Linux-Advocacy Digest #658, Volume #31 Mon, 22 Jan 01 18:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Windows 2000 Datacenter Server does support the "five nines" ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: 10,000 to 20,000 Linux/Alphas - CLUSTERED! ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: NT is Most Vulnerable Server Software (T. Max Devlin)
Re: NT is Most Vulnerable Server Software (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: A salutary lesson about open source (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Windows curses fast computers ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Please tell me your motherboard name if it works properly in Linux (Perry Pip)
Re: "Linux is no Windows killer" ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
future of linux pda (jorgen)
Re: Why "uptime" is important. (Mark Styles)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 Datacenter Server does support the "five nines"
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 17:18:15 -0500
Craig Kelley wrote:
>
> "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > So there you go. Microsoft has now stated that at least one of its
> > Datacenter Server offerings can be 99.999% reliable. I wonder if the phrase
> > "can help" might appear some time soon :-)
>
> I'm sure it uses clustering to do this (no big deal).
>
> It's already years late, I wonder when it will finally ship? :)
>
...with, or without SERIOUS bugs?
> --
> The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
> Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
--
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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 10,000 to 20,000 Linux/Alphas - CLUSTERED!
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 17:26:16 -0500
"." wrote:
>
> sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > WOW!
>
> > http://computerworld.com/cwi/story/0%2C1199%2CNAV47_STO56666_NLTpm%2C00.html
>
> Hmmm. Linux scales from my Tivo to a 100 trillion OPS supercomputer.
>
> No matter how you cut it, windows 2000 does not have anywhere near a comparable
> scale. This is a fact.
>
> What exactly is it that windows does again?
>
crashes.
> -----.
--
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: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: NT is Most Vulnerable Server Software
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 22:33:55 GMT
Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 22 Jan
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 22 Jan
>>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>> T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 21 Jan
>>>>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>>>> T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This is a convention, not a rule of routing or the IP protocol.
>>>
>>>It is not a convention. Look up the appropriate RFC's. The private IP
>>>address ranges should never appear on the Internet.
>>
>> That's what we call a convention. Notice the "should". Where as,
>> 0.0.0.0, and 127.0.0.1 *cannot* appear on the Internet. Get it?
>
>I 'should' have said must. Now tell me why '0.0.0.0, and 127.0.0.1
>*cannot* appear on the Internet'? It just takes a misconfigured router.
>There is nothing magical about these addresses. You really are clueless.
Why must arrogant annoying idiots always seem to become embroiled in
epistemological conundrums? It doesn't take anything "magical" to use
the term "cannot" as it pertains to technical specifications. Check the
RFCs, and you'll find that the terms 'should' and 'cannot' have quite
specific, but non-specialized, meanings in the text of RFC
specifications. Still, to say that something can happen and that "all
it takes" is for a system to function incorrectly is to say that it
cannot happen when the system is functioning correctly.
Further, you've apparently replied before reading the rest of my comment
(no doubt in your eagerness to ignorantly brand me as "clueless")
wherein I point out that it is, in fact, whether it takes a
*misconfigured*, or a *malfunctioning* router, for the address to
"appear on the Internet". IOW, no, you're wrong. Neither 127.0.0.1 nor
0.0.0.0 will ever appear as the destination address of a packet on the
Internet, unless a router has *malfunctioned*, which is to say it is
doing something a router cannot do when functioning properly. Private
address blocks are contrary issue.
[...]
>>>Yes NAT is independant of how a firewall implements a security policy.
>>>However most if not all firewalls implement NAT as it is the logical
>>>place to do so.
>>
>> I think you mean "this is an available feature in most firewall
>> products". Whether a firewall implements NAT is not as trivial a matter
>> to guess. But you can generally tell those enterprises which attempt to
>> use NAT to 'secure their network', as they are the ones with slow
>> performance and intermittent connectivity.
>
>Again you just don't know what you are talking about. NAT is essential
>if you are using private addresses on your Intranet.
Boy, you are a fucking idiot, aren't you? NAT is entirely unnecessary
if you are using private addresses on your Intranet. The only reason
you would have to translate an address is if you are going to be using
it on the Internet.
(Think hard, and don't make assumptions about what you just read.)
>For sure NAT is an
>overhead and you scale your firewall performance appropriately.
