Linux-Advocacy Digest #512, Volume #34 Mon, 14 May 01 17:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" (Chronos Tachyon)
Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" (Chronos Tachyon)
Re: Linux in Retail & Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature" (Bob Hauck)
Re: Linux in college & high school (Karel Jansens)
Re: bank switches from using NT 4 (Karel Jansens)
Re: Linux in Retail & Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know (Neil Cerutti)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick)
Re: What does Linux need for the desktop? (Form@C)
Re: Oracle 8.1.6 on Solaris or Linux? (Bob Hauck)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (Chronos Tachyon)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux has one chance left......... (Pete Goodwin)
Re: What does Linux need for the desktop? (Chronos Tachyon)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Oracle 8.1.6 on Solaris or Linux? (.)
Re: Oracle 8.1.6 on Solaris or Linux? (.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Chronos Tachyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature"
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:11:58 GMT
On Sun 13 May 2001 09:10, T. Max Devlin wrote:
> Said Chronos Tachyon in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 12 May 2001
>>On Sat 12 May 2001 03:10, T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>
[Snip]
>>
>>For reasons I explained earlier in this thread, both radioactive decay and
>>thermal noise are both *truly* random according to Quantum Mechanics.
>
> Thermal noise would be, if it weren't so damned predictable, once you
> have characterized the noise generated by whatever components you're
> using. Change components, and the noise changes, but that makes the
> noise "arbitrary", not "random". Thermal noise averages out too much,
> just as things like "heat" and "sound" to in the macro-cosmic world.
> Sound certainly isn't random, is it? Yet nobody can predict the next
> sound that I make. Still, if you watch me over time, you will detect
> obvious patterns, not only in whether I make sounds, but in the sounds
> that I make.
>
> To be *truly* random, the results can *never* be predicted, no matter
> how long you observe. Only *direct* quantum effects, such as
> radioactive decay, are sufficient; thermal noise is close, but still
> merely a pseudo-random number generator. Far less predictable than a
> quasi-random generator, such as software-only solutions, but not
> mathematically random.
>
You are correct that the noise coming off PC components is mostly
predictable. The trick, however, is to find the places where the quantum
randomness has seeped in: for instance, use only the low-order bits of the
noise; or, better yet, take the HotBits approach: measure the time
between consecutive noise peaks, and define a 1 as the first gap being
shorter than the second and a 0 as the second gap being shorter than the
first -- reverse the relationship 50% of the time so you can reduce any
bias present in the noise's timing.
--
Chronos Tachyon
Guardian of Eristic Paraphernalia
Gatekeeper of the Region of Thud
[Reply instructions: My real domain is "echo <address> | cut -d. -f6,7"]
------------------------------
From: Chronos Tachyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature"
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:16:17 GMT
On Sun 13 May 2001 09:10, T. Max Devlin wrote:
> Said Chronos Tachyon in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 12 May 2001
>>On Sat 12 May 2001 05:30, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
[Snip]
>>The EPR paradox was essentially "solved" in the 1960's, when Bell's
>>Inequality was hypothesized as a way to prove the Copenhagen
>>Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (CI/QM, "spooky action at a distance")
>>or Einstein's local hidden variable theory (HV/QM). The results came out
>>strongly in favor of CI/QM, even after much peer review and many attempts
>>to repeat the experiment. There is still some minor debate about
>>methodology, mostly by eccentrics but occasionally by serious phyicists,
>>but the results are widely accepted as canon. Since all post-Bell
>>physics pretty much assumes that CI/QM is true, especially quantum
>>computing, the evidence is in fact very strong that HV/QM is incorrect.
>>Whenever you hear anyone talking about superposition or collapsing
>>quantum eigenstates, they are talking about CI/QM, which would be right
>>out the window with counting the angels dancing on a pinhead if HV/QM
>>were actually correct. The fact that we can discuss such things, propose
>>experiments, then get meaningful and correct results from them is strong
>>evidence indeed that CI/QM is, if not the final "truth", then at least a
>>special case.
>
> Thanks, Chronos. I understood this, without knowing it; I appreciate
> your explaining it so succinctly.
>
You're welcome. I'd actually done some fact-finding about QM on my own a
few weeks ago, since I hate being uninformed about anything.
--
Chronos Tachyon
Guardian of Eristic Paraphernalia
Gatekeeper of the Region of Thud
[Reply instructions: My real domain is "echo <address> | cut -d. -f6,7"]
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <Don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.retail.category.management,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux in Retail & Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 11:16:33 +0200
"Neil Cerutti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I.e., A faster growth rate for Linux will allow it to easily
> catch up and surpass Microsoft's market share, not matter how
> great Microsoft's lead.
