Linux-Advocacy Digest #866, Volume #30 Thu, 14 Dec 00 03:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Whistler review. ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Whistler review. ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Whistler review. ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Caifornia power shortage... (kiwiunixman)
Re: Caifornia power shortage... (kiwiunixman)
Re: What if Linux wasn't free? (kiwiunixman)
Re: Security (was Re: Several items) (kiwiunixman)
Re: Linux is awful ("MCGWIER ROBERT")
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. (kiwiunixman)
Re: Whistler review. ("Quantum Leaper")
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. (kiwiunixman)
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. (kiwiunixman)
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. (kiwiunixman)
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. (kiwiunixman)
Re: Unuther UNIX sight doun! (kiwiunixman)
Re: Another UNIX sight is doun! ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: Another UNIX sight is doun! ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. (Steve Mading)
Re: Suggestions for Linux (kiwiunixman)
Re: Linux doesn't support P4 ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: Linux doesn't support P4 ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: Linux doesn't support P4 ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: Linux doesn't support P4 (kiwiunixman)
Re: Unuther UNIX sight doun! (Steve Mading)
Re: Linux doesn't support P4 (kiwiunixman)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 06:14:02 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9178r6$j04$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > > > > You said "...regardless of the user...". That includes privileges
of
> > ALL
> > > > > kinds.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > No, with real computers the user is not the same as the
administrator.
> > >
> > > Who do you think set up win2k systems? Administrator-privileged users,
> > > therefor, the point stand.
> >
> > Like I said, on real computers the administrator is not a user even if
> > it is the same person wearing a different hat.
>
> Administrator is a user with very few limitations.
> The assumestion of Administrator (or root) is that they know what they are
> doing, because having unlimited rights to the computer can cause a lot of
> trouble very quickly, if you don't know what you are doing.
>
> When talking about setting up a Win2K box correctly, we are talking about
> somebody with Administrator rights, logged on as such, that set it up.
> If the user don't know what he is doing, then he can take the system down.
An administrator is the one responsible for making the machine work, not
someone who happens to know the password. A user who knows the
admin password or has been given admin rights but doesn't know what
he is doing is not the same thing at all.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 06:20:32 GMT
"Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:PRVZ5.14004$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >
> > No, Let's just say that Microsoft has no VISION!
> > They stole Windows from apple.
>
> Actually Apple stole it from Xerox.
I believe licensed is the correct term...
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 06:22:25 GMT
"Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:mDXZ5.15285$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > If you speak of Linux you could point to APT-GET Dselect
> > or RPM as firsts within the *nix community.
> >
>
> They are just variations on Sun's package manager
Which is a variation (or maybe the same) as the SysV
package manager.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Caifornia power shortage...
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 06:24:44 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>>>> "Aaron" == Aaron R Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>>
>
> Aaron> Why would the governments need to "promote" conservation
> Aaron> and efficiency... that's what the price increase does.
>
> There are always some people who are too rich to be affected by such
> price increases. To make them waste less energy by bringing up the
> price is too infeasible. (Making the price too high would affect poor
> people's normal life, even if they are already saving every bit of
> Watt that they can.
Targeted income related benefits would solve the problem. Hence, only
the low income would receive relief whilst the fat cats pay the price
for wasting electricity/resources.
kiwiunixman
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Caifornia power shortage...
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 19:31:43 +1300
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> Russ Lyttle wrote:
>
>> kiwiunixman wrote:
>>
>>> Its the environmental run off (nuclear waste) that is the major cause of
>>> concern. Since NZ went Nuclear free around 14 years ago (which
>>> pissed-off the US navy) we have had no problems producing electricity
>>> from Hydro, Steam, natural gas and wind.
>>>
>>> kiwiunixman
>>>
>>> <snype>
>>
>> The amount of nuclear waste produced is minute. Wait a few years until
>> the hydroelect dams all silt up. We have THAT problem here in the US
>> with the TVA dams. They are going out of service because all the silt
>> has turned the lake into a swamp that even the ducks avoid. In the NW,
>
>
> Typical government-run project. A commercial entity would have dredged
> the lakes on a continual basiis.
The government entity that owns the hydro dams (and other electricity
facilities) are classified as an SOE (State Own Enterprise's), they
cannot be interfered with by government (under the SOE Act), they are
seen as assets owned by the government (aka Crown), but run along
commercial lines, such as NZPost, ECNZ, TVNZ (an in some cases
government departments) must sustainably be profitable (or in the case
of a government department, expected to shown a surplus at the end of
each financial year).
