Linux-Advocacy Digest #339, Volume #28 Thu, 10 Aug 00 12:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company (Joe Ragosta)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: How can screensaver ignore mouse activity? (Mikey)
Re: No Gnome for me :-( ("Nibor")
Re: C# is a copy of java (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Come on, Jedi, where are you? (Black Dragon)
Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company (Jim)
Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company (Jim)
Re: How can screensaver ignore mouse activity? (Holger Bauer)
Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company (Chad Irby)
Re: How can screensaver ignore mouse activity? (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Sun revenues up WHOPPING 42% !!! (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: How can screensaver ignore mouse activity?
[Q] Too many distribution? ("JongAm Park")
Re: Are Linux people illiterate? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company (ZnU)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Joe Ragosta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 14:13:42 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> JS/PL wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > JS/PL wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > JS/PL wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If I remember correctly, the links were posted as supporting
> > > > > > opinion
> > > > that
> > > > > > Windows2K is extremely reliable. Posted because I was accused
> > > > > > of
> > having
> > > > no
> > > > > > credibility when I said it myself.
> > > > >
> > > > > You have no credibility . How could anyone credibly say W2K is a
> > reliable
> > > > OS -
> > > > > W2K is too new and hasn't be in service long enough to prove
> > > > > itself.
> > > > Hotmail
> > > > > still runs FreeBSD. That's why W2K deployment has been put on
> > > > > hold
> > for
> > > > many
> > > > > firms. It's still hard to get drivers for W2K. Get real.
> > > >
> > > > Who cares what Hotmail runs? Whats's the point of changing the
> > > > server?
> > It's
> > > > just a company MS has purchased like 100's of others. There are
> > employees
> > > > and hardware in place and I'd be real surprised if the service ever
> > turns a
> > > > profit. Why sink dolloars retraining and purchasing un neccessary
> > hardware
> > > > and software when the Hotmail doesn't make dime one.
> > >
> > > Because it's a fucking admission that their OWN product (which,
> > > whaddya
> > > know, doesn't cost MS a dime) is incapable of handling the task.
> >
> > Well after looking into the matter further I've come across this little
> > gem,
> > read it and weep:
> > "HotMail has commenced its much awaited migration to a Microsoft
> > operating
> > system. Some Windows 2000 machines have recently been moved into the
> > load
> > balancing pool, with currently between 90-95% of requests being served
> > by
> > the established FreeBSD/Apache platform, and 5-10% from Windows 2000.
> > The
> > Hotmail site infrastructure is enormous, and even if everything runs
> > smoothly, a migration will likely take several weeks."
>
> It's only taken them 3 YEARS to start what should be a 6-month project
> (180 days from initial concept meeting to completion of debugging).
>
Actually, you're far to kind.
It's taken 3 years to get 5-10% of the way through the project.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 14:21:08 GMT
In article <8mtl87$4q1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
-- snip --
> > One would need to assume the DOJ and Judge were FACTUALLY wrong.
>
> THis is not a huge assumption to make.
Especially for MS Cheerleaders; for them, such an assumption is trivial,
since Microsoft Is Always Right And Everybody Else Is Always Wrong.
> > As we all know, Findings of Fact are reliable.
>
> *cough*bullshit*cough*.
Translation: "Microsoft Is Always Right And Everybody Else (Especially
Government) Is Always Wrong."
> > and rarely is a fact challenged on appeal.
>
> THey will be, I'd imagine.
Translation: "Microsoft Is Always Right And Everybody Else Is Always
Wrong."
> > Is it reasonable to defend MS by looking at the market they
> > distorted to prove the monopoly is maintained by market forces ?
> > No. Of course not.
>
> It is more than reasonable to note a lack of demand in a market for a
> product, where that market is free to choose whether or not to use
> that product.
There has been *NO CHOICE* in the preload market until very recently, a
*FACT* that the MS-Contingent continually ignores.
But I forgot the MS-Contingent's Slogan: "Microsoft Is Always Right And
Everybody Else Is Always Wrong."
My Bad.
Curtis
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Mikey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How can screensaver ignore mouse activity?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 23:44:16 -0400
Thus Sprake Holger Bauer:
> How can I prevent a screen saver from reacting on mouse movements
> (shaking desk ...)
> and only allow to react on keyboard presses?
