Linux-Advocacy Digest #524, Volume #34 Tue, 15 May 01 08:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Oh Chad -- Look at these TCP scores (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Article: IBM Challenges Microsoft's .NET (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: FrontPage clone? (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Promoting Distribution of Open Source Applications (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Security in Open Source Software (pip)
Top Servers: (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Security in Open Source Software (pip)
Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Oh Chad -- Look at these TCP scores ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Security in Open Source Software (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Microsoft BACKDOORS AGAIN! MORE CHEATERY!!! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Oh Chad -- Look at these TCP scores (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Promoting Distribution of Open Source Applications (pip)
Re: What does Linux need for the desktop? (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Oh Chad -- Look at these TCP scores ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Security in Open Source Software (pip)
Re: Win 9x is horrid ("Osugi Sakae")
Re: What does Linux need for the desktop? (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: What does Linux need for the desktop? (Matthew Gardiner)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Oh Chad -- Look at these TCP scores
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 23:26:05 +1200
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> Perhaps you didn't notice that the SGI server had 16 processors *AND* was
> clustered, while the #2 was a Windows 2000 system with 8 processors and
> wasn't clustered, yet with 2x as many processors it achieved less than 50%
> increase and costs more than 2x in the price/perf ratio.
>
>
3000GB http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/h-result1.idc?id=101050802, good old
NCR achieves top result, and doesn't use Windows.
1000GB http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/h-result1.idc?id=101050801, yet again
NCR remains top, and again, not running Windows.
300GB http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/h-result1.idc?id=100050301, IBM
submitting yet another great system without Windows.
100GB http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/h-result1.idc?id=101051401, SGI submitted
another great machine running our old friend Linux.
So, what this tells you is two things, first Intel Hardware is scalable, so
please, give an around of applause for Intel. *NIX and mainframe OS's dominate
in the super large databases, and the NCR used generic Intel Xeon Processors.
So what this tells me is that Intel has their act together, and do provide the
scalability to power bloody huge databases, however, Microsoft Windows 2000 and
Microsoft SQL server doesn't scale well. Am I surprise, nope! I've been saying
it for 3 years, Windows can't scale, it never can and never will while they
still cling to the hope that oneday they will find a solution to the design
problems with Windows 2000.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Article: IBM Challenges Microsoft's .NET
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 23:30:20 +1200
Dave Martel wrote:
> <http://www.wired.com/news/business/0,1367,43766,00.html>
>
> IBM Takes On Microsoft
> Wired News Report
>
> 10:55 a.m. May 14, 2001 PDT
>
> "IBM directly challenged Microsoft's .Net Internet services strategy
> on Monday, annoucing that its own new Web-based development platform,
> "Dynamic E-Business," will support all open Internet standards."
>
> <snip>
>
> "Microsoft's .Net strategy also centers on offering connectivity to
> multiple sources of information, but IBM said that its support of open
> Internet standards, as opposed to a proprietary system, would pave the
> way for the rapid development of Web-services applications. "
>
> "Dynamic E-Business will be implemented across IBM's entire line of
> applications, including DB2, Lotus, Tivoli and WebSphere software. IBM
> (IBM) also announced new software and tools that will enable
> businesses to create, secure, host and manage Web-based applications."
>
> <snip>
>
> Are we having fun yet? :o)
Microsoft, are you listening, this is called C-O-M-P-E-T-I-T-I-O-N.
Something you have taken out of the OS market, then used those dollars to
bribe senators in the US. Your time will be up soon, the EU will try
you, and since the European Union leadership is not elected, but instead
done in terms of 6 months, they have no agenda to ensure they are
elected.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: FrontPage clone?
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 23:31:36 +1200
"William R. Cousert" wrote:
> Is there anything similar to FrontPage for Linux? A coworker uses FrontPage
> on a daily basis, and would like to switch over to Linux.
>
> If not, is there any way to get FrontPage 97 or 2000 to run under Wine? How
> well do they work with Win4Lin?
Websphere by IBM?
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Promoting Distribution of Open Source Applications
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 23:33:15 +1200
Are you some sort of idiot? what sort of twitt will try to sell
opensource, free software on the net?
Matthew Gardiner
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> There is a lot of Open-Source products out there. Some are easy to
> use, Some more difficult. Open Country http://www.opencountry.org
> is trying to build a new delivery mechanism by simplfying installation
> and launch of these applications. As one of our engineers said
> recently: What I am trying to do now within the [open-source]
> movement is:
>
> 1. Expand the range and depth of development. Opening the doors of
> Open Source to even more participants.
>
> 2. Create incentive to inovate.
