Linux-Advocacy Digest #567, Volume #31 Fri, 19 Jan 01 02:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Poor Linux (Charlie Ebert)
Re: CD DAE problem fixed! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Win2k vs Linux? Why downgrade to Linux? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Win2k vs Linux? Why downgrade to Linux? (Charlie Ebert)
Re: A salutary lesson about open source ("Tom Wilson")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Chad Myers")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Chad Myers")
Re: A salutary lesson about open source ("Tom Wilson")
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: And this NZ "Supercomputer" story is great ("Tom Wilson")
Re: Another World's Fastest Parallel Supercomputer running Linux ("Tom Wilson")
Re: M$ *finally* admits it's OSs are failure prone ("Erik Funkenbusch")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Poor Linux
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 06:21:20 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On 19 Jan 2001 02:38:52 GMT, "Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Linux supports all the hardware that's worth supporting.
>
>Bad answer Joe.
>
>Soundblaster Live is the premier consumer audio card and despite all
>kinds of promises from Creative, that go back years, it still is half
>supported under Linux.
>Win2k came out long after Linux support for this card began and yet
>they still have Liveware for Win2k, but a hald assed driver for Linux.
>
It is fully supported under Linux.
See their web site.
>
>>Usually, "hardware" that isn't supported under Linux is defective in
>>that it does not come with published specifications. I wouldn't want
>>to use such "hardware" even if it were supported.
>
99% of the hardware Linux doesn't plan on handling is
WIN hardware. And Win Hardware isn't hardware.
It's an emulation of hardware just like Windows is
an emulation of an operating system.
You'd have to be a dildo to buy into it.
I remember helping a guy install another brand of Win NIC
card once. We ran thru the fucking registry attempting to
move the old WIN NIC card so many times, we finally had
to format the bastards drive off to clean it out!
After we re-installed windows from a blank drive we finally
got the cheap ass Win NIC to work. IT was THEN, I convinced
him to buy a regular 3com card and leave the WIN shit on
the shelf to rot.
WIN hardware is hazardous to WINDOWS.
>Sorry but it is Linux that is defective in this case.
>Harware manufacturers see so little $$$ return on their investment
>that they don't develop for Linux.
>
I have difficulty these days finding a hardware vendor
who doesn't have a linux driver for their product as
Linux is the only OS which is growing now as Windows
is dying. The tide is turning for the Windows cookie monster.
>Linux should stick to servers where you can get by with a VGA card and
>no sound card.
>
It's not. People are demanding Linux as it works RIGHT!
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: CD DAE problem fixed!
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 06:22:58 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On Fri, 19 Jan 2001 03:10:07 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bones)
>wrote:
>
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>Sounds like its saving some information in some nvram somewhere. No
>>surprise, since many ISA pnp devices that I've worked with remember their
>>settings. I had a similar problem with a dual boot machine and an SB16 sound
>>card. OS/2 and Win95 fought over the DMA channel settings.
>
>
>I think you are correct here.
>
>>
>>> So I guess Linux is off the hook in this case.
>>
>>No, you are off the hook, Linux is not. I would still research the problem.
>>Imagine if your hardware shipped with DAE enabled, and you were only running
>>Linux.
>
>Linux has so many problems right out of the box that you need a
>support team just to organize and sort them out for you.
>
>
>Flatfish
>Why do they call it a flatfish?
>Remove the ++++ to reply.
I give you Flatfish!
He advocates Windows and is using a Windows newsreader.
The silly bastard can't even keep up with the pace of SLRN.
Notice how easily he get's buried to my replies.
Another reason Linux is superior to Windows.
With Windows your a sitting duck.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Win2k vs Linux? Why downgrade to Linux?
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 06:24:24 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] flatulated:
>On Fri, 19 Jan 2001 03:03:18 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>
>>On 19 Jan 2001 02:37:42 GMT, Lewis Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> was heard ranting about <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in
>>> alt.linux.sux on 18 Jan 2001
>>>
>>>>On 19 Jan 2001 01:13:12 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lewis Miller)
>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>Mandrake 7.2 cost $35.95-$120 at Borders Books in NYC depending on
>>>>>>version (PowerPack was the most expensive).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Win2k Pro upgrade is about $115.00 average price mail order.
