Linux-Advocacy Digest #838, Volume #34 Tue, 29 May 01 12:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why does Linux / OSS community love mailing lists and hate news servers?
(Matthias Warkus)
Re: ease and convenience ("Todd")
Re: XP "Loctivation" and "Scared-Source" ("Todd")
Re: ease and convenience ("Todd")
Re: ease and convenience ("Todd")
Re: ease and convenience ("Todd")
Re: The nature of competition ("Todd")
Re: Opera ("Todd")
Re: Opera ("Todd")
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust! (Chad
Everett)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Why does Linux / OSS community love mailing lists and hate news servers?
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 14:34:41 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the 29 May 2001 13:46:07 GMT...
...and Villy Kruse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >* wade blazingame wrote:
> >> Threading is almost never
> >> supported as well in mail clients as it is in news readers.
> >
> >Then you're using the wrong MUA.
> >
> >Mutt (http://www.mutt.org) and Gnus (was it http://www.gnus.org?) both
> >thread very nicely.
>
> How does it do this without In-Reply-To: headers or something similar?
Heuristics. Message-ID, Date, Subject, the works. Mutt usually guesses
right.
mawa
--
At least in the US, the rate of increase for consumer indebtedness is
far higher than the rate of increase for gov't debt. The same people
who criticize the `gummint' for mismanaging funds are themselves
incompetent in the same matter. -- Michael Powe
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ease and convenience
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 13:47:05 +0800
Reply-To: "Todd" <todd<remove>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Perry Pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 26 May 2001 17:40:29 +0800,
> Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:yAHP6.22323$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > Not sure why you chose to do it the hard way...
>
> Because he wants to have a *choice* as to what newsreader to use.
So *choose* the one with IE :)
Seriously, my *dad* downloads stuff from the net all the time with no
problem.
I see messages from *technical* people that can't figure out how to do
something in Linux -- not because it is difficult, but because it is so
damned unintuitive and hard to find related documentation.
With Windows, there is a *central* help system for all OS related things
that is *fully* text indexed for easy retrieval.
> >
> > Windows:
>
> You're leaving a few things out about Windows Update, aren't you?? For
> example:
>
> >
> > 1) Start->Windows Update
>
> 1a) answer 'ok' to the message that says you can't download and
> install SP2, security updates, or any other package simultaneously
> while downloading and installing IE.
This is *only* if you decided to install other stuff - my instructions were
*simple* -> just download IE.
So this step is ignored.
> IOW, thru Windows Update you must
> install numerous packages separately and reboot each time. (In
> contrast, I run apt-get once with no reboots)
You do NOT need to reboot each time (I'm assuming you are using W2k
here...) -- YES for Service Packs (of course)... most other stuff does not
require a reboot. AND you can download and install them simultaneously.
> > 2) Download your browser of choice IE 5.5 or 6.
>
> 2a) click 'ok' repeatedly to numerous stupid questions, preventing you
> from going off and doing other things at the time thus making you a
> prisoner to the whole process.
No specifics here... I don't have this problem.
>
> 2b) reboot... once for each update you install.
Wrong. My instructions were for IE only. Not for downloading *every*
update just because it is listed.
> > 3) Start IE->Tools->Read News
>
> 4) go back to step one and repeat the process for each additional
> Windows Update you want to install.
My instructions were only for IE to get the Newsreader. If you *followed*
them, you wouldn't have all the rest of the stuff you mentioned.
Of course, the more stuff you install, the more you have to do... more than
half can be downloaded and installed at the SAME time.
But you are either pretending not to know this, or haven't *really* used
Windows Update (under w2k.)
> > You can pretend that it is hard under Windows, but average users will
find
> > it a lot easier than Linux.
> >
>
> Bullshit, average users ask me for help with the stupidest things all
> the time.
This is *always* going to be the case with *some* people... no matter how
EASY the system is.
HOWEVER -> I have had problems simply getting my ethernet card to WORK under
Linux using DHCP.
Sounds easy? Under W2k, simply PUT IN the network card and TURN ON the
system. It AUTOMATICALLY installs drivers, configures DHCP and gets you on
the net.
Under Red Hat Linux 7.0 ? My computer is still without a connection after
numerous attempts just to find simple documention on what will probably be a
bunch of editing files and other stuff.
