Linux-Advocacy Digest #686, Volume #34 Tue, 22 May 01 03:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!! (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better) (GreyCloud)
Re: Intermediate user who left Windows for Linux (Techno Barbie)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (GreyCloud)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (GreyCloud)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (GreyCloud)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (GreyCloud)
Re: ouch! ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (GreyCloud)
Re: Solaris 8 vs 7/2.x.... (Tor Slettnes)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (GreyCloud)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!!
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:12:59 -0700
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >> >Note that current HP 9000's are Itanium *READY*, and have chipsets
> > > > >> >compatible with Itanium, but are not shipping Itaniums.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Okay, same instruction set and same pin set also.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> But it's not the same chip then.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Well, okay....
> > > > >
> > > > >I'm not sure if they have the same pinouts or not. Their chipsets
> might
> > > > >reroute the pins depending on which processor is installed. But,
> even if
> > > it
> > > > >is the same pinout, it doesn't mean much. It's the internal
> architecture
> > > of
> > > > >the CPU that is the difference between EPIC and RISC, not its pinout.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Instruction sets are meaningless unless there's specific hardware
> > > > inside the chip to tie the operations to specific hardware
> > > > functions. We are not trying to say that one or the other
> > > > is an emulation....
> > >
> > > Certainly Itanium *IS* emulating PA-RISC as well as x86.
> > >
> > > http://www.hp.com/products1/itanium/advantage/aries.html
> > >
> > > "With our Aries emulator that will be bundled with all ItaniumT
> processor
> > > family systems, you can execute PA-RISC applications"
> > >
> > > > Further, since they have the same chip pins and the 9000's
> > > > are therefore compatible with this new chip already, it's
> > > > safe to say the only thing this manuever is doing is transfering
> > > > the burden and cost from one Intel subsidy to the main body.
> > > >
> > > > There may be some slight improvement in newer chips, but
> > > > the architecture is the same...
> > >
> > > You don't appear to understand what a processor architecture is. It's
> > > architecture includes such things as pipelining, branch prediction and
> > > speculation, loop unrolling, etc... these are all wildly different from
> the
> > > PA-RISC chip, and despite what you want to believe, they're not
> > > pin-compatible, since these processors are installed in "packages" and
> not
> > > plugged directly into the motherboard.
> > >
> >
> > But these are for the processing efficiencies... not the actual
> > instruction set.
> > Hp did say on their web site that the PA series can execute the IA-64
> > instruction set.
> > What Hp didn't say was if an emulator was needed or not. But emulating
> > another processor would only be slow, so I don't think that this is what
> > Hp is doing.
>
> Perhaps you misread something. Everything I have read, including the link
> above state that the Itanium will execute PA-RISC in emulation, not the
> other way around.
Yes, I got it backwards. The Aries emulator runs on the Itanium to run
PA-RISC programs.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux posts #1 TPC-H result (W2K still better)
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:25:02 -0700
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said GreyCloud in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 20 May 2001 00:31:01
> >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> >>
> >> Said Jan Johanson in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 18 May 2001 20:52:11
> >> [...]
> >> >Oh we get it - it's SOOO obvious that Linux is the perfect "low cost"
> >> >solution that there is no need to prove it to anyone eh?
> >>
> >> No; if it is the 'low cost' solution, no proof beyond the price tag is
> >> necessary to explain its competitive merits.
> >>
> >> >SO IBM would rather
> >> >spend a million dollars proving something it doesn't need to cause everyone
> >> >already knows the secret that Linux rox...
> >>
> >> IBM is a company; they do what makes fiscal sense, not what they "would
> >> rather" do. I've pointed out they have no fiscal motivation to submit
> >> Linux, and some reason not to, as well. You've resorted to gibberish.
> >>
> >> >... funny how sales of linux continue to be unimpressive and it continues to
> >> >make no inroads in the enterprise... hmmm....
> >>
> >> Sales? Yes, I'm quite sure those numbers look rather anemic, compared
> >> to Windows. Yet, Linux is being adopted faster than Win2K, in any
> >> market save a few isolated "this group of customers are locked into
> >> monopoly crapware because..." niches.
