Linux-Advocacy Digest #595, Volume #30 Fri, 1 Dec 00 19:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: The Sixth Sense (Steve Mading)
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever (Steve Mading)
Re: Linux is awful (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is awful (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is awful (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is awful (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is awful (Jerry Peters)
Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Linux is awful (Jerry Peters)
Re: The Sixth Sense (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Netscape review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Netscape review. ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: The Sixth Sense ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: C++ is very alive! (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: C++ is very alive! (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: C++ is very alive! (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: The Sixth Sense (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Windows review ("Ayende Rahien")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: 1 Dec 2000 23:03:13 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: It takes real bravery to argue with someone who claims they've djinned
: up this app that will fulfill the requirements of the project when the
: app does look like it does the job, but leaves many fundamental and
: somewhat hidden requirements (e.g. speed, reliability, and memory usage)
: unanswered. As far as the president or upper management is concerned,
: the job is done, when it is actually only 5% complete!
Bravo. Very true, in any environment, with any OS. I've got about
5-6 things that were orginally meant to just be demonstrations of
how the task might be done that are now integrated into the whole
system and can't be easily removed. Once the task was done "good
enough", my boss would force me to move on to something else even
though I knew of several situations in which my "good enough"
solution won't work well, and I mentioned them.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: 1 Dec 2000 23:12:15 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: In some languages, two negatives makes positive, in others, three negatives
: makes negative, but in no language two positives makes negative.
Oh, I don't know, with two's complement binary notation you can
get a negative from adding two positives, when the result is
larger than MAXINT. That happens in lots of languages ;-)
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 23:23:08 +0000
Spicerun wrote:
> Seem to be? He has established himself as a Wintroll. It would have been
> one thing if Goodwin had made constructive criticisms about Linux complete
> with constructive suggestions about making it a better OS <without turning
> it into Windows>, but instead all his criticisms of Linux (in one form or
> another) are all about how Linux isn't working like his beloved
> Windows.....and then has the nerve to tell us how Linux should be changed
> to look and act more like Windows. Forget it, it isn't going to happen
> for now.
Now where did I ever say I wanted Linux like Windows? Or for Linux to look
and act like Windows? I never said that. I'll thank you not to put words in
my mouth
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 23:23:49 +0000
Terry Porter wrote:
> If I ever had any doubt about you being a troll Goodwin, you've removed
> them whis this post.
>
> Goodbye Wintroll.
Goodbye Linux fanatic.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 23:24:40 +0000
Michael Williams wrote:
> You don't have to uninstall it. Haven't you ever heard of upgrading (in
> this case, rpm -u filename?)
I got conflicts with various packages.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 23:26:35 +0000
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> http://www.linux-mandrake.com/en/updates/mdk72-updates.php3
>
> 2000-11-09 MDKA-2000:012 Linux-Mandrake 7.2 Updates for security, bug
> fixes, and KDE 2.0 final are available.
Yes I saw that, that's why I grabbed all the downloads. However, it turned
out I already had those versions installed. It would seem the 'final'
version is on some releases of Mandrake 7.2 - I dunno!
-- Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Jerry Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 23:27:57 GMT
In comp.os.linux.x Robert Wiegand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Eric Meyer wrote:
>>
>> >They should really try doing a Windows install before complaining.
>>
>> I have many times. It may not be as easy as installing Office (or the like),
>> but it's still a hundred times easier than linux.
> Then you are a pretty lucky guy.
> Windows may be nice if everything works correctly, but it is a nightmare
> when something fails. Since you can't see hwat is really happing inside
> the OS it is really difficult to trace down and fix a problem.
And it gives such informative error messages to! Like can't find a
file. Of course it doesn't tell you which file. But my all time
favorite windows error message is a popup with ERROR in it and a
button labelled OK. No message test, no help F1 does nothing.
> Windows is also a major pain to install if you have a number of
> devices that aren't supported by the base OS. Installing everything
> on my Windows PC takes about 5 CDROMS and 2 floppy disks. And you have
> to reboot the stupid machine after installing each driver.
I solved that problem by making a custom install cd with all of the
drivers I need and win 95, plus some instructions on what & how to
install. Last time I had to re-install this saved me time having to
track down all the driver cd's & disks necessary.