>
> 3. Promote Open Source OS's as desktop/office/handheld OS of choice.
>
> 4. Take the best that the Cathedral has to offer and install it into
> the bazaar.
>
> 5. Give business the "warm fuzzy" that it needs to promote the use of
> Open Source software in thier day to day work (ie the desktop in the
> cubicle)
>
> 6. Move the ability to use Open Source software from the geek to the
> meek, in other words make it simple enough for my mother to use.
>
> 7. Create an organization that is as resposive to the community of
> users as possible.
>
> Did we succeed?
>
> Use the feedback forms at http://www.opencountry.org
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Security in Open Source Software
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:40:05 +0100
Ian Pulsford wrote:
>
> pip wrote:
> >
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > An interesting article about security in Open Source projects.
> > > http://webdeveloper.earthweb.com/websecu/article/0,,12013_621851,00.html
> >
> > This is interesting but silly.
> >
> [...]
> > Open source is open -> people still don't find the bugs
>
> This is a valid point, why should you doubt him? He has the experience
> to back it up. Open source is better than closed source for security
> but it's not god.
Well, there are good examples of where bugs are not found. But I would
argue that the probability of fast discovery is an order of magnitude
higher when many critically minded hackers try to understand the code to
introduce improvements. There is some sense of security through
obscurity, but at the end of the day it is about a personal choice. If
there security though obscurity idea is valid then you would expect not
to to see the slew of database and web server security bugs, and I mean
the new bugs - not previous exploits that don't get patched. So the
question I would address back is: which is better ? - an open source
project where many bugs are open but solved, or a closed source project
where they linger? Where would you place your trusted data? Which gives
you the power to check (if you have the ability) ?
Is people don't find the bugs valid? Well, sometimes.
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Top Servers:
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 23:38:55 +1200
The top unclustered systems:
http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_perf_results.asp?resulttype=noncluster
Where is Windows?
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Security in Open Source Software
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:43:46 +0100
kosh wrote:
> Yeah apt-get update; apt-get upgrade --assume-yes is a really hard thing
> to put in a cron job for the server and have it run every 24 hours. The
> machine will then check for updates to itself every 24 hours and apply
> security updates that it finds.
>
> What I have found is maintaining open source boxen is far easier then
> maintaing windows or other unix boxen.
Quite so, also the open source community has the ability to respond to
these security threats FAR faster than commercial companies in most
situations.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 11:40:28 GMT
In article <9C3M6.891$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <R90M6.854$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> >You are certainly on the ball Charlie.
>> >
>> >You "just" discovered something that happened over a year ago and was
>fixed
>> >over a year ago. Further, there is no evidence the back door was ever
>used.
>>
>> So are you EF. It's a new one!
>
>No, it's not. Search for "Netscape Engineers are Weenies!", and it's the
>same one.
Well your wrong Erik. It's not.
And further, I'm glad to see you finally admit they had a backdoor
considering the amount of pig pissing you did a year ago when I
first brought the story of a backdoor in IIS.
You said it was a lie then and you were full of bullcrap buddie.
Just like you pumping everybody here on COLA full of bullcrap
daily?
How much does Microsoft Pay you to do this anyway Erik?
>
>>
>>
>>
>> >"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/05/14/1858201
>> >>
>> >> http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/entrepreneur.html?s=smallbiz
>> >> /articles/20010514/microsoft_ackno
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Microsoft admits to screwing thousands of business owners out of the
>> >security,
>> >> to jeapordizing confidential customer information, to cheating the U.S.
>> >> government and the tax payers of their confidential security for years
>> >> without their consent!
>> >>
>> >> EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA!!!!!
>> >>
>> >> EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA!!!!!
>> >>
>> >> Microsoft has proven once again by their own admission to be
>> >> totally untrustworthy!
>> >>
>> >> They CLAIM they knew nothing about it.
>> >> They appearently don't ever do a code review,
>> >> for years yet!
>> >>
>> >> And I'll say it again! Would you quit reading CEO magazine,
>> >> pull your heads out of
>> >> your butts and install Linux servers before you get sued!!!
>> >>
>> >> You know your liable now!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> How many god damn fucking clues do you need here folks!
>> >>
>> >> -
>> >> Charlie
>> >> -------
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Charlie
>> -------
>
>
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Oh Chad -- Look at these TCP scores
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 13:45:46 +0100
> http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/h-ttperf.idc
>
> Not that TCP scores mean anything (sorry, I still think it's a worthless
> meter); but since you put so much credence into it you may wish to
> consider moving your servers over to Linux ASAP.
I don't understand, so mabey someone could explain this to me.
