Linux-Advocacy Digest #775, Volume #30 Sat, 9 Dec 00 21:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Caifornia power shortage... (Woofbert)
Re: Caifornia power shortage... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Caifornia power shortage... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Microsoft using Linux (mlw)
Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: Microsoft using Linux (sfcybear)
Re: i/o in linux ("Kyle Jacobs")
Re: Windows review ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Windows review ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. ("Kyle Jacobs")
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. ("Kyle Jacobs")
Re: Uptimes ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. ("Kyle Jacobs")
Re: Uptimes ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. ("Kyle Jacobs")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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: Caifornia power shortage...
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 01:16:02 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Static66
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I read that they haven't built a power plant in over 15 years, yet in
> that same time the population of california has basically
> doubled...piss poor government planning..
How DARE you question the wisdom of the past Republican administrations?
CA government has built a *lot* of new jails ... and, in their wisdom,
has cut back on building schools and universities because they know that
the jail inmates won't be needing the schools. }: )
--
Woofbert <woofbert at infernosoft dot com>, InfernoSoft Datadroid
http://www.infernosoft.com/company/techsupport.html
"Inside every Microsoft application, there are
several simple programs trying to get out."
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Caifornia power shortage...
Date: Sat, 09 Dec 2000 20:10:22 -0500
Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Mike Marion wrote:
>>
>> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>>
>> > Actually, the REAL problem is that the ECO-NUTS in California shut
>> > down practically every fission power project that came down the pike
>> > in the 1970's.
>> >
>> > If those plants had been built, a lot of oil-fired and coal-fired
>> > plants would have been taken off-line a long time ago AND Cali.
>> > would STILL have surplus capacity.
>>
>> Not to mention the growth here. I mean, jesus, we don't have enough power for
>> the people here, yet I've not heard a single official (or SDG&E reps) suggest
>> that perhaps we should slow down the massive home building constantly going on
>> here. What's going to happen in a year, or two when our population grows by
>> that much more?
>>
>> I shudder to think.
>Leftwing Liberal paranoid eco-freak's worst nightmare...
>Public DEMANDS for nuclear power plants.
>Of course, this is exactly the situation which the radical left
>was hoping for....a general degradation of life in the US...it's part of
>their overall strategy of trying to cause internal collapse within the United
>States so that a power-vacuum will occur, allowing them to sweep into power
>and install a Communist state.
What a mythical world you live in. The shortage is a predictable result of
utility deregulation. The radical left force it. It was the right and the
left power brokers that get on their knees when big-business and bankers come
calling, and all the average people who said NIMBY to new plants.
--
===========================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Caifornia power shortage...
Date: Sat, 09 Dec 2000 20:25:04 -0500
Mike Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>> Actually, the REAL problem is that the ECO-NUTS in California shut
>> down practically every fission power project that came down the pike
>> in the 1970's.
Blame the correct cause. Every project under design or planning being canceled
by the utilities after Three-Mile Island.
>> If those plants had been built, a lot of oil-fired and coal-fired
>> plants would have been taken off-line a long time ago AND Cali.
>> would STILL have surplus capacity.
>Not to mention the growth here. I mean, jesus, we don't have enough power
>for the people here, yet I've not heard a single official (or SDG&E reps)
>suggest that perhaps we should slow down the massive home building constantly
>going on here. What's going to happen in a year, or two when our population
>grows by that much more?
>I shudder to think.
>--
>Mike Marion-Unix SysAdmin/Senior Engineer-Qualcomm-http://www.miguelito.org
>Homer Simpson: "To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's
>problems." -- Simpsons
--
===========================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft using Linux
Date: Sat, 09 Dec 2000 20:31:13 -0500
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> Interesting article covering Microsoft's possible
> use of Linux in the near future and their
> discontinuance of Windows.
>
> http://www.cnbc.com/news/001208plotkin.html
>
> I suspect we will see more of these in the
> near future.
>
> But I wasn't shocked to hear him say what
> I've predicted would happen for 3 years
> now.
There is some historical and legal reasons why Microsoft can't sell a
UNIX or UNIX clone. One has to read some history of SCO and Xenix.
Secondly, the GPL is a very good licencing system to prevent Microsoft
from stealing and not sharing.
