Linux-Advocacy Digest #227, Volume #30 Tue, 14 Nov 00 05:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum ("Les Mikesell")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Ketil Z Malde)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays. (Stefan Ohlsson)
Re: Most important computer program in the history of humanity ("Tom Wilson")
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Disapointed in the election ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Linux + KDE2 = 8) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Goldhammer)
Re: Linux + KDE2 = 8) (Pete Goodwin)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Pascal Haakmat)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Tuesday 14 November 2000: Elliott Spitzer, Attorney General of New York, Martin
Garbus, Defender of the People, and Jules Polonetsky of DoubleClick on the several
massive intertwined plots against your privacy and property ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: We will never know what the MS intruder did (Ketil Z Malde)
Re: Side by side (Stuart Fox)
Re: The Sixth Sense ("David Brown")
Re: We will never know what the MS intruder did (Ketil Z Malde)
Re: Lets try serious advocacy/discussion. (Ketil Z Malde)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? (Jacques Guy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:10:13 GMT
"Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:xP5Q5.126446$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > > On the other hand, Oracle on NT has advantages:
> >
> > But none of the things you listed were NT specific.
>
> Don't be so blatantly dishonest.
Beg your pardon?
> "some other platforms" have 2GB or 4GB file limitations.
>
> Linux and Unix would be examples.
(A) even if this were true, you mean some versions
of Linux (x86, pre-2.4) and even fewer versions of
Unix, perhaps none of the current versions.
(B) did you miss the earlier post by someone who
is running a large Oracle database on Linux?
> NT does NOT have a 2GB or 4GB file size limitation.
>
And this doesn't matter to Oracle.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
From: Ketil Z Malde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:11:00 GMT
"Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And yet, when you check the security pages for Linux, it seems almost every
> exploit is a buffer overlow one.
Yes. But before you kick back in comfort over Window's security
superiority, I suggest you try to compile any non-trivial MFC program
with a tool like Insure++ or Purify.
I get something like 50 messages about uninitialized memory,
out-of-bound indices and similar error, all from deep in MFC and
Win32, just by starting my application.
It is a feature of using primitive tools like C and C++ for high level
applications, and it impacts, unfortunately, all popular systems.
> Because of the number of exploits I must assume that security is way down
> the list of projects that Linux programmers consider interesting.
True. But it is high on the list for many distributions, if security
is very important, get Trustix or Bastille or some other
security-focused distro. I like Debian myself, which IMHO is
reasonably conservative. Red Hat seems more focused on new features,
which may be what you want, but makes me a bit uneasy for production
equipment.
Or you could use OpenBSD, who take security very seriously, and audits
code intensively.
-kzm
--
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 02:31:59 -0600
"Ketil Z Malde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Yes. But before you kick back in comfort over Window's security
> superiority, I suggest you try to compile any non-trivial MFC program
> with a tool like Insure++ or Purify.
>
> I get something like 50 messages about uninitialized memory,
> out-of-bound indices and similar error, all from deep in MFC and
> Win32, just by starting my application.
>
> It is a feature of using primitive tools like C and C++ for high level
> applications, and it impacts, unfortunately, all popular systems.
Interesting. Since the MFC code is not instrumented, there is no way that
Purify or Insure++ could tell that an array index is out of bounds "deep in
the MFC" code. It can only instrument your code, and array bound checking
is something that can only be achieved through instrumentation in those
tools.
Also, the uninitialized reads are also possibly false positives. Here's a
good technical note on how this can happen:
http://www.numega.com/support/knowledgebase/docs/717.stm
"If BoundsChecker displays the error 'Reading uninitialized memory'
and you have determined that there is no error, the problem may be
caused by the fill value used by BoundsChecker to detect the error. "
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefan Ohlsson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 2.4 Kernel Delays.
Reply-To: Stefan Ohlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 14 Nov 2000 09:31:39 +0100
Bruce Schuck wrote:
>The next version of Windows will be out in 2001. It will merge the best of
>Win2K and the best consumer aspects of Windows Me. And programmers from both
>versions are working on it.
>
>On the other hand, the next version of Linux (after the long delayed 2.4 is
>finally released sometime in the next 6 months) is 3 or 4 years away. And
>will be written by who knows. (I'm assuming it will be the Linux programmers
>who can't get a full-time job).
>
Now compare the Windows release times to Red Hat, Debian, SuSE,
Mandrake, etc combined. Those are the real OS:es, Linux is just the
kernel - a very small part of an OS. Very important, but small.
