Hello from Gregg C Levine normally with Jedi Knight Computers Indeed. The term raptor does describe birds of prey. I can't quite remember what crows are considered, though. And I did have an opportunity to correct even an IBMer, over the application of the term, she considered the ones that chased the children from that movie to be some other type of dinosaur, I remembered that they were indeed the specie of raptor, that the scientist there, was fond of. ------------------- Gregg C Levine [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------ "The Force will be with you...Always." Obi-Wan Kenobi "Use the Force, Luke."� Obi-Wan Kenobi (This company dedicates this E-Mail to General Obi-Wan Kenobi ) (This company dedicates this E-Mail to Master Yoda )
> -----Original Message----- > From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of > Dennis G. Wicks > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 9:30 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Two More Responses to Sun's FUD Attacks > > Well, they don't even get basic "everyday" facts correct. Raptors are not > extinct. > That is the term for birds of prey, which includes hawks, falcons, eagles, > and > possibly even crows. (And maybe z800s, in a technical sense!) > > Since the author doesn't know this, maybe it is because of their extremely > young age > and lack of experience. After all, if it passes the spell checker, it must > be right. > > > > > > Phil Payne > > <Linux@isham-res To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > earch.com> cc: > > Sent by: Linux Subject: Re: Two More > Responses to Sun's FUD Attacks > on 390 Port > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > RIST.EDU> > > > > 03/21/02 03:10 > > AM > > Please respond > > to Linux on 390 > > Port > > > > > > > > > Well, here's another one. > > http://www.bigbluesmoke.com/worldnews2.html > > The 'IBM unearths Raptor' story is either deliberately intended to mislead, > or the author has > such a poor appreciation of what IBM did that he/she should be disciplined > and not be > published again without a stringent review. > > The statement:"This new baby-frame has been "factory crippled" so that it > will only utilize > 1-4 cpus and only run "Modern" workloads" is flat and completely wrong in > both respects - it > may even be actionable, if IBM can be bothered. > > Firstly, the z800 is NOT crippled in any significant way. It uses a new > MCM purpose-developed > for the machine. Because it is intended (under other labels) for the > Japanese market it has > VOS3 functionality - which is a significant plus for the machine. There > are a few things > that the z800 doesn't support, such as parallel channels - but it also > doesn't support > VS1:ECPS, byte multiplexor channels or 1401 emulation. What does Sun think > it is - a > dinosaur? > > Secondly, and IMO much more seriously - the last paragraph of the story > creates the very > strong impression that z/OS.e is a prerequisite, not an additional option. > In fact, there is > no compulsion for anyone (ISV or user) to change ANYTHING to run on a z800. > Even most stuff > written up to three decades ago will still run. > > The art of good FUD is to build implications around an indisputable fact. > However, these are > not facts - they are very misleading lies about IBM's product. They > proceed either from quite > appalling knowledge of a competitor's product or from malfeasance on > someone's part. > > Whichever it is, it is Sun's responsibility because the site is quite > clearly sanctioned by > Sun. > > -- > Phil Payne > http://www.isham-research.com > +44 7785 302 803 > +49 173 6242039 >