Duct-tape your mouse down. No. Unplug your mouse. :)
--
Since-beer-leekz,
Mikey
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam
possit materiari?
------------------------------
From: "Nibor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.ask.phred
Subject: Re: No Gnome for me :-(
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 09:29:47 -0500
Ed Maier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> OSguy wrote:
> >
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > > "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 23:59:47 -0500, OSguy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> just
> > > > might of wrote, but I'm not going to swear to it:
> > > >
> > > > <snip>
> > > > >
> > > > >Thanks for letting me rant.....
> > > > >
> > > > ><Wintrolls need not make remarks to this post since this is
probably
> > > > >over their heads...no BSODs were involved.>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > Hey, You brought me here, and now you're saying I can speak up?
> > > >
> > > > BTW, that's why I like Mandrake
> > >
> > > I haven't tried Mandrake but I AM wishing I had gone with Corel rather
than Redhat. From everyone I
> > > know that uses they all say it is much more *user friendly* God I hate
that term.
> >
> > No you don't want to go with Corel. If you read the archives of
c.o.l.a., you will see many, many
> > complaints on Corel. Basically their installation is broken and will
probably give you more of a bad
> > taste feeling towards Linux. If you need something easier than Redhat
6.2 or Mandrake 7.1, try
> > OpenCaldera.....but also be advised that there are complaints that you
can't easily reconfigure Open
> > Caldera once it is installed. Perhaps others in this group can let you
know of other distros that are
> > easier.
> >
> > Good Luck.
>
> I play with SuSE alot. No complaints here. All my hardware configured
okay,
> except the drivers for the sound card don't provide output for the rear
> channels. It (SuSE) only costs $29.00.
>
> Ed Maier
> Arlington, TX
Glad to hear all the hardware configured but I would think sound output
from the rear channel might be a little embarassing for SuSE. Even for
only $29 one must maintain some sense of decorum.............
gRoG
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Subject: Re: C# is a copy of java
Date: 10 Aug 2000 14:20:32 GMT
In article <jIfk5.21786$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Spud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If it does, your fundamental design is broken.
Somehow I think you're wrong there. This isn't your average piece of
code squidging a WWW form over ODBC but a high-level microchip
simulator and deadlock analyser. Its ability to gobble enormous
amounts of memory a few bytes at a time is unmatched by nearly
everything else I've ever compared it with. (Sure, I've purified it
and chased down every leak. But it was a pain.)
> The simple approach of acquire, use, release is very simple and very
> robust; the most frequent case of resource leaks is trying to
> acquire too early or release too late, both of which, barring
> possible optimization issues, are design errors.
While that works well for simple stuff, its not particularly effective
when the usage pattern isn't so sweet. With a simulator, for example,
the flow of control of the program and the flow of control of the
simulated program are usually completely different. I'm simulating
systems with hundreds of parallel processes talking a protocol that is
optimised for direct hardware implementation, and which has built-in
non-determinism. If I used the simple model of memory use you
describe, I'd probably need to have around 10 times more memory than
now because I would be unable to share values around to the extent I
do at the moment.
OK, I am working with one of the more unusually nasty problems in
computing. Most people don't need the techniques I'm using for many
of their tasks. But I know (from experiment) that *I* need them!
(My simulator is fast though; it kicks the butt off another in-house
simulator that was written by our hardware development people, and
theirs has both an optimising compiler and a native-code translator.
*chuckle* >:^)
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Actually, come to think of it, I don't think your opponent, your audience,
or the metropolitan Tokyo area would be in much better shape.
-- Jeff Huo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Black Dragon)
Subject: Re: Come on, Jedi, where are you?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 14:30:56 GMT
On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 13:51:21 GMT in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> `Roberto Alsina' said:
>And no matter how many GNOMEs try to call us crooks and want us to
>go away.
GNOME & KDE are both wonderfull, but neither of them is as fantasic as a
*nix CLI!
--
Black Dragon
"Trying to make the Internet a better place, one Linux box at a time."
------------------------------
From: Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company
Date: 10 Aug 2000 14:42:30 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, ZnU
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "JS/PL"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > I believe Amazon.com was running their site with final release
> > version of Advanced Server a few weeks before the product was
> > available to the general public.
>
> Well, now Amazon is running Stronghold/2.4.2 Apache/1.3.6 C2NetEU/2412
> (Unix) on Compaq Tru64 UNIX
>
> > Lets see...who else is running it...
