Linux-Advocacy Digest #19, Volume #33 Thu, 22 Mar 01 19:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: What is user friendly? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: What is user friendly? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: What Linux MUST DO! - Comments anyone? (Chad Everett)
Re: More FUD from Ballmer (Rex Ballard)
Re: What is user friendly? (Chad Everett)
Re: Too expensive, too invasive (was: Re: uh oh, redhat is gonna do it) (Hal
Burgiss)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 18:52:25 -0500
Chad Everett wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2001 17:44:07 -0500, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Chad Everett wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 22 Mar 2001 17:20:01 -0500, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >Chad Everett wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, 22 Mar 2001 15:51:44 -0500, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >Chad Everett wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> This is NOT true at all. Maybe business and management departments
> >> >> >> and schools will still teach COBOL, BIG maybe. There is no way that
> >> >> >> CS department at the university level is going to teach COBOL. COBOL has
> >> >> >> no place in modern software engineering and hence a CS department has no
> >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >> >> >> reason to even discuss COBOL, accept as an aside perhaps.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Name one Fortune 500 company that doesn't pay considerable sums of money
> >> >> >maintaining COBOL code.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Name one way your question has anything to do with whether or not COBOL
> >> >> is taught at universities or whether or not COBOL has a place in
> >> >> modern software engineering curiculums. It isn't and it doesn't.
> >> >
> >> >You didn't specify ENGINEERING....
> >> >
> >>
> >> Sure I did, see 15 lines above.
> >
> >So, you're saying that financial applications at all 500 of the Fortune 500
> >corporations fall outside the realm software engineering, and therefore,
> >COBOL should be ignored, because, quite obviously, the wishes of the
> >profs are more important than the corporations which pay the taxe
> >which pay that prof's salary.
> >
> >
>
> I never said COBOL should be ignored. Hey, there was a real big demand for
> old folks who could help companies with their big-time COBOL Y2K problems
> about two years ago.
And when those "old folks" die off...who will maintain the COBOL code?
Hell, you can't even MIGRATE if you don't have someone who can read the
old code you want to replace and figure out what it's doing.
And thus far, I've seen very little REPLACEMENT of COBOL applications with
equivalents written in other langauges.
> Modern software engineering in COBOL...don't think
> so. Like I said before: COBOL is not taught in CS or Engineering departments
> at Universities or Colleges. Maybe business and management departments and
> schools.
>
> You really seem to be confusing University education with vocational training.
A University "education" which consists entirely of theory with no discussion
of currently-used technology nor legacy systems that are widely installed and
not going anywhere any time soon is nothing more than 4 years of mental
masturbation.
Yes, theory is important...and in fact should make up the bulk of a university
education...but to the exclusion of ALL practical knowledge is idiotic.
That's why Purdue's EE graduates get better offers for programmer positions
than Purdue's CS graduates...because the CS department at Purdue tends to
shy away from dirtying their hands with uncomfortable things like real
world conditions.
Sad, but true.
--
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: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 18:54:02 -0500
Chad Everett wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2001 18:30:01 -0500, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Chad Everett wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 22 Mar 2001 17:16:52 -0500, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >Chad Everett wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, 22 Mar 2001 15:50:37 -0500, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >Chad Everett wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Most "college's worth attending" don't "teach UNIX". They'll teach
> >> >> >> fundamentals like mutual exclusion, process and threads management,
> >> >> >> memory managment, file systems, network theory, algorithms,
> >> >> >> software engineering, etc., etc. They'll certainly use Unix and
> >> >> >> Linux systems, but they won't "teach Unix" per se.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Or would you call it an effective teaching strategy to give a programming
> >> >> >assignment to be written on a Unix platform, mandating the use of, say,
> >> >> >dynamic memory allocation without introducing the malloc() function....
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> malloc() is part of the standard C library and is independent of UNIX.
> >> >>
> >> >> If I was giving a programming assignment, mandating the use of
> >> >> dynamic memory allocation to a university class, I would have them
> >> >> write their own dynamic memory allocator and tell them they were not
> >> >> allowed to use malloc.
