Linux-Advocacy Digest #485
Linux-Advocacy Digest #485, Volume #34 Sun, 13 May 01 16:13:03 EDT Contents: Re: Linux in Retail Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know (David Brown) Re: Linux disgusts me (Les Mikesell) Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (David Brown) Re: Anecdote: MS' grip loosening (Bobby D. Bryant) Re: Find your sole mate here!! Post your FREE personal ADs here! (Bobby D. Bryant) Re: Microsoft standards... (was Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product) (Les Mikesell) Re: Microsoft Windows for Linux (Anthony Argyriou) Re: How to hack with a crash, another Microsoft feature (Chronos Tachyon) Re: Richard Stallman what a tosser, and lies about free software (Jeffrey Siegal) Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Rick) From: David Brown [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: Sun, 13 May 2001 21:15:19 +0200 Very entertaining. NT advocates already know all of this but it's nice to have a single document that clearly brings all the elements together. Allow me to quote the management summary: (if you don't have a newreader that can handle HTML, add this to another reason why your OS choice sucks cause every windows newsreader handles HTML). I hardly need to say it (intelligent people, both Windows fans and Linux fans, know this already), but newsreaders are applications, not part of the OS. There are text-only newsreaders for Windows (for those who don't like junk HTML news posts to automatically start IE, or run VBS scripts, or whatever), and there are HTML-aware newsreaders for virtually every system in common use. Management Summary For PHBs only. Despite popular belief in the retail and hospitality markets, the Linux operating system is not free. The Linux kernel itself may be free, but there are many other costs associated with the total cost of ownership of a system. There are significant costs associated with retail-hardening Linux. Even Linux executives admit that Linux isnt free, but that you just pay in different ways. Linux especially has a long way to go in retail, and someone is going to bear these costs. In case you don't know, there are addtional costs to use Windows software as well - and that is over and above the cost of the OS and basic applications. When investigating Linux for your retail enterprise, you should investigate and calculate these ten factors into your total cost of ownership (TCO) model: And do the same when calculating the TCO for a Windows solution. 1 Limited Device Driver Support Very few device drivers are available for Linux today, especially those used in retail environments. The JavaPOS standard is still in the early stages and has not been proven like the OPOS standard. In fact, most JavaPOS installations today run on Windows with OPOS and a Java OPOS wrapper. JavaPOS has a long way to go before it can provide the same device driver support as OPOS provides. The cost of developing retail device drivers is a huge consideration in total cost of ownership. Someone is going to have to pay to develop them for retail. The Microsoft platform is years ahead of Linux in meeting the retail industrys needs and provides an extensive set of device drivers. I don't know anything about OPOS or JavaPOS, but very few device drivers are available for Linux is outdated drivel. Exactly how many officially certified screen drivers were available for W2K when it was released? A small handful, perhaps. Have you ever installed a Windows system without having to feed in a dozen other CDs with device drivers for the screen card, the sound card, the monitor, the printer, the network card, etc. ? Bare Windows (as of Win98SE, the latest I installed) doesn't even have a driver for an MS Intellimouse that came with the system!! With a good Linux distribution, on the other hand, there are probably an order of magnitude more drivers available on the CD. 2 Support / Maintenance Costs Support and maintenance for Linux is not free. Most Linux distributors Support and maintenance for Windows is not free, either. make their money by selling their services. Support options vary by vendor and can get quite expensive for the enterprise. You will have to As for Windows. pay for support when you need it. However, before you can even receive support, you have to meet certain requirements. Most Linux distributors As for Windows. will only support un-modified versions of their software. Some of them As for Windows - you can only *run* un-modified versions of their software. At least with Linux, you have the choice of going it alone if your own staff are up to the job. also require you to meet certain hardware requirements before they will As for Windows - and how much hardware is on the approved
Linux-Advocacy Digest #485
Linux-Advocacy Digest #485, Volume #32 Mon, 26 Feb 01 01:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Something Seemingly Simple. (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: RTFM at M$ (Craig Kelley)
Re: RTFM at M$ (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Does anyone know how much computer power we have/ ("Mike")
Re: M$ doing it again! (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Does anyone know how much computer power we have/ ("Mike")
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: Does anyone know how much computer power we have/ ("Mike")
Re: Maximum Linux Magazine Is Going Out Of Business Ha Ha Ha (Bloody Viking)
Re: Mircosoft Tax (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Does anyone know how much computer power we have/ ("Mike")
From: Aaron Kulkis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Something Seemingly Simple.
