Linux-Advocacy Digest #639, Volume #34 Sun, 20 May 01 06:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("jet")
Re: Linux Mandrake Sucks!!!! (Terry Porter)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (GreyCloud)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! ("Matthew Gardiner")
Can I use GPL? (Ivan Popivanov)
Re: Dell Meets Estimates ("2 + 2")
Re: Windows makes good coasters (Terry Porter)
Re: Advice needed. ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Dell Meets Estimates ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux Mandrake Sucks!!!! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (GreyCloud)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Can I use GPL? (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) ("Edward Rosten")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "jet" <[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: Sun, 20 May 2001 02:09:08 -0700
You've got MALE.. sex organs! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Kulkis is an idiot.
>
True.
J
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux Mandrake Sucks!!!!
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 20 May 2001 09:08:40 GMT
On Sun, 20 May 2001 01:50:35 -0700,
GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Terry Porter wrote:
>> Gee I'm a prolific Wintroll baiter aren't I :)
> Heck, if you are an expert at it... maybe you could bait a
> master-baiter!
Hahahah LOL!
>:-)
>
> --
> V
--
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: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 02:11:40 -0700
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> > > No, Newtonian physics don't apply here.
> >
> > Incorrect! The Bureau of Standards has already determined this!
>
> Newtonian physics applies to mid-size objects, and even then it fail (Mars,
> anyone?) sometimes.
> For the very large, you need relativety, for the very small, you need
> quantom mechanics.
> To understand why light move slower than C on a medium, you need to
> understand the very small.
I already worked this out in the gov. It all started with why optical
lenses in telescopes got hot while looking at the sun. Light waves in a
medium carry quantum packets... in a vacuum they don't. Every time a
wave changes medium, quantum packets are incompatible with that medium.
Then the wave exchanges quanta in that media for another.
I'll continue... later!
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[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: Sun, 20 May 2001 21:14:09 +1200
> DirectX, registry, COM (I know that Solaris has it, how can it compare to
> Windows' COM?), DCOM, COM+ (This is equilent to J2EE system + Solaris. How
> many KLOC does WebSphere has?).
> Just a couple of things of the top of my head.
They support open standards. Grab a SUN box, there will be OpenGL, Java,
Netscape, TCP/IP, NFS and numorous other open standards compliant add on's.
Maybe instead of Microsoft re-inventing the wheel, the invest some of their
super normal profits into making a more stable OS.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ivan Popivanov)
Subject: Can I use GPL?
Date: 20 May 2001 02:16:09 -0700
Hi,
I went through a fair amount of material about free software and
still, I'm not sure whether I can use GPL or LGPL in the following
situation:
I have some source code, which I want to make freely available.
However, I may like to use this source code in a commercial
application. It looks to me that I can't do that if I release the
source code under GPL or LGPL. The problem is that most of my c++ code
is contained in header files (inline functions) therefore if I apply
any of the GNU licenses I will have to release the source code of my
application too. I understand that I should made all the changes to
the released code available, but I don't want to make my application
source code available. Is my understanding of the licenses correct?
Thanks in advance,
Ivan
------------------------------
From: "2 + 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: Dell Meets Estimates
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 05:11:08 -0400
heh heh
GreyCloud wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Jon Johansan wrote:
>>
>> "Shun Yan Cheung" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:9e4ulh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > In article <9e4lh4$ccu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, 2 + 2 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> > >That's just a Sun press release.
>> >
>> > At least it has benchmark numbers for TPC-H....
>> > TPC-C is too simplistic and has been considered to
>> > be outdated, SAP is a better measure. Go to
>> >
>>
>> SAP is excellent:
>>
>> a..
>> 1.. In SAP Sales & Distribution and Retail Benchmark performance tests:
>> 2.. A 32-way Unisys ES7000 running the SAP Sales and Distribution
>> benchmark achieved 18,500 SD users. This compares to the best Sun result
of
>> 23,000 SD users on a 64-way E10000. The Sun E10000 is at the end of its
>> product life, while Unisys expects to further enhance the ES7000 with 900
>> MHz processors in the very near future.
