Linux-Advocacy Digest #534, Volume #34 Tue, 15 May 01 23:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Oh Chad -- Look at these TCP scores (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better) ("Paolo Ciambotti")
Re: Campaign: Microsoft Free by October 1st ("Dave Martel")
Re: MS POLL! ("Paolo Ciambotti")
Re: Linux in Retail & Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know (Bob Hauck)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Top Servers: (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 ("Adam Warner")
Re: Oh Chad -- Look at these TCP scores (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better) (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Ray Fischer)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! ("Chad Myers")
Re: Campaign: Microsoft Free by October 1st (Michael Vester)
Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better) ("Chad Myers")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 01:11:52 GMT
Microsoft has a policy of just deleting things when it becomes a problem!
Yes Microsoft does. Microsoft, the Wintrolls, Wintroll Management,
Wintroll Administration
all have policies of just deleting things which get in their way!
Remember the I-LOVE-YOU virus?
When that blew thru town and wiped out our network
it was decided to cripple our internet services by denying E-mail attachments.
So our E-business was crippled because of it.
And when the IIS server was being attacked by worms, they recommended you
disable even more services to prevent the problem.
And when we discovered there was a new backdoor, we were again asked to
delete a particular .DLL program to eliminate the problem.
When people complain about the lousy rotten service Microsoft provides
our company, they are deleted.
When ever you suggest a SANE interface to Windows, you end up getting Deleted!
Our Wintroll Management spends all of it's time surrounded by Windows as
it slowly deletes their intelligence along with everybody elses.
Windows Deletes our profits.
Windows Deletes our bottom line.
Windows Deletes your good nights sleep.
At this rate, Microsoft's recommendation will be to totally disconnect
all your Microsoft products from the internet as a cure-all to fix everything.
It is still my suggesting that we simply just Delete Microsoft from our
lives and save the company the trouble and bother of informing us
of the NEED TO DELETE ONE MORE THING TO MAKE THE FUCKING STUPID ASS
OS WORK RIGHT!!!
And I'm still 100% for firing any CEO who recommend MS for another year
at any board meeting @WW. It's a costly and foolish mistake to mix
MS up with an actual e-business environment.
It was never ready for prime time.
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Oh Chad -- Look at these TCP scores
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 01:14:24 GMT
In article <9dsehu$2r3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Daniel Tryba wrote:
>Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> 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).
>
>> 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.
>
>BTW Intel bought the StrongARM from Digital couple of years ago. So
>maybe it's Intels fault for not marketing them for these purposes?
>
>--
>
>Daniel Tryba
Your wasting your time on the blithering bastard.
Even if you present Chad with the facts he will just ignore them
and continue on his merry rampage anassment anyway.
--
Charlie
=======
------------------------------
From: "Paolo Ciambotti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better)
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 18:20:31 -0700
In article <3b01a496$0$2882$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jon Johansan"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> What's this? The linux box is not a box, it's a ... GASP ... CLUSTER! OH
> NO! And, what's this? The W2K box IS a single box.
Those who can, do. Linux clusters very well. And much more elegantly
than MSFT, as we all know.
> And, what's this? The
> linux solution isn't even availble yet, not until 10/31/01 (if it ships
> on time).
In a head-to-head vaporware contest with MSFT, the boys from Redmond will
always win.
> And, what's this? The W2K solution is 9 months old with less than
> state-of-the-art HW and SW.
I'll concede that MSFT is less than state of the art.
> And, what's this? The linux solution uses 16x700 Mhz PIIIs and the W2K
> result uses 8x700 Mhz PIIIs.
> And, what's this? The linux solution uses a fiber channel storage array
> connected via 5 PCI controllers (whew!) versus a single plain jane scsi
> card in the compaq.
> And, what's this? Linux needs a gigabit adapter while W2K does fine with
> a single 10/100 card.
Again, those who can, do.
> But - say the penguins - remember, LINUX IS FREE and since the OS is
> free obviously (according to them) everything associated with it is so
> much cheaper that you'll always save money using Linux.
