Linux-Advocacy Digest #638, Volume #30 Sun, 3 Dec 00 23:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux ("Michael Williams")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Linux is awful (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (T. Max Devlin)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Jeff Glatt)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Off Topic: Funny Light Bulb Joke: ("kiwiunixman")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("Chad Myers")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Michael Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt,comp.os.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux
Date: Sun, 3 Dec 2000 22:42:43 -0500
Reply-To: "Michael Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
None of the sites you mentioned are running Win2K, unless Win2K happens to
be WinNT4.
Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:90d94h$pqem$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Michael Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:90cn3c$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > That ignorant lutefisk Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
foolishly
> > posted the following words into comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy:
> >
> > > > Win2K is slow,
> > > Compared to what? It's the fastest transaction processing system
> > > according to TPC.org.
> >
> > It might be fast if you're running it on a gigabuck server, but put
linux
> on
> > the same machine and it will blow Windows right out of the water.
>
> It haven't yet.
> And IBM had to move it system to Win2K in order to reach the top ten.
> If they could've done it on Linux, they would've.
> Linux can't do this.
>
> > As far as
> > desktop OS is concerned, have you ever tried running Windows NT/2000 on
a
> > pentium classic with 32 megs of RAM?
>
> Yes.
>
> > If you have, I'm sure you fell in love
> > with that spinning hourglass cursors and a bunch of blue screens. Linux,
> on
> > the other hand, would run just fine on that system.
>
> No, it wasn't any slower than X on the same hardware.
> And certainly within the limits of workable.
>
>
> > > Win2K has set serveral data transfer records as well as scalability.
> >
> > I agree, it might be scalable, but your pocketbook has to be scalable as
> > well :) Win2K's multiprocessor support sucks, the ultra-expensive data
> > center server supports 32(?) CPUs, while linux supports 64(?). The
numbers
> > might be wrong, but I believe they are reasonably close. Looks like
Linux
> > wins again.
>
> Pocketbook? Get WinCE, based on NT kernel.
> About linux supporting 64CPU, on what platform & kernel?
> I don't think this is true, I know that SMP was improved in 2.2, but I
think
> that is one of the main attractions of 2.4
>
>
> > > > unreliable
> > > Compared to what? Linux? That crashy, buggy, unstable, development
> > > "OS"? Give me a break.
> >
> > Correctly configured linux servers can run uninterrupted for years,
while
> > your beloved Windows NT/2000 goes belly-up every few days.
>
> False.
> A properly configured Win2K has no problems staying up for as long as you
> like.
> The only reason it's not up for years is because it's less than a year in
> the market.
>
>
>
> > It might be a
> > little more stable on one of those giga-everything boxes, but who needs
to
> > spend $100,000+ when you can get a reliable Linux server for under
$5000?
> If
> > you're planning to deploy a Windows-based network, you'll spend much
more
> > than that on software alone. Still think Win2K is more reliable that
> Linux?
> > All right my good friend, why don't you find some .gov or .mil domains
> that
> > are running it.
>
> False.
> TPC tests include TCO for five years, Win2K is still the clear winner in
> *both* price *and* performance.
> If you think that you can reach one tenth of the level that the Win2K
> cluster did with a 10,000$ linux machine, than you are mad.
> Win2K broke performance records, Linux isn't even a runner-up.
> Beside, even assuming that Linux is 1000% more than Win2K, which it isn't,
> you would *still* not be able to reach that level with a 10,000$ linux
> machine.
> Doubling your price just in case.
>
>
> www.israel.gov.il
>
http://uptime.netcraft.com/hosted?netname=IL-GOVT-NET,147.237.0.0,147.237.25
> 5.255
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=4woman.gov
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=abaweb.faa.gov
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=access.gov
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=access.wa.gov
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=acquisition.jpl.nasa.gov
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=adoptahorse.blm.gov
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=aepo-xdv-www.epo.cdc.gov
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=amoebawww.den.nps.gov
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=anchor.ncd.noaa.gov
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=aoc.gov (And you call *this*
> accurate?)
