Linux-Advocacy Digest #681, Volume #34 Tue, 22 May 01 00:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux ("Les Mikesell")
Re: The nature of competition (mlw)
Re: Win 9x is horrid (Doug Holland)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: RIP the Linux desktop (.)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Intermediate user who left Windows for Linux ("Glitch")
Re: Dell Meets Estimates ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 03:17:13 GMT
"Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3b080a1d$0$37294$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Usually the advocacy groups are the best place to find out if something
> > *can* be fixed, even if you don't get all the details. I can't
reproduce
> > this thing - it just happens a couple of times a day on machines that
> > are serving somewhere less than a million hits each a day and about
> > 10% of those involve a transformNode operation. It may involve
> > an error in the http GET of the xml data, or an error in the data
> > format returned from the backend xml data servers, but I don't
> > think that excuses any service popping a dialog box and waiting.
>
> Look - if you corrupt memory in a service causing the service to crash -
> what do you expect it to do?
First, I don't understand why asp pages using documented xml methods
should corrupt memory in a service, but I can accept the fact that bugs
exist. I just don't see why a service intended for unattended operation
should ever stop and wait.
>Just crash silently and do nothing.
Yes, if it has to crash it should exit quietly and politely. The service
manager can then restart it.
> At least
> you're getting a box to tell you that's gone down hard. If it's dead and
> can't be restarted then it's really really dead.
I don't want a box. There is no one there with a mouse. The reason
it can't be restarted is that it is waiting for a mouse-click on a dialog
box. It wouldn't be dead if it would just exit and let the system restart
it. If a service has something to tell me it should send email, or at
least
use the event log (I suppose syslogging to a remote host like every other
network-aware device does is just too much to ask...).
> Advocacy groups are THE worst place to ask for a fix for this problem.
But,
> what the heck, how about posting as much detail and code as you possibly
can
> and we'll try to get you fixed up.
There is not much to go on. Perhaps twice a day out of somewhere less than
a million hits/box, IIS pops the dialog and waits. It may be getting
errors
in the xml request to the back end data server or it may be something
involving
threads and timing, but I can't reproduce it and it hasn't logged the
relevant
hit yet. How do you diagnose things that might involve concurrent thread
operations? I've never needed to do that under unix.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The nature of competition
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:19:20 -0400
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9eav8b$110c$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>> > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:9eaikh$tr1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> > news:9e9eus$c8b$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> >> I was talking with some guys at work. We were joking that we saved
>> >> > $100,000
>> >> >> on Microsoft licenses on our website. We used Linux, Apache,
> Postgres,
>> >> > php,
>> >> >> and perl across multiple boxes behind a load balancer.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I see a lot of talk on this forum about how Linux is marginally
> better
>> > or
>> >> >> W2K is marginally better, etc. From a price/performance perspective
>> >> >> W2K
>> >> > has
>> >> >> to be A LOT better than linux to even tie, and we don't see this
>> >> > happening.
>> >> >
>> >> > Well, so far, the only real tests of price/performance that Linux
>> > machines
>> >> > have participated in is the TPC benchmark, and that showed a
>> >> > price/performance ratio of over twice that of the Win2k box.
>> >>
>> >> The TPC is NOT an OS benchmark. How many times does this have to be
>> >> debated? It is a measure of home many transactions a specific database
>> >> environment can do. It is a heavy test of hardware, SQL environment,
> and
>> >> configuration. The OS has very little to do with it.
>> >
>> > The point is that nobody seems very interested in trumpeting Linux's
>> > superiority in a way that can be proven. Everyone appears to rely on
>> > hearsay only. You would think that if Linux was so superior, people
> would
>> > be generating reams of documentation to prove it.
>>
>> The above paragraph does not refute my statements about TPC. So, I'll
>> assume you agree that only an idiot with no understanding of computers
>> would attempt to apply TPC as an OS benchmark.
>
> My point was that the *ONLY* proveable benchmarks linux systems have
> participated in so far is TPC. I made no effort to claim how valid or
> invalid that is.
That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. TPC is not an OS benchmark.
If one were to measure performance of a system with IDE drives, and then
replace the IDE drives with high performance hardware raids and ultra wide
SCSI cards, does that mean the OS has magically becomes faster? No of
course not, TPC is not an OS benchmark, it is a system and configuration
benchmark in which the OS plays a very small part.
