Linux-Advocacy Digest #855, Volume #33 Tue, 24 Apr 01 00:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Chad Myers")
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Intel versus Sparc ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Jan Johanson")
Re: Microsoft gets the credit its due, as a marketing Co. that sells (John
Westerdale)
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Jan Johanson")
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Chad Myers")
Re: Why do Win advocates suck? Part 1 (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead. (Chad Everett)
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Boris Dynin")
Re: Buy Microsoft stock!!! ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product ("Gary Hallock")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("JS PL")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 03:21:46 GMT
"Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3ae460a3$0$2739$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > >
> > > Win2K is better all around.
> >
> > Then why do my IIS 5.0 servers crash regularly? If I didn't have a
> > third party load balancer avoiding the ones that decided to pop
> > up a dialog box (from a service???) instead of restarting after
> > a crash they would be down much of the time. They are just
> > doing xsl transformations with Microsoft's msxml3.dll.
>
> Because your applications are incredibly buggy?
Perhaps, if you define calling a Microsoft-provided dll as being
a bug, which is beginning to sound reasonable to me.
> Given that we run just a hair less than 100 IIS5 servers split between our
> two largest clients (plus a smattering of about a dozen more) and have to
> date had a SINGLE blue screen event (a brand new gigabit over copper
> ethernet card with the "latest" drivers hosed us, we fell back to our
> previous Intel adapter and were up and running in minutes) - I would think
> that the problem lies elsewhere...
I ran a couple of these servers for several months delivering static images
without problems before we tried to switch the dynamic parts from
reliable Linux boxes (one had been up about a year and a half when
I finally had to shut it down for replace a hard drive). Now IIS crashes
several times a day, often failing to restart itself even though the service
is configured for automatic restarts. Maybe it is OK as long as it doesn't
really have to do much. And maybe with your 100 servers they each
don't have much of a load...
> if you have a service poppping up dialog boxes then that service is
> obviously fooked!
Yes, obviously, and there is nothing but Microsoft dll's and a bit
of vbscript calling them. Why should there ever be a dialog
box from a service regardless of the circumstances? Why doesn't
it just die quietly and let the service manager restart it?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 03:07:00 GMT
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> JS PL wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >
> > > > And your a College Educated Unix Engineer.....who only uses
> > Windows..Pffft..
> > >
> > > Even after I explain the deception, he still doesn't get it.
> >
> > Explaining something which is possible isn't proof that your doing it. Your
> > using Windows98 and lying about it. Your worse than Devlin who uses it and
> > claims he's forced to do it.
> >
> > > > After you deal with your own lies, you can begin throwing accusations
> > > > around.
> > >
> > > So, what college campus did you trespass upon?
> >
> > SDSU - dropped out after a year, and have never looked back.
>
> LOL. me, a 4 year degree vs. JS PL, a college drop out!
>
> Matthew Gardiner
No wonder you guys are MS haters. You were brainwashed for 4+
years about the evils of Corporate america while you were taught
archaic technology and then dumped into a Corporate america with
no real skills, but lots of knowledge but computer systems which
haven't been used in 15 years.
College... gotta love it!
-c
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 03:24:30 GMT
"Boris Dynin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:NGQE6.20249$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Then why do my IIS 5.0 servers crash regularly? If I didn't have a
> > third party load balancer avoiding the ones that decided to pop
> > up a dialog box (from a service???) instead of restarting after
> > a crash they would be down much of the time. They are just
> > doing xsl transformations with Microsoft's msxml3.dll.
> >
> > Les Mikesell
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> This problem can be solved easily by writing a simple program in VB or
C++.
> Have your watchdog service enumerate windows on the screen once in every
> several seconds. If message box window is found, emulate OK click.
Thanks, but it is really pretty scary that someone knows how to deal with
something like that. I take it I'm not the first to experience the
problem...
