Linux-Advocacy Digest #447, Volume #29 Wed, 4 Oct 00 13:13:04 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux and Free Internet? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Java (off-topic?) (Was: Re: Because programmers...) (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Donal K.
Fellows)
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? ("Drestin Black")
Re: Linux and Free Internet? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux and Free Internet? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux and Free Internet? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Donal K.
Fellows)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Stephen Uitti")
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? ("Drestin Black")
Re: Linux and Free Internet? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Linux and Free Internet? (.)
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? (.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux and Free Internet?
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 15:18:10 GMT
In article <8rdbjh$26rc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I haven't been able to spare $20 a month in several
> > years for regular Internet service, so I've had to
> > use several "Free ISP" internet service providers.
> > Unfortunately, all of the "free internet" (i.e.,
> > ad-bar) services only have software for the Windoze
> > 9Whatever OSes. So I've been in the irritating
> > position of requiring a multi-boot computer for
> > years, and booting into Windoze to get on the
> > Internet. Freewwweb.com used to exist to provide
> > non-ad-bar Internet for Linux users, but they
> > recently merged with Juno and now Juno is the only
> > company.
>
> > If you want to get Linux on the desktops and laptops
> > of the world, you need to get *any* of the Free
> > Internet companies to create a version for Linux.
> > Linux has software to replace every single Micro$oft
> > application. If you could advertise that Linux
> > essentially "comes with" free internet service,
> > Linux usage would increase. A clever licensing
> > agreement could even put the "free isp" software on
> > the distribution CD itself.
>
> Oh I see. In order for linux to 'succeed' (whatever
> that means), it has to make YOU happy.
You're right, I didn't say that right. "You" *should*,
rather than need, to get free internet for Linux. Also,
as far as success is concerned, I just think it would be
faster with free internet than without it. Right now,
Linux is proceeding at a decent pace. Add in free internet,
and Linux would get its own jet.
Yes, I would benefit. Yes, Linux should make me happy.
I'm not a programmer, I'm a user, and I'm pretty sure that
non-programmer users outnumber programmers.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Subject: Re: Java (off-topic?) (Was: Re: Because programmers...)
Date: 4 Oct 2000 15:15:45 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Roberto Selbach Teixeira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As for JITs, well, I heard about them and decided to try. I've never
> seen a java program which could be even _near_ C++ speed, especially
> when you can optimize C++ to use processor specific instructions,
> etc... Of course, I have no numbers nor have I ever tried to _really_
> benchmark this.
Our HPC research group has been looking at this, and they have been
able to get (specially-preprocessed) Java to within a factor of two of
FORTRAN on tests like large matrix inversion. The compilers they are
using are pretty much state-of-the-art all through, as is the
hardware. Considering how long Java's been about in comparison to
FORTRAN, and that we are working on FORTRAN's home ground, that's not
too bad.
Instruction-level optimisations are a mugs game, especially when
hardware varies as much as it does...
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I could even declare myself a religion, if that'd help.
-- Mark Loy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: 4 Oct 2000 15:29:53 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nobody cares. A program is not data to the end-user, and data is not a
> program to the end-user. That's all that matters.
Real end-users don't care about the difference, and don't want to
care. Computer people should not force that care upon them...
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I could even declare myself a religion, if that'd help.
-- Mark Loy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: 4 Oct 2000 10:33:03 -0500
"Michael Marion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
>
> > Oh puhlease - I have been using them religiously since 3.64, you haven't
a
> > clue. I contribute news to one of the most popular nvidia fan sites too.
You
> > haven't a clue. They are solid.
>
> Well, from my experience, until the detonator 3 drivers came out, the
drivers
> for w2k were complete shit. I tried every driver I could get from Asus
and
> nvida for my V6800 I had, as well as every driver from Creative and nvidia
for
> my newer Annihilator 2... and every driver (until nvidia's det 3) would BS
> fairly regularly in 2k. 98 was much more stable... but then it would
crash
> for other reasons.
Your milage may vary - of course :) I've personally found the asus drivers
to be no where near as good as the reference drivers - I suggest you use
those instead of the repackaged drivers - I think you'll have far better
success.
as for apps you can't get running, I suggest visiting NTCompatible
(http://www.ntcompatible.cjb.net/) - they seem to have solutions for
everything :)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux and Free Internet?