And don't forget rebooting any time you change just about any
parameter. "You need to reboot your computer for this change to take
effect. Reboot now?"
Jerry
> --
> Regards,
> Bob Wiegand [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 23:31:21 +0000
Charlie Ebert wrote:
> Were not big enough for that problem.
Then try harder. It can be done. If _we_ can do it (and the company I work
for is pretty small), so can you. Microsoft do respond, eventually. You
just have to be persistant.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Jerry Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is awful
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x,comp.os.ms-windows,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 23:33:27 GMT
In comp.os.linux.x Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Robert Wiegand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Guy wrote:
>>
>> > windows is easy to use...no brainer to use most of the time plus you can
>> > get support up the wazoo...but its unstable, erratic, and downright
>> > bloody annoying...
>>
>> Windows may be easy to use, but is is *not* easy ti install.
>>
>> A big problem is that many people compare a pre-installed Windows
>> to a install-it-your self Linux. Then then complain that Linux
>> is too difficult.
>>
>> They should really try doing a Windows install before complaining.
> I installed windows *many* times.
> The win9x installtion is a easy if you've fat partition (and impossible
> without, and yes, it sucks)
> You're asked several simple questions, and then windows install itself.
> Linux installation is comparable to NT/2K installations now. Mainly because
> both systems require you to choose a partition and partition type.
> Personally, I think that this is a mute issue. Installing linux shouldn't be
> a problem to anyone with a moderate knowledge in computers.
> Take a look at Corel Linux, it's just as simple as win9x, and suffer from
> much of its flaws. (Defaults to running as root with blank password being
> one of them.)
> Using linux for the email/browsing/word proccessing is not an issue, as
> well.
> There are plenty of good tools that will do it for you (But not StarOffice,
> please, that is all I ask)
> The main problem with Linux is that it isn't friendly to the end user, the
> newbie, to learn.
> Requiring an end user to learn too much, too soon, in order to do too
> ordinary tasks.
> The steep learning curve is one of linux's biggest disadvantages.
> Too many people are looking at this, and thinking, "This isn't for me, it's
> too hard."
> Tools such as LinuxConf make life much easier for those people, but they are
> simply insufficent.
> LinuxConf looks crowded, full of options, and it is hard to find exactly
> what you need in there.
> I rather have something like the Control Panel, which is far less
> intimidating to the average user, but doesn't give up the flexibility and
> power.
> You see all the options you can choose from, no need to scroll down to get
> them, or guess them if you don't know what they are.
> All the main keys (and some of the sub keys) could be there, allowing quick
> access to all the options.
> For that matter, another big minus on linux is that all the application use
> text files for their configuration, all of them in different formats, which
> makes the work of tools such as LinuxConf much harder than it should be.
> And it makes editing those files manually a hard task, which either require
> you to keep all those configuration formats in memory an almost impossible
> task for most people, or keep a copy of the reference nearby.
> IMO, that should be abolished. You shouldn't have to refer to the manual in
> order to administer your computer.
Oh? How do you admin a windows box? Many of the items on those cute
gui screens certainly aren't intuitive. Maybe you use the help files?
What's the difference between help files and man pages? (Other than
the man pages actually contain information, not dumbed down like
windows help).
Then let's discuss the registry, another stinking pile of dung from
MS. The same information repeated multiple times under indecipherable
keys with little or no documentation. I'll take text format files any
day.
> Does LSB include standard for conf files?
> I checked http://www.linuxbase.org/ and didn't find one, but I didn't look
> very deeply.
> I wrote the following file while learning XML:
> http://www10.ewebcity.com/ayende/lmc.xml
> It's really pretty simple, I don't think that it is sufficent, I mainly
> wrote it because I wanted the practice.
> Take a peek, you'll probably laugh at this attempt, but that or similar
> syntax should be able to do the work.
> Assuming that this or similar (or not-similar, as long as there is a
> standard) would be *very* good, it shouldn't be a problem to build a program
> to handle those files.
> This gives you the ability to write a single tool to do all the
> administration on linux in GUI or CLI in an easy to use tool, while retain
> the ability to be edited via any text editor.
