Linux-Advocacy Digest #942, Volume #30 Sun, 17 Dec 00 12:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: Conclusion (sfcybear)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Russ Lyttle)
Re: Caifornia power shortage... (dc)
Re: Linux is awful (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: 32-Bit PCI Fast Ethernet Adapter (Bob Hauck)
Re: Conclusion ("Adam Ruth")
Re: "Is the end looming for the Microsoft monopoly?" (Richard Storey)
Re: Conclusion ("Adam Ruth")
Re: Conclusion ("Adam Ruth")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Conclusion
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 15:13:26 GMT
Take a class in statistics.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Russ Lyttle <[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: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 15:22:42 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Russ Lyttle writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Steve Mading writes:
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not exactly uncommon. When my VCR is "off", it's still on by
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enough to keep a clock running and monitor its programming to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> determine whether to turn "on" (or should I say "more on") and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> record a program. Doesn't make the power switch any less
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> intuitive.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Actually, I would say that that sort of power switch is highly
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unintuitive. Intuitively, you'd expect that turning something
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> off would, you know, actually turn it off.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Depends on what you consider "off" to be. When you turn your
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> microwave oven off, do you expect it to lose the time? (Yes,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that does presuppose an oven with a clock on the display.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are there any new models that don't have one of those built in?)
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I haven't seen any microwaves with an on/off button lately.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Okay then, "Start/Stop", if you must be pedantic.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If they had them, then yeah, I'd expect them to at least turn
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the display off, and go down to a trickle that only serves
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to maintain a few K of RAM (for the clock and maybe some programs)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (which takes very little power, as evidenced by calculators and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> watches, and could be done by battery like it is for CMOS
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> settings on computers.)
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Even with the display on, it could still be a trickle.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All this "unintuitive" behavior of power switches is causing a major
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem in California.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Illogical. It is quite possible that people will generally know what
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to do with a power switch without needing to consult a manual, but
>will
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> not generally know how much power is consumed in the on and off
>states.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Consider the AC adaptor for a modem, for example. The power switch is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the modem, not the AC adaptor.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Logical. The behavior of the power switch changed from its traditional
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> role. People *think* it still works the way it did 10 years ago.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Oh really? Your Curtis Mathes is older than that. You claim it kept
> >>>>>>>>>>>> the power on.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but it was very unusual for its time.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Really? I had a clock-radio that when "off" kept the clock on. Very
>usual
> >>>>>>>>>> for its time.
>
> >>>>>>>> Note: no response.
>
> >>>>>> Note: still no response.
>
> >>>> Note: still no response.
>
> >> Note: still no response.
>
> Note: still no response.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Its behavior isn't capable of being comprehended without logical
>thought.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> And with logical thought, the average consumer will know how much power
> >>>>>>>>>>>> is still being consumed by a unit even when the switch is in the off
> >>>>>>>>>>>> position? That's not the issue here.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> (See definition of intuitive).
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Practice what you preach.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> They are still trying to make decisions
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> based on the traditional use of the power switch - power cord setup.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On the contrary, sounds like your example involves a mislabeled
> >>>>>>>>>>>> button. There is a difference between "video blank" and "power off".
> >>>>>>>>>>>> You've described the former. I've been talking about the latter.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> No, they concern the device that serves as a power switch these days.
>
> >>>>>>>>>> An "off" switch that leaves 10 amps of power running isn't much of an
> >>>>>>>>>> off switch.
>
> >>>>>>>> Note: no response.
>
> >>>>>> Note: still no response.
>
> >>>> Note: still no response.
>
> >> Note: still no response.
>
> Note: still no response.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The issue of all these devices still drawing power is keeping a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> load on the system that it wasn't designed to handle.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you suggesting that systems outside of California were somehow
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> designed to handle it?
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> No. Outside CA, NY, and MA, there have been more plants built. These
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> plants are now selling some of their excess off peak power to CA. In
>the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> past CA would sell power to Texas during the peak time in Texas and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Texas would sell to CA during the peak time there. Now the transfer is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> all one way. To CA. But it is getting difficult for Texas utilities to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> justify building more plants just to have power to sell to CA. They
>have
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to justify the need for plants based on need in Texas.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> That has nothing to do with being designed to handle the load.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That coupled with lack of new power generation in California is
>putting
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a strain on the system now, promising a major breakdown in the near
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> future.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds like those Californians are going to have to do without their
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 72-inch projection televisions. (Did your Curtis Mathes need 10 amps
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> to keep its filament going?)
