Linux-Advocacy Digest #374, Volume #28 Sun, 13 Aug 00 08:13:13 EDT
Contents:
Re: FAQ for c.o.m.n.a Now Available! (Cihl)
Re: background in fvwm?? (Tim Hanson)
Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was: Microsoft
Ruling Too Harsh (Loren Petrich)
Re: Gutenberg (Arthur Frain)
Re: Reinventing Mexican food... why should anyone be so silly?! (Stephen S. Edwards
II)
Re: Microsoft MCSE (Stephen S. Edwards II)
Re: - Windows has made me stupid !!! Thanks, Bill. (Windows is worst than
Crack-Cocaine) - (I got to say it again!!!) (Craig Kelley)
Re: C# is a copy of java (Craig Kelley)
Re: It's official, NT beats Linux (?) (Craig Kelley)
Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company (Craig Kelley)
Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company (Craig Kelley)
Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard says
Linux growth stagnating (Craig Kelley)
Re: OS advertising in the movies... (was Re: Microsoft MCSE) (2:1)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: FAQ for c.o.m.n.a Now Available!
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 09:20:31 GMT
Leonardo wrote:
>
> Aaron Kulkis, a "Unix System Engineer". WOW!
>
> What a joke you are. You haven't done much with your life as you have ended
> up being a pathetic unix systems engineer who speds his whole life on
> c.o.l.a.
>
> Have a nice life!
>
Hey Aaron, have you ever noticed how people always start attacking
others personally when they can't win an argument? They know it's
true, so they just start bitching and whining about the one who wrote
it.
Looks like you really won the argument, Aaron.
--
You have changed the signature included in your e-mail.
For these changes to take effect, you must restart your computer!
Do you wish to restart your computer now?
[YES] [NO]
------------------------------
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: background in fvwm??
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 09:31:43 GMT
You put something in your .fvwm2rc file, but I'm not sure what. You
might try poking around http://www.fvwm.org/.
Alan Murrell wrote:
>
> Greetings, once again!
>
> I like using a basic X setup, with fvwm as my window manager (it's fast,
> light, and serves its purpose well). However, I would still like to have
> a background image, and have noticed a few screenshots of peoples'
> desktops using fvwm with background images, and was wondering if that was
> possible without the use of a desktop (such as gnome, or KDE -- i.e., with
> *just* the fvwm window manager).
>
> Thank you for your input.
>
> --
> Alan Murrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ: 1147392
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Comet/1777
--
On account of being a democracy and run by the people, we are the only
nation in the world that has to keep a government four years, no matter
what it does.
-- Will Rogers
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Loren Petrich)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Anti-Human Libertarians Oppose Microsoft Antitrust Action (was:
Microsoft Ruling Too Harsh
Date: 13 Aug 2000 09:56:38 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>1. Does Loren accept that Communism *IS* still alive (and thriving) in
>Russia
Mr. Kulkis has to report to bizarre conspiracy theories that defy
belief, such as how the biggest retreat since Brest-Litovsk in WWI is
some kind of fakery.
I've made a similar sort of case for Linux and the open-source
movement being parts of a Communist plot to destroy capitalist software by
both underselling it and by creating an ideological framework for the
collectivization of software. V.I. Lenin had allegedly claimed that the
capitalists would sell the rope that the Communists would use to hang
them, and offering software for free is a variant of that strategy.
>2. Is the motivation for his denial of the health of the Communist
>system
> in Russia due to the fact that Loren is either a Communist agitator
> himself, or what Lenin referred to as "a useful idiot"
>I have challenged Loren on no less than 10 occasions to mention even
>ONE significant difference between his beliefs and Communist philosophy.
> The fact that he REFUSES to answer is most telling.
I thought that my differences from Communism had been apparent in
my numerous postings, and it seems that Mr. Kulkis is unwilling to find
these differences. So I'll be explicit:
* Marxist dialectics is absolute gibberish, devoid of meaningful content
or predictive value.
