Linux-Advocacy Digest #540, Volume #30 Wed, 29 Nov 00 20:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Whistler review. ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! ("Simon Cooke")
Re: How Tux helps Linux succeed (was: Is design really that overrated?) ("the_blur")
Re: Ok, putting money where my mouth is... ("the_blur")
Mandrake baby! ("the_blur")
Re: The Sixth Sense ("PLZI")
Re: Whistler review. ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Whistler review. ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Whistler review. ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 19:28:28 -0500
kiwiunixman wrote:
>
> I wonder who the developers are who develop the apps at Microsoft, does
> the big Microsoft think tank say to the developers to write a program
> with a whole heap of features (that no body except the 0.01% who find
> them useful) and not to worry about efficiency. For once I would like
> Microsoft to set a base system that all their Office and Operating
> System (Client) software should work at a reasonable level on, say a
> Pentium 100 with 850 Mb HDD and 32MB Ram, if it doesn't perform, back to
> development until is does, then finally Microsoft will realise that
> every computer user does not have a bottom-less pit of money in their
> back yard so that they can upgrade their hard disk, memory, and
> processor so that they (the consumer) can use the new version of Office
> and Windows, why not stick with the version they already have? well,
> their work has upgraded, hence the new suite file types are not
> compatible with the previous release...could all this bloatware be a big
> a conspiracy theory....Microsoft colluding with Hard disk, memory and
> processor manufacturers. :) so that they (hardware manufacturers) can
> sell more of their products.
You don't understand...BLOAT is actually a Microsoft sales tactic.
First, you upgrade Word...which slows down your old system...
so, then, you try upgrading the OS...which ends up slowing down
the system even more...
finally, you throw up your hands in disgust, and buy a whole
NEW computer....thus paying for ANOTHER copy of Word, and ANOTHER
copy of the OS.
>
> kiwiunixman
>
> T. Max Devlin wrote:
>
> >> Patrick Raymond Hancox wrote:
> >>
> >>> a single UDMA66 20Gb drive sells for about $180 or so, last i looked. 650Mg
> >>> (which, i'm guessing, includes your page file) is not much of a problem.
> >>
> >
> > Said kiwiunixman in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 27 Nov 2000 14:04:53
> > GMT;
> >
> >> Add 34 real media files, development programs, games, office suite and
> >> other assorted goodies, and there ya go, almost full.
> >>
> >> kiwiunixman
> >>
> >
> > It is simply foolish and ignorant to *ever* consider a real resource
> > (that being something that is in limited supply, regardless of how large
> > the supply is) as unlimited. It is the primary failure in most cases in
> > which resource limitations are a problem, in fact, and is the only
> > reason they ever do become a problem. Because some numbnuts thought,
> > "resources are cheap, so its not much of a problem."
> >
> > This is most particularly true with hard drive space. You cannot make a
> > hard drive bigger; you have to replace the hard drive with a larger one,
> > or add an additional drive. (This is trivial in Unix, as a mount point
> > can be added anywhere as an extension of the existing file system; the
> > only limitation is you can't make it part of an existing directory. It
> > is not possible to do this in a way which is operationally effective in
> > any MS system, as the new drive is always an additional storage resource
> > from the root.) Because the hard drive is persistent storage, it is
> > inevitably much more difficult to "expand" hard drive space than it is
> > to add RAM, or even to replace the CPU entirely! (Except in any MS
> > system, where changing the CPU requires what is effectively the
> > equivalent of a "kernel recompile", except you need the OEM disks for
> > every piece of hardware you have connected to the system!)
> >
> > Pretty pathetic how bad PCs are, in the real world, with Microsoft
> > illegally monopolizing, in comparison to what you would expect if you
> > know anything about computer development over the last thirty years,
> > don't you think?
> >
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job?
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 00:33:48 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>Stuart Fox wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > In article <8vvrt2$as3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pete Goodwin 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....
>> >
>> > 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.
>> >
>> What exactly are you doing with your boxes where you have to reboot
>> them every three days? Working in an all NT desktop/90% NT Server
>> development environment myself, I just don't see this at all. We
>> reboot them when we upgrade them, and that's it. They don't reboot
>> themselves, they don't bluescreen. Why does it seem to be Unix
>> advocates who can't keep an NT box running longer than a day?
>
I will be happy to explain this. We use them to process
insurance work for life and health. We have a bank
for them serving 13 life and health insurance companies
around the U.S.
If these systems are all not rebooted every morning,
every one of them will blue screen by 3:30 pm at
the lastest that business day. They start blue
screening by 2:30.
They are used for database processing and file
serving mainly with a little in house printing
on the side. Most of the printing is done
remotely at the various sites.
