Linux-Advocacy Digest #47, Volume #32 Thu, 8 Feb 01 02:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: ERIK FUNKENBUSH CAN'T TELL US ***WHAT*** .NET IS (Sgt Detritus)
Re: The Wintrolls (J Sloan)
Re: how come you have to reboot when you change DNS servers in Windows? (Ben Reiter)
New get paid to surf program! (UnionWay)
Re: Linux is INFERIOR to Windows ("Hugh Jass")
Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: ERIK FUNKENBUSH CAN'T TELL US ***WHAT*** .NET IS (sfcybear)
Re: LinuxWorld Trip Report (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: "Linux is Going Down" says Microsoft (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Microsoft vs Reality (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: MS executives at LinuxWorld Expo (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: MS executives at LinuxWorld Expo (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: The Wintrolls ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Sun vs. MS ("Robert Morelli")
Re: Wy Linux will/is failing on the desktop (Osugi)
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) (spam)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Sgt Detritus <[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: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 04:39:44 GMT
<snip>
> >He has discussed it intelligently on several occasions.
>
> Well, he's discussed it. And as much as its hard to accuse Aaron or
> Charlie of being icons of intellectualism, they've shown much more
> intelligence in understanding .NET (hint: its a marketing ploy and a
> 'cool idea' hook, not a technology) than Erik has.
>
> >He refuses to tell you guys because your ignorant AND arrogant at
the same
> >time.
>
> No, he refuses to "tell us" because he cannot. Microsoft themselves
> cannot explain what .NET is. They can say a lot of things about it,
but
> just what the hell "it" is is simply not possible given their
> requirements. The first requirement, and the killer, is to avoid
using
> the phrase 'an attempt to extend the illegal monopoly'; since that's
> about all .NET is, they're screwed coming out of the gate.
I just spent some time lurking in the darkend halls in the bowel's of
the infested pit known as www.insidemicrosoft.net (sorry, I'm tired and
getting a bit carried away). I read a big chunk of Bill Gates' speech
to investors and his article that appeared in Fortune(?) magazine.
I will now explain .NET to the best of my ability (since Chad and Erik
refuse)
"Lets find a way to make me richer. I like the idea of that bluetooth
wireless networking stuff. since that's all hardware and we know
nothing about it, we'll just release a lot of press about it in general
terms so we look like we know whats going on. Next, lets parrot a lot
of what AT&T has been going on about for years. You know, all that
stuff about people getting information when and where they need it.
It'll be kind of like a politician talking about taxes. We look good,
and we still don't have to know what's really going on. Now we need to
make our good little engineers working on something that does exist.
It won't work when we release it, but the first days of sales will pay
for the cost of all the patches. How can we do this? Hey, let's
embrace and extend XML. Sun thumped us last time on the whole Java
thing, but with initial sales of Whistler to all the suckers out there,
we can buy better lawyers. Maybe if I add to it the amoumt of money I
can scrounge out of my couch cushions, I might be able to get a good
enough lawyer that I can patent 1's and 0's like I've always wanted.
I'm done for now, but after I torture a few more of those vendors from
the last Las Vegas convention, I should have a few more useless ideas
to throw into the mix. I'm going home to watch my favorite episode of
Star Trek now. You know, the one with the Borg...."
<snip>
> Indeed. So with all that information, you figure you'd sock puppets
> have a more succinct and specific idea of what it is, wouldn't you? I
> guess we can presume Microsoft's sock-puppet briefings have been as
> vague on the idea as those thousands of web pages are.
Many of those web pages praising .NET remind me uncomfortably of many
of Bill Clinton's forays into the realm of double-speak. "Talk for 45
minutes and say nothing of substance"
--
Any man agitated enough to lift a 300lb. ape
without noticing is a man with way too much on
his mind.
~~Terry Pratchett, Guards, Guards~~
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Wintrolls
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 05:10:57 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> > So, why not stick with RPM 3?
>
> Because I needed RPM 4 to install XFree86 4.0.2 to try and fix my video card
> problem.
Eh?
