Linux-Advocacy Digest #393, Volume #31 Thu, 11 Jan 01 14:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Why Hatred? (Steve Mading)
Re: Is Bill Gates MAD?!?!? (Steve Mading)
Re: Anyone going to the LinuxWorld Expo in New York City? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why does Win2k always fail in running time? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: kernel problems(new) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux misseery cont. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Reg. Gnome.. ("Rajendra Jadhav")
Re: The real truth about NT ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux misseery cont. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux misseery cont. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux misseery cont. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux misseery cont. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: "Is the end looming for the Microsoft monopoly?" (Michael Marion)
Re: Scientific Software Engineer needed (.)
Re: I am trying Linux out for the first time. (.)
Re: I am trying Linux out for the first time. (.)
Re: The real truth about NT ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux misseery cont. (.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Hatred?
Date: 11 Jan 2001 17:52:49 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
: news:93iqoq$fea$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
:> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>
:> : I don't fear Linux. In fact, I run my web server under Linux. I simply
:> : don't find Linux useful as a desktop system today, and get annoyed when
:> : Linux zealots insist that Linux can replace Windows today. It can't.
: If it
:> : could, I'd be using it.
:>
:> Can you comprehend the difference between "X can do Y", and "I use X to
:> do Y"? Just because YOU don't use it that way doesn't imply it can't
:> be used that way. Pretending that your personal needs are identical
:> to everyone else's is a common error when extrapolating from anecdotal
:> evidence to the general case.
: I didn't say it can't be used that way. Why do you insist on pretending I
: said things I didn't say?
You *did* say it can't be used to replace windows. You even repeat it
in this reply.
:> : Linux zealots insist that Linux can replace Windows today. It can't.
: I said Linux isn't useful on the desktop for me today. And I said that
: Linux cannot replace Windows today (it can't. that's a fact). That's *ALL*
: I said.
And that's what's false. Let me teach you some basic logic:
If someone says, "X *cannot* do Y", all it takes is a single
counter-example to prove it wrong. That's why it's a pretty
stupid idea to make such a sweeping generalization in an
argument. All it takes is a single example of someone replacing
Windows with Linux, and the statement "Linux cannot replace Windows"
becomes false. Go read the press releases for the last few years.
While there aren't a *large* number of these examples, there are some,
and all it takes is one single example to make your claim false.
:> : Just like I used my Amiga over DOS, OS/2 over
:> : Windows 3.1, and Windows 95 over OS/2, and Windows 2000 over Windows 9x
: (I
:> : still used Win98 primarily until Win2k came out. Although since then I
: have
:> : at least one NT4 box hanging around) when each proved themselves more
: useful
:> : to me.
:>
:> : Fact is, as long as Linux must be maintained by through text files, it's
: not
:> : going to be able to replace Windows.
:>
:> There is a difference between "able to" and "likely to". Learn it.
: If it's not likely to, it's not going to be able to in all likelyhood.
That's nice. This has nothing to do with your sweeping generalization
that it "cannot".
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Is Bill Gates MAD?!?!?
Date: 11 Jan 2001 17:58:37 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Steve Mading wrote:
:> Specify, what is it that is illegal?
: You're not allowed to pump your own gas in New Jersey.
You've got to be kidding. Me and my boss were just out there
about 4 months ago visiting Rutgers, and I could swear we
stopped for gas some time during our stay and filled up the
rental car, in the standard self-serve style. My memory could
be faulty, though, since I wasn't the one doing the driving and
so I wasn't really paying attention.
Can't pump your own gas??! That's just plain stupid - why?
[absurd-length sig snip]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Anyone going to the LinuxWorld Expo in New York City?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:01:03 GMT
On Wed, 10 Jan 2001 22:44:24 -0500, jtnews <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Anyone going to the LinuxWorld Expo in New York City?
>
>I was thinking of going this year since I live
>close to the city. I'm wondering what other people
>think about it.
I'm going.
Just got my free passes today in fact.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why does Win2k always fail in running time?
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 12:10:28 -0600
"Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:ztf76.2261$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:7Y076.13$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > (Mind you, it seems that Matt is one of these strange people that
> believes
> > > that writing and debugging device drivers should be easy and
> > straightforward.