You're just not getting it, are you? Whether a firewall and a NAT are
entirely separate functions SAYS NOTHING ABOUT WHAT BOX THEY'RE RUNNING
ON. Now, I can understand if, in your low-level technician-type
understanding of networking, you believe that what box something is
running on is the only thing of importance in the whole world. But that
doesn't mean you should be wasting my time with your ignorance.
Please, try to control yourself. Just because you don't understand what
I'm saying doesn't mean that I don't. How many times do you think I'll
have to repeat that before you read and comprehend it. I can understand
your wanting to beat your chest a bit, and even to "put me in my place",
as I'm well aware I'm not the least annoying personality on Usenet.
Still, if you didn't have your head shoved so far up your ass you can
whistle while you fart, you'd remember that I've already pointed out
that I am not, despite your impression or your contentions,
unknowledgable in the least degree, regardless of any minuscule factual
discrepancies you may think you detect in my descriptions.
[..]
>Max it is quite clear you do not know what you are talking about.
>At what level in the OSI stack would you place ethernet, IP, TCP, ftp
>for example?
Well, Ethernet is part of layer (the OSI "stack", by which I presume you
mean the OSI 7-layer Reference Model, does not have 'levels') 1
(10Base-T, et, al.) and part of layer 2, the Data Link layer (CSMA/CD).
IP is of course the Network (routing) layer, layer 3, and TCP shares
layer 4 with UDP (and putatively RDP). FTP is not so conducive to
correlation, since software is not generally broken down between layers,
particularly Internet-type software. The FTP protocol itself provides,
as all "servers" do, a session, presentation, and application layer.
(You're sure to disagree with this last part, owing to the universal
confusion caused by misappropriation of the *telecommunications network*
model developed by the OSI for the *datacommunications* industry.)
>I'm sure you cannot answer this. Proxies work at the
>application layer (7) to give you a little help.
That would depend on the proxy; many proxies work on the session layer,
as a matter of fact, though I'm quite sure that you naively and
routinely use the term "application layer" and that all the others using
the term naively and routinely (because none of you, no matter how
wondrous and grand your capabilities or skills, gives a rip about the
fact that this usage contradicts the usage of other equally capable
people in other specialties).
I've been through this discussion with no less than a dozen people on
Usenet, and literally hundreds, potentially thousands, of people
throughout the industry. The only two results that have ever occurred
is a) they give up, and consider me wrong or b) they recognize I am
correct.
Which are you going to go for?
>>>PAT is port address translation often also called
>>>hide address translation. When you do many to one NAT you have to have
>>>some method of knowing which packet belongs to which connection. Doing
>>>port translation allows this. Nothing to do with proxies which work at
>>>the application layer.
>>
>> Don't move! You've just stepped on a land mine. Carefully, without
>> bending over, pretend you never said "the application layer".
>
>This is just too stupid to believe. Your credibility has just dropped to
>zero.
Perhaps with you; your credibility is zero as well, so that makes no
never-mind, to me.
>For example, squid is a proxy. Pray tell me what layer in the OSI
>stack does squid function?
It doesn't matter. Squid is a piece of software. Software just does
what it does, it doesn't "function at any layer" other than whatever
layer YOU are abstracting it as. Of course, since you don't really have
any definition of the abstractions which each layer encompasses, you
have no method whatsoever for consistently, accurately, or practically
*applying* the knowledge of "on which layer does squid function".
My model, in contrast, provides these things. But the first step to
understanding it is to get rid of this ingenuous and disfunctional
notion that "the OSI stack" is a "software architecture". It doesn't
work like that, because the technology which it was originally designed
to be an architecture *for* is now rather trivial and even outdated.
Pop Quiz: What software architecture was the OSI reference model
created for? (Hint: "the OSI architecture" is not a valid answer.)
[...]
>Listen I administer several checkpoint fw-1's, Sun's sunscreens and
>a couple of tuxscreens (don't know what that is do you?).
No, but I've explained how they work to those that do. Does that count?
>I have
>administered firewalls for 4 years and been a Unix system administrator
>for over 12 years. Be so kind to tell us what experience you have in
>this area. Do you understand what NAT is? From what you have said I
>don't think so.