>
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=abonline.monroe.army.mil
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=agena.spawar.navy.mil
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=astimage.daps.dla.mil
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=baileys-mtmcwww.army.mil
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=5yrplan.nfesc.navy.mil
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=cooper.nosc.mil
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=jdmsweb1.nosc.mil
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=Metasc.nosc.mil
>
http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=ntcsslab.spawar.navy.mi
> l
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=METAVAWG.nosc.mil
>
http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=baileys-mtmcwww.army.mi
> l
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=www.mtmc.army.mil
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=assist.daps.mil
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=www.dodssp.daps.mil
>
http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=battlelabs.monroe.army.
> mil
>
> http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=commprj.nosc.mil
> (Win2K)
>
>
> Need some more?
>
> > > > hard to set up
> > > Compared to Linux? ROFL... This is by far the funniest thing I've
> > > heard all week.
> >
> > Linux might be difficult to set up if you're attempting to install some
> > hacker distribution such as slackware or jurix. Mandrake and RedHat,
> > however, are as easy to install as Windows9X, which, in turn, is much
> easier
> > to set up that NT/2000.
>
> False, Redhat is as easy to install as NT/2K, not as 9x.
>
> > > > and outrageously expensive
> > >
> > > The initial cost compared to Linux. Compared to the rest of the
> > > industry it's rather inexpensive. Not to mention Windows has the
> > > lowest TCO of any business-class OS.
> >
> > I don't recollect anybody talking about the rest of the industry. Are
you
> > trying to tell me that windows nt, will al the money-sucking upgrades,
> will
> > still be cheaper that linux in the long run? All right Chad, now's my
turn
> > to ROFL.
>
>
> Yes, check TPC for data.
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 03:45:02 GMT
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> The sad part is, the legal system WAS designed to handle crybaby losers
> like Gore, however, the Gore lawyers, the almost entirely Democrat
> controlled election system in Florida, and 7 Democratic activists -- er
> -- FL Supreme Court Justices managed to ursurp the Constitutional election
> power from the FL legislature and make a mockery of the Rule of Law.
>
> But then, this is nothing new for the Democrats, take the Impeachment.
> Clinton and Gore are bullet proof. Laws do not apply to them, so they
> can bend it and stretch it to however they see fit. It's unfortunate
> that there are so many willing accomplices willing to throw conscience
> to the wind and do whatever he says no matter the Constitutional
> ramifications.
>
> The really, really sad part is, the American public is too ignorant to
> understand it, let alone get angered about it. A large portion of them
> think Hilary is right when she wants to do away with the electoral college.
> If it were her druthers, she'd abolish the Constitution all together.
I'd stop listening to AM radio if I were you. Start reading newspapers.
Find some good history books. Start looking into the shenanigans of
your own party.
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[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: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 03:54:58 GMT
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> I know that it is in the docs, the reason I've problems with it is that
> Redhat neglected to put a simple warning box through the installation.
> You may disagree, but on every other possibly distructive action, you get a
> warning saying this may be dangerous. Why not on one of the most dangerous
> thing that you can do to your computer?
I guess RedHat should pop up a long box telling the user about the
intent of a Server Installation.
On the other hand, due to hacking I've had to install server stuff (using
custom install, though) so many times that the effort became minimal.
------------------------------
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: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 10:07:16 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 3 Dec 2000
>"Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> >
>> > Do you know how you remove TCP from Linux? It requires a kernel recompile.
>> > So Yes, it does require a reboot to remove it and another reboot to add it
>> > back in.
>>
>> You're not exactly fair.
>> If by removing you mean "physically removing", then you're correct, but
>> that's of very little interest.
>
>That is what mlw originally specified.
Only because that's the only possible way to do it in Windows.
>> If you mean "disabling", i.e. making it unavailable to any user, locally
>> and remotely, which is what is normally required, you can do it without
>> rebooting, and without affecting any running application, except
>> applications using TCP, of course.
>
>Same with NT. Under NT4, for instance, right click on Network Neighborhood,
>choose properties. Select the Bindings tab. choose All Protocols from the
>Show Bindings for dropdown. Click on TCP/IP and choose Disable. Choose Ok.