>> a.. In the SAP Retail Benchmark, the best Windows 2000 and SQL Server
>> solution scored 3,165,000 transactions per hour while the best Sun
solution
>> scored only 2,412,000 transactions per hour.
>> b.. Over half of new SAP sales are on Windows-based systems. Over
>> one-third of existing SAP sites run on Windows platforms. SAP has over
>> 10,000 customers running on Windows platforms. (Source: SAP)
>>
>> Of course, W2K owns SAP too...
>
>How about SAP SUCKER!!
>
>--
>V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 20 May 2001 09:17:44 GMT
On 20 May 2001 17:00:03 +1000,
Jeremy Lunn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <9daca3$1022$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Steve Sheldon wrote:
>> Yes, crashing out of X-Windows back to a console is pretty routine.
This is just plain wrong. Unless you have a videodriver/card problem
one will never "crash out of X"
I should know, I've been using X every single day (linux only here)
since 1997.
And I've only had 4 problems with X in that time.
2 were nuke related, 2 were IRC related.
--
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: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Advice needed.
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 11:23:55 +0100
> technologies are still absent. For instance, expect to be shocked by
> how primitive the font and printing technologies are under Linux.
> Somehow, Linux grows on you, despite how primitive its technology is.
I take issue with the bit about printing technology. The printing
technology is every bit as advanced as Windows' print technology (except
the filters make it much more flexible) however, it simply has its
advantages in very different areas.
There was a thread on this earlier (a couple of weeks ago), so I'm no
going to repeat myself.
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: Dell Meets Estimates
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 11:26:10 +0100
> 1.. In SAP Sales & Distribution and Retail Benchmark performance
> tests:
> 2.. A 32-way Unisys ES7000 running the SAP Sales and Distribution
> benchmark achieved 18,500 SD users. This compares to the best Sun result
> of
> 23,000 SD users on a 64-way E10000. The Sun E10000 is at the end of its
> product life, while Unisys expects to further enhance the ES7000 with
> 900 MHz processors in the very near future.
Sy you're saying that a brand new produch being hammered by a nearly
decomissioned product is a *good* thing? Man you have wierd logic.
-Ed
PS And how good do you think the sucessor to the E10000 will be?
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 02:27:04 -0700
GreyCloud wrote:
>
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > > > No, Newtonian physics don't apply here.
> > >
> > > Incorrect! The Bureau of Standards has already determined this!
> >
> > Newtonian physics applies to mid-size objects, and even then it fail (Mars,
> > anyone?) sometimes.
> > For the very large, you need relativety, for the very small, you need
> > quantom mechanics.
> > To understand why light move slower than C on a medium, you need to
> > understand the very small.
>
> I already worked this out in the gov. It all started with why optical
> lenses in telescopes got hot while looking at the sun. Light waves in a
> medium carry quantum packets... in a vacuum they don't. Every time a
> wave changes medium, quantum packets are incompatible with that medium.
> Then the wave exchanges quanta in that media for another.
>
> I'll continue... later!
>
> --
> V
Happens a lot... all of a sudden my hard drive starts thrashing like
crazy! I pull the plug and it stops..(the modem).
Anyway... heat is a side product of the quanta exchange. It happens
twice in a glass lense. Upon entering and leaving. Also, the quanta
slows down upon entering a denser medium like glass or air. No one has
ever tested the speed of light in a vacuum! I can find no reference of
any tests in a lack of medium.
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Mandrake Sucks!!!!
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 11:28:39 +0100
> Nope. Someone is copying "me style" to create some traffic.
>
> My material is much better.
>
>
> flatfish
Whatever happened to the ++++?
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 02:28:37 -0700
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Gary Hallock wrote:
> > >
> > > In article
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The National Bureua of Standards has measured it to be about 88% of c.
