Linux-Advocacy Digest #899, Volume #32 Mon, 19 Mar 01 18:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: IBM adapting entire disk storage line to work with Linux ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and misleading claims about GPL software being
free (Pat McCann)
Re: User Friendly?? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: What is user friendly? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: What is user friendly? ("Shades")
Re: Here's a load of horse crap ("Weevil")
Re: What is user friendly? ("Shades")
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> ("WGAF")
Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie! ("Weevil")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM adapting entire disk storage line to work with Linux
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 17:39:58 -0500
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> "Ed Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <va9t6.87051$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> Ed Allen wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > In article <cCOs6.82336$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > >> > Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >It's alright, laugh it up. I know you're really just jealous
> > >> > >because you know that I'm right. You know that the only company
> > >> > >who really takes Linux seriously (if that's what it really is)
> > >> > >is IBM, and IBM has a poor track history with desktop and
> > >> > >small-server OSen.
> > >> > I suppose that is true if you have a secret definition for
> > >> > "seriously" like Erik likes to do.
> > >> >
> > >> > How many more millions does Intel need to invest to qualify in
> > >> > your private definition ?
> > >> >
> > >> > Lets not forget that AMD is encouraging Linux developers to use their
> > >> > coming 64-bit chips. They don't qualify, why ?
> > >> >
> > >> > SGI does not qualify either. Why not ? They are planning to add
> > >> > their NUMA technology and sell Itanium cluster machines.
> > >> >
> > >> > Then too, all the universities using Linux to put together their
> > >> > own Supercomputers are not companies either.
> > >> > http://www.vnunet.com/News/1113447
> > >> >
> > >> > What do you think the graduating students will recommend for use
> > >> > at their new jobs ?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Yes, a very excellent point!
> > >
> > >It's a very common problem.
> > >
> > >Universities using archaic or esoteric systems to teach their students,
> > >and then when the students graduate and get out into the real world
> > >where companies have to make money, they realize they know nothing
> > >necessary to compete.
> > >
> > >Meanwhile, the intelligent individuals who decided not to waste
> > >their time on worthless university "computer science", and instead
> > >decided to learn the hot technologies that pay well and are making
> > >a fortune and are in high demand, even in today's economy.
> > >
> > >Those students may suggest it to their employers, but their employers
> > >will laugh because they know the truth about linux.
> > >
> > I suspected you might ignore my refutation of your false claim and
> > make another to change the subject, hoping nobody would notice.
> >
> > Sorry Chad sock-puppets do not think or write well without their
> > masters' hand up their butt.
> >
> > I don't usually post HTML but this one's for you and I would not
> > want to strain your little neuron.
> >
> > The first one is the *only* link I have seen for a W2K cluster.
> > It is one tenth as powerful as one of the Linux links beneath it.
>
> Not everyone uses supercomputers. For the masses, Win2K is the fastest
> clustering solution you can buy (or can't buy, as the case may be).
> See www.tpc.org.
Do "the masses" have $80,000 to spend in licensing fees to get lower
performance than can be obtained with $100 worth of Linux CD's?
>
> The Linux clusters are accomplished only by stringing together hundreds
> of machines. It doesn't speak much about Linux that it's so low-performance
> that you need to string hundreds of machines to achieve any respectable
> performance.
Must be why 1-, 2-, 4-, and 8-CPU mother boards always perform BETTER
when running Linux than when running LoseDOS.
>
> > The second one explains that Linux clusters are rapidly climbing to
> > the top of the list of largest supercomputers.
>
> So? Stringing together hundreds of boxes isn't something to really
> be proud of, necessarily.
Can you take 100 80386 boxes destined for the trash bin, and hook
them together to get supercomputer performance using any WINDOWS
product?
a) yes
B) HELL NO!
Can you do this with Linux?
a) no
B) HELL YES!
Ask the department at the Oakridge, TN nuclear weapons facility which
needed the throughput of a CRAY supercomputer, but didn't have the funds...
but were able to build a supercomputer and get the throughput and
performance they need using nothing other than old 80386 and 80486
machines collected from the trash-heaps of other departments.
Let's see you try that with Mafia$oft operating systems
Oh...and notice that Macneil Schwindler Corporation, the vendor of the
most widely used Finite Element Analysis software is now advertising
for Linux-people to go around to their most computationally demanding
customer sites and install:
LINUX CLUSTERS
...to run their high-end products.
Why is that?
> And even so, they're just competeing with
> Unix, for the most part. For the rest of the world, there's Windows.
