Linux-Advocacy Digest #623, Volume #31 Sat, 20 Jan 01 22:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Kernel space? Who gives a @#$% (J Sloan)
Re: Windows 2000 ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: M$ *finally* admits it's OSs are failure prone ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: A salutary lesson about open source (Cliff Wagner)
Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice (J Sloan)
Re: 10,000 to 20,000 Linux/Alphas - CLUSTERED! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windows curses fast computers (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Windows curses fast computers ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: 10,000 to 20,000 Linux/Alphas - CLUSTERED! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: NT is Most Vulnerable Server Software (Tim Smith)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance (Cliff Wagner)
Re: Windows curses fast computers ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windows curses fast computers ("Erik Funkenbusch")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Kernel space? Who gives a @#$%
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 01:41:35 GMT
> Adam Warner, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>
> >Do you have any opinion on what effect the Linux box having one more network
> >controller than the Windows box would have made?
There is one obvious explanation, in light of the fact that microsoft
didn't start getting results in Linux' league until some months after
Linux went to the top:
Windows results were not as good with 8 interfaces - if the
results were better with 8, they would have gone with 8. During
the many months of preparation, they doubtless tried every possible
hardware and software configuration in attempt to try to catch up
to Linux.
jjs
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 19:48:58 -0600
"Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:taka6.218$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Microsoft had already screwed over Apple with the Windows thing. Apple is
> ALSO in the software game and by most accounts, did it better. It was in
> MS's best interest not to support that platform. Apple was a true
competitor
> to them. They had the potential to actually hurt them. (They also had
> incentive too.)
That depends on what you mean by "better". Yeah, they had a better
interface, but the OS design itself made even Windows 1.0 look like a
masterpiece of engineering. It was programmed in Pascal (Apple Pascal, of
course), and used very weird memory management concepts. It used "handles"
for memory (Windows also did, but they did it the right way, explained
later).
A MacOS "handle" was a double indirect pointer. The handle pointed to
another pointer which pointed to the actual memory. This allowed the MacOS
to move memory around internally and update the "handles" without forcing
the code to adjust itself. While this seems nice on the surface, it made
programming a nightmare.
Windows, on the other hand, used Handles as well. Instead of double
indirection, however, you called a function to "lock" the handle. This gave
you a direct pointer to the memory for it's use. This worked much better
and was less error prone.
The PC had a good reason to do this, segmented 16 bit memory. The Mac had
no such good reason, other than the fact that "near" code (code within 32k
of the current IP) was more efficient to access than "far" code (fully
qualified addresses) on the original 68000.
> I've said as much above. Actually, if Apple had a good CEO back then, they
> could have had a much larger impact.
Which is mostly what i've said all along. MS got to where it was due to the
incompetance of it's competitors.
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: M$ *finally* admits it's OSs are failure prone
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 19:44:52 -0600
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> Which message is that? According to Deja, you've only posted 5 messages
> since July with the word "average" in it, and none of them are it.
Here's the original post with the averages, at LT. I mentioned it here on
09-Jan.
http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-01-07-004-20-OP-MS-0022
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 19:56:32 -0600
"Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 10:46:14 +0000, Pete Goodwin
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Everyone goes on about how Linux offers me the 'choice' of which desktop
I
> > can use, unlike Windows. However, choice here does not equate to
consistant
> > style.
>
> Of course not. That's what choice means. Things aren't forced into a
> consistent mold.
Can you imagine what kind of chaos would reign if there were no standards
for gasoline, or if there were 50 standards? Each gas station would be
forced to carry all 50 brands of gas, or you'd have to search for a gas
station that supported the kind of gas you needed for your car. Hell, it's
near impossible to find leaded gas anymore (at least in the northern states,
where most older cars rust out from the winter).
Or what about if there were were 20 different telivision standards? You'd
need to buy a TV that handled all of them, or be stuck watching only those
channels that your TV supported.
