Linux-Advocacy Digest #41, Volume #34 Sun, 29 Apr 01 16:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (mlw)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Primary and secondary missions (Larry Caldwell)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (mlw)
Re: What will the pundits say after appellate ruling? (Tim Hanson)
Re: MS should sue the pants off linux-mandrake (was: Re: Winvocates (JS PL)
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Les Mikesell")
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Les Mikesell")
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Craig Kelley)
Re: Why do Win advocates suck? Part 1 (David Goldstein)
Re: Why do Win advocates suck? Part 1 (David Goldstein)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (JS PL)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 18:47:57 GMT
Donn Miller wrote:
> OK, I WILL agree with you on that point. This machine is a P166, 64
> megs RAM, and the last time I tried xine w/XFree86 with a 42 meg music
> MPEG video, it was dropping frames like crazy. It looked like a slide
> show. But Media Player under Win ME suffered very little frame
> lossage. Amazing. Of course, remember that MS tuned Windows ME
> specifically for this sort of thing. ME is not very good in general,
> because most things seem too damned slow on ME. But when it comes to
> playing videos (both RealPlayer, Windows Media, and MPEG music video),
> Windows ME has been outstanding. I find ME unusable for much else.
> Well, you know that MediaPlayer is probably using some sort of direct
> access to the video HW for optimum performance, so Windows does outshine
> Linux in this respect.
For some reason my Linux system graphics is slower than Windows graphics in
general. I can only assume this is something to do with my Voodoo 5500 and
XFree86. Since 3dfx has been swallowed by NVidia, I'll have to upgrade
eventually.
> Unfortunately, there's much more to computing than multimedia, so I only
> reboot into Windows to play music mpeg vid's. Of course, you know that
> music videos are much more demanding on CPU time than MPEG movies,
> right, because now you've got a continuous stream of sound as well as
> the video portion itself to deal with.
I've yet to see both audio and video work on Linux. I can get one or the
other but not both. Which application where you using?
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 14:52:48 -0400
Donn Miller wrote:
>
> mlw wrote:
>
> > I don't know what your problem is, but I I was looking to buy a laptop. I
> > didn't want to spend a lot on one because, by and large, they are the "bic
> > razor" of computing. The company I am at, offered me a Compaq Presario 1690.
> >
> > They were getting rid of it because it was too slow. I installed RedHat Linux
> > 7.1, went without a hitch (sans modem, of course) even the PCMCIA netcard
> > worked as designed.
>
> So, how much did you pay for it, if you don't mind me asking? The
> cheapest used laptop I could find was a P100, 16 megs RAM, 1.1 GB HD for
> $200. Now, I KNOW that's got to too damned expensive for what it is.
> These people annoy me that pull this, because they know some
> unsuspecting schmuck is going to shell out that kind of cash eventually,
> so they won't sell it at a more reasonable price. All I want is a good
> older laptook to dick around with, not fast, but good enough to do the
> things I want to do, at a reasonable price.
It was a "Nobody wants it? Can I take it?" sort of deal. Gratis.
--
I'm not offering myself as an example; every life evolves by its own laws.
========================
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 18:49:14 GMT
Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> Try loading Win 2k on the same system. Comparing Linux with Win98 is not
> really a fair comparison -- Linux is closer to NT/W2k in functionality.
Windows 2000 will crawl, I suspect.
> If you want to compare with W98, you also need to spend some time trashing
> W98's reliability, its susceptibility to viruses, and its complete absence
> of server functionality.
Windows 98 SE is fine as a server (we have one running for months at work).
Provided you don't do anything else with it. I have file shares and a web
server running on it. No ftp server though.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 18:50:11 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Of course, I have conversely noted that DVD playback works perfectly on
> my Duron linux box with a TNT2 graphics card, taking something like 30%
> CPU time, using xine.
xine? I've not tried that one.
> In contrast, my brother's recent upgrade, featuring a Duron and a
> GeForce2MX, using the DVD playback software included with the graphics
> card itself, did not produce fluid and smooth DVD playback. Just didn't.
Windows or Linux?
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 18:51:49 GMT
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> So you no longer run SuSE Linux 7.1? because it has informed you that your
> hardware is faulty. Ignorance in action people, you can't help but burst
> out laughing.
This is on my 2nd machine... it has Windows 98 SE and Mandrake 8.0 on it.
It is a Pentium 166MHz with 32 MBytes of RAM.
The faulty RAM system _was_ an Pentium II 400MHz, but I've just upgraded it
to an AMD Duron 850MHz.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Larry Caldwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,us.military.army
Subject: Re: Primary and secondary missions
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 12:05:11 -0700
In article <9cglch$31b$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> >> No, you have it backwards. Propagating DNA is the primary mission.
