Linux-Advocacy Digest #97, Volume #32 Sat, 10 Feb 01 11:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Peformance Test ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux fails to deliver on the hype (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux fails to deliver on the hype (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux fails to deliver on the hype (Pete Goodwin)
Re: NTFS Limitations (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Linux 64 bit and Windows 32 bit ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Interesting article (Giuliano Colla)
The gleaming linux boxes at Blackwells. ("Edward Rosten")
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (John Hasler)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! ("Edward Rosten")
Red Hat 6.2 as nis server and an aix as client (help) ("Irger Armin")
Re: Linux reference distro ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The gleaming linux boxes at Blackwells. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Craig Kelley)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: You think you've got it bad ? ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Interesting article (Craig Kelley)
Re: The Wintrolls ("Mart van de Wege")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Peformance Test
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:04:10 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Mike
Martinet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here's a nifty Linux vs. W2k performance test. Round up a
> Linux distribution (Slack, RH, whatever) and a copy of Win2k.
> (Using any software other than that provided on the Linux/W2k
> disks is cheating)
>
> Get ahold of a couple of 486-50's with 32M of RAM, a 2.5G HD
> and network cards. You'll only need one VGA display adapter*.
> Install on the machines (Hint:do the Linux box first) and
> configure them as mail servers - pop, sendmail, fetchmail - and
> nothing else.
>
> *Once you've got Linux running, switch the kbd and VGA card
> from the
> Linux machine (don't try this in reverse) to the Windows box
> (you might want to add a mouse at this point).
>
> Now measure how much mail each system is capable of handling
> daily in a
> 25-user environment.
>
>
> (I *am* smiling)
>
>
> MjM
Given that W2k's minimum recommended system requirements are a P300 with
128M, you should be laughing!
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 14:15:30 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Go ahead and find them yourself.
>
> Just exactly what "claire" did. When confronted with the burden of proof,
> claire told me to 'go find them myself'.
>
> Because they dont exist. This is called 'smokescreening' or 'snowing',
> pete. A sophomoric deflection at best.
Actually I'm just being lazy.
> Again I ask you: provide URLs, or admit your lie.
What lie? I told you I never lie.
> Because it doesnt exist. I see.
Because they do exist.
http://x65.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=726298021&CONTEXT=981813346.757202969&hitnum=2
http://x65.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=721452552&CONTEXT=981813346.757202969&hitnum=161
http://x65.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=721459108&CONTEXT=981813346.757202969&hitnum=162
and there are more than this. I just can't remember where they are. I'll
keep on looking if you _really_ want me to.
--
Smug Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux fails to deliver on the hype
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:16:41 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Then don't imply you agree if you don't, prick!
I suggest you learn to read before you open your mouth, o dork.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux fails to deliver on the hype
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:22:04 +0000
sfcybear wrote:
> Twirp, The statement that *you* used as the title "Linux fails to
> deliver on the hype" is NO WHERE in the article the word Hype is NOT in
> the article. The statement "Linux fails to deliver on the hype" is yours
> alone.
Hmmm...
The title of the article appears to have changed. I thought it actually
said "Linux fails to deliver on the hype".
The words are not mine along, I pasted them in.
However, in the absence of any articles appearing with those words in, I
withdraw them.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux fails to deliver on the hype
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:24:43 +0000
sfcybear wrote:
> Ha, you are riot. It was you and not the article that made the statement
> "Linux fails to deliver on the hype". It is the title of your post. You
> did NOT say "SuSE claims Linux does not live up to the hype" YOU said
> "Linux fails to deliver on the hype" YOU made that claim. You did not
> say that this article claims "Linux fails to deliver on the hype" YOU
> made that statement. The statement "Linux fails to deliver on the hype"
> is no place in the article. Then you're such a weasle that you won't
> stand behind your own statement.
I did not make the statement "Linux fails to deliver on the hype", I pasted
it in from the article. At least, so I thought. The article title appears
to have changed.
So, I withdraw those words as a mistake.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
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 14:34:19 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said Giuliano Colla in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 10 Feb 2001
> [...]
> >> >That's an error in the way Windows detects hardware, that's all.
> >> >It gets tricked into thinking you have new cards when you
> >> >change the thing they are plugged into (the motherboard).
> >>
> >> Actually, I think its a flaw in the way Windows is designed. If you
> >> change the thing they plug into, Windows has to reload all the cards
> >> from scratch.
> >
> >Unfortunately it's even worst than that. They reload all the cards, but
> >not from scratch. They leave behind a lot of previous things which
> >interfere with the new ones and make the system sluggish if you're
> >lucky, unbearably unstable most of the times, unable to start for the
> >rest.