In many situations, too much (or even any) choice is BAD for the consumer.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cliff Wagner)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A salutary lesson about open source
Date: 21 Jan 2001 01:50:37 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 21 Jan 2001 00:35:20 GMT, Chad Myers typed something like:
>
>"Cliff Wagner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[SNIP]
>> Probably because you make up your own analysis as opposed
>> to actually addressing what is on the page you are
>> so happy to quote:
>> -------- BEGIN QUOTE FROM URL CHAD LOVES SO MUCH -----
>> The 1999 Fortune 500 list of companies ranks the top corporations
>> in the United States. We expected the results to be dramatically
>> different than the Netcraft results because upper management in
>> big business generally don't understand open source software (OSS).
>> They often forbid the use of OSS because they confuse it with the
>> FreeWare and ShareWare from the 1980s. They're not aware that
>> the quality of Apache rivals the commercial products and surpasses
>> the commercial products in terms of flexibility and functionality.
>> ------- END QUOTE ----
>> That basically say that the Fortune500 is skewed due to business
>> politics (in case you have problems comprehanding it).
>> And are you ever going to get me a number of "all these unimportant
>> low-traffic sites" that run on apache? I know of a lot that
>> run on IIS as well. Hell, i've designed some for both platforms
>> (gotta love companies that believe, if you build it they will come)
>
>
>So now what biznix says in opin is the bible? The facts speak for
>themselves. You can make up all sorts of fairy-tales about business
>politics to make up for Apache's poor showing, but it's just
>that, fairy tales.
>
>Please show conclusive proof that the reason Fortune 500 companies
>don't use Apache is because they think it's shareware. That's an
>assinine statement. That URL shows numbers, the rest is just all
>idle conjecture.
>
>-Chad
In other words, your opinion is more valid then
those who actually did the study.
How nice.
--
Cliff Wagner ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Visit The Edge Zone: http://www.edge-zone.net
"Man will Occasionally stumble over the truth, but most
of the time he will pick himself up and continue on."
-- Winston Churchill
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 20:04:39 -0600
"Karel Jansens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I have, until today, only encountered _one_ PC operating system with a
> thoroughly consistent user interface, and that was the OS/2 Warp family.
And
> even there, some programs 'chose' not to follow the rules and do it their
own
> way (StarOffice happens to be one of them, at least in their post-3.1
> incarnations).
I guess that's why there wre text mode programs and GUI programs. Some
programs supported SOM, some didn't. Some allowed the use of Rexx, some
didn't. For instance, a program that manuall set it's font rather than
following the OS supplied default was quite common.
> What I have seen of Windows 9x, gave me the impression that someone tried
to
> copy the 'look and feel' of the WPS (*), without bothering with the OO
> foundations. The result was utterly frustrating for someone who had
actually
> used an OOUI (Objext Oriented User Interface), since the Windows 9x
desktop is
> littered with inconsistencies.
You seem to be confused on what OO means. It has nothing to do with
consistency, but rather with extendibility (at least when referring to an
OOUI). Explorer is nearly as extendible as the WPS is, and it's quite OO
(since it's based on COM).
> My point is this: If you want to discuss consistency of the user
interface,
> please don't compare anything to Windows, because that is very silly. If
indeed
> you would have used a good interface previously, Linux would be a step
back.
> But the only good interface you could have used is the one of an operating
> system that is on its way out anyway (which, according to many, we have
> Microsoft to 'thank' for), so you might as well swallow and get on with
it.
Windows is consistent in most things a user does. There are a few
inconsistencies, but nothing major. Linux has almost no consistency,
especially between apps of different environments.
> (*) OS/2 Warp 3 came out before Windows 95. It was actually really funny
to see
> the UI of Chicago evolve into a WPS lookalike.
Most people think the WPS is a MacOS lookalike.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 20:10:39 -0600
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >>If I want all my file save/open dialogs to all look the same - like the
KDE
> >>style, or MOTIF or Gtk, can I do that with the Linux desktop? No I
can't -
>
> Sure. Just restrict yourself to one desktop.