I've worked with Microsoft for over a decade.
Neither Microsoft nor Microfocus seems to
have an answer for this other than their
use.
Our servers will stop and start 5000 programs
per day. At ususally the 6500 pid level
they will start failing, one by one.
And the man is correct.
Microsoft is a peice of shit for a server.
The workstations we have aren't much better.
You can edit and compile programs for 3-4
days before the same thing happens with them.
Now, I've told you the truth. We have
complaints filed with Microsoft.
Microsoft's only help has been to tell
us to install service packs. The
service packs have not helped.
And you've been given the straight stuff
here. And I already know your going to
act like a baby and call me a liar,
but he other people reading this won't
think so.
So you have it. I answered your question.
They don't handle heavy loads very well
at all.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux growth rate explosion!
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 16:32:03 -0800
"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <Ue3V5.91230$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Simon Cooke wrote:
> >
> >"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
>
> Maybe they were. You need systems likely to be up to lauch co-ordinated
> attacks from. Windows amazing instability will make it a less than
> ideal platform for this.
Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were a PUTZ when I answered you. "Oh ho
ho ho... Windows has to be up for that to work... bwuhahahahaha".
How hilarious.
Well, it's a good thing that Unix is so insecure as to make that kind of
DDOS attack possible, isn't it, Mark? Because if it wasn't such a pile of
crap, they wouldn't have been able to do that.
If you want to fight with spurious rhetoric in a he-said, she-said manner
about things that you obviously know nothing about (eg. Windows 2000/NT
uptimes, computer security, internet terrorism, et al), then sure, we can
carry on all night. Poopy head.
> >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.
>
> Kind of depends on how the attack works, that.
Denial of service. In this case, sheer weight of numbers flooding the pipes
that connected Ebay to the net.
Simon
------------------------------
From: "the_blur" <the_blur_oc@*removespamguard*hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: How Tux helps Linux succeed (was: Is design really that overrated?)
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 19:06:49 -0500
> So? XFree is not a corporation. BTW, the globe has become somewhat of
> an universally accepted symbol for the Internet, which makes it a nice
> symbol for a communal, Internet-based development effort such as
> XFree.
No, it's an incorporation (whatever that means...) hence, Xfree86, Inc.
However I may have spoken too soon about Xfree. When I really thought about
it, the concept of what xfree86 is... It's so vague and ethereal I couldn't
even hammer out an idea for a logo...(I didn't know what to sketch!)
They're not a window manager...They lie below the window manager...bizarre
stuff!
A challenging project indeed. I haven't looked into this more, because I may
just fry my brains doing it =)
The reason that the globe is bad is not because of what it is, it's because
it's been done so many times before, and Xfree86's execution is no better
than the mass of others who have done it. Some have actually done it well
(AT&T, Network Solutions).
Fred.
What is the meat and potatoes of your argument sir? Because ultimately, it
is the meat and potatoes that drive us!
------------------------------
From: "the_blur" <the_blur_oc@*removespamguard*hotmail.com>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Ok, putting money where my mouth is...
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 19:18:47 -0500
> Exactly. He was saying the the whole system is crap based
> on the splash screen.
I most certainly was not! I loved Mandrake! That's why I hated the fact that
the design was crappy! Everything else is good! I never said the system
sucked. I said the design sucked. Linux Mandrake is the best Linux I ever
tried. BTW, I did say I was willing to redo them.
> I don't see why any SANE person would write off a reliable,
> efficient, highly productive operating system on the basis
> of a splash screen.
I wasn't writing off the system based on the splash screen. I just said it
sucked. Mandrake is still happily humming away in my computer so I certainly
haven't dumped it...
> I'm just commenting on his contention that a splash screen that
> doesn't align with *his* taste somehow nullifies ALL of the
> advantages of Linux. This is EXTREMELY short-sighted.
Wow, would you mind quoting the bit where you came up with this, I'd love to
hear myself say that...
> By the way, the sketches look like they were snagged from the
> source of the illustrations from O'Reilly's books ( http://www.ora.com/ )
Are you accusing me of plagiarism? Where specifically did you find my
drawings other than on my website?
------------------------------
From: "the_blur" <the_blur_oc@*removespamguard*hotmail.com>
Subject: Mandrake baby!
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 19:36:42 -0500
> 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
I've tried Corel Linux, Mandrake 6.0 and now Mandrake 7.2. I must say M7.2
is BY FAR the easiest to install/configure. Also comes with LOADS of goodies
so you can get your feet wet and really nice tutorials. It also has a very
pretty desktop by default (KDE2).
Anyway, as a fellow newbie (which I assume you are) I _highly_ recommend
Mandrake.