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Intel versus Sparc
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 21:23:39 +0600
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Figured it couldn't be compiler bugs! After some
> more dicking around with cleaning up some of
> the myriad of warnings, I noticed that the
> bad function was pushing an array of structures
> onto the stack. Looking at the size of the array,
> found it was 64 Mb!
As others have pointed out, it is customary to use the heap for
humongous data structures.
Meanwhile, you might want to use your favorite search engine to find out
how you can change the stack size on your x86 machine if it's running
Linux. (I'd tell you how, but I've never needed to do it. When my
programs exceed the default, I modify them then and there, because I
don't want to have to ask everyone who uses them to change their stack
settings too.)
> So, be careful about thinking PC's are the best
> things around, just because they are much more
> powerful than they used to be.
I'd happily exchange my x86 system for a top of the line Alpha, if only
I didn't have to pay for it.
No one with half a clue is under any illusion that PCs are the best
things around.
Bobby Bryant
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: 23 Apr 2001 22:25:17 -0500
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Jon Johansan wrote:
> >
> > and all that means... you are a unix dude... ok. so?
> >
> > Gee, an OS that is bogged down by _buggy apps_ who'd a thunk?
> > I'll bet I can create a buggy app that'll bog down any OS if the bugs
were
> > gnarly enough eh? silly...
> >
> > memory usage too high? What's the yardstick? If you compare usage to
> > Commadore 64 levels then even Linux is a memory PIG! However, we're not.
And
> > 256 megs of ECC RAS2 memory will set you back a whooping $89 - do you
really
> > need to be concerned about 486's running with 32 megs?
>
> $89, no, its is not, you are looking at least $NZ150 for 128MB RAM, that
> is standard, off the shelf memory, I have 384MB of RAM, which works out
> to be around $NZ450 worth of memory in my computer.
I'm sorry memory is so expensive for you - but for me and fellow
pricewatch.com visitors this is not the case.
>The memory usage of
> an OS sound be as minimal as possible, for example, the Amiga 500 used
> 100K to load Workbench 1.3.2 out of 1.5MB of ram (excluding the
> FastMem), compare that to a Average computer, at 128MB, which the OS
> alone takes up 32MB of RAM, that is an example of bloat.
Well - it would be nice if the Amiga OS had at least 1/8th the funtionality
of the Windows OS so we could even remotely begin to make comparisons.
>If Microsoft
> concerntrated on making Windows more secure, smaller, both disk and
> memory usage, I would be prepared to pay up to $1000 for it, however,
> Microsoft insists on sloppy code, well, you get bloat as a result.
So, given that you've never actually seen the code and simply because it has
become larger as more features were added, you deduce it's sloppy code?
Sherlock Holmes you are not.
------------------------------
From: John Westerdale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Microsoft gets the credit its due, as a marketing Co. that sells
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 03:20:42 GMT
> > or hotfixes that require a (planned) reboot. We've never had a W2K crash.
>
> *Are* there hotfixes that don't require reboot?
Maybe Microsoft Will put out a clean operating system, People will use
it
for years, and years, without needing to upgrade, because it works so
well.
Maybe?
That does fly in the face of what I have seen as being the real reason
that
the WInXX admin has to scramble more often.... the incessant need to
satisfy both
users and admins need to feel like they are in control. A battle that
ensures the
OS Vendor re-sells a customer a new BOX and OS every 2 Years.
If you put a single app on a box and leave it alone, it will probably
work. What
Unix box suffers for having Apache on board?
What user would be happy if he/she couldn't install drivers? (In Unix
you dont, but
printer Mfr's haven't generally ported their spiffy GUI interfaces,
aside from Irix that
can read a PPD file and construct a GUI on the fly). What user wouldn't
be tee'd off
if they couldn't load that new blastwell-Maximus game _with_ the
BFG-3000. These activities
degrade the quality of the O.S. because it breaks the continuity of the
original
clean install. Ever see an BigCo printer driver install and all the
software it mucked
with (OEM Microsoft DLLS getting whacked).