Faster and *sustained* growth rate.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft "feature"
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:20:32 GMT
On 14 May 2001 15:05:08 GMT, Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 May 2001 14:48:20 GMT, Bob Hauck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Mon, 14 May 2001 02:10:54 GMT, T. Max Devlin
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> So 2+2=7 IF what?
>
> 2+2=7 *if* 7=4. Of course 7=4 is pretty hard to achieve, but as soon
> as we, say, redefine "+" as an operation in a set different than the
> integers, such a thing may happen.
Are you trying to cause Max's brain to short out or something?
> His position is even more bizarre, if we consider a very simple algorithm,
> used by everyone, that contains a (ok, very simple) translation table:
>
> binary multiplication[1].
Binary multiplication is therefore a computational procedure rather than
an algorithm...8->
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Linux in college & high school
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 12:32:11 +0000
mmnnoo wrote:
> That new widescreen PoserBook is actually quite cool. If it works with
^^^^^^^^^
^
If that is not a typo, you have my vote for funniest post on cola this
spring!!!
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
===============================================================
"You're the weakest link. Goodb - No, wait! Stop! Noaaarrghh!!"
===============================================================
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: bank switches from using NT 4
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 22:22:42 +0000
Jan Johanson wrote:
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Jan Johanson wrote:
>> >
>> > "Chad Everett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > On 9 May 2001 00:43:02 -0500, Jan Johanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >Your car has unique ID numbers etched into 100 locations, all
> recorded in
>> > a
>> > > >corporate database and shared with the police and other dealers -
>> > > >you
>> > don't
>> > > >have a choice. That doesn't bother you? Seen any black helicopters
>> > lately?
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > But I own my vehicle outright. It's all mine and it won't refuse to
> run
>> > if
>> > > I make improvements to it.
>> > >
>> >
>> > So don't buy licensed software who's terms you don't agree with.
>> > Simple.
>>
>> I don't.
>
> Good for you! There, not much of a monopoly MS has got there now is it?
>
A friend of mine recently wanted to buy a new computer in a store. She did
not need the Windows 98 operating system or the applications that came with
it, so she asked if she could buy a computer without operating system or
any applications installed (after all, she already had a decent operating
system linux - and all the software she was ever going to need - SuSE).
The sales droid told her that this was impossible, as all computers came
with Windows software preinstalled.
So she asked if she could get a refund if she did not buy the software;
after all, all the programs that were installed on the computer were also
for sale as separate items in the store.
This, the shopinator told her, was also impossible, but when asked why, the
drone went into maintenance mode.
Indeed, this MS monopoly is nothing but a giant fata morgana. It does not
exist. People make it up as they go.
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
===============================================================
"You're the weakest link. Goodb - No, wait! Stop! Noaaarrghh!!"
===============================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Neil Cerutti)
Crossposted-To: alt.retail.category.management,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux in Retail & Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know
Date: 14 May 2001 20:24:07 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ayende Rahien posted:
>
>"Neil Cerutti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> I.e., A faster growth rate for Linux will allow it to easily
>> catch up and surpass Microsoft's market share, not matter how
>> great Microsoft's lead.
>
>Faster and *sustained* growth rate.
Then you're left to argue that Linux's growth rate will not
sustain; you risk being humbled like the rich land-owner by
thinking that a higher growth rate is meaningless in the face of
Microsoft's huge market share.
--
Neil Cerutti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 16:30:26 -0400
JS PL wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > JS PL wrote:
> > >
> > > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > JS PL wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > JS PL wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > > > > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > > > > > > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > It's a good thing as long as it's something that the
> OS
> > > > > should
> > > > > > > > > provide.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Today, can you really sell an OS without a browser?
> Can
> > > you
> > > > > > > *find*
> > > > > > > > > an OS
> > > > > > > > > > > > > that doesn't come with a browser?
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > What OS besides Windows ha an "-integrated-" browser?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > KDE? GNOME?
> > > > > > > > > > > Not an OS, but same principal.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > KDE and GNOME are not OSs.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Konqueror is indeed a file manager/browser, but it is not
> > > > > "integrated"
> > > > > > > > > > into the OS. It is just another application.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > IE isn't integrated into the OS, it's just another
> application.