So, download xfree 4.0.2 from xfree.org - what on
earth does that have to do with your version of rpm?
> > All rpm packages contain tarballs, so that's nonsense.
>
> No, all RPM packages do not contain tarballs. Where do you get this form?
> SRPM's include source, not RPM's.
Yes, of course I meant all SRPMS, good catch.
jjs
------------------------------
From: Ben Reiter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: how come you have to reboot when you change DNS servers in Windows?
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 00:16:53 -0500
In article <FBQf6.3523$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "jtnews" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I was trying to experiment with
> > various networking options in windows
> > 98se and for each little different
> > configuration like changing a DNS server
> > I had to reboot windows. Why is that?
>
> The reason is not quite as difficult as you might imagine. The 9x TCP/IP
> stack initializes at boot, and once initialized it can't be changed.
I can't think of any reason this should be necessary, nor any reason why
it couldn't have been fixed in 98, 98se, etc.
The OS should handle DNS lookups (I'm using this as a network operations
example since it's used in the original question). A simple call to
WinGetAddrByName(name) (example; I don't know the winsock APIs) should
return the IP of the name based entirely on the name the OS is using. I
can't think of any other modern OS that can't switch DNS servers without
shutting down power and completely reloading the OS and all applications.
Could someone with more experience in Windows programming, maybe even MS
OS design, show me a reason why this change requires a restart? Or,
rather, why the TCP/IP stack, 'once initialized it can't be changed'?
\Ben
--
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher regard
those who think alike than those who think differently" - Nietzche
"Think Different" - Apple
My address above has no spamproofing - spam me, and I'll get your throwaway
account cancelled, guaranteed.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (UnionWay)
Date: 08 Feb 2001 05:35:31 GMT
Subject: New get paid to surf program!
This web site is very good! They pay cash! I got my check already!
http://www.linkvantage.com/signup.asp?referrer=unionway
------------------------------
From: "Hugh Jass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Linux is INFERIOR to Windows
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 05:38:04 GMT
hell, where I work we're still running some PDP 11's to control our
manufacturing machines :-)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:95o5q7$gp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Stuart R. Fuller
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Lincoln Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > : Probably true if you consider Solaris or VMS, but who can afford the
> > : price of the software and specialized hardware?
>
> > : On Mon, 15 Jan 2001 00:39:38 GMT, "Stuart R. Fuller"
> > : <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > :>Charlie Ebert <charlie> wrote:
> > :>: Linux has the BEST uptime record of any operating system in the
> > :>: world.
> > :>
> > :>Well, between Windows and Linux, that might be true. However, there's
more to
> > :>the world than Linux and Windows.
> > :>
> > :> Stu
>
> > I was specifically referring to VMS. One site had an uptime of 18 years
(yes,
> > 18 YEARS). Longer than since Linux was invented!
>
> That machine must have been very useful after 18 years. :P
>
>
>
>
> -----.
>
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 05:55:40 GMT
Thats probably the biggest crock of shit I have ever read! My first
computer was an Amiga 500 (1988-89), and the only piece of software made
by Microsoft was AmigaBASIC. From what I remember, I knew alot of
people who had this as their first computer or the Atari (which was very
similar to it), hence, your argument that Microsoft bought computers in
homes was bullshit. When I got my Amiga 500, the PeeCee was still using
monocrome monitors, pc-speaker etc. If it weren't for the shit
advertisement and marketing by Commodore, they would still be around,
and Windows would have never gotten off the ground.
Matthew Gardiner
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Microsoft has done more than any other company to put computers into
> the home and to make them friendly and fun to use.
>
> Linux on the other hand seems to want to turn the clock back on
> computing and put us back in the early 1990's again.
>
> As an example, take the latest Windows Media Player which is V7.x.
> After delaying my upgrade til MS got the bugs out, which have all been
> fixed, I finally got around to downloading and using it.
