Linux-Advocacy Digest #40, Volume #32 Wed, 7 Feb 01 19:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (Josh McKee)
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Wy Linux will/is failing on the desktop ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (Josh McKee)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (Josh McKee)
Re: ERIK FUNKENBUSH CAN'T TELL US ***WHAT*** .NET IS (sfcybear)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (Josh McKee)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (Josh McKee)
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) (Giuliano Colla)
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) (Giuliano Colla)
Re: IDE v. SCSI: Long-Term Review. (WAS: Crappy CDROM?) (Bloody Viking)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (Karel Jansens)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (Karel Jansens)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (Karel Jansens)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Josh McKee)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 23:18:58 GMT
On Wed, 07 Feb 2001 04:05:23 GMT, G3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Josh McKee at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>wrote on 2/6/01 8:09 PM:
>
>> In other words the problem was the result of something you did and not
>> a failing of Linux itself?
>
>Linux not being able to recognize CS mode on IDE devices is MY fault?
You didn't mention anything about CS in your previous post. Your post
suggested that your problem was related to improperly set jumpers.
>Sounds to me its the stupid "worth less than shareware" support structure
>for linux.
As it is, you don't know what solved your problem. It is interesting
that the problem went away after you did some kind of re-configuring.
Which would suggest that the problem was incorrect configuration and
not the OS.
>>>>> How exactly did you get the install-CD going if the CD-ROM wasn't
>>>>> recognized?
>>>>
>>>> Uhm. The BIOS finds the CD, boots from the El Torito floppy image, and then
>>>> that image loads a kernel which doesn't probe the CD? This can't happen
>>>> to various users of various OS's more than a few thousand times a week.
>>>
>>>> Linux may not be as bad as that guy thought it was, but you sure aren't
>>>> impressing anyone by "debunking" a story which is fairly common and
>>>> well-understood.
>>>
>>> The install was treacherous, and for little benefit. Work already has
>>> serveral linux servers I can telnet to, I have yet to find a good reason to
>>> waste on e of my own machines on it. I do mostly graphic intensive stuff,
>>> 90% mac based with Windows mostly around for compatibility testing.
>>
>> IMO, unix is not a general purpose OS. It is an excellent backend
>> server OS. And that's what we were discussing in the initial thread. I
>> don't recall Aaron ever claiming that unix was an excellent
>> workstation OS. It's a strawman that you created.
>
>Aaron has said multiple times that Linux is a CONSUMER OS! *I* have said it
>is a fine server OS, and cannot see why any general purpose user would waste
>the time and energy setting it up for personal use.
Please provide a quote of Aaron making such a claim.
>>> Still these linux idiots presume that just because all they do is write perl
>>> scripts all day to processes text files that no one else does anything
>>> requiring REAL graphics capabilities, like multiple monitors, color
>>> correction, video editing, image editing. Etc.
>>
>> A strawman. We were discussing server work, not general workstation
>> work.
>
>We were NOT discussing server, at all, ever. The whole thing came up as a
>comparison to the consumer friendly ness of Windows 9.X.
There was a small portion of "Unknown Posters"message where Windows
9x/ME was mentioned. The main points of this particular thread have
centered around server work. The fact that someone mentioned something
about Windows 9x/ME doesn't change the main point of the thread.
Still, I don't see where Aaron claimed that unix, let alone Linux, was
a consumer ready OS. Please feel free to post quotations and I will be
happy to offer you an apology.
Josh
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[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: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 23:26:45 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:63Pf6.560$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Thanks but no thanks...Windows 2000 Professional is the end of the
> line
> > > for
> > > > me. Whistler is totally unnecessary and .NET will NEVER pollute one of
> my
> > > > machines. It's about as transparent a money vacuum as DIVX was. We
> will
> > > > neither utilize it nor develop for it - period. It is something to be
> > > > viewed with disdain, not anticipation. Only the severely short-sighted
> > > > would actually welcome such a system.
