Linux-Advocacy Digest #403, Volume #31 Thu, 11 Jan 01 22:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Knock off the FreeBSD vs Linux bullshit. (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance ("Chad Myers")
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (Paul Colquhoun)
Re: The real truth about NT ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Call for developers: Living Object System (long) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Kill all ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux a non-starter at CES (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant
Re: The real truth about NT ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Linux is easier to install than windows
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. (Charlie Ebert)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 21:31:22 -0500
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 08 Jan 2001 13:44:07
> > >"Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:93arkl$rnh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> : Again, though, "No fucker ever got fired for buying Microsoft."
> > >> : Bleh.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> That's because Mafia$oft markets to clueless managers, not IT
> > >> professionals.
> > >
> > >No, it's because everyone knows that if you go MS, it'll work.
> >
> > BHAW-Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha. BWAH-HA-HA-HA-HA! Oh, my.
> > BWAH-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha.... hahahahaha. Bwah-ha-ha-ha.
> >
> > >If you go anything else, you're betting your company's success
> > >on some 2nd rate software.
> >
> > Oh, god, STOP, PLEASE! I can't breath! .....ha-ha-ha-ha-ha, hahaha...
> > BWah-h-ah-ahaha-haha.... Uh. Uh. No more...
>
> Yet another factless, debateless, and unintelligable post from T. Max
> Devlin.
So says Chad Meyers...a man who can, and usually does....spend an entire
day posting to USENET and fail to get a single fact correct.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Knock off the FreeBSD vs Linux bullshit.
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:33:41 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>Clamchu wrote:
>>
>> Hey bastards, cut out the FreeBSD vs Linux bullshit. I've been lurking
>> in here, and I see some of you Linux turds slamming FreeBSD for it's
>
>Um, doofus...most of the Linux vs. BSD stuff is started by the BSD folks
>(And, by the way, i "grew up" on BSD...4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 in college).
>--
>Aaron R. Kulkis
>Unix Systems Engineer
>DNRC Minister of all I survey
>ICQ # 3056642
>
>
3.X Series here!
Now a Debian user.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:23:00 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:93kkto$bmp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >Just a few reasons:
>
> >Security - running things in the kernel is a Bad Idea (tm)
> >Reliability - any bugs in the http daemon bork the whole system. And yes,
> >all http daemons have bugs. Apache and IIS both continue to have bugs
> >posted on them even to this day.
>
> I guess those are excellent reason for not using an OS that runs its
> grapics core in kernel space :-)
Hmm, not really. Running an app that opens sockets and is vulnerable to
external attacks vs running a small portion of the GDI in kernel which
only drivers can access isn't really comparable.
Besides, there haven't been any security issues with the GDI in the
kernel and only very poorly written video drivers can do harm, and
even then the worse they can do is cause a BSOD. Not anything compared
to a kernel patch, root kit, or similar problem with an httpd running
in the kernel. I've yet to see an httpd that didn't have an exploit
in it (yes, even Apache and IIS). OTOH, I've yet to see an admin
exploit using video drivers and the GDI.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Colquhoun)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:47:27 GMT
On Thu, 11 Jan 2001 14:00:52 GMT, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|
|"Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
|news:93jbt6$iri$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
|> Hi Chad,
|>
|> If this really necessary?
|>
|> > > "Linux performance and scalability is architecturally limited in the 2.2
|> > > Kernel."
|> > >
|> > > Wouldn't want to mention the 2.4 kernel would we?
|> >
|> > Hmm, hasn't really changed much.
|>
|> Here's some information about the 2.4 kernel:
|>
|> http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-01-05-007-04-NW-LF-KN
|>
|> A small quotation:
|> "A number of changes in Linux 2.4 can be described as "enterprise level."
|> That is, they may not be immediately useful to many desktop users but work
|> to strengthen Linux as a whole. For the most part, the addition of these
|> features does not degrade Linux in more "normal" environments. First, Linux
|> 2.4 can handle many more simultaneous processes by being more scalable on
|> multiprocessor systems and also by providing a configurable process limit.
|> Second, the scheduler has been revised somewhat to be more efficient on
|> systems with a larger number of concurrent processes. Third, the revised
|> Linux kernel can now handle an amazing number of users and groups-- about
|> 4.2 billion. (And that's a lot of users!) In addition, support for more
|> powerful hardware is provided in the new kernel, which now supports up to 64
|> gigabytes of RAM on Intel hardware, up to 16 Ethernet cards, 10 IDE
|> controllers, multiple IO-APICs, and other pointless abuses of good hardware.