Machines like Alphaservers and SGI's have fantastic floating point
performance, but why use them for database work? Surely all those lovely
FPUs are wasted. Why not use something like 200MHz StrongARM CPU's since
they're about $10 each, and a 100 CPU machine would cost 10,000$ for the
CPUs and consume mabey 200 W (not counting Hard Disks).
Fast/Cheap integer only processors seem ideal for this kind of task, so why
aren't they used?
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Security in Open Source Software
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 23:50:31 +1200
Ayende Rahien wrote:
> An interesting article about security in Open Source projects.
> http://webdeveloper.earthweb.com/websecu/article/0,,12013_621851,00.html
First of all, hackers don't hack because they want information, they hack
because they want to beat the system. They don't have the password, or
system information, which makes it that much harder, meaning, more pair
recognition in the hacking and cracking chat rooms once they have "hacked"
the system. What that (the author of the article) twitt was saying is that
a person goes to a house, and even though they have the keys to it, they
use a pick the lock instead, that does not make sense!
Hacking a opensource system is nothing to be proud of, shit, the
instruction manual is right in front of you! what have they got to gloat
about? nothing. Compare that to Microsoft stella security record.
Maybe instead of chatting about security, he should go into a hacking chat
room and find out what makes these people tick, then from there, they can
create a secure solution. Yes, you can use the cheap, generalisation that
all they want to do is cause problems, however, that in the real world is
not the case.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft BACKDOORS AGAIN! MORE CHEATERY!!!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 11:53:08 GMT
In article <TN0M6.56211$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chad Myers wrote:
>
>I know, the Open Source promise is a strong one, but in the real world,
>it just doesn't pan out properly.
>
>-c
>
>
Hey DICKHEAD! Or should we call you the GERMAN saying DICHHEAD!
http://slashdot.org/articles/01/05/14/1858201.shtml
Looks like Microsoft has admitted to another back door in IIS!
Microsoft could see into your entire lan with this one and
steal all your customers credit cards!
When will you DICHHEADS learn Chad!
In the Open Source world there is no back doors DICHHEAD!
Anybody who runs IIS is an utter fool.
Microsoft products are engineered for people like Chad.
People who don't know their BUTT from a HOLE IN THE GROUND!
Myers,
I'm convinced you don't have the manhood of my Cocker Spaniel.
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Oh Chad -- Look at these TCP scores
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 23:54:16 +1200
> I don't understand, so mabey someone could explain this to me.
>
> Machines like Alphaservers and SGI's have fantastic floating point
> performance, but why use them for database work? Surely all those lovely
> FPUs are wasted. Why not use something like 200MHz StrongARM CPU's since
> they're about $10 each, and a 100 CPU machine would cost 10,000$ for the
> CPUs and consume mabey 200 W (not counting Hard Disks).
>
> Fast/Cheap integer only processors seem ideal for this kind of task, so why
> aren't they used?
>
> -Ed
>
>
Chip-Politics. For example, the Cruso chip could be used, it gives
comparable intergrer results, even thought the floating point processor is
shit house. Another one would be the new Cyrix 3, which requires no fan and
uses .13 technology. Both solutions are viable, however, since it doesn't
carry the "Intel Inside Logo", you have all the IS idiots thinking they (the
respective CPU's) are inferior.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Promoting Distribution of Open Source Applications
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:59:27 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 1. Expand the range and depth of development. Opening the doors of
> Open Source to even more participants.
My bets are on RedHat boys. Also those fine Debian people.
> 2. Create incentive to inovate.
Apt-get already exists. Does incentive mean selling software for
"download" from your server? If you wanted to do something interesting
then why don't you do this on a single cd - maybe you could even make it
bootable so that it can make all updates without a single rpm -i of your
install software?
> 3. Promote Open Source OS's as desktop/office/handheld OS of choice.
As long as you come up with the dosh right?
> 4. Take the best that the Cathedral has to offer and install it into
> the bazaar.
..and sell it to silly uses who can get updates from RH.
> 5. Give business the "warm fuzzy" that it needs to promote the use of
> Open Source software in thier day to day work (ie the desktop in the
> cubicle)
I'd still choose RedHat for that fuzzy IPO feeling.
> 6. Move the ability to use Open Source software from the geek to the
> meek, in other words make it simple enough for my mother to use.
I am sure that your mother would love to open a shell, navigate to the
download directory and do a rpm install (er - so you are targeting RH
people).
> 7. Create an organization that is as resposive to the community of
> users as possible.
We have one - it's called the "community" and we pay them by value-added
services, not duplicates designed to milk people.
