Linux-Advocacy Digest #593, Volume #30 Fri, 1 Dec 00 16:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Joseph Dalton)
Re: Linux is awful (Robert Wiegand)
Re: Netscape review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Anybody considering Linux should read this. (tom)
Re: Linux is awful (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is awful (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is awful (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is awful (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is awful (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is awful ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Steve Mading)
Re: Major shift (.)
Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job? (Pete Goodwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 01:21:55 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Chris Ahlstrom in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 01 Dec 2000
>Ayende Rahien wrote:
>>
>> By who? And where does the money come from?
>>
>> > >> Actually, that's the solution. The problem is that with copyright
>> > >> wrapped in a trade secret, you can make money just *owning* it, without
>> > >> ever selling anything at all.
>> > >
>> > >Please repeat that, I don't think I understand what you are saying here.
>> > >If you can, would you provide an example of what you mean?
>> >
>> > I'm sorry to say, you'll have to point to which part you didn't
>> > understand. Re-typing it wouldn't help, after all.
>>
>> How can you make money by owning copyright wrapped in a trade secret? Are
>> you talking about licensing software instead of selling it?
>
>As far as I know, there is nothing to prevent you from
>selling GPL software. Linux vendors do it all the time.
>I buy those products for the convenience of the bundling and all
>the work that went into adding scripts to make configuration
>and installation simpler.
The simpler way of putting it is that buying software which is GPL is
procuring a service of distribution and implementation of software,
while buying software under common commercial terms is leasing the
ability to use the software, but only with restrictions and only with no
warrantee for intended purpose (even though production is effectively
zero cost, and returns are unnecessary) and with no options at all for
future migration or upgrade.
>I could write, say, a wave editor, and sell it, posting the
>code for anyone who wants it, with a GPL license. Some people
>might want to buy the software so they can call me to get help.
Bringing us back to the affinity between the shareware model and GPL.
No, you don't get the object code in shareware, or any rights to use it.
But you do get the software for free, and are encouraged to pay for it
primarily by your desire to gain access to the producer's technical
understanding of the product and the code. Hell, the difference is
practically invisible to 98% of the consumer base, who cannot read
source code anyway.
>Sure, Microsoft can make bigger bucks selling an office suite,
>especially now that they've knocked off the competition. But one
>can still live on the proceeds of free software. "Free" means
>"unrestricted" here... not "having no price".
Free speech, not free beer.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== 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: Joseph Dalton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: 01 Dec 2000 14:17:32 -0500
"James A. Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > Consider the above argument by Chad applied to phone companies - If I
> > (as a phone company) invest a lot of money into wiring up a locale,
> > using a particular digital format on the interconnect, and a copy-cat
> > comes along, it is my responsibility to make sure he can connect to my
> > network? .... I believe the FTC has said yes.
> >
>
> Not with cell networks they haven't. And pricing has dropped a <lot>
> faster there than it did under the 'utility' model applied to standard
> phone service. Letting competing vendors have at it in an open market
> usually works out best. The 'utilities' you worry about are all
> <government created> monopolies - they didn't get that way themselves.
>
<grin> Of course ATM isn't so very closed, is it?
I'm not worried about "utilities". I was responding to your implied
argument that simply because not every person in the world needs a PC
that there is no monopoly in PC software. Utilities happen to be
easily seen to be monopolies, and yet not everyone has a need for
them. Thus your argument is invalid.
Actually I agree that a competitive environment is good for consumers,
I just don't think there is a very competitive market for PC word
processors right now. Consider that StarOffice is free. (...bloated as
well, maybe, but so is Word.) Both work roughly the same (I don't much
like either of them), yet as far as I can tell Word is still preferred
by "the market". Why is that? Is Word somehow better? In what precise
way?
--
-- Joe Dalton
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Robert Wiegand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 12:42:45 -0600
Ayende Rahien wrote:
> Actually, you can usually tell by looking at the hardware panel in system
> properties, and look for a yellow exlamation.
> (I assume this is what you mean when you say a problem, if not, please
> spesify, win9x has a *lot* of problems).
By "problem" I meant meant something more like "the system locks up
during boot", "the systems crashes randomly" or "the system locks up
during shutdown".
The yellow exclamations are usually for resource conflicts which
are easier to figure out.
--
Regards,
Bob Wiegand [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Netscape review.
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 21:52:51 +0200
"Eric Remy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <908el5$aa6u$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ayende Rahien"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> You'd be wrong. MSIE 5 for the Mac is one very nice browser. In
several
> >> ways better than MSIE 5.5 for PC, including standards compliance.
Given
> >> that Netscape sucks on Macs even worse than on Windows or Linux, it (or
> >> iCab) should be the choice for most folks who've actually compared the
> >> things.
