Linux-Advocacy Digest #556, Volume #34 Wed, 16 May 01 17:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Rant: Report from the newbie front ("ecnal nillaf")
Re: To Erik: What is Wordperfect missing? (Terry Porter)
Re: Campaign: Microsoft Free by October 1st (Dave Martel)
Re: To Erik: What is Wordperfect missing? (Terry Porter)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 (T. Max Devlin)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (T. Max Devlin)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (T. Max Devlin)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (T. Max Devlin)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "ecnal nillaf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Rant: Report from the newbie front
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 14:05:28 -0600
Hello linvocates! (hello winvocates too)
First I have to say, I am not that technical and I am *not* in the
computer trades fields at all.
I'm just a security guard (you know us, underachievers inc. )
anyway ... I got my first computer in 1995 ... just something to play
with. Win95 was installed, I didn't know about any other OS (except I had
previously heard of IBM and MAC)
Anyway ... admittedly ... win95 was GREAT! (initially) it looked good,
it was fairly easy to learn how to get around with all the gui menus and
whatnot.
Fortunately I have a younger brother (I'm 37) who is a network security
specialist working for a prominent company that has programs for both
windows and linux. Anyway ... My brother is fairly knowledgeable in more
than just the network security aspect.
cutting to the chase ....
anyway ... it has been a great joy (and many frustrations) plunking away
with both windows and linux (and a little in dos) I still feel that I
don't know anything ... but I guess I'm a little above the average user?
Maybe I'm what they call a power user? Who knows? Who is john Galt?
hehehe anyway ...
I bounced back in forth with linux and windows about 2 years ago ... I
have a dual boot system with win98 on the other hard drive ... but ... I
rarely use windows, I can't tell you totally why I rarely use windows
anymore and I can't tell you why i still keep win98 on any hard drive?
That's what i'm trying to say ... there are uses for both ... As far as
the evilness of MS-Windows ... well ... did those larger companies have
to agree to play by Gates' rules? Was billy boy the only game in town?
He either had a product that they wanted ... or he did not
... and they agreed to those terms (which terms I thought sucked ... but
who am I?). I'm not going to get into this game about who is more evil
and the roots of windows and linux. Let the superior product succede the
most!
For me ... Linux is that superior product. I can only give a few reasons
why (for now) but most of it (after the learning curve) is based on feel
(don't tell my fellow objectivists that I said that!).
Reasons linux is better for me (just an "at home" user)....
1. I learn a lot more about the nuts and bolts of the system .. the hood
isn't welded shut as it is in ms-windows (and mac and amiga???? etc etc?)
2. Things run smoother (for the most part, most of the time... no OS is
without blemish, NO OS at all! )
3. I live in screwed up New Mexico (Albuquerque) where we grow
micro-chips in our backyard (INTEL at Rio Rancho) but have shitty phone
lines, ("dial-up only" for most areas) and the cable company hasn't
finished installing everything necessary to get my greatly desired cable
modem access yet! aaarrrrggghhh! so ... point is ... do you want to
d-load windos bloatware? I'll take the .tar files anytime over that (at
least with this slow ass dial-up here)
4. I don't really play "Quake" or anything like that ... I use my
computer for learning more about the OS and also for chatting, e-mailing,
viewing pics, browsing, and when I do play any games I like xlincity and
that penguin solitaire game ... and maybe xfrisk ... and that's about it,
I really don't have time in my busy (under-achiever) life to mess with
games ... use windos for that untill linux gets better and easier for the
neophyte. I am planning to take some unix courses at the local community
college soon, I would like to get certification in any distro of linux or
unix ... but I have a lot more to learn.
5. oh yeah ... whenever things might lock up in linux ... (and they
rarely do for me) I can hit ctrl+alt+backspace and I don't lose my
connection! and I still have a command line to work with! That beats
win98 all to hell and back (as far as I am concerned) just that point
right there is worth the switch.
