Linux-Advocacy Digest #59, Volume #33 Sat, 24 Mar 01 16:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux dying (David Steinberg)
Re: Kulkis not Chad, Gates (was Re Unix/Linux Professionalism) (Chad Everett)
Re: Linux dying (Chad Everett)
Re: Linux dying ("Chad Myers")
More Microsoft security concerns: Wall Street Journal (Chad Everett)
Re: Linux dying (Chad Everett)
Re: More Microsoft security concerns: Wall Street Journal (Chad Everett)
Re: What is user friendly? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: What is user friendly? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dying
Date: 24 Mar 2001 20:18:10 GMT
Chad Myers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Compare that with Red Hat, who considers it a major acheivement if
: they only lose x amount vs y amount. Meeting analysts expectations
: consists of not losing as much as normal.
: And we won't even go into market cap. That $52 that MS has is
: after dozens of splits.
What a pointless thread.
If your point is that Microsoft is a larger and more profitable company
than Red Hat, I don't think anyone here is going to disagree.
However, if you'd like anyone to conclude from this that Linux is dying,
as the subject suggests, you've got your work cut out for you. Quit
telling us what we already know, and prove to us that Linux is dying.
--
David Steinberg -o)
Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Kulkis not Chad, Gates (was Re Unix/Linux Professionalism)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 20:20:43 GMT
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001 18:44:24 GMT, Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Chad Everett wrote:
>>
>> But any programmer who was was any good, if they're going to go to the trouble
>> of modifying the Netscape identity string and re-compile, would modify the code
>> so that it would generate the identity string by reading an external config
>> file. That way the string could be changed at will, without re-compiling.
>>
>> You are either lying, or a very poor programmer. Maybe both.
>
>All AK wants is to make it a little more difficult for the average dork
>to enumerate his system. He doesn't want to change the string at will.
>He wants it to stay the same. He went to a module and modified the
>construction of the string. That is all he needed to do for his
>purpose.
>
False premise. He hasn't done it at all.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dying
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 20:24:03 GMT
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:99hefe$tsa$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> >>Red Hat has started charging for their update services
>> >> >>in a futile attempt to actually make money sometime in
>> >> >>the next 10 years.
>> >>
>> >> Redhat has just been reported to have "broken even" for the last quarter,
>> >> and thus to have exceeded market expectations[1].
>> >
>> >They still lost $600,000 this quarter. It boils to $0/share but they
>> >still lost money. There was no profit.
>> >
>> >Oh yeah, and this:
>> >
>> >"Shares of Red Hat have lost 91 percent of their value since
>> > reaching its 52-week high of $64-1/16, while the Nasdaq
>> > Composite has lost 62 percent in the same period."
>> >
>>
>> Since Microsoft has lost about 52% of its value since reaching
>> it 52-week high of 115 (about one year ago), you are probably
>> not suggesting that these stock values are much of an indication
>> of the health of the company. Right?
>
>Well, considering MS just endured persecution from the government,
>their stock is doing quite well. They are still making profit,
>revenue is high, they still beat investors estimates, they have
>met analysts expectations for earnings all but one quarter in their
>public trading life.
>
>When the NASDAQ is down, they're typically up.
>
>Compare that with Red Hat, who considers it a major acheivement if
>they only lose x amount vs y amount. Meeting analysts expectations
>consists of not losing as much as normal.
>
>And we won't even go into market cap. That $52 that MS has is
>after dozens of splits.
>
So in other words, you agree. The stock values are not much of an
indication of the health of the company. It was really a very simple
question.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dying
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 20:22:29 GMT
"David Steinberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:99ive2$525$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> : Compare that with Red Hat, who considers it a major acheivement if
> : they only lose x amount vs y amount. Meeting analysts expectations
> : consists of not losing as much as normal.
>
> : And we won't even go into market cap. That $52 that MS has is
> : after dozens of splits.
>
> What a pointless thread.
>
> If your point is that Microsoft is a larger and more profitable company
> than Red Hat, I don't think anyone here is going to disagree.
It seems though, that there are people in this group, who reply to
my posts, that don't seem to get this. They think that MS losing 60%
and RHAT losing 60% are the same thing and are comparable, which they
are not.
-c
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: More Microsoft security concerns: Wall Street Journal
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 20:37:51 GMT
Microsoft's HailStorm Initiative
Raises Security, Privacy Questions
By Rebecca Buckman
Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal
Microsoft Corp.'s sweeping new Internet initiative, dubbed HailStorm, is
raising security and privacy questions, including how well Microsoft can
manage a huge database of personal information that could include
people's calendars, address books and credit- card information.
An equally important issue is whether Microsoft can persuade people to
pay for some of the new Web services that it is proposing.
HailStorm is a set of technologies and services -- to be run by
Microsoft and other companies -- that is meant to help consumers manage
their interactions on the Web. The services rely in part on Passport, an
existing Microsoft service that manages how users sign up to Web sites.
