Linux-Advocacy Digest #572, Volume #29 Tue, 10 Oct 00 11:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Roberto Teixeira)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum ("Christopher
Smith")
Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for? (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
(=?iso-8859-1?Q?Paul_'Z'_Ewande=A9?=)
Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("JS/PL")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Jeff Sturm)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (Roberto
Alsina)
Re: Unix rules in Redmond (=?Windows-1252?Q?Paul_'Z'_Ewande=A9?=)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (chrisv)
Re: Newbie: How do you setup 2 PC's using Rhat Linux 6.2? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Fr�d�ric G. MARAND")
Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-) (chrisv)
Re: The Power of the Future! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Real Linux Advocacy ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Hotmail been down most of the day ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux Sucks ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for? (Roberto Alsina)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Roberto Teixeira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: 10 Oct 2000 11:30:01 -0200
>>>>> "Chad" == Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Chad> Of course they did. What basis for this claim do you have?
Every time someone has to restart a WinNT server gives him basis for
the claim.
regards,
-- Roberto.
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 23:42:46 +1000
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:7HEE5.28150$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> You can run most of the GNU utilities with the POSIX subsystem and you can
> run most OS/2 2.x applications with the OS/2 subsystem (which is what it
was
> designed for).
That would be most OS/2 1.x apps I think you'll find. The OS/2 subsystem
won't run any OS/2 GUI apps.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for?
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 15:24:49 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:04:32 GMT...
...and Bob Hauck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 04:31:52 GMT, Mike Byrns <@technologist,.com> wrote:
>
> >Really? How much RAM do you have? I've run it comfortably on 64MB.
> >MacOS and Mandrake Linux with Gnome both claim to use more RAM than
> >Windows 2000 in my tests.
>
> KDE uses less RAM than Gnome.
Please support this claim by facts.
mawa
--
Gedanken sind zwar frei, aber trotzdem bewertbar.
-- Paul Rullof
------------------------------
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Paul_'Z'_Ewande=A9?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 15:43:48 +0200
"Gardiner Family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit dans le message news:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Microsoft wanted to grab the enterprise market, and to do this, they had
to
> ensure that when they release it, it was as stable and bullet proof as
they
> could possibly get it. The big difference between Microsoft and Linux, is
that
> Microsoft must turn a profit to make the share holders happy, I have
nothing
> against this, however, I do think, when it comes to their consumer
products,
> they donot put as much effort into ensuring realiabilty as they should. I
have
It's not that MS didn't care, but Win9x was to designed to support as much
as possible legacy with old DOS/Win16 software and drivers which needed
certain concessions and trade-offs, and to move developpers and the market
to the Win32 platform, something that NT in '95 wasn't garanteed at all to
be able to pull of..
Those design constraints made the Win9x line what it is. Win9x has served
its purpose well, ie move the consummer market to Win32, it should get a
well deserved and now overdue retirement.
> no grudges against Windows 2000, as I have used it quite alot with no
problems,
> but like my other posts, I prefer to use Linux because of the Unixness of
it.
>
> matt
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:15:54 -0500
"Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8rlpvj$lnc$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Certainly, given a high enough network load, ANY variety of
> webserver, be it Apache/linux or IIS/NT, or whatever, will have
> to split out to several servers. The point is, if IIS is set up
> this way more often than apache, and *isn't* handling more traffic,
> then IIS is handling less traffic per server. So your point
> originally, about multiple servers hiding behind one hostname, cannot
> possibly make IIS look better.
No, my original point was that there are no hard numbers which suggest that
Apache is used in more servers. As I said, it may be, but I see no numbers
to validate this assertion.
> You're right that the netcraft
> survey is sloppy, but you are wrong in assuming that correcting
> the slop in the case of hiding servers behind one hostname would
> make IIS look better, for if it increases the IIS number of sites
No, I'm talking more about multiple hostnames on one server, not necessarily
the other way around (though that's also an issue). 100 hosts on the same
machine are counted by most apache advocates as 100 apache installations,
and that's just not necessarily the case.