What Admin. should be content to leave any O.S. partition read write for
users the
Futz with? Why cant you run many apps on an NT Server? Seems they all
Morph the
(probably stable) MS code into their own flavor. NT with
TApe-Restore-Plus isn't the same
as NT with Big-Dog-Co printer drivers. Different still is the same box
with AOL 5.0
on it... Its a damn battleground. Who wins? Who knows. Who loses? the
consumer that
wants a stable box. Always wanted to point My Computer at the system
files just to
see if I could start whacking things.. Delete, delete, delete... Would
expect "that's
not fair".... complaints, but what IS security?
In Unix land random binary strings are executed in rapid succession...
not 'cause its
fair, but because its real... How many hours can crashme run until
something odd happens.
Or is it days or weeks? Why tolerate reboots as casual fixes?
The Quality of an MS-O.S. seems to decay because the System files are
not adequately
protected from the installation process. I have watched AOL installs go
by and and recall
being amazed that the machine still worked! This generally doesn't
happen with Unix. The stack is
not mucked with by setup.csh. The printer already works OK. (though I
would hope that
Linuxers would envision a better way to Permit Vendor Variation in
printing functions
al la PPD file (postscript printer definition files)).
So... Why post this Here? its a legit beef, and it needs to be handled,
because the
Linux/Open Source movement must be sure to separate Base-OS operations
from the
Application softwares. XFree86 must be Clean and operational
completely, then there is
no need for any other junk to degrade an otherwise properly operating
system. The
various software utilities must be included in a stable build. A clear
distinction
between the O.S. and the Application space would protect the user from
Himself, by insulating
the O.S. from the well intentioned user. OK... So Linux has the Kernel
space. Who
can ask or define what a software package can and can't do?
It makes a business case for MS to generate a continuous stream of $,
but Linux/Open Source
has to keep this from being the issue that keeps computers from being
transparent. That is,
once a technology gets ubiquitous, it becomes transparent.
Refrigerators, Washing machines,
TV's even bring new content every day, and don't usually explode. (HDTV
is a paradigm shift,
yeah, I know, but its a serious upgrade!).
Have removed this from the MS-adv. lists, they know this and would be
offended if this
point was offered in a public forum. Let them endure the vagaries of
their master that
envisioned their world. Its not mine. The future belongs to the
efficient.
Enough ranting... Give credit where its due, and find the reasons for
the instability.
These are things I have noticed in maintaining all sorts of systems.
... Phew... Sits under table to avoid flying Debris from upset
applecarts ...
JDW
# Retro-Genius: Ability to change perceptions to redefine the original
reality #
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: 23 Apr 2001 22:27:18 -0500
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Jon Johansan wrote:
> >
> > "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > However, product activation in XP is ONLY an issue with those that
> > intend to
> > > > bootleg it. It is of NO issue whatsoever to those that purchase
> > legitimate
> > > > copies.
> > > >
> > > > I've been working with the beta and it continues to amaze me how
many
> > people
> > > > have the operation of activation completely and categorically wrong.
> > I'll
> > > > repeat: product activation is ONLY a concern to those that bootleg
XP -
> > it
> > > > means nothing to legitimate users. (small tidbit pirates already
know:
> > > > enterprise versions of XP come with a "magic" key that bypasses
> > activation).
> > >
> > > I agree with your statement regarding the activation. I have been
using
> > > commercial UNIX's for years, and most software, such as SUN Forte
> > > Developer require registration as each installation is node locked,
> > > however, in a large organisation, there is a floating license which
> > > bypasses the activation. Maybe Microsoft is learning yet again from
the
> > > UNIX world. I do however have a concern with its salability, in a
small
> > > specialised market this sort of licensing is easy to police, however,
> > > imagine call centres bombarded with thousands of calls per minute of
> > > people pissed off waiting 20 minutes for service.
> >
> > Think: Activation can be automated over the internet ... and it is.
>
> True, true, however, comspiracy theorist Aaron will come up with a story
> about how the data will be used in a communist plot again America.
