Linux-Advocacy Digest #77, Volume #31 Wed, 27 Dec 00 11:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Newbie: "Linux has come so far only to seem so far away" (matt newell)
Re: Newbie: "Linux has come so far only to seem so far away" (matt newell)
Re: My experiance with win98 and SCSI vs Linux (matt newell)
Profitability of Linux being a challenge (Curtis)
linux security ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why Advocacy? (Form@C)
Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge (.)
Re: Conclusion ("Adam Ruth")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: matt newell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Newbie: "Linux has come so far only to seem so far away"
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 03:33:40 -0800
Form@C wrote:
> maximus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in <92c704$pr1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> <all snipped>
>
> I have noticed the same myself. A the end of the day, I don't think you are
> looking at Linux in it's real light. The GUI interface system is *very* new
> in comparison to windows and is not really ready for mass market
> applications. It is in a constant state of change. It is an OS for OS fans,
> not for users!
>
The X windowing system is actually fairly old and hasn't changed(besides
extensions) for years. If you are refferring to KDE or gnome, they are
toolkits and desktop applications. Saying that it is not an OS for users is
ridiculous. Currently, linux can satisfy any user except the hard-core office
user, but that is comming along quickly.
> Linux is great for server applications because, in such applications, only
> a few components tend to be running simultaneously. This means that the OS
> is smaller and consequently more stable. Unfortunately, as with DOS,
> putting a GUI on top of it tends to reduce its stability...
You must not know anything about Operating Systems to come to that conclusion.
Take Linux 2.2.18 + KDE 1.1.2 and you have a great desktop that will *never*
crash. You could use it for years and it would not crash. KDE 2.0 had a few
bugs, but they will be fixed in 2.1 which will be out in a couple of weeks.
This is getting off the point though, you say that the gui makes the OS less
stable, this is far from true. You can take the buggiest piece of crap gui in
the world and it would not cause the system to crash. The gui might crash,
but all you would have to do is restart it. With Linux the gui is not part of
the kernel and can't trash the system like windows.
> Windows is for users. That is why almost all software is written for it. It
> has problems, but by and large these do not prevent it from working.
Software is written for windows because that is where the money is at, that is
the only reason. People write software for linux because they want to and
Linux will continue to improve until people stop wanting to write new software.
> Windows 2K is more like Linux than windows - in spite of its appearance.
> Some people have said that it has stability problems but I am not sure
> about this. So far I havn't managed to crash it fatally!
You are measuring stability in comparison to Windows 9x, this is absolutly
foolish. Try keeping Windows 2000 up for a year or so, I bet you can't. Now
install a bunch of software, the system gets less stable, linux doesn't have
this problem. I have never crashed my Linux box and have been using it for
over two years.
> The arguments in this NG are the birthing pains of what *may* become a
> truly great OS, but there is a long, long way to go...
First of all, A truly great OS is just an opinion. Linux has been a truly
great OS for sysadmins or programmers for years. Are you implying that
Windows is a truly great OS, it isn't. I will admit that Linux needs a few
things before it will become perfect, but it is getting there quickly.
Matt Newell
My Desktop uses fully anti-aliased fonts, does yours?(Window font smoothing
doesn't count)
------------------------------
From: matt newell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Newbie: "Linux has come so far only to seem so far away"
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 03:40:15 -0800
maximus wrote:
> Greetings all. I posted a question on this forum and alt.os.linux
> looking for the best distro for a linux newbie. The posting was
> titled "Which retail Linux distribution is best?" The responses I
> received were very courteous, professional. Due to the ambuguity of my
> question (my fault), the responses were quite varied but all were well
> intentioned. I am a consultant, have my own consulting business and
> have been in this biz since 1967 (mainframes, mini's, Pc's, dos,
> windows, et. all. Began as a programmer and finished up as Director of
> MIS before I started my own consulting business. Have never really done
> much in Unix but witnessed the potential of it as a dominant OS,
> particularly on the client side, clearly lose it's momentum because of
> warring factions which caused such fragmentation corporations were
> afraid to commit to it. Though it's capabilities exceeded anything in
> the marketplace, it didn't achieve the overall success it should have.