> > >
> > > Spoken just like someone without a clue about what .NET is.
> > >
> > > (HINT: The subscription based services are only a tiny part of it, and
> > > something that very few .NET programs will take advantage of. If this
> is
> > > the only argument you can come up with, you're going to be quite
> surprised).
> >
> > OK, Erik The-laughably-named...why don't you tell us *precisely* what
> > .NET is.....
>
> That topic could fill volumes. Essentially, it's a set of services backed
> by a run-time compiled intermediate language similar to SmallTalk (not the
> syntax, but the way it works). Those services include a GUI framework
> (WinForms), Web services (ASP.NET), etc...
>
> Note that there is a difference between "software as a service" and
> "software as a subscription based service".
>
> Here's a FAQ for you to read
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?URL=/library/techart/faq111700
> .htm
That's what I got:
"The page you're looking for has been moved or removed from the site."
This, I believe is the best possible explanation of .NET, with "hands
on" experience. Thank you.
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Wy Linux will/is failing on the desktop
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 00:20:56 +0100
In article <95ri7t$545$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "MH"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > 5. Answer is StarOffice is garbage.
>
>> All office programs have been tested lately: StarOffice won.
>> It was much
> better
>> than MS-Word2000. It just takes to many system resources. I'm
>> going to
> install
>> OpenOffice. StarOffice is commercial. OpenOffice=StarOffice,
>> but then the source code is edited by everyone, just like the
>> whole Linux is made. This
> is
>> becoming THE office suite. Much lighter than StarOffice is
>> recourses, very
> much
>> more powerfull than MS-Word.
>
> Where did you read this "test"? What a complete load of BS. If
> SO was what you say, do you really think 1000's of businesses
> would be using something that costs 500$ vs. something better
> that's free? Yeah, I know, everyone else (the other 90% of the
> world) is an idiot. yeah yeah yeah. Another mlw-ism
>
Actually that was in the one of the last issues of 2000 of the
german magazine c't. They put all the major contenders of the
windows office suite market in a direct head-to-head
competition. They really tried to push performance. MS did quite
well, but only won on Excel. OTOH they were totally clobbered on
the large document test (an academic dissertation of several
hunderd pages), which would repeatably send Word crashing when
trying to do *anything*. The test was done on Office 2000 SP1.
StarOffice got a good review. Not the best of the bunch, but
very good for everyday use, and a clear winner several areas.
BTW, get off your US high horse a bit, StarOffice actually had
somewhere around 20% marketshare in Germany last time I checked.
Check http://www.heise.de
I don't have galeon running at the moment, and I'm too tired to
look it up, but I believe a summary was posted on the c't
website.
<art
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Josh McKee)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 23:36:27 GMT
On Wed, 07 Feb 2001 04:19:14 GMT, G3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Josh McKee at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>wrote on 2/6/01 7:58 PM:
>
>>
>> If it's incorrectly configured, then how is this the fault of the OS?
>
>Um windows 95, 98 and 2k ALL support that config fine.
Doesn't matter. If it is a configuration that is not supported under
Linux, then the fact that it is configured incorrectly is not the
fault of the OS.
>I'd say any would be competitors who think they can just haphazardly not
>support standard windows configs are very much at fault if they don't.
The fact that it works with Windows does mean that it is configured
correctly, or that the product meets the specification for the
standard. Windows works with a lot of non-standard hardware. Bad
criteria for judging standards compliance.
>>> Uhm. The BIOS finds the CD, boots from the El Torito floppy image, and then
>>> that image loads a kernel which doesn't probe the CD? This can't happen
>>> to various users of various OS's more than a few thousand times a week.
>>
>> I would find it highly unlikely that Linux wouldn't find his CD-ROM
>> drive if it was a standard IDE CD-ROM. Perhaps if he had a SCSI CD-ROM
>> or some unusual CD-ROM. The chances of it not recognizing a standard
>> CD-ROM drive are low, IMO.