> >
> >I never run netscape on Mac, why is it so bad?
> >I understand that one of Mac's problems is with handling memory, and
> >netscape is noturious in demanding more and more and more memory as time
> >goes by. Not a good combination.
>
> That's one of the big problems.
>
> Add to it an utterly miserable JVM, at least in older versions. At
> least the newer ones allow you to use Apple's runtime.
> Tack on glacial performance.
> Crash happy. Sometimes (used to be always) kills the system on crash.
> Likes to install stuff you specifically ask not to, such as AIM.
Oh, I really *loved* that one, two icons of real player on my desktop, one
of them named "take5" for some misterious reason, and has a different icon.
One icon for AOL, and another for AIM.
The JVM is installed as well, providing me with absolutely no functionality
whatsoever aside from showing that my disk is 20MB fuller.
There was also some wizard during first loading, which basically tried to
make me agree to get spam.
> But at least it runs Chime correctly: MSIE on both Mac and PC tends to
> die with too many embedded molecules. (And the Mozilla team fixed the
> incompatibility with 6.0 when I reported it from the beta- kudos. MS
> hasn't done so yet.) At least that's something...
What is chime?
About MSIE, there is a service pack for IE 5.5, I don't know if it's
applicable to macs, though.
------------------------------
From: tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anybody considering Linux should read this.
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 19:54:25 GMT
I intended to specify the section on "Considering Linux". Yes, I'm
quite aware that installation procedures have gotten easier over time,
but the fact is that Windows and Linux are quite different animals and
people should be aware of that going in. Like the article says,
Windows might work better for some people, Linux for others.
(Not that I don't find the Win vs. Linux arguments
here 'entertaining' :).
Tom
In article <907cqt$fh2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
tom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I recently came across a nice introduction to Linux at About.com ; it
> talks about what Linux is, and what it isn't. I think this should be
> required reading for anybody thinking about trying Linux. At the very
> least, it would cut down on all the people complaining because Linux
> isn't like Windows:
>
> http://linux.about.com/library/weekly/aa071698.htm
>
> Tom
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 20:39:10 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Les Mikesell) wrote in
<EVDV5.27465$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>They aren't problems to anyone but you. We all know that ISA cards
>can't have all their settings detected reliable and attempts to probe and
>guess will result in locking up some systems.
So when I see the statement "this hardware is supported", I should take it
with a pinch of salt?
> All of us including you
>know the correct way to handle this non-problem, and it isn't to
>complain in an advocacy group.
I'm not complaining, I'm pointing out that there are things that are
claimed to be supported but don't appear to be.
> I'll agree that there are real problems,
>just not those, and not that a reasonable response to them is complaining
>in an advocacy group, especially not before asking for the solution
>or work-around in the technical groups. It is not only non-productive
>it is anti-productive and most likely serves some other agenda. Why
>complain to people who you know don't share the imagined or
>even real problem?
Because it is indicative of the malady of Linux.
--
Pete Goodwin
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 20:40:43 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JM) wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>After being called "Shithead" by one Linux Advocate, does that tell me
>>the typical IQ of a LinuxUser?
>
>No, it tells you that you are indeed a "Shithead".
It certainly tells me your IQ. Somewhere near your shoe size.
--
Pete Goodwin
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 20:41:58 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (kiwiunixman) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>hmmmmmmmmm, are you sure you didn't get the Dutch version of Mandrake
>Linux? :)
8*} now that would be fun! Tryck op retur! Er, what?
--
Pete Goodwin
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 20:43:35 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Erik Funkenbusch) wrote in
<UAEV5.3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>AFAIK all commercial packagers of Mandrake 7.2 include the pre-release
>version. The versions on their web site have been updated to include
>KDE 2 final. You can run MandrakeUpdate (you'll likely have to install
>it) and it will tell you the actual versions (you should also be able to
>do a rpm -q kdebase and see what package RPM thinks is installed.
I downloaded all the updates and installed them. It didn't touch KDE2.0 as
installed, mainly other things.
--
Pete Goodwin
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 20:45:45 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Snarf) wrote in
<908k90$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Pete, why don't you stop bitching about KDE being unstable, head over to
>their site and download the latest version? I totally agree with you,
>the beta version that came with LM7.2 crashes all the time, but the KDE2
>final is rock stable.
I have KDE 2.0 on a seperate set of CD's. I tried to remove KDE as
installed by Mandrake 7.2, then install the one on the CD. BANG! my system
locked up tighter than a drum. Nothing responded, not even remote login.
--
Pete Goodwin
---
Why don't I use Linux?
