Linux-Advocacy Digest #723, Volume #25 Tue, 21 Mar 00 02:13:08 EST
Contents:
Re: Producing Quality Code (Loren Petrich)
Re: A pox on the penguin? (Linux Virus Epidemic) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: LINUX IS NOT FOR EVERYBODY (Terry Porter)
Re: seeUthere.com switches from Linux to Windows DNA for Web site development (Terry
Porter)
Re: I don't want to stir up any concerns... (Matt Chiglinsky)
Re: Linux ISP? ("Gooba")
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (Joseph)
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (Joseph)
Re: Producing Quality Code ("Gooba")
Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again) (Joseph)
Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin or Linux
(Koan Kid)
Re: Make linux primary OS at work? (Darren Winsper)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Subject: Re: Producing Quality Code
Date: 21 Mar 2000 05:05:59 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
><RANT>
>I more or less agree with you. I have been interviewing people for the
>last few months and can't find a decent guy in the bunch.
OK, I'll take your test.
>Just one freaken person should know about SMP performance issues with
>shared data.
I think the problem is that one has to impose one-at-a-time
access to the data. Which means that only one CPU at a time will be
active. However, if the data could be partitioned, then more than one CPU
may be active, each on its assigned partition.
>Qsort issues with ordered vs random files.
Quicksort, as I understand it, is O(N log N) most of the time, for
N items. But if the list is initially sorted in the wrong direction, the
time becomes O(N^2).
>How to write a good algorithm.
Rather generic.
>When to use and when not to use recursion.
The only problem I can think of with recursion is that it might
eat up too much stack space, because each function call needs a few bytes
for passed parameters and local data.
>Just once give me a guy that knows how to write a decent hash table.
I've never done that, but I think I know what a hashtable is. One
composes hash codes from items to be accessed and then assigns those
items to places in a list indexed by those hashcodes. One does have to
have some alternative sort of list for more than one sharing the same
hashcode, however. And the ideal choice of hascode algorithm would be one
that would make the items evenly distributed.
>Can't anyone discuss pros/cons of using trees, hashtables, and
>array+bsearch?
I'm only really familiar with array+bsearch; the main downside is
that this array has to be sorted before it can be used.
Binary trees are automatically sorted; however, they can become
unbalanced.
Hashtables offer good performance, but there is a tradeoff
between hashtable size and hashtable-member size (each must be a list).
>Doesn't anyone know what a histogram is used for anymore?
I've done a lot of data visualization in my career, and yes, I've
sometimes used histograms.
>Every time I see a Windows guy app guy come in, they don't know squat
>about how to code decently.
Most of my programming has been rather generic, but I've used
several OSes over the years, and I've seldom programmed in Windows.
>And, if you know these things, drop me an e-mail, we need good people.
I'm not sure I'd be in any position to accept such an offer.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A pox on the penguin? (Linux Virus Epidemic)
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 21:12:55 -0800
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefan Ohlsson) wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>
>>> As a matter of fact, AmigaOS is safer than W95/98 when it comes to viruses
>>> or at least worms. There's no Internet Explorer with ActiveX and no Outlook
>>> that blindly runs attached programs...
>>
>>Unless you use AmigaGuide :) which would execute commands in the document
>>blindly. *ouch*
>>
> Send me an AmigaGuide document that executes a nasty command when I open
> the email, I dare ya :)
Whenever I fire up my remaining amigas, I try to remember that. :)
>
>>Nice idea, but I think html is better :)
>>
> More flexible, powerful, etc.. yes. Altough AmigaGuide is smaller and simpler.
> I think it's a bit of an overkill to fire up a www browser just to read
> some online help :)
>
> /Stefan
Yes, I like the gnome help for that. I think it uses html, but is lightweight
(compared to say Netscape)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: LINUX IS NOT FOR EVERYBODY
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 21 Mar 2000 13:12:35 +0800
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 03:02:47 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED],net <[EMAIL PROTECTED],net> wrote:
>On 21 Mar 2000 09:59:40 +0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry
>Porter) wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 05:44:15 -0600, Tim Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Ilya Grishashvili wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>> There was a discossion here that moved me to post this message.
>>>>
>>>> This is my opinion you don't have to agree.
>>:)
>>>>
>>>> I'm a real Penguinist, but I have to admit:
>>>
>>>> LINUX IS NOT FOR EVERYBODY
>>True
>
>
>10 points for honesty.
cool :)
>>>> AND NOT FOR EVERY NEED.
>>True again
>
>Another 10 points.
Great :)
>>But so is every other OS in the world!
>
>You get 50 points for that one.
Smokin :))
>>>>
>>>> If you're a secretary who only needs email and office tools,
>>>> linux is not for you!
>>Before MS started pushing their crap, Secretaries used BANYAN to run
>>MsWord, and that networking system is STABLE!