> > > > It does not travel at the speed of light. Neither do electrons in a
> > > > copper wire.
> > >
> > > Radio waves are light. The speed of light, including radio waves,
> > > varies depending on the medium. However, usually when one refers to the
> > > speed of light without specifying the medium, the speed of light in a
> > > vacuum is assumed. The speed of radio waves in a vacuum is the same as
> > > light. Perhaps the the 88% of c is the speed of radio waves in the
> > > earth's atmosphere. However, since interstellor space is very close to
> > > a vacuum, the speed of radio waves coming from a distant star would be
> > > traveling at very close to the speed of light in a vacuum (until, of
> > > course, it hits the earth's atmosphere).
> > >
> > > Gary
> >
> > Radio waves are not light! Radio waves have been measured by the NBS at
> > 88%.
> > The speed of light has never been measured in a vacuum!
> > It has been measured, tho, in space that light without quantum packets
> > travels instantaneously. Otherwise, the appearance of distant galaxies
> > would be totally distorted beyond recognition.
> >
> > But this is all irrelavant. Even if the speed of light were 1000 faster
> > than what we know... the million light years of distance and time of a
> > signal, let alone the attenuation of the inverse square of the distance
> > would render any signal unreadable, let alone detectable.
> >
> > Interstellar space is full of energies... and full of unseen
> > gravitational disturbances.
>
> Where do you pull this stuff from?
>From working on the inside of the US gov. DOD.
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[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: Sun, 20 May 2001 21:34:38 +1200
> All I know is that Solaris 8 occupies a large part of 4GB of hd space.
> Most of this is from 1 CD of documentation. This I really like. The
> docs are great!
> The rest is from a great deal of good programs that cover the complete
> spectrum from A to Z!
>
It should only occupy just under 2 gigs, installing both CD 1, 2 and the
documentation on. Thats not including the swap partition.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 02:34:24 -0700
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > > I think the SETI program is a farce! No offense to you, but I often
> > > > wonder what good does it do them? Radio waves travel a little slower
> > > > than the speed of light. And if the radio waves are coming from many
> > > > million light years away I'd say it was very old news we would be
> > > > receiving. But I doubt they will get anything from it as they
> advertise
> > > > they are looking for. All I know is that the end user gets a block of
> > > > data to crunch... do we really know what this data is? Could it be
> > > > entirely something else?
> > >
> > > Bah!
> > > Get some lessons in physics first.
> > > Radio waves and light are the same thing!
> > > They travel at the speed of light, and unless some funky think happen,
> that
> > > is the fastest thing around.
> > > Yes, if it reached from any decent distance, then it's old news *where
> it
> > > happened*, not here. Time isn't constant, it's flexible.
> >
> > I did. Time is flexible! Radio waves and light are not the same! There
> > is a lag and an inherent inertia to radio waves. Academics are not in
> > touch with the current state of the art. My education was from the very
> > best in there fields. I also was very lucky to get my education from a
> > nobel prize physicist! His name is Rodger Packett! He was contracted
> > to the U.S. gov. to teach to DOD specific candidates.
> >
> > Most academic physics classes ... well, what can I say?? OLD??
> > I worked with what I was told to work with.
> >
> > I heard that Gallileo had the same problems.
>
> Why don't you post to rec.arts.sf.science, this is not the place to agrue
> about physics.
True... but the argument is bascially that SETI project is a hoax. When
you download software to your personal computer and believe it is in a
just cause to search for ET, one can only look at the absurdities of
this research. There are possible alternatives to long range
communications other than radio. The big complaint is the data that the
end user of SETI receives. I can't even determine if this data is
related to the search of ET. This data could very well be a derivative
of CARNIVORE or some other project.
After all, this is an unmoderated ng.
--
V
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 09:35:42 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > Yet 1 million desktop machines (which includes a large majority of
> > Windows machines) produces one that is bigger than only one
> > supercomputer in the world.