I didn't have to configure anything but my cable modem (my video card, sound
card and SCSI board worked out of the box), and even that was easy to figure
out once I stopped being a dummy and really sat down and thought about it
(hehe, I checked the config of my network card in windows, copied the values
and applied them in Linux, maybe it'll save you some time. Also, don't
configure an iNet connection in drakconf, configure a local network and
apply the values there -- now I'm rambling).
My system is:
A celery 566@707
BX6 rev 2 Mobo (ATA33 only)
128 MB Ram
Western Dig. 20G ATA66
Western Dig. 13G ATA33
SB live value
Asus SC-200 SCSI board
Pioneer SCSI reader
Panasonic SCSI Burner
2 network boards, both supported (one tulip, one rtl8139)
It all worked perfectly. Since it handles RPMs, installing video drivers for
your video card etc. should be no sweat.
I also have an AGFA Snapscan touch USB...I haven't tried it yet =) (but it's
detected correctly)
------------------------------
From: "PLZI" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2000 00:33:13 GMT
"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <aW7V5.171$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, PLZI wrote:
> >Now let us see.
> >
> >If the law finds, say OJ Simpson, not guilty, we can safely say that
anyone
> >who thinks he is a killer, is somehow against the law, and prefers
breaking
> >it (as "what do I think about the US Legal system ruling in MS case" would
> >lead to the question of do I prefer breaking the law or not.).
> >
> >Now is that interesting or what?
> Microsoft has been found to be a monopoly. Nothing to do with any
> sportsman at all.
Let us go over this veeeeery slowly.
The courts of US have found the MS guilty of illegal use of monopolistic
power.
The courts of US have found OJ Simpson not guilty of murder.
If I have an opinion of MS trial, I am soon faced with question, do I choose
to obey the law? (This of course means, that if I dispute the courts
findings, I am against the law somehow).
If someone has an opinion of OJ Trial, they should be equally asked, if they
choose to dispute the court's findings, do they obey the law? Cause if they
do, they equally are against the law somehow.
Simple enough? Was there an error somewhere? Please explain. Both cases
(again, in my opinion) tell something about the US court system itself. What
it tells, I leave to each and every one to come to their own conclusions.
And FYI, the US laws and the findings of US courts are still very much
non-issue here in europe.
> Good troll attempt, though.
I was not aware that I was trolling?
- PLZI
------------------------------
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 19:37:25 -0500
Matthew Soltysiak wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>
> > Matthew Soltysiak wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > You're obviously going to a 3rd-rate college.
> > >
> > > I was hoping you would be a little more original.
> >
> > I'm 100% serious.
> >
> > > Actually, I go to very nice college thanks.
> >
> > Compared to what?
> >
> > MIT
> > Carnegie-Mellon
> > U of Cal, Berkely
> > Purdue
> > U of Illinois
>
> Yes, i will be going to one of those for grad studies.
>
> >
> >
> > These are the top-rated schools in Computer Science and
> > Computer Systems Engineering.
> >
> > Microsoft sells you shit...to use as servers with design flaws
> > that would cost a sophomore a 10% reduction in grade if used on
> > a typical homework project at any of these schools.
> >
> > > Anyway, here's something that will blow your mind away (because i'm guessing
>you're the type who
> > > can't accept the truth, and has to advocate all kinds of shit to get somewhere).
> People use
> > > what they want to use. The guy who like Whistler liked it. Simple as that. Is
>your brain
> > > suffering from crashed yet? No? good.
> >
> > Microsoft produces absolute shit. If you haven't figured that
> > out from your course-work, then your education is deficient.
> >
>
> Then you haven't learned a thing.
That must be why I got an A in Operating Systems Programming
from the School of Electrical Engineering at Purdue University.
> Read what i said carefully. You're not paying attention.
I did. In your sophomoric ignorance, you didn't comprehend
what I said.
> Ultimatly, that'll be your undoing.
That must be why I pull down over $50/hour plus benefits.
>
> --
> Matthew Soltysiak
> Comp Sci/Soft Eng
> ICQ: 3063118
--
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 19:39:39 -0500
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> > >Conrad Rutherford wrote:
> > >>
> > >> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >>
> > >> <very large snip because Aaron doesn't understand the first thing about
> > >> replying to posts or how to use usenet or even how to change underwear
> more
> > >> than monthly 100+ lines to write unrelated stupidity at the bottom - a
> > >> typical @yahoo.com user, almost as bad as an aol.com user>
> > >>
> > >> > For now, I think that there is a good chance that Whistler will be
> as
> > >> good
> > >> > > from win2k as win2k was from NT.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Wow....look at this car
> > >> >
> > >> > It's great
> > >> > It's fantastic.