Microsoft expects to begin testing an initial set of HailStorm services
late this year. One will notify users of various events, such as
canceled plane flights, and another will offer an online "wallet" to
manage Web payments. Microsoft officials plan to charge for some
advanced services, though some will remain free.
Analysts like the idea of fees, but aren't sure consumers will pay
Microsoft for these new services. "The question is how compelling they
are going to be," says Drew Brosseau, an analyst with SG Cowen & Co. in
Boston.
For Microsoft, new revenue sources are becoming increasingly important.
Just Thursday, Goldman, Sachs & Co. trimmed its revenue and earnings
estimates for Microsoft's current quarter in light of slowing demand for
technology. Meanwhile, Thomas Weisel Partners analyst David Readerman
predicted two weeks ago that Microsoft would pull in only $5.9 billion
in sales for the quarter and earn 40 cents a share, slightly below
Goldman's new estimate of $6 billion to $6.1 billion in sales and profit
of 41 cents a share.
But successful Web services have to be reliable and secure -- and
Microsoft has taken some recent hits on that front. In the last six
months, the Redmond, Wash., software giant has suffered at least two
high-profile hacker attacks, including one in October that forced it to
shut down remote network access for more than 40,000 employees. Some
Microsoft products -- notably its Outlook e- mail program -- have been
targeted for tampering because they're so widely used.
Right now, "a lot of this personal information that you have is probably
on your PC hard drive or maybe on your Palm Pilot -- and [Microsoft]
wants to sort of encourage people to put it in a central location," says
Richard Smith, a computer-security expert who is now chief technology
officer of the Privacy Foundation, a research and education group. "This
is going to sort of create an incentive to break in there."
In an unusual incident disclosed Thursday, the online security firm
VeriSign Inc. acknowledged that it mistakenly awarded two special
"digital certificates" linked to Microsoft to an unidentified person who
said he worked for the software giant but never did (see article ). The
lapse meant that this person could "sign" malicious computer code to
represent it as official, safe Microsoft software, though there were no
immediate indications that anyone had done so. The companies said they
were working with the Federal Bureau of Investigation to identify the
culprit; VeriSign said it was changing its internal procedures to
prevent similar mistakes.
Microsoft officials acknowledge that running large Internet services
isn't their traditional strength.
"But we're committed to learning from the mistakes that we've made, such
as the outage we had in January, to make sure that we put in place the
infrastructure so that we can run these things with extremely high
degrees of availability," said Bob Muglia, a group vice president, at a
briefing this week. Microsoft has also beefed up security in some of its
products, such as Outlook, after e-mail viruses and other problems
cropped up.
"Trust is something you always have to earn," added Sanjay
Parthasarathy, a Microsoft vice president, in an interview. He noted,
however, that many people already trust Web sites now to safeguard
personal data such as credit-card numbers or bank-account information.
A central repository, in theory, could make it easier for Web services
to verify consumer data and forward information wherever consumers are,
whether at their own desktop computers or on a friend's cellular phone.
CheckSpace Inc., a Bellevue, Wash., electronic-payments company, said it
wants to use HailStorm's notification service in addition to e-mail to
alert customers when a late payment has arrived, for instance. Naseem
Tuffaha, its chief executive officer, said that the new alerts could
come through pagers or instant messaging.
Critics, of course, don't like the notion of Microsoft's servers
becoming involved in so many Web transactions. Indeed, Microsoft
officials said at their HailStorm announcement on Monday that they hope
everyone who uses the Internet signs up for a Passport identity account;
Microsoft's Mark Lucovsky said that "this spiral of services that we can
tie to an identity is virtually limitless."
To the anti-Microsoft lobbying group ProComp, short for the Project to
Promote Competition and Innovation, that's akin to Microsoft turning
"the Internet into a Microsoft toll road," a briefing paper from the
group claims. Microsoft officials respond that HailStorm will work with
many technology platforms, including those that compete with its Windows
system.
Mr. Tuffaha said he would link up with other companies, too, to better
serve his customers, but "today, Microsoft is leagues ahead in the
implementation [of Web services]."
-- Ted Bridis in Washington contributed to this article
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dying
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 20:43:22 GMT
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"David Steinberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:99ive2$525$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Chad Myers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>> : Compare that with Red Hat, who considers it a major acheivement if
>> : they only lose x amount vs y amount. Meeting analysts expectations
>> : consists of not losing as much as normal.
>>
>> : And we won't even go into market cap. That $52 that MS has is
>> : after dozens of splits.
>>
>> What a pointless thread.
>>
>> If your point is that Microsoft is a larger and more profitable company
>> than Red Hat, I don't think anyone here is going to disagree.
>
>It seems though, that there are people in this group, who reply to
>my posts, that don't seem to get this. They think that MS losing 60%
>and RHAT losing 60% are the same thing and are comparable, which they
>are not.