* Marxist theories of historical inevitability I do not find very convincing.
* Marxist attempts at diagnosing the capitalist class and the working
class involve ideological contortions like those satirized in "Animal
Farm" as "four legs good, two legs bad", where chickens' wings are
officially declared legs.
* Communism has created a new ruling class, and I think that all ruling
classes are to be distrusted.
* Communists have been big on rewriting history.
* Communist countries have acted like the exact opposite of Marx's
Communist Utopia, in which everybody is unselfishly helpful to everybody
else, if I understand it correctly.
>> WTF do your personal attacks have to do with anything resembling Linux,
>> libertarianism, or politics? If all you are going to do is is insult
>Communism is the opposite of Libertarianism.
Both are naive ideologies, and the two have much in common:
* Identification of working and exploiting classes, and being on the side
of the working class. However the two ideologies have different
identifications of working and exploiting classes, though both have run
into cases where their classifications do not fit very well.
* Rationalism, or at least pretentions to rationalism.
* Economic theories being important parts of their ideologies.
* Having an anarchist utopia as their ideal.
* Dustbin-of-history triumphalism.
>I have demonstrated, that for all of his faux concern for "the little
>guy", Loren's PERSONAL standard of success is to have "tens of thousands
>of underlings who grovel at [one's] feet in fear".
No, I was extrapolating from Mr. Kulkis's venomous personality.
>My suspicion is that this all stems from the fact that in high school,
>Loren was not merely a loser, but an extreme loser....and is still one
>to this day. Check out the ONLY picture he has of himself on his web
>page.
How many pictures of myself do I have to have? I'm not an online
exhibitionist like a certain Jennifer Ringley and her imitators.
>45 years old, serious problem with overeating, and dresses like some
>17-year old loser at a grunge concert. As they say, a picture is worth
>a thousand words...or more.
I would not be one bit surprised if Mr. Kulkis looks like me, however.
>Basically, Loren is in favor of Communism because Loren--failing to
>acknowledge even to himself what kind of loser he really is--secretly
>dreams that "when the revolution comes", he will be issuing edicts with
>the names of who should be "lined up against the wall" to face a hail
>of bullets. ...
I have no taste for bloody revolutions; they tend to be cures
worse than the diseases.
>> each other, perhaps it's time for the 2 of you to consider switching to
>> email or at least to alt.we.can't.keep.our disagreements.civil
>ABSOLUTELY NOT!
>Loren Petrich is a closet dictator, whose goal in life is to achieve
>political power so that he can inflict misery and death on any person
>who displeases him, and a few more, just to make sure that everyone
>would
>know how power he is.
Mr. Kulkis's venom suggests something like that about himself.
>Loren Petrich is a very dangerous individual, who should be thankful
>that our courts don't lock people up based on their thoughts and
>opinions,
>otherwise, he would be already be locked up for the remainder of his
>natural life.
Of course, Mr. Kulkis's career would lose rather badly if
anything like that ever happened, because his Red-under-the-bed views are
just plain absurd.
--
Loren Petrich Happiness is a fast Macintosh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] And a fast train
My home page: http://www.petrich.com/home.html
------------------------------
From: Arthur Frain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Gutenberg
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 02:47:49 -0700
Richard wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > Richard wrote:
> Instead of publishing useless crap like Gutenberg did, Aldus published
> philosophical texts and those were infinitely more useful (no matter
> how backwards) than bibles and indulgences. I would consider even a
> book on alchemy or demon summoning to have been more useful than bibles
> and indulgences because they would at least qualify as self-help whereas
> getting a bible would have been no more than the show of submission of
> a slave. I am not fond of slavery in any form.
So your definition of a "book" is normative
and not descriptive. Books then are moral
constructs, not physical objects with common
characteristics.
> And I've never considered them books. I've always thought of dictionaries
> and encyclopedias as entirely different categories of printed text.