>
> Of course it was so simple to download and install because the link is
> right there on the MS home page. Upon starting up the Media Player it
> was obvious that a lot of effort went into the graphics and ergonomics
> of this piece of software. Even with the default skin, it looks smooth
> and crisp and it is very pleasing on the eyes. The visualizations are
> particularly nice, with the kid drawing solo dance being my favorite.
> My kids love this thing and have been trying out the various skins and
> so forth and just plain having a fun time with it.
>
> Now contrast this with Linux XMMS, about the best player (and that's
> all it does) that Linux has to offer.
> Take a good look at how boxy and shitty it looks.
> Look at the skins, most of which are too dark to even read the
> lettering.
>
> Boring, not to mention the help system, which you will need because
> this piece of junk is a jumble of controls scattered all over the
> place.
>
> That's of course assuming you can traverse some ftp site and figure
> out what you need to install and run it.
>
> Nope sorry.
>
> This is but a small example, but it clearly shows that Microsoft cares
> about the user and putting some fun in computers.
> Linux cares about.......? Well who even knows....
>
>
>
> Flatfish
> Why do they call it a flatfish?
> Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 05:58:49 GMT
The Acorn had very good processors (ARM RISC), which is now being used
in Cell-phones, web pads and other thingys that require CPU's with low
power requirements. Also, the RISC-OS, although not exactly randy,
dandy eye candy, it got the job done with minimum fuss and the OS
overhead was fork all.
Matthew Gardiner
Nigel wrote:
>
>
>> No, I had 16-bit, multitasking Amiga 10 years before Windows 95 came out,
>> and they weren't the first either.
>
>
> What machine was first with this feature then, Sinclair QL perhaps?
>
> Also, the Acorn Archimedes had 32bit multitasking 8 years before win95
> came out (and had a very similar taskbar idea to the one in win95).
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft is FUN and Linux is BORING
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 06:04:43 GMT
And what musical instrument do you play?
Matthew Gardiner
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Feb 2001 03:53:26 +0200, "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>> Really? On Win2K, stick a Audio CD to the CD drive, if you aren't admin, WMP
>> will crash.
>
>
> It works fine here for a standard user (not Admin group) with Win2k
> and SP1.
>
>
>
>> Solution, run WMP as admin, let it "know" the CD, then close, and start
>> playing as normal user, now it will work.
>
>
> It works fine for me?
>
>
>> I love 2K & I love windows, but please don't make such outragous statements
>> on such trivial matters.
>
>
> Trivial to a programmer maybe.
> Non trivial to a musician,
>
>
>
>
> Flatfish
> Why do they call it a flatfish?
> Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
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: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 05:59:44 GMT
In article <gIog6.121$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:95slo2$d6h$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > 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?
>
> I did answer. The answer wasn't good enough for Aaron, and he refuses
to
> acknowledge it. He wants a book rather than a paragraph and I'm not
going
> to do that. I've already written a paragraph description.
>
Perhaps you did not say anything in that paragraph worth note.
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: LinuxWorld Trip Report
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 06:20:12 GMT
In New Zealand there was quite a big Linux convention not too long
ago...it got a hell of alot more attention than the Microsoft sponsored
events, and yet again, I will say, New Zealand - The Unix Haven -
Intelligent people making intelligent decisions.
Matthew Gardiner
Sponge wrote:
> Well I wasted today watching the Geek in his native environment.
> God, the STENCH of Linux was everywhere but I couldn't tell if it was the
> operating system or the geeks, dorks, nerds, propeller-heads that were in mass
> attendance at the Javits Center.
>
> They are going to have to flush the entire place down with bleach after this
> expo leaves and they may never get the stench out.
>
> Don't these Geeks Bathe?
>
> Anyway, nothing new on the Linux front.
> Same old shit Linux.
>
> IBM gave me a gym bag and an umbrella.
>
> Back to better things like Windows, which at least works.
>
> Amy is burning the clothes we wore today because we can't get the stink of Linux
> out of them.
>
> Sponge
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: "Linux is Going Down" says Microsoft
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 06:22:02 GMT
oooooooooooooooo, Microsoft has spoken, I am really shaking in my boots,
scared of the almighty NT. 10 years NT has been around, and still it
has not defeated UNIX. Give up Microsoft, you will never win.