> >
>
> Loosely coupling many PCs together across the phone lines is not the same
> as a a closely coupled cluster. The communications overhead is much too
> great to do many useful things. Where are the Windows machines that
> can do weather prediction or simulate nuclear weapons?
Yet the SETI and Intel websites claim this is the biggest supercomputer
and quote figures of 10 TeraFlops.
As for where are the machines, why, nobody has written a distributed
prediction package and aren't likely to write one for simulating nuclear
weapons!
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 09:39:03 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Here's Microsoft's version of standardization: If another company has
> a protocol we want, let's make it Open Source; If we have a protocol
> everyone else wants, let's keep it proprietary so everyone has to come
> to us just for everything.
Now what was it Linus Torvald said... he who owns the copyright?
> You really fail to grasp the concept that
> Microsoft is a predatory company and does not have the interests of
> the computing masses in mind.
It's called Standard Business Practice. Are there any business's out
there that don't do this?
What did Sun do with Java? They tried to submit it to a standards body
but wanted to keep control of it. That went a little awry, did it not?
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 09:40:24 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> I've got other things to do other than listen to you bitch and whine
> about a free operating system.
Fine. Keep your eyes shut and your hands over your ears. But don't tell
me I'm whining when I'm pointing out a shortcoming of Linux/The Gimp.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 09:40:55 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Sounds to me like Pete went down a list of linux flaws and decided to
> suffer every last one of them himself just so he'd have an excuse to
> bitch about linux.
Who needs a list? Just install Linux and see what happens.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Can I use GPL?
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 02:40:30 -0700
Ivan Popivanov wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I went through a fair amount of material about free software and
> still, I'm not sure whether I can use GPL or LGPL in the following
> situation:
>
> I have some source code, which I want to make freely available.
> However, I may like to use this source code in a commercial
> application. It looks to me that I can't do that if I release the
> source code under GPL or LGPL. The problem is that most of my c++ code
> is contained in header files (inline functions) therefore if I apply
> any of the GNU licenses I will have to release the source code of my
> application too. I understand that I should made all the changes to
> the released code available, but I don't want to make my application
> source code available. Is my understanding of the licenses correct?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Ivan
Take it for what its worth. I purchased GNU Pro Toolkit and Source
Navigator from Cygnus for $150. It is the egcs c++ compiler that all
distros use now and no mention of GPL in their license agreement was
ever made. Even Sun Microsystems sells this stuff at a low price. I
suspect the primary purpose of GPL is to keep MSs' mitts from
controlling linux.
--
V
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 09:41:46 GMT
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Of course a professional is required to go above and beyond the call of
> duty.
So in order to use Linux you need to be a professional? In order to use
Windows you don't need to be. It just works.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 09:42:38 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Not curious at all. This project was contracted by the goverment years
> ago. AIX was chosen long before IBM became interested in Linux. And
> IBM had years of experience with using AIX on closely coupled systems
> such as SP2. LoadLeveler and POE have not yet been ported to Linux.
> Note that AIX 5.1 brings AIX closer to Linux. And if you look at the
> software supported on ASCI White, you'll notice some GNU software.
Linux was around "years ago". Yet IBM chose _not_ to use it.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 11:43:33 +0100
>>> You could put "Linux beats Win2K in terms of scalability". Instead you
>>> put the more inclusive version and added "again".
>>
>> So it was requires for you to read the post before understanding it.
>> Well are you really suprised about that?
>
> No. However, you could pick a better title.
>
>> I am suggesting that a benchmark setup is not an example of *real*
>> world scalibility. No one uses benchmark setups to get work done.
>
> True.
>
>> I am suggesting a supercomputer is an example of *real* world
>> scalibility becuase people use supercomputers to do real work.
>
> True.
>
>> Spot the difference.
>
> Then change the title.
If you know all of this then what is your problem? Are you trollig again.
>>> What's the biggest computer out there at the moment?
>>
>> Thje biggest sigle computer is the one at the top of thee top500.
