Linux-Advocacy Digest #411, Volume #31 Fri, 12 Jan 01 09:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Why does Win2k always fail in running time? ("Bagpuss")
Re: Dumping Novell for Linux (almost).. ("Bagpuss")
Re: The real truth about NT (Shane Phelps)
Re: KDE Hell (Donn Miller)
Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next? ("Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz")
Re: Kill all (Jure Sah)
Re: FTP in Unix mistake ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: kernel problems ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: you dumb. and lazy. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why does Win2k always fail in running time? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: I am trying Linux out for the first time. (Jacques Guy)
Re: kernel problems ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Bagpuss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why does Win2k always fail in running time?
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 10:27:37 -0000
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
>
> > "Matt Soltysiak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >
> > > Windows 2000 has failed me more times in 3 to 7 months than any other
> > > operating system I've used, including Windows NT server, for 4 years.
It's
> > > amazing.
> > > Here are some of the common failures:
> > Give me a break, do you really expect anyone to believe this bullshit?
> > If you're going to lie, at least make it halfway believeable.
>
> By pointing out some flaws in windows you have kicked over
> a hornets nest! These blue nosed, humorless windoze zealots
> are not to be taken lightly!
>
> jjs
>
Too right! I'm a newcomer to this group and the mentality amongst the
majority here is like a bunch of 12 year olds. It always appears to be a
case of "Well, this doesn't work in Win2k when I do this" and the reply is
always "You're a fscking idiot, it never happens to me so Win2k must be
excellent." Although the chances of the respondent having the same hardware
configuration and software configuration as the original poster are slim to
none.
There are also Linux fanatics that are convinced that Linux is the best
thing since sliced bread; how it never crashes and anyone who crashes it
must be a complete idiot.
Both groups are living in cloud cuckoo land. Every OS has it strong points
and its weaknesses. I might just have the situation in where I want to give
a toaster an OS (Linux), I might just have the situation where I want to
give an end luser an OS (Windows)
The world would be a boring place without variety.
Anyway, I don't know what the purpose of this post is because it will make
bugger all difference to most of you.
Oh, and just for the record I've had a stop error on Win2k Server from
minimizing an explorer window *and* I've had Linux lockup on me by just
starting X <shock horror>
I'm off to play with my BSD box...
--
Bagpuss
Your friendly cloth cat (donning flame retardant catsuit)
Take the rubbish out before replying
------------------------------
From: "Bagpuss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Dumping Novell for Linux (almost)..
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 10:39:48 -0000
"Joel Barnett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Thanks indeed for the post. Your smb.conf file looks like you are using
> Samba as a domain controller. I was under the impression that Samba can't
be
> a domain controller for my Windows 2000 clients.
>
> jbarntt
>
>
Oooohh, umm! I'm not too sure! That's something I'll need to look up
anyway - upgrading an office in the next few weeks. When I get something
I'll post it.
--
Bagpuss
Your friendly cloth cat
Linux user 192745
Take the rubbish out before replying
------------------------------
From: Shane Phelps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The real truth about NT
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 21:41:11 +1100
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>
> > Write once....and then it can't be used again.
> > Capacity ... less than 1G.
> >
> > 4mm DAT
> >
> > Write once....it's still good for several hundred RE-recordings
> > Capacity... 2G - 25G
>
> CD-R has two big advantages:
>
> (i) You can use it on any machine with a CDROM
> (ii) It has a random access file system
>
> Tapes generally aren't available across several machines, unless they've
> all got the same tape drive attached.
>
> --
> Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
There's tapes and then there's tapes.
AIT and DLT have very good seek times and hold *lots* of 1s and 0s.
Depending on which OS you're running, products like DistribuTape
allow remote tape devices served from a single box. Remote tape
servers tend to be slower and less reliable, however.
There are a number of ways of doing remote backups, some better
than others.
The main advantage of optical and MO media is that they have much
longer safe storage times than pure magnetic media.
