Linux-Advocacy Digest #278, Volume #29 Sat, 23 Sep 00 18:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Never tell me again that Windows is easy to install!!! It's a lie! (The Ghost
In The Machine)
Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time? (mark)
Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time? (mark)
Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively (mark)
Re: Why NT is shite (mark)
Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT ("James Stutts")
Re: The Government's Decision to Use Microsoft ("James Stutts")
Re: Why I hate Windows... ("James Stutts")
Re: Win2K (mark)
Re: GPL & freedom ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Implications ("paul snow")
Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time? (Pete
Goodwin)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Donovan
Rebbechi)
Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: filename extensions are NOT a kludge (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT (C Lund)
Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: The Government's Decision to Use Microsoft (The Ghost In The Machine)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Never tell me again that Windows is easy to install!!! It's a lie!
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 20:14:12 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, The Ghost In The Machine
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sat, 23 Sep 2000 19:22:33 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[snip]
>20 seconds for that. (mkext2fs doesn't take that long to "format"
Correction: mke2fs, or mkfs.ext2. Sorry about that. :-)
[snip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To: alt.windows98
Subject: Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time?
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:17:49 +0100
In article <mYvx5.5510$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Greg Topf wrote:
>Actually its not common, its not an indication of the default behavior of
>win98 at all, you likely either have a hardware or software problem
^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What exactly was the other option?
I've heard some stunning Microsoft turfing advice, but this is truly
magnificent. Possibly even sigworthy.
--
Mark - remove any ham to reply.
(Killed (sigserv (This sig is reserved by another user)))
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time?
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:15:10 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Pete Goodwin wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in <8q68e7$nrl$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>The easiest way to prevent Windows 98 SE from crashing/freezing is keep
>reinstalling it ever so often. Don't let it go for 12 months or so
Nah - the easiest way is to install linux instead. What you don't
run, can't freeze.
>otherwise you'll get the "creep" and registry problems.
Oh yeah - and you don't get creep and registry problems with Linux.
--
Mark - remove any ham to reply.
(Killed (sigserv (This sig is reserved by another user)))
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:26:04 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
dc wrote:
>On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 17:47:11 GMT, Timberwoof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>some of these standards. And because of the Macintosh's excellent
>>support for networking, Apple product users are well-connected.
>
>This I don't quite understand. Not from a 1990's AppleTalk
>perspective, but from a September 2000 perspective, how are Apple
>product users "well-connected" compared to the rest of computerdom
>(meaning, NT and ME)?
I'm having trouble with the phrase 'rest of computerdom' which I assumed
would mean what people actually use, not NT and ME.
--
Mark - remove any ham to reply.
(Killed (sigserv (This sig is reserved by another user)))
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: Why NT is shite
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:33:36 +0100
In article <8pt4n8$39v$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, MH wrote:
>
>> (b) technical skills,
>> which most of the regular contributors here *do* have, correlate very
>> poorly with verbal skills.
>
>(b) The skills of the regular contributors are unsubstantiated, so that
>shoots this theory from the get-go.
>Also, may I see the reference(s) that lead you to state that [sic] "verbal",
>I assume you mean 'writing' skills don't correlate to technical skills.
>After all, 'writing' was the topic of the post, not verbal.
>
>
>I've heard this argument before, and have been involved in one or two on the
>topic.
>Someone who is for all intent and purposes flirting with ineptitude in their
>native tongue (either spoken or written) is IMHO not someone that I could
>ever characterize as technically skilled beyond a 2 year college level.
We've had this problem at work for some time. My best signalling guy
(ie., C7 expert) was also dyslexic. Lot's of people thought that meant
he wasn't up to the job. Basically, he suffered quite extreme prejudice
from people like you.
Please reconsider your viewpoint on this.
--
Mark - remove any ham to reply.
(Killed (sigserv (This sig is reserved by another user)))
------------------------------
From: "James Stutts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 15:35:47 -0500
"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<snip>
>
> The Win32 protocol is junk, though. :-) (Totally different issue.)