> >> >
> >> >Thanks for making my point. Without the use of malloc(), the student
> >> >has to interact with the raw operating system.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> It would be a good exercise on how to implement
> >> >> memory managers. I've had just such assignments. A well designed
> >> >> assignment would not mandate that it be written on a particular OS
> >> >> platform at all. The assignment might limit you to certain platforms,
> >> >> but that's different.
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >There might not be classes specifically devoted TO Unix...but any
> >> >> >college worth attending is going to have a at minimum, a significant
> >> >> >portion of programming assignments on Unix systems.
> >> >>
> >> >> Yeah....that's what I said.
> >> >>
> >> >> > If you don't
> >> >> >teach the students at least the rudiments of the system which you
> >> >> >are telling them to use, then there is something very, very wrong
> >> >> >with *you*.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Not true at all. If you're teaching an Object-Oriented design
> >> >> class and the assignments involve writing object-oriented programs,
> >> >> you don't spend time teaching a particular language. If you're
> >> >
> >> >And they do their programming assignments how...in pencil and paper
> >> >in pseudo-code?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> in a CS program, you don't spend time "teaching UNIX"...they're
> >> >> expected to learn UNIX on their own time. If you're teaching
> >> >> an operating systems class, you don't spend time teaching
> >> >> systems administration.
> >> >
> >> >So, you just dump your incoming freshmen onto an account and
> >> >say, 'Go program, boy'
> >> >
> >> >IF the students don't get at least introductory material about
> >> >the operating system in class, then it is necessary to hold
> >> >short (possible non-credit courses) on campus for new users
> >> >so that they can gain the knowledge required to do such things
> >> >as what is the name of the compiler?
> >> >
> >>
> >> You are changing the discussion. We were dicussing how colleges
> >> and universities don't "teach UNIX". Telling students how to
> >> compile a program is not "teaching UNIX". Maybe we're arguing
> >> over semantics? What exactly do you mean by "teach UNIX"?
> >
> >If you teach a student how to use the editor, so that he can do his
> >first, freshman level programming assignment, then you are teaching
> >about Unix. IF you teach him where the compiler's support files
> >are..you are teaching him unix.
> >
>
> This is not how I define "teach UNIX". Temporarily using YOUR definition
> of "teach UNIX", then OK I agree. I am no context switching back to
> my definition of "teach UNIX".
You're either ignoring it entirely, or you're discussing it, and thus,
teaching it.
There is no in-between.
>
> >Every class will cover a slightly different aspect...but by the
> >time he is done, he will have covered the O/S inside and out.
> >
>
> Not using my definition of "covering the OS inside and out"
Did I ever make such a specification or claim?
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Subject: Re: What Linux MUST DO! - Comments anyone?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 23:57:58 GMT
On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Eugenio Mastroviti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
>
>> Joe home user will use whatever his workplace management puts
>> on his desktop.
>>
>>
>> That's why Mafia$oft became the dominant home platform instead
>> of the far-easier to use Macintosh.
>
>(this will get me flamed...)
>
>When I can't use Linux, I've always found Windows easier to use than Mac...
>maybe it's just I don't trust GUI-only systems, so when it was Dos/Win3.11
>vs. Mac I went instinctively for something that had a CLI, and then the old
>habits stuck...
>
>Eugenio
>
Dos/Win3.11 ???
Newsflash! Even though you must have been one of the first to jump on the
doom and gloom Y2K bandwagon, there was really no need to lock yourself in
that fallout shelter for all these years. Good to see you finally came out
though. In order to catch up with current events, go to www.linuxjournal.com
------------------------------
From: Rex Ballard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More FUD from Ballmer
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 00:01:08 GMT
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
==============0D2547B082CA8BE9FD912DB9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Michael Vester wrote:
>
> Ray Chason wrote:
> >
> > http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB20010320S0002
> >
> > Long on FUD, short on specifics. The thrust is that IBM's support
> > of Linux doesn't matter much, Linux is a toy, we here at Microsoft
> > can't steal^H^H^H^H^Hinnovate it, etc.