>
> * WHAT'S THIS? $347/QphH for the linux "solution" versus $161/QphH for
> the W2K box? *
> (The linux solution costs: almost $1 million vs the W2K solution costing
> about 1/4 that!)
>
> So... I spend almost 250% as much money to get 60% more performance
> using FOUR computers (hey Matt, how much heat is that?? Think of the
> cooling budget!!) that aren't even shipping yet.
>
> The cost of the MS-based software is $16,327 but the cost of the
> Linux-based software is $315,824. I see where the savings using Linux
> adds up there.
And as you WinGuys are always so fond of pointing out, acquisition cost is
only a small component of TCO.
> So lets see, the 10/31/01 clustered result is going head to head against
> last years result using advanced server without clustering. Anyone wanna
> take bets on what a Datacenter driven, clustered W2K/SQL2K result using
> the same number of processors is going to do to that score?? I will...
> (hint: check out the TPC-C results for BOTH raw performance and
> price/performance).
There are lies, damn lies, and benchmarks. Didn't MSFT last year have to
withdraw one of their TPC-C benchmarks because of improprieties? IIRC, IBM
and DB2 took over the lead back then as well.
> The way I see it, W2K is still better. It's cheaper, runs faster and
> easier to use.
Eventually, I might want to migrate to something else, and being locked
into a single vendor is a monstrous disadvantage that more than offsets
any dollar savings or theoretical ease-of-use advantage that I might have
gained initially by using MSFT.
And it's not faster. At least not for the TPC-H benchmark.
------------------------------
From: "Dave Martel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Campaign: Microsoft Free by October 1st
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 19:11:27 +0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On Tue, 15 May 2001 22:26:06 +0200, Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Well.. XEmacs runs on Windows - i have it installed - and GNUS is a
>>excellent newsreader :-)
>
> I'm using slrn on NT4 right now.
>
I've been working my way through all of them. Agent still runs circles
around every newsreader I've ever seen, linux or otherwise.
------------------------------
From: "Paolo Ciambotti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MS POLL!
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 18:36:49 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Unknown"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Consumers are foolish and that is why anyone with a half of brain can
> buy an Aarmani suit, lease a Mercedes and call themselves a consultant.
consultant (n.): anybody with a briefcase from more than fifty miles
away; see "carpetbagger".
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Crossposted-To: alt.retail.category.management,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux in Retail & Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know
Reply-To: bobh = haucks dot org
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 01:43:49 GMT
On Tue, 15 May 2001 12:47:02 +0200, Ayende Rahien <Don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Microsoft's share of the server market has outgrown upstart Linux, leaping
> from 38 percent of the market last year to 41 percent this year.
Dollars or installations?
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:50:54 -0400
Ray Fischer wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Ray Fischer wrote:
>
> >> >> If you're a man, and your have sex with another man who does not have
> >> >> AIDS, your chance of getting AIDS is?
> >> >
> >> >And you know that he's not infected with AIDS how, exactly?
> >>
> >> The same way we know that YOU are not infected with AIDS.
> >
> >Since I don't engage in homosexual acts
>
> So you claim. Besides, that's not the only way to get AIDS, nor even
> the most common way of getting the disease.
You're asking me how *I* know that I don't have AIDS.
Since *I* know that I don't do homosexual sex, that's all the proof *I* need.
>
> > and
> >I don't do intravenous drugs,
>
> That you admit to.
You're asking me how *I* know that I don't have AIDS.
Since *I* know that I don't do intravenous drugs, that's all the proof *I* need.
>
> > and I haven't had a blood transfusion since
> >1973 (if at all -- appendix operation)...
>
> But those $10 hookers...
False premise #1: that I use hookers
False premise #2: that men can get AIDS from women in normal vaginal sex.
>
> >I'm absolutely CERTAIN that *I* don't have AIDS.
>
> Heard that one before.
>
11 years of ARMY blood tests prove that I'm right.