The rule of thumb is tape for backups and optical for archive.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 06:04:47 -0500
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: KDE Hell
Craig Kelley wrote:
> 1) NT does NOT have a uK. Even the NT 3.51 developers wouldn't call
> it a uK, and it's just gotten bigger since then.
>
> 2) A uK doesn't mean high scalability. Look at SGI Origin systems.
> Look at MP-machines. There are several ways to achieve scalability,
> and beautiful architectures are generally *not* the way to do it.
["Aaron R. Kulkis"]:
> Yet, for some reason Lose Neutered Technology and Lose 2000 can't
> handle anything larger than 8-way SMP, whereas Linux handles
> 32-way SMP without difficulty.
Oh well! I guess I'll bow out of this whole discussion now. I just
assumed having a uK meant better scalability. Of course, I don't really
know too much about kernel architectures, so I'll just leave it at
that. But I will acknowledge that FreeBSD 4.x does not handle SMP as
well as Linux 2.4.0. Also, I've heard (so take this with a grain of
salt as well) that FreeBSD's threading isn't all "there" yet. I've also
seen some run-time problems with programs that use threads on FreeBSD.
But, I know that there have been some pretty nice work done in the SMP
area in FreeBSD-current, which is to become 5.0 in the future. 4.2
doesn't have any of these improvements back-ported to 4.2-stable yet,
AFAIK. I've heard that the SMP performance was much better in
5.0-CURRENT than in 4.2-STABLE. It'll be interesting to see what they
come up with.
I'll probably never be running FreeBSD on one of those hopped-up
multi-CPU CMP machines anyways, so I'll never know the difference. 8-)
At least FreeBSD is pretty decent in the stability area.
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.os.os2.networking.tcp-ip
From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Operating Systems? Where would you go next?
Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 22:35:08 -0500
In <93jhe8$ido$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 01/11/2001
at 12:47 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Brock) said:
>Admittedly I probably should have cut you a little slack here, but
>you *did* say "XEDIT macros", not "XEDIT prefix macros".
There's a big difference between "doesn't run XEDIT macros", which I
said, and "doesn't run any XEDIT macros", which I did not say.
>The only missing functionality that has been pointed out to me so
>far is prefix macros and four SET options.
Because for me those were the show stoppers. But if you go to the
Mansfiled site you will find otthers.
>You really made it sound like
>the two were *quite* different,
No, I made it sound like KEDIT is missing major pieces, which it is.
For it to be a clone it would have to include all of the
functionality.
--
===========================================================
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
Atid/2
Team OS/2
Team PL/I
Any unsolicited commercial junk E-mail will be subject to legal
action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any
abusive E-mail.
I mangled my E-mail address to foil automated spammers; reply to
domain acm dot org user shmuel to contact me. Do not reply to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
From: Jure Sah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.linux.sux,alt.linux.sucks,alt.linux.slakware
Subject: Re: Kill all
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 12:13:52 +0100
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> Jure Sah wrote:
> > Alright, I had enough of all of this, I'm making an 'OS' of my own! It's
> > a plug to anything that can handle DOS, but it takes 100% control over
> > the system.
> >
> > I'll write when it is finished.
>
> Too much PCP in your coffee this morning?
I don't drink coffee. =]
Keep sucking!
--
Don't feel bad about asking/telling me anything, I will always gladly
reply.
For those interested in a theory of how to make AI:
HTTP://WWW.GeoCities.COM/GTSC4/mind2.html (updated: 01.02.01)
4E6F746369656420746865204845582D41534349493F
GTSC4 -- If nobody else wants to do it, why shouldn't we?(TM)
HTTP://WWW.GeoCities.COM/GTSC4/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: FTP in Unix mistake
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 11:46:30 GMT
I managed to solve the problem a couple of days ago. I would still
like to have your solution to compare notes. My technique went
something like:
a. Copied /usr/bin/cal to /tmp/foobar
b. Used a short C program to count the no. of occurances of 0a
c. Transferred foobar to the win95 system through ftp-ascii mode
d. Noted that the byte size increased by exactly the value noted in (b)
e. Transferred foobar to the Unix system through ftp-binary mode
f. Used another short program to replace all occurances of 0d0a with 0a
g. Did a chmod to make foobar executable and got the "cal" output !
h. Tried out the same with the 230MB+ database dump. It worked!!