>
>It was a standard 32X ide drive. Mitsumi if I recall. It was running in CS
>mode on the second IDE "bus" (ie the second port on the board for an ide
>cable)
That bus would be called a "controller". This is yet another example
of why I cannot put much validity into your story. You aren't even
using the correct terms. And the arguement "Linux cannot work with the
CS mode of my system" is the third reason that you've given for it
failing (after 1) It didn't work and 2) The jumpers were incorrectly
set).
As I said before, even if you did really experience these problems, I
would suspect that your hardware isn't as standardized as you think.
>>> Linux may not be as bad as that guy thought it was, but you sure aren't
>>> impressing anyone by "debunking" a story which is fairly common and
>>> well-understood.
>>
>> It is difficult to believe his story when some of the very basic items
>> weren't recognized. A keyboard? A mouse? A CD-ROM drive? Perhaps one
>> maybe two, but all three? If so, then I would say that he has some
>> unusual hardware. For the majority of installations using common,
>> standard hardware, Linux easily recognizes those three items.
>
>3 button ps/2 mouse (I wasn't too surprised it didn't find that but the ps/2
>keyboard was a surprise)
Maybe one, possibly two of these items having problems. But all three
is difficult to believe (assuming you're using standard hardware).
>> But, he later went on to say:
>>
>> "Actually if I recall specifics it wasn't detected under X-Windows, I
>> seem to recall being able to get at it from a text prompt."
>
>If you'd learn to read I've pointed out repeatedly this is the combined
>experience with TWO supposedly consumer friendly Linux releases.
If the system is improperly configured, or using non-standard
hardware, this wouldn't suprise me at all. It wouldn't suprise me if
all versions failed to work. The fact would remain that the hardware
is still misconfigured or still unsupported.
>> In order to get X up and running (IMO the most difficult part of a
>> Linux install) he had to have it installed. Which means that he had to
>> have at least the CD-ROM.
>
>After hours of fiddling with it yes. And I guarantee you the average
>consumer wouldn't even know what jumper settings ARE!
When you say "after hours of fiddling" that implies a
misconfiguration. Apparently it is supported when properly configured.
>> Regardless, I would have to question his post when he claims that the
>> CD-ROM works under the CLI and not under X. I guess it is possible,
>> but I really don't see why it would work in one and not the other.
>
>Apparently I was missing some file or something it wasn't too hard to fix
>under the CLI the Linux book I have knew it could be a problem and had it in
>the troubleshooting section so I dunno why you think its so strange.
Because X Windows has nothing to do with the CD-ROM. If you are able
to access the CD-ROM in the CLI then the operating system recognized
the CD-ROM.
Your issue may be that X Windows doesn't provide a GUI based method to
access the CD-ROM, but the problem would lie with X Windows, not the
OS. If this doesn't help you understand why I think that this
situation is strange, then I would certainly have to say that you are
unqualified to make accurate statements about unix or even Linux.
>
>> In all, his knowledge seems suspect. I can understand people having
>> problems with their systems. He might be telling the truth about all
>> of them. But I find his story difficult to believe.
>
>My story is positively normal compared with the average stories Consumers
>have. If an OS can't be installed on 99% of the computers it intends to
>support without the user needing to unplug any devices, or open the case
>then it is NOT a consumer OS.
>
>This is why OS X is going to put Linux and Windows out of business.
OS X is looking very promising. It may finally give unix the pretty
GUI that unix needs to become popular. I've got my copy on order.
Josh
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Josh McKee)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 23:37:23 GMT
On Wed, 07 Feb 2001 03:28:52 -0500, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Josh McKee wrote:
>>
>> On 06 Feb 2001 05:21:35 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Seebach) wrote:
>>
>> >In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> >Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>12x ATAPI CD-ROM not detected???
