Linux-Advocacy Digest #472, Volume #31 Sun, 14 Jan 01 23:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: More Linux woes ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: More Linux woes ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The Linux Show! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: More Linux woes ("Todd")
Re: Why Linux won't get far in Luxembourg's comapanies. (Russ Lyttle)
Re: The Server Saga ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Delphi Forums Downgrading from Windows 2000 to NT 4.0 ("Adam Warner")
Re: More Linux woes ("Todd")
Re: OS-X GUI on Linux? ("Todd")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 03:25:01 GMT
On Mon, 15 Jan 2001 02:48:37 GMT, J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Linux has no quality software.
>
>If apache is not "quality software", why is it eating microsoft's
>lunch in web server market share?
Because it is free, nothing else.
>If sendmail is not "quality software", why is it the #1 mail transport
>agent on the internet?
Where is that quote pulled from?
Prove it please?
>If bind is not "quality software", why is it the de facto standard
>internet name resolution software?
I dunno?
Tell me.
>If Oracle is not "quality software", why is it the most popular
>commercial database in the world?
Better take a look at Oracle's position on Linux over the past few
months. They are not happy. And BTW they are NOT the most popular
database, IBM's DB2 is.
>f the Linux kernel is not "quality software", why is Linux the
>specweb 99 speed champ? Why is it that nasa and others
>depend on Linux for dependable supercomputing power?
>Why do google, deja and amazon depend on Linux for their
>day to day business?
I don't know?
Ask them will you?
BTW NASA uses IBM 9076's clustered with switches running Catia under
AIX. So does Boeing and and Livermore labs.
>Friend, I'm afraid you've sat through one too many microsoft
>marketing spiels, and your brain has turned to mush.
No.
I just look around me when I visit Wall street and I see
IBM/Sun/Microsoft everywhere and Linux is non existent especially on
the desktop, which is what I was talking about from the beginning, so
stop changing the focus of the discussion, yet again.
>jjs
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux Mandrake 7.2 and the banana peel
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 03:30:31 GMT
On Mon, 15 Jan 2001 02:57:26 GMT, J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have no idea what you are talking about.
Doesn't surprise me as you Penguinista's seem to have an awful time
following a simple train of thought.
>> Take a walk through CompUSA someday and try and find non PS printers
>> that ARE supported by Linux.
>> Same goes for scanners BTW.
>
>Friom what I can see, just about any printer works with
>Linux, except for the lame "win printers", which of course
>any one building a Linux system would reject.
Excluding Win-printers which even Winvocates don't support, you are
completely wrong.
Look again.
>>
>> Tell all the folks running those web pages to shut them down.
>
>why?
Because according to you one click and it works.
>> I didn't say anything about servers, you did. I was talking desktop.
>> Stick to the subject.
>
>Red Hat is not going after the desktop just yet.
>They recommend Linux for servers or for technical
>workstations. For an end user like yourself, it would
>be recommended that you get a pre installed Linux
>system, or get some college kid to set everything up.
Sure they are. You can't be that naive can you?
They are plugging Gnome for the server market?
Sure.
What a fool you must be.
>I see windows every day, monkey boy - it just doesn't
>impress me, sorry.
Ahh I knew the insults would come sooner or later.
>microsoft fell from 120 and tanked in the low 40s -
>people have lost billions, and you talk about Linux
>stocks falling?
It still controls 90+ percent of the desktop market and as long as
Linux continues to suck it will remain that way.
>Well, I figure logic is wasted on the likes of you anyhow...
And FACTS seem wasted on you as well.
Please back up your statements for a change.
>Have a good time, claire/whatever you call yourself today.
You, and your type ALWAYS provide me with endless hours of
entertainment.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: More Linux woes
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 03:36:58 GMT
On Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:54:15 -0500, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Like IBM, for instance?
IBM runs NT and OS/2 in their hardware support centers.
They run VM legacy applications along with Windows at the call center
where you place your service calls.
They Run VM legacy applications to dispatch their CE's via a Motorola
RIM device.
They Run Lotus Notes under Windows as their official corporate mobile
platform.
The CE's run an application called CORE which runs under Windows 95
(yep 95) on a Thinkpad 765L the standard issue. Real good for
customers to see IBM reps using a POS like that.
Even their Timecards are filled out using a system called TOTALS which
is a legacy VM application.
Hell, I don't see IBM even USING Linsux, except in some laboratory
tucked away in Poughkeepsie somewhere and in a wet dream by Lou
Gerstner whoi is thinking of nothing more than how much hardware he
can sell giving away Linsux as an OS.
They don't even practice what they preach.
Want more?
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: More Linux woes
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 03:41:01 GMT
On 15 Jan 2001 03:11:29 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David
Steinberg) wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>: I give up. You are just to dense to understand this..
>: Consider it closed.
>
>I must admit that I'm confused, too.
>
>I'm currently playing a CD, and I just disconnected the audio connector,
>and...silence.
>
>Hmmm...maybe I'm not running Linux?...
Exactly David!!!!!!!
That is my point!!!
When I disconnect the the digital audio connector the audio keeps on
playing with nothing more than the IDE cable connected.