> > > Shows what a know-nothing kid *he* is, and what a fool you are for
> rising
> > to
> > > his bait. :^)
> >
> > Not to mention that he claims to NOT be writing a device driver, but
still
> > somehow manages to have his code run in kernel-mode AND claims this
should
> > not crash the system if the code is faulty. ;)
>
> You gotta admit, a world so forgiving that your OS stays up after your
> home-brew device drivers and Explorer extension objects crap out, would be
a
> wonderful place to live.
The OS stays up just fine if explorer extensions fail. They're just
userland DLL's.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: kernel problems(new)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:08:37 GMT
On Thu, 11 Jan 2001 04:52:06 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Having some trouble with the new 2.4 kernel. I compiled it correctly,
>installed it with lilo, but when I boot it, the screen goes black and
>everything stops.
It's normal operation.
You selected the "Stealth Mode" option in the kernel zOrch parameter
field.
>BTW, I know I should be posting this in a diff forum, but for some reason, I
>can't. I get a "No valid newsgroups in that forum" error. So, I am posting
>this in this forum, as it is the only one I can post to.
You are running a piece of junk Newsreader/Browser.
It figures, the Linux news reader is probably hardwired directly to
COLA.
>C Pungent
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com
>http://www.deja.com/
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux misseery cont.
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:03:03 GMT
In article <3R276.28264$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> LINUX ANONYMOUSE wrote:
>
> > It amases me every time that someone tends to object to linux that
> > everyone insults him.
>
> Funny that isn't it.
>
> > I personally use slackware linux and sometimes
> > find it very annoying to configure as well. As for the GUI I
totally
> > agree..... AKA IT SUCKS. I have yet to find a GUI that is easy to
> > configure linux, click and point easy, and very user friendly.
Every
> > GUI I have ever encountered in linux has alway... yes I do mean
always
> > given me either hours of headaches or it very very very difficult to
> > get to set up this is of course speaking of the source installation
> > meathod. I also find that there is a bunch of crackheads writing
for
> > linux. Linux needs some sort of standardization in order to make it
> > big with the standard non-techy user.
>
> I totally agree.
>
> > And Yes I do like linux because of its very fast and stable kernel.
> > I'm just saying it could improve its looks. Come on how can you
> > honestly say that Gnome is a very good environmnet or KDE isn't that
> > good ither. yes they are very very fast and stable but they look
> > terrible. I think that is the reason why windows sells so good is
> > because it hides the ugly background and poor system while wrapping
it
> > up in a pretty package so a child can use it.
>
> KDE 2.0 was the first desktop I saw that made me want to switch.
Well,
> almost.
>
> --
> Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
>
thank you for not making stupid opions that waiste my time.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: "Rajendra Jadhav" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Reg. Gnome..
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 12:25:40 -0600
Hi,
I am facing some problems starting the X-server. I get following errors when
attemting to start xserver.
excve failed for /etc/X11/X (errno 2)
-X11 TransSocketUnixConnect: Can't connect: errno 111
giving up
xinit : connection refused (errno 111): unable to connect to X server
xinit : No such process (errno 3): server error
can you plz guide me in this and tell me what trouble shooting step should i
take.
Thanks,
Raj.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The real truth about NT
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 12:23:21 -0600
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:93jumn$lc0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > 2. Disk Space - I don't think I have to say more...
> >
> > I guess you should, since you don't seem to have a point.
>
> POINT: NT requires lots more disk space then Linux (machines doing
> roughly the same work)
Strange, My linux install was over 1GB.
> > > 3. DBX Files - Two key problems: a) SIZE and b) File Format. I used
> a
> > > utility called oe2mbx.exe to convert a inbox.mbx file to an Linux
> mbx
> > > file. The result was this: DBX = 808Kb MBX = 488Kb. Further more I
> > > think the dbx is a realy dumb format. You can't do anything with
> it. If
> > > you import it in an Excel spreadsheet or even Notepad you get like a
> > > trillion of useless characters. M$ should have added a DBX import
> into
> > > Excel at least.