>>>>>>Full support is included.
>>>>>
>>>>>or better yet sign up for a class at a local college with a site
>>>>>license. With the proper MS site licence for a school, they get a
>>>>>licence for every workstation and server, and one for each employee to
>>>>>take home, and all students get one. this equals Win2k for pretty
>>>>>much free if you're a college student. And if you're in college you
>>>>>usually have something like a T3 connection so downloading the 2 640
>>>>>meg images files for the Red Hat discs, is just a couple hour download
>>>>>while you sleep. So I can get both, and Have gotten both for free.
>>>>>Don't pay what you don't have to.
>>>>
>>>>I saw Win2k Pro upgrade for $99.00 at Staples in NY today.
>>>
>>>ok, that's still a LOT more than Linux, and that's also comparing an upgrade to
>>>a full blown from scratch OS.
>>>
>>>>>ok, first you are using Mandrake. Sucks, and if you don't know how to
>>>>>close down ports you shouldn't be using linux, in fact I would debate
>>>>>if you should even be using a computer. Second, of course Win2k is
>>>>>closed down, unless you get advanced server ed. it's a workstation, it
>>>>>doesn't need ports open. That's kinda like saying WFWG is secure
>>>>>because it doesn't have a bunch of open ports.
>>>>
>>>>Wrong.. You have obviously never used Win2k.
>>>
>>>Wait one sec. <clicks on the Start button> um.. yeah that says Windows 2000 on
>>>the side of the start button...
>>>
>>>>All the nasty ports (ftp etc) are closed down by default yet with the click of
>>>>a mouse you can open whatever you please, individually on each connection I
>>>>might add.
>>>
>>>Nasty ports? FTP? Windows built in FTP sucks. Wouldn't touch the thing. also
>>>Linux does not be default have the FTP port open.
>>>
>>>>Point is, if Linux is trying to appeal to desktop, they should shut
>>>>them all down.
>>>>SuSE is even worse in that regard.
>>>
>>>NO! Linux is NOT trying to appeal to the dekstop. First off Linux does not
>>>have an aggenda, or thought, or opinion, it is an idea. If Linux were to have
>>>any opinions they would be those of Linus T. himself.
>>>Just because Caldera is making an appeal does not make Linux do shit. Besides
>>>it's for those same reasons that Caldera sucks.
>>>
>>>>>Win2k never did detect my SGI/Sony monitor, keeps telling me I can't
>>>>>use the settings it supports. Linux, I don't remember if it detected it
>>>>>or not, I'd just as soon put in the settings myself. For my Digital
>>>>>camera I had to install the software on Win2k, linux had software
>>>>>already installed for it.
>>>>
>>>>I didn't install any software for my camera. It just worked under
>>>>Win2k. I couldn't even get USB working under Linux (Mandrake 7.2) so
>>>>the camera was a non-issue.
>>
>> I find that rather odd considering that the last two versions
>> have been reported to autodetect various USB devices just fine.
>> Furthemore, I MYSELF run USB devices (mouse, keyboard & joypad).
>
>First off you are replying to 2 different people, but I will answer my
>own.
>
>USB no workie under Mandrake 7.2 and that includes a hub and 2 devices
>a scanner and the Camera. It won't even recognze the hub and in fact
>when the boot messages scroll across the screen it says "server" not
>loaded for USB.
>
>Works fine under WIn2k and Win98se.
>
>
>> Non-standard USB device are a crap shoot. On Win2K, there are
>> some that just plain aren't supported.
>
>Mine work fine on Win2k and Win98se and don't work under Linux.
>For God sakes even the hub isn't recognized.
>
>>>
>>>Ok so it didn't work under Mandrake, which does not use the latest version of
>>>Linux (Linux being the Kernel and that is all).
>>
>> ...or he's just full of it.
>
>
>Some one else wrote that.
>
>> You could even run Agent inside of Windows in VMWARE or
>> Merge if you had some other reason to keep Linux running.
>
>It half runs under Whino.
