Linux-Advocacy Digest #450, Volume #29 Wed, 4 Oct 00 14:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Do Linux suXX??? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Linux and Free Internet? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Off-topic Idiots (Was Bush v. Gore on taxes) ("David T. Johnson")
Re: IBM announces 64-bit mainframes and 64-bit Linux for S/390 (The Ghost In The
Machine)
Re: Linux and Free Internet? (.)
Re: Linux and Free Internet? (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: What kind of WinTroll Idiot are you anyway? (.)
Re: Off-topic Idiots (Was Bush v. Gore on taxes) ("David T. Johnson")
Re: Unix rules in Redmond (.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Do Linux suXX???
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 17:39:10 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Wed, 04 Oct 2000 13:50:51 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>...care for some healthy reading good folks?
>
>ok here you have it:
>
>http://www.osopinion.com/Opinions/MontyManley/MontyManley15.html
Interesting. And how do we fix this "freeloader syndrome"?
Go back to Microsoft?
Make Linux closed-proprietary?
Encourage more users to join in and make quality contributions
of their own?
Encourage the development of a "super-code-sniffer" for increased QC/QA?
Switch to Java, where uniformity is almost guaranteed, as opposed to
C++ where different platforms have annoying idiosyncratic differences?
I'll admit, I am a little worried myself about Linux's direction, but
I rather doubt that a closed-end solution, like Windows 2000, is
the answer. Not that I'm sure what *is* the answer, at this time,
but I'm pretty sure W2K is not it -- although I suspect MS will make
pots of money from it (and it is both more reliable and has more features
than NT4, its immediate predecessor, from all accounts that I have
read).
One issue I have with Linux is that the documentation is fragmented:
do I look in /usr/doc, 'man', 'info', HTML, or the ultimate in
documentation, the source code? Still, it's not that bad, although
reading it on occasion does require a bit of technical expertise
on one's system that many newbies may not have -- for example, that
a 16550 is a serial UART (so is a 16650, turns out -- and that one
is the one I have on my firewall and it can go 4x as fast; setserial
works like a champ :-) ).
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux and Free Internet?
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 17:27:22 GMT
In article <8rfm29$r59$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
> [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?
Well yes: when you give something away for free, something
good like the Internet, you tend to have more takers than
when you don't give something away for free.
Right now Win9x has an advantage over Linux: you'll pay about
$150-$200 initially, but you'll get free internet. With Linux,
you pay $30-$80 for the CD, and then you'll have to shell out
another $240 a year for the Internet Access.
This means that within one year, the Win9x investment has paid
for itself and saved you another $40 extra; while the Linux
investment has cost you $270-$320 with no end in sight for
the expenses.
Add in free internet for Linux, and the equation reverses
within the first six months: the Linux investment pays for
itself within 2-4 months, while you have to wait seven months
for the Win9x investment to pay for itself in income not
spent on the Internet access.
> > 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.
You seem quick to throw out the idea that all Linux users
should have the option of reporting bugfixes and requesting
new features from the moment they install their new Linux CD.
I don't find your desire to deny users the chance to report
bugs quickly and for free a way to "speed along Linux's
acceptance".
As for "good access for nothing", you seem pretty sure of
yourself, Mr. Big Orifice. Where can one find "*good*
access for nothing"?
> Do you know ive never payed for internet access at all?
Yes, and when you stop being a student or lose your tenure,
try to find "free internet access for Linux" at HOME.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "David T. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Off-topic Idiots (Was Bush v. Gore on taxes)
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 10:47:54 -0400
Marty wrote:
>
> "David T. Johnson" wrote:
> >
> > Marty wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > But what should anyone expect from someone whose thoughts are so poorly
> > > > formed that he writes illogical, nonsense sentences about club presidents
> > > > who are also members?
> > >
> > > Never seen a "Hair Club For Men" commercial, eh?
> > >
> > > > > Meanwhile, I see you're still hypocritically contributing to off-topic
> > > > > threads. No surprise there.
> >
> > No surprise that you make no sense. Is the "Hair Club for Men"
> > commercial part of the additional information needed to figure out what
> > your are attempting to say? If so, you should reference it to help
> > those unfortunate few who are slogging their way through your posts.
