Linux-Advocacy Digest #729, Volume #29 Wed, 18 Oct 00 16:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: What I would like to see in an OS: (Steve Mading)
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: OFF TOPIC was: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Lars)
Re: Do all Debian users have such bad attitudes?
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? ("Simon Cooke")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun??? (Darin Johnson)
Re: Astroturfing ("Rob Hughes")
Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Re: what defines a paradigm (FM)
Re: What I would like to see in an OS: (Steve Mading)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in an OS:
Date: 18 Oct 2000 19:07:49 GMT
Mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: One can only wonder why the user should ever have to waste time getting a
: system to administer itself. If this is possible, it should set itself up
: and be operational from the time the system is installed. The user's
: investment of time, as with most system administration tasks, should be
: zero.
The problem with that goal is that it is 100% incompatable with
the goal of letting users set things up *differently* according to
their own preferences. Doing things automatically gets in the
way of doing things *my* way.
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 12:33:18 -0700
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >> Alternately, a student or two will get together (or not) and
> >> just implement it themselves. THIS is also how the world works.
> >
> >Indeed. But that only applies if you're not talking about economic
realities
> >of software development, and throw the whole economic side of the system
out
> >of the Window -- which is all that GPL/Freeware/whatever does. It just
> >removes that question from the equation entirely.
>
> Which would seem to suggest that there is no necessity for the economic
> side of it to enter the equation at all.
That depends. If you want to release something, you need to pay people to
write it. Which means you have to charge for it. Which means -- hey
presto -- it's an economic issue.
GPL/Freeware is not the norm; it's the exception.
Although if you think that economics need not come into it, I'd like you,
Max, to write me a 2000 word article on the Microsoft Monopoly that I can
publish. Of course, I can't guarantee that I will publish it, but you don't
mind giving me your time for free do you? Surely not...
> >Which also means it's completely irrelevant to mine & Max's argument.
>
> True, but it is a telling point. In addition to supporting Jedi's
> perspective, Linux also puts the lie to all your other vaunted defenses
> of Microsoft's monopoly.
No, Linux exemplifies a completely different way of doing things -- one that
does NOT necessarily gell with business practices. For example, you wouldn't
have many games companies left if they just charged for services and not for
the games themselves.
And finally, Max, get off your high horse about the "Microsoft Monopoly" --
all of my points here apply to ALL software companies that are not
non-profit.
Simon
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 15:47:02 -0400
From: Lars <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,alt.conspiracy.area51
Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC was: Why is MS copying Sun???
Bill Gates was the pilot of a recovered alien craft. :)
Conspiracist wrote:
>
> ....and this all relates back to Area 51 how?
>
> How about cancelling the cross posting to the Area 51 group and limiting
> it to the alt.computer.geek groups?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Do all Debian users have such bad attitudes?
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 19:37:10 -0000
On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 13:09:42 +1300, Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Its like the Linux vs. Real UNIX debate. Some of the UNIX purists (typically
>bearded and bald) claim that Linux is a watered down version of UNIX. In some
>respects this is true, however, UNIX is clearly lacking hardware support, when
>comparing Linux to UNIX with hardware support, Linux always comes out on top,
>especially with the latest and greatest technologies. I would run Solaris 8,
>however due to the pathetic hardware and software support for the Intel
>Plaform I have chosen to go with Linux.
Solaris intel has inferior support in general. Plus, most of the
nifty things about Solaris are only supported on Sun hardware.
Plus, Sun support is such that if you run ANYthing non-sun in terms
of hardware they will blow you off.
...and it's Sun's support organization that is really useful.
[deletia]
If you don't need a support organization, Sun is pretty much
irrelevant and so is their version of Unix.
Eventually, someone will do with the Linux codebase what
Sun did with BSD...
--
Let's all show human CONCERN for REVERAND MOON's legal difficulties!!
I think... I think it's in my basement... Let me go upstairs and check.
-- Escher
When a fly lands on the ceiling, does it do a half roll or a half loop?
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 12:34:22 -0700
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Simon Cooke in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
> >"Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:Ny3H5.1171$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> So...I can't prove it, but I'm not lying. They really did "pooh-pooh"
> >those
> >> "mickey-mouse interfaces". (Nice phrasing, btw.) They regarded it as
> >> toy-like, not serious enough for business use.
> >
> >I'd actually agree with that opinion -- but for different reasons. The
> >Amigas and STs that most people saw didn't have enough oomph for business
> >use. No networking. No real expandability. No hard drive (well, you could
> >get some as add-ons, but they were prohibitively expensive).
> >
> >They were really good for home use though.[...]
>
> LOLROTFLMAO.
Would you care to explain your mirth? Perhaps by pointing out where I'm
wrong?
Or were just just smoking a good blunt?