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Note: no response.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Relying to much on intuition and not enough on reason is going
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get a lot of people killed.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> The power consumed by a device in the off state has absolutely
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> nothing to do with the issue of whether the power switch itself
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is intuitive.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Note: no response.
>
> >>>>>>>>>>> OK, what is your intuitive concept of the operation of a power switch?
>
> >>>>>>>>>> One position is "on" and the other position is "off".
>
> >>>>>>>>> The switch marked "on" and "off" on my 1903A4 Springfield is a Power
> >>>>>>>>> Switch?
>
> >>>>>>>> Show me your 1903A4 Springfield.
>
> >>>>>>> Next time you are in Arizona, give me a call.
>
> >>>>>> What's your number? I usually get to Arizona at least once a year. It's
> >>>>>> a big state, however. Don't expect me to look you up in Yuma.
>
> >>>>> Tucson/Pheonix. E-mail me.
>
> >>>> Most trips are to Tucson. Somewhat fewer to Flagstaff, which usually
> >>>> involves arrival at Sky Harbor.
>
> >>>>>>>>> Not all switches marked thus perform the same functions or
> >>>>>>>>> perform the same functions the same way!
>
> >>>>>>>> Irrelevant, given that I didn't say they do.
>
> >>>>>>> Looking at your post you definately said your concept of a power switch
> >>>>>>> has "One position is "on" and the other position is "off"."
>
> >>>>>> Yet you illogically turned that around and tried to make it sound like
> >>>>>> every switch with an "on" and an "off" must be a power switch.
>
> >>>>>>> So if that isn't your concept of a power switch, what is?
>
> >>>>>> Something that changes the state of the power applied to a device:
> >>>>>> power on, power off. That doesn't mean every switch with an "on"
> >>>>>> and an "off" is a power swtich. That's just plain illogical.
>
> >>>>> You said the intuitive concept of a power switch was a switch with one
> >>>>> position "on" and the other "off".
>
> >>>> I said my concept of a power switch is that one position is "on" and
> >>>> the other position is "off".
>
> >> Note: no response.
>
> Note: still no response.
>
> >>>>>>> And why did you say it was your concept of a power switch?
>
> >>>>>> Because you asked me about my concept of a power switch.
>
> >>>> Note: no response.
>
> >> Note: still no response.
>
> Note: still no response.
>
> >>>>>>> why won't my computer fire 30-06 rounds from the magazine when
> >>>>>>> the power switch is in the "on" position.
>
> >>>>>> You're erroneously presupposing that your computer has a magazine
> >>>>>> from which it might be able to fire rounds.
>
> >>>>> No, I'm supposing my computer has a switch with one position marked "on"
> >>>>> and the other marked "off".
>
> >>>> Why did you mention a magazine from which rounds are fired?
>
> >> Note: no response.
>
> Note: still no response.
>
> >>>>> The '03A4 loads from a magazine when in the switch is in the "on"
> >>>>> position.
>
> >>>> Is it a power switch? If not, then it is irrelevant to the present
> >>>> discussion.
>
> >> Note: no response.
>
> Note: still no response.
>
> >>>>> Therefore it is intuitive that the computer would do the same.
>
> >>>> Illogical, given that the discussion is about power switches, not
> >>>> some other kind of switches.
>
> >>> Your definition of a power switch :
>
> >> On the contrary, you asked me for a concept of a power switch, not a
> >> definition.
>
> Note: no response.
>
> >>>>>>>>> One position is "on" and the other position is "off".
>
> >>> Therefore, by your define both are power switches.
>
> >> Illogical. All pulsars are neutron stars. Does that mean all
> >> neutron stars are pulsars? No. Classic illogic on your part.
>
> Note: no response.
>
> >>> Want to change your definition?
>
> >> I didn't give you a definition. You asked for a concept. I gave
> >> you a concept.
