Linux-Advocacy Digest #856, Volume #34 Wed, 30 May 01 13:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: ease and convenience (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: IBM to let Linux fans use mainframe--for free ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: INTEL"S ITANIUM DUE OUT TUES !!!!! (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Opera (Bob Hauck)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Chad Myers")
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. ("Chad Myers")
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft (Paul Repacholi)
Re: IBM to let Linux fans use mainframe--for free (Karel Jansens)
Re: What does XP stands for ??? (Karel Jansens)
Re: Linux dead on the desktop. (Dave Martel)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: ease and convenience
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 15:55:41 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Matthew Gardiner \(BOFH\)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 28 May 2001 14:34:37 +1200
<9esdko$56i$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>No, it shouldn't, in theory ask for the CD. YAST 2 only asks
>for it when installing software.
Ah; for some reason I thought this was a new install...never mind.
If one needed the driver module from the CD, one might get it,
but I suspect YAST simply copies the *entire* module tree on
first-time install; that's why that works. (Why not? It's
all there... :-) )
>
>As for Windows 2000, why is it when I install my proper Modem driver,
>it reverts back to the generic driver when I reboot.
Dunno. Somebody's probably not setting the registry properly...
>Maybe Microsoft should fix that problem.
Naaah. That would make their software patches way too simple... :-)
>If I install a driver, I don't want Windows 2000 thinking for me.
Is *that* what they call it? :-) I might call it something else,
but there might be kids reading this newsgroup....
Two words, first word, rhymes with 'muck'...
Second word, rhymes with 'pup'...
>I installed the driver and want it fucking loading, no being
>replaced by some half-assed Microsoft produced driver.
Ah, I take it this is a 3rd-party driver. That figures. :-/
Microsoft is bad enough, but couple that with 3rd-party
misinterpretation of confusing documentation and things
get really screwy, apparently...
>
>Matthew Gardiner
>--
>I am the blue screen of death
>Nobody can hear your screams
>----
>I am the resident BOFH if you don't like it
>go rm -rf /home/luser yourself
>
>"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Matthew Gardiner \(BOFH\)
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote
>> on Mon, 28 May 2001 00:33:56 +1200
>> <9eqsc9$7m8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> >Real world experience.
>> >
>> >1.Open Case
>> >2. Remove metal sleve cover
>> >3. Slide PCI card in
>> >4. Screw in
>> >5. Power on
>>
>> Pedant point: isn't there something about inserting the SuSE CD
>> right about here? :-)
>>
>> >6. Select "Linux_2.4" from menu
>> >7. Login
>> >8. click on lizard icon
>> >9. Click on "Yast 2"
>> >10. Enter Root password
>> >11. Click on Network Icon
>> >12. Follow the wizard.
>> >
>> >How is that harder than Windows?
>>
>> Easy. In the case of Windows, one just purchases an entire new system
>> for less than US $2,000. :-)
>>
>> Of course, for those of us without such funds, I'd say the above
>> is pretty darned easy -- and in any event, under Linux, one can
>> describe precisely what modules one wants to use in various ways,
>> the easiest coming to mind is editing /etc/modules.conf or conf.modules,
>> depending on installation; note that *nothing else has to change*, assuming
>> one hasn't also changed one's network, because everything else refers
>> to the alias name in /etc/modules.conf, usually eth0. Note that
>> Debian has its own ideas; one has to run update-modules after
>> editing the appropriate file in /etc/modutils; this is documented
>> reasonably well in /etc/modules.conf itself, and is not difficult.
>>
>> Under Windows, all of the "automatic" stuff can lead to
>> screaming nightmares. For example, I'm no longer able to do
>> anything intelligent with my Win95 installation with respect
>> to downloading/DNS name resolution. I might get to work
>> eventually -- but why? :-)
>>
>> [.sigsnip]
>>
>> --
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
>> EAC code #191 27d:14h:35m actually running Linux.
