Linux-Advocacy Digest #519, Volume #30 Wed, 29 Nov 00 04:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job? (Ketil Z Malde)
Re: Whistler review. (javelina)
Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ("Les Mikesell")
What is the best/most powerful distro of linux? ("Smartygus")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job? (Stuart Fox)
Re: Whistler review. ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Whistler review. ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job?
From: Ketil Z Malde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 08:18:36 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark) writes:
> I think this concept of 'desktop' needs expanding a little.
> For my work, I do not have a TV card or a need for a sound
> card at all.
Right. When I said desktop, I guess I really meant a system that
supports home use (i.e. games, multimedia), as well as office use.
> I though NT was supposed to be a server OS, not a desktop one?
My impression is that it's NT Server for servers, NT workstation for
office use, and Win9x/ME for home use, games and multimedia. Perhaps
Win2000 is trying to get some quality into the home use department,
but the pricing would suggest otherwise. I guess it's more bringing
multimedia into the office.
> I also thought that NT5's hardware support was somewhat patchy.
NT4 doesn't support hardware any better than your average Linux
distribution, IMHO. Win9x supports more hardware, but hardly
'better'.
The biggest problem with Linux is, I think, Linus Torvalds and the
benevolent dictator model of development.
While most users are able to download the kernel, run the menu
configuration, and install, using hardware that Linus doesn't have -
like my TV card, my SB live, and what have you requires downloading
separate drivers and installing them. A nuisance. You can usually do
with the kernel-supplied drivers, but then I wouldn't get stuff like
my TV remote to work, or get SP/DIF output from analog sources on my
sound card.
You may argue that the situation is similar on Windows, you have to
download vendor-supplied drivers to get anywhere, but the fact is that
Windows drivers are still easier to find, and installation is much
simpler.
I think the Linux kernel should be mature enough that interfaces can
be stabilised - at least within stable series of kernels (e.g. 2.4.x,
2.2.x), so that a binary driver can keep working seamlessly through
kernel upgrades.
-kzm
--
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
------------------------------
From: javelina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 08:07:24 GMT
Ayende Rahien wrote:
> Can't say I ever saw an IRIX, do you mind
> telling why you think it's better?
Because the icon of a core dump looks like
a crushed Cadillac with tailfins.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job?
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 08:21:02 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I keep having to come back to the FACT that Windows of any form
> is UNSTABLE. They are making some BOLD marketing statements
> about Whistler being STABLE, but I bet it's not. They have
> never achieved stability and they are admiting it by taughting
> this marketing fling concerning stability. Why if they
> were stable to begin with....
Windows 95/98/ME is unstable.
Windows NT/2000 is less so.
Linux is stable.
Linux + KDE 2.0 is _not_ stable.
You were saying Charlie?
> And operating system is only worth it's weight in shit if
> you can keep it up and OPERATING for a period of time
> exceeding say a week without it crashing or blue screening
> under normal business conditions. Windows hasn't made
> anything yet which can make it a solid week yet under
> business conditions without having to be re-booted.
> It's either re-boot or crash. In my work, we turn
> them around every 3 days now instead of every day
> with W2k. That's an improvement over NT by a little.
And I've seen my desktop die often enough with KDE 2.0
> The second important aspect which makes all this NULL
> and VOID is the FACT that every release of a Window's
> OS the price doubles. And it's because of this fact
> I'm going to keep declaring Windows dead@WW for 2005.
Funny, I've not noticed the price increase on Windows 95, 98 and ME
Charlie.
> By 2005, whether they are broken apart or not, the
> price of a Windows OS will have exceeded $1,000 per
> copy for the desktop and the server will be in
> the 5-6 thousand dollar range. It will simply
> be too expensive to run the crap and economics
> will kill the system.
Either that or something else would have replaced Windows. Maybe this
subscription Windows will appear (shudder).
> You are just Pete and you'll follow along with
> the majority just like everybody else sweethart.
I see, that's why I'm running Linux + KDE 2.0 at home is it?
As for following the majority, did I do that when I was running RISC-OS?
Was that the majority way back then?
> Now, in my book as it stands right now,
> Windows is useless crap. It's actually legitimate
> embezzelment of corporate funds. It's that
> malignent tumor on the P&L we all need to shake.
In my book anything that does what I need it to (crashes and all) is
enough. Linux + KDE 2.0 does not do what I need it to do, because it
doesn't support everything as yet.
> And you need to be a good boy.
And you need a hole in your head.
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 08:33:11 GMT
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Vn%U5.25827$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I still have a win95 running word 6 on a 486 & 12MB
> > It's being used daily.