Windows is *FAR* easier and more intuitive than Linux.
> Few could use Windows at all without the help of 1) OEM
> preinstalls and 2) technical people to ask for help with problems.
I am technical and am still trying to figure out how to get BASIC stuff to
work in Linux.
Ridicule me if you like, but the fact is, Linux is just too hard to make it
worth the trouble for people that *value* their time.
-Todd
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: XP "Loctivation" and "Scared-Source"
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 13:55:30 +0800
Reply-To: "Todd" <todd<remove>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 26 May 2001 17:41:05 +0800,
> Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > "Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >> Sadly if I owned Micro$oft, my conscience would leave me,
> >> and what good would that be ?
> >
> > Rich?
> Definetly!
lol
> But I'd have had to abandon my conscience, and I'm not
> prepared to do that.
Hey, simply donate half to charity, and keep the other half to yourself!
-Todd
> >
> > -Todd
> >
> >>
> >> --
> >> 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 **
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> 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: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ease and convenience
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 13:48:15 +0800
Reply-To: "Todd" <todd<remove>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Todd wrote:
> >
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:yAHP6.22323$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > Not sure why you chose to do it the hard way...
> >
> > Windows:
> >
> > 1) Start->Windows Update
> > 2) Download your browser of choice IE 5.5 or 6.
>
> Only if you're a fucking MORON
You just called most of the computer literate population a 'fucking MORON'.
You have some nerve.
-Todd
>
>
> --
> 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: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ease and convenience
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 13:49:48 +0800
Reply-To: "Todd" <todd<remove>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9epcqk$hftr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Todd wrote:
>
> >
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:yAHP6.22323$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > Not sure why you chose to do it the hard way...
> >
> > Windows:
> >
> > 1) Start->Windows Update
> > 2) Download your browser of choice IE 5.5 or 6.
> > 3) Start IE->Tools->Read News
> >
> > Easy. Most Windows versions already have IE with a news reader and it
is
> > great.
> >
> > You can pretend that it is hard under Windows, but average users will
find
> > it a lot easier than Linux.
> >
>
> He said those were the instructions to install an updated newsreader NOT
> web brower you moron - why should he be forced to download and install
80mb
> of shit just to upgrade a 1mb application.
The Newsreader is included. And it isn't 80MB of stuff. And most people
*already* have it installed - this was for the few that *didn't* have it.
> Lets see, I live in the UK and access the web via a 56k modem (same as
most
> of the UK) and could be paying around 1p per minute so why should I be
> forced to spend maybe 6 hours online (at a potential cost of 36ukpounds)
> just to upgrade a program which should be around 1 to 2mb and take around
> 15 minutes to download (costing an acceptable 15p).
>
> Only a monopoly can get away with this kind of bullshit - why be forced to
> effectively replace half the OS just to upgrade your newsreader / email
> package.
IE isn't half the OS. Stop exaggerating. It is just an app... and it isn't
80MB either.
Stop your whining.
-Todd
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ease and convenience
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 13:53:46 +0800
Reply-To: "Todd" <todd<remove>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 26 May 2001 17:40:29 +0800, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ("Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >Not sure why you chose to do it the hard way...
> >
> >Windows:
> >
> >1) Start->Windows Update
> >2) Download your browser of choice IE 5.5 or 6.
> >3) Start IE->Tools->Read News
> >
> >Easy. Most Windows versions already have IE with a news reader and it is
> >great.
>
> And it's shit. Change the above to downloading and installing agent
> and you'll have a point.
Not sure why people prefer agent so much... I used to use it, but sometimes
it would garble the fonts and I'd have to refresh the screen... I am
assuming you are using FreeAgent ?
The one built into IE is great -> no problems + it's free.
> >You can pretend that it is hard under Windows, but average users will
find
> >it a lot easier than Linux.
>
> What do you mean by "average" users? Users who don't take time to
> learn about their computer?
No. Users that want to *use* their computer to get work done without having
to know how the whole thing works.
That is your average user, your average consumer. If you don't like this,
you don't have to.
But if the Linux community ever wants Linux to take hold 'on the desktop',
they better damned well learn this soon.