It would be, if it was a protocol. It's an API. One you don't necessarily
have to use on NT (depending on what you want your application to do).
JCS
------------------------------
From: "James Stutts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Government's Decision to Use Microsoft
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 15:45:46 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<snip>
> But, in this case, an exception handler would be needed. You WANT
> the navigation software to continue, despite the Divide By Zero error.
>
> Unix and Linux offer this. And almost every Unix programmer I know
Windows offers this too, if the PROGRAMMER uses them. If anything, they
could have avoided even needing an exception by defining a range limit
for the edit box. If the didn't specify this, then I doubt they'd take the
time
to use exception handling.
> wouldn't let such a simple thing slip past them.
I'm sure a decent Win32 programmer wouldn't either. Now you, Mr. Unix
Systems "Engineer",
are coloring with far too broad a brush.
JCS
------------------------------
From: "James Stutts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why I hate Windows...
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 15:47:36 -0500
"mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<snip>
> Spoken like a true astroturfer, not a user. Because win98se is so
unstable,
> it is necessary to save files every minute or two (particularly for those
Actually, the better approach is to not use a home operating system (Win98)
in
a corporate environment. NT was designed for this. While not perfect, it
is
far more stable than Win98.
JCS
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark)
Subject: Re: Win2K
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:40:08 +0100
In article <8pni5u$dlb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Adam Warner wrote:
>Too many factual errors to even respond to.
>
>Enough said (it looks like a poor troll).
>
>Adam
>
>PS: Aaargh. Can't stop myself:
>1. Of course Win2k can multitask.
>2. Many application crashes do not bring down explorer.
So many application crashes do bring down explorer - the shell.
>3. Even if explorer halts, it can be restarted (the computer will NOT
>spontaneously reboot).
Always, or just sometimes?
>4. Win2k is a stable operating system (but of course it is not "the" most
>stable OS).
Err, how do you know? The previous poster was quite convinced that it
be unstable. So much so that he'd rather use linux at home. Looks like
Win2k is unstable. In his view, at least.
>
>Phew. Enough said.
>
Very little said, I thought, but an awful lot stated without a hint of proof.
--
Mark - remove any ham to reply.
(Killed (sigserv (This sig is reserved by another user)))
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: GPL & freedom
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 16:23:11 -0500
You can't license public-domain code. You can copyright your code and
license it freely though, much like BSD and the X Consotium have.
"Tim Tyler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In several advocacy groups James A. Robertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : It's a license; get over it. All licenses restrict your rights and/or
> : access to code in some fashion.
>
> Surely not. What about a license that says:
>
> ``This program - and its source code - are hereby placed in the public
> domain.
>
> This means you can do whatever you like with them.
>
> Modification, redistribution, commercial use, passing the code off as
> your own - it's all fine by me.''
>
> ?
> --
> __________ Lotus Artificial Life http://alife.co.uk/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> |im |yler The Mandala Centre http://mandala.co.uk/ Namaste.
------------------------------
From: "paul snow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.software.config-mgmt
Subject: Re: Implications
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:13:48 GMT
> Do you have a clue? *I* don't know how much IT companies invest in
> various areas, and I don't know where you get your numbers from.
"Recent industry studies confirm that capital expenses, including hardware,
software, communications, and maintenance comprise less than 1/3 of the
5-year cost of ownership of information systems. Server costs are less than
10% of the total cost of system ownership, with disk storage accounting for
the greatest portion of large server costs. The largest category of costs is
IT labor, which rises incrementally each year as the cost of hardware
diminishes. Tasks such as system management, problem management, network
management, configuration management, storage management, operations
management, resource management, and software installation management
comprise the most costly aspects of acquiring, installing, and operating
production systems in an extended enterprise."
http://www.rs6000.ibm.com/resource/consult/enabling/sp_v2250.html
"The first authoritative report on the subject was issued by the US based
Gartner Group in February 1996, and has been followed by many others.