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2001 00:37:42 -0500
Bob Hauck wrote:
On Sun, 25 Feb 2001 15:57:35 GMT, Gregory Pietsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Edward Rosten wrote:
Is there an official place where a definition of PI is meant to reside?
No.
How about in the trig functions:
#define A_PI (4 * atan (1))
#define B_PI (2 * asin (1))
#define C_PI (2 * acos (0))
invoking a function call every time you want to use the constant "PI" ???
UGH!
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: "meow" is yet another anonymous coward who does nothing
but write stupid nonsense about his intellectual superiors.
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
--
From: Craig Kelley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: RTFM at M$
Date: 25 Feb 2001 22:40:16 -0700
T. Max Devlin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Said Craig Kelley in alt.destroy.microsoft on 25 Feb 2001 21:01:37
. [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
You don't seem to understand the workings of TCP/IP. What care I about
a router? If there is no response, there is no response. The only
possible explanation is a failure somewhere.
I understand them perfectly. I guess, according to you, if internet the
backbone goes down, then the destination server is also down just because
you can't get to it.
No, but the ping wont get through, which will indicate a problem with the
network, correctly so. This is why MS *shouldn't* be blocking pings.
Huh? Why *should* they allow ICMP traffic?
Because they want to allow IP traffic. Most of ICMP is optional; ping
is mandatory. Without it, its fair to say that the host doesn't support
IP. Which is to say that, despite fortunate happenstance allowing some
traffic to be supported, Microsoft is not connected to the Internet. It
doesn't take lack of diagnostic tools to explain why their network is so
unreliable, of course, but it certainly doesn't help.
The problem is that the RFC specifies that the IP stack implementation
needs to honor echo requests, but doesn't specify (the pasted-onto-
newsgroup parts anyway... I'm not going to read an entire RFC to post a
paragraph) that all networks must allow this traffic. Obviously, since
the network is privately owned, they have final say on wha
Linux-Advocacy Digest #485
Linux-Advocacy Digest #485, Volume #30 Tue, 28 Nov 00 00:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: The Sixth Sense (Curtis)
Re: Why Java? (George Russell)
Re: Linux growth rate explosion! ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Whistler review. ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Whistler review. (Charlie Ebert)
Re: The Sixth Sense (Mike Byrns)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Whistler review. ("Tom Wilson")
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (Larry Pyeatt)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Charlie Ebert)
From: "Ayende Rahien" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 06:36:08 +0200
"mark" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
In article 8vsa11$5grsc$[EMAIL PROTECTED], Ayende Rahien wrote:
Why would he need one?
You put it in the cdrom, go to DOS, and install from there.
That's a pretty key point here, because the tale is about
installing Win9x *after* the slackware was already on there,
and a 2nd HD which didn't have it on before. So where was
the DOS?
On the win98 disk.
But this whole situation is odd including
(especially) the concept of expecting win98 to be able to do anything
helpful. The only thing realistic about the whole story is having
problems with a win98 install.
No, win9x usually install without a hitch.
Oh yea, that's right, it went wrong this time, but that's because
the person installing it was an idiot - sorry, I forgot that
bit. Or was it that the install CD from Microsoft was damaged?
Or was it both?
No, because the disk (the media itself) was bad.
--
From: "Ayende Rahien" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 06:36:35 +0200
"mark" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Curtis wrote:
mark wrote...
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Curtis wrote:
mark wrote...
No, the user is an idiot.
An installer is an "it", no a "he"
Er, the user is an idiot because microsoft's CD was broken?
Wow I love windows people.
You're doing the same crap with Ayende I see.
Que? I'm still waiting to see this list of apps
which run on all those different things which
you claimed.