Simon
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 12:35:14 -0700
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >BTW: The NT team started work on NT 2001 before they finished 2000; it's
> >under continous development. It's not just a matter of "hey, we need to
sell
> >more stuff" -- they're actually working on improving it.
>
> LOL again! "They're actually working on improving it." What a naive
> goofball you are, Simon.
Look, Max, I worked there. I believe that I know what people writing code in
an active manner to improve products look like.
You didn't work there.
My word against yours, sure, but at least I know what it's like.
Simon
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 12:35:46 -0700
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >By definition, the API is the documented programming interface which
> >applications use to communicate with another software system (OS or
> >otherwise). Undocumented functions are NOT part of the API; the API is
only
> >the parts which are public.
>
> By definition, the API is the programming interface which applications
> use. Otherwise, it would the DAPI.
Interface implies documented, nitwit.
Simon
------------------------------
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
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 19:40:54 -0000
On 18 Oct 2000 13:37:48 -0500, Relax <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The first indication that Microsoft was not serious about the enterprise
>> was Windows NT 4.0, when they moved GUI code down into kernel space.
>
>GDI != GUI, troll!
The GDI is very much a GUI primitive. What else would it be
used for exactly?
--
Wilner's Observation:
All conversations with a potato should be conducted in private.
Artificial intelligence has the same relation to intelligence as
artificial flowers have to flowers.
-- David Parnas
Perfection is acheived only on the point of collapse.
- C. N. Parkinson
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 19:44:50 -0000
On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 02:10:08 GMT, Darin Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> It is. This is a democracy. Read the Constitution.
>
>But it is not "majority rule". We're really a representative
>democracy anyway. In fact, the majority of the population can not
Even that is restricted by a certain set of core ground rules.
The constitution is all about limiting the powers of congress
(at least theoretically) and preventing it from doing certain
things. Some of these rules are geared towards protecting
political minorities.
>even decide to amend the constitution, only a majority of States
>(well, a majority could decide that the constitution was irrelevant I
>suppose :-).
Actually, a supermajority is required.
[deletia]
--
Sturgeon's Law:
90% of everything is crud.
If you can lead it to water and force it to drink, it isn't a horse.
The heart is wiser than the intellect.
------------------------------
From: "Simon Cooke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 12:38:45 -0700
"Weevil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:RZeH5.1597$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Simon Cooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8sj5ae$pl0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > Provide one SHRED of proof that "DOS ain't done 'till Lotus won't run"
is
> > anything more than an anti-Microsoft FUD mantra. I will gladly post that
> > line, and the qualifying proof as my signature for the rest of my Usenet
> > days if you manage to do so.
> >
> > Proof that qualifies is any kind of evidence that Microsoft did indeed
> > change DOS explicitly so that Lotus would not run, or any kind of order
> from
> > a Microsoft executive of that form.
> >
> > I'll be waiting. But I won't hold my breath.
>
> Hmmm...does it have to be Lotus? Would it be OK if it was another
product?
Nope. It has to be Lotus -- because everyone always quotes "DOS Ain't Done
Till Lotus Won't Run", and it's being used as a keystone for an argument
here.
Though I'll happily listen to arguments about other products. RealPlayer G2
doesn't count (they futzed their installer).
Simon
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
From: Darin Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 19:49:39 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] () writes:
> >even decide to amend the constitution, only a majority of States
> >(well, a majority could decide that the constitution was irrelevant I
> >suppose :-).
>
> Actually, a supermajority is required.
Actually, the winning side of a civil war is all :-)
------------------------------
From: "Rob Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Astroturfing
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 14:52:20 -0500
heh... I get it...
"JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > So who are the astroturfers? Obviously Mike Byrns, but who else?
> > ---
> > Nick
>
> What's wrong with Windows 2000? Surely you must acknowledge that Microsoft
> has the freedom to innovate, building on the strengths of Windows NT
Server
> 4.0, the Windows 2000 Server Family delivers three increasingly powerful
> products that set a new standard for reliability and scalability. The
> Windows 2000 Server Family also demonstrates how well an operating system
> can be integrated with a standards-based directory, Web, application,
> network, file and print services, and end-to-end management. This
> combination of reliability and functionality provides the best foundation
> for integrating your business with the Internet.
>
>
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.lang.java.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why is MS copying Sun???
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 19:53:47 -0000
On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 03:09:53 GMT, Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 06:09:26 GMT, Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >Weevil wrote:
>> >
>> >> Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> > http://www.gallup.com/poll/indicators/indMicrosoft.asp
>> >> >
>> >> > Also see the related analysis links at the bottom of that page.
>> >> >
>> >> > That being read, it seems that the boss is winning points for giving
>> >> people
>> >> > their choice of operating systems at work. As it should be. They made
>> >> that
>> >> > choice at home.