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 15:37:33 GMT
In article <8rdcko$23m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> <idea snipped>
>
> : Oh I see. In order for linux to 'succeed'
> : (whatever that means), it has to make YOU happy.
>
> I didn't find the word "succeed" in the original
> post after a few re-readings, so I'm not sure where
> that comes from.
As the original poster, I was under the impression that
I *had* used the word "succeed", but apparently yttrx
was just very convincing. :)
> But ultimately, if Linux+free software (which I shall
> refer to collectively as "Linux") is going to be popular
> with people, thus attracting more users, thus attracting
> more developers/bug reports/bug fixes, then making
> them happy isn't such a bad idea. And, the typical way
> to do that is to fix their bugs, consider their feature
> requests and encourage all manner of contributions - code
> or otherwise.
>
> Happy users are helpful users, I figure.
My take on it is that since so much of Linux's growth
can be attributed to files and information being
transmitted over the Internet, including Internet access
as part of a distribution would make Linux that much more
attractive to the end user.
With free internet access, end users, even non-technical
ones, are more likely to report bugs to the folks handling
bugfixes (provided the bug isn't in the free internet
software, of course :).
Also, I'd like to think of a Linux Free ISP as creating
its own ad-bar software for the "AOL-Effect": by making
connections even easier than KPPP or EZPPP, coupled with
free internet software, users are more likely to get
Internet accounts and expand the testing user base.
(which leads to faster bugfixes and less downtime for
everyone, so its a win-win situation)
In fact, everyone has had to deal with service downtime
on their regular fee-based ISPs. An extra number to
call for Internet service would be a handy thing for
most Linux users, so there would be folks who get two
accounts, one fee-based and one with the free Linux ISP.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux and Free Internet?
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 15:42:11 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <8rd8u4$6sn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I haven't been able to spare $20 a month in
> > several years for regular Internet service,
> > so I've had to use several "Free ISP" internet
> > service providers. Unfortunately, all of the
> > "free internet" (i.e., ad-bar) services only
> > have software for the Windoze 9Whatever OSes.
> > So I've been in the irritating position of
> > requiring a multi-boot computer for years, and
> > booting into Windoze to get on the Internet.
> > Freewwweb.com used to exist to provide non-ad-bar
> > Internet for Linux users, but they recently merged
> > with Juno and now Juno is the only company.
>
> Netzero makes a linux client
<SARCASM>
REALLY? WOW! You wouldn't think it to read their website!
</SARCASM>
Seriously, do they really have one or are you just
misreading a common press release at these free
ISP sites:
"Mac, Linux, and OS/2 users: We also have $20 a month
service for you guys, same as all those other ISPs you
are trying to get away from or can't afford!"
I'm SICK of that press release! Its always hidden behind
a button which makes you think that maybe, just maybe,
they've actually got a "Mac, Linux, or OS/2" version
of their ad-bar software.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux and Free Internet?
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 15:50:37 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <8rd8u4$6sn$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I haven't been able to spare $20 a month in
> > several years for regular Internet service, so
> > I've had to use several "Free ISP" internet
> > service providers. Unfortunately, all of the
> > "free internet" (i.e., ad-bar) services only
> > have software for the Windoze 9Whatever OSes.
> > So I've been in the irritating position of
> > requiring a multi-boot computer for years, and
> > booting into Windoze to get on the Internet.
> > Freewwweb.com used to exist to provide non-ad-bar
> > Internet for Linux users, but they recently merged
> > with Juno and now Juno is the only company.
>
> Netzero makes a linux client
Well, a site search on their website (www.netzero.net)
of the word "linux"--and also using "Linux"--produces
NO MATCHES. You'd think that if they really had a Linux
client, they'd use the word "linux" or "Linux" to describe
it!
"...and we also have a client for that new thingummy
OS, what is it, some Finnish guy wrote it, darn it,
engineers never tell us marketing folks anything..."
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: 4 Oct 2000 15:46:19 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Fanatics don't have consistent belief systems.
No, fanatics *are not required* to have consistent belief systems.
And the belief system could be consistent, but have no grounding in
the observable universe (a common occurrence!)
> It is not possible to have a 'consistent belief system' unless your
> belief system is entirely and only the laws of physics.
Come back, Goedel, we love you!
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I could even declare myself a religion, if that'd help.