> >
> > That's why they have a compact function. Right click in OE on the
> newsgroup
> > and choose compact.
> >
> > Mailbox files are automatically compacted. Aditionally, Mbox format
> is
> > simply the emails appended to each other, while the DBX format uses
> indexing
> > to allow it to find messages faster and search easier.
> >
> > In any event, I fail to see this is a "general" problem for
> businesses to
> > avoid NT.
>
> OE is on most Win x boxes as it is the only app most people (users)
> know off. OE takes progressively longer to load as your dbx files get
> larger. In older machines this can take very long with three years of
> correspondence in your inbox.
That's why you should archive your emails. Simply create an archive folder
and move all the emails you want to archive to it. Keeps your inbox nice
and tidy. You know what happens if you use Mbox format over NFS? You
*WILL* lose your inbox eventually. That's why Maildir format was created in
qmail.
> I have created search scripts for the Linux boxes, and the results so
> far are very good. I have not perfected it yet, but in general I get
> results faster then in OE. The results can also be used in any other
> app, which is not the case with OE search results (unless you know of a
> 3rd party app that I can get hold off)
OE searching is quite fast.
> > > 4. CD-RW - NT gave so far 6 duds vs 0 to Linux in my org. (Maybe
> > > mentioning that the Linux box burns about 15 times more CD's then
> the
> > > NT box is overdoing it...)
> >
> > Simply incorrect. If you're making coasters, then you've got
> something
> > seriously screwed up.
>
> Nope
I've burn dozens of CD's a week and I have never burned a coaster on NT.
Something is screwed up on your system if this is the case.
> > > 5. Backup - ALL User data in Linux ends up in $HOME. In NT MOST end
> up
> > > in ..\Profiles, *BUT*, two major problems: a) *.DBX does not end up
> > > here, causing OE data not to be backed up on most sites, and b)
> when re-
> > > installing NT, you loose your ..\Profiles from the word go. I found
> it
> > > also a hassle to move Profiles to another location because you waist
> > > time when re-installing NT to reconfigure everything again to the
> new
> > > location.
> >
> > 2000 doesn't use the profiles directory. But, even so, Outlook
> Express
> > *DOES* store it's files in Profiles in NT. On my NT4 system it's in
> > C:\WINNT\Profiles\FunkenbuschE\Application
> > Data\Identities\{FF07A5B0-0B73-11D3-97D5-005004608B71}
> \Microsoft\Outlook
> > Express.
> >
> > So you're wrong again. And you don't lose your profiles if you
> reinstall
> > NT, it just creates new ones. You only copy the files from your old
> profile
> > into the new one.
> >
>
> The problem is the "{FF.." part which differs. You see, in my setup I
> need to convert some users dbx files to mbx files as they use dual boot
> systems (users that are slowly seeing the light!).
The FF part is within my personal profile, so it gets backed up, unlike your
claims.
> In any case, my existing Profiles WAS destroyed. NT even displays a
> warning message during the early stages of the install (file server).
> Of course if it's a workstation it's a bit easier, but the local
> profiles still get destroyed.
NT does *NOT* destroy profiles when you reinstall, it just creates a new
one. You need only copy the files over from the old profile.
> > > 6. Install time - As you might have guesed, I re-installed NT now a
> > > couple of times. Average install time from scratch to a FULLY
> working
> > > Work Station with all apps installed takes about 4 hours (on some
> older
> > > systems up to 6 hours). I have not yet re-installed a Linux system,
> but
> > > a new install, with linking up to my company $HOME directory and all
> > > the other bells and whistles takes less then an hour.
> >
> > Fully installing Linux took me 3 days to get all the apps configured
> > correctly.
>
> While you are learning Linux, yes - maybe. After a couple of years - no
> way.
Yes way. Unless of course you're always installing the exact same programs
with the exact same configurations, in which case you should just ghost your
drive.
> > > Net result: The M$ TCO theory goes up in smoke!
> >
> > As if there is one for Linux.
>
> No need - it's a fact.
Facts have supporting evidence. None exists for linux.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux misseery cont.
