Linux-Advocacy Digest #96, Volume #32 Sat, 10 Feb 01 09:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Interesting article (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Interesting article ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Interesting article (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux 64 bit and Windows 32 bit (CR Lyttle)
Re: You think you've got it bad ? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Karel Jansens)
Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux (CR Lyttle)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux (Michael Wieserner)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:20:08 GMT
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> "Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Chad Myers wrote:
> > >
> > > "Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Fermin Sanchez wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Peter
> > > > >
> > > > > "Peter Köhlmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >
> > > > > > OS/2 also has a quite decent implementation of TCP/IP, different
> > > > > > from that MS-shit.
> > > > >
> > > > > Which parts of MS's TCP/IP implementation don't you like? On which
> Windows
> > > > > versions? Please be more specific.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Why, is there a MS TCP/IP implementation which isn't shit? Is it still
> > > > in beta? When is it coming out? Up to now all have been one worse than
> > > > the other.
> > >
> > > Well, first we have tpc.org. We see Windows blowing away all Unixes.
> >
> > Well, I'm fed up with tpc.org. It's a site handled by a number of
> > companies to advertise their products, and it has nothing to do with
> > "independent benchmarks". Only a clueless ignorant Windows supporter
> > could stop considering its useless data.
> > Leave it aside and try with another one.
>
> Another example of "Windows won the benchmark, so the benchmark must
> suddenly be wrong".
>
No, another example of a meaningless benchmark, (cluster
against single box) that you insist to use because it's the
only way to claim a non existing superior performance of
Windows.
> It's really sad when you guys can't accept a major fact. Just because
> you don't like that Windows is the highest performing transactional
> processing OS doesn't mean that you can just throw it away.
>
I note that you carefully snip the part of the posting
showing you're absolute ignorance on the subject you're
discussing.
> You can make up a bunch of irrelevant, non-sequitor arguments
> about how clusters are somehow inferior than an all-eggs-in-one-
> underperforming-basket Unix big-iron server, arguments, but it's
> all really just that, irrelevant. Windows kicks ass, it's a big-time
> product in the Enterprise and on the desktop and Linux is no where
> to be found, despite all the claims of stability, performance,
> and enterprise readiness, it's still just a cheesy academic OS
> that has no real merits by itself.
Then can you explain why corporations which make money out
of their Internet activity are using Linux, or other good
professional servers, while only corporations using Internet
as an useless pretty face do sometimes use Windows?
Just a few names for Linux: Google , Amazon , Akamai
(hosting Doubleclick, MSNBC, NetRadio, Lycos, Reuters, CNN,
Yahoo, NBC, BBC etc. etc.)
Non Linux ones: Yahoo (FreeBSD), Excite(Solaris), NYSE
(AIX), Altavista (Tru64)
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:11:27 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Amphetamine Bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I agree that Linux is an excellent OS but on the basis of what
> my friends tell me, I think OS/2 is still better. You Linux
> guys should have more respect for OS/2 and the proprietary
> Unixen and even mainframe OSen. A number of these OSen are
> truly awesome. OS/2's reputation as a has-been OS is rather
> naive. It is still a very modern operating system.
>
> Instead of fighting all the other OSen like they are the enemy,
> you Linux guys should be saying something positive about all
> the fine OSen out there, proprietary or not.
Folks,
I have to agree with Bob here. At our office we still use OS/2
WPS, and it is a nice system to work with. The points raised by
js however still hold true, OS/2's multiuser characteristics are
almost non-existent. Apart from that it still beats the pants of
NT4 Workstation, but our boss has been listening to the
salesmen, and we are now in the process of migrating to NT4, to
be completed by the end of the year. (I wonder what my boss will
say when he hears he has to upgrade to whistler, just after a
costly migration).
For the record, since I've gotten my NIC working under Linux, I
use it exclusively as my desktop, and I am missing zero
functionality (and as a tribute to OS/2 I am running IceWM as my
window manager).
Mart
Happily running Debian, posting with Pan
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:44:09 GMT
Amphetamine Bob wrote:
>
> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
> >
> > 2 + 2 wrote:
> >
> > > The article compares OS/2 with the Win9x/Me code base in terms of
> > > innovation.