/Stefan
--
[ Stefan Ohlsson ] · There will always be survivors - Robert A Heinlein · []
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Most important computer program in the history of humanity
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:38:13 GMT
"Moderator" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> mmnnoo wrote:
> >
> > A Microsoft exec dubs Windows 2000
> > "the most important computer program in the history of humanity"
> > (http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/nov2000/nf20001113_046.htm)
> >
> > Although this strikes me as ridiculous and somewhat offensive, I can't
> > think of any other computer programs that really deserve the title,
either.
>
> I remember before Win2000 came out, they dubbed Windows 2000 one of the
> greatest works in the history of mankind, and compared it to the
> pyramids of Egypt and some other things. No joke.
A stupendously large object with a questionable purpose....
Sounds accurate!
(Couldn't resist)
--
Tom Wilson
Registered Linux User #194021
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:38:17 GMT
"Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > IE now run on three OS that I know of. Win*, Mac, Solaris.
> > >
> > > Now that is funny. Have you ever tried running IE on Solaris?
> > > It was so slow and bloated that it was unusable. Also, if I
> > > remember correctly it only ran on a specific version of Solaris
> > > (2.6 I think). Now how many applications do you know that only
> > > work on specific versions of Solaris? Seems like Microsoft
> > > can't write portable code for a specific OS. That must be why
> > > you often need to upgrade your applications when you install
> > > a new version of Windows. :-)
> >
> > That's what happens when your entire company is based on
> > code written by those with no more than a highschool education.
>
> In Europe there's a common notion that US high school do not provide
> much of an education, but I never could believe it so true, until your
> remark!
The notion is indeed accurate, I graduated with people who still couldn't
read or write above a grade school level. There's an upside to the story
though - Plenty of people around to keep the pizzas delivered and the lawn
mowed.
--
Tom Wilson
Registered Linux User #194021
Also...
NT 4.0 User
Win 95/98 User
They're operating systems...Not religions
GET A LIFE!
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Disapointed in the election
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:38:16 GMT
"Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:TBKP5.248030$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:fQaP5.22$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 09:39:19 GMT, Tom Wilson wrote:
> > > >
> > > >The media keeping their damned mouths shut until the results are
truly
> in
> > > >would also be an improvement.
> > >
> > > I don't quite agree. The media's job is to report events, not to
cover
> them
> > > up. OTOH, they jumped the gun wrt making predictions, twice (once when
> they
> > > called Florida, and once when they declared Bush the winner).
> >
> > Precisely!
> >
> > Their job IS to report events. It isn't to predict, speculate and
> otherwise obsfucate the
> > issues. I'm all for freedom of the press. Please don't get me wrong.
It's
> just that
> > a certain responsibility comes with that freedom. Making a blanket
> declaration about
> > something so important as a Presidential election BEFORE the ballots are
> completely
> > tabulated, borders on gross negligence.
>
> Let's see: "Gore concedes!" is news, as is "Gore unconcedes!" But I
suspect
> that few things in journalism are as bad as "Gore unconcedes! But it would
> be irresponsible and negligent of us to tell you why!"
>
No, of course the above examples are valid....
The irresponsibility was in calling the damned election before the votes
were counted.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:38:46 GMT
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:xZTP5.7894$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:RIOP5.422$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > That is because notepad can't handle multiply files.
> >
> > I hate that!. My solution, and I know it only appeals to a few, was to
> grab
> > the source off the MSDN CD, convert it to an MDI application wrapped
> around
> > CRichEditCtrl, and voila! In a couple of hours, I had a program
identical
> to
> > Notepad that handles multiple text files >64k in length.
>
> Notepad handles files of any size in NT.
I know. I was using 95 at the time. Besides, the issue is being able to load
multiple files.
>
> The Rich Edit control becomes pretty much unuseable after about 1-2 meg of
> data.
I've edited 1.5 meg rather handily with it. Your available RAM makes a big
difference.
>
> > I wonder why MS continued to build notepad around the Win16 Edit Control
> in
> > and beyond Win95?
>
> Because that's what Notepad is. A wrapper around the Edit Control.
My point is they needed to re-wrap it around CRichEdit. I know that role was
taken by WordPad. However, by simply setting m_bRTF to false, it make a
damned good ASCII editing class.