> > Oh Stratus http://www.stratus.com/news/2000/2000417ov.htm
> >
> > You better go tell them Windows2000 hasn't been proven yet because
> > they are guaranteeing 99.999% unterupted computing on their servers
> > running Windows2000
>
> "The Stratus ftServer family delivers 99.999% hardware availability in
> baseline configurations."
>
> Please note "hardware availability." Not software. They'd been insane to
> make claims about another company's product like that.
>
> > Then you have Hewlett Packard who is installing the operating system
> > on 80,000+ desktops worldwide. Hmmm - you better hurry up and call
> > them to let them know that their decision was made from non-credible
> > information! There might still be time to save them from impending
> > doom!
>
> Chances are it's more stable than NT4 or Windows 98. But more stable
> than Solaris, AIX or even FreeBSD? Nobody knows, but somehow I doubt it;
> similar claims about previous versions of Windows have failed to pan out.
But does that prevent know-it-all webmasters from swallowing the ol'
treble hook, along the the M$ line and sinker? Noooooo....
--
Jim Naylor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company
Date: 10 Aug 2000 14:43:45 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "JS/PL"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "ZnU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "JS/PL"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > I believe Amazon.com was running their site with final release
> > > version of Advanced Server a few weeks before the product was
> > > available to the general public.
> >
> > Well, now Amazon is running Stronghold/2.4.2 Apache/1.3.6 C2NetEU/2412
> > (Unix) on Compaq Tru64 UNIX
> >
> > > Lets see...who else is running it...
> > > Oh Stratus http://www.stratus.com/news/2000/2000417ov.htm
> > >
> > > You better go tell them Windows2000 hasn't been proven yet because
> > > they are guaranteeing 99.999% unterupted computing on their servers
> > > running Windows2000
> >
> > "The Stratus ftServer family delivers 99.999% hardware availability in
> > baseline configurations."
> >
> > Please note "hardware availability." Not software. They'd been insane
> > to
> > make claims about another company's product like that.
>
> They would be insane? You mean to say they invented and built every peice
> of
> harware in their server so they wouldn't haver to be insane, or are they
> in
> fact using someone elses products to build the server and guranteeing
> those
> products?
> Plus this is a direct copy and paste from their site:
>
> "Stratus, maker of the world's most reliable servers, is responding to
> this
> need by extending its unsurpassed uptime to Microsoft� Windows� 2000
> environments."
>
> > > Then you have Hewlett Packard who is installing the operating system
> > > on 80,000+ desktops worldwide. Hmmm - you better hurry up and call
> > > them to let them know that their decision was made from non-credible
> > > information! There might still be time to save them from impending
> > > doom!
> >
> > Chances are it's more stable than NT4 or Windows 98. But more stable
> > than Solaris, AIX or even FreeBSD? Nobody knows, but somehow I doubt
> > it;
> > similar claims about previous versions of Windows have failed to pan
> > out.
>
> Chances are it's the most stable operating system ....to date "."
And chances are, you get paid by the post for saying so...
--
Jim Naylor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Holger Bauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How can screensaver ignore mouse activity?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 19:04:50 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mikey wrote:
> Thus Sprake Holger Bauer:
>
> > How can I prevent a screen saver from reacting on mouse movements
> > (shaking desk ...)
> > and only allow to react on keyboard presses?
>
> Duct-tape your mouse down. No. Unplug your mouse. :)
>
> --
> Since-beer-leekz,
> Mikey
> Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam
> possit materiari?
Well, unplugging will stop Linux from working (at least last time I've
tried) :-)
Holger
------------------------------
From: Chad Irby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 15:08:10 GMT
Over the course of a couple of posts posts,
"JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...in an attempt to "show" that many companies use IIS.
> and this...and this....and this...
> http://www.netcraft.com/whats/?host=ancestry.netscape.com&port=80
> http://www.netcraft.com/whats/?host=askjeeves.netscape.com&port=80
> http://www.netcraft.com/whats/?host=atyouroffice.netscape.com&port=80
> http://www.netcraft.com/whats/?host=www.oracle.li&port=80
> http://www.netcraft.com/whats/?host=www.oracle.ru&port=80
> http://www.netcraft.com/whats/?host=www.sun.kz&port=80
> http://www.netcraft.com/survey/developers/compaq.html
> http://www.netcraft.com/whats/?host=www.apple.co.at&port=80
Since you don't seem to know anything about domain name squatters, you
might want to actually *look* at some of the URLs you're posting about.