> > >
> > > Microsoft's real innovation with its OS products was with Windows NT/2000.
> > > And it competes with Linux and Unix.
> > >
> > > And OS/2 is no match for Linux in particular.
>
> I know a ton of OS/2 users who have tried to go over to Linux. Almost
> every single one of them has come back to OS/2. Most of those who do
> not miss OS/2 every day. OS/2 exceeds Linux in the following ways:
> speed, multimedia, resource use, multitasking, multithreading, TCP/IP
> stack, GUI, Java and ease of use. Linux is better in a few ways,
> especially stability. I think OS/2 could use the memory mapping and
> symlinks, too.
Another situation where Linux is a better choice is when, as
in my case, you are dealing with stringent timing
constraints: the open source allows you to see exactly how
scheduling is performed, and, if you have the guts, you may
even dare to modify something, if you don't, you may tune
your applications in a better way, and be aware if in the
next release something is changed which affects your
strategies. It's a special case, but common in all embedded
or quasi-embedded applications.
[snip]
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:50:45 +0000
Edward Rosten wrote:
> Yes it is. Under windows, if you install the wrong driver, then you get
> garbage out of the printer.
No it isn't. I have _one_ driver under Windows. It's called the Epson 640
Color Stylus driver.
Under Linux I selected the Epson 640 Color stylus driver when I installed
Linux Mandrake. What do I find? The Gimp doesn't use this, it defaults to
postscript instead.
Well, DUH!
> > What you're saying is that The Gimp has its
> > own drivers for printers!
>
> No, I'm saying Gimp produces nothing but postscript. Pick the correct
> printer from the list of installed printers.
The Gimp picks postscript by default. I had to override that and get it to
select the Epson printer instead. Image that! I install a driver at
installation time, and I install it _again_ per an application. Why kind of
nonsense is this?!?
> > Sheesh! Windows left that kind of nonsense
>
> So has Linux. You're putting words in to my mouth. Don't do that.
See above.
> > behind a while ago. If Windows, the inferior product, can do it, why
> > not Linux?
>
> Linux can, and does on my computer. I think yours is set up incorrectly.
> When you try to print from GIMP it will give you a list of print queues.
> Pick the correct one.
THERE IS ONLY ONE PRINT QUEUE, IT'S CALLED "lpr".
The Gimp defaults to Postscript output (for some reason best known to The
Gimp). I had to override this and select Epson. I see - I need a printer
driver per application.
> I have several set up. One for graphics, one for text and one for text
> where it prints the pages really small. If you give them 2 names each,
> one is quick to type from the command line and the other is descriptive,
> and easy to pick from the GUI.
I have one printer on Windows. It takes everything and it does it all
correctly. Why bother with multiple queues for different settings?
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: CR Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux 64 bit and Windows 32 bit
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:49:11 GMT
Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> "Charles Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > "CR Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Then explain your comments about "requiring a new version rather
> than
> > > just a
> > > > > build option".
> > > > >
> > > > Linux is Linux, same version, on all processors. If I had time, I
> would
> > > > go back through your posts to find the place you talked about MS
> > > > creating new versions.
> > >
> > > Whistler 64 bit and Whistler 32 bit are also the same version number.
> > >
> >
> > wierd isn't it. Does this mean that if I name my dog "Dan" and my cat
> > "Dan" they are both horses? (For the animal impaired, "Dan" is generic
> > horse name.)
> > > > > NT doesn't allow you to get "directly to the hardware" in any way
> but
> > > device
> > > > > drivers, and then you just need to rewrite the driver. Period.
> > > > >
> > > > That seems to depend upon how much money you pay MS. As a lowly
> > > > consumer, I don't even get to write good drivers. But we had this
> > > > discussion a couple of months ago. A short search will get you lots
> of
> > > > hits on writing virus software that does bypass the kernel and go
> > > > directly to the hardware.
> > >
> > > No, it won't. To my knowledge, there has not been 1 single virus for
> Win2k
> > > that "goes directly to the hardware". I'm not quite sure what a virus
> would
> > > do with access to the hardware anyways, but please provide some
> evidence.