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 01:37:12 GMT
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 09 Dec 2000 08:40:16 GMT,
> Chad C. Mulligan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> On Sat, 09 Dec 2000 04:56:04 GMT,
> >> Chad C. Mulligan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >Linux was used on the Titanic but the render farm had to be augmented
by
> >> >utilizing NT boxes after they had finished doing the design work. The
> >Linux
> >> >render farm, as designed wasn't up to the task. If you are looking
for
> >> >referrences to what I say, check out the TITANIC thread in this group
and
> >> >COLA from about 20 months ago.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Just so the crowd doesn't think your full of shit,
> >> give us just one link to a web site which proves this.
> >>
> >> Just one.
> >>
> >
> >Try deja.com the whole thread is there in all it's glory. BTW, I cannot
> >remember the name of the article that was quoted in that thread by Matt
and
> >Stephen Edwards. I'm sure a search on deja will return the info you
need.
> >
>
> Your going to post a newgroup thread for your proof here?
>
There are multiple referrences referrenced their, I don't have them archived
and don't have the time or inclination to do your research for you.
>
> >>
> >> >
> >> >Really funny, the company I work for at this time does support for
> >Disney,
> >> >Universal and are negotiating with Paramount and guess what not a
Linux
> >box
> >> >to be found the VP at Universal says they can't use Linux because
their
> >> >internal TCO study found Linux too high compared to Windows NT.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> And what company would that be?
> >>
> >
> >Can't say.
> >
> >> Thanks for bringing up Disney. They made TRON
> >> with a non-windows based computer also.
> >>
> >
> >Amiga IIRC.
> >
> >> I almost forgot that.
> >>
> >> As far as your comment about Disney not using Linux
> >> or FreeBSD to do animation work, your fucked.
> >>
> >
> >They don't
> >
> >> Nobody does any sort of animation work on Windows
> >> anywhere.
> >>
> >> You couldn't point us to one web site which does.
> >>
> >
> >Who cares about web sites, I'm talking about movies.
> >
>
> Moron. Movies is what we ARE talking about.
>
> Charlie
>
------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 sucks compared to linux
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 01:38:24 GMT
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 09 Dec 2000 06:46:54 -0500,
> Curtis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert) posted:
> >
> >| >Linux was used on the Titanic but the render farm had to be augmented
by
> >| >utilizing NT boxes after they had finished doing the design work. The
Linux
> >| >render farm, as designed wasn't up to the task. If you are looking
for
> >| >referrences to what I say, check out the TITANIC thread in this group
and
> >| >COLA from about 20 months ago.
> >| >
> >|
> >| Just so the crowd doesn't think your full of shit,
> >| give us just one link to a web site which proves this.
> >|
> >| Just one.
> >
> >http://linux.nuvoli.to.it/varie/titanic/2494.html
> >
> >You'll see that Digital Unix, NT and Linux were all used.
> >
> >Both NT and Digital Unix were not selected for the final rendering
> >because of cost, not capability.
> >
> >Linux's kernel needed significant enhancing to made suitable for the
> >process, but this is what OSS is about .... having access to source
> >which I can't take away as a definite advantage to Linux. :=)
> >
> >Anyway, the point is that Linux helped in the making of Titanic. It
> >wasn't by any stretch of the imagination, exclusively used to create the
> >graphics in the Titanic. It proved to be the best choice for the final
> >rendering process but it wasn't used for actual design and creation of
> >Titanic graphics, that was a job for NT and Digital Unix machines.
> >
> >--
> >Curtis
> >
> >| ,__o
> >!___ _-\_<, An egotist thinks he's in the groove
> ><(*)>--(*)/'(*)______________________ when he's in a rut.
> >
>
>
> And this is the REAL truth, not some bullshit posting
> from a moron who's refering to a newsthread rumor.
Can't refute the evidence so attach the messenger. Penguinista prime
directive.
>
> Linux is what run's hollywood these days and people
> who try Microsoft W2k to perform digital rendering
> and colorization of Movies fail every time.
>
HA HA HA, Been their lately/
> You NEED an operating system to perform these tasks.
>
> Windows is not an operating system.
>
> Charlie
>
>
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft using Linux
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 01:34:45 GMT
Talked to death!
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Interesting article covering Microsoft's possible
> use of Linux in the near future and their
> discontinuance of Windows.
>
> http://www.cnbc.com/news/001208plotkin.html
>
> I suspect we will see more of these in the
> near future.
>
> But I wasn't shocked to hear him say what
> I've predicted would happen for 3 years
> now.
>
> Charlie
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: i/o in linux
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 01:37:38 GMT
Damn, when someone sums up every post I've ever made to the Linux NG's in a
matter of sentances, it sure makes me feel long winded.
"MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:90u6ej$bpg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Yep. Linux may indeed catch up, but then it will be behind...again.
>
> Very good low cost server. Pretty good dev platform. Third rate desktop
> paradigm.
> And, more importantly, the hype of the past 2 years has begun to wane.
> Redhat's stock is dropping, game vendors such as ID are dropping support,
> Caldera said the hell with it, we can't make any money. More and more
> businesses are finding they can't resolve a profitable methodology using
> Linux. Like I said years ago, unless you standardize and realize a viable
> business model Linux will fade back into the realm of
> netserver\hacker\outcast\hobbyist\CSstudent status\malcontent status.
> Where it most likely SHOULD stay.
>
> "Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:Zl%X5.1038$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> > Didn't we all say this two years ago?
>
> Close. They say it EVERY YEAR. I like linux, make no mistake about it. But
> the rhetoric has been exposed for what it is, HYPE.
>
> > > Give it 2 years, and lets see.
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Windows review
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 01:43:41 GMT
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> > Well, considering most can barely grasp the idea of double-clicking,
hacking
> > the kernel seems to be way to overbearing.
> >
> > Windows gives the appearance of being easy, but allows you to get down
to
> > the nitty gritty if you know what you're doing.
> >
> > Linux, OTOH, forces you to be a kernel developer to do the most basic
> > things.
> >
> > It tries not to be, but the overriding arrogance built into it is
overwhelming
> > for a novice user.
>
> Neat, I never knew an OS could be arrogant!
>
> > Why would he want to do that? Most of them don't care, they're just
> > writing documents to print out. Besides, who cares about those poor
Linux
> > users who painted themselves into a corner and are now whining for
everyone
> > else to cave to their demands.
>
> You got it wrong, Chad. Linux arose because a large group of people
> decided to create an operating system that does what they want.
And when it does what I want I'll probably use it.
------------------------------
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: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 02:34:15 +0200
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 6 Dec 2000 11:24:57
> >"Anonymous" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 4 Dec 2000 13:27:01
> >> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 3 Dec 2000
00:36:39
> >> >
> >> >> >Users can of course write to HKCU.
> >> >> >Please check MS guidelines to programming in windows, you'll see
that
> >it
> >> >> >states very clearly that user spesifics settings in HKCU.
> >> >> >Beside, the very same mecanism (HKCU being user spesific) works in
> >win9x.
> >> >>
> >> >> And as I've explained (quoted below), this does cause the kind of
> >> >> problems you're addressing. And they're *Microsoft's* problems,
since
> >> >> the app isn't supposed to have to be re-written to work on NT.
> >> >
> >> >It doesn't need to be re-written for NT.
> >> >It need to be written correctly the first tim.
> >>
> >> Even if it was written for WinDOS? Years before MS shoved NT down
> >> everyone's throat as a desktop OS?
> >
> >If it was written to dos, it doesn't use the registry, so yes.
> >If it was written to win9x, it uses the registry and need to use it
> >*correctly*.
>
> That is for the market, not Microsoft, to decide. And, yes, "WinDOS" is
> what you call "9x". Windows plus DOS, covers Win95, Win98, and 98SE and
> ME, as well.
The guidelines to the registry were published long time ago.
They always included putting *user spesifics* settings in the HKCU.
Part of the reason is portability.
Unless an application does a low-level job, it can quite easily be
transfered between 9x & NT, assuming it was written correctly.
> >This guidelines has been published long ago.
>
> Yay.
So why ignore the instructions from the people who *made* the system?
> [...]
> >> No, that's not the point in permissions. The point in permissions is
> >> that the administrator can determine what is the machine's
> >> configuration, not the application configuration. This isn't a host
> >> we're talking about; its a desktop or a workstation or a server, not
all
> >> three or any one, like a Unix system. (:-D I'm just funnin' with
ya'.)
> >
> >NT is a workstation/desktop/server.
>
> Yea, right. Now if only it didn't suck at all three, compared to Unix.
Guffow
> >And you are wrong, applications configuration is part of the machine's
> >configuration.
>
> Not if its user-specific stuff.
Good, you are showing progress.
If it's user spesific stuff, where do you think it should be?
A> HKLM
B> HKCU
Hint:
HKLM = The place where *Local Machine* settings are stored.
HKCU = The place where *User Spesific* settings are stored.