-- Mark Loy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: "Stephen Uitti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 11:19:24 -0400
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:n0yC5.4035$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "unicat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > They can't find any new bells and whistles to hang off of Windows to
> > make people buy new
> > versions. And MS makes exactly $0 from people who just continue to use
> > the old Windows OS. Remember, MS isn't in the business of helping your
> > business to prosper, they're in business to make MONEY. Think of the
> > last decade or so. It used to take a 16Mhz 386 PC with 4MB of RAM
> > and a 120MB hard drive to allow you to run WORD, Excel, and a
> > project planner, and to send and receive e-mail. Since then we've thrown
> > out our hardware and replaced our software five or six times, and for
> what?
> > The same basic office functions!
>
> And you can still run Word, Excel and a project planner on such a machine.
> It's just that our expectations of what software should do and how fast it
> should do it has risen since then. Go ahead, Crank up Windows 3.0 on a
> 16Mhz 386 with 4MB or RAM and run Word, then compare it to running Word on
> computer today and tell me you don't find the old way virtually unuseable
by
> comparison.
I'm currently using Windows 98 at work with Office 2000 on a PIII/450.
At home I have a 1987 Mac II - 16.7 MHz 86020, originally with 40
MB hard disk, 2 MB RAM, now 1.5 GB hard disk, 20 MB RAM.
I still use it. I run Word 5 for the Mac. It's performance is still good.
MS Word's improvements since then include very few items I use.
Sections are now allowed to switch between portrait and
landscape. I use seperate documents on the old system for this.
As a bonus, my old system does not support Word macro viruses.
My 1987 to 1990 vintage graphics programs still provide superior
capabilities
when compared to the modern Windows apps I use. It's not that there
aren't good apps for Windows, it's just that my employers don't buy
them. I paid a little more, but I got over ten years out of them. I'd have
bought a new Mac long ago, but protected address spaces has just
become available (OS X). NT's unreliability was very disappointing.
Unfortunately, the old graphics apps didn't foresee 360 DPI printing,
my old printers died, and I can't upgrade the apps. Even though they
aren't as good as they were, they're still pretty good.
If my 13 year old Mac II dies - I can buy a refurbished one for $130.
The real problem is getting modern software for it. Netscape 3 requires
a 68030 (pointlessly so), so I'm stuck with Netscape 2. When Netscape
6 stabilizes, I'd like to see a 68000 compile. Open source may be
the only way to get new software into the old dog. OS 7.5.5 is the
end of the line for it.
I'd like to be able to say that I foresaw being able to run the
Mac II for over a decade. What really happened was that I
hedged my bets. I bought a PC in 1987 too. It's been replaced
twice. However, I 'upgraded' DOS to Linux. I use a DOS
emulator for old DOS apps. I use native apps when possible.
I haven't bothered to configure the DOS emulator this latest
time around, but I will soon. I have WordStar files to print
and convert.
I run Linux on a PII/350 with 128 MB RAM. StarOffice is big
and slow. I have moved internet stuff - email, web surfing, and netnews
to the Linux box. This will free me to 'upgrade' the Mac to OS 7.0.1.
This is quite a bit faster on my Mac, and works better with most
of my software - since that's what I ran when I bought it. I don't know
yet if 7.0.1 will support my 'new' printer. It's my third printer. The laser
printer 'only' lasted nine years. I wish I could have replaced it with
one that was 100% compatible. One of the biggest problems with
running a system for so long is support for parts that break.
The longest run system I ever used was Purdue's CDC 6600. They
ran it for about 27 years. They 'replaced' it with a Cyber 205, then
three. But these did not last very long by comparison. I don't believe
they have a CDC 6600 compatible machine on campus anymore.
They might not even have an emulator. A modern PC ought to be able
to emulate a 3 MIPS dinosaur in better than real time, and even get
the floating point right. You might even get the console flashing lights
to appear on a screen.
> > And support staff demands have probably doubled at the same time. Some
> > people are fed up. They're tired of the MS churn-and-burn cycle that
> > pumps cash out of their wallets and delivers nothing but hype in return.
> I guess that's why people keep upgrading. They're so tired of it, they
run
> right out and do it some more.
Most companies do not upgrade all their systems at once. They buy
what they need when they need it. When the new systems come with
a new version of Windows or Word, they upgrade (replace) the
old systems as needed to get the new standard. Unless a company is
really big (like China), they feel compelled to run what everyone else
runs. I understand that many fortune 500 companies are moving to
Linux on the desktop. This is one of the necessary (but not sufficient)
steps to dumping Windows.
