Linux-Advocacy Digest #140, Volume #35 Mon, 11 Jun 01 19:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Test your Brain! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: A Browser is a Browser (Rob S. Wolfram)
Re: The nature of competition (Rob S. Wolfram)
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: More funny stuff. ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?) (Mark)
Re: More funny stuff. ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: UI Importance (Mark)
Re: UI Importance (Pascal Haakmat)
Re: which OS is better to learn for an entry level job? ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff? ("Weevil")
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- He Created Unix, But Now Uses Microsoft Windows (pip)
Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- He Created Unix, But Now Uses Microsoft Windows (pip)
Re: Dennis Ritchie -- He Created Unix, But Now Uses Microsoft Windows (pip)
Re: KDE and Gnome are totally 80s ("Matthew Gardiner")
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? ("Matthew Gardiner")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Test your Brain!
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 16:58:36 -0500
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9g3602$f3a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "mlw"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Charlie Ebert wrote:
> >>
> >> A guy backed me up in a hallway some weeks ago and made the following
> >> proclaimation.
> >>
> >> In the DP environment, if you can't spend the money to solve the
> >> problem then the problem wasn't worth solving.
> >>
> >> This came from a highly respected person from a another company who's
> >> worked in mainframes his entire life.
> >>
> >> What is wrong with this man's thinking!
> >
> > Actually, he is correct, but the cause and effect is ambiguous to the
> > casual listener. Think about it from a return on investment sense.
>
> > He isn't being a nitwit, he is being a realist.
>
> I think you may be missing a point (or mabey I'm just inventing one).
> Throwing money at a problem is not always the best way to solve it.
> Sometimes small amounts of thought carefully applied can do much more
> than a lot of money.
Actually, in this context, I'm certain that Charlie was trying to convince
his boss that Linux is free and that they shouldn't spend money on it, and
his boss replied with "If it's worth doing, it's worth paying for".
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob S. Wolfram)
Subject: Re: A Browser is a Browser
Date: 11 Jun 2001 20:49:42 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I'm not sure of the value of this technology, so:
>
><devils advocate>
>This would seem to be a change to the way we look at the web, where content
>is no longer determined by the author, it's also determined by whatever else
>you choose to connect it to. This means that for the user, the web becomes
>more "dynamic". Microsoft may well have found from user testing that they
>would like this feature.
></devils advocate>
>
>I don't know if I actually believe what I wrote, but it's one alternative
>way to think about it. Given that this is browser based, it would be hard
>to combat it. Of course, you could always hope that it turns out to be a
>piece of shit (which it probably will), and gets removed in later versions.
My problem with this is that it is hard to draw the line of what is
permissible and what not. If I understand the feature well enough (I've
never seen or used it), the smart tags are presented as part of the
text, even though it is clearly different from ordinary links. If this
feature is permissible, I see no compelling reason why "smart tags" that
are indistinguishable from ordinary links are not, and then how about
"smart tags" that would replace the author's own links? All of them are
generated on the client side, right?
I do applaude Microsoft for disabling this feature by default, I
honestly hope they keep doing that. I also wished they would have done
the same with the "fast save" feature in MS Word. I bet there are lots
of secretaries out there that are unaware of the fact that the
confidential text that they deleted from the .doc file was still present
when they sent the file out via email...
Cheers,
Rob
--
Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OpenPGP key 0xD61A655D
... then you wish to copulate?
-- Seven of Nine, stardate 51186.2
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob S. Wolfram)
Subject: Re: The nature of competition
Date: 11 Jun 2001 20:56:45 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ayende Rahien <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Rob S. Wolfram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> How would you suppose that KDE, running on a headless server in the
>> campus server room, change the display depth and resolution of one of
>> the 23 X-terminals in the computer-lab?
>>
>No idea, but TS can handle it.
Just curious, is this done by the remote Windows session that is being
presented to you via TS, or is it the Windows version that runs
underneath your TS client that handles this? If it's the remote version,
how is it handled? Is it part of the protocol?
(I've never used Terminal Services, so I'm genuinely curious).
Cheers,
Rob
--
Rob S. Wolfram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> OpenPGP key 0xD61A655D
I cannot conceive that anybody will require multiplications at the
rate of 40,000 or even 4,000 per hour ...
-- F. H. Wales (1936)
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 17:06:08 -0500
"macman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <9g276l$btn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "Woofbert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In article <9g1olv$qvo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ayende Rahien"
> >
> >
> > > > They have a *very* distinct look, I posted a screen shot, did you
saw
> > > > it?
