Linux-Advocacy Digest #890, Volume #31 Thu, 1 Feb 01 11:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: The nightmare that the current Open Source king (Linux) has bestowed ("Bobby D.
Bryant")
Re: The nightmare that the current Open Source king (Linux) has ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: The nightmare that the current Open Source king (Linux) has bestowed ("Bobby D.
Bryant")
Re: Linux headache (Geoff Lane)
Re: Will future employment agreements prohibit open source development? ("Bobby D.
Bryant")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("David Brown")
Microsoft gains on open-source Web server rival Linux ("al")
Microsoft opening Windows source code ("al")
Re: Wow, an actual survey (Linux dissatisfactions and wish-lists) ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING (Nick Condon)
Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING (Nick Condon)
Re: Wow, an actual survey (Linux dissatisfactions and wish-lists) ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Linux Distribution ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Linux Distribution ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Aspects of open-source that MS will co-opt: Predictions? ("Bobby D. Bryant")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The nightmare that the current Open Source king (Linux) has bestowed
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 09:11:50 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Microsoft was eating them for breakfast. Except for a few legacy
> niches, most WinDOS users are hopping behind office just like
> Lemmings.
Ooops. I think you failed to detect his sarcasm. (Pretty easy thing to do here,
considering how many resident trolls and astroturfers we have here constantly making
ridiculous claims with straight faces.)
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The nightmare that the current Open Source king (Linux) has
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 09:14:01 -0600
Ralph Miguel Hansen wrote:
> >> al wrote:
> >
> This al means Al Bundy ? Doesn't he sell shoes for fat ladys anymore and
> got a job as a computer-scientist ?
"The rising tide lifts all the boats", kind of thing. Besides, anyone who
can push a shoe onto a foot should be able to click a button labeled
"reboot".
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The nightmare that the current Open Source king (Linux) has bestowed
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 09:08:33 -0600
al wrote:
> We are already starting to experience the nightmare that the current
> Open Source king (Linux) has bestowed upon us in the form of...
> 1. Small business ...
Wow, that was a long list.
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Geoff Lane)
Subject: Re: Linux headache
Date: 1 Feb 2001 15:24:35 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:35:00 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>
>>
>> Meanwhile, Microsoft forces you to do a version upgrade to get
>> USB support or FAT32 support.
>
> And everything works perfectly the first time.
Er, no. Ever tried to install Win98 on one of the older Fujitsu Lifebooks
(running Win95 happily)? And MS's response - it'll never be possible.
That kind of support is going to move people to Linux faster than anything
else :-)
--
/\ Geoff. Lane. /\ Manchester Computing /\ Manchester /\ M13 9PL /\ England /\
Behind every succesfull man is woman with nothing to wear
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Will future employment agreements prohibit open source development?
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 09:18:14 -0600
Flacco wrote:
> Given the almost undeniable threat that open source poses to entrenched
> software providers, do you think the commercial market may try to dry up the
> open source talent pool by prohibiting employees from participating in it?
> Surely the case could be made that open source is a competitor in a given
> corp's market.
Fortunately, the market favors the employee rather than the employer right
now. They're desperate. Just say no.
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?)
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 16:26:26 +0100
Chad Myers wrote in message <0Wde6.602$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>
>No, quotas have been around for NT for years.
>Save the lies.
I am curious about the disk quotas on NT - we have NT 4.0 Server at the
office, and I can find no mention of disk quotas anywhere in the help files,
or in any of the administrative tools. In fact, the only mention I find of
the word "quota" is that in order to use the SU program (a utility to let
you change to another user in a command box - it is very limited, but
nonetheless essential for administrating NT - why you have to buy it as part
of the NT Resource kit is beyond me), a user has to have the "Increase
Quotas" account priviledge.
At the moment, my method of enforcing disk quotas is shouting at people when
the server complains about lack of free disk space. I would be interested
in using NT's long-established disk quota system, if someone can tell me
where to find it.
>
>>
>> > It's pretty sad that the only redeeming quality of Linux is a
>> > few utilities that you don't have to buy 3rd party.
>>
I am not sure that this is its only redeeming quality, but even if it were,
it is still a major benifit.
Whatever you think of Linux and Windows, you should be a little more
objective - Linux has huge numbers of utilities that you don't have to buy,
whereas Windows is missing huge numbers of essential utilities that you *do*
have to buy (either 2nd or 3rd party). For example, the NT resource kit is
pretty much essential even for a workstation (at least for a "power-user").