Thanks for responding to my problem.
Regards
Ramakrishnan
In article <92qnfr$dlh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi ckmaru,
>
> There may be a solution to this problem. I tried
> to send you e-mail, but it bounced. Please write
> me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] (and include a mail
> address where you can be reached).
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Mark
>
> In article <92jckp$aoi$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > We have (had !) a production application running
> > under SCO Unix System
> > ...
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: kernel problems
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 12:05:18 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I have lot's of time, lot's of time. Being self employed has many
> advantages over reporting to a cubicle everyday and watching the CEO
> (who has a contract BTW do you?)get rich and fat, and the slaves lose
> their benefits one at a time.
In other words you're unemployed. Failed your MSCE exam I
presume. You then thought you would get into Linux and
become a Unix system administrator. However, as you have
stated so clearly yourself, you cannot get any Linux
distribution to work properly (and it seems you have
tried them all). So you now have a grudge and all this
spare time to troll away on cola. I presume your PC came
preinstalled. Be careful with it (ie don't install any
other SW on it) and it might run for 6 months. Of course
you could spend this spare time learning a trade. Brick
laying sounds about right.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: you dumb. and lazy.
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 12:44:35 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <JQr76.42326$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Kyle Jacobs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The point is that out OF THE BOX this distro suffers from Linux's DLL hell.
> Which you seem to miss as the BIG PICTURE (because your so obsessed with
> minutia it's pathetic.)
>
> I shouldn't HAVE TO edit the sources lists manually, the distro should come
> pre-set with the needed options, and I shouldn't have to dick around in the
> sources list editing the sources, PERIOD.
It comes pre-set like that as all their packages are on the cdrom set
and it has set sources.list to the cdrom. Makes perfect sense as they
are not assuming that the installer is connected to the Internet. It
does come with manuals telling what to do. Why don't you learn to
read? Again you are just creating FUD. If you don't like Linux or
can't manage to install it properly why are you wasting your time
on a Linux advocacy newsgroup? You just piss people off with your
ignorant remarks. Play with your toy Microsoft OS's and leave us
alone.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Why does Win2k always fail in running time?
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 12:32:40 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <93ioa4$cp9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Bobby D. Bryant wrote:
>
>> Conrad Rutherford wrote:
>>
>> > ALL of the things you mention, if
>> > they were true, are such big show stoppers that the millions of poeple
>> > runing W2K
>>
>> Just curious... how many people *are* running W2K, as far as anyone can
>> tell?
>
> About half of those that Gartner predicted last year. If i recall correct
> they said 20% - the real number is max 10 % .
And with Microsoft getting rid of the guy in charge of
W2K marketing and that they won't say how W2K sales are
going it looks really bad. Whoever is buying their shares
at the moment would be well advised to dump them before
their next quarter figures are published.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 12:22:14 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I am trying Linux out for the first time.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Caldera is a good choice. Mandrake 7.2 is another good choice, but
> don't get your hopes up. Linux running a gui is still quite crude
> compared to Windows.
Yeh, Tymm, thae bowthe suqq beeeeg tyme. Lyssen, Tymb, ole qoq,
fiks thatt spellyngue czechr awf yores, wyllyuh? Eye downt
reck-ugg-nieze thee ole Timm uv yore. *Smooooooooooooch* Timb!
Post-scriptum. Hey, folks there was ONE (count 'em , ONE) word
NOT misspelt there. Can you tell which one. The grand prize
is *four* aspirin tablets!
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: kernel problems
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 12:56:08 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:edom39.08b.ln@gd2zzx...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > I have lot's of time, lot's of time. Being self employed has many
> > advantages over reporting to a cubicle everyday and watching the CEO
> > (who has a contract BTW do you?)get rich and fat, and the slaves lose
> > their benefits one at a time.