6. SuSe and RedHat are geared for the GUI lovers and newbies :) try it
... stick with it ... you'll like it! especially if you have a lower end
system! (I have a P-II 400 ) (just got this recently ... I moved up from
my used p-120 that I bought for $300) (I'm a guard, I'm poor, I make do)
I could think of many more reasons ... but hell ... the point is ... if
you love windos ... and can't deal with anything else ... fine ... use
what works for you. I won't hate you, just don't think you are superior
or I'll smash you! :p
I am happy I pulled all my hair out and learned a few things about linux,
hehehe I'm staying with Linux untill the next thing better OS comes out
(FreeBSD? whew ... not for me ... not yet anyway ... sounds like it would
be fun to get to know though)
BTW ... I'm using RedHat 7.0 with gnome and sawfish (I sometimes use
iceWM).
the other gripe I have: Distro and Desktop wars ... sheesh ... use what
you can deal with and what you like ... linux needs a united front ... who
cares what distro and what desktop ... use what you like!!
Okay ... I'm done ranting ... I feel better now.
Hasta La Pasta amigos!
Lance from sunny and under-connected New Mexico
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: To Erik: What is Wordperfect missing?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 16 May 2001 20:14:21 GMT
On Wed, 16 May 2001 18:43:49 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> > > Just imported a Access table into Paradox without any problems.
> Quattro
>> > > Pro is handling MS Excel with any formatting issues, and Wordperfect
> is
>> > > as stable as the pope. Please, yet again I stress, where are the
>> > > so-called features that MS Office has that Wordperfect hasn't.
>> >
>> > That's not what I said. I said, In-place edit an embedded spreadsheet
>> > within the word processing document. What you are doing is converting
> the
>> > excel spreadsheet into a database format, which is something totally
>> > different.
>>
>> what part of "Just imported a Access table into Paradox" don't you
>> understand?
>
> What part of OLE don't you understand?
What part of Comp Linux Advocacy, don't you understand ?
> (why the hell would *you* use access anyway? isn't it another worthless,
> evil product from the Borg?)
This is a common misconception by Wintrolls like you. Most Linux advocates
have used many MS apps, for many years. We know the problems that these Ms
apps exhibit, because of our *experience*.
You on the other hand, puff and blow all day long about your wonderfull
MS OS, and XP is coming to screw you, yet you still have no clue.
> In any event, all you're doing is pasting an image (static) of the data into
> the document.
Well DOH!
> You update the data in the source, the data in the document stays the same.
Thank you for your elementary cut n paste lesson.
> If you embed the same, the link is "live". Changes to the source are
> reflected in the document in which you "embedded" a live copy.
And you're happy to do this on a WP (Word) that has enough trouble handling
a document over 200 pages as it is ?
I can only conclude that Ubertroll specialises is *short* documents.
Perhaps a list to take to the shop for lunch?
> D'oh.
>
> Another LinPert telling us how *everything* else in the world works.
At least they have a clue, unlike you, troll boy.
>
>
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Campaign: Microsoft Free by October 1st
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 14:05:38 -0600
On 16 May 2001 13:50:52 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Cerutti)
wrote:
>Terry Porter posted:
>>On Tue, 15 May 2001 19:11:27 +0700, Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>>Except in areas of cost as only 'Free Agent' is gratis ?
>>
>>Personally I cant stand Agent or Pan, perhaps SLRN has spoilt
>>me.
>
>slrn is terrific, but you have to love console apps to love slrn.
I grew up with CP/M so I'm comfortable with the CLI, but one gets
tired of looking at the same old screen all the time. For me a GUI is
more a matter of esthetics than functionality.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: To Erik: What is Wordperfect missing?
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 16 May 2001 20:23:55 GMT
On Wed, 16 May 2001 18:53:30 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
>
>> Just imported a Access table into Pardox without any problems. Quattro
>> Pro is handling MS Excel with any formatting issues, and Wordperfect is
>> as stable as the pope. Please, yet again I stress, where are the
>> so-called features that MS Office has that Wordperfect hasn't.
>
> Not to get into a pissing match over features here,
You're not succeeding are you ?