>> Linux. When Microsoft isn't enough anymore.
>
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 30d:22h:06m actually running Linux.
[select one]
Linux. When Microsoft isn't enough anymore.
>>> Make Signatures Fast! <<<
No neutrons were harmed during this message.
Be paranoid. Everyone else is.
All hail the Invisible Pink Unicorn (pbuh)!
[ ] Do you want this message to be private? Oops, too late.
>>> Make Signatures Fast! <<<
This is a voluntary signature virus. Send this to somebody.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 19:11:23 +0200
"Karel Jansens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Wed, 30 May 2001 02:21:30 GMT, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >
> >"Donn Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Chad Myers wrote:
> >>
> >> > VBScripts end up being executables which only run with as much
> >> > or less privilege than the user.
> >> >
> >> > How is this different from perl scripts on Unix?
> >>
> >> Because Perl scripts can't touch "normal" users' files. It's obvious:
> >> Windows 98 is a wide-open system, and most unices are not. The only
way
> >> to delete users' files on a unix system is if someone compromised the
> >> system, and put a rogue Perl script where it shouldn't be.
> >
> >We, well I wasn't at least, talking about Win9x. Win9x is a toy OS and
> >sucks. NT/2K are different.
> >
>
> What's the market share of NT/2K?
About 10% to 15%
> How many viri are writtten specifically for 2K?
AFAIK, exactly one, and it wasn't a very hostile one.
> Besides, you claimed that Windows is ubiquitous because it is the better
> O/S. If NT/2K is better than 9x, why is not everybody using that than?
Price, Win2K cost more than 9x.
NT is also aimed more at bussiness, and there are some problems with
compatability with some software.
And NT's drivers can be a lot of hassle.
But I agree with you, everyone who uses a 9x should stop and use an NT based
product.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IBM to let Linux fans use mainframe--for free
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 19:13:43 +0200
"Karel Jansens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> An interesting thing I discovered recently when trying out knode: that
> newsreader has the ability to filter out .sigs, if they comply to the "--
> preceding" rule. For one reason or another (probably sheer luck), Aaron's
> .sig complies to knode's requirements, so if anyone would be inclined to
> read Aaron's posts without the .sig overhead, knode is a good choice.
>
Um, no, that is not the reason why so many kill-filed him.
His sig certainly didn't help, but that isn't the reason.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 19:16:03 +0200
"Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:cb6R6.55370$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> MFC is not part of Windows; it's a framework,
> included in Microsoft Visual C++. Such
> frameworks are commonplace on most OSes, but
> MFC isn't much of one- it does not do much more
> than change the syntax from foo(bar,baz) to
> bar.foo(baz).
>
> This, I think, shows how strong Win32 is all
> by itself- it does not need a *thick* layer
> on top of it to make it usable.
>
> But it does leave one wondering what
> the point of MFC actually is. :(
I understand that MFC is supposed to allow C programmers to use it.
It's a bad framework in terms of OO, that is certainly. I present CSocket as
proof for that.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 19:17:29 +0200
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> > MFC has nothing to do with Win32 API.
> > IE, the Win32 API has no relation to MFC, MFC build on Win32 API,
though.
> > Some people feel that MFC make the Win32API easier to use. For
> > easy-to-meduim stuff, I would agree, once you get to serious stuff, I
think
> > that the MFC start to encoumber you.
>
> Besides being a very //bad// example of how to do object-oriented
> programming.
*That* I would agree to instantly.
No concept of encapsulation, for a start.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: INTEL"S ITANIUM DUE OUT TUES !!!!!
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 16:18:52 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 28 May 2001 04:26:42 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]\
co.home.com>:
>On Mon, 28 May 2001 15:11:18 +1200, Matthew Gardiner \(BOFH\)
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Let me see, I can either choose AIX-5L, HP-UX, Solaris, Linux 2.4
>>or Windows 64bit, which is unproven. Most people know which one's
>>I will consider in a large Itanium server roll out. A clue for the
>>clueless, it ain't Windows.