Waiting for Borland to release Delphi.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 22:20:24 +0200
"Robert Wiegand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> > Actually, you can usually tell by looking at the hardware panel in
system
> > properties, and look for a yellow exlamation.
> > (I assume this is what you mean when you say a problem, if not, please
> > spesify, win9x has a *lot* of problems).
>
> By "problem" I meant meant something more like "the system locks up
> during boot", "the systems crashes randomly" or "the system locks up
> during shutdown".
If it display this behaviour, remove the devices which 9x didn't have
drivers for, and install them again, one by one.
I rarely encountered this behaviour due to installing multiply drivers
without rebooting.
> The yellow exclamations are usually for resource conflicts which
> are easier to figure out.
Agreed.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 22:22:20 +0200
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > Most people, however, would opt to the free choice, which is the get the
> > source and compile it, and then use it.
> > All of this without you seeing a penny.
> > Not to mention that someone else might take your application, make some
> > minor changes, and sell it, profiting from *your* work.
> > And if you design your application well, people won't *need* to call you
for
> > help.
>
> You've got some good points there.
>
> There is one form of non-monetary payment you get, which is the good
> will of other developers who let you use their tools to do your work.
>
> I think what you say is most true when the application is large,
> well-written, well-documented, and performs a popular function.
> In that case, then the project can only be funded by a company
> with sources of income from other projects. A good example is
> Star Office. Another is IE.
(MS)IE is not open source.
Actually, I'm thinking more about things like Apache & MySQL as examples for
how it can work for the benefit of all.
The problem is how to make *profit* out of GPLed products.
If anyone seen "Cabaret" (a decent movie about pre-nazi germany), you might
remember the song "Money Makes the World Go Around"
But what I'm saying is true for all well-designed software. It should be
able to be used without *requiring* you to buy support.
Buying support for a product you don't know well is a Good Thing. Especially
something as critical as an OS, such a Linux or FreeBSD.
That way you get people who get *paid* because they *know* how to fix the
system to *help* you.
The problem is that you can usually do *without* buying the support.
Especially in the examples that I've said: Linux/FreeBSD
Plenty of help avialable for free, of course, it might not be as good as you
would get if you paid for support, but it's usually enough.
Now, assuming that I make a good software, no matter what size it is, I
would hope that people can learn to use it without *requiring* my help.
Frankly, if I sell support and give the software away, I find myself in a
conflict of interests. On the one hand, one of my definations of good
software is that it's easy to use or learn.
So I find myself in a troublesome situation, if I GPL the software and sell
support, I've one of two routes to choose, make good software which won't
require much support, those reducing my profits, or make bad software (not
neccecaryily bad as inefficent/ineffective, but bad as in hard to use and
overly complex) and increase my profits.
Since *very* few applications reach the point where I can make good
software, GPL it, and trust the fact that I'll have enough users so I could
count on the clueless/careful ones to buy support to pay up the bills.
I can also try to sell the application, but how economical would this be
with GPLed code? One user buy it, modify it slightly, and release it for
free. Who would you go after, two application of exactly the same quality
and usability, but one that cost money, the second is free?
Even worse, IMO, assuming that I GPLed the code, anyone might take it,
modify it a little bit, release it as theirs, and make profit out of *my*
work.
Both scenarios will affect cause my profits to go down.
Are you aware of any company/coder(s) which sell applicaiton which they
GPLed and make profit out of it?
Any company/coder(s) which GPL their products and make profit out of it?
I know this seems like a flame, but I think that those are real concerns
when a programmer/company need to decide whatever to GPL their code or not.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 22:23:20 +0200
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > I'm annoyed because it took me about 5 minutes to give you this list
with
> > Google.
> > If you needed PostScript in windows, you could've looked for it.
>
> Sorry about that! I was merely making an argument. However, I can
> see a possible need for those links at work. Thanks!
Glad that I could help out.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 22:24:32 +0200
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Chris Ahlstrom in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 01 Dec 2000
> [...]
> >But the only tool for generating Postscript shown in those
> >links is that HTMLDOC product. Isn't there any thing for
> >/producing/ documents in PostScript, aside from Adobe?
>
> Not generally, because Adobe owns PostScript, and they don't license it
> cheap.
Okay, this explains why there aren't tools to do it.
Does Adobe has copyright on postscript? If so, when does it end?
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 22:33:14 +0200
"Joseph Dalton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "James A. Robertson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > >
> > > Consider the above argument by Chad applied to phone companies - If I
> > > (as a phone company) invest a lot of money into wiring up a locale,
> > > using a particular digital format on the interconnect, and a copy-cat
> > > comes along, it is my responsibility to make sure he can connect to my
> > > network? .... I believe the FTC has said yes.