>
> Word 6? Hmm, hardly the first version of that product.
And? Maybe that's the first version he bought. Certainly, that's the first
one I ever got -- before that, I used Works (for Windows) -- and before
that, Works for DOS.
Before that? Wordstar :)
Si
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux growth rate explosion!
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 08:37:08 GMT
"Andrew Suprun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:BB_U5.99725$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Byrns) wrote in
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >> Doh. How do you get a trojan onto a unix machine?
> >
> >Ask the folks that used them for the widespread DDoS attacks on eBay et.
> >al. earlier this year.
>
> May be thay should switch from Windows they currently run on to
> some Unix boxes to prevent such kinds of attacks.
The problem was that infected *Unix* boxes were attacking Ebay. The fact
that Windows was running Ebay had nothing to do with it -- an overloaded
router or saturated pipe doesn't care what OS the machines behind it are
running.
Simon
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 08:38:06 GMT
"PLZI" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:qx2V5.29$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <emLU5.81$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, PLZI wrote:
> > >
> > >1. The authorization data field is meant to be used for, yes, you
guessed
> it,
> > >authorization data.
> > >2. The field in question is defined by company who wishes to use it.
> > >3. No-one raised a single voice, when IBM used it in their Kerberos.
> > >4. The MS used authorization data in there - yes, NT group GUIDs.
> > >5. There is no unix which uses NT Groups.
> >
> > So, MS wanted to be sure that this would be as unix unfriendly as
> > possible then? Looks like monopoly action to me.
>
> Now, very slowly, please explain to me, what is MS supposed to do with NT
> group information? Provide a NT Group support for all *nix platforms?
When did documenting your protocol without NDA restrictions become
'support'? The other platforms will take care of themselves, given
the opportunity.
> Yes, NT's user groups are proprietary. They do not exist on unices. Let me
> see. I'll put a Win32 binary file as an attachment to an email message.
Now
> you receive that file on a very standard SMTP transport. Say you're using
> linux. Are you now telling me, that the SMTP standard is somehow violated,
> cause the attachment can not be run in your system?
Yes, Microsoft made millions on upgrade licenses simply because they
arranged to have Office97 included or as a cheap extra with new PC's
and immediately everyone else in the office could no longer read the
boss's email until they got the upgrade themselves. Getting client
software on every desktop that will not interoperate completely with
any other vendor's server, and charging client license fees for that
server even if you only authenticate against it is another stab at the
same thing.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Smartygus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Smartygus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: What is the best/most powerful distro of linux?
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 08:51:31 GMT
hi guys,
I was just wondering if i could get some opinions on which linux distro is
the most powerful. ie. a combination of good useability with powerful
features.
thanks,
Michael Smart
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 08:59:10 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Said Les Mikesell in alt.destroy.microsoft on Tue, 28 Nov 2000 04:52:34
>>"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:8vv5ea$5nime$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>
>>>
>>> IBM is a company comparable to Microsoft, if not larger.
>>> IBM apperantly had a technically superior OS.
>>> Why did IBM failed? IBM is more than powerful enough to break MS monopoly
>>> (which it created, apperantly)
>>
>>Ibm was legally constrained from bundling products before they even
>>developed the PC. There is no way they would have been allowed
>>to force customers to buy their OS and they knew better than to try.
>>
>>The question is, how did Microsoft get away with it for so long?
>
>Ooh, Ooh, Ooh! I know, I know!
>
>The answer is, "Because they weren't tying it to something concrete,
>like a piece of hardware, but something abstract, like "the application
>barrier." Since maybe only one in one thousand people seem capable of
>grasping abstractions, that makes it pretty easy.
>
Windows is tied to PC hardware but because there have always been
multiple vendors of that hardware the FTC did not see evidence of
criminal activity until they noticed that all the Windows
competitors had disappeared.
Microsoft signed the "Consent Decree" to avoid an antitrust trial
back then, 1994, but they still owned the Windows Monopoly and seem
unable to avoid using it anticompetively.
I think that Max is right that even antitrust lawyers seem unable to
understand that leaving the Windows Monopoly intact assured more
criminal activity.
Only breaking the monopoly will allow the Market to restore its
balance.
--
"Whether you think their witnesses are credible or non-credible;
they've admitted monopoly power, they've admitted raising prices to hurt
consumers, they've admitted depriving consumers of choice...
-DAVID BOIES, US Department of Justice
------------------------------
From: Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job?