> --
> Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] into you -- Nietzsche
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
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: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 21:51:17 -0400
Ray Fischer wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Ray Fischer wrote:
> >> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >Ray Fischer wrote:
> >> >> Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >> >Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> >> >> >> > Where in my statements did I say I was afraid of homosexuals. I am not
> >> >> >> > afraid of them anymore than I am afraid of people with bipolar disorder
> >> >> >> > or any other genetic malfunction.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> If you have really firm evidence that homosexualtiy is genetic, I suggest
> >> >> >> you publish.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Then you admit that it's a choice.
> >> >>
> >> >> Why are bigots so often stupidly illiterate as well?
> >> >
> >> >I have a right to judge other people by their CHOICES and BEHAVIOR.
> >>
> >> Ditto, bigot.
> >
> >So, if I hold someone's felonious behavior against them,
>
> Being a homosexual is not a felony, bigot.
But it's even MORE revolting.
>
> --
> Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] into you -- Nietzsche
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
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: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Top Servers:
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 14:04:51 +1200
"." wrote:
> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> The top unclustered systems:
> >>
> >>
> > http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_perf_results.asp?resulttype=noncluster
> >>
> >> Where is Windows?
>
> > Considering that all of the computers in this list do not run Windows 2000,
> > it would be a little hard to compete on the same hardware, don't you think?
>
> Its hard to compete on different hardware actually.
>
>
Also running a reliable, cross platfom benchmark is almost next to impossible.
Hence, when the old TPC-C debate comes knock at the door, I ignore it as it has
no reliable evidence what so ever.
The only Ultra Sparc III vs. Xeon benchmarks have been made up by diehard
Winadvocates so some how prove that because the clock speed of the Ultra Sparc
III is not the same as the Xeon, they make the pre-emptive conclusion that the
Ultra must be shyte. Maybe these diehard Winadvocates should start admining
some big irons, then come back and try to justify their comments.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 14:07:40 +1200
Hi Ayende,
> I don't understand Linux attitude toward the kernel modules.
> Linux users constantly complain about not having drivers, but they also
give
> the drivers company no *choice* in the matter, because they would've to
> support a driver for every change in the interface.
> Any idea why Linux doesn't have a unified driver model?
> Most other OS has, AFAIK.
This is the kind of attitude I vividly remember reading of some important
kernel developers (sorry no reference, just consult the kernel lists):
If you won't release your source then don't dare complain to us about your
driver breaking in a later release of the kernel. It is your responsibility
to keep up your closed source driver releases. There is no way kernel
development will be hampered by such pleas.
BTW "Linux users constantly complain about not having drivers" is FUD
(exaggeration). I'm not complaining because my hardware is supported and for
the future I will only be buying supported hardware with source drivers.
Other people may be satisfied with binary only hardware releases.
So now you understand the attitude even if you don't agree with it.
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Oh Chad -- Look at these TCP scores
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 14:13:53 +1200
> Your wasting your time on the blithering bastard.
>
> Even if you present Chad with the facts he will just ignore them
> and continue on his merry rampage anassment anyway.
>
> --
> Charlie
> -------
If I remember correctly, the Strong Arm Processor was designed and developed by a
company in England, and that Intel licenses the technology off them. Can't
remember the name, however, Apple a few years ago owned some shares in the
company, and has since, sold them off.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better)
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 02:14:16 GMT
Jon Johansan wrote:
>
> I had to blink and look twice: Linux has finally made it's appearence at
> tpc.org and it's in first place!
>
> http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/h-ttperf.idc
>
> There you have it, a linux powered result of 2733 smoking past the 1699
> result posted for a W2K box.
>
> Well, I extend my hand in congratulations to the penguins for their stunning
> entry into the world of high end database benchmarks. I'm certain suddenly
> the TPC will be in style again and accepted for all to see.
>
> But... wait...
>
> I peered past the self-congratulatory posts at /. and looked into the actual
> disclosures themselves...
>
> What's this? The linux box is not a box, it's a ... GASP ... CLUSTER! OH NO!
> And, what's this? The W2K box IS a single box.
Score one for Win 2K on the Unisys machine.
> And, what's this? The linux solution isn't even availble yet, not until
> 10/31/01 (if it ships on time).
Sounds like a ship date similar to XP!