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:05:20 GMT
In article <93kghb$2kj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
> Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In article <93ijun$rj4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> >>LINUX ANONYMOUSE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> It amases me every time that someone tends to object to linux that
> >>> everyone insults him. I personally use slackware linux and
sometimes
> >>> find it very annoying to configure as well. As for the GUI I
totally
> >>> agree..... AKA IT SUCKS. I have yet to find a GUI that is easy to
> >>> configure linux, click and point easy, and very user friendly.
> >>
> >>Then dont use linux. If you want pointy-clicky, stick with windows.
> >>
> >>See ya.
> >>
>
> > No NO NO no no no...
>
> > If you want pointy-clicky you need GNOME installed on your Potato!
>
> > Use Debian.
>
> Dammit, stop using my favorite distribution against me. I concur.
>
> :P
>
> -----.
>
>
Gnome is far from being point and clicky easy such as windows. i don't
mean to affend you but I still think Gnome has a way to go.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux misseery cont.
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:09:14 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jim Broughton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> LINUX ANONYMOUSE wrote:
> >
> > It amases me every time that someone tends to object to linux that
> > everyone insults him. I personally use slackware linux and
sometimes
> > find it very annoying to configure as well. As for the GUI I
totally
>
> For a person that wants more point and click configuration I find it
> hard to belive that you run the distribution that requiers the most
> by hand configuration. If you want pointy clicky config try red hat
> and use linuxconf under X.
>
> > agree..... AKA IT SUCKS. I have yet to find a GUI that is easy to
> > configure linux, click and point easy, and very user friendly.
Every
> > GUI I have ever encountered in linux has alway... yes I do mean
always
>
> I dunno about you but I find kde 1.1.2 very usable and configurable.
> I have it setup to my tastes and it suits me just fine.
>
> > given me either hours of headaches or it very very very difficult to
> > get to set up this is of course speaking of the source installation
> > meathod. I also find that there is a bunch of crackheads writing
for
>
> hmmm ./configure then make then make install. How damn easy do you
> want it to be. One click will probably be your answer.
>
> > linux. Linux needs some sort of standardization in order to make it
> > big with the standard non-techy user.
> >
>
> This is about the only thing I can agree with you on. A standard for
> package installation and distribution BUT then again linux is a
> system that offers choices (would you have it be a complete windows
> clone?)
>
> > And Yes I do like linux because of its very fast and stable kernel.
> > I'm just saying it could improve its looks. Come on how can you
> > honestly say that Gnome is a very good environmnet or KDE isn't that
> > good ither. yes they are very very fast and stable but they look
> > terrible. I think that is the reason why windows sells so good is
>
> Mine looks fine. I'm using truetype fonts and they do look great.
> Look for an easier to install and setup font anti aliasing in a
> very soon to come release of Xfree86.
>
> > because it hides the ugly background and poor system while wrapping
it
> > up in a pretty package so a child can use it.
> >
>
> So what you really want is linux to hide the background and be pretty
> just so a person with the mentality of a child can use it?
>
> > Sent via Deja.com
> > http://www.deja.com/
>
> My final question is WHATS YOUR POINT?
>
> --
> Jim Broughton
> (The AmigaOS now there was an OS!)
> If Sense were common everyone would have it!
>
My point is linux has a bit to go before it can be considered for the
general workstation. Linux is really great for the server but I would
love linux to be much more pretty like windows.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux misseery cont.
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:07:25 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Then dont use linux. If you want pointy-clicky, stick with windows.
> >
> > See ya.
> >
>
> If it's pointy-clicky you're after, get a Mac!
> --
> http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club
>
You know last time I checked there are many platforms that support the
Mac. As far as sticking with windows, I practically use linux much
more often for servers but when it comes down to the workstation level
windows would be my choice.
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux misseery cont.
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:14:45 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jim Broughton wrote:
>
> > For a person that wants more point and click configuration I find it
> > hard to belive that you run the distribution that requiers the most
> > by hand configuration. If you want pointy clicky config try red hat
> > and use linuxconf under X.
>
> ...and it would be good if it wasn't so slow and
> seg-faulted every five seconds. It's web interface may be more stable
> though.