>
>
>> the dams are killing off the Salmon fish. Your grandkids will curse you
>> for destroying the beautiful country you inhabit : Turn the rivers into
>> muck with overgrazing sheep and hydroelectric dams.
>> --
>> Russ Lyttle, PE
>> <http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
>> Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What if Linux wasn't free?
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 19:44:32 +1300
<snype>
> One of the most respected computer professionals in the insurance
> industry was a conductor of an orchestra.
>
> Charlie
If my memory serves me correctly, didn't Einstein play the Violine?
kiwiunixman
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Security (was Re: Several items)
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 19:50:35 +1300
Microsoft is like a Japanese import, nice on the outside, but wait a few
months and the thing falls to bits. Unix is like a Volvo, although not
particularly good looking on the outside, when you get down to the
nitty-gritty, the Volvo is built like a "brick shit-house". Windows
2000 Server, is like a Lada (Russian Made Car), though on the outside
they look tough, when you get down to the nitty-gritty, it is nothing
more that a mini-minor in the frame of a tank.
kiwiunixman
<snype>
------------------------------
From: "MCGWIER ROBERT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.mandrake
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 06:51:15 GMT
"Jeremy Bowen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Linux isn't for amateurs
>
This statement is clearly and demonstrably false.
Linux is not for the appliance computer user who says that
Windoze is easy because it came preinstalled on the computer
and that Linux is too much trouble. I think the folks that get
into trouble are the ones that go off half cocked, install
Linux without another way to get the tons of online documentation
and help and then are frustrated beyond belief because they
wouldn't know DHCP from DNS if it hit them in the face.
>
> Linux isn't for everyone. I suppose you got into it because you heard all
the
> hype about Linux. Now you're frustrated because you can't get things to
work.
> Frankly I started out 2 1/2 years ago the same way, frustrated because I
> couldn't even get my video card to work, I left Linux alone for a while
and
> guess what all my problems we're solved a few months down the road. I
enjoy
> Linux because it's challenging. Sure windows brags about Plug and Play,
but
> nothing beats the sensation of a conquering a challenge.
>
> Sorry I can't help you out here. Good luck and stick with it if you want
a
> challenge if not have fun with ME.
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>
> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>
> > "WorLord" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Taken from the obscure and questionable writings of "Kelsey Bjarnason"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> :
> > >
> > > >Odd; I installed it just the other day - or tried to. It wouldn't
even
> > > >recogniz that the drives _existed_, never mind supporting them.
> > > >UltraDMA-100. Doesn't understand it at all, apparently. 'Course.
> > throwing
> > > >them onto the IDE bus let it find them - but so much for the UDMA
> > support.
> > >
> > > Tell me something, do you try to install Intel software onto an IMAC?
> > >
> > > No?
> > >
> > > Then why are you trying to install an OS that *clearly states* that
> > > UDMA-100 is *not* supported onto a computer that has a UDMA-100
> > > controller?
> >
> > Hey, this is *Linux* - the be-all and end-all of OSen, right? Hint:
WinME -
> > which was released _before_ this particular distro of Linux, if I'm not
> > mistaken - at least recognized the drives, installed on them, booted
from
> > them, and once I'd installed the drivers for the UDMA controller
(included
> > with the system, BTW) voila - UDMA100 support.
> >
> > Compare that to Mandrake. Can't even _install_ it, it won't recognize
the
> > drives, even as IDE. Yup, modern, advanced, powerful... but won't even
> > install. Love it.
>
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 06:56:28 GMT
Swangoremovemee wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 05:35:11 GMT, kiwiunixman
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>> You have missed the point completely. Windows 98SE is compiled and
>> optimized to work with the lowest grade processor possible (486), hence,
>> the very poor speed improvement once the processor is upgraded (say from
>> a PII to PIII). Compare that to Linux, where, if I have the latest
>> processor, and Linux can recognise it, you have the ability to optimize
>> the kernel to utilize the processor to its compacity.
>
>
> Now if it only supported USB hardware properly like Windows and Mac.
> If it only had a decent non pre-alpha web browser.
Can't win that battle, so you go back to the USB whine feast, very
mature, esp for a socalled "computer expert" with 25 years experience.
>
>
>
>
>
>> If you RTFM that is included with your distro (like the huge one
>> included with SuSE Linux), unless you are a complete moron, anyone
>> should be able to compile a kernel.
>
>
>
> You haven't tried to compile a kernel under Redhat 7 yet have you?
>
> Try following the How-To and see if it works.