>If I have to run VMware I might as well run Windows where Ican easily
>have multiple instances of Agent running at the same time without some
>aborted config file.
>
>
>
>Flatfish
>Why do they call it a flatfish?
>Remove the ++++ to reply.
USB works just fine under Linux.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Win2k vs Linux? Why downgrade to Linux?
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 06:26:07 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>On 19 Jan 2001 03:17:33 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>
>
>>Honey, you arent supposed to run those applications as root.
>
>Doesn't matter.,....
>
>>> to a long
>>> list of major bugs like Glint,
>>
>>Which youve never used.
>
>So how do I know about it?
>Do some reasearch on it...
>
>>> mis-named kernel (they put an extra
>>> extension on it)
>>
>>Its not misnamed actually.
>
>
>It was around Redhat 5.x or so.....
>They put an extra .06 in there and while they added it to the source
>tree, the compiler (or whatever does the compiling) didn't find it....
>
>Do some research again....
>
>>> so re-compile failed and so forth.
>
>
>>You didnt even attempt it.
>
>
>Do some research because you are looking like a fool here.....
>>
>>
>>
>>-----.
>
>Flatfish
>Why do they call it a flatfish?
>Remove the ++++ to reply.
Do you even know what your talking about here Flatfish.
I think you need an asprin and some beddy bye time.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A salutary lesson about open source
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 06:27:47 GMT
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:VLQ96.115$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:LuQ96.3021$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:UCh96.4223$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message
> > > news:zX896.2827$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >
> > > > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:KZY86.1680$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >
> > > > > "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:OZP86.2713$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > news:DQC86.3397$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > > news:a9y86.159$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > news:Yfp86.2938$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message
> > > > > > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > > > > > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Actually, it shows how difficult it *IS* to find
> > backdoors.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > It took them 6 months to find this backdoor, with
> > thousands of
> > > > > > people
> > > > > > > > > > > looking at the source code.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Per my other post, there are exactly 35 developers on
the
> > > > Firebird
> > > > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > > > > Some of them have joined relatively recently.
SourceForge
> > shows
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > no one
> > > > > > > > > > has downloaded their pre-release kits yet.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Your "thousands of people" are as vaprous as
closed-source
> > > > security
> > > > > > is.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > But what about the thousands who supposedly review Linux.
> > From
> > > > > > > > developers,
> > > > > > > > > to watchdog groups, to tinkerers, you'd think most of the
> > obvious
> > > > > > bugs
> > > > > > > > would
> > > > > > > > > be flushed out immediately. However, every shipping Linux
> > release
> > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > > all major distributors still comes riddled with security
> > exploits
> > > > not
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > mention all other bugs. If Open Source is so superior,
and
> > all
> > > > this
> > > > > > > > > peer review actually happens as you people say, then how
are
> > these
> > > > > > > > glaring
> > > > > > > > > bugs slipping through so frequently?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Its' impossible for all bugs to be rooted out of a large
> > software
> > > > > > project.
> > > > > > > > Only the most glaring and obvious show up quickly. It takes
> > time for
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > more subtle ones to present themselves. With open source,
the
> > option
> > > > > > exists
> > > > > > > > to patch them as they come along as opposed to placing a
bug
> > report
> > > > > > with a
> > > > > > > > vendor and counting on them to actually heed it and provide
a
> > patch
> > > > in
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > timely manner (or in some cases at all).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So basically you're saying that Open Source offers no
advantage
> > for
> > > > large
> > > > > > > projects? This is basically what I've been saying all along.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No, I'm pointing out something that should be obvious - There's
no
> > > > perfect
> > > > > > system. I, indeed pointed out an advantage to open source,
though.
> > You
> > > > > > neglected to quote the whole response.
> > > > >
> > > > > You may not be saying that OSS is perfect, but others are
implying
> > that.
> > > > > They are implying that OSS is superior to everything else and
that
> > there
> > > > > is NO reason why you WOULDN'T want to use OSS.
