Linux-Advocacy Digest #803, Volume #32 Wed, 14 Mar 01 15:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: How Microsoft Crushes the Hearts of Trolls. ("Scot Mc Pherson")
Re: Microsoft announces support for Linux! ("Scot Mc Pherson")
Re: Linux PDA'S Blowing everything away! (Karel Jansens)
Re: .Net to run on Linux ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: The Linux office, a possible future..... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: The Linux office, a possible future..... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Microsoft announces support for Linux! (Nico Coetzee)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Scot Mc Pherson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: How Microsoft Crushes the Hearts of Trolls.
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 19:29:42 GMT
"LShaping" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:VQOr6.56457$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Scot Mc Pherson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:3wOr6.244206$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Yeah I don't know...I am not sure why open source applications are a bad
> > idea. I mean, bind, inn, apache and most of linux native system software
> is
> > mostly FSF GNU or open source software anyway.
>
> But why are open source applications good? I would guess that one reason
> why source applications is bad, for capitalism loving programmers, is
> because stealing the code and including it in a closed version is too
easy.
> Do you propose regulation that requires all code be open source? Not
> likely.
Perhaps the best way to ensure growth WOULD be to open source everything. It
wouldn't have to be free software, but if everyone had access to the source
code, software that was most successful would be coninuously improved upon
and the model would work. It would force companies to ensure their software
was continuously "improving" and not getting fatter because someone else
could step in a create something better. That would well prevent
monopolozation because it would keep competition to an extreme edge and push
new and better technology to the front of the industry while laggers will
lag behind and get crushed by the ball as it rolls over them.
Sure you might get a super giant who has all the best coders and hackers
working for it (and they work for it because its the best), but if they
produce a genuinely and consistently "best" product that everyone (and they
have access to the code) likes and intelligently choose to use than who
cares? You can buy the binaries and get support for the product or you can
compile and customize your own version of their code and get "no" support
for it. If someone new comes along with something better they can post the
source in public, and say here I have something better try my stuff, and
then the money goes somewhere else for a little while, until either that
person successfully keeps up, or the new super giant successfully integrates
the code in a way that is better than the original code writer. The reason
why a Microsoft monopoly was considering damaging to consumers was because
they were entrenching consumers in mediocre software with little room for
alternatives, little room for increasingly better solutions, and little room
for education into the way the system can be best utilized.
I mean that's true ubiquity anyway, when something is so ingrained in
society that no one notices anymore. Computers and software become
commodities at that point, software code could get banked as a security with
the hopes that that peice of software will be successful. CPUs and other
chips of all classes will be produced and warehoused and banked as a
commodity en-mass and give the comsumer the ability to build a system to
exactig specification. I mean, geez you can barely get i486s and pentiums
anymore with the current IT market model, and they are still great CPUs that
perform exceedingly well when used for the right applications. I mean the
CPUs I am talking about in the potential new "open source IT market" might
not strictly be i486s and pentiums, but an equivelent standard processing
unit would be more than indispensible for the right environments. People who
are security conscious don't build super computers and serve everything from
it, they distribute the services out to more, but less powerful servers
within a network. This way if one service is comprimised, it doesn't mean
the rest of the network is comprimised. So we still have need for these
lower power chips. I run a fairly high-traffic web/ftp server running on a
pentium 150 with 48 MB RAM, and the choking point is my internet connection,
not the CPU. My router/firewall/cache is also a pentium 166 mmx with 64 MB
RAM, and it handles the high level of traffic extremely well and keeps the
pipe filled during high traffic. This is because the software (which is
OPEN-SOURCE) is written extremely well and is efficient and I don't need a
super processor to run that junked up fat code. So what's successful in this
case? The locked up software or the open source software?
Cheers,
Scot Mc Pherson
> > Why would the software be choked because its open source?
>
> Something was lost in the translation.
>
> > Once the mass populace becomes more
> > comfortable with the "choices" people will start buying/using software
> based
> > on its merit, not on what a company like M$ markets.