Only an idiot with no understanding how what constitutes valid testing
procedures would use the TPC to rate operating systems.
To even suggest TPC in an OS debate indicates one is an idiot.
>
>> There are other benchmarks, some have to do with web, some with file
>> servers, etc. The point is that NONE of these benchmarks show any real
>> advantage of W2K over Linux. The may bounce back and forth, but that's
>> it.
>
> We've seen a few, and everytime a benchmark is done, it's done by some
> impartial party who doesn't bother to tune the other side.
There have been several tests that have been impartial, but I agree it is
hard to find an impartial test, but that does not validate TPC as an OS
test.
>
>> With the cost of W2K so high, it is clear that it provides no value for
> its
>> cost, and that is the point of this thread.
>
> It's value is not in it's direct cost, that's obvious. It's value
> includes: Millions of trained professionals who understand it,
Most MSCE's I have met do not understand NT/W2k let along construct
meaningful sentences.
> boatloads
> of advanced tools and RAD environments to speed development,
RAD tools suck. They are a product of a failed economic boom. They will
fade because they produce crap.
> the ability
> to use off the shelf software for niche tasks rather than writing it
> yourself or paying someone to write it for you.
What "off the shelf" software is available for NT that does not have an
equivalent on Linux and UNIX?
>
>> >> >> Linux is at least as fast, if not faster.
>> >> >
>> >> > Depends on the task. Linux is *NOT* as fast or faster for things
> like
>> >> > Video editing, for instance.
>> >>
>> >> That is an interesting statement. Why do you say that? Perhaps some
>> >> applications are not as fast as others, but TiVO is based on Linux,
>> >> wouldn't that mean anything?
>> >>
>> >> In fact, with kernel frame buffer support, there is no reason that
> Linux
>> >> would be any slower than any other OS on the same hardware.
>> >
>> > TiVo doesn't do video editing, it only does video capture/playback
> to/from
>> > mpeg. While, that's not a simple task by any measure, TiVo isn't doing
>> > this
>> > through X, it's doing it to a dedicated framebuffer. Video Editing
>> > requires rather complicated GUI's, not to mention that it must do
> multiple
>> > sources at
>> > the same time without skipping frames. Of course this is mostly
> hardware,
>> > but the GUI must be fast enough to deal with it, and XFree simply isn't
> up
>> > to the job.
>>
>> I don't have any experience with video editing software, but technically,
>> with framebuffer support, there is NO reason why Linux would be any
>> slower than Windows or NT on the same hardware.
>
> Then why aren't there any Linux based video editing systems built by any
> of the major players?
Like I said I don't know that area, but there is no technical reason why a
Linux solution could not be just as good if not better. There probably is a
Linux solution, I just do not know first hand.
>
>> Once you have a pointer to the frame buffer, it's just bits across the
> bus.
>> If you have a specialized video card with multiple viewports, it is an
>> IOCTL call to have it move the memory from one to the other.
>
> Oh great, just what an application programmer wants to be doing.
Do you thing DirectDraw comes for free? Application writers have to deal
with this stuff.
>
>> I have written video drivers for Windows and NT, and I don't see any
> reason
>> why Linux (with frame buffer support) would be any slower. If you know
>> something about the technology involved that would make Linux slower,
>> please explain. Otherwise you are making it up.
>
> XFree86 is slow, even 4.0, it's very slow. You need to do all this within
> a GUI, and you need other tools to function as well, so you can't take
> over the framebuffer.
This shows you have know idea how video systems work, and are trying to FUD
the group. The X protocol is not much slower (if it is slower) than the
Win32 protocol.
It is the extensions to both of these systems that give them any speed.
>
>>
>>
>> >
>> >> >> Linux has been proven to be more stable.
>> >> >
>> >> > It has? How? I've seen no verifiable studies that show Linux's
> uptime
>> > to
>> >> > be greater than anything else.
>> >>
>> >> Define "Verifiable" as it applies here.
>> >
>> > Verifiable is not someone saying "My linux box stays up for 3 years
>> > without
>> > a reboot". It's a study, performed in a repeatable manner with
> evidence.
>>
>> You mean like the Microsoft funded MTTF study of Windows W2K? lol.
>>
>> >
>> >> >> Linux has proven to be more secure.