>It will rebind the protocols and ask you to reboot, however you don't have
>to (this is a long standing bug. NT asks you to reboot, but in almost all
>cases it's not necessary). Check your TCP connections, they no longer work.
>Go back in and reenable TCP/IP, still without rebooting and they work again.
Now go back and reboot, even though they work. They won't work, because
its disabled, of course. Turn them back on. They won't work, until you
reboot.
The "bug", unbeknownst to Erik, is that they don't require the reboot,
not that they put the window up saying they do. Imagine the hell your
apps will have trying to figure out what's not working, when the TCP/IP
connection has been disabled, but not removed. Being disabled but not
removed, after all, isn't a state that the OS recognizes. As indicated
by the fact that you need to reboot to turn it back on, _unless you
haven't rebooted yet_.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeff Glatt)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 04:04:58 GMT
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>12 years of posting to USENET, and [Tholen is] STILL the biggest
>moron I've ever come across.
Yet another quote for the Tholen archive, and yet more evidence that
Tholen is widely regarded as a fool among usenet readers
------------------------------
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: Sun, 03 Dec 2000 10:14:34 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Erik Funkenbusch in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 3 Dec 2000
>"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Ayende Rahien wrote:
>> >
>> > Have you even tried comparing memory footprints?
>> > Right now, OE is taking 15MB (peak at 30MB), IE 7MB (peak at 17MB).
>> > Netscape reached 40MB (peak at 65MB at which point I terminated it because
>> > it seem to just want more and more) easily, by simply surfing with *one*
>> > window open. And just openning it would take 22- 25MB.
>> > Trying to do things with more than one window open increase memory usage in
>> > a totally unacceptable ways.
>>
>> On my linux box, Navigator and Messenger use 16.9 Mb. Adding another instance
>> of Navigator adds about 0.5 Mb.
>
>Something to consider is that Windows counts memory differently. For
>instance, memory mapped files are considered part of the memory footprint,
>and Outlook Express opens it's message files as MMF's, thus if you have a
>large message file it appears to be using a lot of memory even though it's
>not.
So it counts memory *wrong*, is that what you're saying?
>Similarly, I've been lead to believe that programs like Elm read their
>message files into virtual memory, thus taking actual memory which must be
>swapped in and out.
No, they would have to read their files in *real* memory, to be swapped
in or out. Swap *is* virtual memory.
>> You have to take these numbers with a grain of salt. There are different
>> ways to grab memory in Win32. The question may just be how much can you
>> do before the "Out of Virtual Memory" box comes up (in NT 4).
Or the system becomes unusable. Either way, you're dead in the water
because you can't know what's really going on. How anybody could avoid
seeing this as the most pathetic excuse for a commercial operating
system possible is beyond me. Almost.
>That box doesn't mean what you think it does. It means you've reached the
>minimum limit, and that NT has to expand the swap file.
Which is to say, its meaningless. And this is a good thing?
--
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: "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Off Topic: Funny Light Bulb Joke:
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2000 17:08:32 +1300
Follow up:
The competitors (Linux) to the Windows Light Bulb are able to reverse
engineer and create a light bulb that is compatible to the Microsoft switch
board, the Linux solution is called called Line, Lightbuld is not an
emulator, however, the next month Microsoft releases a patch that makes the
competitive light bulbs uncompatible with the "upgraded" switch board. The
competitor (Linux) starts to get pissed off this all this changing, so Sun
Light Bulbs (the one who creates the real big, powerful light bulbs) release
the source code to the UFS (Unix Frequency System), more companys adopt this
standard, Such as Apple (who makes the lovely candy coloured Lightbulbs),
Cobalt Networks (who makes the compact, yet powerful light bulbs) and Compaq
(that makes lightbulbs of all sizes, shapes and colours), as a result,
Microsoft is forced to comply with the open standard set down by Linux,
Apple, Cobalt Networks, Compaq and Sun.
kiwiunixman
The Ghost In The Machine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, kiwiunixman
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote
> on Thu, 30 Nov 2000 12:12:25 GMT
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >The license would work like this:
> >
> >One from the electricity supplier
> >One for each person/animal who get benefit from it
> >
> >However, you would have to upgrade the power board with all Microsoft
> >made fuses and components, otherwise the bulb will be buggy and
> >unreliable, however, once you've upgraded the switch board, all the rest
> >of the light bulbs in the house don't work as they donot understand the
> >Microsoft Lightbuld Protocol (MLP), so you have to upgrade all of the
> >light bulbs, by the time all this has been done, your switchboard has
> >blown up as there are too many simultaneos lights on at any one time.
