Linux-Advocacy Digest #188, Volume #31 Tue, 2 Jan 01 08:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Why Hatred? (mlw)
Re: Why Hatred? (John Travis)
Re: Why Hatred? (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Uptimes (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Linux vs Microsoft ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? ("Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz")
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? ("Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz")
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? ("Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz")
Re: Uptimes ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: Uptimes ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: Uptimes ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: Sun Microsystems and the end of Open Source ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: Sun Microsystems and the end of Open Source ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("Chad C. Mulligan")
Re: LINUX ROCKS AND WINDOWS SUCKS ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (Giuliano Colla)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 05:46:39 -0500
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > > Any script you can write in Unix can be written for Windows as well. I
> > > don't understand your point.
> >
> > Really?
> >
> > Fork off 500 paralell processes on a LoseDOS machine and see what
> > happens.
>
> The same thing that happens under Linux.
This is completely false. Processes in Linux are much more lightweight
in their counterparts in Windows land.
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: John Travis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 10:31:33 GMT
On Tue, 2 Jan 2001 03:38:49 -0600, "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
:Name something you would "normally" do under Linux but can't do under NT.
This really has nothing to do with the topic, but I have one for you. And
if there is a good workaround please let me know, I would be very
interested :-). I often _have_ to burn cds in *nix becuase of its
rockridge support. I'd rather not trim all the names to adhear to joilet
standards either. So is there anything I can use in windows that supports
longer file names than joilet?
jt
_________________________________________
Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org
FreeBSD http://www.freebsd.org
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 11:50:48 +0100
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> I must be in a part of Europe where I don't see as much of this. Certainly
> my Windows skills are very much in demand. I'm not an MSCE BTW.
>
Perhaps just because you're not an MSCE.
In our company beeing an MSCE would not mean anything at all except perhaps
to be extra carefull with that guy.
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 12:02:30 +0100
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> Just one power outage can kill your whole filesystem under ext2.
>
may be, although i've never experienced such a thing.
BUT, both machines in question run on a UPS, so at the time NT4 just
decided to destroy itself completely (it could not be rebooted , you could
not even get to the data) there surely was no power glitch.
Again, i will NEVER again trust valuable data to microshit.
For doing some games, OK. Office is already out of the question. It crashes
way to often.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux vs Microsoft
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 11:29:54 GMT
Honestly, have any of you really fairly tested Windows 2000 with service
pack 1? How about Windows 2000 DataCenter? It seems no one here would
even give W2k the time of day (or money) to really try it out to
determine how true these statements are.
If so, specifically what was unstable? And don't say "Well on home built
computer with hardware from
the 70's..."
My RedHat 7.0 is far, far from ideal....
Perry Pip wrote:
>
> On Mon, 1 Jan 2001 19:49:11 +0100,
> SwifT - <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Mon, 1 Jan 2001, Nigel Feltham wrote:
> >
> >> On the other hand if anyone is desparate to get the new kernel they can get
> >> the latest test release to use from www.kernel.org
> >
> >Good point.
> >
>
> And even in a beta state, it's more stable than any MS OS.
>
> Perry
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 17:57:31 -0500
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 12/30/2000
at 06:22 PM, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>Any editor which, when editing an existing file, REQUIRES you to
>"delete" non-existing characters from the end of a line before you
>can append text to that line is a piece of dain-bread deficient
>trash.
You are confusing the editor with the terminal. And even there your
description doesn't match what is occurring.
--
===========================================================
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2
Team OS/2
Team PL/I
Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal
action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any
abusive E-mail.
I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to
domain acm dot org user shmuel to contact me. Do not reply to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 17:55:38 -0500
In <92k70m$ekh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on
12/30/2000
at 08:31 AM, "Tim Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
>Although I tend to agree, it's one of those "cultural" things. Either
>you're primarily an MVS TSO/E+ISPF user or a VM/CMS user. You get to
>know the tools of you primary environment inside-out and anything
>dissimilar is a large "culture shock".
For the newbies, perhaps. Someone with experience under his belt will
have learned to pick up new platforms. I see myself as an MVS and TSO
advocate, but there are a lot of things to like in VM, including
features of XEDIT.
--
===========================================================
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2
Team OS/2
Team PL/I
Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal
action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any
abusive E-mail.