>
> One might almost think they had the conscious intent to make it very
> difficult to get a new motherboard without buying a whole new PC (which
> they get a cut of), eh, Giuliano? ;-)
Maybe that's the goal (which could make one point for you),
but the intermediate result is that sometimes they get
confused, and at boot the silly machine catalogues your NIC
adapter, which is there since a lot of time, as "Unknown
hardware", with the proper card name and such. The machine
loses LAN connection, you don't understand what's happened,
you see that the adapter is gone from the network devices
and you re-install it, but it will not work, because
networking is still tied to the "unknown hardware". If you
then move your NIC card in a different slot, and install it,
it will work, with reduced performance, because it will have
networking tied both to the existing card, and to the no
more existing card, labeled "unknown hardware". Then finally
you discover the "unknown hardware", remove it, reboot, and
it starts working as it should, until next occurrence of the
same problem. Which could make one point for me :-)
>
> You're right; it is even worse than having to reload all the cards from
> scratch. BUT, I've had a great deal of success when upgrading any
> low-level hardware (and even, sometimes, with stuff like soundcards and
> modems, when Windows gets cranky) by ripping out the PCI bus* and
> rebooting.
>
> * In the software! Go to System--Devices and Remove the PCI bus
> 'driver'. On the reboot, Windows will do a complete detection. Stuff
> will still be left on disk, of course, and maybe even some stray stuff
> in the memory, but its the next best thing to a complete re-install, and
> it doesn't trash all your application configurations. I will admit to
> no responsibility whatsoever for anyone trying to physically remove the
> "PCI bus" from their computer.
The temptation of ripping out the PCI bus, the mother board,
the power supply, and even the fans is sometimes very strong
when dealing with MS!
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux 64 bit and Windows 32 bit
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:42:00 +0000
>> >> >> Hell, Linux needed a new version to support Itanium too. The 2.4
>> >> >> kernel.
>> >>
>> >> If 2.4 wasn't in the works at the time, 2.2 would have supported it,
>> >> but everyone was working on 2.4.
>> >
>> > And you think this is any different for Whistler?
>>
>> WTF are you talking about. You claimed that Linux needed a new Kernel.
>> I contend that claim. I said it didn't need a new kernel, but support
>> did come with the new kernel. If the Itanium was avaliable a year ago,
>> 2.2 would have itanium support.
>
> Your point was that since everyone was working on 2.4, it was easiest to
> just add it to 2.4.
Yes.
> Since everyone in the OS division at MS is working on Whistler, it's
> easiest to add Itanium to Whistler.
That makes sense, but what is your point?
> Same thing.
I wasn't talking about Whistler. I was pointing out that your statement
about Linux needing 2.4 to support Itanium was incorrect. Why bring
whistler in to it?
You also implied that I thought this was somehow different from Whistler.
I don't know where you got the idea from.
>> What has what I said got to do with Whistler?
>
> No capability for logical thought?
You must have been trying to make a point by bringing Whistler in to this
discussion. I have not picked up what this point is meant to be. Could
you tell me?
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
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 14:44:55 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said Giuliano Colla in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 10 Feb 2001
> [...]
> >Have reached an agreement all of you who don't know a thing about
> >networking to post on the subject?
> >Do you know what QoS is? Try to explain it in a few words, then try to
> >explain in a few words what TOS is, then read what you've written (if
> >you've written anything). Then read your posting and understand why
> >you're making a fool of yourself.
>
> Actually, Giuliano, they *are* different things.
I'm not expert in networking, but I understand the
difference. My point is that the wintrolls posting on the
subject simply don't know what they're talking about, and
they just cite MS press releases.
> They even work
> differently, and accomplish different objectives. However, they are
> intended to accomplish the same ends, essentially; the distinction is
> actually much too subtle to matter to anyone except an extreme expert
> who is simultaneously not a specialist.
>
> With that said, if you'd like me to explain it, feel free to ask.
>
For the moment my scant knowledge is sufficient for my
needs. Besides, I'd like to see what explanation will be
provided by those lecturing on the subject, and your
explanation would provide them the knowledge they lack!
> >> > In other words, MS's TCP/IP just hogs the network unconditionally with
> >> > highest priority, forcing others to do the same if they want any
> >> > throughput, and making sensible prioritizing of network traffic flow
> >> > impossible.
> >>
> >> Now that's the only reason for you not to use Windows?
> >
> >Well, don't you think that QoS is important enough? You made such a fuss
> >about it!
> >If something impairs it, I take it out of the network.
>
> You will generally find that both TOS and QOS will impair a network.