> Developers also fell in the same quandry and subsequently a lot (most)
> of the commercial market went elsewhere. Unix was almost a forgotten
> word (still had a good niche) until it was "resurrected" through the
> net. I bring this history (forgive me) back to the future because I'm
> afraid I see the same thing happening with Linux. I began looking into
> Linux over a year ago (still have references to it on my website)but
> for a number of reasons which I won't go into great detail here, put it
> on hold. During that brief foray, I used Deja forums as a source of
> questions and knowledge. People helped me (and flamed me-in a kind way-
> when I asked a Windows related question) but I could sense the gentle,
> wise, common goal approach that seemed to be so pervasive that it
> overcame the sometimes seemingly over zealous give and take that I
> found myself in and observed. My background-on the pc side-is now
> decidedly microsoft. I have tried and seen all the previous contenders
> fall. From Dr. Dos to OS/2. From dbase, 123, wordperfect and on. I used
> all these and they were the best in their "niches" but microsoft won
> out. Like it or not, that's the real world. It is frustrating that so
> many good innovative companies (and their products) have fallen by the
> wayside and it is our loss! Windows (for all it's problems and
> agravation)has become the choice and "name" brand. The single key issue
> of this result is that developers have recognized this and written
> their applications for this platform. That is what it is all about.
> That is the bottom line! Consumers and businesses (not all) have little
> recourse when it comes to the OS because of the overwhelming depth of
> software (shrinkwrap and custom)that is available for the microsoft
> platform. Then came Linus and Linux and there was hope. I had hoped
> (still do but abated)that I, as many others, could join in on the
> ground floor of a viable fresh competitor, offering a solid stable
> growing OS for the server AND desktop with "many choices" for consumer
> and business applications. Hope for a "choice" for my business so I
> could offer a "choice" to my clients and differentiate my business! I
> fear, however, after spending many hours looking through and reading
> the various forums that it may be a waste of time learning the Linux
> platform. I see bickering, distrust, name calling but worst of all I
> see what appears to be fragmentation towards that common goal. Frankly,
> I now have NO idea which is a "good" distribution for me to select
> from. Not on the desktop NOR the server. I was looking for one
> distro/vendor which would satisfy both needs for a Linux newbie who was
> willing to invest the time and effort AND had a business goal in mind.
> I'm sure that given the time I would actually somewhat enjoy trying out
> all the distro's and knowing the nuances of each. That, realistically
> speaking, is time that is ill afforded. And where are the applications?
> Star Office is fine but what about the range of other consumer and
> business applications? If, as seemingly indicated by the dialogue on
> the forums, the main focus is on problems with the different distro's
> and still (unbelievably) resolving basic hardware compatibility
> problems (like it or not, there are tons of winmodems and winprinters
> out there), then I suspect there can be little time or impetus for
> application development. Linux has come so far only to seem so far away
> to me. I'm not here to sermonize (sorry), but I am confused as to how
> to continue. Linux is one word, isn't it? Thanks and best regards.
>
>
> --
> "Strength and Honor"
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
>
I couldn't really find your point?
Linux is not fragmenting, any linux developer knows that.
Linux has many good applications, sure it is a bit behind with word
proccessing, but in other areas it is even or ahead of windows.
Many people have problems installing linux and getting the hardware working
good, but how many of those people have installed windows? Most computers
ship with windows so they never have to go through the hell of Installing,
downloading drivers, restarting, downloading different drivers
restarting....This happens all the time and can be a real pain even for the
most advanced user, because they have to follow the same mindless dialoges as
the newbie.
Matt Newell
You shouldn't go to a newsgoup and make a prediction about something that you
know nothing about.
------------------------------
From: matt newell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: My experiance with win98 and SCSI vs Linux
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 03:45:48 -0800
genkai wa doko da wrote:
> I don't even know why I am posting except it's something to do on a
> cold night after tooling on a disagreeable computer all day.