> Did we succeed?
>
> Use the feedback forms at http://www.opencountry.org
Well, you've posted this message numerous times and the response has
been negative - so the question should be are you listening? I doubt
your mother is perusing *any* newsgroup let alone comp.os.linux.advocacy
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What does Linux need for the desktop?
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 23:56:30 +1200
Mark wrote:
>
> |> >OK, I hear people say that Linux is not ready for the desktop. I always wonder
> |> >why. OK, I'll concede games, but that is a different story all together. For
> |> >now, lets focus on the office/home office desktop, i.e. what would keep a
> |> >company from going all Linux?
> |> >
> |> >Having these answers in a neat little HOWTO (How To run your company on Linux)
> |> >would be sort of cool.
>
> I believe there are such documents available. A quick search should
> return something of value.
>
> |> Linux is missing a accounting system for small to medium businesses.
>
> |Assuming you are talking about MYOB. Maybe it is possible to run it with
> |wine? I am not too sure, some one may have to correct me on that one.
>
> I'm not of the belief that many small business owners are even going
> to ponder installing and configuring Wine to run windows accounting
> packages. Why not just run them under windows since you need windows
> anyway?
>
> |> Linux is missing a free (both senses) groupware system (Lotus is not
> |> free and not even cheap when you're looking at client licenses).
>
> Collaboration - groupware - management programs are non on linux.
>
> |There are solutions out there, I forgot which ones. I know there are
> |iPlanet collaboration tools that available for Linux, however, I am not
> |too sure about the quality, or reliability.
>
> Exactly.
>
> |> Linux is missing a project management tool like Microsoft Project (one
> |> which can calculate correctly)
> |
> |How many people honestly use Microsoft Project?
>
> You'd be surprised. How many larger businesses use PeopleSoft?
>
> |> Linux is missing a not too heavy office package (StarOffice is too
> |> heavy for systems with 64MB or less).
>
> Koffice is a work in progress, but with potential for what you
> describe.
>
>
> |I've had no problems runing Linux on 64MB Ram w/ staroffice, cd playing
> |in the back ground and a download happening the background as well.
>
> Running it, and running it with snap and aplomb are two distinctly
> different things. I found the performance of SO horrific with 96.
WHy do you reply to comments that aren't mine?
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Oh Chad -- Look at these TCP scores
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 07:19:22 -0500
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> > Perhaps you didn't notice that the SGI server had 16 processors *AND*
was
> > clustered, while the #2 was a Windows 2000 system with 8 processors and
> > wasn't clustered, yet with 2x as many processors it achieved less than
50%
> > increase and costs more than 2x in the price/perf ratio.
> >
> >
>
> 3000GB http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/h-result1.idc?id=101050802, good
old
> NCR achieves top result, and doesn't use Windows.
And doesn't use Unix either.
> 1000GB http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/h-result1.idc?id=101050801, yet
again
> NCR remains top, and again, not running Windows.
Again, no Unix.
> 300GB http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/h-result1.idc?id=100050301, IBM
> submitting yet another great system without Windows.
Again, no Unix. It's running Dynix/ptx which was originally created by
sequent before IBM bought them.
> 100GB http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/h-result1.idc?id=101051401, SGI
submitted
> another great machine running our old friend Linux.
And, as pointed out already, gains less than 50% with 2x as many processors
and 2x the cost of it's windows competitor.
When you see a Windows 2000 benchmark with 16 processors, I'm certain it
will be trounce the SGI score.
> So what this tells me is that Intel has their act together, and do provide
the
> scalability to power bloody huge databases,
Indeed, but none of these are running commercial grade OS's, they're all
running specialized OS's specific to those tasks.
> however, Microsoft Windows 2000 and Microsoft SQL server doesn't scale
well.
What does it say about Linux?
> Am I surprise, nope! I've been saying
> it for 3 years, Windows can't scale, it never can and never will while
they
> still cling to the hope that oneday they will find a solution to the
design
> problems with Windows 2000.
Your statements are based on pure speculation.
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Security in Open Source Software
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 13:02:06 +0100
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> [Hacker this, Hacker that]
I quite enjoy hacking. I don't much like those crackers or
script-kiddies though...
Happy Hacking (RMS signiture)
------------------------------
From: "Osugi Sakae" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win 9x is horrid
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:01:39 +0900
In article <Qo5M6.902$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > >
>> > > > It's not intimate knowledge, it's the equivelant of an MD5
>> > > > checksum. It's a hash created by a number of unique identifiers,
>> > > > with no way to reverse the data to retrieve the original data.