> > >
> >
> > Not with cell networks they haven't. And pricing has dropped a <lot>
> > faster there than it did under the 'utility' model applied to standard
> > phone service. Letting competing vendors have at it in an open market
> > usually works out best. The 'utilities' you worry about are all
> > <government created> monopolies - they didn't get that way themselves.
> >
>
> <grin> Of course ATM isn't so very closed, is it?
>
> I'm not worried about "utilities". I was responding to your implied
> argument that simply because not every person in the world needs a PC
> that there is no monopoly in PC software. Utilities happen to be
> easily seen to be monopolies, and yet not everyone has a need for
> them. Thus your argument is invalid.
>
> Actually I agree that a competitive environment is good for consumers,
> I just don't think there is a very competitive market for PC word
> processors right now. Consider that StarOffice is free. (...bloated as
> well, maybe, but so is Word.) Both work roughly the same (I don't much
> like either of them), yet as far as I can tell Word is still preferred
> by "the market". Why is that? Is Word somehow better? In what precise
> way?
StarOffice has an annoying way to load *everything* when you open it. (For
comparison, think what would happen if when you opened Word, you would also
be forced to open Excel, PowerPoint, Access, Outlook) *And*, it replace the
familiar look of Windows with a totally new one, which I, presonally, don't
like.
I never used StarOffice extensively, so I can't tell you what else Word has
that StarOffice lack.
Someone else would've to add this.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 20:52:25 GMT
bobh{at}haucks{dot}org (Bob Hauck) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>You would understand from OpenVMS how a sane person would implement
>them, not how PC's do. I am _not_ saying that you don't know this (six
>years Windows experience and all that), just that OpenVMS experience
>will not clue you in on the oddities of PC architecture.
You think OpenVMS is sane?
Ever tried working with $DESCRIPTOR and item lists?
>Come one Pete. Two weeks vs six years and you want to claim it doesn't
>matter? Good problem-solving skills mean you can climb the curve
>faster, not that there isn't one.
Two weeks with Linux, two years with UNIX. Oh yeah, it's GNU isn't it.
GNU's not UNIX.
Funny, they look very familiar.
OK, I got caught by the filing system differences, i.e. how you partition
them, but that's about all.
>Yes, you have to manually configure them. I knew that having had both
>of those cards at one time or another. You didn't know and had a hard
>time finding out how to find out. Six years vs two weeks.
The Mandrake setup claims to auto detect them.
I've installed a AHA1510 a long time on Linux, I remembered how I did it.
Funny, in all that time it hadn't changed. I had a look at the source code
and it looked remarkably familiar.
--
Pete Goodwin
---
Why don't I use Linux?
Waiting for Borland to release Delphi.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: 1 Dec 2000 20:57:06 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad C. Mulligan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:DaiV5.26838$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:>
:> "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
:> news:903l4f$57ru$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:> >
:> >
:> > About the documents, I can read documents made in office 97 or 2000 with
:> > Word 6.
:> > File > Save As > Word 6.0
:> > No problems there.
:>
:> How do you do that when you only have word 6.0 and an office 97 document?
:> And please don't tell me about the conversion program that was released
:> much later.
:>
: OK Les, Please explain to all of us how to write in version x of any
: program support for features in version of x+2 of that same program. Are
: you psychic or psychotic?
Take HTML as an example - even if you use a new feature that didn't
exist in a previous version, a browser designed to read the previous
version will simply ignore the few parts it doesn't understand,
while still showing the parts it can understand. Thus a user of an
antiquated browser still can see your text, but maybe not in the
right font, or maybe not formatted the way you wanted, but this is
a damn sight better than refusing to render the document at all.
(Which is, unfortunately, what happens in most Word Processors,
especially Word - since Word's document format is really nothing
more than a dump-the-structs style of binary file. - If it becomes
changed by so much as one new inserted integer, the whole thing is
unreadable.)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Major shift
Date: 1 Dec 2000 21:00:12 GMT
Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <9017g3$ji5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>>
>> 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.
>>
> You've obviously never seen it running on Sequent (now owned by IBM)
> NUMA-Q boxes. With their custom HAL they were running 64 CPU boxes on
> NT 4.0...
Non-intel architecture is not supported by NT-4.0 anymore, and was
never supported by intel. :P
=====.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 21:01:17 GMT
bobh{at}haucks{dot}org (Bob Hauck) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Well, sorry to say that there are in fact some things wrong with it.
>Nothing fatal, but it does have bugs. It will get better.
That's true of any software, especially one that's just been released.
>A couple of which I ran into also (e.g. the smb: one).
Yes, that one's an odd one. I can get it to work, but only with a network
connection active. Yet smbclient works just fine... I did think maybe it
was to do with DNS but now I'm not so sure.
--
Pete Goodwin
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