> If you ask someone to point to a book, then to point to an encyclopedia
> and then to point to a book again, I'll give you 100:1 odds that they
> will move their hand away from the encyclopedia.
And yet a common term for a Bible is
"the Good Book".
> Innovation can be either discovering a new process to do something, or
> discovering a process to do something new. It's safe to bet that most
> people on COLA have an engineering mindset, one which devalues the
> second form of innovation as trivial while simultaneously elevating
> the first form of innovation to the status of hero worship.
If you look at slashdot regularly, you'll
find a lot of articles related to science
("something new") as well as "new process"
types of things.
It took me a lot of time and effort to
acquire an engineering mindset, and it's
one of the things I'm proudest of.
> Gutenberg did the first, Aldus did the second. And it's Aldus whom
> I respect as the crucial innovator because he did something much harder
> (even if it took less time) and because his kind are much rarer than
> Gutenberg's. In order to do what Gutenberg did, you only have to be
> able to think rationally about physical objects. In order to do what
> Aldus did, you have to think rationally about human desires. The
> latter is MUCH more difficult to do, even if the only people who
> seem to do it are those who wish to exploit others (eg, the fucking
> managers, the fucking marketroids and the fucking self-styled gurus).
> And while you can expect an engineer or engineering-minded person
> to think rationally about the physical world, there are plenty of
> reasons (none of which I want to get into since that's psychology)
> why you can't expect them to think rationally about human needs.
When you state it that way, you're creating
a false dichotomy - both examples are highly
utilitarian. The "physical world/human needs"
dichotomy is completely in error - you simply
don't seem to know much about engineering.
In a utilitarian realm (at least from an
engineer's perspective), there is no
difference between a new process and
something new. The purpose of engineering
is to solve problems.
A good example is one from my "Engineering
Design" course - poptops on beer cans. The
idea of a poptop is to eliminate the can
opener, which is strictly about human needs.
There are a number of ways to do this:
corks, rubber stoppers, screw tops. The
solution chosen was (tada) "something new"
which involved (tada) a "new process"
(pre-stressing a section of the can lid
and adding a pull tab). The result is
a combination of evaluating human needs
and meeting them through physical properties.
That would be a fairly good definition
of engineering.
If you want another example, consider
Frank Lloyd Wright's "mushroom" columns
(actually they look like engine valves)
used in the Johnson Wax building in
Racine, WI. They're both something new
and a new process.
But not all problems require "something
new" as a solution. Plastic soda bottles
for example use screw tops (slightly
modified).
Engineering being largely pragmatic,
the emphasis is on solving problems,
not doing "new" things for their own
sake. In that sense (new for new's
sake) why attach any value to it in
a utilitarian realm (eg "human needs")?
"New for new's sake" may be appealing
from the standpoint of aesthetics,
achievement, knowledge, and Maslow
would recognize those as human needs,
but so would engineering (the Wright
example above). If "new for new's sake"
is a parameter of the problem, than a
good engineer would address it. Most
problems don't require that; some
problems obviate that.
Gutenberg and Aldus solved different
problems. Aldus' solution was not
likely without Gutenberg's, and in
fact may have been easier ("Hey!
What if I assemble Plato's Dialogs
just like the books of the Bible?")
Difficulty/ease don't seem important
factors in "innovation" - I don't
recall even Marx asserting the "Labor
Theory of Innovation Value".
Perhaps Aldus deserves as much
reverence as Gutenberg - the fact
that he doesn't get it is a problem
to discuss with historians and
similar types of people, not with
engineers.
Arthur
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen S. Edwards II)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Reinventing Mexican food... why should anyone be so silly?!
Date: 13 Aug 2000 10:11:26 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (fred) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Thu, 10 Aug 2000 21:25:45 -0700, "Stephen S. Edwards II"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Therefore, I wish to create a new genre of food, that
>>has the same spicy flavor, and makes you run to the
>>bathroom every 7-10 mins, but has absolutely _ZERO_
>>associations with Mexico, or anything that is Mexican.