>
> Choice would make little difference in the percentage of GUI usage. You
can
> take that survey question to other groups if you really want to know.
> C ya,
> LShaping
>
>
>
> >
> > Although the masses are still pretty entrenched in proprietary software,
> > there is an increase in the open source movement which is not increasing
> > parallel to the growing industry, but is exceeding the curve. That means
> > that a higher % of total global users are moving to the open source
> > community for if not their total needs, at least for a great majority of
> > their needs.
> >
> > You are right about the gui. A gui uses an aweful amount of resources
and
> > will continue to use lots of resources. Even a barebones xserver still
> will
> > be the single largest resource consuming process on a gnu/linux system.
> They
> > can get more efficient, but they will still be resource hogs. On my lite
> > servers, I have the gnome desktop installed, but I only start the
xserver
> > when it is needed, being that I am not required to use it since I am
just
> as
> > if not more comfortable with a terminal for sysadmin stuff. Sometimes
> though
> > it't nice to have concurrent multiple terminals displayed side by side.
As
> I
> > said, on my lite server, unless I am doing something gui specific, it is
> not
> > running. Everyone has this option.
> >
> > --
> > Scot Mc Pherson
> > N27° 19' 56"
> > W82° 30' 39"
> >
> >
> >
> > "LShaping" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:6NNr6.56410$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > "Scot Mc Pherson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:eIMr6.243904$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >
> > > > > That is a principle which is easy to understand for a lot of
things.
> > > Any
> > > > > more popular product is more scrutinized. Not sure how that
> argument
> > > > > supports Linux over Windows. I do not advocate closed-doors
secret
> > > > > policies, and if opening Windows can be done, it might be a better
> > > > solution
> > > > > than a breakup (but the devil probably is in the enforcement, the
> > > > government
> > > > > amicus seem to favor a breakup). Like Orrin Hatch said, if we do
> not
> > go
> > > > for
> > > > > enforecment now (such as a breakup), we will be in for heavy
handed
> > > > > government regulation later. I agree 100% with the open OS thing,
> > since
> > > > the
> > > > > OS is the standard to which all applications are written. I
> sincerely
> > > > hope
> > > > > the appeals court will understand that.
> > > >
> > > > Well I wasn't really even thinking about opening windows and ie5, I
> was
> > > > kinda of refering to the statement that Linux is a developer's
sandbox
> > and
> > > > windows is a developer's real world. Although of course the end
result
> > of
> > > > your development is scrutinized by the windows user community, your
> code
> > > is
> > > > not and so you can never really get any input on how to make the
code
> > more
> > > > efficient. Forget about feature improvement, I mean code efficiency
is
> > > > probably the most difficient part of windows programming.
> > > > Scot Mc Pherson
> > >
> > > And my comment was about graphical user interfaces, not specifically
> about
> > > Windows. The personal computer operating system will never be without
a
> > GUI
> > > again. In the PC context, the text based interface is history. I do
> > > efficiency to a fault. But besides requiring more system recourses, a
> GUI
> > > (like any other code) can be done efficiently. As far as the
> applications
> > > go, (not that it matters, but) I would not advocate open source
> > applications
> > > at all. The reason the OS needs to be open, or at least separated
from
> > the
> > > applications makers, is because otherwise outside developers will be
cut
> > off
> > > by the choke point OS monopoly holder as has been the case with
Windows.
> > I
> > > wonder how much thought the prosecution gave to prohibiting the OS
maker
> > > from writing applications, or if they gave up that idea as being more
> > > intrusive than a more simple, temporary breakup.
> > > LShaping
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > "LShaping" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:VsGr6.63857$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >
> > > > > "Scot Mc Pherson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message
> > > > > news:iJwr6.242893$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > If a
> > > > > > > > > programmer is not willing to venture into the real world
of
> > > modern
> > > > > > > > > computing, then he will be left behind in the sand. I
would
> > > love
> > > > to
> > > > > > > > > have a more efficient operating system than Windows, but
> > command
> > > > > line
> > > > > > > > > stuff is for the birds.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This single sentence rules you out as an opponent worth of
an
> > > > answer.