> > Based on your recent posts, there must be some other commercials needed,
> > as well.
>
> "You just... don't get it, do you? You don't."
> "Why must I be surrounded by frickin idiots??"
> -- Dr. Evil
Do you feel that this is this a common state of affairs for you? If so,
perhaps you need to reevaluate your surroundings since you fail to
impress me as being extraordinarily bright, yourself.
>
> > > > Unlike you, I have pointed out that the thread in question does not
> > > > belong in the newsgroups in which it is being posted.
> > >
> > > ... which itself doesn't belong in this newsgroup.
> >
> > You point to my 2 or 3 posts in that thread on that subject as not
> > belonging but you completely ignore the hundreds of similar posts made
> > in the "Bush vs. Gore on Taxes" thread over the last few weeks.
> > H-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e.
>
> Do you even know what the word means? Let's take a moment to re-acquaint
> ourselves with the word's meaning before making a bigger fool of yourself...
>
> hypocrite \Hyp"o*crite\, n. [F., fr. L. hypocrita, Gr. ? one who plays a part
> on the stage, a dissembler, feigner. See Hypocrisy.]
> One who plays a part; especially, one who, for the purpose of winning
> approbation of favor, puts on a fair outside seeming; one who feigns to be
> other and better than he is; a false pretender to virtue or piety; one who
> simulates virtue or piety.
>
> Was I taking a part in the "Bush vs. Gore on Taxes" thread before you stepped
> in?
Interesting that you admit that it was my entry into the thread that
prompted your own entry. My posts expressed an opinion on the off-topic
nature of the posts on economics and politics in COOA. Your posts, that
you admit were prompted by my entry, were merely garbled and illogical
attempts at insults. Further evidence of your hypocrisy.
> Furthermore, was I starting additional off-topic threads like you were
> about Chris? In addition, was I accusing others of being off-topic, other
> than my pointing to your hypocrisy? The hypocrite is you David.
I posted my advice on a suggested response to the Wenham pattern of
posting. Your logic is confused but you seem to be suggesting that this
post was hypocrisy. If that is your claim, I would definitely
disagree. As for the off-topic posts, you admit that you entered the
thread solely because I had previously entered it yet, with your
question above, you claim to be superior to what you term as my
hypocrisy. I entered the thread to comment on the numerous off-topic
posts cluttering the newsgroup. You entered the thread to hurl
insults. By your own definition of hypocrisy (one who feigns to be
other and better than he is) you are a hypocrite.
>
> > > Were you also pointing out that a thread doesn't belong when you said:
> > > "Probably Wenham will be hugely impressed by the capabilities of this OS/2
> > > software and will soon post here with his new enthusiasm. Heh, heh."
> >
> > Seems a valid comment to me about Wenham's perceived enthusiasm for OS/2
> > software. This is the COOA newsgroup, after all. OS/2 is in the title.
>
> And where does such a comment lead? Does it give way to cogent, on-topic
> material? Or does it turn an otherwise informational thread into a flame
> war? Isn't that what you claim you've been fighting against? Or is it ok for
> you to do, but not ok for others?
Now you seeming to be claiming to know my thought processes and your
objection to my post seems to be based on what you believe those thought
processes to be. At least this is a new comment. Your old ones
('hypocrite,' 'liar,' 'troll,' et. al.) are boring. But no, AFAIK, you
do not know my thought processes and your opinion of those thought
processes is irrelevant. My comment was valid. Your opinions about the
effect it might have on others or my thought processes when I made it do
not diminish its validity.
>
> > > Or how about when you started off the "Wenham Advice" thread?
> >
> > Seemed and seems a valid comment (to me, anyway) to make about someone
> > who has exhibited a pattern of posting about OS/2 subjects in many
> > different threads in hundreds of posts.
>
> What seems to you is irrelevant.
Ignoring the usual grammatical errors, this seems to neatly summarize
your online opinion of every post that you disagree with.
>
> > > You're a mime and a liar, not to mention a hypocrite.
> >
> > Mime? Liar? Am not! Am not!
>
> Prove it, if you think you can.