My feeling is that the Linux community will just ignore this and whine and
whine about how MS is the big bad 'ol competitor. (that makes the software
so the average user can at least use their computer to get stuff done)
-Todd
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The nature of competition
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 14:15:38 +0800
Reply-To: "Todd" <todd<remove>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Terry Porter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 26 May 2001 18:00:26 +0800,
> Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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.
> >>
> >> Linux is at least as fast, if not faster.
> >
> > I find that the GUI (KDE and/or GNome) seem slower than the W2k GUI.
> Kde and Gnome are notorious for their slowness as WM's, this is quite
> understandable as they are both still in development.
Ok, fair enough. But Kde and Gnome are what 99% of Linux users are using...
and what they are comparing to W2k.
> I notice you
> didn't compare W2k to any of the fast Linux Wm's such as Xfce.
True - I didn't. If the only thing I found lacking in Linux were the WM,
I'd gladly pay for a faster WM.
> > I am
> > using a GeForce 2 MX TwinView (2048x768).
> >
> > The one MindCraft benchmark where MS, PCWeek and RedHat all attended
clearly
> > showed W2k was faster than Linux in basic tasks.
> Mindcraft tests have been shown again and again, in many topics here, to
be
> 'aranged' to favor Windows.
How so? Red Hat was there representing the Linux community - twice.
Are you saying they were biased??
> And every Wintroll knows it.
I don't know - I think you are stating this because Windows won and Linux
lost. If Linux had won, you'd be touting how MindCraft ROCKz and all.
> > W2k seems to scale a lot better with multiple processors as well.
> 'seems' ?
W2k (in benchmarks) has been benchmarked several times against NT (which has
won SMP benchmarks against Linux in web/file/app. sharing) -> and W2k has
come out ahead of NT by at least 25% faster utilizing SMP.
Thus, one may be able to deduce (or at least write 'seems') that W2k should
be a lot better at SMP than Linux (which just got SMP and is probably not
fully mature yet in terms of stability or performance).
> >> Linux has been proven to be more stable.
> >
> > The few times that I have used Linux, it is stable. However, Netscape
was
> > able to bring it down. I am using RedHat 7.0 btw.
> Netscape has *never* brought my system down, sure Netscape does crash from
> time to time, but only Netscape dies.
>
> I simply think your fabricating that statement.
Actually, I am not. I have seen other Linux users' posts regarding Netscape
and how it can cause panics - which is surprising given that an app.
(admittedly of low quality) can bring down *all* of Linux, not just X.
> > W2k has, in my experience on many systems, proven to be very stable.
> Tell us again how stable it is, when Microsoft replace it with a 'better
> more stable Windows', just like they did with Win3.11, Win95, Win89, WinME
> etc, ad nauseum.
Excuse me. I have *never* stated that the 9x generation was *good* or even
*ok*.
Personally, I think it is all crap (good for some things) but as an OS, it
is crap. OK?
I have always been talking about W2k or NT... and I used OS/2 Warp while
others were using 95. I simply refused to use it.
So *please* do not confuse me with other, more generalized wintrolls :)
> >> Linux has proven to be more secure.
> >
> > Not sure about this. Most 'attackers' or hackers target Windows
> > platforms...
> Thats because Linux has proven to be more secure.
Lol.
Sorry, but that just isn't the case.
Most hackerz want to target *windows* platforms because they hate MS. Not
because Windows is more or less secure.
> > and SP2 addresses a ton of security issues from before.
> In other words Win2k had a ton of security issues when it was released?
Yes, and it probably still has quite a few more security issues. But so
does every other OS.
W2k is a very complex OS that has many things built into the OS that Linux
simple doesn't provide at all... things like distributed COM objects or
Active Directory...
Yet it all works very well with surprisingly few problems.
MS is also very good at getting patches out very quickly, and they even have
an automatic updater just for hotfixes which you can download free from
their site with Windows Update.
Very nice indeed.
But yes, Windows is far more of a target than UNIX/Linux for the hackerz out
there... and this will just result in W2k becoming a lot more secure as
these are fixed.
Who *knows* what lurks in Linux?
Like the one character password thing from RedHat a while ago... Lol.
> > Who knows what vunerabilities are in Linux because nobody is really
trying
> > to find them... or are *they* ?