> to add that metric in, then that must mean IIS can't handle the
> load with the same number of servers. The only way out of this
> would be if IIS tends to serve sites with higher traffic so that
> the need for these parallel servers would be justified. But,
> as I'll get to down below, that's not the case.
Traffic is not the all-encompassing statistic. It's what the traffic is
doing at the site. Is the content dynamic? Is it using large database
queries? e-comerce?
> : Well, I can't think of a site that has more traffic that MS. And that's
not
> : even counting Hotmail and bCentral. IBM's web site runs on Domino.
Yahoo
> : runs on some unknown web server running on FreeBSD. CNet runs on
Netscape's
> : server (as of course does Netscape).
>
> : Which top 100 sites, as measured by traffic run Apache again? I can't
think
> : of many. About the only high traffic sites I know of running Apache are
> : places like Slashdot, and they wouldn't even register on the top 100.
>
> Look here and be shown: http://www.durak.org/sean/pubs/bss/
It should be noted that this is merely a "front door" survey and doesn't
test other servers in the domain unless it has seamless load balancing
instead of redirects.
It also only counts pure number of hits, and nothing related to the amount
of traffic by volume.
------------------------------
From: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:57:09 -0400
Reply-To: "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"John R. Mashey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8rua3d$1ur$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Sigh, I'm not sure why this dicussion is deemed useful for 7 newsgroups.
> Can any of the posters explain why this has
> anything to do with comp.arch, comp.protocols.tcp-ip,
comp.lang.java.advocay,
> and especially alt.conspiracy.area51?
Go ask someone named "unicat"
http://x69.deja.com/threadmsg_ct.xp?AN=677304871.1&mhitnum=0&CONTEXT=9711857
30.1475543081
It looks to me like he started the thread and crossposted it to some of his
favorite groups
http://www.deja.com/profile.xp?[EMAIL PROTECTED]%3e&ST=PS
And as quick as he came, after post #1 he left.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:24:13 -0400
From: Jeff Sturm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Bob Hauck wrote:
> >So if it's so well understood then why did the WINE folks fail?
>
> Maybe they're stupid. That seems to be the explanation you folks
> always trot out for why competitors can't compete against MS.
>
> Or, just maybe there's more there than meets the eye and MSDN?
Win32 seems like a reasonably well documented API.
But Wine is trying to accomplish more than that: binary compatibility. I don't
know if Microsoft's ABI is fully documented anywhere. At least I haven't seen
it.
Full binary compatibility is much more difficult than source compatibility. You
must take into account calling conventions, dynamic linking/loading, exception
handling, etc. none of which are covered by the API.
--
Jeff Sturm
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:27:40 -0300
El lun, 09 oct 2000, Richard escribi�:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> El lun, 09 oct 2000, Richard escribi�:
>> >Except that "crystals of H2O" isn't H2O anymore than "a chain of monomers"
>> >is a bunch of monomers.
>>
>> The molecules in the crystal are H2O molecules. Again, ask a chemist, he will
>> explain it to you. They are arranged in a crystaline structure.
>
>And the particles in an atom are arranged in a nucleus. This doesn't
>make atoms into protons and neutrons.
[snip long rant about his own chosen topic]
> Thank you very much for forcing this kind
>of situation upon us, mindless reductionistic moron.
You might want to actually argue against what is said, not what you invent.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:28:59 -0300
El lun, 09 oct 2000, Richard escribi�:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> El lun, 09 oct 2000, Richard escribi�:
>> >What a lie. If you were curious, you'd have followed the references
>> >I gave earlier and already known this. But anyways,
>> >
>> >The law of detail scaling. And it only violates this several different ways.
>>
>> Care to cite the law? I find no reference to it in the 'net.
>
>Never bothered to think this might be related to the Architecture
>and Order links I already gave, did you ??