>
i use slackware because of the fact it doesn't hide the installation
and configuration. I'm saying that if linux wishes to compete with
windows on the workstation level than it needs to be point and click
configuration (much like the XF86Setup that I much like and has helped
us all.... thanks for that very powerful tool i always use to hate
configuring the x-windows configuration files with vi or jed).
Wouldn't it be cool if there was a program to set up you NIC, kernal, X-
windows, Internet, ect just by typing in one command and having a very
friendly wizard like configuration?
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Michael Marion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: "Is the end looming for the Microsoft monopoly?"
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 18:24:29 GMT
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> TiVo is perhaps not a good example. Both my friend and I returned our TiVo
> boxes within a short while with different problems - in my case flashing
> colours and distorted sound - in my friend's case, MPEG drop outs.
I think they had a lot of problems with the first generation models (the early
14hour ones). I had one, then bought a 30 hour and gave the 14 to my
parents. The 14 hour started to die a few months later. My 30 hour has been
rock solid for almost a year now (and I even hacked it to add a 60Gig disk...
B5 episodes at high quality :) ). I also ended up getting a larger one for my
parents late last year, and our family has gotten models for my grandparents
and my sister's family (yeah, too many toys in the family). Other then the
original 14 hour losing sound, and my grandparents having an infrequent
lockup, the rest have worked fine.
Tivo also has superb support, replacing a bum model at no cost during the 90
day period, or for a small charge thereafter (don't know the cost though).
The Tivo was the first home electronic item I've ever bought that I felt was
well worth it right away. Usually when I get a new stereo or something, It
takes me awhile to stop wondering if the cost was justified... with the tivo I
didn't do that.
--
Mike Marion-Unix SysAdmin/Senior Engineer-Qualcomm-http://www.miguelito.org
Peter: "Oh my God! Brian, there's a message in my Alphabits.. it says,
'oooooo'"
Brian: "Peter, those are Cheerios!" -- Family Guy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Scientific Software Engineer needed
Date: 11 Jan 2001 18:24:14 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Location: Maine,US
> Type: PERM
> Jobs available: Scientific Software Engineer (Job#219-222/OT)
> Key responsibilities:
> There is a Scientific Software Engineer (SSE) position available in
> the new Physiogenomics Program. The SSE will develop scientific
> applications related to the collection of physiological and behavioral
> data in mice and contribute to the development of a new public database
> for the dissemination of information related to this program.
> Applicants must be energetic, imaginative, and ready to participate in
> a highly interdisciplinary environment combining biology and computer
> science.
> Desired skills include: Web site design and implementation (HTML, CGI,
> Java Servlet API, Java applets), relational database programming (SQL,
> JDBC, ODBC), GUI design and implementation, object-oriented design and
> programming, Perl, Python, Java, Sybase or Oracle. Excellent
> communication skills required. Windows and Mac experience is required.
> UNIX experience helpful. B.S. in Computer Science or equivalent
> experience is required. Strong interest in biology, genetics, and
> statistics preferred.
> For more info or to send resume for immediate attention :
No. The proper thing at this point in your idiotic, off topic drivel
is to set the salary range; and for a job like this it better damn well
start in the middle 100s.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: I am trying Linux out for the first time.
Date: 11 Jan 2001 18:25:01 GMT
rus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I find the video setup disheartening. I also find that text editing
> instead of GUI controls for program setup frustrating. I am using
> Caldera distro. Is there a distro for people only having time to do
> work and not time for figuring out their OS?
People who only have time to do work should be lined up against a
wall and shot.
=====.
--
"It's natural to expect there might be people doing stupid things
with computers"
---Michael Vatis, director of the FBI's national infrastructure
protection center commenting on Y2K concerns about hacker attacks
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: I am trying Linux out for the first time.
Date: 11 Jan 2001 18:25:47 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "rus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> I find the video setup disheartening. I also find that text editing
>> instead of GUI controls for program setup frustrating. I am using
>> Caldera distro. Is there a distro for people only having time to do
>> work and not time for figuring out their OS?
> I'm sorry, but most Linux people seem to think you don't exist. Why would
> someone want to get work done instead of tweaking their OS? (yes, that's
> sarcasm).