>
> That is infact all you are doing when you run Windows.
> There exist no competing toolkits for Windows save those
> ported from Unix.
I guess that depends on what you call a "toolkit". In Linux, these are just
C and C++ frameworks, which often include custom widgets. In windows
there's OWL, VCL, Zinc, MFC, ATL, WTL, VCF, Atilla, WFC, and the list goes
on and on.
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 02:10:41 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> Can you imagine what kind of chaos would reign if there were no standards
> for gasoline, or if there were 50 standards? Each gas station would be
> forced to carry all 50 brands of gas, or you'd have to search for a gas
> station that supported the kind of gas you needed for your car. Hell, it's
> near impossible to find leaded gas anymore (at least in the northern states,
> where most older cars rust out from the winter).
>
Your examples are ridiculous, and have no connection with
Petes' pet peeve wanting all X apps to use a single widget set.
In contrast to your example above, gtk, qt, motif and xlib based
programs all exhibit the same behavior, serve the same functions
& can interoperate quite nicely.
jjs
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 10,000 to 20,000 Linux/Alphas - CLUSTERED!
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 20:23:44 -0600
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:94chnr$esm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:94blks$5ov$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Adam Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > Hi "sfcybear",
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >
http://computerworld.com/cwi/story/0%2C1199%2CNAV47_STO56666_NLTpm%2C00.html
> >>
> >> Also, apparantly linux is able to scale to 20,000 processors.
> >>
> >> Compared to windows 2000 datacenter's alleged 32.
> >>
> >> Thats a pretty big difference.
>
> > Man, this isn't even vapor.. it hasn't even been *STARTED*. They claim
to
> > not have the machine ready till 2004. Lots of things will change in
both
> > the Linux and Windows side before then.
>
> Alright then. 6,000 nodes on the Google linux cluster.
>
> How many nodes exactly are capable of operating on one W2K cluster again?
Did you read the article? It's *NOT* a clustered computer. It's a single
machine with 20,000 processors.
Why don't you people read the articles you harp on about?
Here's a quote:
"However, the system will be a long time in coming. Bill Blake, vice
president of high-performance technical computing at Compaq, said the three
partners hope to have a prototype machine ready by 2004."
Note the use of the singular word "machine".
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows curses fast computers
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 03:15:00 +0100
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> How do you know? These drives only recently were released.
>
> Even if they don't, it's because FreeBSD and Linux don't shut down the
> computer when you halt the OS.
>
>
Did you notice how conspicously Erik Funkenbusch is absent now from this
thread since now he is shown once again the crappy design of Wintendo, this
time without possible way out because he painted himself into a corner.
Seems he has not even the grace to accept beeing wrong, although he has
just shortly ago answered to several different threads (were at the moment
not all is lost, I presume)
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows curses fast computers
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 20:28:21 -0600
"Donn Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > In article <M6ha6.1011$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> >>
> >> Even if they don't, it's because FreeBSD and Linux don't shut down the
> >> computer when you halt the OS.
> >>
>
> > Where have you been? I don't know about FreeBSD, but Linux does shut
> > down the computer when you halt.
>
> FreeBSD has this feature as well:
I stand corrected. I don't typically halt FreeBSD or Linux, but rather just
reboot.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: 10,000 to 20,000 Linux/Alphas - CLUSTERED!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 02:25:24 GMT
On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 20:23:44 -0600, "Erik Funkenbusch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Did you read the article? It's *NOT* a clustered computer. It's a single
>machine with 20,000 processors.
>
>Why don't you people read the articles you harp on about?
Not enough time as they are too busy reading How-To's.
Flatfish
Why do they call it a flatfish?
Remove the ++++ to reply.
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Multiple standards don't constitute choice
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 03:19:28 +0100
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> Most people think the WPS is a MacOS lookalike.