> >> Getting laid is merely a supporting operation.
> > A Social Darwinist. How quaint. I thought Social Darwinism was limited
> > to survivalists squatting in their bunkers discussing their imminent
> > world domination.
> Looks to me more like biological darwinism.
No, anybody who knows anything about biology knows that genes are not
unique. You could easily remove 3/4 of the entire human race and not
lose a single gene.
Social Darwinists believe that they are intimately involved in the great
struggle for Survival of the Fittest, and think that their beliefs
determine that fitness. Of course what they think has nothing at all to
do with their biological fitness. If you measure reproduction rates,
what we have in our society is survival of the poorest and stupidest.
--
You don't have much to say about the length
of your life, but you have a lot to say
about the breadth and depth.
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 15:11:32 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Sun, 29 Apr 2001 11:40:58 -0400, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >[ranting snipped]
> >
> >I don't know what your problem is, but I I was looking to buy a laptop. I
> >didn't want to spend a lot on one because, by and large, they are the "bic
> >razor" of computing. The company I am at, offered me a Compaq Presario 1690.
>
> That's nice.
Very cool indeed.
>
> >They were getting rid of it because it was too slow. I installed RedHat Linux
> >7.1, went without a hitch (sans modem, of course) even the PCMCIA netcard
> >worked as designed.
>
> Will wonders never cease.
Yes. I have NEVER seen ANY os install on a laptop as easily as this did.
>
> >Not only do I now have a perfectly usable laptop, for which I did not have to
> >pay, it also runs all the nifty Linux stuff that people CAN'T run on Windows
> >9x/ME.
>
> People are not interested in compilers.
Well, Let me tell you what I do have on it:
Star Office (I like it better than MS Office, I use the drawing package a lot
for diagrams, and IMHO it is easier to use than Viso, and whether or not you
admit it, cheaper.)
PostgreSQL. I do have database needs for some stuff, PostgreSQL is way overkill
for most of it but still smaller than Microsoft's Jet Engine.
unixODBC, for StarOffice and other such apps.
Various games, my son is addicted to Maelstrom.
Gimp, while I am not trilled with the UI (I prefer PaintShopPro over everything
else, gimp gets the job done.)
gPhoto seems to work, but the jury is still out.
Of course all the programming languages. (That is, of course, my job)
Netscape, Konqueror, and other internet tools.
XMMS and cddb. I have the WHOLE freedb database, which you CAN'T do with
Windows, none of my CDs go without tracklists, even when I am not connected to
the internet.
AOL Instant messenger
LOADS of other stuff.
I even have Wine installed.
Bit I can code and run my server applications on my laptop, which is great.
Something I could not do with Windows 9x or ME, and 2K wouldn't run on this
laptop.
>
> >Granted, it is slower than my dual PIII desktop, but it is a portable.
>
> So is my ThinkPad 765 which also runs Windows faster than it runs
> Linux with a GUI.
Your milage may vary, but having seen this laptop on Windows, and now on Linux,
Linux seems much faster.
>
> >I don't know what you are complaining about, Linux is awesome for the desktop,
> >and laptop.
>
> Linux is a bad joke on the desktop.
Except for some specialized apps, what is missing from the Linux desktop? Yes
there are some el-cheapo hardware that doesn't run, but so what, that stuff is
crap anyway. What common "must have" applications are not available?
> Maybe for geeks who like playing with Emacs, but it is dead before it
> even had a chance.
On a side note, I hate emacs.
>
> >As with all things, just check the hardware compatibility list.
>
> Why bother?
For the same reason you look at the compatibility list for Windows 2K. So you
can be sure what you buy works with the OS.
>
> Even supported hardware half works because the word "supported" has an
> entirely different meaning in the Linux world than in the Windows
> world.
That is complete FUD and you know it.
--
I'm not offering myself as an example; every life evolves by its own laws.
========================
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 12:33:32 -0700
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: What will the pundits say after appellate ruling?
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said William Shakespeare in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 28 Apr 2001
> >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> >>>
> >> What counts is not whether they are convicted of being a monopoly,
> >> however; what counts is what remedy is applied, and whether it works.
> >
> >Yes Max but my point was that even if the remedy is watered down or
> >thrown out, MS has virtually zero chance of getting reversal on the
> >charge of whether or not it is a monopoly, and therefore guilty of
> >violating the Sherman Act.
>
> I understand that, and I'd agree with your point. But in terms of "what
> counts", I am not comforted by any metaphoric victories, only in a
> remedy.
>
> >The point being that even if the
> >government slaps MS' wrist, the monopoly conviction which *will*
> >remain will open the door to a potential vast, incredible wave of
> >private lawsuits by anyone abused by MS' monopoly, including other
> >corporations. And they can all sue for *3X* damages. Sun is
> >reportedly contemplating just such a suit.