> > >
> > > They look different, but does the user know why? There is no standard
> > > for the colors of links, and IE and NS have between them pretty much
> > > destroyed any other useful standards ... why shoudl this be anything
> > > different?
> >
> > It's not just another color for a hyper link.
> > It's a totally different mecanism.
> > You *can't* get confused between them.
> > http://www10.ewebcity.com/ayende/SmartTags.png
> > Here is a screen shot.
> > news:9fua39$1ek$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> So what if you can't get confused?
>
> I'll add my own hyperlinks, thank you. I don't need or want Microsoft to
> do it to my web pages -- no matter what color they make them.
To be quite frank, there is little you can do about it.
If I want to create a web browser that replaces all instances of macman with
moron, I can do so, and there is no legal leg for you to stand on.
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More funny stuff.
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 10:30:36 +1200
> > LOL! some people can be real Doris's sometimes. I sometimes wonder how
on
> > earth these people actually get through life without killing themselves.
> > Mind you, the poem, "Danger Eliminates Stupid People" puts it in plain
> > English why these morons continue to breed like rabbits.
>
> Well, sometimes they don't survive, have you read the Darwin Award?
Maybe these activities should more heavily promoted, like smoking, speeding,
j-walking and removing the AOL virus.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?)
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 23:30:49 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <x1QU6.11547$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chad Myers wrote:
>
>"Mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <EhLU6.13627$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chad Myers wrote:
>> >
>> >"Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:9fvbkh$5n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >>
>> >> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > LOL!! :-)) I was looking at the other companies' software lineup...
>> >> > they'll recompile the same product for a new o/s and charge more for it.
>> >>
>> >> It wouldn't surprise me at all.
>> >> I just wonder how compelling 64bits really is, enough to make ISV develop
>> >> for it?
>> >> Win64 info is still on its way to me, so I can't tell you if there is
>> >> anything there that is good enough to make an ISV lock its product from
>> >> IA32.
>> >> Databases will certainly use it, and servers, I suppose, but other than
>> >> that?
>> >
>> >Graphics or 3D apps? Anything that's heavily (x) intensive probably
>> >will. (x) being IO, graphics, memory, etc.
>> >
>>
>> ah, I can hear it all again - 640k is enough for anyone.
>
>huh? What does that have to do with anything?
>
See the Greycloud post for yet another reminder of 640k is enough
for anyone. Aka why would anyone want 64bit systems, etc. etc.
You can summarise it as "we don't support this so no-one will want it",
as a kind of marketing mantra.
--
Mark Kent
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More funny stuff.
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 10:41:21 +1200
> > Might I reccomend the "Computer stupidities" page. It has many more liek
> > this. I can't remember the link, but I think google picks up on it
pretty
> > easily.
>
> http://rinkworks.com/stupid/
> Is this it?
>
> On first glance, this doesn't seem as funny, but I'll take a deeper look.
It is quite funny. Maybe the tech support person should say, "I'm sorry,
you're too much of a fuck-witt to use a computer, please package it up and
send it back. Also, as punishment of this ignorance, a person with a black
hood will come and visit you to give you the public beating you deserve".
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/30/19435.html is quite funny.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/30/index.html BOFH, home grown humour
in godzone (aka New Zealand).
any yanks and pome's out there trying to pronounce Waikato, please don't, it
sounds terrible.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 23:40:23 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <9g0jq3$2v4j$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Stuart Fox wrote:
>
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Said Stuart Fox in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 10 Jun 2001 12:50:04
>> >"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >
>> >This is hardly an example of how the Windows CLI is crippled I'm afraid.
>>
>> Well, you're obviously afraid of something. ;-)
>>
>> >Given that Windows doesn't do process limits in a unix fashion, not
>having
>> >this ability in the command interpreter is not crippled.
>>
>> So now bash cannot be better than cmd.exe simply because Unix is better
>> than Windows?
>
>Given that we're talking in the context of the CLI, no. Arguing that the
>command interpreter is better on one platform over another (which was not my
>argument BTW - mine was simply that the Windows CLI is not crippled) based
>on features that the OS itself does or does not support is a bit daft.
>Saying that the Windows CLI is crippled because *Windows* does not support
>process limits is silly, the correct argument there would be that *Windows*
>is crippled by not having process limits (an argument I'm not going to get
>into), given that the command interpreter has little to do with whether
>Windows supports process limits.