>
> > How do you think working on and building clusters big enough to be
> > ranked among the top 500 supercomputers in the world deserves to be
> > labeled "using archaic or esoteric systems" ?
>
> In terms of how the world uses computing, this is a small portion of it.
> Granted, it is the largest portion in terms of MIPS, but in terms of
> people using them, many more people use Windows every day for servers
> and desktops. Linux is still a niche OS.
>
> >
> > Oil companies, biotech companies, and financial houses are hardly
> > what I would class as dead end jobs.
> >
> > The Linux community is putting together several "Supercomputer On A
> > CD" distros so these clusters will become more common and the
> > knowledge of how to put them together and keep them tuned up will be
> > within the reach of every highschool science club.
> >
> > This is the territory Bill is aching about getting in to and Linux
> > is here first and widening the gap.
>
> Not really. Bill goes after the big bucks, not some geeky niche.
>
> > I would let someone else show him this list if I were you, he has been
> > known to spit and throw things when he is unhappy.
> >
> > <TITLE>Bookmarks for Chad Meyers</TITLE>
>
> It's "Myers", fuckwit.
>
> <snip: html post>
>
> -c
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and misleading claims about GPL software
being free
From: Pat McCann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 19 Mar 2001 14:37:59 -0800
Austin Ziegler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jumping in here: JD isn't after encumbering the software. It's
> encumbered by copyright. The GPL adds FURTHER encumbrances in its
> sharing language, where JD wants to reduce the encumbrances to a
> minimum in the sharing language.
It seems that you're sort of apologizing for jumping in. I think
jumping in on Usenet needs no apology. One can ignore things on
Usenet that one can't in verbal conversations. On the other hand,
the Japanese are said to spend a good deal of effort on unnecessary
apologies and have made an art-form of it. Maybe I should try it.
Sorry for bringing it up. (Hummm.... how long should the test run.)
Anyway, JD isn't AFTER encumbering the software, but so far he hasn't
proposed a license that does not encumbering it. His standard for
"minimum" is as arbritrary as Stallman's. As far as I can remember,
his minumum consists of at least two arbitrary conditions.
I guess you could construct a license which doesn't encumber the
software with: "You may do anything you want with this software, even
remove the copyright statement and license text (which doesn't change
the copyright & licensing status much), but only if you first agree to
never sue me (except to the extent licenses can't forbid it)". The
software is only encumbered by copyright law, as you mentioned, and I
guess you could say that the licensee (but not the software) is
encumbered by the agreement not to sue. I suspect that such a license
would be of less benefit or more risk than releasing the software to the
public domain.
I'm sorry if this seems to be getting absurd.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: User Friendly??
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 17:40:55 -0500
Chad Everett wrote:
>
> On Mon, 19 Mar 2001 14:16:55 GMT, Martigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >I think user friendly is: The ability to change everything about the OS to
> >fit your needs, with out multiple reboots.
>
> I disagree. I think user friendly is providing interfaces that do what
> the user expects. www.gnome.org had a link to a pretty an article that
> some guy named Joel wrote that I thought was pretty good:
>
> http://joel.editthispage.com/stories/storyReader$51
regardless, under either definition...windows fails.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 17:43:40 -0500
Shades wrote:
>
> "Aaron Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > Obviously, you were not working on a fully configured Unix system.
> >
> > Clue for the clueless: most of the GUI features you see in modern
> > M$ Windows systems were implemented on Unix systems almost a decade ago.
> >
>
> Ok but that was because the hardware at the time that DOS ran on could
> not support graphics all too well. Also who had the money to biy
>
> >
> > Yes, the x-windows based gui's that were available in 1988 were
> > fairly primative...however, by the early 1990's, they were VERY
> > much more sophisticated.
> >
> > Such as multiple desktops (still not implemented in Windows), implemented
> in
> > the CDE GUI in the early 1990's, and is standard in ALL modern Unix GUI's.
> >
> > icons for frequently used tools on a task bar (not until Windows98,
> implemented
> > in CDE in the early 1990s', and is standard in ALL modern Unix GUI's.
> >
> > symbolic links....implemented in Windows98....implemented in Unix in the
> > early 1970's.
> >
> > Pre-emptive multi-tasking. Implemented by Microsoft in windows
> 1995....implemented
> > in Unix in 1969.
> >
> > Need I go on...
>
> Well this is all true but creating a multitasking OS and having hardware to
> support it on was way too expensive for companies to put on someones desktop
You are truly and idiot.