> > > >
> > > > To put it in a more rational light, there are many compelling
reasons
> > for
> > > > chosing OSS over CSS. And those have been discussed, shouted,
> > filibustered,
> > > > grunted, flamed, and what-not ad-infinitum. IMO, CSS's only
advantage
> > is
> > > > stricter control and less deviation from a set standard. The fewer
> > cooks at
> > > > the pot thing. Again, IMO, that alone isn't enough to justify it.
> > > > Particularly when it comes to the CSS OS we oft discuss around
here.
> > >
> > > OTOH, there's no compelling reason for OSS. The stated advantages are
oft
> > > never realized (peer review, greater security, better design, etc).
> > > Particularly when it comes to the OSS OS we oft discuss around here.
> >
> > If that were the case it wouldn't be running on so many servers and we
> > wouldn't be bickering about its' benefits/non-benefits.
>
> Well, that doesn't make much sense, now does it?
>
> The same would be said about CSS. The thing with OSS is, it's not about
> OSS, it's simply because Linux is free. People use it, but hardly anyone
> bets the company one it, and the ones who have are mostly out of business
> now.
And, if everyone who touched Linux, went out of business.....
"...we wouldn't be bickering about its' benefits/non-benefits."
Who's not making sense?
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?)
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 06:15:20 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:948hkn$n89$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > Linux is not at all at fault in this scenario. You have issues with
> the
> > > > limitations of one filesystem. Exactly like the limitations of FAT or
> > > > NTFS (I know NTFS can handle larger files than ext2, but that doesn't
> > > > mean it doesn't have its limits).
> > >
> > > The only real limitation of NTFS I'm aware of is slow new-file creation
> when
> > > dealing with orders of tens of millions of files.
> >
> > There are limitations on file sizes and numbers, as there must be...
> > luckily, the max filesize with NTFS is huge, but it wont be long before
> > people are hitting that limit too (if they haven't already).
>
> 16 Exabytes ???
> 16 billion Giga byte.
>
> I'm not sure exactly *what* you can put into a file to get into that size.
> Hell, you can probably put the Internet in one such file with room to spare
> including all the warez sites (anyone knows how much data is on the
> internet? Last I checked was about two years ago, and it was in the order of
> TBs only.)
>
> > > Sometimes ago someone mentioned ADS as an NTFS exploit, but I've found
> > > absolutely no information about this.
> >
> > ADS?
>
> Alternative Data Streams
>
> appear in the form of:
>
> filename:ADS
> ":" is the ADS delimitor.
>
> Possible documentation you would like is Linux Kernal mailing list, search
> for NTFS streams.
> (Check out Linus' idea about "Everything, but I mean *everything*, is a
> file", btw.)
>
> They are also called Named Streams, btw.
> Currently they are mainly being used for Macintosh compatibility (much
> better than what Linux has at the moment, btw).
Actually, Data streams are being used more now than ever in Windows 2000.
You know when you right-click on a file and bring up its properties
and click on the Summary tab and you and edit the file's title, author,
etc? Those are all in streams. You can have many streams per file all
with relevant data to the file. While this isn't a new thing to NTFS5,
streams have a much better implementation on NTFS5. Microsoft was
encouraging developers to use streams to provide more data about their
documents to the OS and to users to allow them to sort and arrange
documents more logically than by just filenames, dates, etc.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?)
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 06:18:21 GMT
"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:948hkn$n89$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<SNIP> Information on NTFS data streams </SNIP>
More information:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/techart/ntfs5.htm
More info on Encryption, reparse points, sparseness,etc
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/techart/ntfs2.htm
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A salutary lesson about open source
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 06:38:31 GMT
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:GMQ96.116$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9wQ96.3022$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > On Wed, 17 Jan 2001 14:03:32 GMT, Chad Myers
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >"Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message
> > > >news:zX896.2827$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >>
> > > >> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >> news:KZY86.1680$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >> >
> > > >> > "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >> > news:OZP86.2713$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > [deletia]
> > > >> To put it in a more rational light, there are many compelling
reasons
> > for
> > > >> chosing OSS over CSS. And those have been discussed, shouted,
> > filibustered,
> > > >> grunted, flamed, and what-not ad-infinitum. IMO, CSS's only
advantage
> > is
> > > >> stricter control and less deviation from a set standard. The fewer
> > cooks at
> > > >> the pot thing. Again, IMO, that alone isn't enough to justify it.