> Personally, I couldn't care two hoots whether Microsoft requires
> activation because, 1. no one forces you to buy either Windows XP of
> Office XP, there are alternatives, such as Wordperfect Office 2002 and
> Lotus Smart Suite that do a pretty good job. 2. The only people who are
> worried are pirates and conspiracy theorists who have nothing better to
> do than come up with a grand story.
True on the first part and your #2 but I have used Wordperfect Office and,
dude, it sucks. Have never used Lotus smart suite so can't say but the WP
stuff has been crap after version 5.1 for DOS.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 03:12:20 GMT
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Jon Johansan wrote:
> >
> > and all that means... you are a unix dude... ok. so?
> >
> > Gee, an OS that is bogged down by _buggy apps_ who'd a thunk?
> > I'll bet I can create a buggy app that'll bog down any OS if the bugs were
> > gnarly enough eh? silly...
> >
> > memory usage too high? What's the yardstick? If you compare usage to
> > Commadore 64 levels then even Linux is a memory PIG! However, we're not. And
> > 256 megs of ECC RAS2 memory will set you back a whooping $89 - do you really
> > need to be concerned about 486's running with 32 megs?
>
> $89, no, its is not, you are looking at least $NZ150 for 128MB RAM, that
> is standard, off the shelf memory, I have 384MB of RAM, which works out
> to be around $NZ450 worth of memory in my computer. The memory usage of
> an OS sound be as minimal as possible, for example, the Amiga 500 used
> 100K to load Workbench 1.3.2 out of 1.5MB of ram (excluding the
> FastMem), compare that to a Average computer, at 128MB, which the OS
> alone takes up 32MB of RAM, that is an example of bloat.
No, it's called improved functionality. To compare the workbench and
a modern OS is rediculous.
Perhaps you could compare the kernel since Amiga had pre-emptive multitasking,
etc. But Amiga didn't have DirectX, it didn't have COM+, it didn't have
plug-n-play
for many unrelated devices with drivers from many, many different vendors, it
didn't have any of the functionality that modern OSes have, yes even Linux which
is tough to call a modern OS, but it's more modern that Amiga.
> If Microsoft concerntrated on making Windows more secure,
Win2K is very secure.
> smaller, both disk and memory usage,
Ram is cheap, so are disks. I'd rather have them have a slight bit of bloat
for much more functionality and quicker releases. If you still insist on
running the latest OSes on your 386 20 with 4MB of RAM, have a blast, but
for those of us living in the real world, the different between a 100MB
footprint and 300MB really doesn't mean a hill of beans if the whole thing
runs well, which Win2K does.
> I would be prepared to pay up to $1000 for it, however,
> Microsoft insists on sloppy code, well, you get bloat as a result.
Sloppy code? Please provide facts, sir, not your ignorant rantings.
-c
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why do Win advocates suck? Part 1
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 15:28:09 +1200
Neil Cerutti wrote:
>
> Matthew Gardiner posted:
> >As for running it in a design studio, I don't see in the short
> >term Linux making huge inroads, however, how do I or any one
> >else knows that Adobe of Macromedia are quiety testing out
> >pre-alpha linux versions of their software on Linux? maybe they
> >are just hanging around and may release it when the time is
> >right. No one knows. As for photoshop and Quark Xpress,
> >howmany home users out their use those sorts of titles,
> >considering Photoshop in NZ is $2500 +GST, and Quark Xpress is
> >around the same amount.
>
> The CorelDRAW Graphics Suite for Linux was recently reviewed in
> _Linux Journal_. Not such a great port, apparently, but the big
> boys of the commercial graphics suites do seem to be porting to
> Linux. Well, one has. The reviewer comes to the conclusion that
> The Gimp is still better.