>> >>I'm not buying THAT load of horse-shit either,
>> >
>> >Then you're forgetting one of the most common PC Unix problems; most
>> >Unix-like systems politely ignore incorrectly jumpered drives - say, a
>> >slave device on a channel with no master device.
>>
>> If it's incorrectly configured, then how is this the fault of the OS?
>>
>> >>How exactly did you get the install-CD going if the CD-ROM wasn't recognized?
>> >
>> >Uhm. The BIOS finds the CD, boots from the El Torito floppy image, and then
>> >that image loads a kernel which doesn't probe the CD? This can't happen
>> >to various users of various OS's more than a few thousand times a week.
>>
>> I would find it highly unlikely that Linux wouldn't find his CD-ROM
>> drive if it was a standard IDE CD-ROM. Perhaps if he had a SCSI CD-ROM
>> or some unusual CD-ROM. The chances of it not recognizing a standard
>> CD-ROM drive are low, IMO.
>>
>> >Linux may not be as bad as that guy thought it was, but you sure aren't
>> >impressing anyone by "debunking" a story which is fairly common and
>> >well-understood.
>>
>> It is difficult to believe his story when some of the very basic items
>> weren't recognized. A keyboard? A mouse? A CD-ROM drive? Perhaps one
>> maybe two, but all three? If so, then I would say that he has some
>> unusual hardware. For the majority of installations using common,
>> standard hardware, Linux easily recognizes those three items.
>>
>> But, he later went on to say:
>>
>> "Actually if I recall specifics it wasn't detected under X-Windows, I
>> seem to recall being able to get at it from a text prompt."
>>
>> In order to get X up and running (IMO the most difficult part of a
>> Linux install) he had to have it installed. Which means that he had to
>> have at least the CD-ROM.
>>
>> Regardless, I would have to question his post when he claims that the
>> CD-ROM works under the CLI and not under X. I guess it is possible,
>> but I really don't see why it would work in one and not the other.
>
>I fail to see who the symbolic link /dev/cdrom would simultaneously
>point at the correct device when referenced by the CLI, but not
>point to the correct device when referenced by the GUI.
>
>Did he put some special code in the GUI that munged and restored the
>/dev/cdrom symbolic link every time the GUI attempted access?
Because he doesn't know what he's talking about. He thinks that X
Windows is the OS. His issue seems to be with X Windows, not the OS.
Josh
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: ERIK FUNKENBUSH CAN'T TELL US ***WHAT*** .NET IS
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 23:29:16 GMT
In article <Tshg6.6910$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > None of which indicates if Funkenbusch knows what the fuck .NET
really
> is.
> > > >
> > > > I want *HIM* to explain it.
> > >
> > > What you want is irrelevant. I've said all i'm going to say. I'm
not
> going
> > > to write a book just because *YOU* want me to. The subject is way
too
> > > comprehensive for a simple usenet post.
> >
> > Translation: Funkenbusch has absolutely NO fucking clue what .NET is
> > (of course, neither does anybody else, but that's another matter.)
>
> Translation: I'll demand something so outrageous that he won't
answer, then
> I can call him names and pretend that I am superior.
What is so outrageous about asking what .NET is thay you wont answer?
>
> Grow up Aaron.
>
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Josh McKee)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 23:40:50 GMT
On Wed, 07 Feb 2001 04:02:42 GMT, G3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> So the problem wasn't with the OS but where the video card was seated?
>> Why is this an OS problem?
>
>Um because windows 9.x and win2k had NO trouble recognizing it?
Doesn't matter. If it didn't work before you re-seated the video card,
and did work after re-seating it, I would claim that the seating of
the card was the problem, not the OS. After all, the OS didn't
magically change after you re-seated the video card did it?
