Linux-Advocacy Digest #878, Volume #30 Thu, 14 Dec 00 16:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Voting (was: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks) (Donovan
Rebbechi)
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Sun Microsystems and the end of Open Source
Re: Uptimes ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux is awful ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: IBM 1 billion dollar deal - Linux! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Another UNIX sight is doun! (Michael Marion)
Re: Whistler review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Whistler review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Windows review ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Whistler review. (Josiah Fizer)
Re: The real power of Linux (cry Winbabies cry!) ("Colin R. Day")
Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks. (SwifT -)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Steve Mading)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: 14 Dec 2000 19:14:33 GMT
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:14:12 +1300, kiwiunixman wrote:
>Swangoremovemee 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,
I have a couple of objections to this:
(1) As Mading pointed out, it might not be as simple as it looks on paper.
(2) What if you have lousy eyesight ? Surely, the ballot isn't easy to read.
(3) So what if the people who got it wrong are morons ? I mean, why not
force all would-be voters to take an IQ test to determine if they
are smart enough to vote.
(4) It's an inevitable fact -- there are going to be voter errors. It's
desirable in a country that aspires to be democratic to design ballots
in such a way to minimise such errors. Clearly, the "butterfly" was
not a very successful design.
While one may question possible remedies, I think it's beyond question that
the ballot was badly designed.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Voting (was: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks)
Date: 14 Dec 2000 19:20:09 GMT
On 14 Dec 2000 10:07:00 -0700, Craig Kelley wrote:
>kiwiunixman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>The problem was made by "bussers". These people gather up as many as
>are willing (genuine voters and/or bribing with cigarettes/free
>dinner) and drive them to the polls. Their instruction were to "vote
>for the second candidate" on the ballot.
>
>It just happened to be the reform party, and not the democratic party.
Because the ballots were incorrectly designed. Gore was supposed to be
second on the ballot (it's a legal requirement).
Also, the ballots were confusing. (I mean, what is "second" on that ballot?)
>They discovered their error and then tried to foist their claim that
>the ballot was "confusing", when in reality, the voters were given bad
>instructions by party leaders.
I think if the ballot was clearer, we would have seen much less of this.
If what you were saying is true, then what about the "bussers" elsewhere ?
Are you trying to imply that they are only in Florida, or that they only
gave bad instructions in Florida ?
If the leaders couldn't6 work out how to instruct the voters correctly,
what does that say about the effectiveness of the ballot design ? This
would imply that it's not just the illiterate bums who can't work it out,
even the party leaders were having trouble!
>Should those votes "be counted"? I dunno, I can see both sides of the
I can understand why both sides wanted to gerrymander this election in
their favour, but I don't think they should be counted.
Of course, if it wasn't for the way the electoral system worked (with third
party candidates syphoning off major party votes), Al Gore would have easily
won Florida.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: 14 Dec 2000 19:22:11 GMT
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 11:20:59 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Tue, 12 Dec 2000 07:36:45 -0500, Nick Ruisi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>You forget, that to 90% of windows-oriented users, the term "compile" is
>>like mentioning black magic.
>
> Nah... it's "read and follow instructions" that is the real
> _Black Magic_...
You'd be surprised. I am TAing for a C++ class, and none of the students
could work out how to get the downloadable version of Borland C++ installed,
despite instructions on Borlands website and instructions on my website.
Took me all of 10 minutes or so.
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun Microsystems and the end of Open Source
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 19:34:43 -0000
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000 08:11:52 +0200, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:a3ZZ5.16358$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > "Chad C. Mulligan" wrote:
[deletia]
>> > Well, these corporations are also giving a lot back to the open source
>> > community. IBM has open sourced AFS and JFS, for example.
>> >
>> > Gary
>>
>> But didn't Sun promise worlds of support to the Linux community. Cross
>> platform Apps IIRC. They made Solaris run Linux stuff but aren't you
>still
>> waiting for the Solaris packages for Linux?
>
>Here is a thought, when Linux would be able to run Solaris applications, you
>can get IE to Linux.