>> >> >
>> >> > Again, it has? What do you call the 49 security bulletins in the
> last
>> >> > 6 months for Red Hat?
>> >>
>> >> It isn't the number, it is the severity and the number of documented
>> >> exploits prior to a patch being made available. Besides, I think any
>> > notion
>> >> that NT/2K is secure is ridiculous based on the various news items.
>> >
>> > I never said it was secure, I'm saying that Linux is no better. Bugs
>> > exist in all software, and the security bugs in Linux are just as bad.
>> >
>> > The number of exploits is also meaningless, since a single bug can
>> > cause
>> > millions of exploits. Remember the morris internet worm?
>>
>> I state that Linux is secure because people can see the code and bugs get
>> found, and fixed faster. I also state that W2K is less secure because it
> is
>> closed source and no one can double check for secret back doors or stupid
>> errors.
>>
>> That is the logical argument. Do you refute it? If so what is the
>> argument to the contrary?
>>
>> >
>> >> >> Linux is free.
>> >> >
>> >> > More of that ambiguity.
>> >>
>> >> What is ambiguous about free? That is a FUD comment and you know it.
>> >
>> > Are we really going to go into this? Hell, the FSF has a complete
>> > essay on the ambiguity of the word.
>>
>> I don't know how you define free, but I am working on a computer for
>> which I have never had to pay anything for any of the software on it. Not
>> one penny, I pay nothing and I am fully licensed to use the software on
>> it.
>>
>> That is what I mean by free.
>>
>>
>> >
>> > I know you'll find it humorous, but the quality of the software is the
>> > issue. Quality in this sense does not mean "stability" or "how many
> bugs"
>> > but rather "what it can do".
>>
>> What does Star Office *not* do?
>>
>> I have yet to find something I want to do on Linux for which I can't find
> a
>> program.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: Doug Holland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win 9x is horrid
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 21:30:26 -0600
Fred K Ollinger wrote:
> chrisv ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> : Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : >The problem Microsoft has is that they are an operating system company
> : >in an era where the operating system is becomming a ubiquitous item.
> : >In a few years people aren't going to care what OS is installed;
> : >they'll all come with every basic tool you need (internet,
> : >word processor, spreadsheet, audio/video tools, etc.). Microsoft's
> : >offering will be just another face in the crowd -- the real money will
> : >be made on hardware.
>
> : You are joking, right? Hardware, whether it's a cell phone, a
> : satellite receiver, or a computer, is something that is GIVEN AWAY so
> : that you can sell software and services!
>
> Show me where I can get a free computer if I buy windows.
>
>
> Fred
>
Computer sales don't go by this model, as the hardware manufacturers are
separate from the software manufacturers, and they both want to make money.
On the other hand, most game console producers sell the consoles
themselves at a loss and make the money back from game sales.
--
Meldroc
Remove the name of SPAM's creator to email.
------------------------------
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: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:40:00 -0400
"Vallely's Dirt in Boss King's Ditch.." wrote:
>
> Aaron's a homophobe,
^^^^^^^^^
You misspelled "person who finds buggery disgusting"
> in addition to being a pathetic little right
> wing gunny turd..
Be careful who you insult, asshole
The military people who protect your constitutional rights are "right wing gunny
assholes"
So are the police who protect you while you sleep.
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
> > >
> > > Aaron> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> >>>>> Aaron R Kulkis writes:
> > > >>
> > > Aaron> Roberto Pavan wrote:
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> > You guys STILL have yet to demonstrate that homosexuality is
> > > >> >> > anything OTHER than defective behavior.
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Why? Seriously. Why should they demonstrate anything?
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Seeing as it affects you not one whit whether someone chooses to have
>sex with
> > > >> >> someone of the same gender, why should they have to prove anything to
>you at all
> > > >> >> regarding this behaviour? Why not go on wearing your tutu and playing
>with your
> > > >>
> > > Aaron> If a car that I don't own, and I'm not riding in, crashes, killing all
>aboard,
> > > Aaron> due to brake failure...
> > > >>
> > > Aaron> are you trying to imply that I should be prohibited from commenting
>that
> > > Aaron> the car was obviously defective in some way...
> > > >>
> > > >> >> sock while listening to Barry Manilow records and staring at pictures
>of flatulent
> > > >> >> field mice and leave them the hell alone? Both you and they will be
>ever so much
> > > >> >> happier...