>
> In other words you're unemployed. Failed your MSCE exam I
> presume. You then thought you would get into Linux and
> become a Unix system administrator. However, as you have
> stated so clearly yourself, you cannot get any Linux
> distribution to work properly (and it seems you have
> tried them all). So you now have a grudge and all this
> spare time to troll away on cola. I presume your PC came
> preinstalled. Be careful with it (ie don't install any
> other SW on it) and it might run for 6 months. Of course
> you could spend this spare time learning a trade. Brick
> laying sounds about right.
Actually, brick laying can be damned complicated.
Microsoft help desk worker would be suitable.
All you need to do is say "Reboot the machine"
PS: There ARE a few good tech support people over there who know their heads
from their asses. Emphasis on the word few, though.
--
Tom Wilson
Sunbelt Software Solutions
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 13:18:17 GMT
Said http in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 10 Jan 2001 00:03:46 +0000;
>On 9 Jan 2001 01:24:44 GMT, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ([EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)) wrote:
>
>>In comp.os.linux.advocacy * <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>>>> * wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > "." wrote:
>
>>>> Now just hold on here a minute!!!! How do we know that
>>>> "*" isn't really "." in disguise!!!???
>
>>> c'mon, " . " is just a little speck..
>>>
>>> i'm a wildcard! ;)
>
>>Yes, but I am your current working directory.
>
>And I'm a picture of Ray Gordon.
I am a small replica of an Easter Island head, with the tip of the nose
and part of one eyebrow broken off in an unknown accident in the distant
past. That, or a plastic potted plant.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 13:18:20 GMT
Said Kyle Jacobs in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 07 Jan 2001 07:19:09
>"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[...]
>> Edit /etc/inetd.conf. Any retard can do it.
>
>No, they can't. What's more, they don't HAVE TO anymore. There are more
>human level interfaces to perform this task, under OTHER OS'S. Linux just
>doesn't seem to want to get the concept of a human capible USER INTERFACE.
I'm afraid you're quite mistaken. Yes, they can; all of them, we
assume, know how to read text, type, and press the appropriate keys to
save the file. Its not brain surgery. As for there being "human level
interfaces to perform this task", I can't for the life of me think of
what you are referring to, as no such facility exists at all in Windows.
>> But then again, youd know that if youd actually read any documentation.
>
>Oh yes, because those drunken ravings called "howto's" are just so complete,
>and comprehensive...
So whining about having to learn how to do something is now (still) the
entirety of the Softhead's argument? What you need, to make you a
really respectable sock puppet, is some good FUD and a couple "this
doesn't happen in W2K". You should attend more meetings; they give them
out in PowerPoint slides.
>> You know, ive been looking in the mandrake group(S) for all of your
>> claims, and they are simply not there. I suspect that you havent even
>> installed the operating system, but have compiled all of your posts
>> from complaints by other retards.
>
>Fine, let's say that HE IS taking posts from other users. The problems
>still exist.
It is difficult, I know, for many on this group to determine if you are
another Steve/Clair alias, or just another sock puppet. I think its the
latter, but it really doesn't make much difference.
>THESE ARE PROBLEMS WITH LINUX and just because one person
>decides to bring them up, you call them a liar because they didn't have the
>exact same experence you did with Linux.
If they say they had the experience, indeed, they would be a liar.
Observing that is not quite the same as denying the problem, as you seem
to suggest.
>> Theres more documentation on the web. If you cant get samba printing
>> working, you are a complete idiot.
>
>I think I've seen better "documentation" written on the back of a CS
>student's hand. These people just can't write about their own damn
>products.
Sounds like a large market opportunity, once the illegal monopoly quits
bleeding the industry dry.
>> > Along with all of the others on the net that can't get it to work. How
>> > come there are so many sites devoted to making it work? I don't see
>> > sites like that for Windows......
>>
>> Really? Then you havent been looking.