People who only have time to do work are absolutely worthless as humans,
they should be exterminated immediately so that we may enter a grand age
of enlightenment and leisure.
=====.
--
"It's natural to expect there might be people doing stupid things
with computers"
---Michael Vatis, director of the FBI's national infrastructure
protection center commenting on Y2K concerns about hacker attacks
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The real truth about NT
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 12:32:15 -0600
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:93kftr$2kj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > You "found" these facts? You claim you personally experienced this.
>
> Semantics manipulation. I wouldnt have thought you capable of it, erik,
> since you whine about it so constantly.
No, I find that the way people phrase things betrays their true experience.
> >> 4. CD-RW - NT gave so far 6 duds vs 0 to Linux in my org. (Maybe
> >> mentioning that the Linux box burns about 15 times more CD's then the
> >> NT box is overdoing it...)
>
> > Simply incorrect. If you're making coasters, then you've got something
> > seriously screwed up.
>
> Yes, like running another application at the same time. My W2K install
> stopped making coasters completely when I ran NOTHING BUT CD-RW while
> it was burning. Even bringing up a putty terminal during a burn would
> cause coasters.
I run other apps while burning all the time. I've never had a problem.
Under 9x, sure. Running other apps would fail, but not under NT.
> >> 5. Backup - ALL User data in Linux ends up in $HOME. In NT MOST end up
> >> in ..\Profiles, *BUT*, two major problems: a) *.DBX does not end up
> >> here, causing OE data not to be backed up on most sites, and b) when
re-
> >> installing NT, you loose your ..\Profiles from the word go. I found it
> >> also a hassle to move Profiles to another location because you waist
> >> time when re-installing NT to reconfigure everything again to the new
> >> location.
>
> > 2000 doesn't use the profiles directory. But, even so, Outlook Express
> > *DOES* store it's files in Profiles in NT. On my NT4 system it's in
> > C:\WINNT\Profiles\FunkenbuschE\Application
> > Data\Identities\{FF07A5B0-0B73-11D3-97D5-005004608B71}\Microsoft\Outlook
> > Express.
>
> Dont fall into the mistake of praising outlook express over *anything*.
>
> To do so marks your extreme lack of experience in the matter.
As usual, you're completely ignoring the context. He claimed that OE's data
files weren't stored in a central place so they couldn't easily be backed
up. My point is that he was wrong.
> >> 6. Install time - As you might have guesed, I re-installed NT now a
> >> couple of times. Average install time from scratch to a FULLY working
> >> Work Station with all apps installed takes about 4 hours (on some older
> >> systems up to 6 hours). I have not yet re-installed a Linux system, but
> >> a new install, with linking up to my company $HOME directory and all
> >> the other bells and whistles takes less then an hour.
>
> > Fully installing Linux took me 3 days to get all the apps configured
> > correctly.
>
> What apps? It usually takes me about three hours. It sounds like your
> problem is simply that you dont know what youre doing.
Yet he claims it only takes "less than an hour".
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Linux misseery cont.
Date: 11 Jan 2001 18:27:12 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <93kghb$2kj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>> Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > In article <93ijun$rj4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >>LINUX ANONYMOUSE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>> It amases me every time that someone tends to object to linux that
>> >>> everyone insults him. I personally use slackware linux and
> sometimes
>> >>> find it very annoying to configure as well. As for the GUI I
> totally
>> >>> agree..... AKA IT SUCKS. I have yet to find a GUI that is easy to
>> >>> configure linux, click and point easy, and very user friendly.
>> >>
>> >>Then dont use linux. If you want pointy-clicky, stick with windows.
>> >>
>> >>See ya.
>> >>
>>
>> > No NO NO no no no...
>>
>> > If you want pointy-clicky you need GNOME installed on your Potato!
>>
>> > Use Debian.
>>
>> Dammit, stop using my favorite distribution against me. I concur.
>>
>> :P
>>
>> -----.
>>
>>
> Gnome is far from being point and clicky easy such as windows. i don't
> mean to affend you but I still think Gnome has a way to go.
To be usable by the retarded, braindead, lazy, worthless masses.
I agree completely. But I dont think that its gnome that has the long
way to go, its the masses that do.
=====.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