>Also back before all the UNIX geeks started flaming me for letting reality
>cloud their bullshit advocacy, this whole debate began with my pointing out
>UNIX is not in any of its forms a CONSUMER OS, then I pointed out how my
>experiences had run with TWO commercial packages. Caldera didn't have
>nearly as many problems but didn't install with any of the sort of things I
>wanted Linux for so I nixed it and tried red hat.
If your hardware is incorrectly configured, improperly seated, or
unsupported, then it wouldn't matter how many versions you tried. I
wouldn't expect any of them to work.
>>>> As one who has been using Linux for a few years,
>>>> I can say that an install of say Red Hat on a recent
>>>> machine takes all of 45 minutes from booting the
>>>> install disk to a functional X desktop and full-on
>>>> network connectivity.
>>>
>>> Wow thatıs the same amount of time it took me to get win 2k to upgrade my 98
>>> drive, convert my programs (and weed out ones suspected to not work) and to
>>> reformat the drive to NTFS. No problems since either.
>>
>> Try installing Solaris on a Sparc system. You'll find out how very
>> easy Solaris is to install.
>
>How the fuck is that a consumer set up?
Where did Aaron or myself claim that it was?
Josh
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Josh McKee)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 23:41:23 GMT
On Wed, 07 Feb 2001 04:23:02 GMT, G3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Josh McKee at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>wrote on 2/6/01 7:39 PM:
>
>> Did you see the part where he said: "Installing HP-UX or Solaris is a
>> breeze"?
>>
>> Josh
>
>You mean the part where he backs up linux's being a consumer OS (which he
>stated repeatedly) by pointing out versions specifically targeted at
>servers, are easy to use?
Where?
>Yeah I caught that one all right.
Where?
Josh
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[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: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 23:42:25 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:63Pf6.560$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Thanks but no thanks...Windows 2000 Professional is the end of the
> line
> > > for
> > > > me. Whistler is totally unnecessary and .NET will NEVER pollute one of
> my
> > > > machines. It's about as transparent a money vacuum as DIVX was. We
> will
> > > > neither utilize it nor develop for it - period. It is something to be
> > > > viewed with disdain, not anticipation. Only the severely short-sighted
> > > > would actually welcome such a system.
> > >
> > > Spoken just like someone without a clue about what .NET is.
> > >
> > > (HINT: The subscription based services are only a tiny part of it, and
> > > something that very few .NET programs will take advantage of. If this
> is
> > > the only argument you can come up with, you're going to be quite
> surprised).
> >
> > OK, Erik The-laughably-named...why don't you tell us *precisely* what
> > .NET is.....
>
> That topic could fill volumes. Essentially, it's a set of services backed
> by a run-time compiled intermediate language similar to SmallTalk (not the
> syntax, but the way it works). Those services include a GUI framework
> (WinForms), Web services (ASP.NET), etc...
>
> Note that there is a difference between "software as a service" and
> "software as a subscription based service".
>
> Here's a FAQ for you to read
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?URL=/library/techart/faq111700
> .htm
On a second attempt I have been able to read the link. It appears that
your Outlook Express is unable to keep a link on a single line and it
breaks it(I checked the source, it is broken to start with). With this
further demonstration of the unattained capability of Microsoft to
master the intricacies of Internet, I'm afraid that "Microsoft's
strategy for delivering software as a service" (as they describe .NET)
fails in a couple of details. In order to deliver software you must at
least: a) Have some software to deliver. b) Have the technical
capability to deliver it. If you don't know how to write a decent Mail
client, you show some deficiencies both on a) and b).
However I thank you again. This also is a very good practical
demonstration of what .NET is. Pure crap.
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[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: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 23:48:15 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > YEAH! Everything that bad old SUN company promised to do but
> > never came thru on.
>
> Yes, such as submitting Java to ISO, and then ECMA for standardization.
>
> > Perhaps the $20 million Microsoft just agree'd to pay them for
> > *STEALING JAVA* in the first place might have had something
> > to do with that.
