Linux-Advocacy Digest #33, Volume #31 Sat, 23 Dec 00 15:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Predictions (featuring Drestin Black) ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: Conclusion ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: Question with Security on Linux/Unix versus Windows NT/2000 (J Sloan)
Redhat needs an update tool. Was: My pet peeve (Perry Pip)
Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use? (Perry Pip)
Re: Conclusion (sfcybear)
Re: Conclusion (sfcybear)
Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: The Sixth Sense (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Predictions (featuring Drestin Black)
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 18:39:19 GMT
"Philip Neves" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:u5%06.863081$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Conrad Rutherford wrote:
>
> >
> > "Arthur Frain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Conrad Rutherford wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Truckasaurus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:90rvcr$g4h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > It is time to look at predictions for the year past - 2000:
> > > > > This one's by Drestin Black:
> > > > > "Message-ID: <hrlL3.7102$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > > I'll argue with you there. I am willing to take a double or
nothing
> > bet
> > > > > from
> > > > > you, Windows 2000 will sell 2x more copies than the combined sales
> > > > > of Linux
> > > > > in 2000."
> > > > >
> > > > > Sadly enough, I think Dres wins this one. But if you look at it,
> > > > > it's kind of a wussy guess - I mean Win has 90% of the desktop
> > > > > market...
> > > > >
> > > > > 1 Prediction point for Dres, and 100 wuss points in the same
> > direction!
> > > > > Get som hair on your chest Dres, and give us a real prediction!
> > > >
> > > > I don't remember him making a wrong prediction yet - it helps that
he
> > > > probably has enough stock in MS to call Bill's cell phone :) but
fact
> > > > of
> > the
> > > > matter, he told it like it was.
> > > >
> > > > Giving "wuss points" is just sour grapes.
> > >
> > > Funny you should mention Drestin and MSFT stock in the
> > > same sentence. Anyone recall Drestin's recommendation
> > > on COMNA (back around Valentine's Day IIRC) to buy
> > > MSFT (at over 100) because MSFT *always* goes up
> > > upon a new OS release - W2K at the time. He sure
> > > got that one right, didn't he? MSFT closed at 58 and
> > > change today - a 40+ % loss.
> > >
> > > Drestin hinself was going to buy 1000 shares. Hope
> > > he did, but I suspect that was more of his usual BS.
> > > It's all on deja if anyone wants to check it out.
> > >
> > > My investment advice would be to buy stocks that
> > > actually increase in value. (And nope, I wouldn't
> > > recommend RHAT or LNUX either)
> >
> > Gee, so the guy buys 1000 shares of a technology stock that has had a
> > company history long record of increasing and recovering higher than
> > before after any fall and it hasn't rebounded yet. Is there anyone who
> > seriously believes MS stock will stay so low (other than penguin lovers
> > and MS haters)? I've watched MS climb and fall but in the long term
climb.
> > I fully expect that it will recover it's value and more. Besides, it's a
> > HELL of a bargin now at 58. I'd buy more if I had money to spare. He may
> > have recommended buying stock (and been wrong at this time) but who's to
> > say it won't be worth it later and even if it isn't, he didn't make a
> > prediction, just gave a recommendation (he never claims to be a stock
> > broker or expert in that field).
> >
> > Unlike rhat stock which has done nothing but fall, just like all other
> > linux stock, without any signs or hopes of rising again. I mean, how CAN
a
> > company profit when it's product is available for free? I don't laugh as
> > hard at Redhat as I do at it's investors and those pengin lovers that
went
> > crazy to buy the stock - remember those that whinned on-line when they
> > missed their chance to buy the inflated stock and some were able to
after
> > all? I'll bet every single one of them are now feeling pretty stupid.
It's
> > like the for-a-month millionairs that had that redhat stock they
couldn't
> > sell when it was worth 100+ and now it's worth, what, a buck? I dunno...
I
> > wonder if they still think linux is their future? Unless eating dogfood
is
> > your thing, linux ain't the future for people who realize the mechanics
of
> > the world are greased by dollars.
> >
> > If I had 58,000 - I'd buy 1000 shares of MS right now.