Let's leave that to the other thread which is tiresome as it is already
is. mutter This one is tiresome as well /mutter
If the user didn't know what to do when faced with a broken
Microsoft install CD (which apparently had _only one_ file
broken - something very rare indeed), then they need help
and support not calling an idiot by you or by Ayende.
A solution was offered to him. Ayende told him what could be wrong and
how to go about fixing it assuming it was just one file that was
corrupted. A single file corruption is a reasonable assumption
considering the OS installed and ran just fine otherwise. He refused to
attempt this and tried installing again as if the problem would magically
go away on the *third* attempt.
No, a single file corruption on a CD is amazingly unlikely.
Since this image came from Microsoft, there would be a batch of
these made, 10,000s or so, so there would be either a history,
or the whole batch would have been withdrawn (unless there's
no QA at all on this, but I don't think even Microsoft would
be that foolish).
Burn 1000 cds.
Now take one and scratch it.
Please explain me how a scratch on one CD render all CDs that were burned
unusable.
--
From: "Ayende Rahien" [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, 28 Nov 2000 06:39:43 +0200
"." [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
In article 8vsjnl$5ffj4$[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
A common anti-ms arguement is that it change the API without bothering
to
tell anybody and thus breaking competitor's applications.
I think you mean "a common anti-ms observation"
Even if they don't do it intentionally, they keep breaking things. I
think it was SP6 that broke Notes server wasn't it? Required all clients
have admin access
Linux-Advocacy Digest #485
Linux-Advocacy Digest #485, Volume #29Fri, 6 Oct 00 10:13:04 EDT Contents: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Donal K. Fellows) Re: To all you WinTrolls (John Sanders) Re: "Overclocking" Is A Bad Idea (Donal K. Fellows) Re: To all you WinTrolls (mlw) Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (.) Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (.) Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (.) Re: [OT] Bush v. Gore on taxes (dc) Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto Alsina) Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto Alsina) Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto Alsina) Re: 2.4! (David M. Butler) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows) Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) Date: 6 Oct 2000 10:31:24 GMT In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Richard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: "Donal K. Fellows" wrote: is a lattice but not a tree. It's called partially ordered because the ordering operation "is lower than" is not defined for every pair of elements, but does follow the rules of any ordering like transitivity (if (a b and b c) then (a c)). So a lattice is (approximately) the transitive closure of a DAG (Directed Acyclic Graph)? Actually, no. A DAG is a lattice with the relation "there is a path from X to Y" defined on top of some pairs of elements. At the time, I thought there might be a difference between a DAG and a lattice but there isn't. I'm used to thinking of lattices as being nicely ordered and DAGs as spaghetti, so that messed me up. It depends. From your description, a lattice appears to be a DAG where AB means there is a path from A to B, and you can form a lattice from any DAG by taking the transitive closure of the relation. If there are additional constrains (e.g. unique suprema or minima) then this isn't true. Donal (I find nomenclature harder than semantics...) -- Donal K. Fellowshttp://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't realize how arrogant I was before. :^) -- Jeffrey Hobbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- From: John Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: To all you WinTrolls Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2000 07:24:46 -0500 "David.L" wrote: This is to all of you morons who write posts such as: "Linux sucks", "Windows Rulez" and such in linux newsgroups. Almost every linux user i know including myself has used Win9* Win 2000 etc... either at work, at school or at home. I used Windows NT/Win 9* four years before i switched over to Linux. I have even tried out Windows 2000, and yes Windows 2000 is pretty good //by Windoze standards//. So i, and most linux users has had first hand experience with Windoze and know at least the basics. But the morons who write "Linux sucks" have usually not even seen a Linux screenshot. So before you write "Linux sucks" try out Linux for an year or two. Until you have done that shut up!!! //Sorry for the bad english// Chad Myers will explain it to you. He sez that this is an irrelevant argument. -- John W. Sanders === "there" in or at a place. "their" of or relating to them. "they're" contraction of 'they are'. -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows) Subject: Re: "Overclocking" Is A Bad Idea Date: 6 Oct 2000 12:55:14 