|> The 2-gigabyte file size restriction has also been lifted. With these
|> changes and others, the Linux kernel development team is proving that Linux
|> can be an option in many new environments."
|
|They claimed Linux 2.2 was "enterprise ready" which was a big pile of crap.
|
|2.4 is better, I'll agree, but it's still nowhere near the level of Win2K
|DC, Solaris, HP-UX, AIX, etc.
|
|As far as the "4.2 billion users and groups", it doesn't matter because
|the security implementation in Linux is elementary. There is no support
|for ACLs (without "unstable" add-ons), there's only the less-than-secure
|permission bits option. There's no real directory service. NIS+ is about
|the closest thing, but it's still no NDS or ADS level.
You don't consider LDAP to be an acceptable directory service?
|The 2gb file size has also NOT been lifted. There is still no "stable"
|or "released" filesystem out there. RiserFS and ext3 are STILL in development
|and both have caveats that may discourage their use.
This *again*!
Yes it *has* been lifted. Ext2 has *always* supported files >2Gb on 64bit
*and* 32 bit architectures. The restriction on file sizes was in the kernel
VFS (Virtual File System) layer on 32bit platforms.
This has been pointed out to you before. Your learning difficulties are
showing again, or is this deliberate FUD?
|
|>
|> What Processor architectures does Windows 2000 run on by the way Chad?
|
|What does it matter?
|To answer your question, Win2K will run on any platform that it's ported to.
Well, Duh!
|The NT kernel has been ported to many platforms, but MS only sells the ones
|that people demand: x86 and IA-64.
Every release of the NT kernel runs on fewer paltforms than the last, every
Linux kernel release runs on more paltforms than the last.
--
Reverend Paul Colquhoun, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Universal Life Church http://andor.dropbear.id.au/~paulcol
-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-
xenaphobia: The fear of being beaten to a pulp by
a leather-clad, New Zealand woman.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The real truth about NT
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 21:39:29 -0500
pip wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > pip wrote:
> > >
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > > > I get 100% success with Windows 98 SE. What's your point?
> > > >
> > > > How much do you burn? My company burn's about 1000 CD's per month (all
> > > > custom stuff for clients).
> > >
> > > Then get better CDR software :-)
> > > What has this got to do with the OS?
> >
> > The CD writing process is susceptible to bottle-neck-induced errors.
> >
> > NT's "agressive caching" technique (i.e. caching when there's absolutely
> > no fucking reason to cache), causes disk I/O bottlenecks...thereby
> > increasing the likelihood of your CDR-burn to have errors.
>
> Fair point, except that:
> 1) Linux also has _very_ aggressive file chaching and on the whole it
> does a great job
> 2) Most decent CD burners have an internal cache to prevent this
> (remembering that
> if you are burning cd's you should _not_ be using other programs anyway
> either under NT or Linux, so caching should not present a real problem).
> Linux and NT are not "designed" for this type of predictable data flow
> really (well, maybe RT Linux can be?).
Yes, since this is a Real Time activity, a Real Time kernel is the best choice.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:41:04 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Paul Colquhoun wrote:
>On Thu, 11 Jan 2001 15:32:29 +1200, Adam Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>|Hi Ayende,
>|
>|> Have you even seen the 4Q results of SPECWeb99 ?
>|> Tux just barely got the higher score, and it's a web server *no one* use.
>|> IIS got just behind Tux, and it's a commonly used webserver.
>|
>|Thank you for alerting me to those results.
>|
>|I see the results you are referring to are here:
>|http://www.spec.org/osg/web99/results/res2000q4/
>|
>|Specifically the Dell PowerEdge 8450/700. Windows 2000 Datacenter Server
>|only loses to Red Hat : TUX 2.0 by a small margin.
>|
>|Do you know how Microsoft improved the results so much? (Also possibly
>|helped by the fact that Linux still might not scale as well as the number of
>|processors is increased?)
>
>
>Lets see,
>
>Linux:
>
> 5 9Gb drives, 10Krpm
> 1 disk for OS & logs
> 4 disks for data, RAID0, 2Mb Chunk size
>
> 8 network controllers
>
>
>NT:
>
> 9 disks. 1 9Gb 10Krpm, 7 18Gb 15Krpm
> 1 disk for OS (presumably the 9Gb, 10Krpm)
> 6 disks for data, RAID0, chunk size not given
> 2 disks for logs, RAID0
>
> 7 network controllers
>
>
>Hardly identical configurations.
>
HA! I KNEW THEY FUKIN LIED!