> >
> >
> I think that your wrong there bud. First of all think about what you are
> saying. If MS is selling there product and their competitors are giving
> their product away then MS's future is at risk as well. Redhat doesn't
> count on linux alone for their revenues. They are bundling linux with
> Oracle and other products that give there product more value.
>
> Even if Redhat doesn't succeed Linux will always be there not just because
> it is free but because I think there will alway be someone to write the
> code. Everyone in the industry know that the money is in providing
> solutions. Well if you are a solutions provider and you have to compete
> with another solutions provider in the industry that uses windows then you
> are going to have a price advantage over your Microsoft competitor. That
is
> nothing to sneeze at when you are talking about a price difference of
$1500
> for a server edition of NT and a $2 burned copy of linux. Tell me how can
> you ignore that?
Divide by two for the Server Version of NT.
------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Conclusion
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 18:42:33 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Chad C. Mulligan in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 22 Dec 2000
> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Said Chad C. Mulligan in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 19 Dec 2000
> >> 02:08:59 GMT;
> >> >
> >> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> Said Chad C. Mulligan in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 17 Dec 2000
> >> >> [...]
> >> >> >The essence remains a properly administered NT system is as stable
as any
> >> >> >UNIX. At this time getting the proper administration skills to the
system
> >> >> >when they are needed is the problem.
> >> >>
> >> >> Bullshit.
> >> >
> >> >Same to you.
> >>
> >> The real world is a bit more unforgiving of monopoly crapware than you
> >> are. I have to deal with monopoly crapware, too, you're right about
> >> that. But I'm not dumb enough to buy that load of bullshit about NT
> >> being stable, except for 'proper administration'. Its nothing but
> >> hindsight bias.
> >
> >Only through your eyes.
>
> According to you. According to me, through any reasonable and informed
> person's eyes. Your ball.
>
> >Sorry that you have problems, be specific maybe we
> >can solve them for you.
>
> It is not a problem that other people can raise post-modernistic
> arguments from ignorance in order to insist that my position encompasses
> only my opinion; it is merely a fact of life. Your ball.
>
I was asking about your system problems I'm a network project manager not a
psychiatrist.
> >Call it a learning experience.
>
> I call everything a learning experience. You are still mistaken, so
> perhaps you should do the same, in this case. Your ball.
>
Yeah but do you learn from them?
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
>
> Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
> http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
>
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Question with Security on Linux/Unix versus Windows NT/2000
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 18:46:07 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Is Linux or Unix vulnerable to this?
> > >
> > > Nothing in Linux prevents you from saving a binary attachment and
> executing
> > > it. If you're running as Root when you do this, it can do anything.
> >
> > bzzt, wrong answer - there are mechanisms in Linux like
> > immutable files, etc which make it impossible for even root
> > to overwrite or delete them.
>
> We're talking about formatting the drive.
Same answer - there is something called "capabilities"
in Linux which can restrict even root from formatting the
drive, or any other action deemed questionable. On a
system like this, one would have to boot it with a floppy
in order to really damage it - in other words, it would have
to be done "on purpose", by someone with full and
unhindered local access to the machine. In a case like
that, no system is safe.
jjs
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Subject: Redhat needs an update tool. Was: My pet peeve
Date: 23 Dec 2000 19:13:03 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 22 Dec 2000 14:38:47 -0700,
Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip) writes:
>
>> On 22 Dec 2000 08:56:14 -0700,
>> Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> >> Actually, I like the way FreeBSD does it. If it needs something to compile,
>> >> it goes out and gets it.
>> >
>> >Just like rpmfind and apt-get under Linux.