>> >>
>> >> People use whatever comes on their computer. They don't "choose" one
>> >> operating system over another, especially when they're not even aware of a
>> >> choice.
>> >
>> >So they don't read the front page or watch the news? They all know they can buy
>> >a Mac or get Linux for their PCs. There just not interested because Windows
>> >satisfies them. Reference the Gallup poll.
>>
>> ...then they have to be bailed out by some Linux user because the
>> local WinDOS user can't even hook up a SCSI chain properly.
>>
>
>And here again is that famous Linux user superiority complex that is SURE to put off
>almost every computer user on the planet. The average computer user does not have
>
>external SCSI peripherals or internal ones for that matter. The average computer
It is just so amazing how much Lemmings conform to their own
criticisms of others. SCSI peripherals are out there. They are
lying on the shelves in CompUSA. Inevitably, they will be bought
and installed by naieve consumers. There is simply no getting
around this. It's much like the problem of consumers buying
hardware that isn't compatible with NT5 or Linux.
Now, the naieve don't care that I'm berating their local guru.
They're just happy when their stuff finally works.
>user will call the technical support line for the item they bought, not spend hours
This presumes that the average consumer would necessarily be
able to get any use out of a technical support line. This
not only naievely assumes that there will be a gratis support
option available but that the joker on the other end of the
phone will actually be able to get a random non-technical user
through the whole process.
You Lemmings have yet to cite this actually occuring in real life.
[deltetia]
>> ...and on the subject of WinDOS "scanning apps": what Umax bundles
>> is not very impressive in the least. Linux (gimp+sane) trumps it
>> by a wide margin. Their attempt at "one touch" scanning is simply
>> pathetic. The end user is still presented with a screen full of
>> options they likely don't understand.
>
>What does this have to do with the price of tea on China? You want gimp/sane use
>Photoshop and TWAIN or my personal favorite, JASC's PaintShop Pro and the WIA built
Photoshop costs big money and not every casual user is willing
to shell out for it. Meanwhile, a reasonably complete and
simple Linux option exists for free. They can even get something
roughly equivalent to Photoshop for free as well.
You see, it's quite irrelevant how much tweaking a non-tweaker
could do. They don't tweak. That's rather the point.
>into Windows ME and 2o00. Windows 98 users can use STI as well. They both support
>image acquisition from scanners, digital still cameras and frame capture from
>"webcams" over USB, SCSI or IEEE1394. Older parallel devices are supported through
>their existing TWAIN drivers. The really cool thing is that there is no "one touch"
>involved at all. You just open the device as if it were a folder and get the
>pictures. You can even do basic color correction, cropping, rotation, etc. The cool
This assumes the the end user aware any of that. Images are
a subject all their own with inherent complexities. It's a
burden of knowledge that will be imposed on the novice should
they decide to exploit the full power of their image acquisition
devices. Shiny happy tools won't help them.
[deletia]
Linux can support a multitude of image acquisition options as well
and it too has a standardized interface for applications support.
This is not something that Monopolysoft has an exclusive on.
--
Have at you!
"Do you think there's a God?"
"Well, ____SOMEbody's out to get me!"
-- Calvin and Hobbs
There are certain things men must do to remain men.
-- Kirk, "The Ultimate Computer", stardate 4929.4
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (FM)
Subject: Re: what defines a paradigm
Date: 18 Oct 2000 19:17:44 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Donal K. Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>FM <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Point out where I said runtime polymorphism is a paradigm. It of
>> course isn't a paradigm, but given a decent type system, it's about
>> the only thing you need to program OO.
>You also need aggregation, but virtually everything supports that.
Yup. That's I guess part of what I meant by "decent type
system" as such should allow aggregate data types. Runtime
polymorphism, aggregation and etc need a type system to
function correctly and I'm sure it's possible to cripple
the type system deliberately as to prevent the use of OO;
hence the qualification.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What I would like to see in an OS:
Date: 18 Oct 2000 19:57:10 GMT
Gardiner Family <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: I was only joking! All I was trying to emphasise is that there is an advocacy group
:for almost anything.
The reason, I think, is that with hardware there is no
grey fuzzy area. The hardware performs according to very
measurable parameters. There can be no argument over which
hard drive is "faster" for a task - just test it and publish
the numbers. There can be no argument over which hard drive
is more reliable - just publish the mean time between failure
numbers. There's nothing to argue about because everything is
a measurable quantity. There might be argument over which
quantitiy is more important (is it better to be reliable or
fast, for example), but not over the measurable statistics
themselves.
But OS'es live at a higher level, where measures are more
abstract. You can't measure "simplicity", or "usefulness",
or any of the other things that people argue about in OS
advocacy groups. So they end up being matters of opinion,
and hence, advocacy.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