> > > >> Particularly when it comes to the CSS OS we oft discuss around
here.
> > > >
> > > >OTOH, there's no compelling reason for OSS. The stated advantages
are
> > oft
> > > >never realized (peer review, greater security, better design, etc).
> > > >Particularly when it comes to the OSS OS we oft discuss around here.
> > >
> > > ...except when it comes to commodity supercomputing in
> > > academia and the oil industry... <snicker>
> >
> > I'll not even mention the Web server thing....<chortle>
>
> Oh you mean the heavily inflated web server thing? The grossly
unscientific
> misrepresentative web server thing? Where every virtual host is counted
> as a sever thus doubling or trippling the server numbers?
You're absolutely right, Chad. Its' all smoke and mirrors meant to placate
the great unwashed Linux peasant masses.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 01:37:31 -0500
Sgt Detritus wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> <snip some funny stuff>
> >
> > Sure enough, mean time to failure (MTTF) tests for 98, NT and 2k
> show, among
> > other things, that the heavily-sold consumer OS is hopelessly buggy
> and in
> > fact eager to crash.
> >
> > 2K wins the competition hands down with a respectable MTTF of 2893
> hours
> > (actually sounds like a professional product, doesn't it). NT showed
> > considerable anaemia, struggling for an MTTF of 919 hours, while the
> crap OS
> > most of you are using as you read this article, Win9x, exhibited a
> > predictable, consumer-schlock MTTF of only 216 hours.
> >
> > ---If I were a OS vendor I would be very ashamed of that uptime! if
> the
> > uptime was, say, 10 months, YES, jump around and
> celebrate..however...most
> > commercial UNIX's and Linux achieve 2893 with out too much effort.
>
> Something odd that I have noticed. Bill Gates steps down as CEO and
> begins riding herd on the programmers and they turn out a product that
> is slightly more palatable than the shit we've been fed for years. It
> seems the programmers are working as though pursued by Satan himself.
> Makes you wonder, don't it!
Go see the movie Anti-Trust
>
> --
> Any man agitated enough to lift a 300lb. ape
> without noticing is a man with way too much on
> his mind.
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: And this NZ "Supercomputer" story is great
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 06:39:42 GMT
"kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I'm still waiting for Claire Lynn/steve/flatfish to reply, "there are
> people/cultures/nations outside the USA?"
>
They're only a nasty rumor. <g>
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Another World's Fastest Parallel Supercomputer running Linux
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 06:42:00 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On 16 Jan 2001 23:30:42 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.) wrote:
>
>
> >Neat. Oh im sorry, where was that windows machine that can do 2
teraflops
> >again?
> >
> >Chad? Claire? Dresden? Anyone?
> >
>
> It's in my living room right next to my particle accelerator courtesy
> of BrookHaven Lab's.
>
> I wonder if they have figured out how to disable DAE on that beast?
They instructed the applications not to rip audio.
You oughta try that.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: M$ *finally* admits it's OSs are failure prone
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 00:54:16 -0600
"sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:947gua$n7o$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <ekl96.134$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Milton wrote:
> > >
> > > It is pathetic on so many levels:
> > >
> > > (1) Win2K can't compare for stability to any of its server
> competition.
> > > (2) NT, despite Microsoft's claims, sucked as bad as we said it did.
> > > (3) Microsoft is "proud" of these numbers, which tells you they have
> no
> > > idea of what an operating system should be.
> >
> > No, it means that MS is being realistic. Linux fails too, and I'd bet
> it's
> > MTTF is about the same as Win2k's, that is if you'd bother to be
> realistic.
>
> Based on nubers from Netcraft and Uptimes I would find this claim hard
> to believe. Just guessing without documentation to back it up is hardly
> being realistic.
Really? Why don't you list every Linux system listed in Netcrafts database
and give the average uptime of all of them combined.
I'll bet you it'll be a lot worse than the MTTF listed in this report.
Provide the statistics, since you claim to have them.
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