> >>
> >> Want to change your accusation?
>
> > What is your intuitive concept of a power switch?
>
> I already answered that question. You erroneously declared my answer
> to be a definition.
>
> > Care to try to duck the question again?
>
> You're erroneously presupposing that I ducked it previously. From
> above:
>
> RL] OK, what is your intuitive concept of the operation of a power switch?
> ]
> DT] One position is "on" and the other position is "off".
>
> Your claim that I ducked it is rather ironic, considering all the
> statements of mine that you've ducked. For evidence, see above where
> I've written "Note: no response."
Until you give an intuitive definition of a power switch, nothing you
say or ask has any meaning whatsoever. Therefore, it gets no response.
--
Russ Lyttle, PE
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: dc <[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, 17 Dec 2000 09:31:22 -0600
On Sun, 17 Dec 2000 08:51:14 GMT, Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> What's barbaric is to let someone like that couple in Belgium who
>> killed all those people, after torturing them, live. Or that nut in
>> England who shot those kids at a school. THAT is barbaric. 3 meals a
>> day and a comfy bed, maybe even cable T.V. for the rest of their
>> lives? For what? Killing others? They denied others the right to
>> live. Why should theirs be upheld?
>
>You cannot teach people that killing is wrong by killing people.
Why not? It is a necessary evil, designed as an incentive to avoid
more killing.
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[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: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 15:38:34 GMT
Ilja Booij wrote:
>
> Pan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > the_blur wrote:
> >
> > > Also, Linux distroes must get a working GUI on the system asap in the
> > > installation process,
> >
> > * must * is too stong a word. A well designed tui installer is every
> > bit as useful a well-designed gui installer.
> >
>
> often more usefull. no irritating graphics to distract you from what
> you're doing, just simple questions (with often simple answers)
>
> i tried the RH6.1 graphical install once.. took me twice as long to
> navigate through that.
>
> then again, the RH6.1 install was quick and clean compared to the
> graphics-fest of a Windows98 install.
>
> Ilja
There is one nice thing about the RedHat graphical installation.
If you customize it, then you can go through each package and read
a blurb about it, which helps you decide if you want it loaded.
Chris
--
Are you sure you want to read this message?
Click Okay to continue, and Cancel to okay
this dialog.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: 32-Bit PCI Fast Ethernet Adapter
Reply-To: bobh{at}haucks{dot}org
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 15:43:41 GMT
On Sun, 17 Dec 2000 14:18:08 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>i've got the 32-Bit PCI Fast Ethernet Adapter for the cable modem for
>my pc.
What brand? "32-bit pci" isn't very specific. You'll need to tell RH
to use the driver for the specific card you've got.
>the driver has been installed to Win98 sys. and runs ok to connect to
>internet.
So if you don't know what kind it is you can ask the Windows Control
Panel. Then re-ask your question in comp.os.linux.networking with more
complete information.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: "Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Conclusion
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 09:47:28 -0700
> Netcraft does no filtering though. They simply provide the numbers, no
> matter how random they might be.
1) You can still get good values from a site that uses load balancing, over
time. You just can't get a good instantaneous measurement. It would need
to be really random to be worthless.
2) Show me a site that has worthlessly random values.
> Exactly, which means that neither the Unix *OR* Win2k numbers are
accurate.
> You don't KNOW if those sites are behind firewalls or load balancers or
> anything else unless you know what hardware that site is running
> specifically. That means grabbing any random site and running it through
> Netcraft is as good as pulling numbers out of a hat. Without detailed
> knowledge of the sites infrastructure, you're just guessing if the numbers
> are right or not.
Netcraft will read a proxy box as being Unix, and will report the uptime of
the Unix box as a Unix box. You seem to think that Netcraft will read the
uptime of the Unix box and report the OS as NT or vice versa. The fact of
the matter is that that just isn't true. They only report on the front end
box. So all of those numbers will be correct. It's just not the web server
box itself, but that doesn't matter in an OS based query.
> > 3) The statement you quote has nothing to do with your arguments. You
> > should have selected something more apropos than what you did.
>
> I think it has everything to do with his arguments.