> The idea is fundamentally silly, an attempt to make TCP/IP networking
> function contrary to its nature, thus removing all its benefits while
> maintaining all its liabilities. This doesn't stop the biggest names in
> the industry from spending billions of dollars doing it, of course.
>
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: The gleaming linux boxes at Blackwells.
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:49:57 +0000
Who remembers flatfist+++'s (it was clair at the time) post about thick
layers of dust on Linux boxes in the shops?
Well, I was in Blackwell's (A very big bookstore, one of the biggest ones
in the UK) buying (duh) a book, and I decided to look at the Linux
section. Well, it was huge, with loads of books and 4 different distros
(Rh7, Suse, Corel and something else), and not a speck of dust on any of
them :-) I guess they have vigilant cleaners, then.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 13:52:31 GMT
Stefan Ohlsson writes:
> I know the atheists have a theory that man will develop to a super-man
> that can travel back in time and will create it all. That's the simple
> version anyway. I know, sounds weird.
Who are "the" atheists?
Steve Mading writes:
> Are you being deliberately silly?
Well, it isn't as silly as the old guy with the beard.
Stefan Ohlsson writes:
> No, I heard it on a lecture about religion. Did I get it wrong? Then
> please correct me.
Looks to me like you read it in a science-fiction novel.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:55:04 +0000
> 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.
I checked it also. I don't have a PS printer, but the image came out
fine.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Irger Armin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
redhat.networking.general,redhat.servers.general,redhat.general,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Red Hat 6.2 as nis server and an aix as client (help)
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:57:57 +0100
Hi,
i got an Red Hat 6.2 als nfs/nis server, which works fine. All other 15 linux
machines running well.
But now i got an RS6000 with aix 4.3.3.0. I installed the nfs and the nis
packages, this works.
I can import the /home/staff, /home/guest, /home/proj from the nfs/nis
server.
If i use the lsuser (shows all users) an lsgroup (shows all groups) on
the aix. I got all users/groups from the nis server, all users exist on
the aix, but no user can't login on the aix. "Wrong user or passwd".
But all users and groups are on the aix. The uid and gid are right.
Could it be the ypbind protocol. I read that the yp-tools under RH "only"
supports version 1 and 2, because the version 3 is not free ?
Please Help
-Armin Irger
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux reference distro
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 14:59:50 +0000
mlw wrote:
>
> Now that various Linux companies are having money issues, as with most tech
> companies in the U.S.A, this might be a perfect time to reassert the notion of
> a standard linux configuration.
>
> An open standard about package format, configuration files, and compliance
> versions, anyone remember this?
>
> I see, in the near future, if SuSE or RedHat goes under, that corporations may
> have an issue with support. A set of standards, created by and adhered to, will
> make any one company failure irrelevant. This is the power of open source.
>
I think this is a good idea. If this was done, it would also help the
progress of the Linux desktop.
Incidentally, there is very little evidence that SuSE or RedHat going
under.
--
http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The gleaming linux boxes at Blackwells.
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:11:22 +0000
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> Who remembers flatfist+++'s (it was clair at the time) post about thick
> layers of dust on Linux boxes in the shops?
>
> Well, I was in Blackwell's (A very big bookstore, one of the biggest ones
> in the UK) buying (duh) a book, and I decided to look at the Linux
> section. Well, it was huge, with loads of books and 4 different distros
> (Rh7, Suse, Corel and something else), and not a speck of dust on any of
> them :-) I guess they have vigilant cleaners, then.
>
I've noticed something similar in Waterstones. They seem to have quite
a good selection, plus lots of general UNIX books and so on. I don't
recall if they had any actual distros, but it wouldn't surprise me. I
also went into PCWorld (who always used to be very MS-centric) the other
day, and couted 4 diferent Distros on their shelves. WHSmith in
Birmingham carry 3 separate Linux magazines.
Somebody must be buying this stuff :)
--
http://www.guild.bham.ac.uk/chess-club
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: 10 Feb 2001 08:14:45 -0700
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Bruce Scott TOK 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!".
Install PageMaker for Windows to find the answer to your question.
[snippage]
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:14:52 +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.
If you use the wrong driver under Windows, you get garbage out. Simple.
Try installing Adobe's PostScript printer dirver and printing to your
Eposn Stylus under Windows. You'll get garbage out.
> 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.
Yes, of course it does. What do you expect? You have not paid the
blindest bit of attention to anything I've said.