Richard, maybe you are under the misguided impression that I read everything
you write, and further, that I care about everything I read, and even that I
remember everything I care about?
> A search of "architecture"
>and "detail scaling" yielded one reference on the first page alone!
>
>
>
>A Universal Rule for the Distribution of Sizes
>http://www.math.utsa.edu/sphere/salingar/Universal.html
a) I fail to see how the Bilbao Guggenheim follows that law more than the cubic
building
b) A cubic building can follow that law.
Therefore, you should like cubic buildings more than the Bilbao Guggenheim, as
previously said.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 15:55:37 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Tue, 10 Oct 2000 13:21:09 GMT...
...and Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > That's where you are wrong. Linux was *not* based on any existing
> > code. Linux was coded from scratch. It is surely not a hack upon a
> > hack as you state.
>
> Then why is it 90% the same as other Unixes in form and function?
For the same reason that most wheels are 90% the same as other wheels
in form and function. (I.e. they're circular and they rotate, making
at at least one point contact with a surface moving, at this point, in
the same plane and in the opposite direction.)
mawa
--
A pipe gives a wise man time to think
and a fool something to stick in his mouth.
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 11:31:50 -0300
El lun, 09 oct 2000, Richard escribi�:
>Roberto Alsina wrote:
>> >> You said "Empathy is knowing exactly what someone is feeling". Check it
>> >> for yourself at http://x73.deja.com/=dnc/getdoc.xp?AN=675716833
>> >
>> >And then I qualified it. It's fucking annoying seeing you quote
>> >out of context.
>>
>> I provide a reference for the full context. If I tried to misrepresent, I
>> wouldn't would I?
>
>Easily explained: you're an idiot.
Or not.
>This is what I wrote:
>Empathy is knowing exactly what someone is feeling to the deepest core of
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>your being because you have the exact same emotional capacity as they do.
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Geez, doesn't seem to fit Vulcans, does it?
Why? Vulcans could have emotional capacity and be repressing it through
training,
>And then I go on to write:
>Psychopaths can figure out what people feel from anthropological studies,
>but they aren't 'connected' to any other human beings.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Mental melding is not an anthropological study.
>This entire sentence heavily modifies the previous sentence.
Not enough to make it not fit the case.
>> Proof by blatant assertion won't fly here. I have seen biologists and
>> anthropologists seriously suggest that the variation between modern man
>> and neanderthal man was overestimated, and that "if a neanderthal walked today
>> in NY, he wouldn't look remarkable"
>
><rolleyes> They're not commenting on the genetic difference between
>humans and neanderthals, they're commenting on the common picture of
>neanderthals among the general population as stupid brutes.
They are commenting on the appearance of neanderthals. Since that's all we have
to base our guess of their genetical differences, it does matter.
>> >What part of the above did you fail to understand, idiot?
>>
>> The part where you pass your opinion as science?
>
>Understand your own quotes before producing them as evidence for your
>position.
Perhaps you feel you understand better. I have seen no proof in that direction.
>> >Your idiocy had gotten old to me maybe two weeks ago.
>>
>> Then why do you bother?
>
>Perversity.
So, you are a pervert?
>> >And of course, no modern corporation has high turnover. It's
>> >not like you can't require this of all new employees and expect
>> >this to mean "all employees" within a few years. Nowadays,
>> >"not rehired" is the same thing as fired.
>>
>> Well, that is different, isn't it?
>
>No it's not.
I'd say it is.
>> >Libertarians and Fascists versus Marxists, Anarcho-Syndicalists and
>> >Stalinists.
>>
>> I'm none of those.
>
>Which means nothing. I know extreme right-wingers who identify
>neither with Libertarianism nor Fascism.
What can I say? My political position is known by me and not by you.
>> >as you are will make me look like a fool. "The wise man doesn't argue
>> >with the fool for the passerby won't be able to tell the difference."
>> >Well, I'm obviously not wise enough yet.