Actually it doesn't. He quoted my interpretation of what Chad Meyers said
(he said NT admins are less knowledgable than Unix admins). That really
does have nothing to do with Netcraft numbers. It's clear he just picked a
random paragraph. I was just niggling him for it.
> Yes, *IF* netcraft were to filter obviously inaccurate numbers, and *IF*
you
> look at the numbers as an average you'll get some number which *MIGHT*
have
> some accuracy over a given period of time. However, Win2k hasn't been out
> long enough to gain those kinds of benchmarks. Tell me, how many sites
can
> you find still running a 2.2.0 or 2.2.1 kernel? I doubt you'll find any.
> They're either running a very stable 2.0.x kernel or a recent 2.2.1x
kernel.
> Either way, they're running on a system which has had most of the bugs
> shaken out of it due to it's long time useage.
>
> By asking for a Win2k system that's been up since it was released, you're
> asking for the equivelant of a Linux system running 2.2.0 with an uptime
> since it's release. It aint gonna happen.
That doesn't mean I can't start identifiying trends off of the data.
Remember, and this is the big point, trends are NOT definitive answers.
Adam Ruth
------------------------------
From: Richard Storey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: "Is the end looming for the Microsoft monopoly?"
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 16:59:56 GMT
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/15526.html
>
> One can but hope.
>
> --
> ---
> Pete
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
With Mr. Balmer at the helm we can look on with slightly higher hopes.
Reports of Balmer's temper preceeded him in his current role--it's legend.
I remember Balmer's remark when Justice was first beginning its challenge
of MS's monopoly. He said that Janet Reno can, "...go to hell." This was
on a national news program, before cameras, blah, blah. What kind of
corporat executive pulls that kind of blooper, in that situation? Perhaps
his loose screw will jar even looser as the presures mount higher.
------------------------------
From: "Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Conclusion
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 09:59:36 -0700
> Maybe you should be more clear in your posting...
Maybe you shouldn't nit pick over semantics, or see the letters NT when
they're not there.
> Load balanced servers seldom have same uptimes, Netcraft might connect to
> server01 on the first day and serverx on the next and so on. Not to
mention
> that some of the load balancers might reply to Netcraft directly. The
report
> will be on some switch and not on the web server.
Still, it doesn't affect a time based statistical baseline, or at least not
nearly as much as you think.
> So what? It means that the numbers are not accurate at best. Besides, if
> Netcraft reports Unix instead of NT wouldn't it mean that all of the
uptime
> for Unix is actually NT :)?
Netcraft will see a frontline Unix box, pull the uptime of that frontline
Unix box and report the value of the uptime as Unix. You quote their FAQ to
me but clearly you didn't read it. Sure the web server may be NT, but they
never measure it. If the firewall is running Unix, then the site is
reported as a Unix site and the uptime is for that Unix box. That's how it
works. The same would be true if the OS's were reversed. That's why I said
"so what?".
> How about this quote from Netcraft's web site:
>
> "HP-UX, Linux, Solaris and recent releases of FreeBSD also cycle back to
> zero after 497 days"
>
> In theory, there should be no more than 497 days uptime reported for those
> systems. Nonetheless it does not stop Netcraft to post numbers otherwise.
Show me a HP-UX, Linux, or Solaris site on there that shows more than 497
days uptime. There are some FreeBSD sites, but my guess is that they are
the older releases. There is a Solaris box that shows 492 days uptime, but
that's less than 497. Be honest, you just assumed that they posted uptimes
over 497 days, didn't you. You didn't really check.
> At least you admitted that there's flaw in Netcraft's numbers, which seems
> to favor the *nix platform and it shows in their numbers. That explains
why
> NT 4.0 isn't in the survey, despite having sizable market share on the web
> server market.
Of course there are flaws, nothing is perfect, I've never said anything to
the contrary. I view the numbers within the context of their flaws, I don't
out of hand ignore them.
Adam Ruth
------------------------------
From: "Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Conclusion
Date: Sun, 17 Dec 2000 10:01:07 -0700
I know, it's it funny how people speak "authoritatively" about statistics,
yet don't seem to understand how they work.
"sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:91il6j$qok$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Take a class in statistics.
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