>
>
Most people think Erik F is on drugs
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: NT is Most Vulnerable Server Software
Date: 20 Jan 2001 18:22:50 -0800
Reply-To: Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Microsoft just suffer the same thing .. twice from the same guy? At least
>this worm isn't costing billions to companies worldwide. If Microsoft can't
>protect themselves from known bugs in their own software why are you surprised
>that normal redhat users are in the same boat? Archsloch.
The thing I don't understand about this worm is *why* Red Hat still uses
the wu ftp server. Based on its history, it is clear that either the
authors of it have no care about security, or they are not competent to
write software that runs as root. It needs to be taken out of Red Hat
and replaced with a good ftp server. Red Hat has the resources to write
such a server, if no good secure ftp server exists.
At least when Microsoft screws up security, it is because they are
trying to do something ambitious, like allow scripting in email or
something. Screwing up security by having a buggy FTP server is just
pathetic.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cliff Wagner)
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: 21 Jan 2001 02:46:48 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 21 Jan 2001 01:24:08 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed something like:
>On 21 Jan 2001 00:45:15 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cliff Wagner)
>wrote:
>
>
>>Let's see....I haven't had any major problems with konqueror. I
>>mostly use it because it's just plain fast. I sometimes use
>>netscape (since some people like to do all sorts of fancy things
>>with their web sites which aren't standards based and
>>end up looking like crap in konq or opera).
>
>Since you seem to like looking things up on the net, a must when
>running Linux, try google and "konqueror+certificate" and see what
>happens.
Interesting reading. I can't say that I have used
konq on many secure sites (other then using webmin),
so haven't ran into this. I still think it has a
lot of merit.
>> I have no idea
>>what problem you have with your wheel mouse. Mine behaves
>>exactly like, well, a wheel mouse should.
>
>Under Windows In a split pane Window (like gmc or knode for example) I
>move the pointer over each pane within the same window and that
>becomes the active pane eliminating the need to click each time I move
>around. I can also press the scroll wheel and a little icon appears
>that allows very smooth and controlled scrolling of the Window by
>moving the mouse. Those are features that make the wheel mouse, well a
>wheel mouse. Completely missing from Linux. At best you get a coarse
>scrolling effect, not the smooth scrolling you get under Windows.
I haven't come across any instances where this really
was an issue. Of course it would be nice if windows
had built in focus-follows-mouse.
As for giving up my middle mouse button? Gods, I
hate that Microsoft utterly ignores the fact that
most mice have 3 (or 4) buttons. I love that I
can copy a URL and hover over a netscape window, press
the middle mouse button, and it goes there.
>>I also haven't had any problems with kmp3. Of course I have
>>an 18 hour playlist, so I guess I don't really care much about
>>adding songs that often. But when I do, it's right where I
>>left it. *shrugs*
>
>Not on my system it wasn't. It always went back to my /home directory.
I just tested it, and it stays in /usr/mp3 every time
for me.
>>Well, let's see...konqueror vs. ie....at least I can properly
>>download files in konq. The only problem I mentioned has more
>>to do with poorly designed sites.
>
>You're doing something wrong with IE if you can't d/l files.
Oh? So it's a pointless disclaimer on e-mailanywhere.com
about downloading attachments with IE? Or that when I
tried to get the registration key for windvd, I had to
click "open from current location" twice before I finally
got the binary to download? I can forward you over
the email from support there, since they seem to be
aware of the problem. But I guess it's my fault, and
these sites have the disclaimer up, just for me. I feel
special now.
>>Listening to music....Ummm...Musicmatch and kmp3....well,
>>uhhh....i load up my music, hit random play, minimize it.
>>How much more do I really need out of it? I guess I could
>>ask it to brew up my coffee too.
>
>You might as well go for coffee if you are using MusicMatch under
>Linux, because:
>1. The thing is a 13meg download slug that takes forever to load
that would take all of 2.5 minutes to download for me, not
even enough time for it to brew up.
>2. It is a version behind the WIndows version.