>...
>>This would mean no tomatoes, chilis, beans, corn, misc. veg's,
>>beef, chicken, salt, cheese, rice, etc. Well, that pretty
>>much wipes out any possibility of flavor. Do you know what
>>I'll end up with, if I omit all of these items?
>>
>>That's right. Bread and water. Whoopee. Oh, and I'll have
>>to add a fair amount of powdered soap to get the diahreahah
>>effect as well. Sounds good, eh? Yup, and for desert, we're
>>having a roll of paper towels dipped in sugar water. Delish.
>
>I thought that Taco Bell already patented this new anti-Mexican
>formula. :-)
*Giggle!*
I heard on the radio that a large chain of Taco Bell
restaurants opened on the East coast. People back there
have been calling it "Mexican food." LOL!@# :-)
--
.-----.
|[_] | Stephen S. Edwards II | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount/
| = :| -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
| -| "Even though you can't see the details, you can sense them.
| | And that is what makes great computer graphics."
|_..._| -- Robert Abel of Abel Image Research
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephen S. Edwards II)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft MCSE
Date: 13 Aug 2000 10:24:17 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Smith) wrote in
<8n5kjg$kqq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"Courageous" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> > Actually I think they're hoping to get that kid into bed from
>> > Jurassic Park. You know the one, she looked a the rotating
>> > graphical image of the compound on the screen and said, "I know this
>> > system its UNIX."
>>
>> Please spare us your adolescent pedophillic fantasies.
>
>Something I've often wondered about, is if one "child" fantisises about
>another "child" is s/he considered a paedophile ?
>
>Assume, for a moment, that "fred" is only 15 years old (not an
>unrealistic assumption, these days) - does fantasising about a 14 year
>old girl make him a paedophile ?
Nah, I don't think so, because in that case, he's not in a
position to take advantage of her being young and
inexperienced. Now if fred turns out to be a 45-year-old
man, I'll have to say... "eew."
Jeez, I remember being a sophmore in high school. My math teacher
was an ex-Dallas Cowboys cheerleader. She constantly wore short
skirts to class (I swear to God, I'm not kidding). Talk about
fantasies. In that case, I don't think I would have minded being
taken advantage of. *large grin*
Of course, I frequently had trouble with complex problems, such
23 + 32 = ?, and such, which required hours of tutoring. :-D
Yes, I'm a pervert. :-P
--
.-----.
|[_] | Stephen S. Edwards II | http://www.primenet.com/~rakmount/
| = :| -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
| -| "Even though you can't see the details, you can sense them.
| | And that is what makes great computer graphics."
|_..._| -- Robert Abel of Abel Image Research
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.os.windows2000,alt.linux,alt.windows98,alt.linux.os
Subject: Re: - Windows has made me stupid !!! Thanks, Bill. (Windows is worst than
Crack-Cocaine) - (I got to say it again!!!)
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Aug 2000 11:17:33 -0600
matts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Linux, however, can't fix these problems; sadly, it's only an operating
> > system for your computer. Windows does not make you stupid and Linux
> > will not make you smart.
> >
> > Best of luck!
>
> Actually, you're wrong. I've seem some of the best DOS/bbs ppl (good old
> days of BBS's) that were quite bright with DOS. THey knew they're computer
> well, and needed no assistance in understanding their systems. That's
> because back then, DOS forced one to understand the technology running on
> the computer - much like with Unix.
Knowing DOS doesn't make you smart either; in fact some (not I) would
argue that running DOS was a sign of stupidity to begin with.
> Windows, howver, has changed that, because it introduced "wizards" and
> "setup.exe" programs that required no knowledge of the computer to work.