> Every cracker in the world is, as usual.
Most are focused on Windows -- but, you never know.
> If you had a logging system in Windows, you'd see that, but as it is
you're
> blind to whats happening to your Windows box.
?
> >> Linux is free.
> >
> > The OS is free. True.
> >
> >>
> >> So, why would anyone choose a Microsoft solution?
> >
> > Good question.
> >
> > For me, it is because I can put together a *complete* working solution
much
> > faster with w2k because of all of the advanced development tools.
> So you do have to 'develop' code, orotherwise you wouldnt need
> 'development tools' ?
A lot of stuff within Windows can be done almost for you automatically today
and with a lot of help - ever see Visual Studio 98??
> > COM
> > objects allow me to pick and choose the tools I need, and they integrate
> > into any part of the OS, or any applications.
> >
> > Very, very nice.
> If you say so.
Most UNIX/Linux developers wouldn't grasp how great this is until they've
used it.
I used to dread COM myself until I realized I could easily write COM objects
in any language and call them from any language, application or script.
Awesome power.
> > With Linux, I'd probably have to *hand-code* a lot of the applications
and
> > make some of my own tools...
> That shouldnt be a problem for you, as Linux comes with a ton of 'advanced
> development tools too' but with one small difference to the Windows tools.
Linux development tools are archaic and don't come close to what even MS
offers for Win32 development...
Not even close.
> Linux tools are free.
True, but when you are developing a multimillion dollar system, a few
thousand in development tools is like ordering a few cups of coffee
everyday.
> > Yes, you could do it.
> I continue to do it.
Fine... some people also still code in Assembler.
But when you are quoting on a project, time=money. And MS allows you to
develop stuff in a greatly reduced time period.
> > But timing is everything in big projects,
> Agreed.
>
> > and the MS solution provides us
> > with another benefit: service.
> Howso ?
If you have a problem with their products, depending on the service level
(usually good if you are working on big projects), you could have an expert
at your door the next day to help debug the solution.
Try to get that with Linux or the other 'free' development tools that just
don't have centralized service.
> > Just my 2 cents.
> I rate your post at 0.01 cents, myself, loaded as it was with biased
Windows
> comments.
Hehe - well at least it was worth something then.
> In case you havent noticed,this is a *Linux* advocacy group.
Yet all you do here is whine about MS.
-Todd
>
> >
> > -Todd
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> 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: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Opera
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 13:32:07 +0800
Reply-To: "Todd" <todd<remove>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9eqic8$5n7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ok, so other poster's versions did crash and took Linux with them (as in
> > the core dump from the previous poster who uses linux).
>
> hahahahah!
>
> Idiot. Why don't you admit that you've never used UNIX?
Sorry... confused the 'panic' with core dumps... <sigh>
Irregardless, Netscape does cause a few 'panics' now and then as well as
core dumps.
It just doesn't seem like there is a quality browser for Linux at all.
>
> -Ed
>
> PS For future reference, a core dump does not mean the OS crashed, it
> means the app crashed.
yeah yeah yeah :)
-Todd
>
> --
> (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 pop 240 420 moveto 0 1 3 {4 2 1 r sub -1 r show}for showpage
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Opera
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 13:36:41 +0800
Reply-To: "Todd" <todd<remove>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9erqom$kqo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Terry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : Many of you seem to be having troubles with your browsers and the
> : features some of them have. If you want a really useful, Linux
> : compliant browser, try Opera.
>
>
> There are many of us, myself included, who use Linux in large part
> because we value freedom.
I value freedom to. I *choose* to use W2k and I *choose* to use IE over
Linux. How do I not value freedom?
I'd be mystified if I were *forced* to choose either Linux or Windows.
But I *do* have a choice, and I am happy about that.
> We have free alternatives that are at least nearly as good as Opera,
> including Konqueror and Mozilla.
Being *free* doesn't have anything to do with freedom.
> Because freedom matters, I really prefer to patronize these, and
> support those who are working on them, rather than a company producing
> nonfree software.
Ahhh... so nonfree software implies you can't have freedom??? how so?
> OTOH . . . if someone *must* use a proprietary product, because for
> whatever reason they can't choose a free alternative, I'd far prefer
> to see them use Opera, which at least attempts to support standards,
> than something like IE or earlier versions of Netscape.