I wrote a multi-user, multi-tasking OS in FOUR WEEKS...BY MYSELF
on a lowly mid 1970's Motorola 6809 system.
> in even the early 80's. The 8086/88 were not really made to be
> multitasking at all. Also MS developed OS/2 which WAS a multitasking OS in
It was a hell of a lot more powerful than a 6809....
> late 80's. I am not sure any of you statements mean anything though. We
> all stand on the shoulders of giants in some way or another and Unix itself
> learned a lot over the years from other endeavors that it copied and use.
You really are fucking clueless about how little effort it takes to
create a multi-tasking operating system.
I suggest you shut your pie-hole until you have taken the relevant
systems programming course at a university.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: "Shades" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 17:48:36 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Shades wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > You obviously haven't worked on any HP, Sun, or SGI machines with
> > > version 1990 or later versions of Unix.
> > >
> > > The learning curve for these systems is SHALLOWER than windows.
> > >
> >
> > Well then I suppose Sun/HP and SGI are going to be winning the desktop
> > anyday? Hmm?
>
> In the same way that the gasoline engine ripped the guts out of
> steam-powered automobile manufacturers.
>
Hmm... too bad Sun/HP and CERTAINLY SGI doesn't have the business acumen to
make it happen. Otherwise I would agree with you.
------------------------------
From: "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Here's a load of horse crap
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 22:46:48 GMT
Shades <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:990osv$gbn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> I suppose those lightbulbs are innovative ideas in the software industry
and
> in the next picture he gets up and stomps all over them :-)
>
>
> "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > http://www.microsoft.com/billgates/default.asp
> >
> > --
> > [ Do Not Make Illegal Copies of This Message ]
>
Q: How many Microsoft programmers does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Three. Two to hold the ladder and one to hammer the bulb into the
faucet.
--
Weevil
================================================================
"The obvious mathematical breakthrough [for breaking encryption schemes]
would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers."
-- Bill Gates, The Road Ahead (pg 265), 1995
------------------------------
From: "Shades" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 17:55:13 -0500
"John Fereira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:995png$nsh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <995m23$t8n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Shades" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >
>
> >Well this is all true but creating a multitasking OS and having hardware
to
> >support it on was way too expensive for companies to put on someones
desktop
> >in even the early 80's.
>
> When I was a unix systems administrator in the early 80's I had an
HP9000/900
> on my desktop. Not only was it multi-tasking but it was running a real
time
> O/S (RTE-A). Everyone else in my department was running the same machine
> on their desktop as well. One of them wrote a significant portion of that
> O/S. I left that job in 1984 to become the unix systems administrator
> resposible for the first four unix machines that Hewlett Packard owned and
> subsequently set up their first tcp-ip network.
>
I believe you but you are probably at a University or an Engineering firm
(Ok I am just guessing and I could be wrong). But any small-medium-large
sized business could afford one for every desktop AND it had the
applications for people to get their jobs done. What I am getting at was
that affordability and large volume was important for companies and that is
what IBM/Intel/MS provided. They had to keep it cheap to make it successful
and the Intel 808x was very limited (should have gone with a Z80). It
proved to be a successful business model that survived for quite a while.
>
> John Fereira
> Ithaca, NY
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "WGAF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 23:00:27 GMT
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
Useless FUD deleted...
> And with this in addition to the already panic stricken
> market and frankly a depression like wave comming upon us,
> isn't NOW the TIME FOR YOU TO NOT BE A FUCKING DUMBASS.
Too late for you Charlie.....
------------------------------
From: "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE 2.1 oopsie!
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 23:04:19 GMT
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Iw8t6.932$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Roy Culley wrote:
>
> > Unlikely as he would need to read some documentation to know about
> > --force. He says he did 'rpm -i' and he has told us many times he
doesn't
> > lie so we have conclusive evidence that he screwed up ... again.
>
> Then why did it work with no errors? Why am I using it _right now_???
>
> --
> Pete
> Running on SuSE 7.1, Linux 2.4, KDE 2.1
> All your fly zone are belong to us
You are clearly wrong about something, Pete. Either you're lying about what
happened, or you're mistaken about the rpm command you typed in.
One way or another, you are wrong. It happens to everybody. Many people
here think it happens to you a *lot*. :)
--
Weevil
================================================================
"The obvious mathematical breakthrough [for breaking encryption schemes]
would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers."
-- Bill Gates, The Road Ahead (pg 265), 1995
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