GMT In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Mathias Grimmberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows) writes: Intel FP is not as bad as it used to be, but it is still nothing to write home about. That gamers haven't figured this out doesn't surprise me; they tend not to be anything nearly so hot-shot technical people as they like to believe themselves to be... Well, that is true. An Alpha may be even faster. Maybe. The only way to find out is to test on real code and real problems[*], and that's an expensive test to carry out However I fail to see how SPARC boxes would be interesting in any way, shape or form to gamers? Not everyone is a Nethack nut... Some of us do work other than playing games, you know... (And I've not played nethack since '94. USENET is more fun. :^) MGri (who sometimes likes playing a game too and doesn't do it on SPARCs) Looking slick is all very well, but I don't buy games for visual candy. I buy them for gameplay. (And FPSs all exacerbate my tendency to motion-sickness; putting loads of 3D in a game *puts me off*...) Donal. [* It's too easy to optimise for benchmarks instead of real software; only real tests count, and even then they only count for your specific
Linux-Advocacy Digest #485
Linux-Advocacy Digest #485, Volume #28 Fri, 18 Aug 00 16:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux
growth stagnating ("Christopher Smith")
Anti-Linux/Pro-Microsoft Propaganda Campaign In Usenet (was: COMNA's favorite
conspiracy theorist rides again... (Mark S. Bilk)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux
growth stagnating (Stephen S. Edwards II)
Re: FAQ for c.o.m.n.a Now Available! ("Robert Moir")
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
saysLinux growth stagnating (Stephen S. Edwards II)
Re: Tholen digest, volume 2451775.w590d^-.1 ("Joe Malloy")
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says Linux
growth stagnating (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Anti-Linux/Pro-Microsoft Propaganda Campaign In Usenet (was: COMNA's favorite
conspiracy theorist rides again... ("Christopher Smith")
Re: Linus says Mindcraft was accurate (Stephen S. Edwards II)
Re: FAQ for c.o.m.n.a Now Available! (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
From: "Christopher Smith" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says
Linux growth stagnating
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2000 05:57:43 +1000
"Nathaniel Jay Lee" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Drestin Black [EMAIL PROTECTED] spoke thusly:
"Nathaniel Jay Lee" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
Hey, I'm not trying to discredit MS in this venture, I'm
trying (and apparently succeeding) in discreditting you.
hardly!
You say you have, without any qualifications, 'no
incentives' for promoting MS, then you say you have
financial gains to be made because your business succeeds
based on MS products. That is what we humans call a
'contradiction'.
[snip]
So, you can try to twist it as much as you'd like but the fact remains
that
I am not in any way "forced" by MS to say anything (good or bad) about
them.
I do so cause I wanna...
I'm not trying to twist anything. You stated two things
that were a direct contradiction to eachother. Now,
*maybe* that's not what you meant by those two statements,
but they did contradict eachother. And BTW, I never said
*you* were forced to use MS products. You said you have
no financial incentive for backing up MS products, then
you said you did a few sentences later. That's all I
pointed out.
IMHO your logic is flawed, because his statement can support both points of
view.
If he is selling a service (say, webservers) that just happen to use a
certain OS (in this case, Windows) then he is making money off the service,
not the product. Hence he has no financial incentive to push the product,
since his income comes from the service.
Essentially, there is no contradiction, depending on your interpretation.
--
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Anti-Linux/Pro-Microsoft Propaganda Campaign In Usenet (was: COMNA's favorite
conspiracy theorist rides again...
Date: 18 Aug 2000 19:47:47 GMT
In article 8njkmq$7mp$[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Stephen S. Edwards II [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk) wrote
Stephen S. Edwards II [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark S. Bilk) wrote
Erik Funkenbusch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The KDE people do not seem to be taking this lying down. There is
probably going to be an all-out war soon. The days of peaceful
cooperation between KDE and GNOME are probably over.
Erik Funkenbusch has a long history as a pro-Microsoft
anti-Linux propagandist.
Ah, it's COMNA's favorite conspiracy theorist.
Tell me Mark, is Erik getting paid more than me?
Because if he is, then that's the last straw!
It isn't "conspiracy theory" to point out that some people
have been spreading FUD and outright lies against Linux
and in favor of Microsoft in Usenet and elsewhere. These
include both Erik Funkenbusch and Stephen Edwards.