> >
> >It really must be cold in Sweden or Norway for Jon/Jan.
> >If you really want to light his fires just tell him that it takes 10
> >good swedes to hold down a good norwegian. (Or vice-versa)
>
> Please; I'd have hoped that having lived for some few decades, you'd be
> smart enough to avoid such lame-brained ideas. How childish.
>
> --
> T. Max Devlin
> *** The best way to convince another is
> to state your case moderately and
> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Cool it youngster. I was poking some fun at him. Around here, little
Norway, (Poulsbo) we always have fun between the Norwegians and the
Swedish. Its all in good fun and we all get along about it.
--
V
------------------------------
From: Techno Barbie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Intermediate user who left Windows for Linux
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 06:27:51 GMT
Terry Porter wrote:
>How did they know you had installed Word on more than one computer ?<
When I bought the program (WORD 2000) about a month ago, I installed it on
my Compaq Presario. The program ask/forces you to register the program,
when you start WORD. It was at this time that I registered via e-mail with
MS.
I recently purchase a new Gateway computer, and I was trying to install
WORD on it. So I installed the program, and registered again with MS like I
did before. They sent me an e-mail about illegal copying. I then called
them and gave them the registeration code. They told me that was not the
same computer they had on file, and installing it on a different
computer was illegal. Needless to say, I was somewhat offended and upset
because I had to "prove" myself. The support person was going to give me a
new code to activate the program, after I gave her information about my
system, but I was upset how I was treated, so I told her to forget it.
Besides Word 2000 was not much different than Word 97 anyway.
>Microsoft have already said that "the small business and home sectors are
where the majority of piracy occurs" so I suppose these areas wont be too
happy.<
I respect the time and effort that goes into creating programs, and
understand the concern over illegal copying. But I have a problem with
someone accusing me of wrong doing, and treating me like a criminal.
Perhaps the industry is going through a change with protecting software,
but MS could improve greatly when it comes to customer "soft" skills. For
me the whole issue, was them developing a wrong assumption before knowning
the situation. They sort of jump the gun.
Techno Barbie
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[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: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:29:17 -0700
Quantum Leaper wrote:
>
> "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9e5tq9$hpa$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Most of them are now wandering Seattles' 1st avenue hanging around the
> > > soup kitchens on skid row! :-))
> > Seattle, the home to the two biggest cons, Microsoft and Boeing.
> >
> Boeing is moving to Chicago....
Hehehe... I know! :-) You should have seen the face on Art Schell
(Mayor of Seattle) when Boeing announced the move. Its just the
beginning.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[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: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:30:28 -0700
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
> "Quantum Leaper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:TwcO6.16527$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:9e5tq9$hpa$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Most of them are now wandering Seattles' 1st avenue hanging around the
> > > > soup kitchens on skid row! :-))
> > > Seattle, the home to the two biggest cons, Microsoft and Boeing.
> > >
> > Boeing is moving to Chicago....
>
> Oh, so now they are joining the inefficient, bloated, crap, money hungry,
> gas guzzling US motor industry. Why aren't I surprised?
>
> Matthew Gardiner
Could be... but Washington State is not business friendly. The State
taxes the hell out of everyone.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:41:14 -0700
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9ecgmv$hli$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:9e8e6n$ino$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:9e81s6$7bi$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > 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
> > >
> > > In NT since 3.5, in 9x since 95 OSR2.
> >
> > But never pushed. DirectX was a "suck in the developers, then when they
> > want to move, they can't because there is no DirectX for anyother
> platform"
> > plan.
>
> OpenGL is nice, but while it can compete with Direct3D, it doesn't compete
> with DirectX.
>
> > > > , Java,
> > >
> > > Not an open standard.
> >
> > Anyone can adopt it, as long as it to the Java charter, if it isn't, they
> > can't call it Java.
>
> Anyone can adopt Win32 API, that doesn't make it an open standard.
>
> > > > Netscape,
> > >
> > > Netscape? Standard? That isn't even funny as a joke.
> >
> > Ok, its the industry standard in that it is on more OS's that IE.
>
> Netscape is not open source, perhaps you are thinking Mozilla?
> IE 5.5 is the most standard compliment browser in the world, period.