> > > >>
> > > Aaron> Personally, I wish all of these defective people would quit running
>around
> > > Aaron> demanding that I give them special rights, so that they can indulge in
> > > Aaron> their defective behavior.
> > > >>
> > > >> Can you name a single right being asked for that heterosexuals
> > > >> do not either already have,
> > >
> > > Yes> The PRIVILEGE of not allowing others to judge their behavior.
> > >
> > > Aaron> For example, *I* get judged on my behavior all the time. Why should
> > > Aaron> homosexuals get a special exemption?
> > >
> > > Who is asking for such a thing?
> >
> > The gay privileges lobby.
> >
> > >
> > > >> or would have along with gays should
> > > >> the proposed item be passed into law?
> > >
> > > Aaron> They tried that in my home town just this week.
> > >
> > > Aaron> Although public opinion polls showed the special-rights-for-gays
>proposal
> > > Aaron> to have a slight majority....the ACTUAL VOTING TURNOUT was a landslide
> > > Aaron> defeat for the homsexuals.
> > >
> > > Name one of the so-called special rights.
> > >
> >
> > The privilege to NOT bear the consequences of one's behavior.
> >
> > > Aaron> Imagine that.
> > >
> > > >> I will not hold my breath.
> > > >>
> > > >> There is nothing "special" about equal rights.
> > >
> > > Aaron> Homosexual already HAVE equal rights.
> > >
> > > No, they are not allowed to marry the willing adult of their
> > > choice, and are thus shut out of a large set of rights, privileges
> > > and responsibilities.
> >
> > Any man is allowed to marry any woman whom he so chooses.
> > Any woman is allowed to marry any man whom she so chooses.
> >
> > All gays have these rights, just like anybody else.
> >
> > >
> > > Aaron> Any additional laws are Special Privileges.
> > >
> > > I have yet to see a single special right or privilege being
> > > asked for.
> >
> > You wish to escape the consequences of your deviancy.
> >
> > >
> > > You have, despite several challenges, failed to come up with
> > > one.
> > >
> >
> > > Big surprise.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andrew Hall
> > > (Now reading Usenet in alt.fan.rush-limbaugh...)
> >
> > --
> > Aaron R. Kulkis
> > Unix Systems Engineer
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: RIP the Linux desktop
Date: 22 May 2001 03:43:15 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 21 May 2001 21:24:03 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>>And once again, who cares? What is it to you or any of us? Linux
>>was just fine before it was noticed by money chewing corporate
>>types (like yourself) and will be just fine after.
> I'm self employed.
> Left the corporate world years ago and it was the be$t thing I ever
> did.
You still have the mindset.
>>We didnt make it for *you*.
> So *who* did you make it for?
Ourselves.
=====.
--
"George Dubya Bush---the best presidency money can buy"
---obviously some Godless commie heathen faggot bastard
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 06:46:09 +0200
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:ZSkO6.3712$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> How do you diagnose things that might involve concurrent thread
> operations? I've never needed to do that under unix.
You debug, of course.
You never need to do that on Unix because it has lousy thread support.
------------------------------
From: "Glitch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Intermediate user who left Windows for Linux
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 00:00:32 -0400
> Having tinkered with Linux for more than a year, I finally made the
> break with Windows and only use it to play games. Although I cannot
> install programs that are not RPM's yet - and editing configuration
> files are confusing to me - I did get Star Office up which is the main
> thing I use my computer for.
>
> I really wonder how MS new security measures on their software, is going
> to effect the average user. For me it was enough to tick me off and make
> a switch to another operating system.
>
> Well off to learn something called the command line :-)
>
you don't neeed the command line for the most part
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: Dell Meets Estimates
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:56:02 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "cjt & trefoil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Jon Johansan wrote:
> > >
> > <snip>
> > > 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.
> > <snip>
> >
> > Bingo. The successor to the E10000 will be along soon, and I expect it to
> > outperform the machine it replaces. So what was your point?
>
> It isn't here yet? Windows 2002 would be here soon too, you won't hear
> anyone talking about its performance, now do you?
Considering that every successive version of Windows has WORSE
performance, you can count on the Mafia$oft people ignoring most of all.
--
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.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