> > > > > > > > > It *is*, however, integrated into the shell, same as
> Konqueror.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Tell Micro$oft it isnt integrated into the OS. They say if you
> > > remove
> > > > > it
> > > > > > > > Windows becomes unuseable. They even presented an unuseable
> > > version to
> > > > > > > > Judge Jackson to prove it.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Now, what "shell" is Konquer integrated into? It seems to be
> just
> > > > > > > > another app to me. I can install it, uninstall it, use it in a
> KDE
> > > > > > > > session, sue it without a KDE session. How is it not another
> app?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > What browser is "integrated" into GNOME?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Nautilous, by RIP Eazel.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Is nautilus actually being shipped in GNOME yet? And how
> > > "integrated"
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > it? Can you remove it and still have filemanange capabilities?
> > > Will
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > OS work?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It doesn't matter if you CAN remove it, or CAN'T remove it. It's
> a
> > > > > useless
> > > > > > > argument - Microsoft can bundle a ham sandwich with windows if
> they
> > > so
> > > > > > > choose.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thats not what the consent decree says.
> > > > >
> > > > > SORRY, the consent decree does state that they may integrate
> anything
> > > they
> > > > > like into Windows.
> > > > >
> > > > > (E) Microsoft shall not enter into any License Agreement in
> > > > > which the terms of that agreement are expressly or impliedly
> > > > > conditioned upon:
> > > > >
> > > > > (1) the licensing of any other Covered Product, Operating
> > > > > System Software product or other product (provided, however, that
> this
> > > > > provision in and of itself shall not be construed to prohibit
> > > > > Microsoft from developing integrated products);
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Provide the REST of the citation.
> > >
> > > Why? You can't seem to grasp the relevant portion. I don't think I'll
> put
> > > anymore up for you to misread.
> >
> > Gee, does this translate into... "if I put any more up, they will see
> > parts incriminating Microsoft"?
>
> No. It means just what it says. You can't grasp the section that your
> purporting MS to have broken. No one else including the DOJ has accused MS
> of breaking any other section besides IV (E) (1) which is posted above,
> along with the appeals court remarks.
> Any more dumb shit questions?
Maybe...But Im getting tired of dumbshit answers.
--
Rick
------------------------------
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 16:34:13 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > "Rick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > > > You said that MS should be broken because they added networking
> support,
> > > > > Rick.
> > > > > Don't try to deny it, google keeps an archive.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Provide the quote.
> > >
> > > The very buttom of this page.
> > > As well as news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > "That[Why MS wasn't broken up because it added GUI, networking & memory
> > > management] is what a lot of people are asking."
> > >
> >
> > I never said the above statement as written. You have altered it,
> > proving you asa dishonest as m$.
>
> Here is the whole qoute:
> The part with the preceding > is me, the part without is you.
>
> <Qoute>
>
> > <Sarcasm>
> > But IE isn't the only thing that MS integrated.
> >
> > What about TCP/IP stack? MS integrated that into the OS, and kill the 3rd
> > party stack supplier(Trumpet Winsock). *Bad* MS, why wasn't it split then?
> > What about GUI? MS integrated that into the OS, and killed the 3rd GUI
> > suppliers (Desqview). *Bad* MS, why wasn't it split then?
> > What about memory management? MS integrated that into the OS, and killed
> 3rd
> > part memory management (Quarterdeck ). *Bad* MS, why wasn't it split then?
> >
>
> That is what a lot of people are asking.
>
> </Qoute>
>
> > > In other words, if someone does it, MS is not allowed to do it too,
> right?
> > > Can you name *one* feature that MS is then allowed to enter Windows,
> under
> > > your philosophy?
> >
> > Any feature they have -independantly- developed, as opposed to just
> > stealing from the competition.
>
> Define stealing from the competition.
For instance, patent infringement (Stac - compression) and taking code
(Apple - used quicktime code in windows video). m$ lost both cases.
IBM also paid Killdal (sp?) a bunch of money so he wouldnt sue over the
CP/M code that was in DOS.
--
Rick
------------------------------
Subject: Re: What does Linux need for the desktop?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Form@C)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:30:52 GMT
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> OK, I hear people say that Linux is not ready for the desktop. I always
> wonder why. OK, I'll concede games, but that is a different story all
> together. For now, lets focus on the office/home office desktop, i.e.
> what would keep a company from going all Linux?
>
too easy....