>
>
>
Doesn't one of the latest incarnations have no command line at all?
ME or XP or something? How much more crippled can you get than that?
--
Mark Kent
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pascal Haakmat)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: UI Importance
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 22:52:17 GMT
Stuart Fox wrote:
>The previous poster was me - you don't have a threaded newsreader do you?
>
>OK, it's an example of a bash script with no external executables. However,
>my point was that the command line is really only as useful as the tools you
>can plug into it.
That's trivially true, but irrelevant. For most useful work you want a
commandline to satisfy much stronger constraints. For example, "are these
tools plugged in". Or, "how much will it cost to plug in this tool".
>Windows cmd.exe does not do process limits at the command
>line, because as far as I am aware, Windows does not do process limits.
>Therefore, claiming that the Windows CLI is crippled because Windows itself
>does not support something is a little futile really. You can argue that
>Windows itself is crippled if you like.
In the case where the underlying system does not support a certain tool,
then the costs of plugging in such a tool often becomes excessive. Again,
whether or not it is possible to plug in such a tool is almost always
irrelevant.
>I just get bored of people throwing out the line "the windows CLI is
>crippled", and providing no justification. I would really like to know why
>people think that.
Try both.
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: which OS is better to learn for an entry level job?
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 10:52:06 +1200
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9g364k$fa3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > First programming language learnt was BBC Basic, followed by AmigaBASIC
> ^^^^^^^^^
>
> Good choice. One of the best and fastest BASICs ever made. Also one of
> the few (only one?) that could cope with memory allocation and pointers.
>
>
> -Ed
AmigaBasic is one program from Microsoft that doesn't suck majorly. 15-16
years ago, Microsoft was quiet an innovative company, now they are just
another monopoly trying to maintain its strangle hold on the market. Or as
Adam Smith, the father of modern economics, put it:
"A monopoly granted either to an individual or to a trading company has the
same effect as a secret in trade or manufactures. The monopolists, by
keeping the market constantly understocked, by never fully supplying the
effectual demand, sell their commodities much above the natural price, and
raise their emoluments, whether they consist in wages or profit, greatly
above their natural rate.
The price of monopoly is upon every occasion the highest which can be got.
The natural price, or the price of free competition, on the contrary, is the
lowest which can be taken, not upon every occasion, indeed, but for any
considerable time together. The one is upon every occasion the highest which
can be squeezed out of the buyers, or which, it is supposed, they will
consent to give: the other is the lowest which the sellers can commonly
afford to take, and at the same time continue their business. The exclusive
privileges of corporations, statutes of apprenticeship, and all those laws
which restrain, in particular employments, the competition to a smaller
number than might otherwise go into them, have the same tendency, though in
a less degree. They are a sort of enlarged monopolies, and may frequently,
for ages together, and in whole classes of employments, keep up the market
price of particular commodities above the natural price, and maintain both
the wages of the labour and the profits of the stock employed about them
somewhat above their natural rate. Such enhancements of the market price may
last as long as the regulations of police which give occasion to them. The
market price of any particular commodity, though it may continue long above,
can seldom continue long below its natural price. Whatever part of it was
paid below the natural rate, the persons whose interest it affected would
immediately feel the loss, and would immediately withdraw either so much
land, or so much labour, or so much stock, from being employed about it,
that the quantity brought to market would soon be no more than sufficient to
supply the effectual demand. Its market price, therefore, would soon rise to
the natural price. This at least would be the case where there was perfect
liberty."
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff?
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 22:53:57 GMT
Donal K. Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Question: why would you want to ask that question in the first place?
> Counting the number of set bits in an array of unsigned longs seems a
> fairly pointless task to me!
Depends on the type of programming you do. If you were writing a chess
program, for example, and you represented the board position with a variety
of "bit boards," then you would certainly want to be able to quickly
determine how many bits were set in the BlackPawn or WhiteBishop bit field.
If you were writing a program that simulated the propagation of email virii,
wherein each bit in an array of millions indicated whether that simulated
user was infected, you would surely want to be able to quickly count the
number of infections many times during the course of the simulation.
Couting the set bits in a bitfield is an important enough operation, in
certain types of applications, that some machines have a single instruction
that does just that. Another "bit" operation that seems useless at first
glance is determining the index of the first set bit in a word, yet the Cray
architecture provides an instruction that does the trick.