> but uh, it's obvious
> that your spreadsheet doesn't have anything in the beyond standard formulas.
Oh I dunno.
His spreadsheet has remote GUI, stability and is probably free.
> It couldn't have:
> VBA macros
> OLE
> Excel Pivot tables
> Complex 'what if' scenarios
> I could go on and on ..
Allow me :)
It also couldn't have BSOD's, XP, the BSA, and it cost you a bundle
unless like many Windows users, you *stole* it.
>
> The point is, that, if it is a standard "works for dummies" spreadsheet
> (which I'm thinking it is), then no problem. If it's something used in a
> professional capacity, such as a Real Estate business that puts everything
> into Excel workbooks,
I'd have thought that theyd want something more reliable ?
Perhaps its ok for those Real Estate firms with less than 20 clients.
> then forget it. You're not doing your Advocacy any
> favors
Don't advise anyone about Linux Advocacy Ubertroll, you're only
qualified to rant about Windos advocacy.
> by perpetuating this sort of blatant BS.
You're the bs expert Ubertroll.
> Just tell it like it is:
Hahahha, why..... ?
You don't have the aptitude to follow.
> Corel for Linux will handle the importing of MS office files if said files
> don't include any of the more advanced features of that software.
Or any of its unreliability.
> Your
> manure is getting thick,
Mr black Uberkettle.
> as is your lack of knowledge on concepts such as
> OLE.
He demonstrated no lack of knowledge of OLE, you're the one
making these claims.
We are still waiting for someone to explain the so-called
features that MS Office has that Wordperfect hasn't.
You may consider OLE to be a feature, is that your point ?
--
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux.
1972 Kawa Mach3, 1974 Kawa Z1B, .. 15 more road bikes..
Current Ride ... a 94 Blade
Free Micro burner: http://jsno.downunder.net.au/terry/
** Registration Number: 103931, http://counter.li.org **
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:33:31 GMT
Said Charlie Ebert in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 16 May 2001 01:11:52
[...]
>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.
Without a doubt. As soon as they've got enough .NET crap to keep
everyone nice and locked in, you can be sure that will become the
cure-all to everything; with .NET over MSN, why would you need the
Internet?
And you'll save money, because you'll only have to pay by the bit!
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:33:32 GMT
I'm just setting it up; someone else has to knock it down.
Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 16 May 2001 02:00:52
[...]
>And I suppose that you have some type of miracle cure that prevents users
>from opening attachments with viruses?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:33:33 GMT
Said Seán Ó Donnchadha in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 16 May 2001
>"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Of course fool. By using a secure operating system in the
>> first place an E-mail virus not only can't trash out the
>> OS core but it can't get at your address book.
>>
>> Linux provides this, Microsoft doesn't.
>>
>
>Yeah. Linux "provides" this by lacking a standard API-accessible address
>book. And if someone your legs off, you should be thankful because now you
>have "tripping protection".
Any text file is "a standard API-accessible address book". It is the
Linux apps which lack the access to this standard API-accessible address
book. You think you need a special library to access a text file for a
specific reason? What kind of crippled stupidity is this monopoly
crapware?
Linux is a secure operating system. Microsoft isn't. 'Nuf said.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:33:34 GMT
Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 16 May 2001 17:40:02
>"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> "Seán Ó Donnchadha" wrote:
>>
>> > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Of course fool. By using a secure operating system in the
>> > > first place an E-mail virus not only can't trash out the
>> > > OS core but it can't get at your address book.
>> > >
>> > > Linux provides this, Microsoft doesn't.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Yeah. Linux "provides" this by lacking a standard API-accessible address
>> > book. And if someone your legs off, you should be thankful because now
>you
>> > have "tripping protection".
>>
>> Please elaborate, also, proof read your sentences.
>
>Translation:
>Linux is more secure because there is no way to access the adress book in
>Linux.
>Similar to providing protection from falling down by cutting your legs.
Correction: Windows is less secure because there is only one standard
way to access only the standard address book in Windows. Not because
that is less secure (it's just stupid, really, monopoly crapware at its
finest), but because that access and that address book are not secure.
