Linux-Advocacy Digest #82, Volume #35 Sat, 9 Jun 01 15:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: Laugh, it's hilarious. (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Desktop Linux ("Robert Morelli")
Re: Here's a switch for a change ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: More micro$oft "customer service" ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?) ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Here's a switch for a change (Rotten168)
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? ("Chad Myers")
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? ("Chad Myers")
Re: Opera ("Todd")
test news ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?) ("Chad Myers")
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! ("Chad Myers")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: alt.aol-sucks,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Laugh, it's hilarious.
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 18:36:25 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Aaron R. Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sat, 09 Jun 2001 12:10:09 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, T. Max Devlin
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote
>> on Fri, 08 Jun 2001 04:05:43 GMT
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> >Said Chris Ahlstrom in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Thu, 07 Jun 2001
>> >>flatfish+++ wrote:
>> > [...]
>> >>> ie: This machine comes with 40 gigabytes of memory right?
>> >>
>> >>On the other hand, in the auto section of Walmart you'll hear more
>> >>intelligent questions. Why is that?
>> >
>> >Well put. Why *is* that?
>>
>> It might be that NASCAR is more interesting than the yearly competition
>> amongst highly intelligent, computer-knowledgeable students (I forget
>> the name, but it's an East vs. West competition setup). :-)
>>
>> Of course, Battlebots (Comedy Central) and knockoffs such as Robotica
>> (TLC?) might change the equation slightly -- but even there, it's not
>> clear that there's much computer hardware there, beyond a remote control
>> and a few servos.
>>
>> But it's a start. :-)
>>
>> Not sure how one would create a show around such things as Codewars.
>> The idea is to write code that will take over the arena -- in this
>> case, a delimited interpreter within a computer, as I recall.
>> A far more sinister variant may be happening right now: Viruswars.
>> The arena in this case is every worldwide node on the network.
>>
>> At least the Mitnick worm wasn't intentionally destructive, but
>> then, neither are certain mussels that hitch rides on international
>> shipping then take over the Great Lakes...sigh.
>
>On the bright side, the Zebra Mussels have cleaned up the water in the
>Great Lakes to such an extent that the enviro-wackos are crying that their
>favorite "give us money or you and your children will die die die" issue
>has been destroyed.
Bwahahahahahahaha....oh broooother, talk about a dilemma!
Not to mention an interesting method by which to clean water.
(Sadly, it would only seem to work for those pollutants which
mussels like to eat. :-) )
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- maybe we can try this in Lake Tahoe?
EAC code #191 40d:05h:37m actually running Linux.
This is not a .sig.
------------------------------
From: "Robert Morelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Desktop Linux
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 09:28:24 -0600
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Donn Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> mlw wrote:
>
>> At work, most of the people have Windows, and every last one of them
>> has had to have Windows reinstalled at least once, even the developers.
>> What's even sadder is that the Windows users are not using anything
>> that requires "Windows." Simple email, word processing, light
>> diagramming, spreadsheet, a presentation, a little HTML editing, web
>> browsing, etc.
> I think the best attribute of Windows is its implementation of OLE. For
> example, it's nice to be able to edit a diagram, and stick it neatly
> into a Word document, and instantly see where your diagrams are. With
> LaTeX, you don't get that instant gratification, because I assume that
> most TeX users embed figures as postscript documents. It's kind of hard
> to instantly visualize what a TeX document will look like as it's being
I've been using LaTeX daily for well over 10 years. I can pretty easily
visualize what it's going to do most of the time, but including graphics
is definitely one of the weakest points. In fact, the TeX system on
which LaTeX is based doesn't have even a single graphics primitive.
The only way you can include graphics is by using driver specific
extensions or using one of a variety of bizarre kluges (like converting
an image into a character of a gigantic bitmapped font).
TeX was conceived in the 1970's and retains most of the limitations
that 1970's computing placed on it. One of those was lack of a
common graphics standard, but there are lots of others. On the
whole, TeX is a hopelessly primitive and wacky typesetting system.
Unfortunately, TeX is one of the standards for document
publishing under UNIX, but its development was basically abandoned
in the 1980's. Development of LaTeX has continued, but at an almost
imperceptible pace. The LaTeX of today is only marginally better
than the original LaTeX of 20 years ago. That slow rate of progress
is mostly because the TeX foundation on which it's built is such a
poor technology.
What's really pathetic is that a lot of UNIX folks still think TeX is
an "advanced" and "powerful" system.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Here's a switch for a change
Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 21:26:34 +0200
"Nigel Feltham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9ftjl0$5va55$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > There is no such clause in the EULA, in fact MS offers a 30 day money
back
> > guarantee on retail software.
> >
>
> But how many users have actually managed to get a refund - I have seen 'NO
> REFUNDS GIVEN' signs in the software section of all the shops around here
(
> and in most record shops as well - it's not limited to computer software )
> even though this is probably illegal here in the UK under consumer
> protection laws.