>
> http://linux.corel.com/products/draw/
>
> --
> Neil Cerutti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The Corel draw runs ontop of Wine, which unfortuanetly gives a shocking
performance. I am going to wait until the end of the year, when Windows
XP is released and Corel Wordperfect Suite 2002 is released, then I will
decide whether I should move of stay. Yes, I would like to see a stable
Windows so that I cam use Corel Draw 10 and Corel Wordperfect 2002,
however, like many a time before, I have been let down, again and again
by Microsoft, hence, I am very suspicious of any marketing Microsoft
carries out, hence I am waiting atleast 5 months to see how things iron
out, and any gotchas that may occur along the way.
Matthew Gardiner
--
Disclaimer:
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
If you don't like it, you can go [# rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
Running SuSE Linux 7.1
The best of German engineering, now in software form
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Subject: Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 23 Apr 2001 22:08:16 -0500
On 24 Apr 2001 02:13:40 GMT, Terry Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon, 23 Apr 2001 23:35:50 GMT, webgiant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I had a IDE r/w CDROM. with SUSE 7.1, kernel 2.4, and KDE latest and greatest.
>>>>
>>>> Wanted to burn some files into the CD (which on windows is a breeze).
>Really ??
Bull:
I put in a Yamaha CD_RW drive a while back so users can
create CDs on a Windows 2K Pro box. Trouble is, Windows
2K Pro will only let the administrator write to the CD-RW
drive. WIndows "online help and knowledge base": no help.
Yamaha online help: only administrator can write to CD-RW
drives in WIndows 2K. Easy CD Creator and NERO app: same
answer. So Ive got this new CD-RW drive and only administrator
can even use it. Really nice for the users, huh? A CD-RW
drive that they can't use.
Looks like it's quite a challenge for Windows 2K Pro to me.
------------------------------
From: "Boris Dynin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 20:34:46 -0700
> Essentially the only developer-written code is in the form of xsl
> sheets and calls to transformNode (from a Microsoft-supplied
> dll). There may very well be bugs in the xsl/xml or both. Does
> that mean IIS should crash when reading it?
So you are using ISAPI DLL, right? If so, your DLL is in IIS process space
and any bugs in the DLL can crash IIS easily. If you resorted to Active
Server Pages and out-of-process COM+ components IIS would be isolated from
(potentially) buggy user code.
Boris
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Buy Microsoft stock!!!
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 21:31:16 +0600
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> Bullshit? It usually takes Linux 3-6 months from the release of a product
> before drivers are available for it. By that time, many of the OEM's have
> already moved on to other hardware.
That's funny. I just built a system a few weeks ago by walking into the local
stores and buying whatever hot state-of-the-art components they had on the
shelf. The only thing I avoided was WinModems. I installed the Red Hat 7.1
"Fisher" beta on my Frankenstein box, booted it right up, and the only driver I
needed that wasn't already in the kernel was a Matrox driver that I downloaded
from www.matrox.com.
Meanwhile, I have a new coaster collection from all the CDs with Windows
drivers on them, which the device manufacturers kindly included with almost
every component. I didn't even bother sticking them in the drive to see what
might be on them.
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 15:38:12 +1200
Jan Johanson wrote:
>
> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Jon Johansan wrote:
> > >
> > > But I stated a fact.
> >
> > You stated an opinion, pure and simple. You can't assume that you know
> anything
> > about what I think.
>
> I based my comment upon reading your non-stop spewing of blind hatred for
> anything remotely related to MS. I've never seen you once give quarter to
> any MS product and given that MS products do not universally 'suck' it's
> obvious your opinion...
Windows 2000 as a desktop isn't bad, however, if it was more UNIX like
in the command line, device layout etc I would instantly move to it.
However, with that being said, I am going to wait 3-5 months after the
Windows XP launch and see how things iron out, as I will also buy COrel
Draw 10 and Wordperfect 2002 if Windows XP turns out to be a good OS,
however, I am suspicious to whether it will be reliable and stable esp
after the hype of Windows 2000 was released, I bought a legal copy, then
to my surprise, I found that the TCP/IP stack is even worse than Windows
9x/ME, PPP connections constantly disconnecting, in Linux I have no
problems, buggy apps such as Nutscrape Scabpicker 6 crashing the GUI,
however, with that being said, Windows 2000 isn't bad. If Microsoft has
learnt it's lesson and does a good job on Windows XP I may be tempted,
however, I must stress the "may". However, I don't use Office because
it is just plain shocking at handling graphics and fonts, Wordperfect I
feel is a superior suite of applications when compared to MS Office.