Linux can use any kind of address book you might want; yours or some
standard-based format (I'd recommend LDAP). Similar to providing you,
not the keys to the kingdom, but the right to vote with your legs.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:33:35 GMT
Said Pete Goodwin in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 16 May 2001 08:55:48
+0100;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>> >Telling me I'm lame does not make me lame. [...]
>>
>> Neither has this, or any of your other posts, provided any evidence to
>> the contrary, Pete. See-ya.
>
>Neither this nor any of your posts provides any evidence as to _why_ you
>think I'm lame.
Wow. Deja vu.
Guffaw.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:33:35 GMT
Said Peter Köhlmann in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 16 May 2001
[...]
>So, to play by fair rules, you belong into the killfile also.
You can make up any teleology you want, Peter. Just shut up and go
away, okay? I *really* could not care less.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:33:36 GMT
Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 16 May 2001
[...]
>Linux is NOT Unix.
Spoken like a very dim bulb. Of course Linux is Unix. And, yes,
experience with Solaris and HP-UX and even AIX and other Unixen is more
than sufficient to ensure that an end-user is going to be comfortable
and efficient on a Linux desktop.
If you aren't a dim bulb, that is.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:33:37 GMT
Said Pete Goodwin in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 16 May 2001 08:53:56
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>> Because I'm not here to play with wintrolls or posture. The system was
>> great; far superior to Windows. But, of course, Windows is more
>> convenient. Since I'm not spending another dime on it, anyway (and MS
>> got the last dime they'll ever get from me in 1995), I'm running an old
>> Win95b copy on it for the moment. It was mostly for games (my brother
>> buys all the cool new Windows games, and I wanted to play some of them)
>> but for the last few weeks, it's mostly been wordprocessing. DirectX
>> sucks; I could only play a quarter of the games in the end anyway.
>
>Liar.
>
>You are here to play and posture. You've done nothing but since you've
>been here.
ZZZZZZZZZ
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[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!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:33:38 GMT
Said "JS PL" <hi everybody!> in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 16 May
>"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:9du6kt$ita$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> The majority of suppliers only supply with windows on. I have one
>> >> question for you: are you trying to be stupid or does it come
>> >> naturally?
>> >
>> > I submit that only "stupid" people can't find a system from a major
>> > vendor WITHOUT Linux installed. And there's no one to blame but those
>> > same stupid people. Trouble is, most people want windows preinstalled.
>>
>> No, the monoply is to blame. All the places that do the advertising
>> advertise Windows only. That is what most people (stupid or not) see.
>
>I see large outlets advertising Apple Computers every day. Most people see
>that too, but they still choose Windows. With all these choices there can be
>no monopoly. It's really that simple. Even stupid people can figure out that
>they have choices. But if they can't, then only they are to blame.
But the relevant market isn't just "any PC purchase", JS PL. It is,
quite specifically, AFTER a consumer has decided, for WHATEVER reason,
to buy a PC. What choice do they have in large outlets advertising PCs
ever day? Large, retail outlets? What's preloaded, 95%+ of the time.
With all these choices (Windows, Windows, or Windows in large retail
outlet preloads) how can you claim there is not a monopoly? If you just
make the extreme cases (the small percent who not only roll their own
with Linux or a Linux OEM, but only those among that group that don't
still pay for WIndows) the only people who aren't "stupid", you're just
pointing out how ludicrous your case is.
Talking happy horse shit popular wisdom delusions because you haven't
anything better to do is all well and good, so go whine with the other
children about how "people are stupid" and the vast majority of
consumers are supposedly too dumb to recognize overpriced shoddy goods,
if you want to.
We are talking about law here, anonymous troll, not your childish
stupidity and its interpretation of what constitutes a violation of the
federal law in a federal court.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:33:39 GMT
Said Ayende Rahien in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 16 May 2001
[...]
>In other words, they turn their back to people who want to develop drivers
>for Linux.
No; they will gladly help anyone who wants to develop drivers for Linux.
