Linux-Advocacy Digest #162, Volume #35 Tue, 12 Jun 01 15:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux IDE RAID Cards (Stuart Cianos)
Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed (Eugenio Mastroviti)
Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?) (Dave Martel)
Re: Mail Order Brides? Check this place out! (Dave Martel)
Re: IBM Goes Gay (Peter Hayes)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (Peter Hayes)
Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff? (James)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (Ed Allen)
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" (Dave Martel)
Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed ("Jon Johansan")
Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed ("Jon Johansan")
Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed ("Jon Johansan")
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? ("Jon Johansan")
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? ("Jon Johansan")
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? ("Jon Johansan")
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? ("Jon Johansan")
Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff? (drsquare)
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts getting
good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!) (drsquare)
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts
getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!) (drsquare)
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (drsquare)
Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (drsquare)
Re: Why homosexuals are a threat to heterosexuals (drsquare)
Re: Why homosexuals are a threat to heterosexuals (drsquare)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stuart Cianos)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Linux IDE RAID Cards
Date: 12 Jun 2001 17:51:42 GMT
Dear Sir:
I use the Escalade cards in several _heavily_ loaded servers with great
success. I would strongly reccomend these cards to anyone - and their
support is very good. I haven't tried their new 7000 series yet, but am
looking forward to it.
- Stu
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
>>
>> Chris Lopeman wrote:
>> >
>> > Can anyone recommend a good raid IDE controller for Linux.
>> > Preferably ATA 100. We have tried using the Promise controller with
>> > limited success. We probably want to run 2 controllers in the
>> > server (for more speed) with a total of 6 drives. 4 of the drives
>> > running raid 1+0 and the other 2 forming a separate mirror. The 2
>> > in the mirror we also want
>> >
>> > to boot off of.
>> >
>> > If you can't recommend a good one maybe you can let us know your
>> > experience with the AMI or Escalade cards. We are considering going
>> > to one of these.
>>
>> http://www.research.att.com/~gjm/linux/ide-raid.html
>>
>
>The link you posted was for software raid. There are a lot of pros and
>cons for hardware vs software for RAID, but in the case of IDE, a
>hardware raid solution makes more sense than a software one.
>
>
------------------------------
From: Eugenio Mastroviti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 18:51:41 +0100
Jon Johansan wrote:
>
> http://www.wininformant.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=21403
> or
> http://www.zdnet.com/eweek/stories/general/0,11011,2772060,00.html
> The study results prove that Linux on the server side is still "just a niche
> play," Miller added. It's unrealistic to look at sales numbers and believe
> that all of these are being deployed. While many users have bought Linux to
> try it out, a large number of those copies bought, downloaded and acquired
> were tested and then never actually used, he said.
Well, if I may add my 2 cents to the discussion:
I'm sysadmin for a small company in London. In the last year we have
bought a total of 9 servers. None of them had Linux preinstalled when we
bought them. Now they all run Linux. Why? Because I don't like
preinstalled software. I know what partitioning scheme will work for our
servers, I know what software configuration will work, I know what
packages I want, I know what packages I don't want - mostly because I
prefer compiling the sources. So we bought them without the OS and we
also bought a copy of RedHat.
So if this survey had been run in the UK, these 9 Dell servers would
have been classified as non-Linux.
I believe others here could tell the same story...
Eugenio
>
> "Many of our customers have tested it, but found that it falls short of what
> is required for a business server platform," Miller said. "Windows has good
> penetration on the server side, but the misstated Linux market share figures
> unfairly present the actual position of Novell and others rather than us."
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?)
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 11:51:31 -0600
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 17:01:04 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed
Allen) wrote:
> They claimed that they had 32 bits before 95 but that it was not
> "complete". Now they have 64 bits but it is not "complete".
They didn't have 32 bits after Windows 95, either - many of the DLL's
and drivers were still only 16 bits.
Windows 1.x-3.x was supposed to be a multitasking OS, but it wasn't
really. Windows 95 was supposed to be a 32-bit OS, but it wasn't
really. Windows 98 was supposed to REALLY TRULY be a 32-bit,
properly-multitasking OS this time - but it wasn't, really.
That's why I'll never buy another MS operating system again.
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Mail Order Brides? Check this place out!