> BTW, anyone can guess what I meant when I called the file that way?
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 23:36:55 GMT
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
> "Chad C. Mulligan" wrote:
> >
> > "mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > My BIOS has nothing to do with Win98 failing to shut down.
> >
> > Actually it has everything to do with it.
> >
> > > Interestingly, if I use APM and linux on the same hardware,
> > > not only does it close down properly, but it powers down as
> > > well.
> >
> > So you got the correct drivers.
> >
> > > Win98SE is failing to even close down, let alone power down.
> > >
> >
> > Get the correct drivers....
>
> I thought the big selling point of these Win9x systems was
> that they detected the hardware and configured themselves.
> Hell, the Red Hat installer does a heck of a better job!!!
>
Sorry to jump in.
FWIW, because it appears that MS has the capability of screwing the same
thing in all possible ways, my experience tells that one of the apps
most prone to hang at closing down is the connection manager.
However a good thing to do is to look to the apps still running when you
are ready to shut down (CTRL-ALT-DEL and that stuff, you know).
Terminating them one by one manually tells you which one hangs, then you
may try to get rid of it. I'd bet you'll discover it has nothing to do
with APM drivers.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Netscape review.
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 01:27:46 +0200
"Eric Remy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <908vr1$71j1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ayende Rahien"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> Add to it an utterly miserable JVM, at least in older versions. At
> >> least the newer ones allow you to use Apple's runtime.
> >> Tack on glacial performance.
> >> Crash happy. Sometimes (used to be always) kills the system on crash.
> >> Likes to install stuff you specifically ask not to, such as AIM.
> >
> >Oh, I really *loved* that one, two icons of real player on my desktop,
one
> >of them named "take5" for some misterious reason, and has a different
> >icon.
>
> Even better on a Mac: it installs AIM into the menu bar. You can't just
> trash it: you have to go play with extensions.
Ouch.
> >> But at least it runs Chime correctly: MSIE on both Mac and PC tends to
> >> die with too many embedded molecules. (And the Mozilla team fixed the
> >> incompatibility with 6.0 when I reported it from the beta- kudos. MS
> >> hasn't done so yet.) At least that's something...
> >
> >What is chime?
>
> http://www.mdli.com 3-d molecular visualization plugin. Very, very
> nice toy for those of use who teach chemistry.
Okay, I don't teach chemistry, not even interested at it very much right
now.
> >About MSIE, there is a service pack for IE 5.5, I don't know if it's
> >applicable to macs, though.
>
> No.
Too bad.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Netscape review.
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 01:30:59 +0200
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8DVV5.486$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Eric Remy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >Please don't insult the Mac people.....I doubt they're thrilled with
IE.
> >
> > You'd be wrong. MSIE 5 for the Mac is one very nice browser. In several
> > ways better than MSIE 5.5 for PC, including standards compliance. Given
> > that Netscape sucks on Macs even worse than on Windows or Linux, it (or
> > iCab) should be the choice for most folks who've actually compared the
> > things.
>
> Actually, MS brought the standards compliance up to the same level as IE5
> for the Mac in IE 5.5 sp1.
Cool!
The last time I checked, IE5 for Mac was the best standards compliance
browser around. (Before NS6 was out)
If IE5.5 SP1 is now comparable, it's *very* good.
Does anyone know about tests done with Netscape 6 about standards
compliance, and on what level it is?
I understand that it supposed to abolish the old Netscape way "Who need
standards? We do it *our* way, put up or shut up, and who care about you
anyway?" about standards.
How good did they got it to be?
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 01:32:23 +0200
"Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9097va$o2g$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad C. Mulligan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> : "mark" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> : news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> :> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Mike Byrns wrote:
> :> >
> :> >How about going to the root of the problem and updating your BIOS?
> :> >
> :>
> :> My BIOS has nothing to do with Win98 failing to shut down.
> :>
>
> : Actually it has everything to do with it.
>
> You contradict this statement down below.
>
> :> Interestingly, if I use APM and linux on the same hardware,
> :> not only does it close down properly, but it powers down as
> :> well.
> :>
>
> : So you got the correct drivers.