Mac support is much lower than PC support, leading to lower
cost of ownership. But in corporate america , the lemming effect
rules. There have been reasonable alternatives to DOS and
Windows since the Macs got hard disks and about 512K RAM.
1986?
> Haven't seen the competition in the game console market have you? The
> playstation 2 is roughly equivelant in processing power to a 733Mhz PIII
and
> also has Internet connectivity.
The game machines on the net strategy may have good luck in the home
market. Many people buy home machines to match work machines,
mostly for training issues. But, if they think of their home machine as
a game machine, they might break this mold. Also, they might see that
these game machines really are cheaper. But, if people continue
to think that they also need a PC, for word processing, etc., it might
not fly. I'd be tempted to get my son a game machine - with web surfing,
just to get him off of my machines. Unfortunately, I want him to really
understand computers. I might have it both ways. So the game machine
would be like having a spare car. A Honda Insight for the commute.
A larger car or SUV for pulling the boat, and other capabilities.
> > So the next gen windows may be an Xbox client, accessing applications on
> > an MSN server by subscription. With the buzz that MS has for eating its
> > own
> > children, if I worked for a PC manufacturer right now I would be hitting
> > the panic button!
>
> Good thing you don't. They'd go out of business.
It depends on the panic strategy. I don't see any suggestions here.
If I sold PCs, I'd have all models ship with Linux preconfigured,
as an option. I'd do what it takes to avoid Windows licenses for
these machines. Preconfigured machines would have the video,
sound, CD, CDR, DVD, network, printer, camera, scanner,
backup, UPS, etc. all working in a first rate manner. There need
to be low end, middle, and high end options for all components.
They need to "just work", like a Mac or modular home stereo.
There are three main target audiences. Corporate America
does not back up desktop systems. They need a desktop
configuration and a server configuration. The home audience
needs stand alone systems. It's not free, but it's cheaper than
trying to own the software. If you're selling the hardware, you
don't have to make much money on bundled software.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: 4 Oct 2000 11:19:03 -0500
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8rd8r1$26rc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8rd66i$26rc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > http://support.intel.com/support/processors/sspec/p3p.htm - show me
the
> >> > PIII666 on that list?
> >>
> >> You have misunderstood what I typed, dresden. I'm not naming the chip,
> >> im describing it. It runs at 666mhz. It does not run at 667 mhz, and
in
> >> fact it CANNOT run at 667mhz. The fact that it is called a 667mhz chip
by
> >> intel is obviously a move to disassociate it from spooky evil columbine
> >> type hacker idiots.
>
> > Actually it runs at 666.6666666666 <etc> Mhz. Obviously intel has
better
> > math than whoever wrote your monitoring program.
>
> Actually, CPU mhz cannot be measured to your significant figures. You are
> quite incorrect.
It cannot? Oh really - and why is that? Do you know how frequencies are
multiplied and divided to get the results we see externally?
>
> >> > yes, I know what your applications tell you - 666 is closer to it's
real
> >> > speed but that's not what you've got. Does your mustang have a 5.0
liter
> >> > engine or 4.87?
> >>
> >> I dont have a mustang. But if I did, it would be 4.88. (4.877)
>
> > So why is a CPU that runs at 666.666666666 <etc> not 667 ?
>
> It doesnt run with that many significant figures, brainiac. Tell me, how
> do you measure 1/100th of an oscillation?
subdivide an "oscillation", you can't. An "oscillation" is an atomic unit.
However, we're talking Hertz here which counts "oscillations" *PER SECOND*
So, braniac, we can go to a zillion decimal points cause a second can be
subdivided ad infinum.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux and Free Internet?
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 16:13:25 GMT
> > Interesting, as a search with "Linux" at Netzero's site produced 0
> > matches. Also, Netzero claims to only support Windows, with Mac
support
> > to come later.
> >
> > www.netzero.net
> >
> > Colin Day
> >
>
> Hmmm, maybe its just vaporware.
>
Think so. Not being fececious here. I've used Juno since 94. It works a
hell of a lot better than net zero. With some arguing with it, I HAVE
gotten it to work with Netscape in WIndows (yeah, I know, I know). But
Netzero has that damn annoying unremovable banner. But no amount of
searching will bring up a Netzero client for Linux. Which sucks. It's
the ONLY thing I have loaded in my Win95 dual boot.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 16:25:06 -0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spoke thusly:
>Ignorance is bliss?
>
>Surround yourself with only what you want to hear and ignore anything
>contrary to your own opinions...