>
> So, yes, windows does make ppl dumb to a degree -- the lazy ones, that
> is... :^) The ones who are not lazy (or whatever reason), will always
> understand computers, etc.
Hmm, so INSTALL.EXE made people stupid too? At what point does
abstraction make someone stupd? ML nuts poo-pooed assemblers who
looked down upon "high level" languages like C, and the C programmers
have been deriding Java for the past few years.
It's all about suitability. Windows may be more suitable than Linux
or DOS for some task. Linux may be more suitable at other times --
I can't think of many situations where DOS is suitable (other than
quasi-real-time embedded applications that have already been written?
Or maybe running Warcraft?)
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Subject: Re: C# is a copy of java
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Aug 2000 11:30:56 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows) writes:
> In article <8ms3b9$ubb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Donal K. Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> In any moderately complex data structure, keeping track of when it is
> >> safe to deallocate it will take up an appreciable amount of the
> >> complexity and bugcount of the program... :^(
> >
> > Proper coding of good algorithms will eliminate that problem.
>
> Not in general, alas. I'm working with systems that have huge memory
> requirements (I easily run out of space on SGI Origins when analysing
> large asynchronous bus models) and to keep the space down I'm having
> to share references to substantial data values between many places.
> The two alternatives are either to reference count (which is what I
> do) or to duplicate (when the whole lot blows my swap space out of the
> water even on a small design.)
>
> If you wish to disagree, perhaps you could suggest what algorithms
> would be suitable for an asynchronous hardware simulator and model
> checker capable of handling a full microprocessor? It would be
> interesting to see what you come up with! :^P
I usually start marshalling stuff to disk at this point (usually in
some db-ish hash) -- it's usually no problem to do so (but I don't
know your exact requirements, so I can't comment on your problems).
It's a difficult proposition the I believe the next generation of
programming languages need to attempt[0] to solve.
Of course, as a programmer, I know my data and the best way to manage
the cheap (disk) and expensive (RAM) resources -- but I'd like to be
able to just throw a ton of structured data[1] at the language and
have a sane default handle it. As you mentioned, your typical OS' VM
is unable to deal with it gracefully -- usually ending up swapping
everything.
It's a fun problem anyway.
--
[0] They won't be successful for at least a few versions, the current
garbage collection algorithims (ie, reference counting == bad,
mmmkay?) will lend help in this arena.
[1] I work on healthcare patitent population analysis involving
millions of procedure, diagnosis and presctiption fills and I have to
construction thousands of patient states out of this "stateless"
information.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Subject: Re: It's official, NT beats Linux (?)
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Aug 2000 11:12:26 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Impartial benchmarks seem to point to NT as far superior...
>
> http://www.zdnet.com/eweek/stories/general/0,11011,1015266,00.html
Those "studies" were done over a year ago. They involved problems
with the Linux 2.0 (and to a lesser degree, 2.2) kernel's handling of
SMP I/O bandwidth.
Anyway, it's old news. The latest benchmarks show Linux mopping the
floor with NT using khttpd (something most sane webmasters wouldn't
use anyway).
Benchmarks suck.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 11 Aug 2000 10:09:41 -0600
Rex Ballard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Has anybody ever successfully published a TPC benchmark for Linux?
> I know that several benchmarks have been done, including
> Linux/Sybase, Linux/DB2, and Linux/Oracle8i with BEA tuxedo for
> Linux as the TPM. However, I've only seen unofficial $/TPM of $3 to
> $4 which are pulled at the demand of the TPM organization.
> Appearantly, their lawyers get very upity if you publicly post
> unofficial results, especially when they show performance levels way
> better than those of their sponsor organizations. As I understand
> it Compaq, IBM, HP, and Dell have all run unofficial TPCC benchmarks
> that blow Microsoft out of the water, and the $/TPM for
> Linux/Progress was so low it was scary.
Yep. It only makes sense.