>> >
>>
>> Can you do updates in rpmfind?? As in like:
>>
>> apt-get update && apt-get upgrade
>
>rpmfind --upgrade `rpm -qa`
>
Do you really do your updates that way?? I just tried it and it
doesn't seem to work. I downloaded it for a RH62 machine from:
ftp://rpmfind.net/linux/redhat/redhat-6.2/i386/RedHat/RPMS/rpmfind-1.4-3.
i386.rpm
I installed it on a RH62 machine that is about 2 months out of date
(and behind my firewall, of course). I checked /etc/rpmfind.conf and
it had the RH62 updates directories listed first, followed by the RH62
distribution directories, followed by the RH powertools, followed by
the RH52 distribution, followed by rhcn. That order seem reasonable to
me. Then I read the man page and your command made sense so I went for
it:
rpmfind --upgrade `rpm -qa`
Well after about 5 minutes it had listed every package and it said
none of them need to be update. So I took a look at the updates page
at redhat.com and verified my system did need updates, and it
did...about 20 or so security updates were needed.
Making a long story short, it turns out it's confused by the version
numbers in the command arguement, i.e. 'rpm -qa' includes version
numbers in the rpm names and that confuses it. So I try it on a single
package w/o the version number:
========
$ rpmfind --upgrade tcsh
Installing tcsh will require 1000 KBytes
### To Transfer:
ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/redhat-7.0/i386/en/RedHat/RPMS/grep-2.4.2-4.
i386.rpm
ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/redhat-7.0/i386/en/RedHat/RPMS/libtermcap-
2.0.8-25.i386.rpm
ftp://ftp.redhat.com/pub/redhat/redhat-7.0/i386/en/RedHat/RPMS/tcsh-6.09-6.
i386.rpm
Do you want to download these files to /tmp [Y/n/a/i] ? :
========
So now you can see it wants to install RH 7.0 packages, which, if you
check Redhats errata page, isn't event the right sucurity update for
RH 7.0. RH 7.0 isn't even mention in the /etc/rpmfind.conf file. But
as it turns out, the tool created a new file, ~/.rpmfind and put RH
7.0 in it. So I fix up the ~/.rpmfind, take the RH7.0 out of it,
verify RH62 is at the top, and now everytime I run it it overwrites
the ~/.rpmfind file with it's own configuration!!! What a peice of
shit!!
Tell me how you get this POS to work on your system, Craig. This is a
major weakness of Redhat, IMHO. Debian, the BSD's and even Win2k all
have decently reliable update tools. With Redhat, you have up2date,
which limits you to X-windows and wants you to pay for 'priority
access', or a third party tool. The problem with third party tools is
every time RH changes their dist it's gonna potentially break the
third party tool.
Perry
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Subject: Re: Windows - Is It Really Easier to Use?
Date: 23 Dec 2000 19:16:27 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 22 Dec 2000 15:57:45 GMT,
Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 22 Dec 2000 09:06:17 GMT, Perry Pip wrote:
>>On 22 Dec 2000 07:43:42 GMT,
>>Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On 22 Dec 2000 06:19:57 GMT, Perry Pip wrote:
>>>>On 22 Dec 2000 03:10:24 GMT,
>
>>>Do you know what "topic drift" is ? Subjects change. Don't just jump in
>>>mid-thread and assume that the pertinent topic is the same as the subject
>>>line. It might not be, and if it isn't, you'll get egg in your face.
>>
>>Don't tell me what I assumed. I originally responded directly to the
>>content of your post and I didn't substantially change the topics. You
>>are using 'topic drift' as an excuse to get out of being wrong.
>
>You said the following:
>
>>>>If you followed the thread you'd see the original post contained some
>>>>questions about the ease of use of Windows versus Linux. If you didn't
>>>>like that subject then why did you post here
>
>The above clearly implies that one
>should only post on the subject of the original thread ( well, I don't see
>how it could imply anything else ), and I am expressing disagreement with
>this.
No it doesn't. You've taken it completely out of context. You bitched
about the topic "Microsoft" being in the thread. Yet the original post
was about "Windows". It seems to me you are willing to drift topics
your way but complain when it goes another way.
>>>What I was discussing was a claim that the distributor is not responsible
>>>for providing a functional distribution -- for example, if the distributor
>>>ships KDE and KDE doesn't work, then the user should go to KDE for support.
>>
>>That was not the claim. The claim is in response to a specific video
>>card not supported by the specific distributor. Get a fucking threaded
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^
^^^^^
^^^
^
>>newsreader and read the thread.