> >
> > --
> > --------------===============<[ Ray Chason ]>===============--------------
> > PGP public key at http://www.smart.net/~rchason/pubkey.asc
> > Delenda est Windoze
>
> "When asked what he thought of IBM's
> huge investment in Linux, Ballmer said,
> "It will have an impact, but Linux is a toy."
(questioning gaze from reporter as if to say "what about IBM?)
> By IBM (stock: IBM) supporting Linux
> well then it is not a toy.
(now realizing that he still has to keep investors from dumping MSFT
stock)
> But does that mean IBM and Linux will carry the day?
(lie like a rug or MSFT stock will be selling at $5 tomorrow).
> No way.-- "
The usual Balmer-speak. First, try to get quoted with an unqualified
statement that will convince others that
the threat isn't real, that Microsoft is the owner of
the "Only True God" (Bill Gates).
It's quite likely that the reporter actually asked the
question, but Ballmer demanded that the two separate
statements be quoted as a single statement. The IBM
question paints Steve Ballmer as either totally ignorant,
or as a liar engaged in fraud and securities manipulation.
By trying to paint IBM as the sole contributor, he hoped
to make the contest look winnable.
Steve Ballmer knows better than anyone that Linux,
especially the 2.4.1 kernel, are the biggest threats
Microsoft has faced since S-100 boxes started using
CP/M instead of BASIC.
Ballmer knows better than anyone what UNIX did to VMS, MVS,
and proprietary operating systems created by Sperry, Harris,
Data General, and even IBM's Series 1 and System 3x. IBM
and DEC still maintain the markets for their proprietary
customers, but in terms of unit volumes, UNIX has blown
away more competitors than Ford, GM, and Chrysler.
Companies that supported UNIX have grown nearly twice
as fast as Microsoft, and have been able to remain profitable.
Microsoft spend Billions promoting Windows NT, Windows NT 4.0,
and Windows 2000 as server
> It is a toy, it is not a toy?
It's not a toy. Ballmer knows it. IBM, Shell Oil, Deuchebank,
several government agencies, Macmillan publishing, Google (and
their users), and the administrators of several million web
servers know beyond a doubt that Linux is not a toy.
> Either it's a misquote or Balmer is losing it.
Ballmer is looking for something that will resonate with
the Press, Investors, and OEMs.
The good news is that thanks to Judge Jackson granting the
stay of the behavioral remedies, Microsoft was able to use
"Cliff Tiered Pricing" with most OEMs to guarantee Microsoft's
revenue stream (if they buy fewer licenses they actually have
to pay more money.
The problem was that the "Cliff" was based on a 20% increase
in sales, not the flat or reduced market that has been plaguing
most of the OEMs since September.
> He can't keep his facts straight from sentence to sentence.
Keep in mind, Ballmer has control of any quotes and most
published opinions. If the reporter gets to nasty, Microsoft
can even stop the story itself. If the paper prints something
Ballmer doesn't like, they can pull a few ads (the equivalent
of the reporter's annual income, the editor's annual income,
and the CEO's base pay combined). Most publications are
very reluctant to print anything that would upset Microsoft
too much. Even though Microsoft has become a direct competitor
for the "classified", car, travel, and real-estate adds as well
as a competitor for television ad money (MSNBC), most are
a bit reluctant to pull the tiger's tale.
If you hadn't noticed, many top IT advisors and pundits are
now simply saying that the best source of information about
these systems is unfiltered feedback from other users (usenet).
> "Ballmer conceded that the .Net road map
> is "going to take a few years to achieve.""
Ballmer is desperately hoping that someone at Microsoft,
or even in the Linux community, can come up with a concept
and a "Killer App" that will give Microsoft an undeniable
advantage over Linux.