The number of major pieces of software that Linux has free, installed along
with the main system, is staggering (program development tools, web server,
mail server, database server, remote administrative tools, office
applications, typesetting systems, postscript utilities, etc.). With
windows, you must download these sorts of tools yourself, and although many
are freely available (almost invariably ported from the unix versions), it
takes a lot more time and effort. Alternatively, of course, you could buy
commercial versions for either system. And even for some of the built-in
features of windows, such as file sharing, and web servering, you still have
to buy client access licences.
As far as I understand it, if I set up an NT server (be it NT4.0 or w2k)
with IIS and some active server pages collecing data from a MS SQL Server
database, I have to buy client access licences for anyone connecting to the
database over the internet. Does anyone know the situation if the same NT
server is running Apache, PHP and MySQL? This is a genuine question, by the
way. The system is likely to move over to Linux some time, but we may be
running on NT for a while first.
>>
>> 1. Why is windows nt the most vulnerable web server platform?
>
>Because, like any other OS, the administrators are not properly
>trained to use the security implementation. When set up and configured
>properly NT is rock solid. Of course, like any other OS, there are
>the occasional buffer overflows and such (Linux is no stranger to this),
>but in general, when you lock down the permissions, it's nearly impossible
>for someone to crack it over the internet.
I thought windows was supposed to be the ultimate in ease-of-use. But
apparently configuring NT properly (and especially keeping up with all those
pesky service packs) is so difficult that a range of MS subsiduaries (or the
3rd parties they hire to do their web hosting) around the world cannot cope
with it. Defacing Microsoft websites seems to be a popular hobby.
>
>> 2. Why couldn't microsoft seem to manage their own dns servers?
>
>It wasn't the DNS servers, it was the routers and the load balancers.
>Some human made a human error and botched the whole thing.
>
As far as I understand it, it was a human error that caused a problem - that
is unavoidable on occasion. But it took such a long time to fix - these
guys are hoping that people will trust them enough to let them run
everything in the computing world (.NET), and a single human error can bring
all their web sites down for nearly 24 hours. Have MS never heard of
emergency planning? Where would the world be if everyone relied on MS's
internet systems to be able to access their documents and applications? The
reason everything at MS failed at once was because everything was on one
sub-net - this is not the result of a single human error, but of consistent
lack of understanding of the buildup of the internet.
------------------------------
From: "al" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Microsoft gains on open-source Web server rival Linux
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 10:30:54 -0500
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
=======_NextPart_000_0025_01C08C3A.0EB37E50
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-4678927.html?tag=3Dmn_hd
=======_NextPart_000_0025_01C08C3A.0EB37E50
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-4678927.html?tag=3Dmn_hd">ht=
tp://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-4678927.html?tag=3Dmn_hd</A></FONT></D=
IV></BODY></HTML>
=======_NextPart_000_0025_01C08C3A.0EB37E50==
------------------------------
From: "al" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Microsoft opening Windows source code
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 10:32:11 -0500
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
=======_NextPart_000_0038_01C08C3A.3C98E9E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-201-4678406-0.html?tag=3Dmn_hd
=======_NextPart_000_0038_01C08C3A.3C98E9E0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><A=20
href=3D"http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-201-4678406-0.html?tag=3Dmn_hd">=
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-201-4678406-0.html?tag=3Dmn_hd</A></FONT=
></DIV></BODY></HTML>
=======_NextPart_000_0038_01C08C3A.3C98E9E0==
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Wow, an actual survey (Linux dissatisfactions and wish-lists)
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 09:34:18 -0600
Flacco wrote:
> > The ability to type
> >
> > ./configure
> > make
> > make install
> >
> > does not constitute programming skill.
>
> I agree with you, but how much programming skill is required to simply
> attach this script to a button somewhere?
>
> Why put off those who are uncomfortable with the command-line?
>
> Do we want to *repel* converts on the desktop?
The sad truth is, it takes more than the ability to click a button to be
able to manage a system. You can already run "make xconfig" and get a
clicky configuration tool, but if you don't know what the heck a kernel
is, you *really* shouldn't be doing that. Would you really be doing the
world a favor if you created a button to run "make xconfig" and put it in
a prominent place so first-day cluebies could find it?
Also, Linux is supposed to free you up, not tie you down. The "a button
for every operation" mentality won't work here, because it would take too
many buttons. You've got to either allow doing things that don't have
buttons for them, or else reduce the number of things people are allowed
to do. Most of us prefer the former. I don't need a button for
something I only do once every six months.
But there's no one to say you nay if that's what you want to do. Write
the program you describe, make it available to the public, and see
whether it catches on.
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Condon)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING
Date: 1 Feb 2001 15:46:19 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bennetts family) wrote in
<HZ1e6.24$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Microsoft has done more than any other company to put computers into
>> the home and to make them friendly and fun to use.
>
>Probably the only thing they have done to advance the world of computers
>(and full credit to them, they did get computers out into the home).