>
>I have a threaded newsreader. And yes, that was my point. It was in response
>to a claim that the user should go to XFree86 to deal with the problem, when
>the video card is listed as being supported. My point is that if the distributor
>lists the card as supported, and it doesn't work as advertised, then the
>distributor should offer a solution/workaround (such as anexplanation of the
>problem, and how to fix it)
Do you understand "not supported"??? The video card in question is
*not* supported under Xfree 4.01 *nor* supported by the vendor. I am
not defending Mandrake but at their web site:
http://www.linux-mandrake.com/en/fhard.php3
"The Linux-Mandrake Supported Hardware List contains information about
hardware devices that have been tested and/or have been reported to
function properly with Linux-Mandrake. Due to the wide variety of
system configurations, MandrakeSoft cannot guarantee that a specific
device will work properly on your system."
Nor is the specific card (Hercules Dynamite) mentioned on the
page. (Although the chipset is). The card will work just fine under
Xfree 3.3.6 anyways.
>>>and this kind of mentality is not going to give Linux stature
>>>and credibility. On the other hand, companies who make sincere commitments
>>>to support Linux have been, and are going to make it big.
>>
>>That applies to any market for any product. So??
>
>So that's precisely what my point is. I'm glad you understand it.
And my point is your point is somewhat moot. There are both shitty and
good vendors in any industry. Just becuase Yugo makes a shitty car
doesn't mean all cars are shitty. Does it?? Just because some
distributers make a shitty Linux doesn't mean Linux is shitty.
>>>BTW, me talking down to people ? Hey, I was the one who was labelled as
>>>"stupid", "lazy", and "not understanding Linux", because I didn't agree
>>>with one of the local zealots (btw, no I'm not referring to you).
>>
>>So then why your totally obnoxiuos response to my previous post??
>>Don't take your anger towards others out on me.
>
>OK, I'm sorry. I wasn't trying to insult you. I admit that my patience has
>been worn a little thin by others in this newsgroup.
Ok.
>>I would argue that most ordinary computer users are frustrated with
>>computer problems and don't feel they get enough support from anyone,
>>period. That's why so many just plain hate computers.
>
>More and more people are using computers, and *that* is a lot of the reason
>why you're seeing more people who "hate" computers. The people who struggle
>with computers nowadays weren't using them 20 years ago.
>
So in the twenties did so many people hate cars and radios?? How about
TV in the fifties?? Microwave ovens in the seventies?? For that
matter, Mac's in the eighties??
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Conclusion
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 19:22:17 GMT
Right chad. And you still have NO proof to show that the numbers are
wrong. The only thing you can say is that the netcraft numbers don't
come from the computers *you* think they should. YOu and the winvocates
here have NEVER shown that the numbers are NOT From W2K boxes and that
they are not accurate. Even Erics statement of how it works states
basicly the same. All of which is CLEARLY documented on the Webcraft
page. From all the actual evidance (real, not your claims) shows that
the numbers are indeed from W2K boxes and are indeed accurate.
2 sources claim the same thing you despite your persistand claims that
they are worng, neither have been PROVEN to be giving false information.
Yes, Netcraft does not always get the numbers from the webserver proper,
but the numbers it does get for W2K DO come from W2K and are accurate,
even according to eric.
In article <VgV06.21734$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:91vpdg$967$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <ZGy06.16247$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> <trimmed>
> > > >
> > >
> > > And Ghost in the Machine, and several others.
> >
> >
> > You are also forgetting the *Documented Fact* that WWW.UPTIMES.ORG a
> > second METHOD of gathering stats, gives the same results. BOTH
indicate
> > w2K is UNSTABLE!
> >
>
> Or they both cannot get the correct metrics from the machine. By
default
> performance metrics are only available to authenticated
administrators.
>
> > Still no spacifics from *you* on how the numbers are so inacurate
that
> > they do can not be used to get an indication as to the stability of
an
> > OS that does report uptime numbers.
> >
> > Does netcraft relate to a singe machine? No. Does that mean that the
> > uptime number that is returned by the responding machine is wrong?
NO.