>
> Make up your mind - is it the BIOS (a hardware thing) or the
> drivers for it (an OS thing)?
Can be either, both, or none of them.
Chad is suggesting the most probable (read: common) causes for this to
happen.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Subject: Re: C++ is very alive!
Date: 1 Dec 2000 11:30:26 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can hardly wait for the day. Image that! You write one peice of
> software on your Linux box and it's already ported to run on
> anything.
Alas, life isn't quite that good. There are still more than enough
bizarre differences between operating systems that porting is
irritatingly non-trivial. (Sure, it is possible to write using a
common subset that is handled right virtually everywhere, but it is
often surprising just how small that common subset is. And beyond
lies a world of *pain*. )^:
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Name me one elf who wants to go to Blackpool after he dies.
-- Raymond E. Feist on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Subject: Re: C++ is very alive!
Date: 1 Dec 2000 11:46:15 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> mlw wrote:
>> When is qsort a bad choice?
> Most of the time. But it is really bad if the partitioning routine
> divides the data into sets of 1 element and n-1 elements.
Its even worse when you need a stable sort, since quicksort simply
isn't. (Stable sort, where the ordering of A,B,C is guaranteed to be
unchanged if the comparison function says they are equal.) If you're
sorting for presentation to a user, you're really strongly advised to
use a stable sort, since changing the sorting criteria will have far
less suprising results then...
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Name me one elf who wants to go to Blackpool after he dies.
-- Raymond E. Feist on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Subject: Re: C++ is very alive!
Date: 1 Dec 2000 15:07:31 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Charlie Ebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This is true with the exception of Hurd. Hurd is all C++ code.
Are you trying to impress someone by repeatedly stating that? Here's
a free clue. If (IMHO) C is a shotgun with which you can blow your
foot off, C++ is that shotgun with a telescopic laser-targetting
night-sight but you foot is still in the firing line.
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Name me one elf who wants to go to Blackpool after he dies.
-- Raymond E. Feist on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 23:51:16 GMT
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Chad C. Mulligan" wrote:
> > >
> > > "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Curtis wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Your example had me wondering though.
> > > > >
> > > > > What practical real world task are you doing with you real world
> > > > > operating system in the context of browsing that I can't achieve
> with
> > > > > IE? I use Netcaptor to be exact that uses the IE engine. I don't use
> OE.
> > > >
> > > > Avoiding Trojans comes to mind. Not to mention that NT/2000 require
> > > > some serious reconfiguration to avoid myriads of problems due to that
> > > > leaky boat called "port 139".
> > > >
> > >
> > > Two settings changes are 'serious reconfiguration' hell you can turn it
> on
> > > and off as desired. Or just implement IPSEC and still use it as
> designed.
> > >
> >
> > This link provides something more than two setting, in order
> > to provide a certain amount of security for NT. Is the
> > fellow crazy or you're oversimplifying a bit?
> >
> > http://bunbun.ais.vt.edu/work/securing_nt.html
>
> Crazy, I would say.
> But he wasn't talking about all the ways to secure NT box, he was talking
> how to disable the "leaky boat called "port 139" "
He had also mentioned avoiding Trojans. Most of the stuff there is just
intended for that purpose.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job?
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 23:54:00 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert:) wrote in
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>YOU GUY'S have to remember here that what makes
>>me SO CRANKY about Windows is I end up getting
>>picked up by the CORP van at 2:30 or 3:30 am
>>to fix this crap when it goes down. I'm often
>>in the office in my robe when this crap happens
>>and I usually don't get it locked down until
>>10 or 11 am.
>>
>>And I'm tired of that. I really am.
>
>Then... change it, Charlie. Or change jobs.
>
>>It scares me because I don't always get a page
>>when this kind of stuff happens and one night
>>I almost shot my boss at the door. I didn't
>>know what the hell was going on, only that
>>somebody was BEATING at my door.
>>
>>From that night forward he rings me to death
>>before he comes.
>
>Why would anyone tolerate this kind of job, Charlie. Perhaps you should
>move on?
>
>>I don't like Window desktop as the system
>>registry prevents me from dragging a compiler
>>home now. The security key crap.