None of the above companies have a vested interest in publishing Linux
scores (especially Sybase ASE11.2/Linux -- the TPC score would almost
be zero, regardless the performance!).
Do Linux users care about TPC-C marks? Not really. It'd be great for
bragging rights (which is what the NT5 launch tests were all about),
but not for much more. DBAs know what works and what is untested and
only time can change that, not meaningless scores.
[snip]
> A hand-tailored Armani suit can cost upward of $3,000. A suit of
> nearly identical cut, nearly identical cloth (different pattern,
> same fabric and weave), and nearly identical notions (buttons,
> fasteners,...) but sold on 36th & 7th and made by unknown Italians
> with a DAMIANI label, costs $70.
Exactly.
[snip]
> It could be that the TPC benchmarke has become too much like a
> "Designer Label", to carefully protected by the phalanx to be a
> meaningful indicator of quality, performance, and value.
It's all about bragging rights; a game that Ellison, McNealy, Gates
and IBM love to play. Linux users enjoy the game as well, but it
doesn't seem that we are willing to actually *pay* to play them (what
a waste of money!).
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Big Brother and the Holding Company
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 11 Aug 2000 10:02:31 -0600
"JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > Thank God for choices; sites that are critical to me personally tend to
> > run UNIX derivatives. I guess they prefer known stability over glitter
> > & empty promises.
>
> For now they might but IIS is becoming known for speed and cost
> effectiveness, soon everyone will come around. Such as this 440,879
> transaction per second benchmark that was triple the performance of Oracle
> running on a Sun Microsystems cluster, at one-third the price.
> http://www.ibm.com/Press/prnews.nsf/jan/88A210640A20DAEC85256913007828C1
Ahem:
http://www.computerworld.com/cwi/story/frame/0,1213,NAV47-68_STO46845,00.html
Try again:
o This required 12 machines with 8 1-Ghz Xeon processors in each one, as
opposed to the single IBM machine with 24 processors (G3 chips at
400Mhz). The sheer integer processing power in the second system
overpowered the other.
o This had next to nothing to do with Windows and *absolutely*
nothing to do with IIS.
o Where is NT on the world's fastest computer list? We're (still)
waiting; even Linux makes several appearances.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Anonymous Wintrolls and Authentic Linvocates - Re: R.E. Ballard
says Linux growth stagnating
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 12 Aug 2000 14:29:43 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne) writes:
> Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Donovan Rebbechi would say:
> >On Fri, 11 Aug 2000 08:29:57 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee wrote:
> >>This is the stuff I find scary. I don't mind the idea of 'modularizing'
> >>the graphical interface into the kernel (as I believe some of the early
> >>efforts are underway to do so), just don't make it something that is
> >>*forced* on me.
> >
> >This brings back memories of the dreaded kernel NFS server. <shudder>
>
> I had dreadful enough experiences that _I_ want nothing to do with it.
>
> It seems to me to be one good reason to compile your own kernel so as
> to make sure you don't have any spurious things that RHAT or SuSE
> decided they thought you should have compiled in...
Of course under Linux, we can leave knfsd, khttpd and fbconsole out of
the kernel. The poor NT folk have to live with the GDI built into
their servers.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS advertising in the movies... (was Re: Microsoft MCSE)
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 11:29:16 GMT
>
> Sometimes the entertainment media show computer and other advanced
> technology in so very many inaccurate ways that it can make you smile
or
> laugh at a point in the flim that was not meant to be funny.
It doesn't have to be advanced---me and a few other engineers went to
see `The Matrix'. We all laughed out loud when the black guy said how
many BTUs humans produced. BTUs?! they were kind of obsolete (although
widely used) when it was found that heat==energy. And they're still
using them in 100's of years from now :-)
Needless to say, we got some funny looks from the rest of the audience.
-Ed
--
BBC Computer 32K
Acorn DFS
Basic
>*MAIL ku.ca.xo.gne@rje98u (backwards, if you want to talk to me)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