I work for an electrical company who do sub-contract work for quite a few
large companies. Linux needs *full* compatibility with Microsoft Office and
Microsoft Project for a start. The token compatibility that Star Office has
just isn't enough. You can't afford to lose formatting information, headers
or footers when exchanging documents. Likewise you can't get multinational
companies to allow Star Office on their systems when they already have a
standard. Their IT departments just won't allow it! (I've tried to get it
accepted in a couple of places - no go. It's Office or we'll talk to
someone else...!)
How about CAD? Anyone know of a Linux prog that can read AutoCad dwg
format? Yet another "standard" that isn't!
Linux is doing well - don't get me wrong - but it has a l-o-n-g way to go
before it reaches office desktops. Running windows apps using an emulator
may work, but it just isn't acceptable.
--
Mick
Olde Nascom Computers - http://www.mixtel.co.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck)
Subject: Re: Oracle 8.1.6 on Solaris or Linux?
Reply-To: hauck[at]codem{dot}com
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:36:33 GMT
On 14 May 2001 19:26:28 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Then try FreeBSD (latest versions of both of course) and check out your
> results. I guarantee that once you figure out that turning off access times
> is a good idea, youll stick with FreeBSD.
The noatime mount option exists in Linux as well.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| Codem Systems, Inc.
-| http://www.codem.com/
------------------------------
From: Chronos Tachyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:38:33 GMT
On Mon 14 May 2001 07:01, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
[Snip]
>
> One BIG advantage of Linux is that SMP code can be inlined, by setting
> a compiler switch and rebuilding.
>
> In proprietary binary operating systems (PBOS), SMP support is provided
> by libraries. The kernel has to jump to the proper library function.
> This function call is necessary so that the PBOS can support both
> uni-processor and SMP machines. However, note that the function call
> is overhead that the open-source kernel can simply compile out of
> existence.
>
> Examples of PBOS's: Windows, Windows, Windows, Windows.....
>
> Chris
>
I believe that this is wrong: NT/2K ships with two versions of the kernel
(and a few core libraries) pre-compiled on the CD, one with SMP support and
one for uniprocessor systems. However, due to the welded-hood approach of
Microsoft products, one must reinstall the OS from scratch to switch
between the two kernels. Yech.
--
Chronos Tachyon
Guardian of Eristic Paraphernalia
Gatekeeper of the Region of Thud
[Reply instructions: My real domain is "echo <address> | cut -d. -f6,7"]
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:38:33 GMT
T. Max Devlin wrote:
> Why did you ask, if you already know? Do you not realize that publicly
> declaring that you are being disingenuous and dishonest in public is
> "making a fool of yourself"?
I did nothing of the sort! I asked _you_ why DirectX sucks. I neither said
it sucks or not!
> Look; it doesn't matter to me whether you want to be known as a lamer or
> a troll, Pete; I'll spank your rosy cheeks either way. But try to
> maintain some dignity. I look like I'm bullying an ignorant child if
> you don't at least try to pretend you aren't both lame and a troll.
Dream on baby!
You just had yo' cheeks warmed and yo' don' like do' ya!
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:39:06 GMT
T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>Two years!
>>
>>ROFL!
>>
>>I've been on COLA less than six months.
>>
>>Boy your memory is seriously broken!!!
>
> Perhaps it was alt.destroy.microsoft? Or I'm misremembering some other
> troll names Pete Goodwin?
It weren't me!
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux has one chance left.........
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:41:03 GMT
T. Max Devlin wrote:
> Pete, you are the one that admitted that you were only pretending that
> you didn't know that DirectX sucks, or why. So how am *I* the one who's
> trolling, saying "DirectX sucks", and then not proceeding into an
> argument about Windows and monopoly crapware, on
> *comp.os.linux.advocacy*. Perhaps you've been camped out here too long,
> pretending to be playing a devil's advocate, to forget that you are the
> one who is trolling.
Oh please! My sides hurt too much! You are so lame!
> The discussion was quite interesting, and made the point far more
> convincingly than I possibly could have done, had I responded to your
> trolling; is this not so?
What? That you know absolutely nothing? HAHAHAHA!
> If you want the true, honest, correct answer to why it took me "so
> long", it was because it was a learning exercise. For you. I hope you
> didn't miss it entirely, and can benefit from it, if only in retrospect.
A learning excercise! Oh please my aching head!!! HAHAHA!
You got caught and now you're trying to duck out of it. You are _so_ funny!
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Chronos Tachyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What does Linux need for the desktop?