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 11:55:18 -0600
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 15:48:24 GMT, flatfish+++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Mon, 11 Jun 2001 20:20:07 -0600, Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 01:50:40 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>>>Has everything you need to know about "buying" the perfect Russian wife.
>>
>>>These men are the hardcore losers and if you read some of the messages you'll begin
>to see why.
>>
>>Hey, let's all chip in and get Aaron one!
>
>
>According to one of the messages on that sorry site it cost's upward
>of $10k to buy one of these fine ladies.
Yeah, we'll never get that much together for Aaron.
How about <http://www.realdolls.com>?
>I must be naive but I thought slavery went out around 1865 or so?
No, it's still practiced by American tech companies.
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: IBM Goes Gay
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 18:56:49 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 18:47:38 +0100, "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "The Ghost
> In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Matthew Gardiner
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote
> > on Tue, 12 Jun 2001 11:28:02 +1200
> > <9g3k91$vsa$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>> > Why not talk about this? We've already established that Windows is
> >>> > superior to Linux in every regard, right?
> >>>
> >>> LOL!
> >>>
> >>> And whilst we're off topic, why not dip in to some
> >>> racism/nationalism/patriotism debates?
> >>>
> >>> -Ed
> >>
> >>I'd also like to go into a debate on whether colourful computers run
> >>faster than beige ones. That should get the Mac crowd going.
> >
> > Could we throw in some nostalgia for the Amiga, Atari, and other such
> > computers as well? :-)
>
> I have recently been singing the praises of BBC Basic. Will that do?
The Z80 was the best processor ever made.
Peter
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 18:57:01 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 12 Jun 2001 01:15:50 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter) wrote:
> Thats not so slow, and with 32 megs ram would have been tolerable
> with X and flwm. I also think a kernel below the 2.2 series as well,
> because they are faster.
Odd. I distinctly remember the 2.2 series giving me a substantial speed
increase, maybe it wasn't so for the 486s.
Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (James)
Subject: Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff?
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 17:58:46 GMT
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 07:47:37 +0200, "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> Windows is written mainly in C++?..where'd ya get that info?
>> Surely Kernal32.dll, user32.dll, and gdi23.dll are in C....I don't
>> see any C++ anywhere....it you mean the COM stuff, yeah
>> that's in C++....but it's not technically part of the OS..
>
>Windows is more than just it's kernel, you know.
>When I'm talking about Windows, I'm talking all of it.
>Try taking COM out of Windows, you'll find that 90% of the programs doesn't
>work.
You were comparing the linux kernal to the window kernal, they are
both written in C as far as I can tell (no source for windows). The
fact that lots of windows programs depend on COM doesn't make
COM part of the windows kernal, does it?...Is the C runtime library
part of the kernal because most programs link to it?..I think not
James
------------------------------
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Allen)
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 18:01:03 GMT
In article <9g5hdn$al$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <3b263ea1$0$94314$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad Myers"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Exactly what I'm talking about. Penguinistas are so far removed with the
>> truth, that when smacked by it, they think it's flaming.
>
>You mean you believe it?
>
As a sock puppet he has to. Since it is on microsoft.com it is
gospel for him to preach to us heathens.
Facts are merely impediments to true understanding of Bill's words.
His mission is to reveal those words to the ones who would rather
ignore even the existence of Bill.
He sees the annoyance at his repetitious falsehoods as resistance to
true enlightenment and strengthens his resolve to redeem us and get
all of us to return to paying annual tribute to Bill.
--
Microsoft is trying to add to the list of biggest lies of all time:
"Hi. I'm from Microsoft and I am here to protect you from the threat of
the GPL."
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 11:59:01 -0600
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 17:38:26 GMT, "Daniel Johnson"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Tim Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> in article lDnV6.75132$[EMAIL PROTECTED],
>> Daniel Johnson at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 6/12/01 8:08
>> AM:
>> >> Give me some URLs.
>> >
>> > Hmm? You haven't noticed all the cites
>> > with the little "get Acrobat Reader free"
>> > badges on them?
>>
>> And that's because they have PDF files you can download NOT because the
>page
>> is served to you in PDF format.
>
>Errrrm... that is what happens with HTML too. It
>uses the protocol even.
Everyone might as well give it up. If PDF became as popular as HTML,
MS would just find a way to add Smart Tags to PDF readers, too.