>>
>>Just because SUN and IBM don't advertise on the end luser magazines
>>like .net or PCWorld, doesn't mean they no product's. I guess
>>your ignorance is due to too much exposure around Windows.
>>
>
>MS will have to go out of their way to make a 100gips processor run
>like a dog. Give them time. They will.
I could give them a few ideas...
- roll dialogs like those old 30-styles movies/cartoons/whatever;
done wrong (right?), that could consume *lots* of time and CPU power
- semitransparent windows -- Linux already has this capability in at
least one window manager I used, I'm sure Microsoft could "innovate" it.
They might even try to patent it (they won't get too far, though! :-) ).
- A Salvador Dali-style clock (one of the ones draped over a tree branch).
Not only would it look silly and consume even more resources, but
it would convey a certain metaphor. (Note that xdali (?) on Linux
merely morphs the digits.)
- moving and slowly disappearing menus -- oh, wait, they have that already.
- When a window opens, it could unfold itself like a phamplet; a
closing would would fold up in half then place itself on the
icon bar. Other alternatives: wad itself up into a ball, fold
into fourths, shred itself into tiny triangles which explode all over
the desktop, drippingly melt, evaporate into single pixels which
escape the top of the screen, fold itself then refold then refold then
refold then refold like one of those magic cartoon boxes.
Or maybe just -- gasp -- disappear off the screen, sans fanfare.
(What a concept!)
- drop shadow on the mouse cursor -- oh, wait, they have that too.
- animated icons on the desk top, such as spinning CD's, bulging disks,
"My Network Places" with packets zipping here and there, "My Documents"
with fluttering papers, etc. (They sort of have this already; any download
or copy shows this cute little anim which I don't think they've changed
in years.)
- a picture of the Earth from a few hundred miles above the user's house;
this would be computed from composite photographs taken every hour
or so from GOES and other satellites, and would include the
shadow/terminator, clouds, and possibly even lightning flashes and
meteor strikes at night, if this is in fact computed "live". This
would be displayed on the user's desktop as a backdrop picture.
- menus that can be taken off the user's window and moved around, completely
losing the connection between said menus and their parent window -- oh,
wait, they've already got that, too. (To be fair, so does Tcl/TK
to some extent, KDE, and Gnome -- which only goes to show that we're
all human and occasionally play "follow the crowd" off the metaphorical
cliff, but oh well.)
Now, do any of these actually assist the user in getting *work* done?
That's the question.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 30d:23h:18m actually running Linux.
Does this message really exist? Where?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Opera
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 16:28:06 GMT
On Tue, 29 May 2001 20:49:23 +0100, drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 27 May 2001 13:43:56 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)) wrote:
> >Upgrades are free, so if you registered a previous version and upgrade,
> >it will still be registered and you won't see the ads.
>
> Do the cracks work on the Linux version?
I have no idea. I paid for mine.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 11:42:17 -0500
"Karel Jansens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Wed, 30 May 2001 02:21:30 GMT, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >
> >"Donn Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Chad Myers wrote:
> >>
> >> > VBScripts end up being executables which only run with as much
> >> > or less privilege than the user.
> >> >
> >> > How is this different from perl scripts on Unix?
> >>
> >> Because Perl scripts can't touch "normal" users' files. It's obvious:
> >> Windows 98 is a wide-open system, and most unices are not. The only way
> >> to delete users' files on a unix system is if someone compromised the
> >> system, and put a rogue Perl script where it shouldn't be.
> >
> >We, well I wasn't at least, talking about Win9x. Win9x is a toy OS and
> >sucks. NT/2K are different.
> >
>
> What's the market share of NT/2K?
> How many viri are writtten specifically for 2K?
>
> Besides, you claimed that Windows is ubiquitous because it is the better
> O/S. If NT/2K is better than 9x, why is not everybody using that than?