>
> I have right now 5 SCSI cards, I have gotten them over the last 3 years
> in varying ways from throw aways to paying small amounts of cash ($16 or
> less) all of them work under linux fine, some better than others, but
> what can you do, they read and write from/to a disk, what more could you
> want?
>
> Of these hosts 4 of them will not work with win98 under any
> swapping/removal of other cards in the same machine. The hosts are as
> follows:
>
> Adaptec 2940U (bios v1.23S3) Compaq OEM I believe (PCI)
> Asus PC-2000 NCR53C810 Based controller (PCI)
> Always in2000 (16 bit ISA)
> Mediavision PAS16 (combo scsi+soundcard 16 bit ISA)
> Future Domain TMC-845 (8 bit ISA)
>
> The only one that works in Windows for me is the 8 Bit ISA card.
> Now obviously all these cards are supported under Windows but even with
> a clean OS install, juggling of CMOS reserved IRQ settings, different
> motherboards altogether, installing the newest drivers, etc. I'm no
> slouch when it comes to puzzling out problems and this is just a total
> puzzle. All I can say is viva Linux (and Unix in general!) I'm not even
> a great advocate of Linux I don't _care_ if other people use it. I'm
> just as happy tinkering on an Amiga or Sparc or VAX (which you'll notice
> Linux runs (to some degree) on all 3 of these platforms but that's not
> my point ;)
>
> Anyone else have far greater 'luck' with expansion cards under Linux vs
> Windows?
>
>
> brian
>
> --
> RCS/RI, Retro Computing Society: http://www.osfn.org/rcs/
> RIFUG, RI Free Unix Group: http://www.rifug.org/
> Dropdead, my band: http://www.dropdead.org/
> my videogame stuff: http://www.gloom.org/~gauze/
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
>
Insead of complianing about these cards not working in windows, why don't you
head on over to microsoft, get the source, and fix the problem. Oh wait, you
can only do that with linux(or any other open software:).
Seriously though, It is amazing to me how good of a job the kernel developers
are doing. There are very few components that aren't supported, and most that
don't work are the cheap pieces of crap.
Matt Newell
------------------------------
From: Curtis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Profitability of Linux being a challenge
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 07:08:04 -0500
http://www.32bitsonline.com/article.php3?file=issues/200012/news200012051&page=1
"Caldera Systems [Nasdaq: CALD] announced today another new executive.
Edgie E. Donakey was named to the position of vice president and chief
of staff. Coming with a long history at 3Com, Danakey will be
responsible overseeing the integration of Caldera's many acquisitions
particularly Santa Cruz Operations' (SCO) server software and
professional services divisions . SCO was acquired earlier this fall."
[....]
"These two recent appointments are attempts to bring life to a battered
Caldera who has seen its stock erode from a high of $33.00 to close
today at only $2.00."
"The appointment have failed to produce any excitement in the markets as
it was dragged down by Linux distribution leader RedHat. RedHat [Nasdaq:
RHAT] announced today that it was cutting 20 jobs and closing three
office in order to conserve cash and help further RedHat's push towards
profitability."
"Linux stocks, in general, have falled out of favour with investors. In
spite of today's huge market rally, Linux stocks such as RedHat and VA
Linux Systems [Nasdaq: LNUX] have failed to move up. Instead, both have
moved further into the red."
==============
What is it that these distributors are doing that makes it so hard for
them to prosper while distributing and providing support services for
the fastest growing OS market in history? The OSS model and approach to
software development and production is advocated as being profitable and
yet these leading Linux distributors are struggling. I see these
articles popping up time and again.
--
Curtis
| ,__o
!___ _-\_<, An egotist thinks he's in the groove
<(*)>--(*)/'(*)______________________ when he's in a rut.
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (ROT13 scrambled)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: linux security
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 15:00:16 GMT
Hi.