>
> So far as I know, this idea remains primarily amateur speculation,
> though I don't doubt it has some validity. Sun already folded for chump
> change in their last suit, so I have little faith in the value of such
> an approach.
>
If you're holding out for an effective remedy from conservative judges
and an administration in Microsoft's pocket, you'll most likely be
disappointed. Moreover, it's my guess that opponents of the Microsoft
monopoly will not get justice in the United States in this generation.
The public has given Gates credit for computing (much like it gave the
Vanderbilts and Rockefellers credit for transportation), untainted
politicians are isolated, competition is neutralized. Customers have no
choice and no say in products they use because there is no viable
alternative. Innovation is stifled and there is little we can do.
>From a business standpoint Microsoft enjoys the status of the drug lords
of South American countries. Here in Washington state, people know
something isn't right with Microsoft's business practices, but they look
the other way because the company brings in so much money to the area.
I think the only solution remaining lies with other countries, those on
the paying end. There is a growing sentiment against sending software
dollars to an American monopolist. Maybe that will dislodge this
particular tooth.
--
"I can remember when a good politician had to be 75 percent ability and
25 percent actor, but I can well see the day when the reverse could be
true."
-- Harry Truman
______________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Still Only $9.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
With Seven Servers In California And Texas - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
------------------------------
From: JS PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS should sue the pants off linux-mandrake (was: Re: Winvocates
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 15:44:00 -0400
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
> Jan Johanson wrote:
> > >
> > > Then there's the Office rip-offs
> > > http://www.linux-mandrake.com/screenshots/venus1.jpg
> > >
> > > It's like a whos-who list of plagiarists!
> >
> > I mean look at this! I love how those that claim to despite the GUI and
> > everything MS like - are the first to do everything possible to copy it.
> > Look at all the damn near identical copies of Windows tools and the look and
> > feel. Give me a break, these screen shots are fantastic. I didn't see a
> > single original idea in the bunch.
>
> It seems that the KDE developers are listening to the screams of
> Win-Users who cannot deal with software that doesn't look and feel
> like Windoze software.
Actually I thought the cloned XP desktop was pretty cool looking.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 19:45:48 GMT
"Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3aeb28cd$0$21757$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >
> > > They aren't, 99.999% reffer to unscheduale downtime.
> >
> > So they just schedule downtime after every crash and patch
> > installation so they don't have to count it? Why shouldn't
> > the measurement be of any downtime?
>
> Because that simply is not how it works.
> If I am upgrading the hard drive on a system that has had 100.0000% uptime
> (i.e., never stopped since it was turned on) and all I do it shut down to
> attach another drive (assuming we don't have hot-swap drive bays with a
> spare bay available) - that has nothing to do with reliability or
stability.
> The OS is perfectly stable, the hardware is perfectly stable.
>
> In your version, the only "stable" system would be one that is turned on
and
> just sits in a cornor until it finally dies from some mechanical failure
> never updated or maintained.
Yes, that is the kind I prefer to use, and if the scope of the job it is
required
to do does not change over the life of the hardware that is exactly how
it should work. Obviously people who have only been exposed to
Microsoft software find the concept shocking... If the load expands
beyond the original design it might be acceptable to shut down while
adding upgrades but considering the typical few-year lifespan of
PC equipment it is usually faster and easier to replace the whole box
with something that meets the new needs.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 19:45:48 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9ce1k3$eep$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >
> > > They aren't, 99.999% reffer to unscheduale downtime.
> >
> > So they just schedule downtime after every crash and patch
> > installation so they don't have to count it? Why shouldn't
> > the measurement be of any downtime?
>
> Patch installation, yes, is schedualed downtime. A crash, no.
> Consider my computer, the only times it's down have been: power cut > UPS
> can hold, hardware upgrade, and not all of them.
> Scheduale downtime is usually meaningless when you are talking about OS
> stability. Are you going to blame the OS because the computer need to be
> re-located, or upgraded?
Yes, if the upgrade is a required service pack to make it do something
promised in the first place. And definitely if it is something like the
21 or so individual security patches that you have to install separately
for win2k/IIS where each one forces a reboot. A server out of service
is out of service for everyone regardless of whether the admin
schedules it or not.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 19:45:48 GMT
"Boris Dynin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:CSqG6.718$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> There's MSDN article on MS SAX implementation (MSXML3.DLL). Basically,
what
> it says is that MSXML3 cannot be accessed from VBScript (ASPs); it's
> possible that some of its methods can still be accessed from VBScript but
> not all of them. You should probably write a COM component in C++ (call it
> Intermediate.DLL) and have it call MSXML3.DLL. Your ASPs will call that
> component: Intermediate.DLL.