> It replace IE5 at that position. Netscape was *never* in that position, btw.
>
Well, at one time it was. Now it isn't. I have an old Linux distro...
Redhat 5.2 that has Netscape sources. I think it is 4.0 or 4.1. Once I
re-installed redhat 5.2 and then used Netscape and came up with "You
have an old version... upgrade to a newer version".
I didn't bother.
> > > > Maybe instead of Microsoft re-inventing the wheel, the invest some of
> > > their
> > > > super normal profits into making a more stable OS.
> > >
> > > You mean, like 4 Billions of them?
> > >
> > > NFS is not applicable in a PC eviroment, there has been a talk about it
> > > recently. If you have root on *your* machine, then you can have access
> to
> > > everything on the NFS mounted directory.
> >
> > Why would you give the end user the root password for their machine? you
> > don't. Maybe you should go back to school and learn the first rule of a
> > role out.
>
> Because a PC is *not* a dumb terminal. I can get root on any machine that
> I've physical access to within one to two hours. People more experiance in
> linux could do it in far less time, I suspect.
> NFS and SMB purposes are *different*, NFS is simply not applicable in those
> situations.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[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: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:38:09 -0700
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
> "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9e8e6n$ino$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:9e81s6$7bi$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > 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
> >
> > In NT since 3.5, in 9x since 95 OSR2.
>
> But never pushed. DirectX was a "suck in the developers, then when they
> want to move, they can't because there is no DirectX for anyother platform"
> plan.
>
> > > , Java,
> >
> > Not an open standard.
>
> Anyone can adopt it, as long as it to the Java charter, if it isn't, they
> can't call it Java.
>
> >
> > > Netscape,
> >
> > Netscape? Standard? That isn't even funny as a joke.
>
> Ok, its the industry standard in that it is on more OS's that IE.
>
> > > TCP/IP
> >
> > In NT & 9x too.
>
> Linux is fully TCP/IP compliant, however, I am not too sure about Solaris.
>
Solaris appears to be compliant. Both Linux and Solaris TCP/IP appear
to be the same. Under Win9x for some reason is way slower.
> > >, 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.
> >
> > You mean, like 4 Billions of them?
> >
> > NFS is not applicable in a PC eviroment, there has been a talk about it
> > recently. If you have root on *your* machine, then you can have access to
> > everything on the NFS mounted directory.
>
> Why would you give the end user the root password for their machine? you
> don't. Maybe you should go back to school and learn the first rule of a
> role out.
>
> > Don't include the GNU utilities in Solaris, just the parts that Sun wrote.
>
> I never was.
>
> Matthew Gardiner
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:54:35 -0700
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> In article <9eaihp$hfu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> > One of Pete's favourite pastimes is snipping people to distort their
> > meaning to prove his point.
>
> Got any examples of that?
>
> --
> Pete
BWAH-HA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:56:07 -0700
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> In article
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> > Go back to the SETI page... they have their program for linux x86 as
> > well.
>
> Yes, the SETI one does, but the cancer research one doesn't!
>
> --
> Pete
The Cancer Research... (???)
Elucidate please.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 23:57:16 -0700
Jim Richardson wrote:
>
> In msgid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pete Goodwin
> wrote: on Monday 21 May 2001 13:59
>
> > In article
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> >> > Yes, you can run the SETI one, but can you run the cancer research one
> >> > on Linux?
> >>
> >> Whats that got to do with SETI??
> >
> > It's one of the examples of a distributed supercomputer.
> >
>
> So, it seems that you are saying that the only way a distributed
> supercomputer can be built (cost effectively) using windows, is if the
> project (seti, cancer research, whatever) doesn't pay for the hardware or
> windows licence. Whereas anyone can (and many have) put together dedicated
> clustering solutions using linux.
> <sarcasm> Sure sounds like windows is god's gift to clusters to me
> </sarcasm>
>
> --
> Jim Richardson
> Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
> www.eskimo.com/~warlock
> Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
It's called "Other Peoples Money" OPM!!
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ouch!