About half of the referred domains are not in the possession of the
folks you're suggesting, and there's no real guarantee that the others
are what they seem.
For instance, the www.apple.co.at domain in Austria is apparently owned
by some guy at Vienna Online, not Apple Computer...
Finding IIS as serversin in places like Lithuania and Kazakhstan pretty
much proves your point, though... you have to be in a backward country
to want to use Microsoft products.
--
Chad Irby \ My greatest fear: that future generations will,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \ for some reason, refer to me as an "optimist."
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How can screensaver ignore mouse activity?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 10:20:20 -0500
Holger Bauer wrote:
>
> How can I prevent a screen saver from reacting on mouse movements
> (shaking desk ...)
> and only allow to react on keyboard presses?
>
> I am using KDE and the screensaver there in.
>
> Regards,
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Don't know about the generic KDE screen saver, but if you use xlock it
won't react until you press a key or click the mouse button.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Sun revenues up WHOPPING 42% !!!
Date: 10 Aug 2000 15:21:49 GMT
In article <8mse55$9kj$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Loren Petrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Also, there is the interesting question of Solaris, especially
> Solaris-x86. It's an interesting question how much money Sun
> directly makes off of Solaris, or whether the main purpose of
> Solaris is to provide an OS for Sun's real moneymaker, its hardware.
Don't forget the support contracts...
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Actually, come to think of it, I don't think your opponent, your audience,
or the metropolitan Tokyo area would be in much better shape.
-- Jeff Huo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: How can screensaver ignore mouse activity?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 15:34:58 GMT
On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 18:12:36 +0200, Holger Bauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>How can I prevent a screen saver from reacting on mouse movements
>(shaking desk ...)
>and only allow to react on keyboard presses?
>
>I am using KDE and the screensaver there in.
Download xscreensaver, examine the code for reacting to mouse movements
and comment it out.
------------------------------
From: "JongAm Park" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Q] Too many distribution?
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 00:53:35 +0900
Well, I checked the Mandrake Linux for my latest Linux. I usually
upgrade
the kernel but this time I need to have bootable Linux CD, so I chose
one.
And I get to have some question about Linux, although I started using
Linux
in 1992.
1. When I read info. about major Linux distribution, RedHat, Suse,
Caldera,
Mandrake, Debian, I coudn't find significant difference among them.
Well, they are the same Linux with different their-own easy-to-use
maintenance
programs.
Don't you think that they are virtually same?
2. How can you make money with the Linux?
Here, people make money by doing IT business with Linux, not by
selling Linux CD. ( Here we have lots of Linux distributions but
they are basically RedHat. Well, the Mandrake is also a kind of
RedHat, also. )
Linux people, including me, like free software. Although the "free"
means
"freedom" according to the open source definition, but people regard
it
as "free". Will thak kind of people want to buy commercial S/W for the
Linux?
Well, special purpose software for special need can be sold, but
general
s/w like editors, simple utilities, etc may not be sold.
What is business model for the Linux?
Should we make friends with H/W guys for doing Linux business?
( Here there are many companies which are in Linux business, and many
of them are in H/W business. )
3. No-standard-UI-environment-available can hurt Linux, can't it?
Well, we like diversity. Linux offers diversity. I like WindowMaker.
Some people like other window managers. Nowadays, people like desktop
managers.
Some of them are GNOME, KDE, etc. Some people like different one, like
GNUstep. ( Well, WindowMaker and GNUStep development looks to be a lot
slower than GNOME and KDE. People only say GNOME and KDE. At least it
looks
so. )
But, don't we need a standard environment?
Without a standard environment, drap&drop cannot be implemented, or
people should write any desktop-app integration codes for every
environment!
I understand that there is an eazel project for making a standard
Linux user environment. But.. will major Linux distributors
support it?
Just curious.
Regards,
JongAm Park
--
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition
from mediocre minds."
- Albert Einstein
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Are Linux people illiterate?
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 11:47:04 -0400
Roberto Alsina wrote:
>
> Matthias Warkus escribi�:
> >
> > It was the Wed, 09 Aug 2000 02:28:01 GMT...