No, I had 16-bit, multitasking Amiga 10 years before Windows 95 came out,
and they weren't the first either.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Condon)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING
Date: 1 Feb 2001 15:47:04 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>This is but a small example, but it clearly shows that Microsoft cares
>about the user
Sure they do.
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Wow, an actual survey (Linux dissatisfactions and wish-lists)
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 09:50:36 -0600
Flacco wrote:
> What do you see as the three biggest problems with Linux? (choose three)
>
> - 54% Configuring hardware/devices
I haven't done a new installation for months, but is it really so bad? It
seems to get better every time I do one, and it was almost transparent last
time I did.
> - 38% User interface shortcomings
Details? I'm pretty happy with mine.
> - 28% Installation/getting started with Linux
Since when was learning something new supposed to be painless? I'm learning to
play the lute, and I'd *love* to be an expert after one day, but the world just
doesn't work that way.
Surprise! You have to learn how to use other computer systems too! I'm
baffled when I sit down in front of the "super easy" Mac, because I'm not a Mac
user and don't have the experience that gives rise to "inutitions" about how to
do something there. That's increasingly true when I sit down in front of a
Windows system, too, because I have not used it regularly for a couple of
years, and it has changed during that time. No knowledge comes without a bit
of effort.
> - 27% Finding the software that I need
rpmfind.net, and presumably similar sites for other distros. When desperate,
there's always www.google.com
Oh, yeah. I think I recently mentioned the Linux Software Encyclopedia,
http://www.math.tu-dresden.de/~schuetze/linuxlist/. Hope he gets that search
engine working on it.
> - 26% Installing/adding software
RPM, apt, etc.
> - 24% Compatibility with Windows and/or Macintosh, generally
Compatibility as in "why don't they use standard file formats?" Or something
else? For that matter, are Windows and Macs "compatible" with each other? If
not, why should we expect Linux to be compatible with them?
> - 22% Compatibility with MS Office, specifically
Tell your MS sales rep that you want Office for Linux.
> Which three of these support services would be most useful to you?
> (choose three)
>
> - 48% One-click software installation
How do you customize something with one click? Is this a 48% vote for
one-size-fits-all? Count me out, please.
> - 41% Software update notification
Subscribe to the relevant mailing lists.
> I was surprised to find that software availability only rated 27%
Yeah, considering how that has traditionaly been the #1 FUD item. But the FUD
on that topic has been dwindling for several months, so maybe people are
figuring out that you really can get work done on Linux.
> Multiple machine admin tools rated 29%, which seems to indicate a pretty
> high percentage of systems admins in the sample.
Astute observation.
As indicated by my comments above, I wonder how carefully these people thought
before answering the survey.
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Linux Distribution
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 15:52:11 GMT
Hello All you Linux Geeks and Geekettes,
I wanted to ask a favor of all of you. If you want to take part in
creating an awesome linux distribution that is packed full of stuff
that you will ever need, please email [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the subject
line: "Linux Distribution Creation" and ask to be on the team.
FYI, this linux Distribution will be codenamed "SuperMan Linux".
Thanks
Joshua Abbott
P.S. If you want more information, please email me too.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(take out the "-no-spam" to email me)
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Linux Distribution
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 15:50:46 GMT
Hello All you Linux Geeks and Geekettes,
I wanted to ask a favor of all of you. If you want to take part in
creating an awesome linux distribution that is packed full of stuff
that you will ever need, please email [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the subject
line: "Linux Distribution Creation" and ask to be on the team.
FYI, this linux Distribution will be codenamed "SuperMan Linux".
Thanks
Joshua Abbott
P.S. If you want more information, please email me too.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(take out the "-no-spam" to email me)
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Aspects of open-source that MS will co-opt: Predictions?
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 10:00:02 -0600
Flacco wrote:
> Any predictions what kinds of OSS-like and Linux-like features / mind-sets /
> attitudes we'll see MS adopting in this way, in a (hopefully futile) attempt
> to head Linux off at the pass?
That's a tough one, because their strategy has traditionally been the polar
opposite of the OSS strategy.
They will surely co-opt the "open source" label without adopting the actual
idea; changing the definition of a term has been a traditional MS PR strategy.
I'll wager that within 2 years they'll be giving their consumer OS away for
free, and pretending that that is the same thing Linux does. (The reason I
think they'll do that is because it will be a necessary move for keeping their
Office monopoly in the face of open competition, and without a monopoly on
desktop software it will be hard for them to shore up the other half of their
monopoly. They will in effect chew off a leg in order to stay alive for a few
more years. That strategy would depend on W2K and .NET being successful, which
I rather doubt will happen, but I do think it's the strategy they'll end up
following.)
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