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 08:48:36 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark) wrote:
> In article <8vvt5j$bm4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Stuart Fox wrote:
> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> An X problem /can/ stop the machine. I've never seen it happen.
I've
> >> only lost my X server a few times (once?) in the last 2 years. I've
> >> never crashed the computer. Strangely, the only people who suffer
from
> >> frequent X lockups and frequent computer lockups as a result are
the
> >Win
> >> trolls. Odd.
> >>
> >Also odd that the Linux users seem to be the only people who have to
> >reboot their NT machines daily to get them to work. How strange.
> >
> I've not seen that claimed. Weekly seems common, it's certainly
> the advice my company gives, along with only one server process
> per machine.
Have a read through the Deja archives, you'll see plenty of that
claim. Our company recommends not rebooting them at all. Instead, it
recommends making sure that you figure out why you need to reboot them,
and fixing the problem. By and large this is a good policy, and we
don't tend to have to reboot the boxes unless we're doing upgrades.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 04:03:40 -0500
Simon Palko wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Bennetts family wrote:
> > >
> > > "Curtis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > "Bennetts family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted:
> > > >
> > > > [..]
> > > > » 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*.
> > > >
> > > > You really should use it before saying such drivel about it.
> > >
> > > Yeah, sorry, I know. I don't doubt that 2k is more stable than NT4, and
> > > Whistler will be even better, but still, there's too many bodge fixes,
> and
> > > the whole thing desparately needs a rewrite from scratch.
> >
> > I would hav ZERO problem with Windows...if someone would come up with
> > an implementation COMPLETELY FREE of development by Microsoft personnel.
> >
> > If MS thinks that they are so hot, why don't they just release the
> > API spec, and challenge someone to come up with something better....
> > and pay the winner a prize
>
> Are you REALLY this dense? The whole Win32 API is freely available for
> ANYONE who wants to look at it. Have you heard of WINE? It's an
> implementation of Win32 on linux (may be on other *nixen now, haven't
> checked up on it in a while).
WINE is an attempt at reverse-engineering, NOT a clean-room
implementation from a published spec.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 04:09:26 -0500
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Stephen Cornell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I've the OS installed for about 24 hours now.
> > > How am I to test something other than look & feel in this time span?
> >
> > Exactly. This is why your conclusion that Whistler was so `cool' is
> > so meaningless. That was what AK was parodying.
> >
> > > Beside, as I'm using the desktop version, it's the most imporant part of
> the
> > > OS.
> >
> > Agreed, at least for Whistler's prospective market, but the way it
> > looks has nothing to do with the way it performs.
> >
> > > The underlying OS is very unfinished, of course, that is why it's a
> *beta*.
> >
> > No, a Beta should have most of the functionality in place, but need
> > more thorough testing to assess stability and iron out bugs. What
> > you're describing is an Alpha.
>
> No, it's a beta1, assuming it would follow win2k, it would've three or more.
> And, for what it worth, aside for minor glitches (two places where I noticed
> unwrappable text) and things like that, I've found no problems in Whistler
> so far.
> (Although, during CPU & Memory intensive &
>
> > > Do you mind telling me what those propriety standards are?
> >
> > Here's a few, off the top of my head: Broken HTML (created by
> > FrontPage) that can only be read by MS browsers; ActiveX; Java that
> > contains `features' that make it incompatible with standard JVM;
> > closed formats for Office documents that change whenever they have
> > been reverse-engineered.
>
> The only useful use front page has is in making templetes. And I've read
> documents created in FP from variety of browsers (the most horrible part of
> web designing. I'm trying to stick to HTML 3.2 for the most part, it's
> widely supported.) There have rarely been problems with it.
> ActiveX is not a standard. It's a de facto standard, which is different.
> IIRC, the Java they wanted to develop would've supported windows spesific
> commands or libraries.
> If you wouldn't use the windows spesific commands/libraries, then you should
> be able to move it around.
> They can do whatever they want with the office documents, there isn't a
> standard for office documents, therefor, you can't claim a propreity
> standard here.
>
> > As for the whole .NET thing... Remember,
> > it's a documented fact that MS have illegaly used their power in the
> > market to enforce their own position.
>
> illegally?
> It's not illegal to use your power to enforce your position.
> It's illegal to prevent competitors from competing, which MS hasn't done.
> That is about as far as my understanding of US laws reach, though.
Wake up, Rip van Winkle.
Microsoft was indicted, tried, convicted AND SENTANCED for doing
exactly that.
Currently, Microsoft is appealing...the CONVICTION...no, merely
the sentance.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