> >
> > Last time I posted some of that data, it caused a real problem. Some
> > script kiddies got it. Fortunately they did it wrong. I thought I had
> > discovered something new. Then I discovered that it was widely known,
> > just kept quiet. I often wonder why that tactic works. But then I get a
> > laugh everytime I go into an airport.
>
> Those things can certainly come back to bite you in the ass, can't they?
> <g>
>
> Then again, they also give one a certain sense of guilty pride...
The moral seems to be, if you find a hole in Windows don't mention it
until you have at least $100,000,000 in your Swiss bank account. Even
then don't mention it unless you have an ex-wife to give several million
to the proper political party.
--
Russ
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You think you've got it bad ?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:52:24 +0000
Edward Rosten wrote:
> > At least with Windows I get one printer driver that everything uses.
>
> That's pure bollocks. Every different brand of printer (and many
> different models too) require different drivers.
You misunderstand me. On Windows I get one printer driver for my printer
that every application uses. That's what I meant to say, sorry for the
confusion!
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:38:23 +0100
In article <961fk5$j2c$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In article <9616o4$7b8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>> Indeed. Its you and "flatfish". Fine company.
>
>> And a few others that you apparently missed.
>
> Name them and show me dejanews urls to their articles please.
>
> Or you can pull a 'claire' and killfile me because youre too
> embarrassed to admit that you cant come up with the evidence
> that you've sworn you have.
>
>
>
>
> -----.
I plead guilty. I have confirmed in another thread that in my
personal opinion (confirmed by experience) Mandrake 7.2 was
rushed to the market.
Mart
--
Happily running Debian, posting with Pan
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:46:34 +0100
In article <961q88$l4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Edward Rosten"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> No, the stuff that came with your computer that tells you
>>> what to do about postscript and Epson printers. It is very
>>> specific and has been around for years.
>>
>> Then explain why when I use konqueror - gosh it prints the
>> file! It understands what I configured - The Gimp is the odd
>> one. The Gimp say,
>> "I don't care what you set your printer to, here's postscript
>> for
>> you!".
>
> All apps print postscript. That's the UNIX printer model. Ypu
> must have set up GIMP so it doesn't print to the default queue.
> Either that, or you set up Konqueror to print to the correct
> queue. If I use the Adobe PostScript driver under windows, I
> get loads of ASCII postscript out of my HP500. Windows must be
> really crap, yeah.
>
>
> -Ed
>
I just checked the gimp. It defaults to default printer queue,
but it uses the option -oraw.
It appears that Pete is right. The gimp does not use his defined
printer, but dumps raw PS to his Epson. This is
counterintuitive, as all other Linux programs generally take the
user-defined default queue.
It is however a gimp issue, not a Linux one.
Mart
--
Happily running Debian, posting with Pan
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:54:38 +0000
Pete Goodwin wrote:
Unfortunately, the output produced by The Gimp had red horizontal lines
running across it. I thought maybe the printer had a fault on the catridge,
so I ran it through konqueror again. Clean printout. It would appear The
Gimp is introducing the lines. Oh dear, so much for printing on Linux!
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:59:06 +0100
Adam Warner wrote:
>
> Hi Karel,
>
> > There seem to be only two valid answers to this question:
> >
> > 1. Everything possible also happens, or the axiom of parallel
> > universes. If there really is an infinite number of them, the entire
> > question Why? becomes meaningless and the existence of God indeed
> > unnecessary (but see below).
> >
> > 2. There is a purpose to it all.
>
> <snip>
>
> This has to be the most fascinating Linux thread of all time ;-)
What can I say? I'm a sucker for a lost argument.
> I'll just
> throw this link in that I came across last year:
> http://www.johnenderby.mcmail.com/
>
> In particular this article:
> http://www.johnenderby.mcmail.com/everything.htm
>
> I found the article impressive and would like to hear comments from those
> who have studied it.
>
I'll read them. I promise. But not just now.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget linux." Zoomm!
==============================
------------------------------
From: CR Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:59:53 GMT
mlw wrote:
>
> Mike Martinet wrote:
>
> >
> > In my experience, copy protection just doesn't work - either at home or
> > work. People blithely trade registration numbers and disks and software
> > with dongles gets replaced with applications that don't require keeping
> > track of a serial-port plug. I can't imagine home users being happy
> > about MS using their machines against them.