Not quite.
IE doesn't run on x86 Solaris.
--
Freedom != Anarchy.
Some must be "opressed" in order for their
actions not to oppress the rest of us.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 14:05:01 -0600
"sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:91alhm$ouh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Bottom line: The numbers are available from the network!
The numbers MAY be available from the network, depending on a number of
factors.
> Bottom Line: I always believed that the numbers were availble from the
> network.
What you believe is irrlevant.
> Bottom line: I did and do believe them to be reasonably accurate!
Because it suits your argument.
> Bottom line: I do not need to prove every thing about netcraft to quote
> netcraft.
No, but you can quote idiots in the desert that claim to have been visited
by UFO's as well, that doesn't mean you're suddenly credible.
> Bottom line: In all the people who cried that it was impossible to get
> the numbers from the network were, in fact, just plain WRONG.
I don't think anyone claimed it was impossible to get it from the network,
but they did claim it was impossible to get it from the header. That was
true.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 14:09:19 -0600
"Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:91aih1$mcd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <pqZZ5.43383$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Boot the install CD in NFS mode, mount a good system on the network
> > and diff the /etc directory to see what went wrong? I think I
> > missed that option somewhere. How does it get the registry fixed?
>
> Yes you're right you can do that with Linux. You could do the same with
> Windows (via booting MSDOS) if the registry was a text file, but it's
> not and you can't copy one from another system. About all you can do is
> reinstall Windows and let it rebuild the registry for you.
You sound so sure of yourself. Too bad you're wrong. On many accounts.
First, the registry can be copied. It's just a file. additionally, each
user has their own reigstry hive with unique settings (from the HKEY_USER
section).
Second, the registry can be converted to a text file, using Regedit from the
command line. changes can be made to the text file, then it can be
converted back to registry format (again at the command line).
Third, Windows NT (which is what we're talking about, not Win9x) provides a
registry backup utility called rdisk that creates emergency repair disks.
You just boot from the NT boot disks or CD and choose the recovery option,
then insert the repair disk when asked.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IBM 1 billion dollar deal - Linux!
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 14:14:29 -0600
"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:919g33$t46$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Even cooler, they've already spent that much already. IBM has 1500
> > > Linux developers on the payroll now. That's committment.
> >
> > Wow... 1500 developers... doing what? They don't seem to have
contributed
> > much of anything back into the source pool.
>
> DB2?
>
> jfs?
>
> vajava?
>
> md/raid work?
>
> kernel patches?
JFS was probably not that much work to port to Linux, since it already ran
on AIX. And DB2 is most certianly not free. I took "1500 Linux developers"
to mean 1500 people working on linux, not 1500 people working on code that
runs on linux.
Even so, 1500 developers should be producing a ton more than this.
------------------------------
From: Michael Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Another UNIX sight is doun!
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 20:45:09 GMT
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> Tim Palmer is either a complete moron, or a troll pretending to be one.
I still say it's someone doing a psych study to see how long people will
continue to argue with someone that's clearly either not serious or simply a
fool.
> Possibly one of the most worthy killfile candidates in this forum (despite
> the fierce competition for that distinction!)
No way.. they're worth too many laughs to ignore them. :)
--
Mike Marion-Unix SysAdmin/Senior Engineer-Qualcomm-http://www.miguelito.org
"Nasdaq crashed this week... guess it must've been running on Windows 2000.
You know Bill Gates lost 12 Billion Doll.. oops, he just made it back."
-- Dennis Miller Live 4/7/2000
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[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 22:36:25 +0200
"Josiah Fizer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Andres Soolo wrote:
>
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad C. Mulligan
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >> No, Let's just say that Microsoft has no VISION!
> > >> They stole Windows from apple.
> > > Actually Apple stole it from Xerox.
> > One bad doesn't make another one good.
> >
> > >> They are stealing the operating system very slowly
> > >> from UNIX.
> > > Now using open standards is stealing the operating system.
> > It wouldn't if they'd done it the proper way, calling the OS an Unix.