In fact what is happening is Linux is causing the CD/Soundcard/system
to do digital audio extraction over the IDE bus by default and I have
yet to figure out a way to turn it off.
What you have is the way it is supposed to work.
I have not found a way to turn this off under Linux, and as you can
imagine this puts a tremendous load on the system.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The Linux Show!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 03:41:55 GMT
On Mon, 15 Jan 2001 02:54:58 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie
Ebert) wrote:
>http://www.thelinuxshow.com
>
>The show is back on again and playable in MP3 format.
>Works great with XMMS.
>
>
>These guys do a good show and it's a good listen.
Now if you could only look at the trailers for your own movie
Anti-Trust which are in QT4. format.
Sad, this Linsux is....
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: More Linux woes
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 11:46:35 +0800
Actually, I prefer using DAE with Windows 2000... no skips hops or nothin...
just good music.
(Never mind I lost the analog cable from my CD to sound card) ... hehe.
-Todd
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I was wondering why playing an audio CDROM (like you would buy in the
> store) seemed to cause intermittent skipping when dragging windows or
> doing any other activity under Linux Mandrake 7.2 so I decided to
> investigate today.
> The CDROM is an Acer 40x on the second IDE controller and it has a
> digital cable (no analog) hooked to a SBLive in the system.
>
> I played an audio CD and started to poke around the system enabling
> and disabling digital audio with the KDE Mixer and things were acting
> strange?
>
> I unplugged the digital cable (the little 2 prong Berg connector)
> while the CD was playing and to my surprise the sound CONTINUED to be
> heard!!!
>
> This sucker was, for some reason, doing Digital Audio Extraction over
> the IDE bus!!!
>
> No wonder things were acting strange....
>
> Score another hit against Linsux for misconfiguring this one.
> Ok Penguinista's, how to I disable this so my system isn't being
> slowed to a crawl every time I play an audio CD?
>
> Every time I look a little deeper I discover another reason why Linux
> sucks, and I'm not even trying hard to find these things.
>
>
> Flatfish
> Why do they call it a flatfish?
> Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux won't get far in Luxembourg's comapanies.
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 03:44:53 GMT
Bartek Kostrzewa wrote:
>
> [deltia]
> >
> > Why not just squander the extra money on frivolous hardware.
> >
> > You could have added a rather nice RAID array to that configuration
> > to bring the price up if that was really the problem.
>
> But what for?! They don't need that kind of machine! That's the whole point
> I wanted to make, you have to buy too much, so you don't have to put so much
> money into the state's pockets, and I find this tax system ridiculous, the
> more money you have to invest, the less taxes you pay... rich people get
> richer, and poor people have to pay (relatively) very high amounts in taxes.
>
Most Americans on this group don't remember the time before Regan when
we had "tax brackets" and had to come up with all kinds of schemes to
avoid the dreaded 110% marginal rate ($1 in extra income resulted in
$1.10 in extra taxes.
What you need to learn is that your friend is in business to make money
and governments are in business to take money. This is what you do to be
both moral and help him out.
First and foremost you find out what the budget is. Get enough
information to make sure that you can meet his needs within budget. DO
NOT TELL HIM THE RESULTS. If you don't tell him what it will cost, then
the government can't charge him with "tax avoidance". "Tax Avoidance" is
the governments way of saying that what he did was legal, but he did it
to avoid tax and therefore has to pay the tax and penalties. You tell
him you need more information. Do a Business Activities Survey. That is
just find other things that could be done to improve his business. Add
into your submission "additive extras". These are things that will help
him improve his business but weren't included in the original
submission. Be sure to bill for your hours. He can select the extras he
wants. His business gets better. His taxes go down. You make more money.
And everyone is happy.
What ever you do don't just spend the money on neat hardware or give
anyone a hint that you could have done the job cheaper. The government
has ears everywhere.
> >
> >
> > >As you see, Luxembourg's taxing logic is pretty hard to understand, you
> have
> > >to invest tons of money into your businness, so the state can't take
> "extra"
> > >taxes at the end of the year...
> >
> > So? Just spend it in hardware.
>
> just like I said... what the heck for?
>
> >
> > --
> >
> > Finding an alternative should not be like seeking out the holy grail.
> >
> > That is the whole damn point of capitalism.
> > |||
> > / | \
--
Russ
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: The Server Saga
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 03:50:22 GMT
On Mon, 15 Jan 2001 03:19:57 GMT, Jim Broughton
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>After having read you above post I can only say that you
>should get the network (tcp/ip) running. THEN install
>webmin 0.83. This is a browser based system setup utility
>(yes it has mandrake 7.2 support) Initial setup is a bit
>hairy (its text based but interactive so its not too painful)
Yea sure, more miserable config files and outdated How-To's to
complicate the matter.
Just what he needs.
There always seems to be some version .0001 tool under Linux that is
designed to not so easily do what WIndows does right out of the box so
easily.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Delphi Forums Downgrading from Windows 2000 to NT 4.0
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 16:52:36 +1200
Hi Jan,
> Now hold on a second here!