I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to
domain acm dot org user shmuel to contact me. Do not reply to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2001 17:53:13 -0500
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 12/29/2000
at 06:11 PM, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>IBM makes GREAT hardware.
Yes. They also make crappy hardware. Much like other vendors.
>There standards for software (usability and efficiency), on the
>other hand, tend to be quite low.
Again, IBM has lots of facilities, and lots of employees at each one.
Standards vary among them.
>Ever use VM/CMS?
No, you got the name wrong. However, I have used VMF/370, VM/SP, VM/SP
HPO and VM/XA SF.
>XEDIT
Yes, and it's a lot better than what I've seen on PCs.
--
===========================================================
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2
Team OS/2
Team PL/I
Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal
action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any
abusive E-mail.
I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to
domain acm dot org user shmuel to contact me. Do not reply to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 12:02:13 GMT
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> > Indeed it did. Yet, somehow a Windows NT machine that crashes daily
doesn't
> > have something wrong with it?
>
> Nothing that could be fixed by an army of onsite MCSE
> and microsoft reps. And I didn't say it crashes daily, I
> said it crashed at inopportune times, and the consensus
> from the microsoft experts was a daily therapeutic reboot.
>
Strange, that was an old UNIX therapy. AT&T used to recommend that their
System V be restarted weekly to defragment swap. Guess old habits die hard.
What exactly was hanging? Was it the database (Oracle Perchance?) or the
Network access, the printers, this seems rather extreme to me and unusual
as I've not seen the need for it in my experience.
> > > I know that this is strong medicine for someone like yourself,
> > > and you may choose to disbelive it. If I find the spare time I
> > > will see if I can locate an online reference.
> >
> > You made the claim. Back it up.
>
> my aren't we paranoid.
>
<GRIN>
Wasn't Matt saying it was only the Windows advocates who never documented
anything?
> > > The windows machine that only runs the database needed
> > > to be reboted nightly. That's also standard practice at web
> > > server farms where they have "green acres" windows nt
> > > installations to try to provide uptime even though individual
> > > nt boxes blue screen at various times. It has been found better
> > > to do a therapeutic nightly reboot at a scheduled time rather
> > > than have windows nt lock up at some random and possibly
> > > inconvenient time.
> >
> > And you know this how?
>
> I work in the industry. I talk to people. I've been a webmaster
> and system administrator for years.
>
> > I'm sure the Windows machines were 9x based. Right?
>
> I'll admit the nt boxes were less trouble than other windows
> systems.
>
> > > Because I've worked with Linux and other Unices,
> > > as well as windows, for years. I know how they behave
> > > in everyday, real life production environments. and I'm
> > > telling you, the Linux systems (and FreeBSD and others)
> > > let me sleep solidly. The windows systems are the ones
> > > that blue screen at 3 AM.
> >
> > Always in the middle of the night. Strange, isn't it?
>
> No, they will blue screen at other times, but it's the
> 3 AM blue screens that stick in ones memory.
>
> > Sure, however there are still far fewer of those than all NT (including
> > Workstations).
>
> Since over 60% of the webservers on the internet are Unix,
> and 75% of the mailservers are Unix, and 80% of the high
> end databases are running on Unix, where do you get the
> idea that unix is outnumbered there by windows nt?
>
Got any sources for those statistics.. 'Though seems to me that a few
months ago the claims for UNIX were somewhat higher.
> jjs
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 12:06:32 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 1 Jan 2001
> >"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> [...]
> >> That's bizzare, I'd holler to my vendor long, loud and hard about
> >> that one - do you have a hardware support contract for the
> >> system in question? What distro and kernel? What kind of
> >> hardware?
>
> I grinned at that, of course, because I often take MS apologists to task
> for winging into "troubleshoot mode" as soon as someone mentions a
> problem they have on Windows. I ridicule them for doing this, long and
> loud, because its really just empty posturing. Generally, the point is
> to find someone to blame other than Microsoft.
>
Yeah you would since you were afraid to discuss your past problems, afraid
that they might be soluable.
> It occurs to me now, of course, that J is doing essentially the same
> thing, but there is a fundamental difference. It makes perfect sense to
> find "someone to blame" other than Linux, since Linux isn't a producer,
> but a product. Obviously, it makes sense, in fact its necessary, to
> reduce the fault domain to a single vendor, in such a situation. Kind
> of ironic, though.