>
>Ooops - 20 points.. You should have said secretaries were using
>DisplayWrite via PC's on 3270 SNA connections.
-20. I *protest*!
But I'm still right Steve, you're just going further back in time. Gimme back
those 20 points you Windows Troll !
>>They used Banyan email utilising "Streetalk" naming methods, and they loved it
>>. Word was just another app.
>
>-10 points. It's all about app's. OS means nothing to a secretary.
Thats my point exactly, so I'll have those 10 points back thanks.
>>>
>>>How many times must we dispell this crap? This is EXACTLY the sort of person
>>>linux is perfect for. This is EXACTLY the sort of job windows (and Mac for that
>>>matter) is HORRIBLE for.
>>I agree 100%.
>
>Unless you want groupware ala Lotus CLIENT and file formats including
>charts and tables that the rest of the office world is using.
>*.txt files are long dead. Today's Email for better or worse (I vote
>worse) includes video, graphics and so forth. You need to ACCURATELY
>be able to reproduce the formats or you are out of the game.
>>People who say this have no real world experience, its just the MS propaganda
>>line.
>
>No they are just used to seeing MSOffice in just about every client's
>account they have.
Yeah I'll go along with that, but it still doesnt mean that its the best.
Things are changing, how long will MS Office be the defacto standard ?
>
>
>>>
>>>I'll agree that linux is not suited to the typical home user/gamer.
>>>Fine. Almost no one here would say that it is.
>>Everyone but me that is :))
>>My kids loved networked Koules (Windows uses have NEVER have seen it, never
>>will), networked Quake, Networked FreeCiv, Adom etc.
>
>Buy a Sony Playstation. Trust me, you and your kids will love it.
They have one, a Nintendo, and Game Boys. Trust me kids LOVE Koules,
mine screeched and raved playing that game for weeks.
Now they're looking at the Linux Game Boy progamming kit, all free of course.
>
>>>
>>>> Unix (Linux) is an operating system developed by programmers
>>>> and for programmers or researchers !!!
>>Crap.
>
>-10 points here. No contest. Linux/Unix is for geeks.
Nonsense, Linux is as good as Windows at most things, better at many
and is Free and Open.
I've helped a long time Windows user to move to the Linux desktop :)
She has had a Linux server up 97 days, but always used Windows for her
own desktop pc.
After the initial mental adjustment (that Steve has never been able to make)
she's settled down to being *way* more productive than she was under Windows
!
Another satisfied Linux Desktop user.
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 1 week 6 days 22 hours 36 minutes
** homepage http://www.odyssey.apana.org.au/~tjporter **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: seeUthere.com switches from Linux to Windows DNA for Web site development
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 21 Mar 2000 13:22:19 +0800
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 01:34:08 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED],net <[EMAIL PROTECTED],net> wrote:
>And your proof of IBM moving Aix to Linux?
>
>IBM is running Linux on an OS/390 as far as I have heard they have
>absolutely no plans what so ever to abandon AIX in favor of Linux.
>
>First off Linux does not support Chrp.
>RAS is not honored. (ie: concurrent maintenance)
>
>Proof please?
>
>Steve
Why would you want to know "Steve" ?
You're just an average, and disgrunled Linux wannabee, who has odd printers
and soundcards that just don't *happen* to be supported under Linux ?
Or are you ??
Perhaps your anonymous persona will prevent us from ever finding out who "Steve"
the troll really is ?
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 1 week 6 days 22 hours 36 minutes
** homepage http://www.odyssey.apana.org.au/~tjporter **
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Chiglinsky)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: I don't want to stir up any concerns...
Date: 21 Mar 2000 06:00:40 GMT
Microsoft making software for someone else's OS? Nothing new. Didn't
they do that a long time ago with Apple? It will only promote
standardization. If they would only port Word to Linux then Linux
would finally be a decent desktop OS.
------------------------------
From: "Gooba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux ISP?
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 06:07:16 GMT
Just a quick warning, there's only one free ISP that I am aware of which
supports Linux. I don't recall the name at the moment, but I know somebody
(Steve, Chad, Drestin, etc.) will go off on it as if the lack of Free ISP's
reflected on the OS itself.
Good luck
"JoeX1029" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I need a good dial-up ISP for my Linux box. Anybody have any info please
EMAIL
> me. Remember: Free is good...
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 22:09:48 -0500
From: Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
George Marengo wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 Mar 2000 16:26:54 -0800, josco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 20 Mar 2000, George Marengo wrote:
> <snip>
> >> Given MS's history, even to that point, there were NO indications
> >> that they would ever concede anything... they want it all. If IBM
> >> thought that MS wouldn't miss "a good sized niche", they failed.
> >
> >You have your "facts" all wrong.