>
> <grin> Good one. :-)
>
> Don't forget the attempts to sell the real pricy Microsoft
> Lamps(tm). These lamps depend on Microsoft Light Bulbs, and
> can do everything from making coffee to managing one's social
> affairs calendar to even starting the car in the morning and backing
> it out of one's garage -- and occasionally into the neighbor's
> garage's back wall....but that's easily fixed by turning off the
> lamp switch and then turning it on again. Oh, wait...
>
> Funny thing though -- they don't look quite right in the living room. :-)
> And one can't replace the Microsoft Lightbulbs with just any old
> light bulb; that wouldn't be kosher. (Or profitable.)
>
> It gets even stranger when Microsoft sells a new batch of light bulbs.
> The lamps, fuses, and switch board stop working. But wow, do they
> look pretty in the new lamps; everyone will want one.
>
> Also, the rumor is that one will have to pay a stipend each month to
> the manufacturer, whether one wants to use the bulb or not; otherwise,
> the bulb will start to only weakly illuminate the ceiling 30 days after
> the last payment. If one wants to look at the floor to avoid tripping
> over the bugs, pay up. :-)
>
> There's also a rumor that Microsoft will start licensing SunLight(tm).
> With SunLight(tm), one doesn't need the bulb; one simply pays a set
> fee (above and beyond a monthly maintenance stipend, of course) whenever
> one wants light, and a window shade opens somewhere in the house.
> (They don't specify where in the ads.) Once done with the light, the
> shade closes.
>
> They're still working out the bugs, though -- I think they're having a
> problem with the Earth's non-transparency, but my understanding is they
> have a workaround. Maybe. I think it involves the Moon; they might
> call it MoonLight(tm), which would be a SunLight(tm) add-on. You didn't
> hear it here, of course.
>
> The original Microsoft Lamps would of course serve as a tertiary backup,
> but would only work if both SunLight(tm) and MoonLight(tm) weren't
working.
>
> Strangely, many people are beginning to look at Linux LED Nite Lights,
> Fluorescent Lights, and Flash Lights, and FreeBSD Halogen Bulbs.
> I wonder why?
>
> >
> >kiwiunixman
> >
> >Tom Wilson wrote:
> >
> >> "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >>
> >>> How about people who post about how if M$ made lightbulbs, they would
> >>> have a pretty pattern on the surface but would stop working until you
> >>> switched them off and on again?
> >>
> >>
> >> Or would require a separate liscense for each person walking through
the
> >> room.
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Tom Wilson
> >> Go home Al....
> >> Game over, man!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
> up 77 days, 14:06, running Linux.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 03:52:59 GMT
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > False Premise.
> >
> > Republicans obey and respect the laws.
>
> I'll just cite Richard Nixon, John Dean, H.R. "Bob"
> Haldeman, John Mitchell, Ronald Reagan, Jim Bakker,
> Oliver North, G. Gordon Liddy as contrary examples.
I never said they were perfect.
In the case of Oliver North, at least he did it to
save hostages and fight communism despite the Liberal congress.
Shall I cite all the Democratic law breakers? The list is much,
much longer. It's also the norm, as opposed to a few rarities
on the Republican side.
> Not to mention non-lawbreaking draft dodgers such as
> Newt Gingrich and Dan Quayle. They made a movie about
> Dan Quayle's Vietnam experience -- "Full Dinner Jacket".
What about Bill Clinton or many current congressmen on the Democrat
side?
Look, I don't hold Clinton's draft doding against him. You'll notice
I've never brought it up in these conversations. I also don't hold it
against the Republicans either.
-Chad
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