>> Unsuprisingly enough, it's a huge IBM monster capable of many thousands
>> of gigaflops.
>
> And the two not mentioned are the ones by SETI and Intel.
1) They aren't single machines, since they're not controlle from a single
node.
2) They have to use whatever is out there since there is no choice, but
that does not make what is out there the best option by any stretch.
3) By your reckoning, Win98 is the most scalable OS in the world. Do you
seriously believe that or can you now see a flaw in your argument?
>> Correct. I have no idea what OS it runs. It's not a Linux cluster.
>
> It's AIX, IBM's version of UNIX. Curiously, not Linux.
Er...? So? My point was about Linux beating Win2K. How does this have
anything to do with it. Linux is still much higher up on the list than
Win2K, even though its not at the top yet.
>> A couple of good examples, but are there any for profit making
>> organisations, ie businesses.
>>
>> Nope.
>
> So now you only consider profit making organisations!
SETI and Intel did not pay for or build a computer for this task. They
simply used what was avaliable (!= what is best). When building one, you
use what is best, since you have a choice. No one has built a large
supercomputer out of Win2K[*] out of choice.
[*]If you consier SETI, et al, they didn't use 2K either. Win9X, mostly.
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 09:43:29 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> SETI runs on unix boxes as well. Of course, Windows is more popular, so
> naturally the majority of them are going to be Windows boxes. This has
> nothing to do with technical merit.
The Intel one only runs on Windows. They chose it because it's the most
popular.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 11:46:54 +0100
> You didn't read what that was all about, now did you? I fixed the
> problem by changing a setting in The Gimp. My whole point througout
> that thread was I that I shouldn't need to.
Yet you claimed it was Linux's fault, not GIMP's fault simply on the
grounds that it has never happened to you under Windows, so it must be
the OS's fault (despite many people claiming it did happen under
windows).
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 09:46:49 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> >Superior networking? Ah yes, that makes sense. Linux can't handle two
> >network cards and DHCP on my machine.
> Works on my server perfectly fine. You don't know how to configure it
> and haven't bothered to research the subject. Where, by the way, did
> TCP/IP stem from? Answer: the UNIX world. Another question: where did
> the IOS on Cisco's networking products come from? Answer: the UNIX
> world. Microsoft would still be using Netbeui if it weren't for their
> piss-poor implementation of TCP/IP.
It would appear the only way I'm going to get around the problems in
Linux on my system is to rebuild the kernel with the two network modules
in the kernel. That way the dumb system doesn't try to load DHCP or the
Firewall _before_ the network drivers are installed.
So TCP/IP originated in the UNIX world? Which machine has really made it
take off? The PC of course! All running Windows!
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 09:47:24 GMT
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> Pete probably means "Linux install can't do it for me automatically".
Correct. If Windows can do it seamlessly, why can't Linux?
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Sun, 20 May 2001 11:49:18 +0100
>>> Interesting! And what OS is that running? Linux?
>>>
>>> AIX, IBM's proprietary implementation of UNIX.
>>
>> You are such a wanker. You love snipping so as to quote people out of
>> context.
>>
>> Idiot.
>
> About the level of response I've come to expect.
>
> So, how come the world's biggest supercomputer (bar one) consists of
> primary Windows desktops?
It doesn't: it is not a computer. There are huge differences between SETI
and ASIC White (et al.) SETI is not controlled from a single node and is
useful for only a tiny range of problems due to very loose copuling.
For the *vast* majority of supercomputer problems, SETI is useless.
-Ed
--
(You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.) (u98ejr)(@)(ecs.ox)(.ac.uk)
/d{def}def/f{/Times-Roman findfont s scalefont setfont}d/s{10}d/r{roll}d f 5 -1
r 230 350 moveto 0 1 179{2 1 r dup show 2 1 r 88 rotate 4 mul 0 rmoveto}for/s{15
}d f/t{240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage}d pop t
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