> > >> >
> > >> > They painted it at the factory!!!!
> > >> >
> > >> > No, I don't know anything about whether the engine is any good,
> > >> > or how it handles in turns....or even going in a straight line
> > >> > down a highway at a mere 60 km/h (US 40 mph)...i only got to
> > >> > drive it 5 feet forwards and back..
> > >> >
> > >> > Yeah...I know there's no locks on the doors...and you can't
> > >> > roll up the windows...and...you know...it doesn't have any
> > >> > rear view mirrors...or seat belts...and that hand-crank in
> > >> > place of the usual steering wheel is gonna take some getting
> > >> > used to...and...yeah, it's kinda strange how they put the
> > >> > radio upside down mounted on the floor...it's got a really
> > >> > leaky fuel system...but...it's got a custom paint job...and
> > >> > when I crack up on the highway, and die in a ball of fire...
> > >> > well, it's gonna look really cool!
> > >> >
> > >> > And...looking cool THAT's what's REALLY important...
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Here's a hint, Ayende....GROW THE FUCK UP
> > >> > --
> > >>
> > >> Hey Aaron, want YOUR hint?
> > >>
> > >> Hey, look at this car.
> > >> Well, it's not really a car yet, it's just a bunch of parts made all
> over
> > >
> > >Really?
> > >
> > >I've done full-installs of Linux from various makers.
> > >
> > >ONE reboot, and the system is up and running...with ALL hardware drivers
> > >installed, and ALL applications available immediately.
> > >
> > >
> > >Getting the same hardware configuration to work on a Windows machine
> takes
> > >MANY reboots (1 for the sound card, one for the graphics card, one for
> > >the monitor, one for the printer, one for the mouse, one for the scanner,
> > >one for the network card, another for the network configuration.....
> > >
> > >And then...installing the software...
> > >
> > >Lets see...If you installed 1,500 apps on a windows machine....how long
> > >would it take?
> > >
> > >A day? don't be foolish!
> > >
> > >2 weeks?
> > >3 weeks?
> > >
> > >Just exactly how many WEEKS would it take to install 1500 apps on a
> windows box?
> > >
> > Exactly why my company uses pre-made images on CD. Problem now is that
> > Microsoft want paying twice. One for the OEM version, then once
> > for the CD.
>
> 1500 apps on one machine?
> Assuming average install time of 5 minutes, that means about 5 days of just
> sitting there 24 a day, just installing software.
> If we assume 8 hour work days, it results in over two weeks.
> No one install 1500 apps on a machine.
Really? Millions of linux users have 1500 apps on one machine.
> No one *need* 1500 apps on a machine.
Nobody *needs* a car, either.
What's your point?
>
> > Now, we're about 150,000 people, what does that work out as?
>
> Too much?
--
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 19:42:21 -0500
Rob Barris wrote:
>
> In article <903r8m$594r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ayende Rahien"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "Rob Barris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In article <903l4c$57ru$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ayende Rahien"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > 1500 apps on one machine?
> > > > Assuming average install time of 5 minutes, that means about 5 days of
> > > > just
> > > > sitting there 24 a day, just installing software.
> > > > If we assume 8 hour work days, it results in over two weeks.
> > > > No one install 1500 apps on a machine.
> > > > No one *need* 1500 apps on a machine.
> > >
> > > I have 1,177 on my PowerBook.
> >
> > 1,117?
> > Doing what?
>
> Rephrase your question?
>
> Generally they launch when I tell them to, do what I want them to do, ad
> quit when I am done with them - to be realistic some are far more
> popular than others, but they are there nonetheless. The top few might
> be:
>
> Eudora
> CodeWarrior
> Internet Explorer
> MT-NewsWatcher
> MPW Shell
> Photoshop
> Excel
> Word
> Sherlock
> SoundJam
> AOL instant messenger
>
> less frequently run ones might be things like an animated GIF builder,
> an anagram generator, an old sound synthesis program, serial port
> tracing tools, TCP/IP network admin tools, telnet, etc.. you never know
> what challenges each day will bring.
>
> The poster claimed that having 1500 apps would be a burden due to total
> installation time. Here is a data point showing that this need not be
> the case. I've probably only done 10 or 15 full blown CDROM installs
> since June on this laptop, the rest of my stuff came from the old
> system's hard drive or from net downloads.
How long did it take you to accumulate and install all 1117 apps
INCLUDING the ones you copied from the old hard drive...
Aggregate time is in WEEKS.
I can go from no OS installed to equivalent functionality in
only 2 hours with Linux.
>
> Rob
--
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
******************************