You use Redhat! you must be a complete moron. Fuck, I wouldn't touch
Redhat with a 40M pole. Why didn't you buy a copy of SuSE Linux 7? or
are you one of those people who only buy "American Made" software (aka
xenaphobic software buyer)? Your so dumb you probably don't even know
what SAP is!
kiwiunixman
------------------------------
From: "Quantum Leaper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 06:29:48 GMT
"Alan Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <PRVZ5.14004$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad C.
> Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 15:45:08 -0500,
> >> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >Charlie Ebert wrote:
> ><trimmed>
> >> >>
> >> >> Windows doesn't have this capability. They never have and they
> >> >> never will. They are slowly going the UNIX way, but they don't
> >> >> have this capability yet.
> >> >
> >> >.....being dragged, kicking and screaming....all the way...
> >> >
> >>
> >> And spell checked.
> >>
> >> No, Let's just say that Microsoft has no VISION!
> >> They stole Windows from apple.
> >
> >Actually Apple stole it from Xerox.
>
> Four things:
>
> Apple was already working on these ideas and visiting Xerox was merely
> the spark that turned higher management on to the concept.
>
Amazing, considing Xerox got the idea from Doug Englebart when he as at SRI
in the late 60s. So even Xerox didn't invent the idea of GUI.
Xerox 'stole' the idea from Doug
Apple paid 6 million, which isn't much considering it was in stock options,
for the GUI from Xerox
MS got the idea from Apple.
So everyone stole the idea from Doug, since he never got paid.
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:05:11 +1300
<snype>
> ie: So how many people do YOU know running StarOffice? I'll even let
> you include the Windows version in your tally.
I use StarOffice for Linux on regular basis, and what the fuck is wrong
with it? nothing. Compare that to Microsoft's mega-mega-mega-mega-mega
bloated office suite that provides millions of features, but the average
joe/jane business/home user, if lucky, use 0.01% of the features. 200MB
vs. Microsofts mega-mega-mega-mega-mega bloated pro version taking up
760MB (on a Win 98 Machine). I know which one I'd pick, and it an't
MSOffice.
kiwiunixman
>
>
> Swango
> "It Don't Mean a Thang if it Ain't Got That Swang"
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:07:23 +1300
<snype>
> ie: So how many people do YOU know running StarOffice? I'll even let
> you include the Windows version in your tally.
by Sun's website, 3,927,343
kiwiunixman
>
>
> Swango
> "It Don't Mean a Thang if it Ain't Got That Swang"
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 07:09:01 GMT
<sype>
>>> Whoop-de-doo, there's ONE.
>>>
>>> One printer down, thousands to go.
>>
>
> Most people don't need thousands.
>
> [deletia]
>
> Most people as a group don't posess thousands.
True, however, as long as you keep to the mainstream printers such as
the HP's and Epsons, then it should be supported. However, problems are
faced if you try to be smart and own an exotic printer.
kiwiunixman
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:14:12 +1300
Swangoremovemee wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 17:58:00 +1300, kiwiunixman
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>> I try to be optimistic, however, the dickhead swango who can't even
>> config, his computer puts real doubts about humanities ability to RTFM!
>
>
> They can't even read an election ballot and you are expecting them to
> run Linux?
>
True, in my local paper (Evening Post), they had a picture of the ballot
paper (that caused the problems), the fucking arrows say it all, if ya
can't follow that, then you must real problems. As a serious question,
down in that county, are they just a bunch of six toed inbreeds, because
that is the only reason I can find for such as pack of dicks making such
a stupid mistake.
kiwiunixman
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Unuther UNIX sight doun!
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 07:33:45 GMT
David Findlay wrote:
> You really should stop hacking into and crashing web servers. Still work for
> Micro$oft?
Of course, he is the chief bug inserted, sorry, I mean programmer. By
Tim's poor typing and lack of net-etiquette, he must obviously be a
programmer for Microsoft. Also, he does not have the balls to use his
real email address either.
kiwiunixman
>
>
> "Tim Palmer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> ALL OF EFNET IS DOUN AS WE SPEEK! EFNET COOD HAVE RAN WINDOS BUT
>
> NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THAY HALF TO BE STOOPIT AND RUN UNIX BECAUSE THAY THINK
> IT MORE STABAL1 BUT ITS NOT AND PROOVE IS THAT ITS ALL DOUN RITE NOW.
>
>>
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another UNIX sight is doun!
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 01:34:27 -0600
kiwiunixman wrote:
> Tim suffers from the very common
> syndrome, called Unix Envy, a bit like the Freudian concept "penis
> envy"
I thought "penis envy" and "eunuch's envy" were the same thing.
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
p.s. - Too bad this isn't Slashdot. That'd rate a (+4 funny) for sure.
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another UNIX sight is doun!