Gartner estimated the TCO of a PC in a US corporation to be between $8,000
and $12,000 per annum, of which only $6,000 is budgeted. The largest
component of this cost, about 46% according to the Gartner Group's model, is
that of end user operations i.e., applications development, casual learning,
file management, peer support and time wasted playing with configuration and
optional settings on the system. Capital costs (purchase, rental or lease of
hardware, software and infrastructure) comprised only 21%.
http://www.rm.com/further/tco/
There is plenty more. Search for Total Cost of Ownership (TOC). 75% may be
on the low side, but consistent with most of the research. And it is
consistent with my own, rather lengthy experience in this area.
So, the observation is that these efforts (which cost all this money and
effort) all amount to the task of taking a set of software X which defines
what can be installed on a set of computers, and applying different
expressions of X on each computer in an enterprise. Furthermore, the
networks and distributed nature of the problem requires that X be expressed
on each computer within the context of each computer's role in the
enterprise.
Figuring out better ways to do this with Linux really amounts to designing a
Linux form of Microsoft's .Net effort. Is this worth while? I would think
so, if Linux is to be competitive.
Paul Snow
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Subject: Re: So did they ever find out what makes windows98 freeze up all the time?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:22:10 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (mark) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Nah - the easiest way is to install linux instead. What you don't
>run, can't freeze.
Linux can freeze just as well as Windows 98 SE can. Or did you think Linux
was 100% bug free?
>Oh yeah - and you don't get creep and registry problems with Linux.
You get other problems instead. Like, no real software.
--
Pete Goodwin
---
Coming soon, Kylix, Delphi on Linux.
My success does not require the destruction of Microsoft.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: 23 Sep 2000 21:22:49 GMT
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 17:27:22 GMT, Richard wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
>> This is so absurd that I'm not even going to respond to it.
>
>Do you know *anything* about sociology or psychology???
Enough to know that you've got some problems.
>I was doing perfectly fine just bashing Unix. And this is something I've
Bash all you like, but bashing isn't going to help users.
>said repeatedly but you seem to conveniently forget every time: I do NOT
>need to promote my own OS project! Just what the fuck is wrong with
>promoting EROS, Grasshopper, VSTa or Plan 9???
Nothing. But that's irrelevant, because you're not promoting them.
However, it's worth pointing out that (again!) users like compatiblity. You're
going to have a hard time pursuading users to switch to plan9 ior
"Grasshopper" ( whatever that is )
>
>If you're looking for a way to end this discussion then that's fine, I have
>better things to do. But
That's funny. You give the impression that you have nothing to do except
troll in advocacy groups. If you've got better things to do, don't let
me stop you ! Go and write a line of code, or if you don't know how to code
or aren't ready to, at least write down a design plan.
> *don't* twist the facts because that just pisses
>me off! I've been working on my project for years now, do you seriously
Wow ! sYears, huh ? And what have you produced ? After years, the best
you can do is troll advocacy groups ? What a dismal failure of a project.
After all these years, all you've produced is some cheap class warfare
rhetoric.
>think I give a shit about anyone's approval??
I hope not.
ypically, those who cannot come up with practicle, implemenetable
>> solutions are also not capable of implementing anything.
>>
>> I don;'t see how you're helping users by hyping some grand and pretentious
>> idea that's unlikely to even result in an OS that can so much as boot
>> ( let alone do anything useful )
>
>And you are of course including EROS, Grasshopper, VSTa and Plan 9 in
>that description, right?
I have heard hardly any "grasshopper" advocacy from you in this thread.
All I've heard is some cheap class warfare rhetoric and half-baked
"architecture" ideas from yet another kook.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 21:26:36 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, James Stutts
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sat, 23 Sep 2000 15:35:47 -0500
<8qj470$ccc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
>message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
><snip>
>
>>
>> The Win32 protocol is junk, though. :-) (Totally different issue.)
