Linux-Advocacy Digest #51, Volume #32 Thu, 8 Feb 01 08:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (Karel Jansens)
Re: Bill Gates and Michael Dell (Karel Jansens)
Re: IDE v. SCSI: Long-Term Review. (WAS: Crappy CDROM?) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Does Code Decay ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Karel Jansens)
Re: KDE Hell ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Does Code Decay ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Oh dear...another 1 (nearly) bites the dust... (Karel Jansens)
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Who was saying Crays don't run Linux? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: X-windows sucks..sucks...sucks!!!! (Geoff Lane)
Re: Would linux hackers like an OpenS windows? (Donn Miller)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 11:21:34 +0100
G3 wrote:
>
> in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Karel Jansens at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 2/7/01 6:20 PM:
>
> >>> 90% of the PC market.
> >>
> >> That's a stupid definition.
> >
> > Not even that.
>
> Um 90% of the PERSONAL COMPUTER market is most assuredly CONSUMERS they are
> very much varied, from people who know a LOT about what they're buying to
> people who have never used a MOUSE before.
>
Again, what do you call the remaining 10%?
> Until ALL of those people can open a shrink wrapped copy of linux and
> install it with AT MOST 10% of them having ANY problems then it is not a
> consumer OS. Currently at least 50% WOULD have problems.
You are not defining a "consumer OS" above; you are defining an
easy-to-install OS.
Let's get this straight: I do not contest your claim that linux is
(currently?) harder to install than Windows (others have, on the basis
that the market segment you continue to refer to as "the consumers"
have rarely had any experience at all in installing an O/S, so it
would be hard to know if an install from scratch of Windows is indeed
easier than linux. But, like I said, I grant you your claim); I
contest your claim that the market segment which does not want to
tinker with PC's innards should be equaled to "the consumers".
Linux is addressing a different market segment from Windows or MacOS.
That this segment is smaller is essentially meaningless; the only
important question is: How well is linux doing in its own segment? You
might find the answer to that question rather disconcerting if you
were to have set your hopes on the continuing success of Windows. In
fact, if what you state above is true (that 50% of the Windows target
segment would have problems installing linux) then that would mean
that linux has now a serious opening into _half_ the Windows market
segment. That's not even disconcerting, that means it's BPT (Big Panic
Time <TM>) for Microsoft.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget linux." Zoomm!
==============================
------------------------------
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 11:32:03 +0100
G3 wrote:
>
> in article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Karel Jansens at
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 2/7/01 6:19 PM:
>
> >> 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.
>
> I was referring to the "consumer market" when the person asked for a
> clarification of what I meant by consumer. The "consumer market" referring
> to the average, non professional Person Computer user. That would include
> everyone who owns a personal computer at home that doesn't use it
> exclusively for business. That means COMMODORE 64 users are part of the
> consumer market.
>
> Obviously anyone who consumes goods is a consumer, and thus I suppose if we
> actually use the dictionary definition of consumer then I suppose any os
> would be a consumer OS, since they are all in one way or another operated by
> consumers.
>
> I think however that I'll stick to well known industry standard definitions,
> having worked for 6 different Mac publications I think I'm a pretty good
> authority on what is and isn't a "consumer OS" and linux is most certainly
> NOT.
If you want to discuss marketing aspects of operating systems, you
might at least want to talk about the right things. Marketing doesn't
care about "the consumer"; to them that's just another word for
"prey".
If we are going to compare the commercial success of different
operating systems, we must first establish what the marketing goals of
those operating systems are, i.e. what market segment they are
targeted on. Once we've got that straightened out, we should compare
relative sizes of the different market segments and finally calculate
market penetration for each operating system. Only then can we tell
with at least a shimmer of authority which operating system seems to
be better taylored towards its own segment (and even then we still
have to factor in extraordinary conditions, such as monopolies, free
software and hardware dependencies).
Flame-inducing battle-cries like: "Linux is not a consumer-OS!" might
be nice for your average Usenet fight, but they do not really help.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget linux." Zoomm!
==============================
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IDE v. SCSI: Long-Term Review. (WAS: Crappy CDROM?)
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 07:19:42 -0500
Bloody Viking wrote:
>
> 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.
No... I mean that the IDE bus protocol is absolute CRAP compared to SCSI.
The reason it's limited to two devices is because even ONE device easily
floods the entire bus.
The main reason is that an IDE device stays on the bus for the entire
time that it's doing it's read/write operation,...INCLUDING the seek-time
in between initial I/O request and once it actually gets carried out.
In contrast, SCSI disks take an initial r/w request, and then disconnect
from the bus....do the head seek, and then re-connect to the bus, and
ask then either ask for the data to be written, or send the data that
was read.
During that disconnect time, OTHER devices on the same bus can do their
own data transfers and I/O initializations.