>3. It runs under Whino........
well, in linux, I use kmp3, so it doesn't matter.
I do have a licensed copy of musicmatch for my workstation
and for my laptop though, since it's one of the best
MP3 players for windows out there.
>>I have no idea what's wrong with your wheel mouse though.
>>I love my cordless wheelman. Works the way I expect it to.
>
>Try it on a Windows machine and you will see the difference.
I do use one on a windows machine, and I get about the
same amount of use.
>>If blizzard wrote games for linux (and macromedia ultradev...
>>with php support), there wouldn't be much reason for me
>>to even run win2k.
>
>I have a Playstation II.
I said blizzard.
a) they don't have PS2 versions
b) you can't be suggesting playing a RTS game on a console.
>>Ahead? It might have better application support, but that
>>isn't anything more then developers developing for a
>>monopoly desktop environment.
>
>Applications are everything to a desktop user.
>That is why Linux isn't making a dent in that area.
And linux is catching up. I mentioned 2 things
that are preventing me from dropping my win2k/98/me
installations. (since I'm a developer I need to keep
a copy of 2kAS around).
>> That doesn't have anything
>>to do necessarily with merits. MusicMatch, ACDSee, DiabloII,
>>UltraDev....good applications...none of which written by
>>Microsoft.
>
>None of which run under native Linux and to which there are no Linux
>equivalents even in the same ballpark.
While musicmatch is nice, all I need out of an mp3 player
is playlist management, and random play. What other bells
and whistles does the typical user need?
ACDSee is nice, but overkill for casual image viewing
(konqueror + kview works fine). I hope that loki can
get permission to port blizzard games, since they
really are in a league of their own.
As for UltraDev....great for layouts, but I still need
to use homesite or screem to do the dynamic stuff.
>>Well, that makes sense if you're looking for information
>>on ugly linux fonts. If you're looking to fix them,
>>If you actually *gasp* read any documentation on linux,
>>you'd realize that HOWTO is the source for informational
>>documentation on..how to do things. But of course, that
>>would mean having to read something. (and don't give
>>me this stuff that you don't have to do that with windows,
>>ask if the casual user is going to find where MS decided
>>to place the utility to create a boot disk).
>
>Even "if" Joe Six pack manages to get Linux installed he will look at
>it once and unless he has a very specific need to run it, it will be
>tossed into the trash can because it has absolutely no curb appeal.
In your opinion. Personally, I like KDE2 and Gnome+e...
One of my ex-gfs used to have no problems with kde1 when
she stayed over here. I had to spend 20 minutes explaining
which applications she would probably use, and she pretty
much figured everything out from there.
>Joe will be pissed off and frustrated and unless he is some geek with
>nothing better to do, will not stay with Linux very long because he is
>going to find that the applications are crude and silly looking
>compared to what he most likely already has with his pre-load Windows
>machine.
>You think he is going to dump Lotus Organizer (a typical pre-load
>program) for that silly looking kde organizer?
> I don't think so.
There's always evolution, or gnome-pim, or staroffice.
And Lotus Organizer isn't preloaded as frequently anymore,
with MS pressuring for outlook to be the default PIM app.
>>I'd say "fonts" is pretty intuitive to most users.
>
>Nope.
>
>>And like I said, if you read a LITTLE bit about linux,
>>you'd realize that HOWTOs are where the info is.
>>Not all that difficult to figure out. Of course if you
>>decide to just blindly ignore all the sources of info
>>readily available, I suppose you could waste a few hours
>>typing in arbitrary search criteria.
>
>Problem is it isn't a LITTLE reading it is constant, never ending
>reading to accomplish what will be easy for him under Windows.
Oh please. Maybe for people who have negative intelligence.
I haven't seemed to have had any problems sitting down
a friend at my PC, showing them that you click on the
little K to get to applications, and a quick little
bit on where to save to and printing and left them go
about their stuff. It's not like they need to learn vi.