Matthew Gardiner
Adam Warner wrote:
> "MS Exec: Linux is Going Down"
>
> http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,41527,00.html
>
> For the intellectually challenged, the mere act of me posting this piece
> doesn't mean I support Microsoft's stance.
>
> But I am enjoying the new refreshingly frank Microsoft. The quotes are even
> better today than a few days ago.
>
> I proposed that Microsoft might be running scared a few days ago. To
> continue the analogy, I now think we're in supersonic territory :-)
>
> Regards,
> Adam
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft vs Reality
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 06:25:15 GMT
I have been in the UNIX world for around 10 years (if you include Amiga
in the equation), and I have peared over the garden fence at the Windows
crowd..still bicking and moaning like old hens...I'm happily sitting
hear, running my copy of FreeBSD 4.1 which has not needed a boot since
it's installation (about a week, give or tack a few hours). Sorry
Microsoft, you have not won over this user.
Matthew Gardiner
mmnnoo wrote:
> Microsoft is the best example of a company that both a) thinks it's
> protecting itself by by not revealing information, and which b) conceals
> information under the assumption that it will simply confuse all of their
> ignorant customers.
>
> Microsoft's help and troubleshooting services are based on these two
> premises. Unfortunately, all companies have these tendencies because
> avoiding blame and appealing to the lowest common denominator are
> usually good for the company.
>
> By contrast, the honesty and openness of open-source software sharply
> reveal the phony veneer so carefully applied to commercial software (and
> all other commercial products). It may never be the case that all
> software is free, but there is enough out there to whet one's appetite
> for reality.
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS executives at LinuxWorld Expo
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 06:26:24 GMT
Maybe Microsoft was at Linuxworld to see if they can steal the secret
source-code to Linux :)
Matthew Gardiner
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Is anybody here going to Linuxworld? Anybody have any idea if the MS
> execs are going to try to pull any sort of this FUD nonsense over there?
>
> http://www.zdnet.com/eweek/stories/general/0,11011,2680345,00.html
>
> (Incidentally, my favourite quote is about how major companies are
> rethinking their strategy vis-a-vis Linux, such as Corel. Hm... That
> wouldn't have anything to do with that big old infusion of cash into
> Corel, thanks to MS, would it?
>
> Naaaah.)
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS executives at LinuxWorld Expo
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 06:29:01 GMT
Maybe what he is saying is that each OS has its good and bad points,
however, with Windows NT, there are more bad points than good (thats my
conclusion).
Matthew Gardiner
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in <95aeu4$h7f$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
>> Is anybody here going to Linuxworld? Anybody have any idea if the MS
>> execs are going to try to pull any sort of this FUD nonsense over there?
>>
>> http://www.zdnet.com/eweek/stories/general/0,11011,2680345,00.html
>
>
> "While we are threatened by the Linux business model, where companies give
> away free software, we are not at all worried about that operating system
> from a technological standpoint," Miller told eWEEK before heading off to
> the conference. "There are no earth-shattering technological innovations in
> Linux -- actually, there's a lot less than can be found in the Windows and
> Unix platforms."
>
> Interesting.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Wintrolls
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 06:40:01 GMT
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:ONog6.123$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > > For instance, with the FreeBSD kernel, there are internal options for
> each
> > > processor that's supported. By removing options for the 386 and
others,
> you
> > > increase the efficiency of the kernel.
> >
> > So how is that in any way different from the Linux kernel?
>
> Here's how you configure and compile a FreeBSD kernel:
>
> cd to /sys/i386/conf, copy GENERIC to whatever name you choose. Edit the
> new file and comment out or add options that are fully documented in the
> LINT file, cd to /usr/src and type make buildkernel.
>
> Configuring your linux kernel is MUCH more involved.