>NT is still behind, even with more & faster disk drives and better
>allocation of the drive space.
>
>
>--
>Reverend Paul Colquhoun, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Universal Life Church http://andor.dropbear.id.au/~paulcol
>-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-
>xenaphobia: The fear of being beaten to a pulp by
> a leather-clad, New Zealand woman.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Call for developers: Living Object System (long)
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 21:40:22 -0500
Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Jacques Guy wrote:
> > >
> > > I'll try to answer to the fellow (I think you people
> > > are too hard on him).
> > >
> > > Jens wrote:
> > >
> > > [now let's get to the nitty-gritty of it]
> > >
> > > > So, in summary an object has the following
> > > > properties:
> > >
> > > > It is small
> > > > It has a clear and limited task
> > > > It runs on it's own
> > > > It is persistent
> > > > It communicates by messages
> > > > It is network aware
> > >
> > > This is strikingly similar to the topic
> > > of a Ph.D. thesis by a former colleague
> > > of mine, by the name of Wei Dai (yes,
> > > Chinese from mainland China). Only
> > > he called those objects "primitives"
> > > and had picked C (without ++) as
> > > the implementation language.
> > >
> > > Temporarily forgetting about computer
> > > science, what you are describing is
> > > a nest of social insects, ants for
> > > instance. The only possible difference
> > > is that I am not sure (and no-one is)
> > > whether an ant (an object) is network-
> > > aware (aware of the relationships in
> > > the anthill). I think it is not --
> > > how could an ant be aware of the
> > > millions of relationships in its
> > > anthill? And, come to think of it, how
> > > could an object as simple as you
> > > aim to make?
> > >
> > > > In addition, all communication is secure
> > > > (encrypted).
> > >
> > > Irrelevant. The objects communicate by
> > > messages. The messages need only be in
> > > a language known only to the objects.
> > > In other words, a sort of "Navaho code",
> > > as was used by the US in WWII (they
> > > used Navaho Indians to translate the
> > > messages into Navaho. Navaho is such
> > > an alien language, phonetically and
> > > semantically, that the Germans and
> > > the Japanese never cracked the "code")
> > >
> >
> > Actually, there was ad-hoc encryption as well.
> >
> > For example if you were to spell out Delphi in the
> > phonetic alphabet, it would be Delta-Echo-Lima-Papa-Hotel-India
> >
> > For the Navajo code-talkers, they would translate the
> > phoneticisms from English to Navajo, and then the guy on
> > the other end would translate the Navajo back to the
> > English designated phonetic alphabet word.
>
> From what I understand, it was never even close to being broken. Their
> language had never been recorded in print and was so difficult to learn that
> only those raised around it could actually understand. Throw in the fact
> that they were "slang-talking" too.
Taking no chances :-)
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.linux.sux,alt.linux.sucks,alt.linux.slakware
Subject: Re: Kill all
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 21:42:23 -0500
Jure Sah wrote:
>
> Alright, I had enough of all of this, I'm making an 'OS' of my own! It's
> a plug to anything that can handle DOS, but it takes 100% control over
> the system.
>
> It's not text orientated and it's not graphically orientated, it's AI
> orientated. The user can ping in as any of the computer programs that
> work in parallel to keep up the system.
>
> I guess no normal user would want to use it, because it is a system cut
> out for me.
>
> I'll write when it is finished.
Too much PCP in your coffee this morning?
>
> Keep spaming!
>
> --
>
> Don't feel bad about asking/telling me anything, I will always gladly
> reply.
>
> For those interested in a theory of how to make AI:
> HTTP://WWW.GeoCities.COM/GTSC4/mind2.html (updated: 01.02.01)
>
> 4E6F746369656420746865204845582D41534349493F
>
> GTSC4 -- If nobody else wants to do it, why shouldn't we?(TM)
> HTTP://WWW.GeoCities.COM/GTSC4/
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Linux a non-starter at CES
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:44:02 GMT
In article <P9d76.168707$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
>> Yes.
>
>When? "Soon" is the answer. Maybe it's like the answer Jesus gave to his
>disciples after they asked him when he's coming back: "Soon". Two thousand
>years is a long "soon".
>
>--
>Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
>
IN the fall of 2001.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:44:42 -0000
On Fri, 12 Jan 2001 01:54:12 GMT, Kyle Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> A variety of other distros have their own central admin facilities.
>> Most of the central admin facilities in Redhat are not Redhat
>> product. So there is absolutely no basis for your blatherings.
>
>They are pathetic excuses for "administration" that barely suceed in
The only thing pathetic here is your response.
