.
But then, telnet isn't too useful on a system with a hampered command
line either...
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