Oh, of course. Yet, you have never once pointed out when
I posted these alleged lies. To you, a lie is merely
something you disagree with.
Wrong. I posted these quotes of Edwards' lies on July 3, 1999.
"Linux seems to exist these days for the sole purpose
of being an anti-Microsoft propaganda tool, rather than
... an alternative to commercial software"
"[Linus Torvalds] has turned into an obnoxious "cult leader"
of a sort"
"Most of the posts I've read coming out of c.o.l.a. are
very confrontational, and snide, concerning Windows users"
These are all attempts to convey false and disparagin
Linux-Advocacy Digest #485
Linux-Advocacy Digest #485, Volume #27Wed, 5 Jul 00 22:13:04 EDT Contents: Re: Linux lags behind Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Re: Linux lags behind Windows Re: Log file says it all (sandrews) Re: Linux lags behind Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Re: Linux lags behind Windows Re: So where ARE all of these supposed Linux users? ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Roger) Re: Linsux as a desktop platform Re: Linsux as a desktop platform (Roger) Re: Anyone actually using Linux for DTP? (Charlie Ebert) Re: Linux lags behind Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Re: Linux lags behind Windows ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Re: Log file says it all ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Re: Running Linsux on a Compaq? Good luck!!! (Michael Marion) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 01:49:21 GMT Good for you. My mother thanks you. My father thanks you. And I thank you. On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:12:54 -0400, sandrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: simple [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You'd love Linsux. Try it sometime What`s Linsux a ms ripoff from Linux? Only ms could break something like Linux. I run Linux, versions: Redhat 5.0, 5.1, 5.2, 6.0, 6.1, 6.2. Suse 6.2, 6.3, 6.4. TurboLinux Server 6.01 TurboLinux Workstation 6.01. on as many machines. That would be 11 machines if you can`t count. Notice no windows. Windows are only good when cut into walls, otherwise windows are of no value. -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] () Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 01:51:34 GMT On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 01:17:09 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:43:22 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote: Oh I see you have had experience with kppp. I haven't used anything so primitive in quite a while now. Yea, but guess what gets automatically setup, well sort of, when you install Mandrake? And guess what the average Joe is going to use? An average joe with a clue is going to be using DSL or cable which is trivial to set up in Linux and always has been (Linux being more LAN centric). You actually believe these folks are going to screw with ppp-up and ppp-down scripts? Get real Linsux in and of itself is primitive... Nope, it's network pipes that are crawling along at 8Kb/s that are horribly primitive... [deletia] The only people still using those are likely AOL fodder and can't even filter their own spam even in the likes of Outlook. Out of reach is out of reach whether it's a meter or a light year. -- It only takes a little bit of bad luck to negate the whole benefit of "runs everything" for a particualar end user. ||| / | \ -- Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:48:44 -0400 From: sandrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Log file says it all [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Could you translate for the non-geek speaking population please? On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 21:03:12 -0400, sandrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From my log file: Jul 5 23:13:37 anniehasit named[237]: Lame server on 'www.microsoft.com' (in 'microsoft.COM'?): [207.46.138.11].53 'DNS4.CP.MSFT.NET' I can`t argue with THAT! Must be running windows. Aye Aye, Captain, she`s sucking mud! The parent name server is delegating a subdomain to a child name server and the child name server is not authoritave for the subdomain. In this case the com name server is delegating microsoft.com to 207.46.138.11, and the name server on this host is not authoritative for microsoft.com. Understand now? -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Linux lags behind Windows Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 01:52:13 GMT On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 01:20:28 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote: On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:47:11 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 00:38:26 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You'd love Linsux. Try it sometime On Wed, 05 Jul 2000 20:17:02 -0400, sandrews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pete Goodwin wrote: Let me see what does Linux not support on my system... 1. Even though Linux detects my USB ZIP 250 drive, it does not work. ...and something else. After a quick perusal of some of the common storage sales sites it's become rather obvious that you have to be somewhat of a fool to bother with ZIPdrives to begin with. Sour grapes. Linux doesn't support it so automatically it is no good. First there is the compatibility issue. ZIP being a highly proprietary format is likely to NOT be available on some arbitrary w