>> > >
>> > > 1) It must be more sophisticated than an MD5 checksum of unique
>> > > identifiers, otherwise they would be unable to tell if I changed
>> > > a single NIC or the entire system
>> >
>> > More likely, the hash doesn't change radically if you change one
>> > piece
> of
>> > hardware, but if the entire hash changes, then you changed a lot of
>> > hardware.
>>
>> That's not the definition of a hash.
>
> And pray tell, what is the definition of a hash?
>
> A hash is simply a value which is derived from other values. Typically,
> this is a value which cannot be reversed to retrieve the orginal
> results.
I seem to have misplaced Mr. Schneier's book, but I believe that one
quality of a good hashing algorythm is that there is no corrolation
between input and output. So, if you change a single bit of the input
the resulting output should be completely different.
If a small change in the input resulted in output that was similar to the
original output, i could figure out the original because the hash would
tell me when i was getting close.
You are welcome to argue that whatever is in the MS 'hash' is not
supposed to be cryptographically secure. That would explain a hash that
only changes a little. It would also allow anyone to find out about
whatever goes into the hash.
--
Osugi Sakae
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What does Linux need for the desktop?
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 23:57:57 +1200
John Hong wrote:
> "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> >> Linux is missing a not too heavy office package (StarOffice is too heavy
> >> for systems with 64MB or less).
>
> >is there any decent office package that runs in under 64M?
>
> >As it happens, SO works just fine on a P133 w/72M. I imagine that most
> >business have rather better computers in general than mine.
>
> Applixware 5.0 Office suite will work even better.
I have used it on freeBSD, and yes, it is a great Office Suite. Even though it
may not have all the bells and whistles, it is more than enough for what a
home user and small business owner requires.
Matthew Gardiner.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!!
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 07:21:21 -0500
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In article <R90M6.854$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Erik Funkenbusch
wrote:
> > > >You are certainly on the ball Charlie.
> > > >
> > > >You "just" discovered something that happened over a year ago and was
> > fixed
> > > >over a year ago. Further, there is no evidence the back door was
ever
> > used.
> > >
> > > So are you EF. It's a new one!
> >
> > No, it's not. Search for "Netscape Engineers are Weenies!", and it's
the
> > same one.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >> http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/05/14/1858201
> > > >>
> > > >> http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/entrepreneur.html?s=smallbiz
> > > >> /articles/20010514/microsoft_ackno
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Microsoft admits to screwing thousands of business owners out of
the
> > > >security,
> > > >> to jeapordizing confidential customer information, to cheating the
U.S.
> > > >> government and the tax payers of their confidential security for
years
> > > >> without their consent!
> > > >>
> > > >> EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA!!!!!
> > > >>
> > > >> EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA!!!!!
> > > >>
> > > >> Microsoft has proven once again by their own admission to be
> > > >> totally untrustworthy!
> > > >>
> > > >> They CLAIM they knew nothing about it.
> > > >> They appearently don't ever do a code review,
> > > >> for years yet!
> > > >>
> > > >> And I'll say it again! Would you quit reading CEO magazine,
> > > >> pull your heads out of
> > > >> your butts and install Linux servers before you get sued!!!
> > > >>
> > > >> You know your liable now!
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> How many god damn fucking clues do you need here folks!
> > > >>
> > > >> -
> > > >> Charlie
> > > >> -------
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Charlie
> > > -------
>
> Go read the article again you illiterate Troll!
The article has no date on it. It's from over a year ago.
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What does Linux need for the desktop?
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 23:59:20 +1200
Chronos Tachyon wrote:
> On Mon 14 May 2001 12:34, Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
> > mmnnoo wrote:
> >> snip>
> >>
> >> Konqueror is nice and light, but again the problem is that it works on
> >> 'only' about 90% of websites. I start thinking how great it is, then it
> >> renders a page with areas of text on top of each other, or I can't join a
> >> chatroom, or access a secure site. Unfortunately, I think getting those
> >> last 10-20% of sites working would be 80-90% of the work in creating a
> >> browser.
> > All the KDE team need to do is get Javascript working properly, and Java
> > applets to load (using an external JVM), then I will be an awsome
> > browser. Hopefully later on, RealMedia will start supporting it
> > natively.
> >
> > Matthew Gardiner
> >
>
> There are still some compatibility bugs with Javascript, but the Java
> support works great in KDE 1.2 right now. You need a 1.3.x JRE installed
> to use it, but I haven't had any trouble with it (yet).
>
>
I finally found out what was wrong, I didn't have it installed (doh!), I
thought I had already installed it. Yes, you are correct, Java does work
without any problems.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