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:45:54 GMT
On Mon 14 May 2001 12:34, Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> mmnnoo wrote:
>> snip>
>>
>> Konqueror is nice and light, but again the problem is that it works on
>> 'only' about 90% of websites. I start thinking how great it is, then it
>> renders a page with areas of text on top of each other, or I can't join a
>> chatroom, or access a secure site. Unfortunately, I think getting those
>> last 10-20% of sites working would be 80-90% of the work in creating a
>> browser.
> All the KDE team need to do is get Javascript working properly, and Java
> applets to load (using an external JVM), then I will be an awsome
> browser. Hopefully later on, RealMedia will start supporting it
> natively.
>
> Matthew Gardiner
>
There are still some compatibility bugs with Javascript, but the Java
support works great in KDE 1.2 right now. You need a 1.3.x JRE installed
to use it, but I haven't had any trouble with it (yet).
--
Chronos Tachyon
Guardian of Eristic Paraphernalia
Gatekeeper of the Region of Thud
[Reply instructions: My real domain is "echo <address> | cut -d. -f6,7"]
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:45:00 GMT
T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>He's using Agent on Linux. He said as much himself. Or did I miss
>>something here?
>
> Did I? I don't recall "saying as much", or even hinting at it, really.
> I am using Agent on Win95b, currently. Before that, I was using it on
> NT4.
OK, then I missed something here. Somehow I thought you were using Linux.
Why are you using Windows 95 B?
Hypocrit!
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:45:54 GMT
T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>More trash form T-Max.....
>>I don't imagine getting my work done. It is only a pipe dream under
>>Linux.
>>So tell me T-max, what do you, the Linux community have in the way of
>>applications I mentioned?
>>I'm all ears...
>>Facts please, and don't try and diffuse the topic to some political
>>statement like you usually do...
>
> You seem to be misreading my words, nimrod. :-D
A typically evasive reply.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 20:46:47 GMT
T. Max Devlin wrote:
>>No, I mean decreed. Not fitting into your square hole am I?
>
> You'd have to ask someone else their opinion on that, I'm afraid. As
> far as I can tell, I've got you pretty well pegged, yeah.
Yes, you think you've been talking to me for two years <giggle>.
--
Pete
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Oracle 8.1.6 on Solaris or Linux?
Date: 14 May 2001 20:51:53 GMT
Bob Hauck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 14 May 2001 19:26:28 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Then try FreeBSD (latest versions of both of course) and check out your
>> results. I guarantee that once you figure out that turning off access times
>> is a good idea, youll stick with FreeBSD.
> The noatime mount option exists in Linux as well.
I know that, you retarded fucksplash. All things being equal, freebsd wins hands
down.
In this particular game at least. We're talking about exceedingly large numbers
of files of vastly varying size in a straight INN install. We're also talking
about nested directories 9, 10 and 11 deep. Also, with close to 160,000 DSL and
cable modem customers, a constant 60-120 megs a second across 4 interfaces.
Linux just doesnt hack.
=====.
--
"George Dubya Bush---the best presidency money can buy"
---obviously some Godless commie heathen faggot bastard
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Oracle 8.1.6 on Solaris or Linux?
Date: 14 May 2001 20:52:41 GMT
pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." wrote:
>>
>> pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > "." wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I have. NVIDIA drivers w/ gforce2 and kernel 2.4-20 with certian 3-D games.
>> >>
>> >> Kernel panic, unrecoverable, hard lock.
>>
>> > And so you use binary proprietary drivers - and this proves what about
>> > the quality of 2.4 exactly ?
>>
>> I'm not saying that the 2.4 kernel sucks, you bitchass nutslap. I'm saying
>> that I can get it to lock consistently. I can also get the FreeBSD kernel
>> to lock, the BeOS kernel, windows NT 4.0, 2000, 98, ME, XP, and also Solaris
>> 7 and 8, HP/UX and SCO. A lockable kernel doesnt mean its a piece of shit, it
>> only means that I could get it to do something that you insinuated might not
>> be possible. :)
> Well this bitchass nutslap (whatever that means) and most others should
> know that shit kernel space code _can_ always lock up the kernel. I
> never insinuated otherwise. Perhaps your reading skills need improving.
> But then again, as a BSD developer maybeyou should concentrate on the
> benchmarks as I think you may be misreading them (hint: the largest
> number does not always win). Still there you go.
I'm not a BSD developer. I work for a living, I implement large UNIX and
UNIX-like systems in enterprise environments.
=====.
--
"George Dubya Bush---the best presidency money can buy"
---obviously some Godless commie heathen faggot bastard
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