Why should I bother? You obviously had no evidence to begin with. No
surprise there.
>
> > > > No surprise that understanding eludes you on this point.
> > >
> > > The lack of understanding is entirely your own, troll.
> >
> > Troll? Your post is riddled with name-calling but very few thoughts or
> > comments and what there is is nearly incoherent.
>
> How ironic, given that last statement.
>
> > I am getting tired trying to extract some meaning from your heaps of
> > words.
>
> Sorry that your reading comprehension isn't up to par. I'll try to dumb it
> down for you in the future.
I doubt that your typical comments can be "dumbed" down any further.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: IBM announces 64-bit mainframes and 64-bit Linux for S/390
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 17:49:35 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on 4 Oct 2000 02:17:20 GMT
<8re3vg$2sec$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Wow. Only $1,200,000.00
>
>It *is* a mainframe type deal afterall. You arent buying little
>compaq machines. :)
True enough. But I can see the spin on it now:
"Microsoft's Windows 2K is far cheaper in price from the
outrageously overpriced Linux system offered by IBM."
(Lying by omission, in other words. :-) )
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: Linux and Free Internet?
Date: 4 Oct 2000 17:53:03 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <8rfm29$r59$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>> [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?
> Well yes: when you give something away for free, something
> good like the Internet, you tend to have more takers than
> when you don't give something away for free.
Thats not data. Thats theory.
> Right now Win9x has an advantage over Linux: you'll pay about
> $150-$200 initially, but you'll get free internet. With Linux,
> you pay $30-$80 for the CD, and then you'll have to shell out
> another $240 a year for the Internet Access.
I didnt have to do that. And neither do you actually, if you know
how to run WINE.
> This means that within one year, the Win9x investment has paid
> for itself and saved you another $40 extra; while the Linux
> investment has cost you $270-$320 with no end in sight for
> the expenses.
I dont pay for internet access.
> Add in free internet for Linux, and the equation reverses
> within the first six months: the Linux investment pays for
> itself within 2-4 months, while you have to wait seven months
> for the Win9x investment to pay for itself in income not
> spent on the Internet access.
None of this is data, its all theory still.
>> > 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.
> You seem quick to throw out the idea that all Linux users
> should have the option of reporting bugfixes and requesting
> new features from the moment they install their new Linux CD.
> I don't find your desire to deny users the chance to report
> bugs quickly and for free a way to "speed along Linux's
> acceptance".
What the hell are you talking about?
> As for "good access for nothing", you seem pretty sure of
> yourself, Mr. Big Orifice. Where can one find "*good*
> access for nothing"?
Well, I did it by getting a really good job at a high speed
access company and claiming it as a perk. How you're going
to do it I have no idea.
>> Do you know ive never payed for internet access at all?
> Yes, and when you stop being a student or lose your tenure,
> try to find "free internet access for Linux" at HOME.
I havent been a student in 6 years. I do not have tenure. I
work with computers, and my access is part of my compensation
and has been for a number of years.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Linux and Free Internet?
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 17:53:46 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on 3 Oct 2000 19:21:21 GMT
<8rdbjh$26rc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> I haven't been able to spare $20 a month in several years for regular
>> Internet service, so I've had to use several "Free ISP" internet service
>> providers. Unfortunately, all of the "free internet" (i.e., ad-bar)
>> services only have software for the Windoze 9Whatever OSes. So I've
>> been in the irritating position of requiring a multi-boot computer for
>> years, and booting into Windoze to get on the Internet. Freewwweb.com
>> used to exist to provide non-ad-bar Internet for Linux users, but they
>> recently merged with Juno and now Juno is the only company.
>
>> If you want to get Linux on the desktops and laptops of the world, you
>> need to get *any* of the Free Internet companies to create a version for
>> Linux. Linux has software to replace every single Micro$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.
Well, if it doesn't make him happy, it won't satisfy him too well.
However, there are a few billion other people, some of whom might
be interested in a Linux desktop or server system, so who knows? :-)
I'm an old Unix head from back in my college daze (1980's),
so Linux resonates well with me. But that doesn't mean it
works well for Joe "I buy my software shrinkwrapped" Sixpack.