> > ...and Courageous <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > "Payed" is much more logical than "paid".
> > > > > > > Just try to *logically*
> > > > > > > explain why "shure" is a misspelling.
> > >
> > > "Shure" is a misspelling, because it *is* -- by
> > > definition. But if you want a system that makes
> > > sense, switch to a purely phonetic system which
> > > makes use of natural dipthongs. All you would need
> > > is some mechanism of distinguishing long vowels
> > > from short ones.
> >
> > Using a phonetic alphabet that makes all the words that sound the same
> > *look* exactly the same, too, would reduce the information content of
> > the text. Not a good idea.
>
> Well, no. Or at least, no, unless you are saying that speech has less
> information content than writing?
>
> > That's the reason why the discussions about introducing phonetic
> > spelling for French never went for long...
>
> You could use phonetic spelling in spanish without problems. In fact
> you almost have it anyway, except for these (I use argentinian
> pronunciation, YMWV):
>
> k,q sound the same.
> s,z sound the same.
> c sounds like either k or s.
> v sounds like b
> h makes no sound (except in ch)
> ll sounds like y (when y is not used as a vowel)
> y sounds like i (when y is used as a vowel)
>
> Change that as Nobel prize winner Garc�a M�rquez suggested, and
> you have spanish with phonetic spelling, no sweat, no information
> lost.
Russian is even more consistant, with it's use of the Cyrillic
alphabet, but still, there is ambiguity
When you hear the sound like "ee" in Engish is it
"i" (actually written as a backwards "N") or the character
that looks like 'bl'
>
> Since spanish is not a less complex language than english (or rather
> the opposite), the same should be possible for english.
>
> Let's face it, english spelling is complex for no particular reason :-)
>
> --
> Roberto Alsina
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642
I: "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"
J: 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
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
that she doesn't like.
D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (D) above.
F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
response until their behavior improves.
G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2000 15:54:52 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "JS/PL"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "ZnU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "JS/PL"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > I believe Amazon.com was running their site with final release
> > > version of Advanced Server a few weeks before the product was
> > > available to the general public.
> >
> > Well, now Amazon is running Stronghold/2.4.2 Apache/1.3.6
> > C2NetEU/2412 (Unix) on Compaq Tru64 UNIX
> >
> > > Lets see...who else is running it... Oh Stratus
> > > http://www.stratus.com/news/2000/2000417ov.htm
> > >
> > > You better go tell them Windows2000 hasn't been proven yet
> > > because they are guaranteeing 99.999% unterupted computing on
> > > their servers running Windows2000
> >
> > "The Stratus ftServer family delivers 99.999% hardware availability
> > in baseline configurations."
> >
> > Please note "hardware availability." Not software. They'd been
> > insane to make claims about another company's product like that.
>
> They would be insane? You mean to say they invented and built every
> peice of harware in their server so they wouldn't haver to be insane,
> or are they in fact using someone elses products to build the server
> and guranteeing those products?
These machines use redundant hardware, so if a component fails, things
stay up. Moreover, I'm sure Windows 2000 is much more complex and much
more of a black box than any of the hardware components they're using.
There's much more room for something to go wrong there.
> Plus this is a direct copy and paste from their site:
>
> "Stratus, maker of the world's most reliable servers, is responding
> to this need by extending its unsurpassed uptime to Microsoft�
> Windows� 2000 environments."
All that says is that they're making more stable Windows machines, and
it only says that in vague and indefinite MarketSpeak. What you
apparently fail to understand is that many people aren't impressed by
the fact that Windows 2000 is more stable than previous versions.
> > > Then you have Hewlett Packard who is installing the operating
> > > system on 80,000+ desktops worldwide. Hmmm - you better hurry up
> > > and call them to let them know that their decision was made from
> > > non-credible information! There might still be time to save them
> > > from impending doom!
> >
> > Chances are it's more stable than NT4 or Windows 98. But more
> > stable than Solaris, AIX or even FreeBSD? Nobody knows, but somehow
> > I doubt it; similar claims about previous versions of Windows have
> > failed to pan out.
>
> Chances are it's the most stable operating system ....to date "."
Most stable Windows OS? Sure. Most stable OS in general? Why should we
believe you or Microsoft this time? What's different?
--
This universe shipped by weight, not volume. Some expansion may have
occurred during shipment.
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