> > > > > > > > Thank you for your time.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Does that mean I get the last word?
> > > > > > > Yes!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think its absolutely amazing that people who advocate windows
> use
> > > idea
> > > > > of
> > > > > > "venturing out into the real world" when they are advocating
> > > > closed-doors
> > > > > > secret policies where their activity is not scrutinized by
anyone
> > > except
> > > > > the
> > > > > > head con-troll-er.
> > > > > > Does it every occur to these people that having your software
> > > > scrutinized
> > > > > by
> > > > > > the "whole world" is just about as far into the real world as
you
> > can
> > > > > > venture?
> > > > > > Scot Mc Pherson
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Scot Mc Pherson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft announces support for Linux!
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 19:31:16 GMT
It even says they are doing so to help migrate other platforms to Microsoft
--
Scot Mc Pherson
N27° 19' 56"
W82° 30' 39"
"Wayne Holland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Charlie Ebert wrote:
> >
> > Those boneheads finally did it!
> >
> > They are announcing support for Linux.
> >
> > http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/01/03/13/010313hnnonms.xml
> >
> > Charlie
>
> Yes, they have indeed. But I would be very wary of MS. For some reason
> I see the spider inviting us into its parlor.
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux PDA'S Blowing everything away!
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 13:13:52 +0000
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> http://www.handspring.com
>
> I'm going to get one of these!
>
> They say the batteries last for 1 month on a single recharge
> and they have wireless internet communications built in!
>
> GO LINUX!
I'd think again, if I were you. The Handspring Visor runs PalmOS, and
comes standard with a USB cradle and Windows-synching software only.
People have to pay _extra_ for the serial connection kit.
I see no compelling reason to use a Visor to support linux.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================================================
"You're the weakest link. Goodb-No, wait! Stop! Noaaarrghh!!!"
==============================================================
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.linux.sux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: .Net to run on Linux
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 21:52:11 +0200
"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > MS wants all the new application to be build against .NET
> > If Linux can run .NET applications, then MS has broken the application
> > barrier. (Bye, Bye, wine, I'm no longer an alcoholist :-) )
> > You could run Office XP (or its viewers) on Linux, now, isn't that nice?
>
> What are the odds that they avoid win32 DLLs with it?
>
> I'd say pretty much zero.
If you program in Java for windows, you rarely write for windows, you write
for the Java platform.
Same with .NET applications.
Beside, what do you mean, win32 DLL? The Win32 API?
I would think that Office XP might be not .NET based, but the next one will
be, and a lot of applications are going to be written for .NET platform.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Linux office, a possible future.....
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 20:00:50 GMT
In article <98jkh5$6hk$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > Where? I see it not?
>
> Thats because you are quite obviously blind.
Or it doesn't exist.
> > Everywhere I look, I see Windows, Windows and yet more Windows.
>
> Neat. You must work in a windows dominated market. I work with information
>technlogy
> and suchness. It is dominated by unix.
Funny I work in IT and all I see is Windows. Even in the job market, it's
Windows all the way.
> > Don't I? In Digital we had one of the biggest private networks in the
> > world. 20,000 - 50,000 nodes at least, and still growing when I left.
>
> Thats a medium sized network in todays world.
What company has in excess of 50,000 nodes?
> > But you can't prove that one way or the other, now can you?
>
> Sure, all you need to do is read microsoft press releases.
But you still can't prove it for my specific machine, now can you?
> > And what did they do with that directory? Take over your machine, did
> > they? All that from a writable directory?
>
> No, you intellectual turd. They uploaded warez and used my machine as a
> hop-site for about 12 hours before I discovered it. I deleted their stuff, checked
> tripwire, and fixed the problem in about 10 seconds.
Well duh!
> > What software are they running to do this?
>
> I am not at liberty to say, but I can say that it is developed by microsoft, and
> that it actually does its job incredibly well.