>
> Actually yes. If the machine the data is requested of isn't the one
> responding the netcraft numbers are reporting the wrong machine.
Wrong in
> any instance is still wrong.
>
> > Does that make the uptime *average* wrong? not in the way that
Netcraft
> > defines what the stat means. Does Uptimes relate to a sinlge
machine?
> > YES. Does Uptimes indicate that W2K is unstable as well? YES! 2
> > different methods, same result. But you seem to ingnore that. Or is
it a
> > bad case of denial?
> >
>
> Averaging bad data will simply give you a bad average. Are you
familiar
> with the GIGO principle.
>
> >
> <trimmed>
>
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Conclusion
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 19:34:02 GMT
In article <VgV06.21734$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:91vpdg$967$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <ZGy06.16247$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> <trimmed>
> > > >
> > >
> > > And Ghost in the Machine, and several others.
> >
> >
> > You are also forgetting the *Documented Fact* that WWW.UPTIMES.ORG a
> > second METHOD of gathering stats, gives the same results. BOTH
indicate
> > w2K is UNSTABLE!
> >
>
> Or they both cannot get the correct metrics from the machine. By
default
> performance metrics are only available to authenticated
administrators.
Prove that the software that gets loaded for the Uptimes tracking can
not track the actual uptime for the server it is on. After all, if it
relied on the metrics that are available from NT, the NT boxes in the to
100 would not be there. They would have rolled over at 49.7 days. Just
as the default metric on NT always does! The uptime used by Uptimes does
not use the standard metric. and that does not make them wrong. infact
it gets past the limitations of MS softare.
>
> > Still no spacifics from *you* on how the numbers are so inacurate
that
> > they do can not be used to get an indication as to the stability of
an
> > OS that does report uptime numbers.
> >
> > Does netcraft relate to a singe machine? No. Does that mean that the
> > uptime number that is returned by the responding machine is wrong?
NO.
>
> Actually yes. If the machine the data is requested of isn't the one
> responding the netcraft numbers are reporting the wrong machine.
Wrong in
> any instance is still wrong.
No it does no. It makes it a different machine. The uptimes and the OS
would still be accurate for that machine even if you *think* it sould be
gotten from another. Netcraft clearly states what happens with firewalls
and so the numbers are accurate in the context of the deffinition of
thoes numbers. YOu really do need to take a stats class.
>
> > Does that make the uptime *average* wrong? not in the way that
Netcraft
> > defines what the stat means. Does Uptimes relate to a sinlge
machine?
> > YES. Does Uptimes indicate that W2K is unstable as well? YES! 2
> > different methods, same result. But you seem to ingnore that. Or is
it a
> > bad case of denial?
> >
>
> Averaging bad data will simply give you a bad average. Are you
familiar
> with the GIGO principle.
>
THe data has never been proven to be bad. In fact 2 sources both show
the same results indicating that W2K is not stable. Athough many CLAIMS
have been made no proof has been given to prove that they are not
accurate. Indeed, every objection has been proven false or a
misreproesentation of what the numbers are *defined* as (read the
netcraft FAQ to get a diffinition of what the netcraft numbers are).
No doccumented proof showing W2K as stable in the production world vs. 2
sources showing W2K is NOT stable and NO documented proof showing that
the numbers from EITHER site are wrong! Even Eric's claims match what
Netcraft states the numbers to be (read the FAQ)
> >
> <trimmed>
>
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 19:40:29 GMT
Said Paul Colquhoun in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 23 Dec 2000
>On Sat, 23 Dec 2000 02:19:49 -0500, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>|Said Bob Hauck in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 19 Dec 2000 17:03:55
>|GMT;
>|>On Mon, 18 Dec 2000 02:41:11 -0500, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>|>
>|>>Does anyone know of a good news provider? I think all the good ones
>|>>(Deja, Supernews, etc) have all "gone web", and while they might offer
>|>
>|>I used to run a small ISP. We finally had to give up on doing Usenet
>|>ourselves because it just became too much of a drain on resources. We
>|>contracted with RemarQ (aka Supernews), and that worked out quite well.