>
> You haven't a clue. The $20 million was to buy out their existing contract
> with Sun. Sure, they won the battle, but they lost the war. Microsoft
> can't use the Java compatible logo, but Java doesn't mean anything anymore.
Except that I was requested to enable Javascript in order to read the
Microsoft link you provided (in broken format).
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Subject: Re: IDE v. SCSI: Long-Term Review. (WAS: Crappy CDROM?)
Date: 7 Feb 2001 23:55:05 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: IDE is demon-spawn. Just as many configuration issues as SCSI,
: with no advantages. The reason IDE is dirt-cheap is because nobody
: in his right mind will pay anyting more for it.
With Linux, I've always had good luck with IDE, but of course the kernel
supports it right out of the box. SCSI isn't bad, just taking a kernel compile
at worst. You must be thinking of RAID and other technologies normally only
found on servers. If you're building servers, SCSI is definitely the way to
go, no argument there. You may as well get the better performance for your
config headache.
: If SCSI was the "standard" technology sold with PC's, then it would
: have the same low razor-thin profit margin that the "commodity" IDE
: drives are sold for.
Exactly. By now, it's a "historical constraint" type issue. Like I said in my
piece, SCSI's only drawback is price. Otherwise, it's a lot better system. If
money wasn't a problem, I would go with more SCSI, preferring that system.
--
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 00:07:55 +0100
Unknown Poster wrote:
>
> "Karel Jansens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> >
> > Define "consumer".
> >
> > --
>
> I don't know about him, but to me 'consumer' means John Q. Public
> who goes into Best Buy, or Comp USA, or any other store and
> purchases a computer that (s)he is able to take home, unbox,
> plug in, and start using.
>
> *nix isn't even close.
>
> Windows 2K/9x is closer, but you still need to look at
> a manual once in a while, and tweak a setting or three.
>
> MacOS *is* a consumer OS. That much they got right.
> The sad thing is the lack of consumer software, due to
> the small market share for the Mac.
>
So you don't consider someone who _does_ know about computers, and who
doesn't mind (and might even like) tinkering with them, a consumer?
DIY-shops don't target consumers then?
"Consumer" is such a vague and content-devoid term that it should not
be used at all in relation with product definitions. UNIX (and linux)
are indeed targeted at consumers, only *different* consumers from
those who prefer MacOS.
IMHO, this is what most FUD is based on: make a statement in which you
use meaningless terms that people nevertheless *think* have a
well-defined meaning. "Consumer" is one of those, and so is "market
share", or "de facto standards", or "user friendly".
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget Windows." Crash!
==============================
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 00:19:13 +0100
G3 wrote:
>
> in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Karel Jansens at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 2/7/01 6:02 AM:
>
> > Define "consumer".
>
> 90% of the PC market.
That's plain silly. So everyone who does not buy PC-related stuff is
not a consumer then?
And how would you label the 10% of the PC-market you don't consider
consumers?
The _only_ valid definition for a "consumer" is: "Someone who
purchases goods (s)he did not manufacture her/himself". But as far as
definitions you can do something useful with, go, that one is pretty
crappy.
You probably meant that Windows, MacOS (insofar that it can be
considered separate from the hardware) and linux are targeted at
different _market_segments_. I can understand that you would prefer
not to phrase it like that, because once we start looking how the
contenders are doing in their own segment, the picture changes
dramatically.
Agreed, Windows occupies by far the largest segment, and linux the
smallest, but linux is steadily making serious inroads into the
segments of the "competition", and the opposite is not true.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget Windows." Crash!
==============================
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,rec.games.frp.dnd
Subject: Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 00:20:16 +0100
Josh McKee wrote:
>
> On Wed, 07 Feb 2001 21:00:44 GMT, G3 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Karel Jansens at
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 2/7/01 6:02 AM:
> >
> >> Define "consumer".
> >
> >90% of the PC market.
>
> That's a stupid definition.
Not even that.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget Windows." Crash!
==============================
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