> >
>
> Unix is a trade marked term. OS-X is not Unix. Linux (for hte most part)
is not
> Unix. NT is not Unix. All three of these can be made into a Unix system by
adding in
> missing parts. Linux, NT and MacOS X can be made 100% posix certified and
all three
> can run X. At that point there are only a few other things that need be
added for a
> system to be "Unix". However the inclusion of a few open standards will
not make an
> OS "Unix" anymore then adding a PDF layer to Linux would make it MacOS X.
IIRC, NT is already 100% posix certified, it doesn't mean anything useful,
though.
Posix is too vague to be Unix.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[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 22:38:36 +0200
"J.C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Thu, 14 Dec 2000 02:07:58 +0200, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >
> >"J.C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> On Tue, 12 Dec 2000 21:41:19 +0200, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >wrote:
> >> >
> >> >"Gary Connors" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> Monkeyboy wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Gary Connors
> >> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > > Fascinating.
> >> >> > > I've always wondered about this type of reasoning and how it
works.
> >> >> > > Blaming the user of the computer for it's problems.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > A well done OS, regardless of user, doesn't crash.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > No such thing exists.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Ahhh...Yet another MS brainwash victim.
> >> >
> >> >Do check again, anyone with root privileges
> >>
> >> That's the thing. Don't give just anyone free reign over a server,
duh...
> >>
> >
> >The people that administer the server need to have administrator/root
> >rights, if they don't know what they are doing, they can kill the system.
> >This is what we are talking about.
>
> ... and my point, which you seem incapable of understanding for some
reason, is that the
> "people that administer the server" should be able to do so *without*
(repeat, shouting)
> WITHOUT fucking the goddamn thing up.
>
> If you want to be able to "administer the server", you'll need "root
rights". Fine. But if you
> don't know what the fuck you're doing, and you kill the install, then
that's the fault of the
> moron in question.
That is *my* point, actually.
> (would you hire an admin that could conceivably "kill the system" that
runs, say, your
> business?)
I can't hire an admin that can't kill the system, I *can* hire an admin that
know what he is doing, so he wouldn't kill the system.
> My point stands. "Don't give just anyone free reign over a server, duh..."
Yes, but that isn't where the sub-thread started, it started with complaint
about Win2K needing skillful administrators in order to work correctly.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[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: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 22:42:22 +0200
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:6a6_5.43410$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:91ajs4$fi6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > >
> > > > The point in GUI is not the GUI per se, but to present the user with
> > some
> > > > easy-to-understand way to work with the program.
> > > > If, frex, I want to go to the directory where I saved last year's
> > reports.
> > > > I can't recall the exact path to the directory, so I've to do
> something
> > like
> > > > this:
> > > > cd <directory>
> > > > dir
> > > > cd <directory>
> > > > dir
> > > > ...
> > >
> > > Or just do "find /partofpathyouknow -name <directory>"
> > >
> > > Roughly similar in effort to right-clicking, selecting "Find", then
> > > typing in partofpathyouknow. (Or you can just start at the root with
> > > either method.
>
> Your real problem here is that you don't have reasonable wild-card
> expansion. In unix you would do something like:
> cd /directory_above
> ls */filename
> or
> ls */*/*wildcard*
> or
> find . -name '*wildcard*' [any of a vast number of options] -print
> to traverse a large tree.
> or
> locate part_of_filename
> to do an instant lookup from a pre-built index
or just tree to it.
or tree | more to it, if there is a lot of directories.
> > > Yes, Midnight Commander, in the curses version. (The GUI version is
> > Gnome's
> > > File Manager.) I haven't used it much, but it might offer the best of
> > > both worlds for file-management.
> >
> > curses version?
>
> Curses is the standard (unix) library for character based screen
operations
> that work on almost any terminal, taking advantage of whatever features
> it offers and optimizing the output. For example it can do most
operations
> with only relative cursor positioning motions, but is much faster with
> a terminal that has insert/delete character and line functions. This is
> hundreds of times faster than dealing with screens in graphic mode and
> if you are dealing with text that you can tolerate (or prefer) in fixed
> width fonts, just as useful.