------------------------------
From: "Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed
Date: 12 Jun 2001 13:05:10 -0500
"Dave Martel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On 12 Jun 2001 11:48:13 -0500, "Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Yes, I know the study was partially sponsored by MS (someone has to pay
for
> >these things) so please don't fire off stupid replies implying that MS
> >purposely contaminated it's own results by 'buying the study' - that's
just
> >preposterous.
>
> Not at all preposterous, given their past history of sponsoring
> "flawed" studies.
Such as? Please don't insult us by saying "Mindcraft" as the two subsequent
retests proved such claims as false and misleading.
>
> At any rate there's a more accurate measure of linux's market share:
> Microsoft does not launch all-out attacks against niche operating
> systems that present no threat to Windows. That they're willing to
> risk so many lies says so very much about their desperation.
That's an opinion which I only partially agree with. However, even if MS
considers Linux a threat - that does not equal server shipments or mean that
the figures given by Gartner are inaccurate.
------------------------------
From: "Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed
Date: 12 Jun 2001 13:05:11 -0500
"Applebee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On 12 Jun 2001 11:48:13 -0500, Jon Johansan
> <3b26471a$0$263$[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Consider when car companies pay someone like JD Powers to
> >guage customer satisfaction - the company that paid for the survey does
NOT
> >always come out on top and that's why people trust JD Powers.
>
> But they don't have Bill Gates screaming at the raw meat to get the stats
> up!
Weird - what are you on?
------------------------------
From: "Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed
Date: 12 Jun 2001 13:08:05 -0500
"Eugenio Mastroviti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Jon Johansan wrote:
> >
> > http://www.wininformant.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=21403
> > or
> > http://www.zdnet.com/eweek/stories/general/0,11011,2772060,00.html
>
>
> > The study results prove that Linux on the server side is still "just a
niche
> > play," Miller added. It's unrealistic to look at sales numbers and
believe
> > that all of these are being deployed. While many users have bought Linux
to
> > try it out, a large number of those copies bought, downloaded and
acquired
> > were tested and then never actually used, he said.
>
> Well, if I may add my 2 cents to the discussion:
>
> I'm sysadmin for a small company in London. In the last year we have
> bought a total of 9 servers. None of them had Linux preinstalled when we
> bought them. Now they all run Linux. Why? Because I don't like
> preinstalled software. I know what partitioning scheme will work for our
> servers, I know what software configuration will work, I know what
> packages I want, I know what packages I don't want - mostly because I
> prefer compiling the sources. So we bought them without the OS and we
> also bought a copy of RedHat.
>
> So if this survey had been run in the UK, these 9 Dell servers would
> have been classified as non-Linux.
>
> I believe others here could tell the same story...
>
I would easily agree that such situations exist and occur, perhaps even
frequently. However, this study was clear in that it looked at shipped
copies; i.e., those with some sort of support attached. I believe that a
portion of the focus of this study was to see if companies like Red Hat had
any chance for profit. RH makes money selling support, not selling Linux,
per say.
------------------------------
From: "Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: 12 Jun 2001 13:17:04 -0500
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Michael Vester wrote:
> >
> > GreyCloud wrote:
> > >
> > > Chad Myers wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm not too sure about the NYSE, but I think the NASDAQ,
unfortunately, runs
> > > > > > on Windows.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Matthew Gardiner
> > > > > >
> > > > > NASDAQ's web server is Windows. The computer that actually does
the
> > > > > trading is a big Unisys mainframe. Microcomputer architecture just
isn't
> > > > > capable. It's not a Windows verses Linux issue.
> > > >
> > > > About a year ago it was still Unisys. Last year they announced they
were
> > > > moving to Win2K Datacenter. I'm not sure if they actually did it, or
if
> > > > it's complete yet or not, but I would imagine we would've heard
about it
> > > > if it went south.
> > > >
> > > > -c
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:84aU6.9834$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > > news:3%9U6.1335$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > > In article <3b212110$0$94312$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chad Myers
> > > > > > > says...
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED] dripot> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > >news:CP8U6.1221$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > > >> What's the skinny ?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >What software are they running for what?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Haven't heard about the fiasco today ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm talking about what they use for managing trades.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Well, their web site runs under AIX, so one would assume that
they're
> > > > > > > probably a big IBM shop, and are probably running trades under
AIX and/or
> > > > > > > OS/390.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Michael Vester
> > > > > A credible Linux advocate
> > > > >
> > > > > "The avalanche has started, it is
> > > > > too late for the pebbles to vote"
> > > > > Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
> > >
> > > Highly unlikely that any stock exchange is using micros or microsoft
> > > products to run the core of operations. These are done with
> > > mainframes... goto comp.os.vm or comp.os.vms and ask the question.