>
>It's called "licensing". You buy your own copy if you want the compiler. If
>you take it from work (and the licence) key it's called "stealing".
>
>I bought my own copy of Microsoft VC++ and Borland Delphi. It cost me
>around �600 but I figured it was worth it.
>
>What did Linus say? He who writes the software gets to write the copyright?
>
>>So, overall, I'm very very pissed about
>>the whole thing and if I can get just
>>spend my time convincing people to leave
>>Windows.
>
>Then why aren't you leaving it yourself? Why aren't you practicing what you
>preach?
>
>--
>Pete Goodwin
You don't know? Didn't you read?
Notice how nobody else is asking me this
question?
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Anyone have to use (*GAG*) Windows on the job?
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2000 23:56:00 GMT
In article <EvWV5.1655$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>Charlie Ebert wrote:
>
>> Were not big enough for that problem.
>
>Then try harder. It can be done. If _we_ can do it (and the company I work
>for is pretty small), so can you. Microsoft do respond, eventually. You
>just have to be persistant.
>
>--
>Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
>
An Windows simply isn't like any other operating
system is. You can't just take a pile
of windows crap and replace a series of mainframes
with it.
That's the lesson we've learned here.
We have good support with MF and we pay a high
fee. They don't know what to say.
So there you go. Windows can not replace
large task a mainframe did.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Windows review
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2000 01:43:24 +0200
"Vann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:4gVV5.4168$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <908cgh$96a7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Ayende Rahien"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > "SuperGumby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:6iNV5.676$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> I'm a Windows diehard, but if you want me to run win9x on a 386 with a
> >> GB
> > of
> >> RAM you can keep dreamin'.
> >
> > Those are the minimum requirements, it would install and work on such a
> > machine.
> >
> I may not personally like Windows, but I'm not particularly biased. If
> anyone thinks that Windows will run well on a 386, he or she is crazy.
> Windows95 on a 386 is beyond unusable, as is X on a *nix. Windows barely
> works on a 486, I used to use it, actually. Linux seemed to do better on
> the 486, though, since I could use a window manager that took up fewer
> resources than explorer.exe ( Window Maker, Blackbox, etc. ) I'm sure if
> Windows came with an alternate, fully-functional, light-weight shell, it
> would be useable as well.
486 + 12Mb makes a pretty good system if your only needs are word processing
& email and maybe a little browsing (recommended with *everything* off in a
new browser, as those can eat system resources like there is not tomorrow.
Especially netscape) with 95.
I've used it to do just so, it's not *fun*, but it's working.
> >> on a 486/66 with 64MB, RH5.2 and Win95 (providing similar
> >> functionality) worked OK, RH6.0 was almost unusable but may have pipped
> >> win98.
> >
> > 64MB is a big amount of RAM, even today.
> Heh, I'm not so sure about that. Right now RAM is dirt cheap. You can
> get 128MB here for atound $50-$65, 64MB about $20-$30. And, from what I
> can see, it won't go much higher if DDR RAM makes a big splash.
Actually, that wasn't what I'm talking about.
Check what the OEM offers, mid range offers, especially, as those are the
current standards in the market.
http://www.dell.com/us/en/dhs/products/model_dimen_dimen_l.htm
http://www.dell.com/us/en/dhs/products/model_dimen_dimen_4100.htm
Right now, at least in here, 64MB is the minimum standard, (which is pretty
funny, because 733Mhz is the minimum for processors. And RAM is much more
important than proccessor speeds.)
You can always upgrade, of course, and it's usually the best to take the
system just below cutting edge (IE, the high end of middle price market) in
order to keep your computers usable for the longest amount of time.
Although, considerring what happened in 95-98, things seemed to have relaxed
a little.
Now hardware surpass the need of the software, and I don't see it change any
time soon for the average user.
I'm going to replace my current computer when Intel & AMD will put out the 2
Ghz processors or when IA-64 will be out.
About half a year to a year, I estimate. I don't think that I'll feel the
lack of processor power that much by that time. Even for games.
BTW, anyone can recommend me what to choose? PIV 2Ghz or IA-64?
It's still in the distant future, so I didn't look at it, but I would like
to hear what you think about it.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