>
Which is exactly why your argument that RH losing more of a percentage
than Microsoft on stock value is not relevant to the point you
are trying to make. Hey, you brought it up.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: More Microsoft security concerns: Wall Street Journal
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 20:50:09 GMT
On Sat, 24 Mar 2001 20:37:51 GMT, Chad Everett wrote:
>
>Microsoft's HailStorm Initiative
>Raises Security, Privacy Questions
>
> By Rebecca Buckman
> Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal
>
> [-SNIP-]
>
> Microsoft officials acknowledge that running large Internet services
> isn't their traditional strength.
>
> [-SNIP-]
>
>
See, even Microsoft agrees with me.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
soc.singles,alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 16:00:14 -0500
FM wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >FM wrote:
> >>
> >> Uhm did I email this to you? I don't think I did, but if so, that was a
> >> mistake. In any case, I'm not at all interested in pursuing an email
> >> discussion, so post your reply to the newsgroup if you want to continue.
> >> Also, you might want to learn more about how CPU architectures differ
> >> from one another and how compiler optimizations take advantage of
> >> these differences.
> >
> >Let's just say that each generation of Intel's CPU's
> >
> >A) 8080 & 8085
> >B) 8088 & 8086
> >C) 80186
> >D) 80286
> >E) 80386
> >F) 80486
> >G) Pentium
> >H) Pentium II & Celeron
> >I) Pentium III
> >
> >Differs substantially from the one before.
> >
> >Although OP CODES, REGISTER MODELS, and other aspects are
> >backwards compatible (such as the 386 being able to simulate
> >several virtual 286's), the internal architectures vary greatly.
>
> Not only do they vary greatly, but certain features are introduced
> in one generation, and then are replaced by others or disappear in
> the next generation. Often, chips are redesigned from scratch, and
> register models and op-codes as apparent to the programmer are
> often not indicative the internals (due to the use of microcode,
> register renaming, etc)
>
> >Which gets back to my main point:
>
> >Mafia$oft sticks you with code compiled for an 80486, and nothing
> >better....even if you're running a Pentium III.
> >
> >Linux installs an 80386 kernal and apps BUT, it lets you re-make the kernal
> >and apps, so that you are using executable code that was optimized for
> >your CPU.
> >
> >
> >Regardless....are you trying to argue that a CPU-cognizant compiler
> >that optimizes for the appropriate generation of target CPU is somehow
> >going to produce inferior results to executable code optimized for a
> >CPU that hasn't even been manufactured for close to 10 years now...
>
> It's possible. Regardless, I wasn't arguing that, your strawman
> notwithstanding.
>
> Also note that:
>
> 1) Pentium IV's L1 caches are as small as ones found in 486.
>
None of which changes that fact that the optimal instruction mix for
a Pentium IV is very different from the optimal instruction mix for
an 80486.
> 2) Pentiun IV's implementation of some instruction that was introduced
> in previous generations is slow enough that it *penalizes* any optimization
> scheme that relies on it.
That's why you need an optimizer which takes these things into account.
>
> 3) Pentium has two decoders. Pentium Pro/II/III has 3 decoders. Pentium IV
> has one decoder, as many as found in 486. Each CPU generation requires
> different scheme for arranging instructions for optimal performance.
Precisely.
Which is why it's best to recompile your system for YOUR processor
using an optimizing compiler which understands these differences.
>
> Besides, we're not talking about two compilers that are equal in all
> respects except CPU-specific optimizations. Your speculations are fairly
> worthless, unless you happen to know the magnitude of performance gain due
> to GCC's CPU-specific optimizations, along with their applicability.
>
> Dan.
Are you insane?
>
> --
> When there are two conflicting versions of the story, the wise course
> is to believe the one in which people appear at their worst.
> -- H. Allen Smith, "Let the Crabgrass Grow"
--
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: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 16:01:08 -0500
FM wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >FM wrote:
> >>
> >> Quantum Leaper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Most Universities still teach Cobol/Mainframe as the center of their CS
> >> >degrees. How useful is that? At least that what my friend told me, when
> >> >he was looking at some Universities. Most programmers I know use C/C++.
> >> >BTW the local college centers around teaching C/C++ as the intro language
> >> >for the CS degrees, instead of Cobol.
> >>
> >> What decade do you think this is? Cobol? C/C++ are plenty backwards
> >> enough (Cobol isn't really necessarily more backwards than, say, C,
> >> just more obsolete in today's computing)
> >>
> >
> >So obsolete that EVERY Fortune 500 company has a shitload of COBOL applications....
> >without which, they companies would fall into chaos within hours.
>
> What part of "more" did you not understand?
If it's obsolete, why isn't it being replaced?
If it's obsolete, why are NEW applications being written in it?
>
> Dan.
>
> --
> What is truth? We must adopt a pragmatic definition: it is what is believed
> to be the truth. A lie that is put across therefore becomes the truth and
> may, therefore, be justified. The difficulty is to keep up lying... it is
> simpler to tell the truth and if a sufficient emergency arises, to tell one,
> big thumping lie that will then be believed.
> -- Ministry of Information, memo on the maintenance of
> British civilian morale, 1939
--
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.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