Good question. Mainly because OEMs are still shipping Win9x because
it used to have better hardware compatibility. That's pretty much
not true anymore, but they do.
Windows XP will change all that, though. MS is going to quickly
fade out Win9x because of all its shortcomings and failings,
not to mention it's a support nightmare.
-c
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 11:44:00 -0500
"Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> > "wrinkled shirt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:<3b13b4c3$0$94307$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > > >
> > > > Don't forget security, of which the MacOS has none.
> > >
> > > I don't know about that. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but last
> > > time I checked they didn't support VBScript files. That's better
> > > security than some right there.
> >
> > VBScripts end up being executables which only run with as much
> > or less privilege than the user.
> >
> > How is this different from perl scripts on Unix?
> >
> > -c
> Unix executables have to be chmod u+x bfore anything can happen. losedos
> executable files are executable by default.
That's irrelevant. If a user wants to run a program, they're going
to run it regardless if they have to +x it or double click on it.
The fact remains that if a user runs a damaging executable on
either OS, it can cause as much or as little damage as the user
has privileges.
You seem to imply that this isn't true on Unix, which is false.
-c
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
From: Paul Repacholi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 30 May 2001 23:23:50 +0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter da Silva) writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Unekis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > All MS-bashing aside, I have a very sincere question.
> > How is MS going to make any money on the X-box????
> > They supposedly have to subsidize the hardware to the tune
> > of over $100 per box to get it price-competitive with PS/2.
> > Then they aren't going to charge licenses on the game
> > cartridges?
>
> It's called "buying market share".
And it is as Illegal as it gets.
BTW, where IS the 3 nice judges? They may well be the bogs biggest
problem.
--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
Spam-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karel Jansens)
Subject: Re: IBM to let Linux fans use mainframe--for free
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 18:42:37 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 30 May 2001 17:46:09 +0100, Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> An interesting thing I discovered recently when trying out knode: that
>> newsreader has the ability to filter out .sigs, if they comply to the
>> "-- preceding" rule. For one reason or another (probably sheer luck),
>> Aaron's
>> .sig complies to knode's requirements, so if anyone would be inclined to
>> read Aaron's posts without the .sig overhead, knode is a good choice.
>
>Some of find Aaron extermemly stupid, immature and annoying.
>
I do not read Aaron's posts because I cannot be bothered to click through
his .sig. Also his signal-to-noise ratio (meaning quotes vs. new text) is
way too high on average.
As to the contents of his posts: What I see of them second hand does not
make him look any worse than just about any cola regular (I leave it to the
reader to figure out what this means).
YMMV, obviously, but if I had not developed a strong feeling of hate for
knode in the short time that I used it, I might very well have un-done the
killfiling of Aaron.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================================================
Give a man fire and he is warm for a day.
Set him on fire and he is warm for the rest of his life.
==============================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karel Jansens)
Subject: Re: What does XP stands for ???
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 18:48:29 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 30 May 2001 14:24:32 GMT, Zsolt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've seen some rather good, although 'unofficial' explanations about the XP
>abbreviation in
>Windows XP. Let's try to collect them in this thread. Anybody, who has other good
>idead, please
>post them here!
>
>To kick-off the collection, some idea's I've seen so far on this newsgroup:
>
>eXPerimental
>eXtra Problems included
>eXtremely Pathetic
>
>
Formerly Urine.
(This one will not likely be bashed by any winvocates, as it requires some
actual thinking)
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================================================
Give a man fire and he is warm for a day.
Set him on fire and he is warm for the rest of his life.
==============================================================
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dead on the desktop.
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 10:48:49 -0600
On Wed, 30 May 2001 11:42:17 -0500, "Chad Myers"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Windows XP will change all that, though. MS is going to quickly
>fade out Win9x because of all its shortcomings and failings,
>not to mention it's a support nightmare.
It's deja vu all over again!
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