> And, what's this? The W2K solution is 9 months old with less than
> state-of-the-art HW and SW.
A non-point.
> And, what's this? The linux solution uses 16x700 Mhz PIIIs and the W2K
> result uses 8x700 Mhz PIIIs.
Nice to see Linux scaling so nicely!
> And, what's this? The linux solution uses a fiber channel storage array
> connected via 5 PCI controllers (whew!) versus a single plain jane scsi card
> in the compaq.
"Plain jane" scsi? Where'd you come up with that one?
> And, what's this? Linux needs a gigabit adapter while W2K does fine with a
> single 10/100 card.
It would have been nice to see the slower adapter on the linux box,
and to have a better breakdown of the bottlenecks on both systems.
>
> But - say the penguins - remember, LINUX IS FREE and since the OS is free
> obviously (according to them) everything associated with it is so much
> cheaper that you'll always save money using Linux.
As happened here... $317 for Linux (why did they cost it as four copies?)
versus $2400 for Win 2000 Advanced Server.
> * WHAT'S THIS? $347/QphH for the linux "solution" versus $161/QphH for the
> W2K box? *
> (The linux solution costs: almost $1 million vs the W2K solution costing
> about 1/4 that!)
>
> So... I spend almost 250% as much money to get 60% more performance using
> FOUR computers (hey Matt, how much heat is that?? Think of the cooling
> budget!!) that aren't even shipping yet.
Look at SGI's server storage costs! $304000 plus $71280 for 5-year maintenance
versus only $157000 plus $30000 for the Unisys hardware.
I'd say SGI hardware is more than twice the price!
> The cost of the MS-based software is $16,327 but the cost of the Linux-based
> software is $315,824. I see where the savings using Linux adds up there.
The total cost of software in the SGI system is essentially due to the
cost of IBM's DB2 software. That's about $316000 plus $50000 versus
$16,000 plus $10000 for the Unisys solution.
You can't fault linux for the greater cost of the SGI system.
> So lets see, the 10/31/01 clustered result is going head to head against
> last years result using advanced server without clustering. Anyone wanna
> take bets on what a Datacenter driven, clustered W2K/SQL2K result using the
> same number of processors is going to do to that score?? I will... (hint:
> check out the TPC-C results for BOTH raw performance and price/performance).
I sure would check them out, if I could find the comparable setup. Can
you provide the link so we know we're looking at the same data? Thanks.
I'd rather look at the specs myself than have to filter out your
ejaculatory verbiage.
> The way I see it, W2K is still better. It's cheaper, runs faster and easier
> to use.
Cheaper than SGI hardware, and cheaper than IBM database software, that is.
In both systems, the OS is a trivial part of the cost, Linux being about
0.03% of the cost of the system, and Win 2K Advanced Server being about
0.85% of the cost of the system.
Can't see how this is a comparison of two operating systems, but I do
agree that it puts SGI and IBM in a somewhat bad light.
Chris
--
Free the Software!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ray Fischer)
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 02:14:54 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ray Fischer wrote:
>> >> >> If you're a man, and your have sex with another man who does not have
>> >> >> AIDS, your chance of getting AIDS is?
>> >> >
>> >> >And you know that he's not infected with AIDS how, exactly?
>> >>
>> >> The same way we know that YOU are not infected with AIDS.
>> >
>> >Since I don't engage in homosexual acts
>>
>> So you claim. Besides, that's not the only way to get AIDS, nor even
>> the most common way of getting the disease.
>
>You're asking me how *I* know that I don't have AIDS.
Learn to read.
>> > and I haven't had a blood transfusion since
>> >1973 (if at all -- appendix operation)...
>>
>> But those $10 hookers...
>
>False premise #1: that I use hookers
>False premise #2: that men can get AIDS from women in normal vaginal sex.
That's how it spreads in most of the world, dimwit. Through
heterosexual intercourse.
--
Ray Fischer When you look long into an abyss, the abyss also looks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] into you -- Nietzsche
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 02:00:52 GMT
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Microsoft has a policy of just deleting things when it becomes a problem!