> > >
> > > --
> > > V
> > Exactly. There are many applications out there that can't be run on a
> > microcomputer platform. Our local municipal government still runs a
> > Unisys system for tax assessment. IBM tried for 10 years to move it over
> > to an IBM mainframe platform. They failed. Now they are trying to move
it
> > to a losedos/Oracle platform. I don't think they will be any more
> > successful.
> >
>
> hehehe... I our city moved over to win2k and oracle to maintain records
> of traffic violations. Then one day ol' Barney Fife caught me doing 38
> in 35 mph zone and gave me a ticket... I waited and watched the
> newspaper for any down time... sure enough they went down... I trekked
> on down to the courthouse to see if I had any moving violations on file
> and they said 'nope'. Sometimes it pays to have Win2k in government.
> :-))
What's funnier is that you expect us to believe that story or, if it is
true, that it had anything to do with W2K.
------------------------------
From: "Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: 12 Jun 2001 13:17:15 -0500
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Jon Johansan wrote:
> >
> > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:fbuU6.12567$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > "Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm not too sure about the NYSE, but I think the NASDAQ,
> > unfortunately, runs
> > > > > on Windows.
> > > > >
> > > > > Matthew Gardiner
> > > > >
> > > > NASDAQ's web server is Windows. The computer that actually does the
> > > > trading is a big Unisys mainframe. Microcomputer architecture just
isn't
> > > > capable. It's not a Windows verses Linux issue.
> > >
> > > About a year ago it was still Unisys. Last year they announced they
were
> > > moving to Win2K Datacenter. I'm not sure if they actually did it, or
if
> > > it's complete yet or not, but I would imagine we would've heard about
it
> > > if it went south.
> >
> > It's still in the works. There isn't an announcment because it's not
done
> > yet.
>
> If there isn't an announcement of the move then how do you know?
> Have any inside info?
My father in law works there.
------------------------------
From: "Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: 12 Jun 2001 13:20:10 -0500
"Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> GreyCloud wrote:
> >
> > Jon Johansan wrote:
> > >
> > > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:fbuU6.12567$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > > "Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm not too sure about the NYSE, but I think the NASDAQ,
> > > unfortunately, runs
> > > > > > on Windows.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Matthew Gardiner
> > > > > >
> > > > > NASDAQ's web server is Windows. The computer that actually does
the
> > > > > trading is a big Unisys mainframe. Microcomputer architecture just
isn't
> > > > > capable. It's not a Windows verses Linux issue.
> > > >
> > > > About a year ago it was still Unisys. Last year they announced they
were
> > > > moving to Win2K Datacenter. I'm not sure if they actually did it, or
if
> > > > it's complete yet or not, but I would imagine we would've heard
about it
> > > > if it went south.
> > >
> > > It's still in the works. There isn't an announcment because it's not
done
> > > yet.
> >
> > If there isn't an announcement of the move then how do you know?
> > Have any inside info?
> >
> > --
> > V
> It is very wishful thinking on the Winvocates side.
No, it's fact.
A peecee toy operating
> system like losedos (or Windows 2000 for those that have not figured out
> my sarcasm) cannot be used for a stock trading system. At 2 billion trades
> a day, this is way beyond a toy operating system like losedos. Even if
> they miraculously got losedos to trade, after a couple failures, NASDAQ
> would lose all credibility and have to fold.
Oh, you mean like the SEVERAL failures of the unix mainframes they've had? I
didn't know the NASDAQ has folded up 3 times in the past 4 years? Someone
better tell those people trading 2 billion shares a day that the system they
use has crashed 3 times already -- course even the uneducated will reply
that they didn't even notice because of backups and safeguards in place no
matter which OS is used. What, you think there is some single unix server
back there with a kernel panic and the entire 2 billion trades just vaporize
into thin air? You are thinking like a peecee toy user.