>
>It would be, if it was a protocol. It's an API. One you don't necessarily
>have to use on NT (depending on what you want your application to do).
Maybe not, but NT doesn't come with X out of the box, unlike
most Unices. :-) (X is available, but I'm not sure as freeware
anymore; Mi/X is now shareware, not freeware. Perhaps XFree86
is compilable on NT, but I haven't tried to lately. It might work.)
>
>JCS
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: filename extensions are NOT a kludge
Date: 23 Sep 2000 21:27:35 GMT
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 18:04:27 GMT, Richard wrote:
I've snipped the entire post because your foul language and silly ideas
are not worthy of the repitition quoting would grant them.
Begone, kook. Show us a working product or at least a design document.
And none of this drivel about how "it's all in your head". I hear
enough of that kind of thing from the weaker students in remedial
math classes as it is.
Once you show the discipline to produce more than expletives, insults, and
hot air, maybe you'll be worth listening to. But I'm afraid I've lost patience
for your drivel.
Good luck with your project.
<plonk>
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (C Lund)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Id Software developer prefers OS X to Linux, NT
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 23:54:59 +0100
In article <q76z5.14589$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad Myers"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> He made a statement that Win98 and Windows 2000 are essentially the
> same product and then, when we told him he was nuts, he wanted us to
> prove to him that, essentially, water was wet.
Nope. I wanted a few examples of the things that were different. Is that
so much to ask? One of you fellow Wintrolls even provided such a list.
That list gave me the impression that the differences between W2K and W98
is essentially "under the hood"; ie same sucky interface but things just
"work better" (in theory, anyway), and the ease with which he provided a
compact list demonstrated that "dc" was stalling because he doesn't really
know what the differences are and wouldn't admit it.
--
C Lund
http://www.notam.uio.no/~clund/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Space Shuttle uses Windows software almost exclusively
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 22:02:42 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, lyttlec
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 22 Sep 2000 20:34:03 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Peter Ammon wrote:
>>
>> Mike Byrns wrote:
>> >
>> > You mean Jeff Goldblume? The same Jeff Goldblume that has appeared in
>> > several Apple Computer television commercials? The one that's on the
>> > Apple payroll? Do you know that Apple pays big bucks in hollywood to
>> > get it's computers in "cool" movies like Independence Day?
>>
>> I don't believe you. Can you back this up?
>>
>> -Peter
>Get the "Killer Tomato" series movies. you gotta watch them all.
Including the cartoon series? :-)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- catchy tune, though
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: The Government's Decision to Use Microsoft
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 22:09:05 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, mark
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 22 Sep 2000 23:23:04 +0100
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Erik Funkenbusch
>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote
>>on Fri, 8 Sep 2000 02:06:41 -0500
>><Z_%t5.136$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>>> Wrong. In Linux, you can write a signal handler for any signal (other
>>>> than 9--SIGKILL), ***INCLUDING*** mathematic exceptions (which is what
>>>> is produced by a div_by_0 error.
>>>
>>>And with NT you can provide a Structured Exception Handler to handle any
>>>fault except NMI.
>>
>>Exactly. The failure lay in a poorly programmed application that failed,
>>not in the OS. The OS stayed up, but even the most rabid Linux Loony
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>My understanding was that it did not. That is an NT problem, since
>Linux does stay up in this situation, and doesn't require the programmer
>to write additional exeption handlers. This seems to be another hangover
>from the DOS days.
I think you might has misunderstood me; my understanding is that
the app died, but the OS stayed up. (However, without the app,
the computer unit wouldn't be able to control its part of the ship.)
I fail to see how Linux would be more intelligent in that situation,
although by default Linux doesn't kill things that divide by 0 (instead,
one gets a NaN, which is a fairly funny number), so maybe that was
the problem in a nutshell.
I'll have to try dividing by 0 on both operating systems the next
chance I get. :-)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random NaN here
------------------------------
** 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 (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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
******************************