I'm running linux sendmail outside of my firewall. It relays all
messages to another linux sendmail server inside my firewall. Lately we
have been getting a lot of spam and people have been sending messages to
us asking to be remove from e-mail lists. I think someone is using the
linux sendmail server outside my firewall to send out spam. The problem
is how to I check and stop it? Also is there a way to found out who is
doing this? Please help.
Thanks for anything help.
Shao
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Form@C)
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 15:29:40 GMT
pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>"Form@C" wrote:
>>
>> pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> Is this still on topic? I dunno, but the comments need to be aired...
>
>No :-)
>
Tough! :-)
<snip>
>> Ah, but there is a major difference. M$ "service packs" don't usually
>> fix windows so that it will run (or even load!) new software.
>
>IE 5 requires a certain patch level as does other software.
>
I must confess that I havn't tried IE5 on Win95!
<snip>
>>
>> Nope. Most new software now will still run on a first revision W95
>> install.
>
>eeeeek! What? What? Pass me more gin - I am seeing things!
>
I said it will *run* - like a slug on downers and maybe have silly problems
bu at least you get to actually *load* most of it! :-)
The software is more likely to be prevented from runnning by lack of memory
as most W95 machines just won't have enough.
>> No SPs, security fixes or anything.
>
>Win 98 se = win98 sp1
>winMe = win98se sp2
>
good point! I still havn't got my hands on anything that needs ME yet
though. Until a few weeks ago I was still on the original 98 (no patches).
Upgraded to SE just cos it was prettier! Still prefer 95 on a lower powered
'puter though...
>>Some new hardware (e.g. USB) needs
>> extra drivers but that's about it.
>
>All new hardware needs the new drivers! The stuff that shipped
>with win98 is old and *really* not recommended. Take video drivers as
"All new hardware needs the new drivers" to work properly! Some stuff, like
the generic CD, mouse & video drivers will at least get something out of
the hardware. Perhaps not with all the trimmings though...
>an example - I would *always* download the latest drivers from the
>Internet
>as it is common for buggy drivers to be pushed out in this competitive
>market.
>
fair enough. You would need to do this under any OS to get full
functionality and stability. I would always keep a copy of my current
driver too if possible (just in case!).
>>AFAIK *all* new windows software will
>> actually load on this system, but a few packages will fall over when
>> run in specific circumstances.
>
>How about direct X? 4,5,6,7 and now 8 - Some software requires this -
>now
directX is no problem. The install is easy and, no matter where you get it
from, it is allways compiled using the same version of the libraries! :-)
>
>>A lot of old 16-bit packages lost some
>> compatibility when windows moved to 32-bit but that was a major change
>> in the OS. Up until W95 they almost all still ran (but sometimes only
>> repeated functions in the new OS).
>
>Win95 was a joke when it came out for just this reason. If M$
>wanted a 32 bit system they should have written one properly!
>
We know that now! (with 20/20 hindsight!) Actually, I think the mistake was
in releasing W98 instead of getting everyone straight onto the NT platform.
It is far better. W95 was a good stopgap measure while people replaced
their 16-bit software. The W32S patch allowed quite a lot of 32-bit stuff
to run very well (once again, remember that most machines just didn't have
enough RAM or processor power for the new progs).
<snip>
>I have experience what is commonly known as "dll hell" and so
believe me, you have my deepest sympathy!
>I am not as convinced by your arguments. There are too many companies
>pumping out crap software for me to feel safe that install programs
>will not happily overwrite dll's and break other programs.
>
W2K now has a mechanism to protect the system dlls. Only time will tell how
useful this is or whether it causes more problems than it solves. W98ME has
a restore facility to take your installation back to a previously stored
mark. Useful if you want to test new software...
<snip>
>One problem is that if say you or I came up with a new distribution
>system which was better than deb or rpm - we are limited to how
>widely these things are adopted if distributions do not take them up.
>This is a very real problem that can blight technically better solutions
>from winning.