>>
>> Indeed, you can look foolish without my help. And, I must say: chicken!
>
>LOL. Well, you've just proved you're not the wise man in our argument.
You mistake necessary and sufficient conditions.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
From: =?Windows-1252?Q?Paul_'Z'_Ewande=A9?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unix rules in Redmond
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 16:27:00 +0200
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit dans le message news:
8ru4kt$1du$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
> You're right chad. As right as dresden. Theres no way a 4096 processor
> mainframe could ever beat a compaq machine.
>
> No, really.
Take that strawman ! And that ! And that !
Now that the strawman has been thoroughly thrashed, will you agree that your
"Nope, microsoft/compaq can still not even come close to touching IBM in any
way, shape or form." was a little overenthusiastic ?
I ask for entertainment purposes only.
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:35:05 GMT
Problem is the wave is dying out :)
claire
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 20:31:33 +1000, Chris Sherlock
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Sounds to me like Compaq are trying to ride the crest of the newest
>wave. Good luck to them!
>
>Chris
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:38:15 GMT
Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>chrisv wrote:
>> >El vie, 06 oct 2000, Richard escribi�:
>> >>Because it's more precise and conveys more information?
>> >
>> >>Why convey little information to everyone when you can convey lots of
>> >>information to a few?
>>
>> Jeezes, you (Richard) are a real moron, aren't you?
>
>Hey, learn something about your own country, ignorant american loser.
If you weren't such a moron, you'd realize that the point was not
whether or not the United States was "evil." The point was how much
of a moron you are for thinking that using phrases such as "The United
States of Satan" was a superior way of communicating this information.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: Newbie: How do you setup 2 PC's using Rhat Linux 6.2?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:39:47 GMT
That's not what jedi told him. I believe he said something about a
kernel re-compile?
Can't you guys get your stories straight?
FWIW, my NE2000 card worked out of the box with Mandrake 7.1
claire
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:20:08 +0100, 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Hi, I have 2 PCs that I'd like to setup together to
>> learn Apache webserver, printer server and DNS. Can
>> someone help me please.
>>
>> I have 2 NIC cards (NE2000), 1 hub and Rhat Linux 6.2.
>>
>> Can someone give me the step-by-step procedure?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Leo
>>
>> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>> Before you buy.
>
>FWIW, RH6.2 comes with the NE2000 drivers working out of the box.
>Just installing RH6.2 anc selecting the apropriate packages should
>install a working web server. Just edit /home/http/html.
>
>-Ed
------------------------------
From: "Fr�d�ric G. MARAND" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,alt.conspiracy.area51,comp.os.netware.misc,comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 16:35:12 +0200
Actually, some people do, yet to this day. We have at least one customer
doing just that to run a MS-Mail/SMTP gateway server.
Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit dans le message :
dFEE5.28149$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Andrew Carpenter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Chad Myers wrote:
[...]> > Would you run a server using DOS?
>
> Of course not. It was a joke =) I realize that Linux can do many
> more things from a command-line than DOS. It was just a dig into
> Linux about not having a decent GUI.
[...]
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Migration --> NT costing please :-)
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:44:28 GMT
"Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>How do you know?
110 lines so that you can ask "How do you know?" How do you know
what?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:46:13 GMT
Not to mention that the average newbie installing Linux tends to take
the Install Everything selection so as not to miss anything, and this
typically starts up all kinds of services that leaves her wide open to
attack.
claire
On 10 Oct 2000 00:35:47 -0500, "Drestin Black"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Dolly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > If you want to disable Netbios, do it.
>>
>>
>> You cannot disable NetBIOS. If you dont install
>> it, a subset of it is still installed in the TCP
>> stack as always allowing NetBIOS port 139 usage.
>>
>
>You are insane and utterly devoid of facts.
>
>You can effortlessly disable NetBIOS and port 139 usage. Quit spreading FUD
>and lies.