------------------------------
From: "Jon Johansan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: 12 Jun 2001 13:20:14 -0500
"Craig Gullixson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9g5b8u$fii$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >Jon Johansan wrote:
> >>
> >> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> news:fbuU6.12567$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >
> >> > "Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> > > Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I'm not too sure about the NYSE, but I think the NASDAQ,
> >> unfortunately, runs
> >> > > > on Windows.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Matthew Gardiner
> >> > > >
> >> > > NASDAQ's web server is Windows. The computer that actually does the
> >> > > trading is a big Unisys mainframe. Microcomputer architecture just
isn't
> >> > > capable. It's not a Windows verses Linux issue.
> >> >
> >> > About a year ago it was still Unisys. Last year they announced they
were
> >> > moving to Win2K Datacenter. I'm not sure if they actually did it, or
if
> >> > it's complete yet or not, but I would imagine we would've heard about
it
> >> > if it went south.
> >>
> >> It's still in the works. There isn't an announcment because it's not
done
> >> yet.
> >
> >If there isn't an announcement of the move then how do you know?
> >Have any inside info?
> >
> >--
> >V
>
> Hmmmm, so this is how urban legends are started .....
Only if they are, in fact, false.
This is not.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What language are use to program Linux stuff?
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 19:26:34 +0100
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 16:32:53 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>Question: Why are you using such enormous indents? :^)
>
>I'd prefer doing:
>
> char *function(char *string) {
> char *buffer = malloc(strlen(string)*2+1);
> char *ptr = buffer;
> char current;
> do {
> switch (current = *string) {
> case '@':
> case '\'':
> *ptr++ = '@';
> default:
> *ptr++ = *string++;
> }
> } while (current);
> return realloc(buffer, ptr-buffer);
> }
Are you TAKING the piss??? All indents should be like THIS:
char *function(char *string) {
char *buffer = malloc(strlen(string)*2+1);
char *ptr = buffer;
char current;
do {
switch (current = *string) {
case '@':
case '\'':
*ptr++ = '@';
default:
*ptr++ = *string++;
}
} while (current);
return realloc(buffer, ptr-buffer);
}
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts
getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!)
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 19:26:35 +0100
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 17:09:52 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Typical American attitude. Let the children starve to death whilst we
>>send pieces of metal into space for fun.
>
>Typical Dutch attitude. Blame someone else for all the world's
>problems.
How is starvation a Dutch problem?
>Sounds like a severe case of jealously, to me. (Gee, I wonder if
>he'll deny it.)
Yes, I'm jealous that I don't hoard up food and resources whilst
children starve to death.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: European arrogance and ignorance... (was Re: Just when Linux starts
getting good, Microsoft buries it in the dust!)
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 19:26:39 +0100
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 12:04:25 +0100, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Thaddius Maximus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>> > Without the USA, mother Russia would have gobbled up most all of Europe
>> > long ago.
>>
>> Without mother Russia, the Nazia would have gobbled up the "land of the
>> free" long ago.
>
>I must have missed that novel piece of history.
Americans do have a habit of being ignorant of historical facts.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: European arrogance and ignorance...
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 19:26:40 +0100
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 17:07:28 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Rotten168 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>> >In Holland they get personal freedom. Unlike the US.
>>
>> Please explain.
>
>Drugs, alcohol, sex; things are MUCH more libertarian (freedom) in
>Denmark than in the US. It's all about personal responsibility.
The US will never have personal freedom whilst their people are still
continuosly brainwashed by Christian ideology.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: European arrogance and ignorance...
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 19:26:41 +0100
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 17:11:45 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
(Rotten168 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>drsquare wrote:
>> >Compared to whom?
>>
>> Canada, Ireland, France, Germany, Spain, Holland, Denmark, Belgium,
>> Italy, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, Mexico, Poland...
>
>Ireland - abortion is illegal
As it will soon be in US
>France - Paris commune massacre, Dreyfus affair, just as bad as US
I think not.
>Spain - dictatorship until mid-70's
Oh, until mid-70s, that means a lot.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are a threat to heterosexuals
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 19:26:42 +0100
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001 12:01:45 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("~¿~" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>I didn't realize LinZealots were such homophobes.
No, that's just Kuntis and Flatfish.
------------------------------
From: drsquare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.men,soc.singles,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Re: Why homosexuals are a threat to heterosexuals
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 19:26:43 +0100
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001 00:17:56 +1200, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
("Matthew Gardiner \(BOFH\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>LOL. Sorry about that. Hopefully you weren't eating sea food soup at the
>time.
SHUT UP!!!!!!
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