>
This is a problem that won't go away while Linux is fed to us via
distributors. Is there, perhaps, a better system already? The traditional
tar.gz package system is fine providing that extracted files can be located
into the correct directories and suitable links set. Does anyone have a
system which can do this (possibly Slackware) without needing a special
system written for a particular distribution? I only mention Slackware
because I remember it as a very "grass roots" type of distribution which
may already use something GNUey. (Remember - I'm not really a Linux person
so I don't know much about the later stuff!)
<snip>
>I'd simply say that Linux is gaining mainly in the server sector and is
>finding
>it's way into so many businesses (even when the business is not aware of
>this).
>Linux is just made to be the server of choice.
>
and so it should be! It was designed with exactly that in mind! Even I run
a Linux-based server at home - you don't really think I would trust
important stuff like that to M$ do you? <grin>
>>.Linux (as a whole) is now trying to re-
>> align a business OS for the home market - hence KDE2 which is *still*
>> only a graphic interface over a command line system (OK, so is
>> windows! Not sure just what W2K/NT is though...).
>
>I think that Gnome deserves a real mention as well. This is aimed
>as making things easier and hopefully for home users as well. Having
>a GUI on top of a CLI is a good thing. I really don't want a buggy
>windows function bringing down all my server processes!
>
>From what I've seen recently, Gnome looks very promising (I don't run any
GUI at home though). It may be held back by KDE now though. Unfortunately
KDE and Gnome do not appear to run particularly well together.
<snip>
>Gives them a headache! We have to learn new acronyms every year! (Now
>what was that new modem/net port called ? :-p )
>
AFP (acronym-free port)
<snip>
I could make a comment about Alcatel's attitude but it would contravene my
isp's AUP... In other words, I don't approve of it!
<snip>
>>If they allow the community to write them there are two problems.
>> Firstly, they lose the advantage of being first on the market with new
>> equipment (or they lose face when someone else writes a better
>> driver!). Secondly, they lose any possibility of making money out of
>> the driver- witing business. I suspect that there is more money to be
>> made out of writing drivers than producing the hardware nowadays...
>
>Do you think? When I buy any new hardware I expect it to come with
>proper drivers! I have never paid extra money for separate drivers.
>
I should think not! The cost of the drivers was included in the price you
paid for the hardware. Remember that the task of writing the drivers may
well have been sub-contracted to another firm. The cost of employing them
will have been passed on to you.
>Windows is a great example of how sloppy driver writing can lead
>to system instability. If they made money out of it, I'd expect
>some better quality software.
>
me too!
>Also if they never produce a Linux driver but open there specs then they
>will not
>be loosing any revenue - only gaining because people like me
>would choose their hardware in preference to others who do not.
very true, I wish they could see that.
<long snip>
--
Mick
Olde Nascom Computers - http://www.mixtel.co.uk
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 17:47:27 +0200
"Curtis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
http://www.32bitsonline.com/article.php3?file=issues/200012/news200012051&pa
ge=1
>
> "Caldera Systems [Nasdaq: CALD] announced today another new executive.
> Edgie E. Donakey was named to the position of vice president and chief
> of staff. Coming with a long history at 3Com, Danakey will be
> responsible overseeing the integration of Caldera's many acquisitions
> particularly Santa Cruz Operations' (SCO) server software and
> professional services divisions . SCO was acquired earlier this fall."
>
> [....]
>
> "These two recent appointments are attempts to bring life to a battered
> Caldera who has seen its stock erode from a high of $33.00 to close
> today at only $2.00."
>
> "The appointment have failed to produce any excitement in the markets as
> it was dragged down by Linux distribution leader RedHat. RedHat [Nasdaq:
> RHAT] announced today that it was cutting 20 jobs and closing three
> office in order to conserve cash and help further RedHat's push towards
> profitability."
>
> "Linux stocks, in general, have falled out of favour with investors. In
> spite of today's huge market rally, Linux stocks such as RedHat and VA
> Linux Systems [Nasdaq: LNUX] have failed to move up. Instead, both have
> moved further into the red."