>
> #1) you excerpted a little sharply with the obvious intention of laying
the
> blame at Windows 2000's feet. This is unfair and the full quote in the
> article places the blame where it belongs.
My intention was only to provide a "teaser" for the full article. It is
legal to quote excerpts of articles in the interests of research, etc. (or
what is know as fair use in the US). If I quoted the whole article that
would not be fair and would probably be a breach of The Register's
copyright.
> This unnamed Tier one vendor has
> promised them drivers for their high end network cards that would work
with
> W2K and they do not. This is not the fault of W2K as much as if your linux
> box crashed with bad drivers is it the fault of Linux.
Are you aware that you compile specific network card support into into the
Linux kernel?
> We use the best Intel
> co-processed NICs and they have never failed us once, never. They had
solid
> drivers out before W2K left beta. Since the vendor is unnamed we're only
> left to guess.
I believe you. It's an interesting story about specific hardware. If a Linux
one pops up I'll report it as well.
> #2) You also miss the points that NT4 is so stable for them that given the
> chance to change not once buy twice (once up to W2K and once again down to
> NT4) they continue to use MS NT. Obviously (and from experience) NT4 is
very
> stable and works great, great enough for Delphi.
There would be a VERY big legacy issue in the
OS/database/scripting/server/etc.
> The NIC drivers caused
> problems - ok, but to blame MS's product for another vendor's problems?
How
> about if I write some crappy drivers for Linux and when people use them
and
> linux crashes hard, can I say it's Linus' fault? See the point?
If a linux network driver is 100% stable under 2.0 (or 2.2) and it's not
under 2.2 (or 2.4) then you can probably blame the Linux kernel. However I
realise the buck doesn't stop with Microsoft because they/you blame a third
party.
This is a legacy issue. This was expensive vendor hardware which runs stable
under NT. It would probably have been on the HCL. Isn't it also Microsoft's
responsibility to see that critical legacy hardware remains compatible?
> #3) If they were smart they'd have changed NIC's instead of changing OSes
> twice. I mean, really... NICs are cheap in comparison to both the OS cost
> and the cost to convert (in time/energy) and in the cost to the end users
> opinion of Delphi's service. I mean, they'll think Delphi sucks, not W2K.
Couldn't they have been talking about 1Gb network cards? (probably not
cheap).
<snip>
> Smart people know where to lay the blame and in this case Delphi is taking
> the easy way out and blaming the easy target - why don't they name the NIC
> vender?? HMmmm??! Why didn't they simply change NICs?
Yes I would like to know who the vendor is.
> Then again, this IS TheRegister reporting... scum pond of computing
> "reporting"
Some of their reporting is now detailed and investigative (e.g. CPRM). And
I've noticed a lot of balance in some other stories (e.g. P4 performance).
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: More Linux woes
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 11:54:56 +0800
"Vann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:0at86.123$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> <snip ramblings>
> Here, sir, is a simple solution to all of your linux woes:
> Don't use linux.
> Now wasn't that hard?
And now you wonder why there are so many windows users? You say "if you
have problems with Linux, don't use it". So we don't.
Then you go on to criticize windows users because of their choice.
Linux *is* too hard to use - Linux will *never* replace Windows on the
desktop if Linux users have this attitude.
-Todd
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS-X GUI on Linux?
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 12:03:47 +0800
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sun, 14 Jan 2001 16:06:51 +0000, Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >Donn Miller wrote:
> >
> >> Tom Wilson wrote:
> >>
> >>> "Donn Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [deletia]
> >> I also think that Xlib tends to scare potential games developers away.
>
> Yet, despite of this I have a shelf full of fully supported
> commercial games. Fortunately, those that like to make money
> tend to have a 'can do' rather than a 'cant do' attitude.
>
> >> For one, the Xlib API is lower level then more popular windowing
> >> systems, like Windows' GDI.
> >
> >
> >Games delelopers generally use DirectX. I have had very little
> >experience with this, but it seemed to be very low level at the time
> >(much lower than the rest of the Windows GUI).
>
> Game developers like DirectX specifically because it allows
> them more direct access to hardware. IMO this is a BAD BAD
> thing. I'd rather prefer my modern OS in the 21st century
> to NOT indulge in such shenanigans, even for games.
Why? If you've ever programmed for DirectX, you would already know that you
*do not* get direct access to the hardware in *any* way. They are just
lower level APIs *compared to* the Windows GDI.
However, because today's hardware is accelerated, the API overhead is a very
small percentage of the overall work... just compare frame rates as the
resolution gets higher... soon the memory bandwidth limitations kick in and
the API overhead almost doesn't matter. At lower resolutions, the FPS is so
high that you don't get any advantage because it is faster than the refresh
rate frequency.
(Assuming you are talking Direct3D - now integrated with DirectDraw as of DX
8.0)
> [deletia]
>
> Meanwhile, Linux users are busy killing WinDOS users
> (and vice versa) on various Quake III and UT servers.
Don't you have any other games besides Q3 and UT? I'm so bored of those
games...
-Todd
>
>
> --
>
> Common Standards, Common Ownership.
>
> The alternative only leads to destructive anti-capitalist
> and anti-democratic monopolies.
> |||
> / | \
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