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Real Linux Advocacy
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:50:22 GMT
You mean you have been posting Linux advocacy here for months and you
just got Linux online?
Or is that a different "2" ?
I leave headers to Bilk....
claire
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 10:55:33 +0100, 2:1
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I've finally got my linux machine on line and it bloody RULES!
>It was so easy to configure. It must have taken all of 5 minutes to
>enter in the IP numbers, reinitialize eth0 and run netscape.
>
>
>To all the trolls, don't bother pointing out how I would have got my
>linux box online quicker with windows, don't bother. The socket was
>wired up wrong, so even windows wouldn't have helped there.
>
>-Ed
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Hotmail been down most of the day
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:52:10 GMT
I just posted it because I knew they would fall over themselves trying
to add it to their pile of twisted "facts".
And they operated true to form!
claire
P.S. It really was down most of the day at least from the east coast.
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 08:34:34 -0400, "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>could be that the moon exploded and ...
>
>You want an example of an unreliable service? Do you use www.linuxmail.org ?
>That damn site is off line constantly.
>
>What I find most telling about the entire hotmail bally-hoo is how when
>hotmail is running great it's "haha, MS has to use *nix to run hotmail". But
>when it's hotmail is having trouble it's "haha MS switched to w2k and now
>hotmail is having trouble." But then in between this stinkin BS, we have the
>ubiquitous "nah, MS claims to have switched over to w2k, but they're really
>running hotmail on > 85% of the hardware" Which is it zealots? Can you make
>up your minds as to what the facts really are? Does G. Bush write your
>speeches or what??
>
>This is really, really, pathetic, you do realize that, don't you?
>
>---get a clue-get a life--It's just a damn computer.
>
>
>"Gardiner Family" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> could be because their service provider connection down (probably
>> running Windows NT).
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> > I just thought I would pass that along.....
>> >
>> > claire
>>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux Sucks
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:57:55 GMT
It seems to matter to the folks that think they are going to make a
fortune off Linux, Like Redhat, SuSE etc.
Do you honestly believe they are not trying to take market share away
from Windows?
Your head is up your *** if you do..
claire
On Tue, 10 Oct 2000 14:12:48 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias
Warkus) wrote:
>It was the Tue, 10 Oct 2000 02:15:47 GMT...
>...and [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> And if it doesn't get it's ass in gear it will remain a niche' system.
>
>And nobody gives a damn about whether it will or won't except for a
>certain sad git without a real name.
>
>mawa
------------------------------
From: Roberto Alsina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for?
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 12:08:58 -0300
El lun, 09 oct 2000, Chad Myers escribi�:
>"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On 8 Oct 2000 20:17:15 -0500, Drestin Black
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >can X create a desktop resolution of 64,000 by 64,000 at 24-bit color
>> >(optionally) across multiple displays?
>>
>> Do you have 2500 displays that you want to make into one desktop? I
>> don't, and I don't think you can put that many video cards in a PC if
>> you did.
>>
>> 64000 / 1280 = 50, 50 displays x 50 displays = 2500 displays
>>
>> FWIW, XFree can use multiple displays, and it can go up to "only"
>> 32kx32k in 24 or 32-bit color. Other X servers may vary.
>>
>>
>> >Terminal Services (metaframe) can. with 128 bit encryption?
>>
>> Yes, running X over ssh will encrypt sessions nicely. You even get a
>> choice of cyphers and ssh is nice enough to automatically set up the
>> display forwarding.
>
>I bet that's *REAL* speedy too... laf. If it's anything like SSL
>performance on the web server side, it'd be almost unusable.
ssh + Xlb is quite quick over a 33.6 modem. (and yes, that was a quite peculiar
situation).
On a 10Mb LAN, it's pretty much the same as a local display, unless you are
saturated, or you are running some sort of mpeg video.
And no, tunneling over ssh and SSL on a website are two totally different
things that have totally different performance issues.
--
Roberto Alsina
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