"here's a word processor. Here's a spreadsheet. Here's
netscape. Here's an e-mail program. Here's an MP3 player.
I keep all my mp3s in /usr/mp3."
The thing that took the longest to explain was there aren't
those stupid drive letters, and to simply save stuff in
/home/LOGIN.
Yups, constant reading to be productive.
>>"fugly fonts"
>>"my fonts suck"
>>"display looks ugly".....
>>Sorry that you had to actually use your brain a
>>little bit to figure out what to search for.
>
>I'd be more sorry that the idiots packaging these distributions don't
>have the brains to swap the 75dpi and 100dpi lines in the config file.
>
>But, I guess they are to busy designing yet another editor for Linux
>or maybe a compiler or some new library for geeks or something.
>Chances are good it will be something totally useless to average Joe
>though.
>Joe would rather have a native version of MusicMatch Jukebox that is
>the current version shipping with Windows.
Yups, reading through freshmeat, that's all I ever see on there.
All text editors, all the time. Never another program. Oops,
I guess I should tell those guys developing evolution that they
went way past developing a word processor, so they better stop.
Also those crazy helix code guys. They really went above
and beyond a text editor. Oops, better stop the entire
KDE team too.
The average joe wants tools to do what he wants. You might
be overly concerned with the aesthete of the matter, and
all the bells and whistles, but most typical users have
typical usages. Word processing, spreadsheet, e-mail, web browsing,
chatting, solitaire, music...typical stuff.
--
Cliff Wagner ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Visit The Edge Zone: http://www.edge-zone.net
"Man will Occasionally stumble over the truth, but most
of the time he will pick himself up and continue on."
-- Winston Churchill
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows curses fast computers
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 21:01:11 -0600
"Peter K�hlmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Wasn't that Erik F who claimed to now use FreeBSD instead of Linux?
> But he does not know that FreeBSD can power off the computer??
I don't typically halt the OS, since I use it for my server.
> Hell, he always tries to look like a know everything (I wonder who those
> folks are who give him all those answers), yet such simple things escape
> him. (I think he barely knows how to write FreeBSD, let alone how to
> install it. He is just one of MicroShit's Macroshits)
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.funkenbusch.com
Notice how the OS was Linux, and now it's FreeBSD. And, in case you think
this is some hosting service, make sure to do a reverse DNS on the IP.
(BTW, this also blows sfc's assertion that Netcraft gains it's OS type from
the server string, since I didn't configure Apache to give the OS in ther
server response).
> And then this bullshit of the drives failure. If MicroShit does not know
> how to handle those drives, they should at least try to do it with a
> timeout long enough, even if this is a bad solution. But their imcompetent
> programmers (who else would wite something like Wintendo98?) just did not
> care, they just went ahead with the worst possible solution.
> But there are other ways I think. You could try to bring the drive into
> standby, then the cache will be flushed. THIS you can check for (if the
> drive is on standby). If it is, you can safely shut down.
Actually, FreeBSD's halt command calls Sync, which is documented to have a
bug which allows it to return before buffers are completely flushed, and
causing a shutdown. Further, FreeBSD's "reboot" function in it's kernel
calls a function called poweroff_wait() which merely waits 5 seconds before
powering off the computer.
You can see it for yourself here:
http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/~checkout~/src/sys/kern/kern_shutdown.
c?rev=1.91&content-type=text/plain
So, do you then think that FreeBSD is also "shit" engineering?
I would wager that Linux does similar, but have been unable to find a web
based CVS repository for kernel source and haven't bothered to download it
yet.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows curses fast computers
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 21:03:48 -0600
"Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:bXla6.185461$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> > Actually, I think this *IS* a fault of the drive. The drive should hold
> > enough capacitance to finish writing out it's cache and then park, but
> > aparently the drive doesn't do this.
>
> Shouldn't the OS wait until the drive signals it's written it's cache?
Drives don't do this. There is no documented way for the OS to know.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