>
>He's refering to the sheer numbers of redundant complaints about the same
>topics on NG's in reguard to SAMBA. Windows gives a USER INTERFACE to
>configuring this, Linux gives a machine interface. Guess which one is more
>logical under the user model. Hmm, possibly the one to provide a HUMAN
>interface?
I'm sorry, it doesn't matter if it is a point-clicky thing, or a text
file, they're all human/machine interfaces. Now, there are bright
humans, and there are humans who expect a general purpose microcomputer
to perform similarly to a television set. But that's a different
matter, really.
>> > The net is full of outdated Lino-trash...How does one separate the
>> > garbage from the treasure?
>>
>> With a brain. You are out of luck.
>
>Really? Linux.com is exclaimed as an excelent site with Linux and open
>source information, and I find propaganda and truely useless "testomonial"
>excaliming the "prefection" of Linux.
Could you possibly cite some quotes attesting to Linux's "perfection"?
Perhaps you merely took something out of context.
>Only recently did I find something
>even ADMITTING to the problems facing Linux on the desktop. So, I
>reiterate, how does one filter the trash? Is there a special code filter we
>should all know about?
I would concur with yttrx; with a brain, leaving you "out of luck".
>> You apparantly did SOMETHING wrong, since you couldnt get it to work.
>
>Ah, the old "YOU Did something wrong..." Ever get the feeling that there is
>something wrong with the system? There IS a limit to the amount of "user
>error" that can occour. Oh wait, "Linux is perfect", I forgot... Sorry,
>I'M HUMAN.
No problem; I don't think anyone holds it against you. The thing is,
you might not be perfect, but you can learn, in theory, anyway. Sure,
its possible there's something wrong with the system; bugs happen.
Nobody denies it; not even Microsoft can quite get away with that cheek,
though they do insist on calling them 'issues' to obfuscate the fact
that they are clueless where the bugs might be.
>> It does.
>
>No, it doesn't. RPMDrake is riddeled with defects. STILL. Even after that
>UI changeover (from the KPACKAGE Clone look) it sill doesn't function
>properly tracking dependencies. Also Mandrake's revision numbering system
>doesn't help RedHat native or RPM generic packages.
All potentially worthwhile issues to address. Please feel free to
contact RedHat or Mandrake, and bring them up.
>> I understand. You are a complete idiot, and you are beginning to suspect
>> it. You feel cheated and awful because you dont have a brain, and you
>> cant deal with the fact that a number of people around you understand
>> things that you cant begin to comprehend.
>
>And you simply can't deal with the fact that Linux is imperfect.
Au contraire; we can, and are, dealing with it perfectly fine. Just
because every potential bug that some clueless and unidentified droid
putatively posted somewhere, and was echoed by the intellectually
challenged Clair/Steve/Flatfish, blows circuits all over your stack
doesn't mean that *we* have problems dealing with the fact that Linux
isn't perfect.
>Rather
>than see where blame truly IS due, you use the user as a scapegoat,
>insisting they are stupid, or incompetent, or unqualified. Or how about
>just "unworthy" of your painfully idiotic "Linux bliss".
Yea, well, whatever.
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 13:18:21 GMT
Said Kyle Jacobs in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 07 Jan 2001 07:28:34
>Microsoft Windows 98 (First Edition) and ACPI "restore status" is a known
>issue with Windows 98 and ACPI systems.
>
>Microsoft has NOT confirmed this to be a problem under Windows Millenium
>Edition, or Windows 2000.
Who cares? I would wonder if any of Microsoft's *customers* have
confirmed this to be a problem; you seem to assume Microsoft works
perfectly until proven otherwise. Luckily, the market is not required
to weigh rules of evidence; we will assume the bug remains in W2K until
we know otherwise, for a fact.
>Windows 2000 has signifigantly more isolated ACPI code to prevent ACPI
>"malfunctions" from causing boot level problems to your day-to-day routine.
>
>You may wish to upgrade your OS to Microsoft Windows 2000. A costly
>upgrade. Windows Me is cheaper, but the Win32 core may still retain the
>ACPI bugs.