Blimey, you actually like something from Microsoft.
> > Everywhere? Where is that? In your part of the world? You think that my
> > office is "idiocy" - funny that, you must live in a strange world.
> > Everywhere I go, my version of the "office" is the norm, even the ones
> > I've seen and worked in America.
>
> When was the last time you worked in america? I havent seen less than 100base
> in this country in at LEAST a year. I'm not saying that it doesnt exist, im saying
> that right now it is the minority.
About a year ago.
> > Why not, pillock?
>
> Read the thread, you goddamned turnip. Its not part of the question at hand
> or the subject mattter.
Why not?
> > What's the biggest market, o cretin? The Office? Or the home?
>
> You appear to not even understand what 'subject' means.
You never heard of SOHO?
> > They had their chance and they sat back and did nowt.
>
> They didnt have a chance, you penis. You tit. You vaginal sore. You
> rectal wart.
Insults huh? Is that the best you can do? Don't have a convincing
argument, yes, let's hurl abuse.
> > What makes you
> > think they can do it now, strange one?
>
> Well, the fact that they appear to be doing just that at the moment is quite a
> tip off, old chap.
Oh yeah? And what inroads have they made so far. Bugger all I can see.
> > I'm not. I use Xara X instead.
>
> Then what the hell was your point?
Twas an example.
> > It's a much weaker clone. Can it handle additional fonts?
>
> Uhhh...yes, actually it can. I'm doing it right now.
What's the font name?
> Uhhh...I just printed via samba to a windows network printer from this here
> machine, FROM STAROFFICE, and it worked just fine.
I tried printing from StarOffice, it hung for a while and struggled to
print a simple picture.
> > Nope. Oh dear, Microsoft Word can!
>
> You're wrong about so much, pete. I suspect that the simple fact is that
> youre too stupid to figure these things out, and further, too stupid to even
> realize that youre really incredibly dumb.
You'r so wrong yourself, old bean. The fact that your response is
peppered with pathetic little insults tells me as much.
--
Pete
All your no fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Linux office, a possible future.....
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 20:02:44 GMT
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > Oh yes there were!
>
> Did you work for the Govment? Before 1993, there really wasn't a small
> computer system that could do these jobs. NASA used DEC equipment for
> years. So has the Dept of the Navy and other government agencies.
> I had a budget to use to acquire computer equipment and was held accountable
> for it too!
> I really never cared for how vms worked, but their compilers were the best!
> Industry now recognizes
> VAX Fortran as the best there is. We had a network of VAXes for the nuclear
> dept. of the Navy and not once
> have I ever seen a log of a system crash.
I never worked the government.
I saw enough crashes at Digital. They're not immune from it, you know.
--
Pete
All your no fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2001 22:17:59 +0200
From: Nico Coetzee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Microsoft announces support for Linux!
Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
> Those boneheads finally did it!
>
> They are announcing support for Linux.
>
> http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/01/03/13/010313hnnonms.xml
>
> Charlie
It's more about sharing data among platforms. Most end users won't even
know the difference. It's more programmers and web developers that are
effected.
Not anything to get excited about - yet...
--
=========================================================
This signature was added automatically by Linux:
.
I sent a letter to the fish, I said it very loud and clear,
I told them, "This is what I wish." I went and shouted in his ear.
The little fishes of the sea, But he was very stiff and proud,
They sent an answer back to me. He said "You needn't shout so loud."
The little fishes' answer was And he was very proud and stiff,
"We cannot do it, sir, because..." He said "I'll go and wake them if..."
I sent a letter back to say I took a kettle from the shelf,
It would be better to obey. I went to wake them up myself.
But someone came to me and said But when I found the door was locked
"The little fishes are in bed." I pulled and pushed and kicked and
knocked,
I said to him, and I said it plain And when I found the door was shut,
"Then you must wake them up again." I tried to turn the handle, But...
"Is that all?" asked Alice.
"That is all." said Humpty Dumpty. "Goodbye."
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