>
> Yes Microsoft does. Microsoft, the Wintrolls, Wintroll Management,
> Wintroll Administration
> all have policies of just deleting things which get in their way!
>
> Remember the I-LOVE-YOU virus?
> When that blew thru town and wiped out our network
> it was decided to cripple our internet services by denying E-mail attachments.
And I suppose that you have some type of miracle cure that prevents users
from opening attachments with viruses?
> So our E-business was crippled because of it.
Because you couldn't send email attachments? What kind of eBusiness is this?
I haven't seen too many eBusinesses rely upon email attachments as the crux
of thier profitability.
> And when the IIS server was being attacked by worms, they recommended you
> disable even more services to prevent the problem.
As opposed to the Unix mentality which is "open more services!"?
Not quite. It is common on both Unix and Windows to restrict services
that are unnecessary. This is certainly not new in the Unix world, and not
different in the NT/2K world either.
> And when we discovered there was a new backdoor, we were again asked to
> delete a particular .DLL program to eliminate the problem.
Which no one uses anymore anyhow.
> When people complain about the lousy rotten service Microsoft provides
> our company, they are deleted.
What? LOOK OUT! BLACK HELIOCOPTERS!
> When ever you suggest a SANE interface to Windows, you end up getting Deleted!
? You mean something like X windows? ROFL...
-c
------------------------------
From: Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Campaign: Microsoft Free by October 1st
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 12:41:55 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> You know, I've been a Windows user since 95 first came out. But more
> and more, the product, and the actions of Microsoft (MS) anger me more
> and more.
>
> Now with all I'm reading about XP, I've had enough and I'm checking
> out all my hardware and I'm putting linux on my machine. The more I
> learn about linux, the more I'm impressed.
>
> I feel though we should all encourage others to do the same. It would
> be negligence on our part to let MS's treatment of consumers to go
> unchallenged. To remain silent and not take action would be an
> endorsement of MS's actions.
>
> I think we should begin a simple campaign, encouraging people to be
> "Microsoft Free by October 1st" (the release date of WinXP).
>
> With this, people knowledgable in Linux should simply keep making
> themselves available to newbies like myself (everyone in the
> newsgroups, and in other user groups have been very helpful to me,
> thank you guys) who might have questions and need help along the way.
>
> Take action against monopolies and unfair treatment of consumers.
>
> (I know I sound silly, but I've just been pissed off at the latest
> articles I've been reading out MS and XP.)
>
> Comments? Flames? Hurrahs?
>
> ________________________________________________________
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.geocities.com/sugapablo
> (To email me, remove "Sugapablo-" from my email address)
I still have a losedos computer. It is used to support software I wrote
for an oil company. Just a P-200, not into dual boot computers. It is
rarely turned on these days. Everything else at home is Linux. I even
found a driver and simple management tool for my serial connected digital
camera. So everything I need a computer to do is covered. I have a vast
assortment of languages, applications, utilities and games. On/off and
reset switch usage is a fading memory.
--
Michael Vester
A credible Linux advocate
"The avalanche has started, it is
too late for the pebbles to vote"
Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better)
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 02:01:59 GMT
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <3b01a496$0$2882$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jon Johansan wrote:
> >I had to blink and look twice: Linux has finally made it's appearence at
> >tpc.org and it's in first place!
> >
> >http://www.tpc.org/tpch/results/h-ttperf.idc
> >
> >There you have it, a linux powered result of 2733 smoking past the 1699
> >result posted for a W2K box.
> >
> >Well, I extend my hand in congratulations to the penguins for their stunning
> >entry into the world of high end database benchmarks. I'm certain suddenly
> >the TPC will be in style again and accepted for all to see.
> >
>
> {rediculous bullcrap deleted}
>
> Yes Jan. As we already knew, Linux blows the crap out of W2k,
> whether it be a single PC in single processor mode, SMP contest,
> or a CLUSTER.
What? It took twice the hardware and 4 times the cost for Linux to
eek out a small percentage of performance over a single Win2K box.
Linux has yet to show up anywhere near the real metric: the TPC-C.
-c
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