If you're coding an office application, say a word processor, then you
probably don't care about squeezing the last iota of speed you can get out
of your target machine since you'll have millions of idle machine cycles to
play with just waiting for the next keystroke. You won't *need* to write
blazingly fast code for that sort of stuff -- just reliable, robust, and
responsive code.
But for large simulations, for virtually any graphic operation, for all
sorts of games, for almost any program where speed is a high priority, bit
manipulation (including counting 1s and 0s) is absolutely necessary.
--
Weevil
"The obvious mathematical breakthrough [for breaking encryption schemes]
would be development of an easy way to factor large prime numbers."
-- Bill Gates
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dennis Ritchie -- He Created Unix, But Now Uses Microsoft Windows
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 23:58:11 +0100
Vilmos Soti wrote:
>
> somebody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Has anyone else read the latest issue of Linux Magazine? There
> > is an interview of Dennis Ritchie complete with several photos
> > of him sitting behind his desk at bell labs.
> >
> > his monitor is clearly visible-- very obviously and very ironically
> > running ms-windows! LOL, i had to laugh!
>
> IIRC this is a company policy to use Windows. Not his choice.
What a load of crap.
If the inventor of Unix and C wants a computer with Linux on it : HE
GETS IT!
If he says "jump", they write a paper on how high the jump should be.
He is a pragmatic guy, they are the type that do great things as he has
done.
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 10:54:09 +1200
"Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3b24ecd2$0$2600$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Norman D. Megill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:OR4V6.812$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <9g2bl8$eq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >Encarta, If I remember correctly, is Funk and Wagnels Encyclopedia,
> thrown
> > >onto CD by Microsoft.
> >
> > With content added, deleted, and modified per Microsoft's marketing
> > agenda.
>
> Untrue - prove your claim!
I've never used Encarta, I prefer sticking to the dead wood on my shelf, you
know, books.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dennis Ritchie -- He Created Unix, But Now Uses Microsoft Windows
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 23:59:06 +0100
GreyCloud wrote:
> Find us a link and prove it.
Are you so shocked that it could not possibly be true ? :)
He probably just uses it for the games anyhow.
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Dennis Ritchie -- He Created Unix, But Now Uses Microsoft Windows
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 00:00:58 +0100
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
> 1. A person with his reputation doesn't play the juvenile, "my OS is better
> than yours" game.
> 2. You failed to mention that Bell Labs uses more than one operating system
> in its facility.
> 3. What are you trying to prove?
> 4. He is a programmer, and does hold juvenile grudges against OS's, unlike
> you. It is only software, no more, no less. Nice little files with 0's and
> 1's placed in a particular order to create something.
> 5. Most users, like my self, don't give a shit what you, or anyone else uses
> as an OS. If you like to use Linux, then so be it. If you like to use
> Windows, then so be it. If you like to use QNX RTP, then so be it.
> However, don't think because you use that particular OS, it make you
> superior to anyone within a 100kilometre radius of yourself.
VERY well said!
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: KDE and Gnome are totally 80s
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 10:57:23 +1200
> But it's 100% standards compliant, and that's the important thing.
> Also, the core components of Mozilla aren't too bad, and Galeon, which
> uses Mozilla-embedded, is proof of this. Galeon is Mozilla w/out all
> that XML stuff slowing it down. But the downside of Galeon is that it
> takes up a lot of disk space, so it's not that simple, light, fast
> open source browser we've all been dreaming of. It's good, though.
>
> Also, anyone ever try the HotJava browser? It didn't seem too bad,
> but the last time I tried it, it didn't run Java applets too well.
> Isn't that ironic -- a browser written in 100% Java that has problems
> with Java applets?
Why didn't Mozilla/Netscape use the cross platform qt library that is freely
available? Opera has done it, to their advantage. Also, as I remember, it is
not 100% compliant, and there is still more work to be done.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 11:00:14 +1200
> Given that your source is a single post from "alt.destroy.microsoft" - you
> don't think that it's FULL OF SHIT?
>
> It is. NASDAQ continues what they started in July of 2000 - converting to
> W2K on the floor, web AND the back server room. You can try to deny it but
> it's true.
Well, I can't deny or accept it, however, what I do know is that the front
and back servers are Intel Xeon based (the couple of Intels ad's I have seen
claiming to be the "engine" behind he NASDAQ), thus leaving very few OS's
left to pick from.
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