Actually, IE does support standards a heck of a lot better than Opera or
Netscape. It's just that they *add* other stuff as well... some of it very
nice, some if it not needed as much.
Netscape 6.1 seems to be a lot better in this support, but it still doesn't
render web pages in CSS as well as IE does. Also, notice how Netscape 6
requires about 3x the time to *render* (not load) to the screen??? It
almost seems like video cards with no acceleration.
Can't compare to Opera since I only tried it once and I didn't care for it.
Also, why would I use Opera with adverts. when I can use IE (and it is
better) for free?
-Todd
>
>
> Joe
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 17:32:51 +0200
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> Don't forget security, of which the MacOS has none.
>
This must be the reason why there are thousands upon thousands
of virii for the Mac.
In contrast Windows with its excellent security will probably never
have a hit by "I-love-you" stuff and other silly exploits, because it was
designed from the ground up with security in mind.
Right, Chad?
Peter
--
Microsoft's Product Strategy: "It compiles, let's ship it!"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chad Everett)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Just when Linux starts getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 29 May 2001 09:55:07 -0500
On Tue, 29 May 2001 09:44:07 -0500, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On 27 May 2001 23:07:06 -0500, Jan Johanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >"Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> On Tue, 22 May 2001 14:09:25 -0400, JS \\ PL <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> >wrote:
>> >> >I have to say, Linux Mandrake 8 was looking real damn good. Support for
>> >all
>> >> >my hardware (for once) easy set-up, even seting up networking and
>> >connection
>> >> >sharing was painless. Good newsreader - Knode, pretty stable OS. I even
>> >> >liked the fact that it stayed connected to the Internet when switching
>> >users
>> >> >(unlike Win2K) I was actually contemplating using it much more often and
>> >> >only using Windows for apps I need to use that aren't available on Linux.
>> >> >But....
>> >> >Well after half a day checking out the new XP OS, I have to say IT KICKS
>> >> >MANDRAKE ASS!!
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Can I setup Windows XP at home so that I can log into it via ssh and have
>> >> a server running that acts as a proxy web browser, allowing me to
>> >> browse the web from my machine at work over an encrypted channel and
>> >> bypassing the filters on my company's firewall? And do all this with
>> >> out-of-the-box free software?
>> >
>> >SSH? No. There isn't a built in SSH server so the answer is no. There are
>> >SSH servers available though and some are free so... a half no/half yes
>> >answer.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Can I use Windows XP to redirect it's output over an encrypted network
>> >> port so that I can run applications on my home machine from my machine
>> >> at work, complete with GUI features? And do all this with out-of-the-box
>> >> free software?
>> >
>> >Sure, free terminal services now included with XP home/pro versions too.
>> >
>>
>> XP is still in beta. Last time I looked I couldn't get Windows XP
>> out of any box. Will it allow this sort of access from a non-Windows
>> machine?
>>
>>
>> >>
>> >> Can I use Windows XP as a NAT server and firewall and allow the machines
>> >> on my LAN to all share a single internet connection? And do all this with
>> >> out-of-the-box free software?
>> >
>> >Yes.
>> >
>>
>> I hope you're not talking about ICS. Chad Meyers tried to tell us that ICS
>> in Win 2K Pro could do this too. Check out this from my Win2K Pro
>> Resource Kit:
>
>It's Myers, jerk, get it right.
>
Not a title I'd choose, but if you say so:
Chad Myers, jerk tried to tell us that ICS in Win2K Pro could do this. Check
out this from my Win2K Pro Resource Kit....
>> "Do not enable ICS in an existing network that has DNS servers, gateways,
>> DHCP servers, or computers configured with static IP addresses.
>> If your Windows 2000 Professional-based computer is in a network
>> where one or more of these conditions exist, you MUST use
>> Windows 2000 Server network address translation."
>
>Yes, because it's a whole solution. It does DNS pass-through, DHCP, and
>routing.
>
Translation: It's a whole solution that won't work if you have a network
with some static IP addresses or perhaps a DNS server or a gateway or
a DHCP server. Microsoft's version of a whole solution: unless you're
'wholey' using Windows....it won't work.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