Maybe it will someday, but not today.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- maybe have an installer that does nothing but
"./configure && make && sudo 'make install'"? :-)
------------------------------
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 17:57:25 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> El mi=E9, 04 oct 2000, . escribi=F3:
>>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w=
rote:
>>>> Actually, CPU mhz cannot be measured to your significant figures. Yo=
u are
>>>> quite incorrect.
>>
>>> It cannot? Oh really - and why is that? Do you know how frequencies ar=
e
>>> multiplied and divided to get the results we see externally?
>>
>>Yes actually, I do. And you cannot, absolutely CAN NOT go out to TEN=20
>>decimal places in this regard.
> Sure you can. You can measure a CPU's frequency to 10 decimal places, ea=
sily.
> Assuming you can count the oscilations exactly, you will have a +-0.5 er=
ror in
> the count.
> Measure time in seconds with an error of less than 1E-25, and count the
> oscillations in 1E15 seconds.
> You will have 10 significant decimal places for the frequency of that CP=
U, with
> plenty to spare (check the error propagation, if you want).
*significant* decimal places?=20=20
Thats not enough to cover the 13 offered in the original post. :)
> Of course there is a tiny practical issue with that procedure, too.
Yes, just a teeny weeny one. You also have to take into consideration var=
iance
according to temperature, humidity, acts of god and whether its the second=
tuesday
of the month. Once you reach out to that kind of placement, you're beginn=
ing to=20
deal with a quantum-like quality; your measurement (if indeed youre taking=
a real,
legitimate measurement) wont be the same twice.
Then again, if youre simply extrapolating from simpler measurement (which =
is what
the original poster was doing), you can come up with any number you like.
=====.
------------------------------
From: "David T. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Off-topic Idiots (Was Bush v. Gore on taxes)
Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 11:01:19 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Wed, 04 Oct 2000 13:42:34 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] in
> comp.sys.mac.advocacy wrote:
>
> >Donovan Rebbechi writes:
> >
> >> David T. Johnson wrote:
> >
> >>> Marty wrote:
> >
> >>>>>>> Congratulations to all of you.
> >
> >>>>>> He's not only the club President, he's also a member!
> >
> >>>>> Your typical garbled, illogical, nonsensical comment.
> >>>>> Maybe you should do some work on that "Grad School in Texas" thread.
> >
> >>>> Reading comprehension problems? How ironic, given you grammatically
> >>>> incorrect statements.
> >
> >>> Your 'given you grammatically incorrect statements' is itself
> >>> grammatically incorrect which is even more ironic. But what should
> >
> >> Now that's what I call a Tholen-war.
> >
> >Inappropriately.
>
> Be quiet turd, you shamed us all with your cowardice.
How ironic, coming from someone who posts annonymously.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: 4 Oct 2000 18:02:39 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Michael Marion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Drestin Black wrote:
>>
>> > Actually you are wrong on both counts. YOu would be much better served
>> > (performance and price wise) running two 100 mb/s NICs than a single Gb
> NIC.
>> > I would run 4 NICs, 2 teamed pairs load balanced. But you'd have to
>> > understand high end networking ....
>>
>> Well we've got multiple NetApp filers with close to (and a few over) 1TB
> on
>> them. These filers are RAID'd, do NFS and CIFS, and are hammered with
> high
>> usage 24/7. They perform much better on Gb then even quad trunked (or
>> individual) 100Mb. If you're not seeing good performance from Gb
> adapters,
>> then you either have sub-par NICs or your OS isn't using them efficiently.
> Come on Mike, you know one answer doesn't fit every question. Obviously
> there are situations where Gig adapters will excel but not in the scenario I
> was discussing/discribing (unless I misunderstood the situation). I'm using
> gig over copper quite happily at two installations - we find multiple NICs
> perform better when there are more users doing large amounts of relatively
> small requests. When the transfers are long/streams the bigger individual
> pipes are the way to go. Depends on usage, I know you know that.
It also depends on OS management and driver quality.
I know you know that.
There is a universe of difference between a gigE int on an S/390 running
some weird ibm implementation of MVS and a gigE interface on a windows2000
compaq "server".
=====.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