I never understood why you should have to deal with the obscure and
arbitrary devices names that *bsd uses in this process. It is much easier
to pick the descriptive choices that you see with the Linux 'make xconfig'
step.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Robert Morelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sun vs. MS
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 21:23:40 -0600
In article <95rllo$l4v$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Patrick McAllister"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just thought this was funny....I liked his responses to MS, although I
> personally can't vouch for their accuracy.....
>
> http://www.sun.com/dot-com/realitycheck/headsup010205.html
I've always admired Sun for one thing. They're the only traditional
Unix vendor that has consistently gone after MS head-on and never
copped out. Compare them to the likes of, say, DEC. DEC
copped out already in the face of NT 3.1. It shows you where
cowardice gets you. DEC, once a titan, is now a humble subsidiary
of a PC company. By contrast, Sun is more powerful than ever,
and is seriously challenging/damaging Microsoft's power.
I think Microsoft is probably genuinely scared right now. It's
staking a lot of its future on .Net, which seems a fairly
dubious proposition. In the meantime, Sun has a 5 year head start
with Java.
Microsoft probably hoped Sun would ignore .Net and just keep
pushing its traditional Java technologies; I think the gist
of the 15 questions is to cast them in that role. However, Sun
is not ignoring .Net; it is starting to unveil equivalent technologies
that will be more open than Micorosoft's. I don't care about
.Net myself, and I'm not sure Sun really does either. (Does
anyone?) But Sun is closing at least one door in Microsoft's face
this way.
In response, MS goes on a publicity offensive with this list
of 15 technical questions. The questions, in my opinion, are
fairly weak. I would say they have less grounds than the
Linux Myths, for instance. My guess is that MS probably
hoped that Sun would just ignore them and they could have a heyday
convincing naive journalists that something was seriously flawed
in Sun's strategy. They've gotton away with that sort of
manipulation of the press in the past, but not with Sun. Sun
shot right back and cut the questions to ribbons, just like
they shot right back (and recently finally prevailed) when MS
starting its campaign to `pollute' Java.
I like Sun's style. They aren't going to take a nap while MS
tries to get away with this .Net BS.
------------------------------
From: Osugi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Wy Linux will/is failing on the desktop
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 06:53:37 GMT
In article <95sd2i$3mp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"ono" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> check out http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2001/January/os.html
> linux 0% , windows 91% (and linux hardly beats Win 3.x :-).)
> Maybe the rest of linux users is busy compiling kernels or
> the yet have to figure out how to get onto the internet.
I just took a quick glance, but that doesn't look like a very reliable
site. What specifically was it measuring? How did they do it? Are they
applicable to the topic under consideration?
--
Osugi Sakae
I will not be filed, numbered, briefed or debriefed.
I am not a number, I am a free man. -The Prisoner
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: spam <[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 23:09:58 -0800
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001 21:51:37 -0600, "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> 1. Binary portability precludes use of platform specific features. Yet
>> MS is claiming that a deficiency of Java is the lack of platform
>> specific features. How is .NET going to support platform specific
>> features and yet be platform neutral?
>
>One way is with managed/unmanaed code. In VC++ 7, you can mix managed and
>unmanaged code, delegating the unmanaged code to platform specific or
>computationally intensive tasks. This means porting only the parts that are
>native for a new platform.
>
>> 2. By controlling the specification of .NET, MS puts itself in a
>> position to squeeze out competing platforms that it doesn't like.
>> Again, this is exactly what MS claims about Java, that by controlling
>> the standard Sun is using it as a weapon against MS. That MS has got
>> ECMA to rubber-stamp their spec means little, and I think you know it.
>> What's really different here?
>
>If it means so little, why did Sun refuse to let ECMA "rubber stamp" Java?
Why isn't MS submitting the CLR to ECMA?
>
>> 3. Given #1 and #2 above, why should anybody who isn't already an MS
>> slave support .NET? All the FUD that MS has put out about Java applies
>> equally to .NET even if you leave out all the licensing nonsense.
>
>Not even close. MS is putting an orders of magnitude more effort, money,
>and skill into .NET than Sun ever did for Java in the entire 5 years of it's
>history.
Evidence please?
----
Glenn Davies
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