>
> No, I don't have my facts wrong. I was using OS/2 2.0 and 2.1 when
> this was occurring and I know the history of the two companies. The
> point is that IBM PSP on one hand was pushing OS/2 while another
> part of the same division was selling Windows.
And I was using OS/2 since version 1.0 (windows since v 2) and I also
know the history of the two companies. So what the hell does that mean
except if longevity wins then I win.
You're wrong that the IBM MS fight with WARP was over OS pre-loads. MS
wanted IBM to stop all OS/2 development and withdraw OS/2 when they
muscled IBM with Win95 licenses for PSP.
> >MS asked IBM to kill OS/2 - Period.
>
> And IBM didn't concede -- what's your point? My point is that IBM
> didn't go in willing to fight Microsoft tooth and nail for operating
> system share.
"tooth and nail" What is tjhat but a nonsense comment. IBM did fight
MS in the OS market and lost hundreds of millions of dollars in Win95
licese fees alone and they delayed access to Win95 for the PSP group
trying to compete. IBM hadn't aquired a Win95 licese until days before
the launch. The US Judge in his finding of fact concluded IBM did try
to fight MS and lost due to abuse of monopoly power.
> >> >from preventing PC vendors from selling a PC with anything
> >> >but MS OS and had they done the very simple thing of providing
> >> >ports of their Office Suite for OS/2 as they did for the Mac.
> >>
> >> True, but was any of that a secret that was kept from IBM? Of
> >> course not, they knew MS's terms.
> >
> >"Hey I told him I'd shoot him if he breathed." Those are the terms.
> >
> >When does this argument become ridiculous? A man who wants to ridicule
> >IBM for not supporting OS/2 has now flipped his argument.
>
> What in the world are you talking about? My argument has been that
> regardless of the illegal activity that MS did, OS/2 ultimately failed
> because of IBM.
The Judge in the anti-trust case thinks otherwise, that MS's behavior
was illegal and anti-competitive.
Oh so you say IBM should have know MS would break the law and so it is
still IBM's fault - yes as much as it is any victim's fault for being
the victim of a crime.
> MS isn't the one who decided that the default OS install on IBM PC's
> would be Windows, MS isn't the one who decided that it would chase
> the moving target called the Win32 API.
No more than a man with gun a pointed at his head "decides" to to what
he is told. You're view runs contrary to the simple and recognized
facts that justified the Consent Decree and the Anti-Trust case.
> Whatever MS _wanted_ them to do, what IBM did with OS/2 was their
> choosing, not MS's.
Naive.
> >IBM should have know better.....so should have MS which is why they
> >are the ones who butts are in court facing a break-up. It is not as if
> >anti-trust laws were kept secret. MS knew the law. IBM survived the
> >encounter, MS will probably not survive. Who won?
>
> MS's legal issues didn't kill OS/2, despite what they wanted.
A Counter-factual argument. Would the winner had still have won had he
not tripped his opponent early in the race? You can't say yes unless
you live in a alternative dimension where MS had followed the law. We
can say the winner has been caught and is being punished. It all
counts, the race and the legal consequences.
> Do you really think that MS won't survive a break-up? Ever hear
> of Standard Oil? Guess what happened to them after they were
> broken up. Break up MS and you'll end up will smaller versions
> of the current MS.
Survive? Sure. As smaller versions of MS without monopoly power, unable
to fix prices and unable to share development and spliting talent. I'm
so scared.
You think Software is like Oil? It isn't. Oil is a bulky
physical/chemical product requiring an extensive supply and distibution
network. Software is digital - sold on CD or downloaded.
Break up MS and into three independent sources and watch their software
prices drop as OEms play them off each other. In time quality will
increase, prices drop quickly and we'll all be better off. I wouldn't
think MS could maintain their monopoly supported profit margins when
split up and in competion. Competiton forces price cuts, lower prifts,
lower corporate value.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 22:18:16 -0500
From: Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
[EMAIL PROTECTED], net wrote:
>
> On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 01:44:36 GMT, George Marengo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >What in the world are you talking about? My argument has been that
> >regardless of the illegal activity that MS did, OS/2 ultimately failed
> >because of IBM.
>
> True. IBM couldn't market a parachute to a bloke who just fell out of
> a plane at 30k feet.
I beg to differ. IBM would NOT be around let alone worth $205 billion
in market value if they were that bad. Historically IBM has been known
as a great marketing company for computers. Wang, Digital, DG are the
real losers.
IBM isn't a good consumer company but you know what? Neither is MS.
Most of MS's customers are OEMs. Most windows users are OEM customers.
MS has had and done a great job with PR and media manipulation (until
recently).
------------------------------
From: "Gooba" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Producing Quality Code
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2000 06:32:28 GMT
This branch of argument is worthless. We don't know you are who you
claim to be. Whether you use Ditchdigger350 or Bill J. Smith, it doesn't
matter. In Usenet we're all essentially anonymous for purposes of
credibility. Unless you actually intend to go meet the person face to face
and verify every aspect of their life is what they claim it is, there's no
need for you to get a "real" email, name, addy, anything.