> >You want a situation where anybody will have access to anything, I fail
to
> >even begin to understand why you want such a situation.
>
> No, I just want an OS which is competitive; I don't really care how it
> ensures that I have access to anything I want or need, as long as it
> does.
How does this has to do with this arguement?
> >> >If I log on as a different user on purpose, I *expect* to get
different user
> >> >settings, and that is what I get.
> >>
> >> Unless you don't, or you do want to, and don't get it. Whichever.
> >
> >No, I'll always get this on a properlly written program.
>
> Ah, the naivete.
No, a properlly written program for windows store user spesific settings in
HKCU.
Therefor, when I log as another user, you will get the *other user's*
settings.
> >Show me those settings that can't be clearly defined as HKCU or HKLM and
> >needed to be update by anyone.
>
> <*chuckle*> How about you waste your time on this, and just let me know
> when you're done. I prefer that market competition take care of
> identifying requirements like this. It is an unassailable point,
> however, that you are apparently satisfied with monopoly crapware.
This has nothing to do with this arguement.
Have you noticed that every time that you fail to find answers, you bring up
this "monopoly crapware" arguement? It's getting tiresome.
------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Windows review
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 01:46:18 GMT
"Kelsey Bjarnason" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:paxY5.14775$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [snips]
>
> "JM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > >Well, as noted, your method doesn't work, so even if your method is 100
> > >times faster, does it matter?
> >
> > How doesn't it work?
>
> Let's try it:
> C:\>"mkdir \My Documents\misc\I_am_a_directory"
> Bad command or filename
> Hmm...
> C:>mkdir \My Documents\misc\I_am_a_directory
> Too many parameters - Documents\misc\I_am_a_directory
Try mkdir "\My Documents\misc\I_am_a_directory"
>
> So, whether one assumes you intended the entire thing to be quoted, or you
> were using quotes simply to indicate the operation, it doesn't work either
> way.
>
> > >Hmm; less than a second to load here, I just tried it. On a moderately
> >
> > 4 seconds for explorer to open. How long for the command line to open?
> > 0 secs: it's already there!
>
> Is it? Not here it's not.
>
> > >or so to navigate the menu, yup - long time. 'Course as a Windows
> _user_,
> > >i.e. someone who actually regularly uses Windows and is familiar with
it,
> I
> > >probably keep several of my commonly-used programs on the quick-launch
> bar;
> > >in that case, no menu navigation involved at all - 2 seconds to launch,
> > >total.
> >
> > Is that taking into account the moving the hand to the mouse, and then
> > moving the mouse about etc?
>
> Well, if you're a GUI user, your mouse is usually conveniently placed
> instead of stuck behind the monitor under a pile of magazines; if it takes
> you more than about a quarter second to go from keyboard to mouse - or
> back - you should probably see an ergonomics consultant.
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 01:43:13 GMT
Ah yes, calling everyone who doesn't have all their free time to reprogram
themselves to use their computers "dipshits".
I don't even want to think about what you people would be like if you had to
(GASP) interact with HUMANS on a daily basis.
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 09 Dec 2000 01:34:58 +0000,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Swango wrote:
> >>
> >> Windows 2000 rocks and Linux is a sluggard if ever there was one. I
> >> tried Redhat and took the server install option and it promptly wiped
> >> out my entire hard disk. Fortunately I had a backup but what if I
> >> didn't?
> >
>
>
> Could I just step in and see if I can be of some help here.
>
> Windows 2000 was written for the dipshit in mind.
> Linux is attempting to be MORE dipshit friendly but
> there is only so much you can do to help the dipshitted.
>
> Now you ask, why do you call me "Swango" a dipshit.
> Well, "Swango", you attempted to install RedHat server
> on the same machine you had a windows product.
>
> But even if you didn't have RedHat server, if you tried
> to "Swango" a server from say Suse or Mandrake on a disk
> with Windows 2000 on it for dual booting purposes,
> you would be considered a dipshit even if you were actually
> sucessful.
>
> Only a dipshit would attempt to dual boot a workstation
> with a server. And that could be even a Windows 2000
> workstation and a Windows 2000 server.
>
> Here's a test. Try installing Windows 2000 server
> on the same drive you've installed Windows 2000 workstation.
>
> See! Your a dipshit again!
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 01:43:40 GMT
That is EXACTLY what I'm saying.