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 01:32:23 -0600
Thank Bog he doesn't post a message every time a Windows site goes down. There
wouldn't be enough room left in this newsgroup for the resident trolls' posts.
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: 14 Dec 2000 07:39:15 GMT
kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: True, in my local paper (Evening Post), they had a picture of the ballot
: paper (that caused the problems), the fucking arrows say it all, if ya
: can't follow that, then you must real problems. As a serious question,
: down in that county, are they just a bunch of six toed inbreeds, because
: that is the only reason I can find for such as pack of dicks making such
: a stupid mistake.
That picture is misleading. It shows a properly printed ballot, and
so people assumed that the people who couldn't figure it out were
morons. I've heard people complain on-line from that area, and
they said they had been given ballots where the binding was not
aligned with the paper properly, causing the arrows to shift to
a spot halfway between holes. The one you see in the newspapers
does not properly demonstrate this problem.
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Suggestions for Linux
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 07:43:41 GMT
Bracy wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Tim Palmer"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>> Microsoft wil do it then Linux wil take 10 yeres to coppy it.
>>
>
>
> What has Microsoft produced that they didn't copy?
>
> Bracy
I've got it:
1. BSOD (Blue Screen of Death).
2. The dreaded registry.
3. Easily corruptable File System (ever tried to corrupt an Amiga File
system on a hard disk, it's very hard to).
4. allow evil ActiveX and VB-Script to fuck up your computer, eg the
love bug.
kiwiunixman
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux doesn't support P4
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 01:43:29 -0600
Steve Mading wrote:
> Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/15416.html
>
> What you fail to mention is that the only problem is a
> piddly little ID code - It doesn't realize that it's on
> a pentium because the ID returned by the CPU isn't in the
> list yet. This is trivial to fix, and involves like one
> line of code or so. In the long run, this won't matter.
The funny part comes in The Reg's newer article:
"Pentium 4 Linux problem all Chipzilla's fault, apparently"
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/15441.html
"""
Intel doesn't appear to have sent notification of the changes to the
kernel mailing list, but seems to have failed to do this through
dumbness rasther than malice. More than two years on from the
commencement of its Big Linux Adventure, Chipzilla seems not altogether
to have grasped how Linux development works. "Intel have failed to
provide good reasons for their change," the notes say disapprovingly:
"We have chosen to continue to report the Pentium IV as a '686' class
processor."
"""
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux doesn't support P4
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 01:39:23 -0600
Mig wrote:
> Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/15416.html
>
> You're a couple of days late on this one... and i have already cried
Yeah, P4 owners *everywhere* are crying.
Have they actually sold any P4s yet?
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux doesn't support P4
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 01:36:46 -0600
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/15416.html
And now we've discovered that the reason is that Intel changed the
pattern of the CPUID numbers it has been using all along, and forgot to
mention it to the kernel developers.
Those guys are good, but they still don't read minds yet.
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux doesn't support P4
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 07:47:17 GMT
Most of the upgrade-ee's I know are going with the AMD Athlon
(thunderbird) because of the $$$$ needed to upgrade the memory on a P4
is over the top (aka beyond reasoning). Pete, go back to your think-tank
and try to come out with something a little more earth shattering than
that piece of tripe.
kiwiunixman
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/3/15416.html
>
> --
> ---
> Pete
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.society.anarchy,talk.politics.misc,alt.christnet,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unuther UNIX sight doun!
Date: 14 Dec 2000 07:42:13 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Tim Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: ALL OF EFNET IS DOUN AS WE SPEEK! EFNET COOD HAVE RAN WINDOS BUT NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:THAY HALF TO BE STOOPIT AND RUN UNIX BECAUSE THAY THINK IT MORE STABAL1 BUT ITS NOT
:AND PROOVE IS THAT ITS ALL DOUN RITE NOW.
Learn how irc works, moron. EFNET is not a single site.
------------------------------
From: kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux doesn't support P4
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:53:21 +1300
<snype>
> Still, the point is mute seeing how Intel has recalled
> the CPU.
>
> Charlie
Won't effect me as next year I am upgrading to a Mac with MacOS X 1.0,
P4 is nothing but a show pony, none of the benchmarks have shown it to
be any better than the o'l reliable AMD Athlon, who (the AMD think-tank)
actually speed up their processor the proper way (they make the core
better, and stick with a 6 stage pipe line) compared to Intels cheap ass
effort to increase speed by increasing from (I think) 14 to a 20 stage
pipe line, thus the abysmal performance results, even with the
ultra-ultra expensive RDRAM.
kiwiunixman
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