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 19:01:32 +1200
Unless you live in New Zealand where hacking and cracking is legal :)
Matthew Gardiner
"kosh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9ectcv$d53$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Paul E. Larson wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>tony roth ([EMAIL PROTECTED])wrote:
> >>>
> >>> My friend (name to be withheld since he's a real freak hacker) found a
> >>> nice little bug in a very very popular OSS package he was quite
grateful
> >>> for the
> >>> open source code since he did not have to do any reverse engineering.
> >>> This
> >>> bug is another stack overflow with root potential. He's just sitting
on
> >>> it waiting for a rainy day! btw it still has not been patched.
> >>>
> >>> bs from mlw snipped
> >>
> >>When it gets exploited, the FBI will come to you.
> >>
> >>You've just admitted that you know of criminal activities, and have
> >>not reported it. thus, you are aiding and abetting a criminal.
> >>Since most "freak hacking" is FELONIOUS, you are aiding and abetting
> >>felonies....and liable to be charged as such yourself.
> >>
> >>Now....either YOU turn over the bug within 24 hours, or *I* call the
FBI.
> >>
> >>
> >>Is any of this getting through to you?
> >>
> > You have never been all that bright and you keep proving it!
> >
>
> Umm actually Aaron is correct in this case. Knowing about someone
intending
> to break the law but not reporting it is prosecuteable.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 00:02:12 -0700
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> > >I worked on UNIX, OpenVMS before I came to Windows. I understand
> > >Operating Systems. I've studied them on and off. Guess what I do
> > >nowadays. I write device drivers. Let me see, what do you need to
> > >understand in order to write those? Why, the OS of course!
> >
> > Well, parts of it, anyway. Not very technologically advanced part, I
> > would expect, either.
>
> Device drivers on Linux are written in C?
>
> Device drivers on Windows are written in C++ and make use of COM. Which
> one is more technologically advanced?
>
I don't know, Pete. C++ still hasn't been standardized yet, and there
are a few differences between compiler vendors yet. In windows, yes if
you use MS VC++, but outside of that... a device driver is just a device
driver... if it accomplishes the job, So what?? Some device drivers are
written in assembler... others are written in C.
> > Linux *is* a technology, and it is more advanced than Windows. Windows
> > isn't a technology, for all its acronyms; its little more than a
> > marketing scam and some monopoly crapware.
>
> Yes, how about an example, instead of a statement?
>
> > You don't seriously expect monopoly crapware to be able to compete on an
> > open market, do you? How silly!
>
> Enough of the dogma! Examples puh-lease!
>
> > >3D sound support is of interest to me since it is my job. So it's not
> > >that silly.
> >
> > It is not silly to you. That doesn't stop it from being pretty silly,
> > in its own right.
>
> OK, I'll tell Microsoft, Loki, Creative, ESS, Crystal, ADI, Voyetra et al
> that T Max Devlin thinks 3D sound is silly. After they've roared with
> laughter _at you_ they'll all carry on producing what everyone appears to
> want.
>
> --
> Pete
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 00:04:57 -0700
quux111 wrote:
>
> Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> >
> >> >I worked on UNIX, OpenVMS before I came to Windows. I understand
> >> >Operating Systems. I've studied them on and off. Guess what I do
> >> >nowadays. I write device drivers. Let me see, what do you need to
> >> >understand in order to write those? Why, the OS of course!
> >>
> >> Well, parts of it, anyway. Not very technologically advanced part, I
> >> would expect, either.
> >
> > Device drivers on Linux are written in C?
> >
> > Device drivers on Windows are written in C++ and make use of COM. Which
> > one is more technologically advanced?
> >
>
> Microsoft's Visual C++ compiler blurs the line between C and C++; WIN32 is
> a completely C-based API, as is COM. ATL is simply a C++ wrapper around
> COM, as MFC is a wrapper around WIN32. I'd like to see some substantiation
> for your claim that devices drivers are written in C++; all the code I've
> looked at in Windows NT (video drivers, IDE device drivers, and soundcard
> drivers) are written in straighforward C. Most designers I know avoid
> using C++ when writing drivers due to the perceived performance problems of
> C++.
>
> (I happen to think that it is not only possible but advisable to write
> drivers in C++, but you need to use good coding practices and modern C++
> techniques, which is hard because VC++ 6.0 is so horribly broken...)