I don't think that is the case. We only access a few methods, using the
http component to pull some content from our old reliable apache
server that would have been too complicated to duplicate in VB,
and the xslt (transformNode) method to turn some xml from a
local data server into html. All the pages work when tested under
light to medium load, and in fact I cannot reproduce the failures.
However, each IIS server will crash several times during the
day and get into a mode were it appears that things that need
xml processing are blocked. Generally it keeps accepting connections
and serving static pages, but since most of our site requires some
xml processing or the pass-through html, it is basically dead.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: 29 Apr 2001 13:53:24 -0600
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Take a P166 with 64 meg and load Linux Mandrake 7.x on it and Win98SE
> > and see which one is more responsive. Linux is slow as shit...
>
> Take a P166 with 32 meg and load Linux Mandrake 8.0 on it and
> Win98SE. At the start of Installation, Mandrake 8.0 complains the
> system is "low on resources" and may fail the installation (it did
> the same with Mandrake 7.2). Mandrake 8.0 recommended installation
> uses KDE, which performs like a dog on this system. Much smaller
> window managers (and less functional) perform much better. Windows
> 98 SE offers the full system and runs without any problems.
Hmmm. Windows 98se is 3 years old and is an unprotected operating
system.
Care to come back with a report on how Windows 2000 fares on that
machine?
> > How about multimedia?
>
> I've noticed on my faster machine (400MHz PII) Linux + XFree86
> doesn't play MPG files very well. On Windows 98 SE they work just
> fine. Overall graphics on thius system performs poorly compared to
> Windows 98 SE.
My experience is the opposite -- although I only have Windows 98 "the
first edition".
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: David Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why do Win advocates suck? Part 1
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 05:41:27 -0700
pookoopookoo wrote:
>
> > How do you make money in a Linux shop? You are a sysadmin (even
> > windows needs these guys, so much for ease of use), you program in Java,
> > Perl, PHP, C++, database admin/developer, etc..., pretty much the same
> > way that you make money in a win shop.
>
> Yeah, but you're supposed to give away your code (unless you're programming
> a custom app for a given company and even then, you should give it away).
> Open Source dictates that you should. Otherwise, no one has any way of
> knowing if the code is good or not. Proprietary is bad.
No, you are not supposed to give away your code--unless you want to.
No where is this written. If I GPL my code and you choose to use it,
you are required to supply the course code. I do not see what is wrong
giving back to the community, however, I am surely not required to
release source code that may be patented.
>
> > I am in the process of setting up a business. I will be using Linux
> > servers and using state-of-the-art software technologies. The
> > workstations will also be Linux, with a couple of boxes to test
> > winclients on (web-based interfaces--should not be a problem). All of
> > the skills mentioned above will be needed for my project and I will be
> > hiring people to do these jobs. So, how do you make your living?
>
> I'm a hardware tech. Your computer is broken, I fix it. But I'm working hard
> to get out of this shitty, uncreative buisness. I'm also a full-time design
> student. I want to work with computers, not ON them =)
And how could you not make money in a Linux shop? As a matter of
fact, design is about as platform independent as you can get.
David
------------------------------
From: David Goldstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why do Win advocates suck? Part 1
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 05:35:58 -0700
Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
<snipped>
> Okay, so Win2K yadda yadda sucks up 1.5Gb of disk space. And?
You failed to read the other posts.
David
------------------------------
From: JS PL <[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: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 16:01:45 -0400
Ed Allen wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >JS PL wrote:
> >>
> >> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > Said Daniel Johnson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 27 Apr 2001
> >> > [...]
> >> > >I see no evidence that the early differences between
> >> > >GEM and Windows had anything to do with who owned
> >> > >DOS. I admit that the transition to Windows 95 did
> >> > >depend upon this- but had CP/M been king, Windows 95
> >> > >would effectivaly have meant migrating everyone to
> >> > >*Microsoft's* CP/M clone in the process.
> >> > [...]
> >> > >It's all hypothetical, but that's how I see it.
> >> >
> >> > I think you are mistaken in ignoring the impact of Microsoft
> >> > force-bundling Windows with DOS, the very behavior that MS signed a
> >> > consent decree to avoid ending up in court. Later, they paid Caldera an
> >> > undisclosed amount (I speculate it could be up to two billion dollars)
> >> > to avoid further investigation into Microsoft's actions to kill off
> >> > DR-DOS.
> >>
> >> I speculate it was 2¢ because Caldera didn't have a shot in hell of winning.
> >
> >Then why did Micro$oft settle?
> >
> Yes. In another post you indicate that the accused should never give
> up if they are innocent.
>
> So do tell.
Who says they settled for any amount?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