>
Linux is a product now. Two days ago you described it as a service. Which
is it?
> >No, it's just some off the shelf hardware.
> >
> >Interesting that as soon as there is a problem with Linux all you can do
is
> >blame the hardware, yet when people blame the hardware for NT you won't
> >accept that.
>
> Actually, the software vendor is just as much, probably more, of an
> issue. That's why I'm going to be happy when the free market returns,
> because I'm pretty sure that the OEMs will end up being the primary OS
> 'vendors', with the distro producers being a supplier to them, possibly,
> and covering the after-market.
>
> >> > It is a fact that all OS's can be unstable in the right
circumstances.
> >> > Period.
> >>
> >> To state it more correctly, for any OS there is a non-zero
> >> probability of trouble, but the thing you miss is that windows
> >> track record is probably the worst of all OSes.
> >
> >NT runs on an order of magnatude more systems than all Unix combined,
thus
> >you're going to have an order of magnatude more problems.
>
> Only if its a pile of crapware.
>
Sound logic that.....
> --
> 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: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Uptimes
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 12:09:36 GMT
"Peter Köhlmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:92peee$pbb$02$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> >
> > It is a fact that all OS's can be unstable in the right circumstances.
> > Period.
> >
> it is a fact (for me at least) that 2 different machines (each with 2
> processors, ECC-memory, all SCSI) just locked up on win NT4 while simply
> doing nothing at all (during the night), no screensaver, no nothing, just
> waiting there. One machine was trashed so badly, that it could NOT be
> rebooted again.
Did you determine what happened. Doing nothing at all sounds far too much
like the typical response a help desk gets when asking someone what they
were doing when their problem developed. Idle computers don't crash as a
general rule unless hardware fails, if it couldn't be rebooted that seems to
be a hardware failure on the surface.
> That was the end of WinNT for me, I simply stopped using it. And i do not
> believe a single word of "win2k is better". Since years we are told "just
> wait for the next win-version, it will solve all these problems". Not only
> were all these problems not solved, we got ne ones in addition.
>
------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun Microsystems and the end of Open Source
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 12:15:27 GMT
"Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Chad C. Mulligan" wrote:
>
>
> > > > > The front end cost is hardly the entire equation. This must be
> > > > > the logic that made DOS a success and the Macintosh marginal.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I was commenting of the thought that someone would actually do more
> > > > comparison shopping with freebies than with a capital expenditure.
> > >
> > > But in the case of Linux, there are more products to compare. For
Windows,
> > > it's pretty much 98/WinME for home/casual users, and NT/Win2k for
> > > people who need more. Whereas in Linux, one has a wider choice of
distro.
> > >
> >
> > Isn't that somewhat incestuous.
>
> Incestuous, how so?
>
initialize your humor daemon.
>
> > BTW weren't talking about OS but
> > applications.
> >
>
> There may still be more options in Linux, at least for
> certains kinds of apps, like word processing/typesetting.
>
HUH?? Seems to me that the WP/Typesetting (Excepting specialized apps) are
a subset of those available for Windows.
> Colin Day
>
------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun Microsystems and the end of Open Source
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 12:16:26 GMT
"Colin R. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Chad C. Mulligan" wrote:
>
>
> > >
> > > Yes, but that's probably not the case. How did Compaq prevent
Microsoft
> > > from continuing its support of Alpha?
> > >
> >
> > MS is continueing support of existing products on Alpha but Compaq has
> > refused to give MS access to the newer platforms, so MS at Compaq's
> > insistance stopped future development.
> >
>
> And what kind of support did Intel give to Linux when Linus first
> started working on it?
>
The data books for all Intel processors are available by simply writing
Intel's marketing department and asking for them.
> Colin Day
>
------------------------------
From: "Chad C. Mulligan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 12:17:15 GMT
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:u3R36.62473$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 31 Dec 2000 15:19:01
> > >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 30 Dec 2000 23:01:49
> > >> [...]
> > >> >While your at it, please show where Republicans have bent the rules.
> > >> >After all, this is what T. Max was claiming, which is an obvious
> > >> >lie. I called him a liar, and I proved it. Now, prove why I am a
liar.
> > >>
> > >> You just did.