You may also wish to engage in a game of russian roulette, solo. Or,
you could replace the monopoly crapware with the emerging de facto
standard: Linux.
>IBM May also have a more ACPI compliant BIOS available for your lappy.
>
>Or, you can install Linux on this machine, and bypass your ACPI problems
>alltogather. No ACPI support, No problem!
Indeed, this would be my preferred solution.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2001 13:18:24 GMT
Said Kyle Jacobs in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 10 Jan 2001 04:13:42
>Ok, this certifies you have never had to work with REAL people during your
>tenor as an administrator.
>
>Says a lot about why you use Linux then.
>
>Those of us who deal with real people, people who aren't as FORTUNATE as I
>am to know what I know about computing, know why Linux is totally
>unfeasible.
Was that you? I thought it was flatfish that was having this
discussion. Or was it Claire; I get them confused so easily. Either
way, its worth noting that your sentence above is internally conflicted
about whether you "deal with real people" or are "fortunate as [you] are
to know what [you] know."
No, REAL people only bought Microchannel systems if they were idiots or
stuck inside of True Blue shops. I don't see what this has to do with
Linux. Other than to highlight that open, standards-based technology
generally beats proprietary crapware, but I think that's the opposite of
what you were thinking.
>"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:93fuvi$90s$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> > On 9 Jan 2001 17:25:04 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>>
>>
>> >>I see that guy is writing your posts again. Or at least, hes copying
>> >>directly from an old spec sheet.
>> >>
>> >>Which is more than youre capable of doing, claire. Nice one.
>>
>>
>> > You just have a difficult time accepting that most people have a far
>> > better understanding of computer history than you have, mostly because
>> > they have lived through it and you are in all likely hood some pimple
>> > faced, kid wannabe who never had the opportunity to be a part of
>> > history. Like the PS/2 model 80/85, which is a piece of history in and
>> > of itself.
>>
>> Ah, whats your name, little boy? Does your mommy know youre posting for
>> her again?
>>
>> > Would you like me to tell you about the model 70?
>> > Or how about the model 25?
>>
>> > What made the model 25 different than the others?
>>
>>
>> > What do you need to get into Advcanced Diagnostic mode on a PS/2 and
>> > why did it upset many people?
>>
>> Claire, I didnt have a "home computer" until my first commodore, which
>> was in 1986. The only IBM's ive ever touched start with the AS/400 and
>> go up from there.
>>
>> Ive never been a 'computer repair person'. I started out (I dont count
>> playing around with a home computer "starting out") as the administrator
>> of a small network of graphics workstations in my first year of college.
>> (1987). I continued in and out of the field for many years.
>>
>> My home computer history does not include an IBM machine of any kind.
>>
>> However, it does include 5 amigas, 2 c/64s, 1 c/128, 1 c/pet (freebie,
>> who could blame me), 1 mac classic, 1 mac plus, 1 PM7200/75, 1 PM
>7200/120,
>> 1PM 7500/100, 1 amiga 2000, 1 486dx/66, 1 ppro 200 system, and my most
>> current:
>>
>> PIII 666 w/384 megs ram, gforce2, sblive, UDMA/66, 80gigs hd space,
>> nice abit mboard, 21" trinitron and some really shitty speakers that
>> ill be replacing with jbl monitors and suitable pre/amplification next
>> week.
>>
>> > Go ahead idiot...I'm waiting?
>>
>> > If you have all of this experience you say you do you will be able to
>> > easily answer those questions without scouting the net for the
>> > answers,
>>
>> Thats not true at all. Thats like saying that if you dont know anything
>> about the way edsels were built, you couldnt possibly know anything about
>> the way the space shuttle is built. Your logic is flawed, and you are an
>> idiot.
>>
>> > but that is what you will do anyway because you don't have a
>> > clue.
>>
>> Actually, I dont do that claire, thats something that YOU do. You're
>> getting us confused. I dont cheat at challenges, and I indeed know
>> almost nothing about the Ps/2 series, as I was never dumb enough to
>> buy one.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----.
>>
>
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