Compared to sending a few 1k data blocks...which takes under a millisecond
on a SCSI bus....the typical head seek takes 5-15 milliseconds.
>
> : 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.
>
On the LoseDOS machine, I use IDE disks, because LoseDOS is completely
unable to handle multiple disk accesses simultaneously....but on the Linux
machine...all of the main "active" disks are SCSI. I only use IDE for
things like Jaz drives, etc. on the Linux box...and as a cheap,
low-performance
place to hold not-used-very-often "archive" stuff like MP3's.
> --
> 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.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Code Decay
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 07:25:53 -0500
Bloody Viking wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> : How can you be sure?
>
> : I dreamed up the same concept in junior high...simply put the components in
> : diplomatic pouches....and slowly build them in country. Or smuggle them to
> : an agent living in the country using frogmen doing beach visits.
>
> That's the Johnny Cash approach, one piece at a time. (: While we allegedly
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That was pretty funny.
> abandoned the briefcase nuke, you can never know if we planted some Johnny
> Cash nukes in good spots. A drawback to the Johnny Cash approach is that "some
> assembly required" factor. While assembly itself isn't too big a problem (you
> just train the agent) all the parts have to get there. For a successful
> Operation Johnny Cash, parts count has to be kept small to lessen the hazard
> of discovery.
>
> Now, an "Operation Johnny Cash" plot could have been used at any time to "get"
> Castro, a CIA priority during the cold war. The agent could have been trained
> to get household stuff to make explosives for a conventional Johnny Cash bomb
> to waste Castro or Saddam. But such explosions never happened. This puts our
> briefcase nukes into a quantum cat catagory, we can't know, while Russian
> briefcase nukes are known to exist and some being at large.
With conventional explosives, you have to get physically quit close to
the target.
With suitcase nukes, you nearly need to get in the same city (although,
it works better if you can set it off at the top of a skyscraper.)
>
> Intrigue can be so, well, intriguing...
>
> --
> 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.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 13:25:33 +0100
Ian Davey wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Geoffrey Tobin
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> but I can't remember who coined it now:
> >> "the existance of God disproves the existance of God, therefore God
> >> does not exist".
> >
> >That's an invalid argument, because its premise is false.
> >
> >If you want to find a logical foundation for your atheism
> >you will have to do much better than to commence by giving
> >credit to arrant falsehoods.
>
> To put it simply, the logic behind it is this: "If God doesn't need a
> creator then neither does the universe". To believe in God you have to believe
> that something can exist without being created (i.e. God) so that applies
> equally to the Universe.
>
> One simple question: If God doesn't need a creator, then why does the
> Universe need one?
>
Sorry for budding in, but isn't that merely shifting the problem?
Aren't you essentially turning the universe into a non-created entity?
And if not, could you explain - in a clear and non-ambiguous way (*) -
how the universe came into being?
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget linux." Zoomm!
==============================
(*) I can't help but noticing that the more cosmology advances, the
more its publications begin to resemble Genesis (there should really
be a smiley here, but then again...).
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: KDE Hell
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 07:27:36 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On 7 Feb 2001 07:36:56 GMT, Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >: Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] () in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 05 Feb
> >:>On Sun, 04 Feb 2001 21:34:00 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >: [...]
> >:>>> IT'S THEIR JOB TO BE IN CONTROL.
> >:>>
> >:>>They were. From all I've seen, its most likely the religious nuts
> >:>>torched their own compound.
> >:>
> >:> CS cannisters that are a fire hazzard certainly don't hurt
> >:> either.
> >:>
> >:> If it weren't a government agency engaging in that sort of
> >:> behaivor, the perpetrators would have been held liable for
> >:> the fire damages.
> >
> >: Oh, for god's sake. Because something, ANYTHING, the ATF had was
> >: flammable, the fact that the Branch Davidians torched their own compound
> >: is somehow a "get out of jail free" card?
> >
> >: No, I think it more likely that if you didn't have that polemic, there'd
> >: be some other reason to insist it was the government that acted
> >: improperly, regardless of who might have acted unwisely.
> >
> >Has it occurred to any of the people in this argument that maybe,
> >just maybe, it's possible that *both* the Davidians and the ATF
>
> In terms of civil liability, if the ATF were civilians
> they would have been held jointly and severally liable.
> IOW, the vagueness of the situation would lead to BOTH
> parties being considered at fault.
Actually, governmental immunity does NOT apply for illegal acts.
Serving a conventional warrant as a "no knock" warrant is an illegal act.
If I were one of the survivors, I would have the Waco county prosecutor
looking at filing charges against all of those assholes.