Matthew Gardiner
--
Disclaimer:
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
If you don't like it, you can go [# rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
Running SuSE Linux 7.1
The best of German engineering, now in software form
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 15:40:07 +1200
Jan Johanson wrote:
>
> "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Jon Johansan wrote:
> > >
> > > and all that means... you are a unix dude... ok. so?
> > >
> > > Gee, an OS that is bogged down by _buggy apps_ who'd a thunk?
> > > I'll bet I can create a buggy app that'll bog down any OS if the bugs
> were
> > > gnarly enough eh? silly...
> > >
> > > memory usage too high? What's the yardstick? If you compare usage to
> > > Commadore 64 levels then even Linux is a memory PIG! However, we're not.
> And
> > > 256 megs of ECC RAS2 memory will set you back a whooping $89 - do you
> really
> > > need to be concerned about 486's running with 32 megs?
> >
> > $89, no, its is not, you are looking at least $NZ150 for 128MB RAM, that
> > is standard, off the shelf memory, I have 384MB of RAM, which works out
> > to be around $NZ450 worth of memory in my computer.
>
> I'm sorry memory is so expensive for you - but for me and fellow
> pricewatch.com visitors this is not the case.
>
> >The memory usage of
> > an OS sound be as minimal as possible, for example, the Amiga 500 used
> > 100K to load Workbench 1.3.2 out of 1.5MB of ram (excluding the
> > FastMem), compare that to a Average computer, at 128MB, which the OS
> > alone takes up 32MB of RAM, that is an example of bloat.
>
> Well - it would be nice if the Amiga OS had at least 1/8th the funtionality
> of the Windows OS so we could even remotely begin to make comparisons.
>
> >If Microsoft
> > concerntrated on making Windows more secure, smaller, both disk and
> > memory usage, I would be prepared to pay up to $1000 for it, however,
> > Microsoft insists on sloppy code, well, you get bloat as a result.
>
> So, given that you've never actually seen the code and simply because it has
> become larger as more features were added, you deduce it's sloppy code?
> Sherlock Holmes you are not.
What can Windows do that Workbench can't? full command line, full GUI,
printers, fonts etc etc. are all available on the AmigaOS.
Matthew Gardiner
--
Disclaimer:
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
If you don't like it, you can go [# rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
Running SuSE Linux 7.1
The best of German engineering, now in software form
------------------------------
From: "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is an excellent product
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 23:38:02 +0000
In article <GK4F6.9497$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And how is that any different from opening up Linux to allow normal
> users to do priviledged activities?
The only priviledged activity that normal users will be allowed to do is
write to the CD. Normal users would still not have the ability to load
and unload drivers. If you have to give out this kind of authority on
W2K to allow normal users to write CDs, why not just give everyone the
password of administrator and be done with it?
Gary
------------------------------
From: "JS PL" <hi everybody!>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2001 23:43:51 -0400
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> JS PL wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >
> > > > And your a College Educated Unix Engineer.....who only uses
> > Windows..Pffft..
> > >
> > > Even after I explain the deception, he still doesn't get it.
> >
> > Explaining something which is possible isn't proof that your doing it.
Your
> > using Windows98 and lying about it. Your worse than Devlin who uses it
and
> > claims he's forced to do it.
> >
> > > > After you deal with your own lies, you can begin throwing
accusations
> > > > around.
> > >
> > > So, what college campus did you trespass upon?
> >
> > SDSU - dropped out after a year, and have never looked back.
>
> LOL. me, a 4 year degree vs. JS PL, a college drop out!
>
> Matthew Gardiner
And your still a dumb fuck, go figure.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