By May or June, Microsoft will begin negotiations with OEMs
and corporate users for the next year's licenses. These
contracts go into effect in August. The OEMs overcommitted
themselves to Microsoft and Microsoft has made no concessions.
Both the OEMs and the Consumers are looking for something
radically different, and Linux looks like a very good candidate.
The price is right. There are several distributors who are
willing to charge far less than Microsoft's lowest OEM price
if they can be assured substantial volumes.
For 20 years, Microsoft's sales people have demanded "all or nothing",
pointing out that without Microsoft's "OS du jur",
their PCs would be nothing more than blinking lights.
Linux have overcome incredible barriers to market entry and
has proven itself in the server market. Furthermore, even
though Linux has only increased from 1% to 4% of the total
market share last year, that's still 3% of nearly 1 billion
machines, or nearly 30 million units in the past year.
This would give Linux nearly 10% of ye 1/2000 annual unit
volumes (keep in mind that IDC's publicly available numbers
are over a year old).
Microsoft prefers to use the dollar volumes in their quotes,
since this still gives them 95% of the market and gives Linux
only about 5%. Since Windows costs 5-8 times the price of Linux,
even if unit volumes were equal, Linux would only have a
20% share. Keep in mind though, that license fees aren't
the primary source of revenue for Linux.
> Just as I suspected, even Microsoft doesn't know what .Net is.
Clearly, Microsoft is aware that the pricing model and structure
of Linux is to give away the software (for very low prices) and sell
consulting and technical support. Because Linux/Unix
gurus are capable of providing better service with less effort,
the nature of the beast is that costs will go down.
The bad news for Microsoft is that, since their own support
staff and consulting partners do not have access to the source
code, and have only limited access to configuration and
management details, they can't compete with Linux on a service
basis.
Microsoft is somehow hoping to find some way, no matter how
illegal, unethical, or risky, to make major corporations so
dependent on Microsoft that any attempt to migrate away
would have the same impact that not having access to Windows
would have on OEMs. For example, if you put your confidential
company data onto Microsoft's application servers, and you
decide later to switch to your own self managed Linux systems,
Microsoft might decide to sell the back-up tapes used to back
up your data - to the highest bidder. If Microsoft can get
BASIC from DEC by buying some "old Junk" backup tapes.
> Michael Vester
> A credible Linux advocate
Yes, you are a very good Linux advocate. Thanks for
being on the team.
> "The avalanche has started, it is
> too late for the pebbles to vote"
> Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
--
Rex Ballard
It Architect
http://www.open4success.com
==============0D2547B082CA8BE9FD912DB9
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
name="rballard.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Rex Ballard
Content-Disposition: attachment;
filename="rballard.vcf"
begin:vcard
n:Ballard;Rex
tel;cell:908-723-4008
tel;work:973-723-4008
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
adr:;;;;;;
version:2.1
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
fn:Rex Ballard
end:vcard
==============0D2547B082CA8BE9FD912DB9==
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is user friendly?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 00:06:51 GMT
On Thu, 22 Mar 2001 18:54:02 -0500, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Chad Everett wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 22 Mar 2001 18:30:01 -0500, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >Every class will cover a slightly different aspect...but by the
>> >time he is done, he will have covered the O/S inside and out.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> >
>>
>> Not using my definition of "covering the OS inside and out"
>
>Did I ever make such a specification or claim?
>
Yes. See 9 lines above.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hal Burgiss)
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat
Subject: Re: Too expensive, too invasive (was: Re: uh oh, redhat is gonna do it)
Reply-To: Hal Burgiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 22 Mar 2001 19:07:38 -0500
On Thu, 22 Mar 2001 23:29:20 GMT, Jim Dandie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>It appears RH is trying to old B. Gates routine...mapping the config
>and using it to their advantage...What else are they grabbing from your
>box?
Only what you decide to let them have I guess. If you don't like, don't
use it. I have no need myself. Seen any black helocopters lately? Or is
this a FUD campaign?
What's the deal with the cross posting to singles groups?
--
Hal B
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