THE STANDARD PRINT MODEL UNDER LINUX IS POSTSCRIPT
That means that every application produces postscript, and the GS
converts it in to printer codes, this way, each app does not need to
speak the language of many different printers. This is almost exactly the
same as Windows. In Windows, each app speaks WPS (Windows print system),
and the printer drivers spew out the correct codes. Most windows apps
have no concept of what the different printers really are, but they can
choose a print queue to send images to.
> Well, DUH!
Duh, indeed.
>> > 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.
Of course it does, read what I've written above. If your printer is set
up correctly, then it looks like a postscript printer.
> I had to override that and get it
> to select the Epson printer instead.
You have set up your printer incorrectly. If it was set up correctly, you
could dump postscript to the printer and an image would come out. That is
the way it should work.
> Image that! I install a driver at
> installation time, and I install it _again_ per an application. Why kind
> of nonsense is this?!?
GIMP is one of a very few applications which has its own print drivers.
If your printer is correctly set up, the default setting (postscript)
will work correctly.
>> > Sheesh! Windows left that kind of nonsense
>>
>> So has Linux. You're putting words in to my mouth. Don't do that.
>
> See above.
Ditto.
>> > 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).
Beacuse that is how the print model under UNIX works. Assume everything
is PS, and use a filter if the printer isn't. Almost the same as Windows,
but substitute WPS for PS.
> I had to override this and select Epson. I see - I need a
> printer driver per application.
Gimp is unusual like this (having its own drivers). If you have set up
your printer correctly, then is should print PS correctly and you can use
the default setting (ie PS, level 2) from GIMP.
>> 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?
I can't do what I described under Windows easily. It is very esy under
Linux.
Copy the following postscript file to a temporary file (tmp.ps).
then type
lpr tmp.ps
%!PS-Adobe-3.0
100 100 moveto
172 100 lineto
172 172 lineto
100 172 lineto
fill
showpage
%End
If you get a black square about 1" by 1" in the bottom left of the page,
then your printer is set up correctly to print postscript. If you get
text out, then you've set up the printer incorrectly. If the printer is
not set up correctly then set it up (if you can't then get RH's print
filters and printtool, which is pretty much foolproof). If you do get a
black rectangle, then check that GIMP isn't passing any wierd parameters
to the printer whan it is printing PS.
Now, don't forget:
PS is the standard under Linux. Every printer appears as a postscript
printer. Therefore, every app prints out postscript. The print filters
and drivers in GS sort out the rest. This is quite similar to the way
windows works. Under windows, every app prints using WPS instead.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:16:47 +0000
In article <3a854947$0$20735@reader4>, "Mart van de Wege"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> People,
>
> Stop picking on Pete in this thread. He is right in one aspect: why does
> the gimp insist on adding it's own options to the lpr command, instead
> of using the default queue as set up by the ystem administrator? Does
> that not defeat the point of having a default queue? Check the gimp's
> print dialog before blindly assuming that Pete is trolling (I know he
> sometimes seems to do that).
I checked GIMP. Although it has its own drivers, it uses PS, level 2by
default and defaults to lp (te default queue).
The other problem with Pete is that he can't understand why everything
prints using Postscript.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: You think you've got it bad ?
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:17:27 +0000
In article <2Gbh6.6684$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Pete Goodwin"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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!
Oh. Sorry.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: 10 Feb 2001 08:20:49 -0700
"Paul 'Z' EwandeŽ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 10 Feb 2001 03:42:13
> > >"Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > [...]
> > >> > 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".
> >
> > Hardly. Windows lost the benchmark, to begin with. But I think
>
> In the past ? Sure. This is now, and it's at the top of the list. Heck, even
> IBM [which invests millions of USD in Linux] to try to beat Compaq turned to
> Windows 2000.
>
> Why oh why didn't they use a Linux cluster to destroy and humiliate Compaq
> and Microsoft ? It's not like they didn't have the money.
Because Oracle for Linux doesn't support the parallel server *yet*.
What are you going to say when they do?
[snip]
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Wintrolls
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 16:09:36 +0100
In article <QvNg6.624$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But.. but.. All you linux people said that there is no reason
> to recompile your kernels, so why would this knowledge be
> "common" and "one of the first things you learn" if you don't
> need to ever do it?
>
>
>
>
Ok,
I'll feed you. I am a bit of a tinkerer, sure, but most of my
system is installed as precompiled binaries. However, the first
thing I found out after installing Linux, is that you can
optimize it to your hardware by compiling software.
At the moment I only compile things myself if I consider maximum
speed as critical. The kernel certainly fulfills that criterium,
as does Mozilla, so these things get compiled by myself. For all
others there is apt :-)
A custom built kernel can speed up your machine by 5-20%. Try
doing that on Windows without paying big $$$.
Mart
--
Happily running Debian, posting with Pan
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