> >
> > I think in about 2 years there's going to be a hell of a lot of business
> > for people who know how to set up Linux.
>
> I read an interesting article a few years back, about software piracy. (If
> anyone recognizes the article by this description, I'd love to find a copy
> again.)
>
> The premise of the article was that the current thinking, every pirated CD is a
> net loss to company profits, was wrong and that there are actually two types of
> piracy: Counterfeit and sharing.
>
> Counterfeit software causes loss in company revenue because customers who have
> proven likely to purchase the product, are paying money to an entity that has
> no rights to collect money for the product.
>
> The sharing piracy, i.e. friends passing around a CD, does not hurt company
> profits because the people copying the software are NOT likely to purchase the
> software, and are not likely to call for technical support. It goes further to
> suggest that casual piracy actually helps the software companies profits by
> making the program more popular, and thus more likely to be purchased by those
> LIKELY to purchase software. It also points out that the people who copy
> software are often the "gurus" who have the authority to recommend software.
>
> In my experiences, I think this is true. I know lots of people that have an
> illegal copy of something that is more expensive than they would buy on their
> own, but have had their company buy it because it is something they want to
> use.
>
> I had an old pirated copy of SoftIce, a friend lent it to me when I was trying
> to track down a bug on a contract job. Ever since then, however, SoftIce is one
> of the first packages on my "must have" list when I do Windows software. So did
> NuMega lose the cost of that one floppy, or did they gain the income of the
> hundred or so copies my use of the product caused?
>
> This is a VERY common scenario, and I bet everyone reading this recognizes it
> as true.
>
> I wonder what will happen when everyone is forced to pay for M$ upgrades? My
> bet is that market demand driven by CD sharing will not happen, and that will
> hurt Microsoft. By focusing on the consumer, and limiting his or her rights to
> do what they want with their computer, in an effort to get money from a group
> of people who are NOT likely to purchase software in the first place, may sway
> the influential computer user elsewhere.
>
> --
> http://www.mohawksoft.com
I've seen several articles along that line. One recent one concerned
napster. It seems that CD sales go up if an artist gets traded on
napster. It was well established back in the 80's that anti piracy
tactics, such as dongles, complex login schemes, etc., reduced income.
But giving away the software, then charging for documentation, support,
or removal of some "annoy ware" device increases income.
--
Russ
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:56:24 +0100
People,
Stop picking on Pete in this thread. He is right in one aspect:
why does the gimp insist on adding it's own options to the lpr
command, instead of using the default queue as set up by the
ystem administrator? Does that not defeat the point of having a
default queue?
Check the gimp's print dialog before blindly assuming that Pete
is trolling (I know he sometimes seems to do that).
Mart
--
Happily running Debian, posting with Pan
------------------------------
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
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:01:31 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
[...]
> >: What version of Redhat involves Kudzu? I've never used it or seen it in
> >: action, but the latest version of Redhat I've seen is 6.0...
> >
> >I don't know when it was first introduced. It showed up when I
> >went from 5.2 to 6.2. It is usually rather silent, amounting to
> >nothing more than a one-line message during boot. It only makes
> >itself noticed when it discovers a change in hardware that it thinks
> >it knows how to deal with.
>
> And then what does it do? It seems to me that "kudzu" is a rather
> apocryphal name for such a utility.
>
It shows a dialog telling that it has detected the change,
and gives you three options: install/uninstall the
new/removed hardware, leave it alone for the moment (it will
ask again at next boot), or leave it alone forever (it'll
never ask you about it).
It keeps a database of the hardware installed in
/etc/sysconfig/hwconf in plain text format, that you may
check, and even edit, if you want.
The name is a Red Hat mistery.
------------------------------
From: Michael Wieserner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:05:19 GMT
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
<P58h6.2274$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> No, Erik, this won't work. In Germany MS already received a court
>> ruling which forbids this. I don't think that they could pull it
>> through even without such a ruling, the germans may be dumb, but by
>> far not THAT dumb.
>
>Hmm.. do you have a reference to this?
http://www.computerchannel.de/news/ticker/cebit_2000/1121.phtml
It's only german, sorry. It says that the district court in Munich forbids
these codes because there are disadvantages for the customers.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