>
> >were guilty, and that neither side was in "the right"? Perhaps
> >the madman *did* torch his own followers out of some demented
> >sense of religious martyrdom, but the ATF shouldn't have put him
> >under the siege in the first place. There's nothing illegal about
> >being a moron who thinks he's some kind of god.
>
> OTOH, you hope that law enforcement personel with fully
> automatic weapons would exercise a little bit more sense
> than they tend to do.
>
> --
>
> Common Standards, Common Ownership.
>
> The alternative only leads to destructive anti-capitalist
> and anti-democratic monopolies.
> |||
> / | \
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Code Decay
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 07:28:53 -0500
Bloody Viking wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> : What's the original electronics adage?
>
> If you want to build an amplifier, build an oscillator. If you want to build
> an oscillator, build an amplifier.
OK
>
> That old adage is a function of Murphy's Law as it applies to radio equipment.
> Often, a ham building an oscillator often ends up with a device that doesn't
> oscillate until he gets it right, and often RF amplifiers have parasitic
> oscillation.
Thanks...without the explanation, it would have been equally murky...but
yeah, that makes sense.
Doesn't transfer well to nuke power/bombs, though.
>
> --
> 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.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Oh dear...another 1 (nearly) bites the dust...
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 13:32:10 +0100
Jeepster wrote:
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/16736.html
>
> Alas poor suse...
Guess I'll have to go Debian after all.
See? That's the difference with proprietary software: If Microsoft
goes belly-up (*), what distribution should Windows users change to?
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget linux." Zoomm!
==============================
(*) Just to prevent useless arguing: Saying "It'll never happen", is
not a valid reply.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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, 08 Feb 2001 07:32:00 -0500
Chad Myers wrote:
>
<snip happens>
>
> The "next big thing" seems to be a problem. A major project comes up,
> attracts a lot of developers, then something else comes up, some of
> the developers leave for that, then another project, some more leave
> for that. By the time it's all said and done, you don't have enough
> new developers joining the cause and all the existing developers are
> strapped so thin that nothing ever really gets accomplished. A bunch
> of half-developed beta-ware is all that sees the light of day. No
> one trusts it because it's so buggy and untested (due to lack of
> resources) that no one uses it.
>
> It's only a matter of time, really.
Sounds like Windows.
>
> -Chad
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Who was saying Crays don't run Linux?
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 07:38:21 -0500
Bloody Viking wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> : That would require a HUGE chip....and, silicon crystal faults being what
> : they are, probably make for a super-low yield....
>
> Not necessarily. You could have the shitload of CPU chips ganged together for
> the ridiculously paralleled data bus. A system like that could handle huge
Ah yes..."bit-slice" concepts.
> integers in one CPU cycle. All the CPUs would execute the same instruction all
> at once, acting like one big 64K*8 bit chip. One extra pin would be needed for
> a carry and borrow feature per CPU to handle the giant integers.
Ah..actually, that's about a 20-year old idea
It's called SIMD Parallel Processing. Single Instruction, Multiple Data.
They were working real hard on it when I was at Purdue (1983-88)...
PASM project (Purdue All Star Machine) using a massive amount of 68000
chips. They never did achieve the goals.
One of the profs (young guy who I used to hang out with some times)
pointed out that SIMD has a fatal flaw (can't remember exactly what
it is), which really fucks up the concept and makes it impossible
(as far as we know) to write a reliable compiler.
>
> The obvious application of a technology like this would of course be to crunch
> numbers to find big primes, but like someone putting two numbers onto one
> calculator with creative 0 use in between numbers, this 64K bus could add up a
> shitload of numbers, say to add the interest payment to bank accounts in a
> batch process. The obvious application for a 64K data bus would be for big
> number crunching for scientific use. My bet is that this would work best for
> 64-bit CPUs like a DEC Alpha CPU but modified with carry/borrow pin and CISC
> instead of RISC.
>
> Memory and especially disk management would be a nightmare for the design
> team.
This is why SIMD has fallen to the wayside and MIMD (Multiple Instruciton,
Multiple Data...i.e. basically "independant" CPUs working off of the same
main memory store) is the only multi-CPU architecture you see today.
>
> --
> 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.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Geoff Lane)
Subject: Re: X-windows sucks..sucks...sucks!!!!
Date: 8 Feb 2001 12:38:01 GMT
As one of the authors of X windows says, "Anyone who wants to write their
own industry standard networked windowing system is free to do so."
--
/\ Geoff. Lane. /\ Manchester Computing /\ Manchester /\ M13 9PL /\ England /\
I'm not schizophrenic. It's this guy beside me!
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 07:39:50 -0500
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Would linux hackers like an OpenS windows?
Steve Mading wrote:
> Try/Catch exception handling doesn't exist, and so that's an
> area where gotos still have a very valid place in C.
I thought that was usually implemented as setjmp/longjmp in C.
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