Interesting graphs:
http://quotes.nasdaq.com/quote.dll?chart=3&page=charting&mode=basics&symbol=
CALD%60&selected=CALD%60
http://quotes.nasdaq.com/quote.dll?chart=4&page=charting&mode=basics&symbol=
LNUX%60&selected=LNUX%60
http://quotes.nasdaq.com/quote.dll?chart=10&page=charting&mode=basics&symbol
=APLX%60&selected=APLX%60
http://quotes.nasdaq.com/quote.dll?chart=10&page=charting&mode=basics&symbol
=SUNW%60&selected=SUNW%60
http://quotes.nasdaq.com/quote.dll?chart=4&page=charting&mode=basics&symbol=
RHAT%60&selected=RHAT%60
http://quotes.nasdaq.com/quote.dll?chart=10&page=charting&mode=basics&symbol
=MSFT%60&selected=MSFT%60
> What is it that these distributors are doing that makes it so hard for
> them to prosper while distributing and providing support services for
> the fastest growing OS market in history? The OSS model and approach to
> software development and production is advocated as being profitable and
> yet these leading Linux distributors are struggling. I see these
> articles popping up time and again.
You can probably blame GPL for that.
It's *very* hard to make profit, or even just to make both ends meet when
you have
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Profitability of Linux being a challenge
Date: 27 Dec 2000 15:57:53 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Curtis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.32bitsonline.com/article.php3?file=issues/200012/news200012051&page=1
> "Caldera Systems [Nasdaq: CALD] announced today another new executive.
> Edgie E. Donakey was named to the position of vice president and chief
> of staff. Coming with a long history at 3Com, Danakey will be
> responsible overseeing the integration of Caldera's many acquisitions
> particularly Santa Cruz Operations' (SCO) server software and
> professional services divisions . SCO was acquired earlier this fall."
> [....]
> "These two recent appointments are attempts to bring life to a battered
> Caldera who has seen its stock erode from a high of $33.00 to close
> today at only $2.00."
> "The appointment have failed to produce any excitement in the markets as
> it was dragged down by Linux distribution leader RedHat. RedHat [Nasdaq:
> RHAT] announced today that it was cutting 20 jobs and closing three
> office in order to conserve cash and help further RedHat's push towards
> profitability."
> "Linux stocks, in general, have falled out of favour with investors. In
> spite of today's huge market rally, Linux stocks such as RedHat and VA
> Linux Systems [Nasdaq: LNUX] have failed to move up. Instead, both have
> moved further into the red."
> --------------
> What is it that these distributors are doing that makes it so hard for
> them to prosper while distributing and providing support services for
> the fastest growing OS market in history? The OSS model and approach to
> software development and production is advocated as being profitable and
> yet these leading Linux distributors are struggling. I see these
> articles popping up time and again.
What these articles arent mentioning is that *most* tech stocks have dropped
severely in the last six months. Check out Covad, Northpoint, Verio, RCN,
AOL, Apple, etc.
Its very easy to blame linux itself for the drop in the market; if you're
a complete moron.
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Adam Ruth" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Conclusion
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 09:03:01 -0700
> You're proving my point. By the inability to prove that Netcraft is
wrong,
> you are proving that you don't know if they're right.
You're not making any sense. No one has an inability to prove they are
wrong, we just need someone familiar with a site that they are wrong on to
step forward. This hasn't happened. I'm familiar with quite a few sites
(that I or friends have worked on) that have all have shown to be correct.
You are familiar with quite a few sites, some very complex sites by your own
admission, but haven't claimed any are wrong. You have shown 1 site (your
own) where Netcraft could gather no data, but that's a far sight from
gathering the wrong data. As I said, the burden of proof is on you, YOU are
the one making the claim.
The impossibility lies is proving a negative proposition, which in this case
is to prove that Netcraft is corrrect in ALL cases. You only need to show
Necraft incorrect in ONE case (to show your theory correct, though it's
another matter to show it statistically significant). That's the
impossibility I'm talking about.
Adam Ruth
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