--
Tom Wilson
Registered Linux User #194021
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux + KDE2 = 8)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:28:38 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
bobh{at}haucks{dot}org wrote:
> It should remove them. The Kppp in KDE 1 does. Could be a bug in
Kppp (I
> don't have KDE 2 on the laptop that has a modem), or maybe they are
> staying in /etc/resolv.conf because you put them there when you
installed
> the system. Have you tried simply removing them with an editor and
then
> starting/stopping Kppp?
Yes, I tried that. It seems that Kppp adds the ISP entries, and so does
ppp (at least that's what the comment says). When I shut down Kppp, it's
entries go, but the ppp ones remain.
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Goldhammer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:25:06 GMT
In article <xP5Q5.126446$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I quoted:
>
> "Internally, all Oracle8i file I/O routines support 64-bit file
> offsets, meaning that there are no 2GB or 4GB file size limitations
> when it comes to data, log, or control files as is the case on some
> other platforms."
>
> "some other platforms" have 2GB or 4GB file limitations.
>
> Linux and Unix would be examples.
>
> NT does NOT have a 2GB or 4GB file size limitation.
Whether or not you can use >2Gb or >4Gb Oracle
datafiles on NT depends on:
1. Your version of NT
2. Your service packs
3. Your version of Oracle
4. The DBA policy at your site. Some sites implement
a policy of outright banning the usage of such large
files.
In any case, don't think life is going to be
so rosy for a DBA who plans on designing a database
around a tablespace with one massive 32Gb Oracle datafile.
In many cases, it's quite possibly the dumbest
design decision one can make.
http://www.deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=519987858
http://in.egroups.com/message/itpoct98/685
http://help.netscape.com/kb/corporate/19990108-5.html
--
Don't think you are. Know you are.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux + KDE2 = 8)
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:32:48 GMT
In article <9d5Q5.20473$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The windows way is the wrong way for more than a single machine.
Yet it works. On the machine with just a network card, I configured the
network via TCP/IP properties in the network applet.
On the machine that is dual bootable, I configured the two networks via
the TCP/IP properties in the network applet for the network card, and
through Dial Up networking per ISP.
In both cases, the hosts file is identical.
In the Linux case I tried to do the same. I setup the network card as
the local network, and the ISP in Kppp.
Now I find the ISP DNS is being left in /etc/resolv.conf.
Please tell me why Windows is doing the wrong thing? It looks to me like
its doing the _right_ thing in this case.
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pascal Haakmat)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: 14 Nov 2000 08:46:58 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Les Mikesell wrote:
>> >Les Mikesell wrote...
>> >> Every mailer that lets the attachment content execute it's choice of
>> >> interpreter whether it is a program known to be safe or not is broken.
>> >> That just happens to be the kind that Microsoft wrote.
>> >
>> >But how can that happen? Outlook opens the file using the default
>> >associated application as defined by the user of the system. The file
>> >cannot determine what opens it. That's ridiculous.
>>
>> Just FYI, to some extent that is exactly how it works on the Mac.
>
>Do the common Mac mailers execute the contents of anything
>you receive that way when you open an attachment?
Although I am not sure (I have never tried), I think it is possible to send
an application program or an AppleScript executable to somebody and have the
receipient execute it by double-clicking.
In any case, whether this is possible or not, an executable attachment will
always have an icon that identifies it as such. You cannot confuse the
system by using multiple extensions such as in Outlook, which I think is the
real issue.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 03:00:39 -0600
"Pascal Haakmat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8uqu62$2q2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >Do the common Mac mailers execute the contents of anything
> >you receive that way when you open an attachment?
>
> Although I am not sure (I have never tried), I think it is possible to
send
> an application program or an AppleScript executable to somebody and have
the
> receipient execute it by double-clicking.
>
> In any case, whether this is possible or not, an executable attachment
will
> always have an icon that identifies it as such. You cannot confuse the
> system by using multiple extensions such as in Outlook, which I think is
the
> real issue.
Outlook wasn't confused. It displayed the correct icon. It's just that the
name was "file.txt
.vbs", and outlook truncated the filename after so many characters.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Tuesday 14 November 2000: Elliott Spitzer, Attorney General of New York,
Martin Garbus, Defender of the People, and Jules Polonetsky of DoubleClick on the
several massive intertwined plots against your privacy and property
Date: 14 Nov 2000 04:16:38 -0500
This meeting is important to attend because the battle is heating up and we
want Elliott Spitzer and Jules Polonetsky to know who we are and how we
feel. Martin Garbus has already told them a hundred times, but repetition
helps get the point across.