Thanks for the info.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 12:52:48 -0800
From: Josiah Fizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Ayende Rahien wrote:
> "Josiah Fizer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Andres Soolo wrote:
> >
> > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad C. Mulligan
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >> No, Let's just say that Microsoft has no VISION!
> > > >> They stole Windows from apple.
> > > > Actually Apple stole it from Xerox.
> > > One bad doesn't make another one good.
> > >
> > > >> They are stealing the operating system very slowly
> > > >> from UNIX.
> > > > Now using open standards is stealing the operating system.
> > > It wouldn't if they'd done it the proper way, calling the OS an Unix.
> > >
> >
> > Unix is a trade marked term. OS-X is not Unix. Linux (for hte most part)
> is not
> > Unix. NT is not Unix. All three of these can be made into a Unix system by
> adding in
> > missing parts. Linux, NT and MacOS X can be made 100% posix certified and
> all three
> > can run X. At that point there are only a few other things that need be
> added for a
> > system to be "Unix". However the inclusion of a few open standards will
> not make an
> > OS "Unix" anymore then adding a PDF layer to Linux would make it MacOS X.
>
> IIRC, NT is already 100% posix certified, it doesn't mean anything useful,
> though.
> Posix is too vague to be Unix.
I thought that NT (like BeOS) was missing some of the Posix network calls.... I
could be wrong however.
====== 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: "Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The real power of Linux (cry Winbabies cry!)
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 15:53:36 -0500
Matthew Soltysiak wrote:
> > I believe Perry is male, your rudness and arrogance earns you a free entry
> > into my kill-morons file!
>
> Awww, so i don't make it in to your little life?? that's too bad. stick with
> reality, dude.
Reality? What would a wintroll such as yourself know of reality?
Colin Day
------------------------------
From: SwifT - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Nobody wants Linux because it destroys hard disks.
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 21:49:57 +0100
On Thu, 14 Dec 2000, kiwiunixman wrote:
> You use Redhat! you must be a complete moron. Fuck, I wouldn't touch
> Redhat with a 40M pole.
Don't relate morons and RedHat. I use RedHat too (not solely, Debian for
my laptop and at this moment JBLinux on my teststation) and I don't think
I qualify for moron (well, I haven't actually ran a moron-test on myself,
but hey :-)
> 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)?
SuSE 6.4 was about 4 hours on my harddisk. Dunno about SuSE 7.0, have to
try it one of these days ... if I find the time
--
SwifT
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: 14 Dec 2000 20:58:43 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Ed Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Bug becomes an "issue", "an undocumented feature" or "a
: partially implemented feature"
: They got laughed at too much for that last one so
: now they use "issue" as in "Win2000 has 63,000
: issues"
Actually that one's not Microsoft's doing. That terminology has been
in the business for quite a while. The thing is, by calling it an
"issue", you aren't classifying *yet* whether it is a bug or not. This
isn't just marketspeak, its a useful term to have laying around. When
some end-user notices some problem, and calls it in, he isn't qualified
to determine whether or not it is a bug yet. (Perhaps he didn't finish
installing the software package, so something is missing. Perhaps the
documentation was badly written, and the program actually does what it
is supposed to, but is documented as if it is supposed to do something
different. (Which isn't a bug, but it is something in need of fixing.)
So call centers and customer support departments call these things
by the generic name "issues", leaving their further classification
(into bugs, documentation errata, user misunderstanding, etc) up to
others who have time to look into them in detail. Perhaps it is
a bug, but not in the program he thought it was in. Perhaps some
other program has a bug that is interferring with the program he's
trying to run (i.e. a special desktop theme widget might get confused
when some other program goes full-screen.)
The point is, this is not Microsoft's invention. The practice of
calling all incidents as "issues" without classifying which are
bugs yet is quite common. Microsoft themselves probably didn't know
yet which of those issues are actual bugs at the time they made
that statement.
I hate Microsoft too, but the valid arguments against it will carry
more weight if the frivolous ones like this are left out.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