His post is a start in the right direction, whatever name he signed to
it. If his post convinces someone to do as it recommends then it's a Good
Thing, regardless of whether he himself does so. This attempt to sidetrack
the argument and attack him instead of his argument is really not the way to
go about this.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2000 22:59:47 -0500
From: Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT (Bob shows his lack of knowledge yet again)
Josiah Fizer wrote:
>
> josco wrote:
> IBM charged an arm and a leg to get an OS/2 devlopment kit while Microsoft gave them
> away free at schools.
> But MS killed off OS/2.
I had a university discount for OS/2 1.0 and up and also for IBM PS/2
systems.
As for development, MS required ALL Windows developer use run OS/2 and
MS C under OS/2 to build DOS/Windows apps up to and including Windows
3.0. All MS tools ran under OS/2 as OS/2 apps. Ever use any of them?
I did so tool advantage did windows enjoy?
> IBM didn't embrace the concept of CD's and multimedia untell way late in the game,
> forcing users to install 50+ 1.44meg disks.
> But MS killed off OS/2.
I never had a 50 disk OS/2 install and I ran/run OS/2 1.0 to 4.0. CDs
began with 2.0, 1.3 wasn't a big install.
What about MS's anti-competitve OEM preloads? How can you forget that
large problem when talking about consumer access?
> OS/2 refused to support an easy install method, forcing users to edit a 200+ line
> CONFIG.SYS file to add a CD-ROM driver.
> But MS killed off OS/2.
MS DOS Config.sys and windows.ini was easier? What about DOS/Windows and
Extended, Expanded and High memory using hexadecimal memory addresses?
That was MUCH harder than editing a text file to add a CD ROM - the very
same thing a DOS/Windows user did but the big bad OS/2 file had more
text lines. Windows had memory management complexities and requried
switches with hexadecimal memory addresses !
Windows won market share with exclusive OEM preloads, not ease of use.
> IBM droped all consumer level support for OS/2 forcing users to pay up to 200$ an
>hour
> for help installing the thing.
> But MS killed off OS/2.
And MS doesn't support ANY OEM editions of Windows -- PERIOD. Hell MS
doesn't even print manuals for OEMs! That's better?!?
> Face it, IBM did the deed with little help from MS. I used OS/2 up to Warp and liked
>it
> a lot, but the lack of software and tool support made it no longer worth dealing
>with.
Maybe if you ignore OEM preloads, the DOJ Consent Decree, DOS memory
controtions, MS refuseal to support OEM software, IBM's excellent OS/2
for Windows, IBM's university pricing and some simple facts about early
OS/2 and windows development.
------------------------------
From: Koan Kid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why not Darwin AND Linux rather than Darwin OR Linux? (was Re:Darwin
or Linux
Date: 21 Mar 2000 06:58:52 GMT
In comp.sys.mac.advocacy John C. Randolph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spake thusly:
> JEDIDIAH wrote:
> [re: Mike Paquette's credibility, vis-a-vis Podlipec]
>> I'll take his word on the matter over some wanker like you.
> Kid, it's pretty clear that you have no idea who Mike Paquette is, and
> are completely unaware of just how big an ass you're making of yourself.
Whoa! Easy, Cobra. You best be mindful'a who yer callin' "Kid". If'n I
weren't such 'n easy-goin' guy, I rekon I might'a took offence. ;)
KK (Smile when y'say that!)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Winsper)
Subject: Re: Make linux primary OS at work?
Date: 21 Mar 2000 15:12:29 GMT
On Sun, 19 Mar 2000 18:29:47 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED],net
<[EMAIL PROTECTED],net> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Mar 2000 12:23:15 -0500, Gary Hallock
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> Try FINDING the Linux version of RealPlayer on their site and you will
> >> get a good idea of how much they care about Linux.
> >>
> >
> >I had no problem finding RealPlayer 7 for Linux. It's right on their
> >website. Works great.
>
> I stand corrected, it was not there 2 weeks ago when I looked.
When Real and RH announced their 'joint venture' (Or whatever), they
said there would be a downloadable version of Realplayer 7 within 30
days. That was a couple of weeks ago.
> Also, this is a BETA version and is for Redhat only.
Then what's it doing on my Debian box? There is an RPM, but there is
also a plain binary installer (Like your beloved Installshield. I told
it where to put itself and it installed itself).
Once again you seem to be rather devoid of clues Steve.
--
Darren Winsper (El Capitano) - ICQ #8899775
Stellar Legacy project member - http://www.stellarlegacy.tsx.org
DVD boycotts. Are you doing your bit?
This message was typed before a live studio audience.
------------------------------
** 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 (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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
******************************