"Swangoremovemee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 08 Dec 2000 20:19:31 GMT, "Kyle Jacobs"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Linux ABSOULUTELY supports USB, it just doesn't support anything plugged
> >into it except the latest Microsoft Mice (Gee, and I thought we were
>
>
> Isn't that like saying "well the car supports tires but nobody makes
> the proper size" so in effect that car you bought is going nowhere?
>
> Swango
> "It Don't Mean a Thang if it Ain't Got That Swang"
------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 01:48:07 GMT
"Pan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> "Chad C. Mulligan" wrote:
> >
> > "Pan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "Chad C. Mulligan" wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Domino exists on many server platforms including linux. Domino is
> > > > > integrating sendmail into their next release to improve its
> > scalability
> > > > > and reliability. SMTP is the name of the protocol that all of
these
> > > > > servers use. MS mail is not an enterprise mail server. Haven't
tried
> > > > > groupwise. Guess that leaves exchange.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Because an application exists on another platform doesn't eliminate
it's
> > > > usefulness on WindowsNT/2000.
> > >
> > > True. But if you are holding up Domino on nt as a model of
reliability,
> > > then my guess is that you haven't actually used it in a production
> > > environment. There are 2 advantages to domino. You can easily spy
on
> > > all the mail sent by your employees. It is very easy to administer if
> > > you understand how to point and click. But if it were stable, they
> > > wouldn't need to integrate sendmail into the next release.
> > >
> >
> > Nor would I, I was refuting a statement that implied that there was only
one
> > mail package available on the Windows platform when in actual fact there
> > were at least four.
>
> I'm pretty sure I said "1 mail package of note". Of course, there are
> also more than 2 mail packages on Linux also, but only 2 that count,
> imo. I'll concede to the overstatement, but it doesn't really change
> the notion that when a winvocate says that linux lacks quality apps,
> invariably they are ignoring servers and programming app's (
> interpretors, compilers, editors, et al ). Nor does it change the fact
> that most server app's running on linux are considerably more stable
> than an app with the same type of functionality on win32.
>
> And I'll add this: Linux has more quality end user applications off
> most cd distro's than windows.
>
Agreed, it definitely has the largest selection of text editors every
gathered in one place.
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://salvador.venice.ca.us
------------------------------
From: "Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 01:44:59 GMT
Your devices work perfectly because you went out and literaly re-wrote the
computing rules on your own PC.
Which granted is something that CAN be done under Linux, but making it the
defacto standard is just wrong; no one should have to do that.
"John Travis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> And Kyle Jacobs spoke unto the masses...
> >Linux ABSOULUTELY supports USB, it just doesn't support anything plugged
> >into it except the latest Microsoft Mice (Gee, and I thought we were
> >banishing Billy here?) and a few Logitech USB devices (might as well be
> >Microsoft)
> >
> >It's the little things, like the DEVICES we use, not the PLUG we use.
>
> <snipped all of the shit you should have>
>
> You mean like my USB zip 250, my 'unsupported' USB scanner, my USB
printer, etc.
> which all work perfectly?
>
> jt
> --
> Debian Gnu/Linux [Woody]
> 2.4.0-test9-ReiserFs|XFree4.0.1|nVidia.95 Drivers
> You mean there's a stable tree?
>
------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 01:50:32 GMT
"Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:90tl32$2ol0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Need or want to? Can't prototype on Win2K pro. Which server can't you
> run?
> > Oracle maybe, but SQL server and IIS are both available on workstation
and
> > can be used to prototype.
>
> SQL Server: The more advanced features, such as full text indexing are
only
> available on the server version.
> IIS: The workstation version is actually PWS, quite different internally
The developer edition of SQL server can do that on workstation. PWS is only
on Win9X on NT and Win2K IIS is Peer Web Services somewhere in between IIS
(Complete) and PWS.
> from the server version. If I'm developing, I don't want to develop on a
> dumbed down version, I'd prefer the whole thing.
>
So it comes down to want to rather than need to.
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 01:46:18 GMT
Whoop-de-doo, there's ONE.
One printer down, thousands to go.
"stelex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Kyle Jacobs wrote:
> > No, it's LINUX, not the manufacturers. Linux doesn't support hardware
that
> > even the ISO/IEEE has landed on INTERNATIONAL standards for!
>
> Not true. My HP DeskJet 842C works well.
>
> > > >I could care less about politics, I want my devices that I paid money
> > > >for to work and the fact is they work under at least 2 non related
> > > >operating systems yet Linux pukes on them.
>
> If you buy OS specific hardware(ms Win).. you are out of luck.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