>
>ahhh... golden silence...
>
>silly.
>
Apparently you missed the part where it was mentioned that
you should killfile the idiots on both sides of the
debate. I have as many (maybe more) people from the Linux
side as I do from the MS side of the OS debate, and I'm a
staunch Linux supporter (no, not a zealot, which would
explain why plenty of zealots end up in my killfile. I
don't mind saying, "there's a problem with X in Linux",
and that's not real popular with the zealot crowd).
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathaniel Jay Lee
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Linux and Free Internet?
Date: 4 Oct 2000 16:32:09 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <8rdbjh$26rc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> > I haven't been able to spare $20 a month in several
>> > years for regular Internet service, so I've had to
>> > use several "Free ISP" internet service providers.
>> > Unfortunately, all of the "free internet" (i.e.,
>> > ad-bar) services only have software for the Windoze
>> > 9Whatever OSes. So I've been in the irritating
>> > position of requiring a multi-boot computer for
>> > years, and booting into Windoze to get on the
>> > Internet. Freewwweb.com used to exist to provide
>> > non-ad-bar Internet for Linux users, but they
>> > recently merged with Juno and now Juno is the only
>> > company.
>>
>> > If you want to get Linux on the desktops and laptops
>> > of the world, you need to get *any* of the Free
>> > Internet companies to create a version for Linux.
>> > Linux has software to replace every single Micro$oft
>> > application. If you could advertise that Linux
>> > essentially "comes with" free internet service,
>> > Linux usage would increase. A clever licensing
>> > agreement could even put the "free isp" software on
>> > the distribution CD itself.
>>
>> Oh I see. In order for linux to 'succeed' (whatever
>> that means), it has to make YOU happy.
> You're right, I didn't say that right. "You" *should*,
> rather than need, to get free internet for Linux. Also,
> as far as success is concerned, I just think it would be
> faster with free internet than without it. Right now,
> Linux is proceeding at a decent pace. Add in free internet,
> and Linux would get its own jet.
Do you have any marketing data to back up this assertion?
> Yes, I would benefit. Yes, Linux should make me happy.
> I'm not a programmer, I'm a user, and I'm pretty sure that
> non-programmer users outnumber programmers.
Find away to pay for internet access, or find a way to get
*good* access for nothing and you wont have a problem.
Do you know ive never payed for internet access at all?
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway?
Date: 4 Oct 2000 16:33:49 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8rd8r1$26rc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Christopher Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:8rd66i$26rc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > http://support.intel.com/support/processors/sspec/p3p.htm - show me
> the
>> >> > PIII666 on that list?
>> >>
>> >> You have misunderstood what I typed, dresden. I'm not naming the chip,
>> >> im describing it. It runs at 666mhz. It does not run at 667 mhz, and
> in
>> >> fact it CANNOT run at 667mhz. The fact that it is called a 667mhz chip
> by
>> >> intel is obviously a move to disassociate it from spooky evil columbine
>> >> type hacker idiots.
>>
>> > Actually it runs at 666.6666666666 <etc> Mhz. Obviously intel has
> better
>> > math than whoever wrote your monitoring program.
>>
>> Actually, CPU mhz cannot be measured to your significant figures. You are
>> quite incorrect.
> It cannot? Oh really - and why is that? Do you know how frequencies are
> multiplied and divided to get the results we see externally?
Yes actually, I do. And you cannot, absolutely CAN NOT go out to TEN
decimal places in this regard.
>>
>> >> > yes, I know what your applications tell you - 666 is closer to it's
> real
>> >> > speed but that's not what you've got. Does your mustang have a 5.0
> liter
>> >> > engine or 4.87?
>> >>
>> >> I dont have a mustang. But if I did, it would be 4.88. (4.877)
>>
>> > So why is a CPU that runs at 666.666666666 <etc> not 667 ?
>>
>> It doesnt run with that many significant figures, brainiac. Tell me, how
>> do you measure 1/100th of an oscillation?
> subdivide an "oscillation", you can't. An "oscillation" is an atomic unit.
> However, we're talking Hertz here which counts "oscillations" *PER SECOND*
> So, braniac, we can go to a zillion decimal points cause a second can be
> subdivided ad infinum.
And you wont get the actual speed of the chip, youll get a very large,
very meaningless number.
But if you knew anything at all about processor architecture and design
(which you very clearly dont), you would know that.
=====.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