>
> >
> >> Linux *is* a technology, and it is more advanced than Windows.
> >> Windows isn't a technology, for all its acronyms; its little more than
> >> a marketing scam and some monopoly crapware.
> >
> > Yes, how about an example, instead of a statement?
> >
> >> You don't seriously expect monopoly crapware to be able to compete on
> >> an open market, do you? How silly!
> >
> > Enough of the dogma! Examples puh-lease!
> >
>
> A good example of lousy Microsoft infrastructure software is MAPI, OLE
> DB/ADO, DirectX until version 7, TAPI, etc. etc. etc. MFC itself, while
> useful, is a horrible Frankenstein's Monster of an API and flouts nearly
> every good C++ coding convention I can think of. There are better APIs out
> there -- Troll's QT, wxWindows, even Gtk+ for WIN32 -- but relatively few
> people use them because Microsoft frowns upon it and makes supporting
> alternate frameworks in VC++ very difficult. (If you doubt me, just try
> doing a GUI-based project using the WTL sometime.)
>
> Being a monopoly means that Microsoft can foist whatever junk they want on
> developers and developers have to live with it because
>
> >
> >> >3D sound support is of interest to me since it is my job. So it's not
> >> >that silly.
> >>
> >> It is not silly to you. That doesn't stop it from being pretty silly,
> >> in its own right.
> >
> > OK, I'll tell Microsoft, Loki, Creative, ESS, Crystal, ADI, Voyetra et
> > al that T Max Devlin thinks 3D sound is silly. After they've roared
> > with laughter _at you_ they'll all carry on producing what everyone
> > appears to want.
> >
>
> 3-D sound is mostly of interest to hardcore gamers and audiophiles, who
> form about 2% of computer users. I too find it kind of silly too that so
> much effort is being put into making such a small demographic happy,
> especially in light of the fact that the differences are so small and hard
> to detect. (You'd need an acoustically-sealed room to tell the difference
> in most games, and the roaring fans in your OC'd machines would drown out
> most subtle noises anyhow.)
>
> To each his own, I suppose....
>
> Regards,
>
> quux111
I've got a tin ear, so 3D sound isn't one of my needs. All I need is
clarity.
--
V
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris,staroffice.com.support.install.solaris,comp.unix.advocacy,alt.os.unix,alt.unix
Subject: Re: Solaris 8 vs 7/2.x....
From: Tor Slettnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 07:07:40 GMT
>>>>> "somebody" == somebody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>> "Rich" == Rich Teer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> stands accused of saying:
Rich> (gcc doesn't cut it for serious development, IMHO,
Rich> especially for 64 bit stuff.)
somebody> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548
somebody> NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.7.211.41
somebody> X-Complaints-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
somebody> oh, you mean like the Linux and FreeBSD projects at the
somebody> heart of billions of dollars worth of e-commerce and
somebody> installed on millions of computers world-wide?
somebody> google.com has 8000 Linux boxes all running 100%
somebody> gcc-built software. ditto for yahoo.com, and many many
somebody> other giant sites.
somebody> i wonder what it is that you're doing that's any more
somebody> serious than that.
Perhaps, building simple 64-bit Solaris kernel modules? Gcc does not
do that. (Netatalk, IPF/IPNat, VTun/Tun, etc all need to be built by
SUN Workshop in order to be used on 64-bit kernels).
Gcc 3.0 is the first version to have 64-bit support on Solaris, and
not very many applications are able to use it yet.
-tor
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 00:06:22 -0700
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> > >That's your dogma.
> >
> > No; that is my conjecture. I have no dogma, Pete.
>
> Oh yes you do! You regularly inject "monopoly crapware" into your posts,
> frequently out of context to the topic.
>
> > >You gotta get Linux desktop up to scratch before it can even compete with
> > >Windows (98).
> >
> > Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha! Still grasping at straws, Pete; you are still
> > grasping at straws.
>
> http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/opinions/3387/1/
>
> Some straw.
>
> --
> Pete
Again, that is only one authors opinion... as far as I know, the author
has no credibility as I never have heard of him.
--
V
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