They turn there back on people who want to try to capitalize a
proprietary extension used to exploit Linux through profiteering.
>What would happen if they tried to do this to Linux's API?
>Who would develop to Linux then?
>
>You see my point?
No. Open source good. Closed source bad. You see the point, now?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:33:40 GMT
Said Jon Johansan in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 16 May 2001 08:16:11
>"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Jan Johanson wrote:
>>
>> > "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > Jan Johanson wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > > > > Um, my calculator says that a 99.999% uptime leaves 5.26 MINUTES
>> > > > > > downtime per year - not 8 hours. Did you perhaps calculate for
>> > 99.9%
>> > > > > > uptime?
>> > > > > > --
>> > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > > > >
>> > > > > 365days * 24hours = 8760 hours
>> > > > > 0.001(difference between 100 and 99.999) * 8760 hours = 8.76
>hours.
>> > > >
>> > > > You Do realize that 5 9s of reliablity is the best that practically
>all
>> > > > vendors claim, even unix ones?
>> > > Unlike Microsoft, most UNIX vendors don't over estimate uptime, hence,
>> > > for the UNIX world, it is rather conservative. However, Microsoft
>wants
>> > > market share, they will even lie to try to get people to convert.
>> >
>> > 5 9s is conservative?
>> >
>> > Show me any proof of such a rediculous claim. Show me ANY unix vendor
>> > promising 6 9s of uptime. ANY OS/ANY hardware. Show me.
>>
>> No UNIX vendor needs to prove it, because most admins know already what
>UNIX
>> can and can't do.
>
>Ooooh, I see... so, proof is for heritics. We unix GODs have no need for
>proof - our disciples rely on faith and the passed down words of mainframe
>monks from history passed...
This is technology, not religion.
>Silly me for asking that someone prove something they claim - what was I
>thinking...
It was a stupid request, don't worry about it.
>Of course, we can borrow your logic and apply it to w2k too; W2K admins
>already know that W2K is reliable. We have no need to measure the length of
>our uptimes against others - we leave that for the penis envy crowd.
Now the problem is, that isn't true, while it is true that speaking of
'five or six nines' is only the very conservative view of reliability;
most people want it to maintain that even in practical use. MS can only
make it to two nines by fudging, quite frankly.
It isn't holy wars, and it isn't jealousy. It is monopoly crapware
against a superior product, that's all.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:33:41 GMT
Said Jon Johansan in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 16 May 2001 08:18:10
>"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Jan Johanson wrote:
>> >>
>> > 5 9s is conservative?
>> >
>> > Show me any proof of such a rediculous claim. Show me ANY unix vendor
>> > promising 6 9s of uptime. ANY OS/ANY hardware. Show me.
>>
>> Here's a little one from Novell:
>>
>> http://www.techshows.com/Calgary/novell_technologies_seminar.htm
>
>I meant "ANY UNIX/ANY hardware" but... so, it takes Novell to be the 6 9s
>king and requires a cluster.
>A Windows cluster can do this as well (and, hell, even a unix cluster). I'm
>talking single machines.
NOBODY in the Windows world claims five nines for a single machine. Not
without plenty of wiggle-room; that would be insanity.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:33:42 GMT
Said Jon Johansan in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 16 May 2001 08:11:08
[...]
>Just because someone/anyone cannot afford something, doesn't make that
>something bad - get it now?
No. It still doesn't make sense. If it is out of your price range, it
is inferior for your uses, no? It does not meet your requirements; it
is a "bad" choice. The "something is bad". Get it?
You only have to do all this second-guessing about "why" people buy what
they buy because you are trying to explain a predatory monopoly without
admitting you've been duped. Deal with it. Not our problem. Get it?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:33:43 GMT
Said Jan Johanson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 15 May 2001 22:46:04
>"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[...]
>> I use SuSE, hence, no security issues for me then
>
>Excuse me? Are you claiming SuSE has never had ANY security issues of any
>kind? Ever?
Category error, reading comprehension problem, or purposeful stupidity?
Votes please.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