>|>You might suggest this to your "small town" ISP.
>|
>|I'm at the point where, if that's what a small town ISP uses, I want to
>|use that. I would hope that I could find it somewhere for commodity
>|rates. I should be using Linux soon, so getting a 'full feed' would be
>|feasible, but I'm not going to pay out the wazoo for an overly
>|commercialized service like 'RemarQ'.
>
>
>I don't think you *really* want a 'full feed'. Last time I checked
>the stats, that was about 10Gb/day and rising.
>(That figure is years out of date)
Like I said, once I'm on Linux, I'll have the resources to handle it.
Not disk-space, though; filtering.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: New to Linux, and I am not satisfied.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 19:40:31 GMT
Said Bob Hauck in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 23 Dec 2000 15:43:43
GMT;
>On Sat, 23 Dec 2000 02:19:49 -0500, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Said Bob Hauck in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 19 Dec 2000 17:03:55
>>GMT;
>>>On Mon, 18 Dec 2000 02:41:11 -0500, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Does anyone know of a good news provider? I think all the good ones
>>>>(Deja, Supernews, etc) have all "gone web", and while they might offer
>>>
>>>I used to run a small ISP. We finally had to give up on doing Usenet
>>>ourselves because it just became too much of a drain on resources. We
>>>contracted with RemarQ (aka Supernews), and that worked out quite well.
>>>You might suggest this to your "small town" ISP.
>
>>... but I'm not going to pay out the wazoo for an overly
>>commercialized service like 'RemarQ'.
>
>RemarQ/Supernews offers an NNTP service to ISP's who want to outsource,
>as opposed to the web-based thing they offer to the public. The ISP
>sets up a name like "news.isp.com" which actually points to one of
>RemarQ's servers, so customers still set up their newsreader the same
>way as always. The ISP pays by the number of simultaneous users, which
>in our case was under 5% of the actual number of users we had.
I am aware of all that, and as I stated in the original message, I am
entirely unwilling to pay a service which doesn't consider my market to
be their main source of business, or at least *a* main source of
business. RemarQ has already proven in the past that it will screw over
NNTP users, because its going for the "web idiot gold mine". I'm
looking for a professional news service, not this kind of crap you
describe.
>My experience was that they were pretty reliable and the rates they
>charged were cheaper than the cost of the extra admin time, hardware,
>and bandwidth to do Usenet ourselves. Usenet is one of those things
>where there really are economies of scale.
So how come you had to pay by the number of simultaneous users?
>So, I'm serious. If your ISP is relatively small (under 2000 users say,
>especially under 1000) and they are having trouble keeping Usenet
>working right, you might want to make a suggestion. That's one of the
>advantages of using a smaller provider; you can make suggestions to
>someone who might actually be in a position to implement them.
They already do things like this, although their supplier is even more
focused on this type of thing than RemarQ is. I've used SuperNews in
the past as a subscription service, and they impressed me at first, and
then swiftly went down-hill as they became 'RemarQ'. I want better
value than that; whether you feel that is adequate value or not.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2000 19:40:32 GMT
Said Chad C. Mulligan in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 21 Dec 2000
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Chad C. Mulligan in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 01 Dec 2000
>> [...]
>> >Noooo. The Notes debacle resulted from changes to the NT security model
>> >included in SP6 that invalidated the Notes/Domino Server's installation
>> >since IBM/Lotus didn't write their application to the Win32 API, or use
>> >proper NTLM account referrences, in short the wrote their server in total
>> >disregard for the platform they wished to run on.
>>
>> They didn't write their application for a platform; they wrote it for a
>> market. And the market they were writing for was platform-independant.
>> Since this didn't happen on OS/2 (more properly considered the 'target'
>> platform for Notes), it is a sign that Windows is crap, and nothing
>> more.
>>
>
>Nope, it is a sign that a quickie port of software without consideration of
>the target platform is doomed to fail.
Yes, that is another reason Windows is monopoly crapware. The only
platform where the most powerful and successful workgroup product gets a
quickie port, because Windows, while being the largest installed base,
is the least standard and rational.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