>
> > Further, his data isn't gone. Just the OS is corrupted.
> >
>
> So how does the average user supposed to get his / her data back when the
> OS refuses to boot when most users need help just using the system
normally
> - if you upgraded your copy of windows and were left with an unbootable PC
> and faced losing an important research project ( and maybe also failing an
> important exam or destroying your career because of it ) and were told by
> the shop that none of their staff can help and maybe being told you need
to
> buy even more software to try to recover that data ( norton utilities
> perhaps) or being offered a refund on the upgrade then wouldn't you feel
> well pissed off.
Well, any decent shop could salvage the data.
That is for sure.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: More micro$oft "customer service"
Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 21:27:25 +0200
"Dave Martel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 09 Jun 2001 13:43:34 GMT, Charles Lyttle
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I maintain that it is a violation of my copyright and amounts to
> >defacement of the page. MS has appropriated my work and republished it
> >with modifications for commercial gain. Also, I suspect it might violate
> >laws passed to prevent defacement of web pages. I will support anyone
> >who has a page defaced in this manner if they choose to file complaints.
>
> If it is then adblockers are also a violation. There's also a program
> out there that lets you "attach" your comments to a website, and other
> visitors using the same program can view them.
>
> Heck, maybe lynx is even a violation since it "removes" graphics. :(
And netscape because it doesn't render CSS & DHTML correctly.
Mozilla because it doesn't support IE extentions.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 21:30:34 +0200
"Daniel Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:jYrU6.72274$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> A *lot* of the problems and general weirdness
> of MFC are due to issues of this sort.
That doesn't excuse the CSocket nightmare, though.
> I do agree about the C++ implementation- it's
> one of the least complete modern compilers.
It's also one of the oldest implementation, though.
> But the IDE sure is nice.
The IDE is great.
IntelliSense can be a god send, sometimes.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[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: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 21:39:58 +0200
"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Daniel Johnson
> I'm wondering if that has been resolved even now.
> I'll admit, though, I don't tend to use exceptions in my code.
Why is that?
The good thing about exceptions is that they seperate error handling from
code.
One of the reasons that I don't really like C is that it's all too often
more error handling than code.
Especiall if you are doing file I/O or something like it.
> And then there's #pragma warning(disable:4786). Aaargh!
> Did MS intentionally limit their linker to 256 characters so that
> developers will give up on STL and use the MFC collection classes
> instead?
http://www.cuj.com/current/feature.htm
Here is a good script to help you out.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?)
Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 21:46:11 +0200
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9ftphv$7gm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > If they wanted 9x on IA64, *then* they would've to rewrite a different
> > OS. Imagine, 32 bit OS on a 64 bits Chip using 16 bits code that it
> > inherit from an 8 bit OS designed to run on a 4 bit chip. Yuck!
>
> produced by a 2 bit company that can't stand one bit of competition?
>
Yeah, I couldn't remember the 2 bit part.
Why the 2 bit, though?
------------------------------
From: Rotten168 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Here's a switch for a change
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 18:47:21 GMT
Nigel Feltham wrote:
> So how does the average user supposed to get his / her data back when the
> OS refuses to boot when most users need help just using the system normally
> - if you upgraded your copy of windows and were left with an unbootable PC
> and faced losing an important research project ( and maybe also failing an
> important exam or destroying your career because of it ) and were told by
> the shop that none of their staff can help and maybe being told you need to
> buy even more software to try to recover that data ( norton utilities
> perhaps) or being offered a refund on the upgrade then wouldn't you feel
> well pissed off.
One of the first things I was told as a kid using a PC was to back up
your data (move it off of a hard drive). You're insane if you think that
the data living in your HD is safe in any way on _any_ platform...
So I don't really blame MS for *those* (notice I didn't say all) EULA
terms. You don't back stuff up, you're gonna get screwed sooner or
later. How many Linux users have accidentally wiped out /etc? Well, I
have, and I lost the partition (or maybe I wasn't sophisticated enough
at that time to recover the data, I'm not sure). Luckily I back
important stuff up.
Back up your data folks!
--
- Brent
"General Veer, prepare your underpants for ground assault."
- Darth Vader
http://rotten168.home.att.net
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 18:40:59 GMT
"Dennis G. Allard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<84aU6.9834$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > I'm talking about what they [the NYSE] use for managing trades.
> >
> > Well, their web site runs under AIX, so one would assume that they're
> > probably a big IBM shop, and are probably running trades under AIX and/or
> > OS/390.
>
> If they were running anything Microsoft, they would have crashes so much
> more often it would make this little down time look like a holiday!
You mean like Nasdaq? They're running Microsoft and I haven't heard a peep
from them about any crashes.
Well, I guess there goes your theory. Perhaps NYSE should look at NASDAQ
and see what they're doing.