The official notice below comes from
http://www.law.nyu.edu/engelbergcenter/publiclecture00.html
New York University Law School lies just south of Washington Square Park.
Subway stops close to the Law School:
Astor Place and Bleecker Street stops of the Lexington Avenue Line
Broadway-Lafayette stop of the B,D, and F lines
West 4th Street stop of the A, B, C, D, E, and F lines
Christopher Street-Sheridan Square stop of the 1 line
Jay Sulzberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Corresponding Secretary LXNY
LXNY is New York's Free Computing Organization.
http://www.lxny.org
Engelberg Center of Innovation Law & Policy
A Worldwide Resource for Practical Information on Intellectual
Property Laws
PUBLIC LECTURE
The Gottlieb, Rackman & Reisman Seminar in Intellectual Property:
Caught in the Web: Privacy Concerns and the Internet
Wednesday, November 14, 2000
5:30-7:30 PM, NYU School of Law
Speakers:
Martin S. Garbus, Frankfurt, Garbus, Klein & Selz, P.C.; Jules
Polonetsky, Chief Privacy Officer, DoubleClick Inc.; Elliott Spitzer,
Attorney General, New York State
Moderator:
Rochelle Dreyfuss, Director, The Engelberg Center on Innovation Law
and Policy, Professor of Law, NYU School of Law
If you would like to attend, please contact Nicole Fenchel, by
telephone, 998-6013, or by email, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________________________
../Library/Engelberg%20Center
../Library/How%20to%20Contact%20Us
[INLINE]
../Library/Index%20of%20Links ../Library/Site%20Map [LINK]
../Library/NYU%20Law ../Library/NYU%20Homepage [INLINE]
Copyright © New York University School of Law. All rights
reserved.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: We will never know what the MS intruder did
From: Ketil Z Malde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 09:19:28 GMT
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> The point is that we only know about security issues from Microsoft as
>> and when they feel like telling - i.e. after a fix is available. You
>> have third party sources, but the other point (which you label "yadda
>> yadda") is that it is very hard for third parties to identify bugs
>> without access to source.
> This is a false presumption.
What is? That it's harder for third parties to identify bugs with
closed source? You actually think using a disassembler is as easy as
reading C?
> People are finding bugs at a rate almost as frequent as Linux,
> although it's waning now in the past few months.
Well, one conclusion could be that there are "almost as many" bugs in
NT as in Linux, another could be that there are many more bugs in NT,
but that they are harder to find.
>>> Not really. In fact, just the contrary, it was you guys who were comparing
>>> ALL of MS products to Linux.
>> Uh? "Linux" is just the kernel, I'm not aware of any current security
>> issues with it. I'm not aware of ever claiming it's fair to compare
>> an OS kernel with a full system - even if MS thinks a web browser is
>> an "integral part" of an OS.
> Ah yes, the old "Linux is just a kernel" copout. I'm sick of you guys
> changing the goal line when it suits your purposes.
What?! Who's changing the goal line?
I'm just wondering what you mean when you say we're comparing "ALL of
MS products to Linux". It would of course be a blatant
misrepresentation if somebody were to compare the kernel with a full
MS installation - but I don't see anybody doing that. Perhaps you can
cite a Message-ID?
But comparing e.g. Red Hat or Debian with NT plus applications would
be fair - or even favoring NT. Popular Linux distributions ship with
thousands of third party applications, including commercial ones, and
the bug reports you're so fond of citing, includes those.
Why don't you specify what you mean when you write "Linux" (the
kernel, the base system of kernel, utilities and libraries, some
particular distribution, all distributions taken as a whole), and
point to where somebody has done an unfair comparison, and why you
think it is unfair?
-kzm
--
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
------------------------------
From: Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Side by side
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 09:07:15 GMT
In article <8upmbo$i5p$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <8up5nt$2mi$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In article <8umgpt$1jr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > let's do some industry by industry comparisons:
> > >
> > > And if you want to say it's because of scheduled maintenance,
please
> > > explain how barns and noble is scheduled maintenance!
> > >
> >
> > I'm still puzzled as to how you can get reliable uptime statistics
out
> > of a clustered set of servers - presumably a different server in a
> > cluster will report a different uptime?
> >
> > Uptime is a pretty unreliable measure - what is really needed is
> > a "consistent user availability measure" or something like that.
You
> > could have a perfect uptime, but if you've put your box into single
> > user mode at any time during that, your uptime figure is basically
> > meaningless.