> > >
> > >You have a warped sense of lying.
> >
> > Guffaw.
> >
> > >You claimed that Republicans bent the rules. They did not, I proved it,
> > >thus proving you a liar.
> >
> > No, you claimed that the Democrats were trying to "subvert the rule of
> > law."
>
> Which they were. You didn't even answer the claims, instead stooping to
> name calling.
>
> > I merely pointed out, which caused you to thrash wildly in
> > partisan posturing,
>
> Spare me the story telling, Grandpa.
>
> > that unless you can recognize that the Republicans
> > were doing the same thing,
>
> Which they weren't. You have not made one attempt to even back this claim
up.
> This was the claim, in fact, that I proved you were lying, or, at least,
> grossly ignorant.
>
> > and to the same degree, then your
> > consideration of the reality of the situation is obviously, and deeply,
> > flawed.
>
> Please show me ONE, just ONE example where the Republicans "bent" the law.
>
Watergate
> -Chad
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: LINUX ROCKS AND WINDOWS SUCKS
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 12:13:25 GMT
In article <1BkX5.9967$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"the_blur" <the_blur_oc@*removespamguard*hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Yes and I bet you believe he will be PENNY LESS after this,
> > joing the church and become a nun in India!
> Of course not, but charity being what it is, and capitalism being what
it
> is, never forget that he's giving a hell of a lot more than we are and
> helping a hell of a lot more people than we are AND HE'S NOT OBLIGATED
IN
> ANY WAY TO DO SO. Get it? He gives because he's a nice guy. Trying to
> dehumanize him because you don't have his money/power or whatever it
is you
> covet changes nothing. 21 billion is a large sum of money, no one said
you
> had to make yourself pennyless to be a charitable person.
> You can attack Windows all you want, but character assasination is
assinine
> and juvenile.
To be a truly charitable person you have to give something of your own
up. Bill Gates is not giving anything real up by giving that money
away, as he is already so rich that it probably wouldn't be feasably
possible for all of his money to be spent. If Gates spent his entire
fortune I expect economies would collapse before he finished!
> > The fact he has this money from the sale of this crap
> > just makes my stomach turn. Can you believe he made
> > that much money off people selling Windows?
> Who cares? That's not the point. Besides, Windows isn't bad, if it
were we'd
> be using something else. I use Linux man, I know "Linux is the Right
Thing
> To Do ®" but even I can see the glaring bugs in it.
People use many things which are not the best. Almost all of
the "good" things about Windows are not really things of Windows
own merit but the result of a spiral induced by nobody wanting to
take risks. Windows is used because it has apps; Windows gets apps
because it is used. Same thing happened with VHS (Betamax was
apparantly technically better). Same thing is happening with MP3
(OggVorbis anyone?)
> Ask me about using Linux
> for graphic design someday so you can learn how unready for me linux
really
> is. Even Windows 98 / MacOS (cooperative multitasking and NO memory
> protection) can beat Linux to a pulp in color calibration, postscript
> output, imagesetter support,
Windows has hardware support because it is used; it is used because it
has hardware support.
> Graphic Design Application support,
Windows has apps because it is used; it is used because it has apps.
> multiformat cutting and pasting and most of all STABILITY in the
desktop.
The difference is that if Linux crashes, you can fix it or ask someone
else to, but if Windows or a Windows app crashes, often companies will
just say "it doesn't work with that hardware.. seeya."
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 12:21:53 GMT
Bob Hauck wrote:
>
> On Mon, 01 Jan 2001 01:28:58 GMT, Chad Myers
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >> No, you claimed that the Democrats were trying to "subvert the rule of
> >> law."
> >
> >Which they were. You didn't even answer the claims, instead stooping to
> >name calling.
>
> How is going to court "subverting" the rule of law? I've always been
> under the impression that you went to court to get an interpretation of
> the law, not to subvert it. Subverting would involve something
> extra-legal, such as paying off the people counting the ballots or
> voting on behalf of dead people.
>
> Maybe I missed a civics lesson someplace where they defined lawsuits as
> "subversion".
>
The lesson you missed is a common notion since written
history exists. A court ruling in your favor is
"interpreting" the law. A court ruling in favor of your
opponent is "subverting" the law. That's what keeps
discussion alive!
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