-c
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 18:47:39 GMT
"Michael Vester" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Matthew Gardiner wrote:
> >
> > I'm not too sure about the NYSE, but I think the NASDAQ, unfortunately, runs
> > on Windows.
> >
> > Matthew Gardiner
> >
> NASDAQ's web server is Windows. The computer that actually does the
> trading is a big Unisys mainframe. Microcomputer architecture just isn't
> capable. It's not a Windows verses Linux issue.
About a year ago it was still Unisys. Last year they announced they were
moving to Win2K Datacenter. I'm not sure if they actually did it, or if
it's complete yet or not, but I would imagine we would've heard about it
if it went south.
-c
>
> > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:84aU6.9834$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:3%9U6.1335$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > In article <3b212110$0$94312$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chad Myers
> > > says...
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED] dripot> wrote in message
> > > > >news:CP8U6.1221$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >> What's the skinny ?
> > > > >
> > > > >What software are they running for what?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Haven't heard about the fiasco today ?
> > > >
> > > > I'm talking about what they use for managing trades.
> > >
> > > Well, their web site runs under AIX, so one would assume that they're
> > > probably a big IBM shop, and are probably running trades under AIX and/or
> > > OS/390.
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
> --
> Michael Vester
> A credible Linux advocate
>
> "The avalanche has started, it is
> too late for the pebbles to vote"
> Kosh, Vorlon Ambassador to Babylon 5
------------------------------
From: "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Opera
Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2001 03:06:05 +0800
Reply-To: "Todd" <todd<remove>[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Fred K Ollinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9fr73v$8k7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ayende Rahien (don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> : "Leigh Wedding" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> : news:9fhnnp$eki$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> : > The way I see it IE is not really free as MS claims, it is
> : > actually included in the price of MS Windows. Can you
> : > grasp this concept?
>
> : No, I can download updates for free.
> : I don't have to buy something to get IE5 on Win95.
>
> Where do I get the source. I'd like to compile the linux version.
It doesn't come with source, like 95% of the applications out there. Source
is intellectual property, something that Linux users don't grasp.
Just because source isn't available, doesn't mean that the application sux
or whatever.
99% of the consumers out there do not *want* to compile, they just want to
*use* the software... another thing the Linux community will probably never
get.
Oh well... if you don't adapt, you will not succeed. So stop whining.
-Todd
>
> Fred
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: test news
Date: Sat, 9 Jun 2001 18:02:06 +0000 (UTC)
test news
--
Gloria
http://www.orravan.com
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?)
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 18:52:22 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <don'[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9fso9s$fq2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > "Rob S. Wolfram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > > <low blow> Windows NT /was/ written with protability in mind (Mach
> > > > microkernel, HAL), but it looks like MS has abandoned that path...
> > > > </low blow>
> > >
> > > Not really.
> > > There are going to be two version of WinXP & 2K for 64 bits.
> > >
> > > Who want to bet on how long it would take to x86 proper to die?
> > > I set the bet on five to ten years from the moment I can get Itanuim &
> > > x86-64 on today's mid-high end prices.
> > > Unless Intel decide to cut 32 bits and just do 64bits.
> >
> > It is apparent that MS has to write two completely different o/ses...
> > one 32-bit and the other 64-bit. I won't bet on the ia-32s future...
> > with marketing and $ in their eyes its going to be pricey 64-bit
> > machines in the future... and repeat the cycle of the same old software
> > again only in new packaging and more colorful advertising.
>
> No, NT is a portable OS, this mean that you can keep most of the code base
> when you port to different platforms.
> You would need to write a new HAL, and maybe do some a little more work, but
> then it should be source code compatible, if not binary compatible (IA64
> would allow this?).
I'm pretty sure it's not binary compatible. IA32 on IA64 might be binary
compatible only because Intel made Itanium support x86 instructions (from
what I gather). You can't take an x86 binary and run it on NT Alpha, however,
it must be recompiled. I'm pretty sure it's just a simple recompile. Granted,
you're not taking advantage of anything the Alpha has to offer, but it'll
run.
-c
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2001 18:54:02 GMT
"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2001 18:32:23 -0500, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> ("Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >"drsquare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> >> >> What the fuck is a "Penguinista"?
> >> >
> >> >Militant, rabid Linux defender/supporter. It's not a derogatory
> >> >term, but it has become one somewhat.
> >>
> >> Who the fuck came up with a term like that?
> >
> >It's pretty standard. Anyone who is a militant rabid defender
> >of something is generally called a <term>inista.
>
> Erm, I haven't and I don't know anyone who's ever used such a term.
> And wouldn't that mean Windows advocates would be known as
> "shitOSinistas"?
No, because people who use Windows are generally grounded and have
nothing to prove or attack. Whereas Penguinistas seem to be attacking
something or feel like they have something to prove. Windows advocates
are just interested in realism and getting the job done, not being
"l33t" or out to prove exactly how much they hate "M$" so their
friends will like them more.
-c
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