>
> If you take enough samples you will get around to polling all of the
> servers. The up time is given by each server and you take an average.
> Read what the netcraft page has to say then---
> Think about it a little....
Which doesn't take account of operation procedures etc, and still
doesn't get around the fact that your website could have 100%
availability and yet have low uptimes...
>
> So why is it that the Linux/Unix clusters always seem to report better
> uptimes averages even though they would have the same cluster related
> issues???
Interesting question. Could be many things though, it's hard to
interpret data that has no other statistics with it.
>
> BTW, if linux and Unix were not posting better uptime averages,
you'all
> would not be trying so hard to discredit the numbers!
>
Not at all. The uptime statistics are meaningless for any OS without
more information.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 10:19:39 +0100
Chad Myers wrote in message ...
>
>Claims were made that somehow because NT isn't shipping, in a box,
>for PPC, that somehow NT doesn't support it or the technology isn't
>there.
>
>I think any intelligent person (yourself included) would reasonably
>conclude that NT certainly has the ABILITY and the TECHNOLOGY to
>run on those platforms, or most any other, it's just that MS doesn't
>have a financial incentive to do so.
>
>I was merely combating the unintelligent claims that somehow because
>MS isn't shipping them, that NT has lost this ability.
>
Fair enough - the NT3.51 kernel has the ability to support a small range of
CPUs. NT4.0 kernel only ever supported x86 and Alpha, IIRC, while the NT5.0
kernel (aka w2k) only supports x86. NT, as it is now, has lost the ability
to support non-x86 architectures. I have little doubt that NT5 could be
made to support these CPUs again if someone were willing to pay for it.
In short, NT *has* lost the ability to run on other platforms. It has the
technological basis to regain that ability, and there are older versions
that can run on other platforms, but the NT of today cannot.
>> There are older systems out there running NT on non-x86 platforms,
>> but for all practical purposes (such as setting up a new system),
>> NT is x86-only.
>
>But that doesn't mean that NT could only run on x86, wouldn't
>you agree?
>
Yes, but "could" does not mean "does". It is a great shame, and I am sure
the original NT designers are bitter about it. The aim with NT was very
much to make a cross-platform OS, both in its abilities to run on a wide
variety of CPUs and in its abilities to support a range of non-native APIs
(all we are left with is 16-bit text mode OS/2 and minimal posix support)
and to interact with any other computers, be they windows based or not.
>>
>> >
>> >NT has always had >2GB file support on every platform it's yet been
>> >ported to:
>> >
>> >IA32
>> >MIPS
>> >PPC
>> >ALPHA
>> >SPARC
>>
>> I did not know that MS ever got NT running on a SPARC.
>
>During internal tests. This is according to Dave Cutler who is most
>likely a trustworthy source.
I'll happily take your word for that.
>
>-Chad
>
>
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: We will never know what the MS intruder did
From: Ketil Z Malde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 09:23:51 GMT
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> When you're interested in being adult about this and debating on
> the merits of Linux as a whole (not the minute changes from one
> distro to the next) please come back. Until then, please direct
> all your posts to alt.child.psychology
Real nice. Use unclear and ambigous terms, and resort to name calling
when people point it out to you.
Taking "Linux as a whole" probably means sense to you, since then you
can count each bug once for each distribution, and I suppose that's
the only way for you to find numbers that make NT look almost decent -
if you carefully pick a month and extrapolate it that is (instead of
using perfectly available yearly statistics).
Come on, even NT isn't *that* bad.
-kzm
--
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Lets try serious advocacy/discussion.
From: Ketil Z Malde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 09:28:49 GMT
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Since you deleted all the references to the previous article
Well, you can look it up in References: I'll mail you a copy if you
like, it's the article where you spell out "cp -a", but are otherwise
quite helpful and explicit, if sounding a bit weary.
-kzm
--
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 09:30:18 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> Perhaps if you looked into things, you might find out what's wrong.
Dear Mr. Funkenbusch
I had booked this trip from Melbourne to Perth with the
local equivalent of Greyhound. A week before I was
due to depart, they replaced their fleet of Volvo and
Mercedes coaches with Trabants. I am now stuck in the
middle of the Nullarbor desert, and my water supply
is dwindling. What do you suggest? Which things should
I look into? The carburettor? The gearbox? The transmission?
The engine? Or should I just ask for my money back and
to be flown to my destination?
Thank you for your kind advice, and... long live
Bill Gates! Eia, eia, eia, alala! (This was for
Giuliano Colla).
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