It is nothing but empty rhetoric completely devoid
of detail.
>configuring networking support. Let alone other truly HARDWARE dependent
>settings.
Details please, if you can.
OTOH, NT5 has this nasty characteristic of hiding where you set
the domain name and putting it quite apart from the rest of
the network configuration.
Then there's that fun with it detecting devices, having drivers
available and then not bothering to tell you.
>
>> Besides, anyone is free to fork a new distro based on the core
>> of Redhat anytime they like.
>
>It's not my job to provide the world with a better Linux.
No one implied that it was.
This is just more vacuous rhetoric on your part.
There is no 'monopoly'. Anyone is free to exploit whatever
Redhat has produced. This infact occurs on a regular basis.
>
>> Alternately, anyone is free to adapt kudzu to their particular
>> distribution.
>
>Kudzu seems to be pretty RedHat dependent, contact us when you get Kudzu for
>a Debian distro, or slack.
Why would they bother? They aren't the one's that are
pre-occupied with moron ease of use issues. You're
indulging in more inane rhetoric.
>
>> Furthermore, I have infact upgraded kernels and xservers and kudzu
>> continued to be useful. The really useful, core parts of what kudzu
>> does are not horribly version dependent.
>
>Aparently you manged to configure your new kernel exactly the same as the
>old one. Kudzu can only recognize what it THINKS the kernel supports, and
Considering that they all build from the same sourcecode, and
utilize the same external utilities (kerneld, depmod, etc)
that's not too hard.
>act approperately with scripts. Those scripts tend not to work when a new
>revision of SOMETHING uses a completely different file format.
How would this break something that already works?
Of course updating kudzu would be required if you wish to
update what it can handle automagically.
>
>> Besides, the need to run Redhat to get certain creature comforts
>> does not negate their existence. At most it would imply that
>> Redhat is ahead of the compeition.
>
>Wonderful. Except RedHat has some of the worst design problems found in a
>commercial distro. Remember "BugHat"?
I don't run it.
Yet I get to exploit kudzu to my hearts content.
That's what happens when you actually look at ease of use
distros when seeking those features out rather than
fixating on Slack and then wondering what went wrong.
>
>> So, all you've really demonstrated is that genuine choice and
>> competition are a good thing.
>
>Not really, so far they only seem to have lead to a load of incompatible
>Linux distro's with random and idiotic functionality problems, and general
>compatibility problems (FORKING!)
Like what?
[deletia]
--
Having seen my prefered platform being eaten away by vendorlock and
the Lemming mentality in the past, I have a considerable motivation to
use Free Software that has nothing to do with ideology and everything
to do with pragmatism.
Free Software is the only way to level the playing field against a
market leader that has become immune to market pressures.
The other alternatives are giving up and just allowing the mediocrity
to walk all over you or to see your prefered product die slowly.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The real truth about NT
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 21:45:19 -0500
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
> > Dlue for the clueless: Disk drive images are NOT an acceptable
> > alternative to backup tapes.
>
> Ses you.
>
> There are other backup media than tapes. CD-R comes to mind.
Let's see....CD-R
Write once....and then it can't be used again.
Capacity ... less than 1G.
4mm DAT
Write once....it's still good for several hundred RE-recordings
Capacity... 2G - 25G
>
> --
> Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is easier to install than windows
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:47:15 -0000
On Fri, 12 Jan 2001 01:47:38 GMT, Kyle Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>XFree86's autoprobe system doesn't seem to find USB devices very well (LIKE
>MICE?!)
It works with mine just fine. (xfree 3.3 and 4.0)
[deletia]
USB mice aren't horribly complicated beasts.
They aren't even distinctive really.
--
Ease of use should be associated with things like "human engineering"
and "use the right tool for the right job". And of course,
"reliability", since stopping to fix a problem or starting over due
to lost work are the very antithesis of "ease of use".
Bobby Bryant - COLA
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 02:48:55 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Thu, 11 Jan 2001 03:07:02 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie
>Ebert) wrote:
>
>
>>Let's read this statement again moron.
>>
>>"Linux is unfeasible at work"
>>
>
>
>I didn't say it was unfeasible at work I said call up some fortune 100
>companies and ask them what their corporate desktop/mobile platform
>is.
>
>You can draw your own conclusions.
I have.
#1. Your a liar. You did say "Linux is unfeasible at work".
And it's not difficult for anybody to read back and prove
that.
#2. I am going to draw my own conclusion.
Your full of crap.
Hope this helps.
Charlie
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