Well, I've been teaching networking and network management all around
the US (and a couple brief trips overseas) for about ten years, now.
Before that I was involved in PC application training. I've done
consulting, seminars, and professional courses for about two dozen of
the largest carriers, service providers, and enterprises in the last few
years, including MCI/WorldCom, Sprint, GlobalOne, Mirror Image, E*Trade,
and several pharmaceutical companies.
I've been working with firewalls since before there were firewalls. And
unlike practically everyone else in the industry, I never had to learn
the difference between firewalls, screening routers, and NAT, because I
was never under the impression they were the same thing.
[...]
>I just don't believe a word of this. You are sounding more and more
>like the wintrolls on this list.
Let that be a lesson to you.
>It is clear you have little or no
>knowledge / experience with regard to IP networking and firewalls in
>particular.
Yes, I'm sure. Nobody engages in chest-beating like Unix admins talking
about networking, that's one piece of knowledge and experience which
seems accurate enough.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: NT is Most Vulnerable Server Software
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 22:33:57 GMT
Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 22 Jan 2001
>On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 19:24:15 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>Max it is quite clear you do not know what you are talking about.
>>At what level in the OSI stack would you place ethernet, IP, TCP, ftp
>>for example? I'm sure you cannot answer this. Proxies work at the
>>application layer (7) to give you a little help.
>
>I'm not Max (thank God), but I believe IP and TCP would go in Level 5,
>which is the session layer.
>
>I agree with what you are saying here.
Yes, that's hardly surprising. <*chuckle*>
IP is layer (not level) 3, the Network layer, (along with RIP, OSPF,
ICMP, ARP, and most other 'housekeeping' protocols.) (Prepare for the
flood of messages from "offended" but mistaken geeks demanding that ARP
is "layer 2" and ICMP is "application layer".)
TCP, along with UDP and putatively RDP, are both layer 4, the Transport
layer.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 22:33:59 GMT
Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 22 Jan 2001
>On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 04:49:24 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
>>Your argument is having been weaned on Windows; that's a story as old as
>>Bill Gate's monopoly. Yes, its all about the application barrier;
>>haven't you read the conviction?
>>
>>http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm
>>http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f4400/4469.htm
>
>Personally I could care less one way or the other.
>
>I use a product because it works for me, not because of some mission.
If you repeat that often enough, maybe it will magically be true, eh?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A salutary lesson about open source
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 22:34:00 GMT
Said JS PL in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 22 Jan 2001 12:39:17 -0500;
[...]
>> When Netscape crashes, and you restart it, does it crash again and
>> again, repeatedly, or is the state restored correctly by the OS so that
>> it doesn't? Answer: on Windows, of course, a program crashes
>> *repeatedly*. On Linux, it just crashes. And that, obviously, is the
>> application's fault.
>
>More of the blame game. Blame evasion perhaps? It's the old "It's their
>fault my life is so hard".
No, its their fault, and their fault alone, that there is a monopoly.
There's no "game" involved; its a matter of factual reality. The fact
that Linux users do not have access to the wide array of applications
which are available exclusively for Win32 cannot be attributed to
anything so much as purposeful manipulation by Microsoft to cause that
result.
>I'm thankfull all the "it's their fault" people
>are gravitating towards Linux. Let the MS users be rid of them. Our loss is
>Linux's gain. Hurry up and switch over Max! (as if....)
Bwah-ha-ha-ha. How ironic. The only people left using Microsoft will
be those too stupid to realize that its Microsoft that's responsible for
problems with Microsoft's platform.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows curses fast computers
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 17:39:00 -0500
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Donn Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Larry R wrote:
> > >
> > > Gotta love this:
> > >
> > > http://www.msnbc.com/news/517823.asp
> >
> > I've seen this on AMD 450 MHz machines running 98. This is what happens
> > when you take shortcuts. For example, find a faster way to shut down
> > all programs when doing a shutdown instead of screwing with
> > real/protected mode.
>
> Did you even read the article?
>
> The problem was not "screwing with real/protected mode". The problem was
> the computer didn't give the drives (with large caches) enough time to
> completely write out their data before shutting down.
>
> 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.
Wrong, shit-head. Any expectation for the drive to work AFTER the
power has been shut off is just plain unreasonable.
For one thing, once the power is cut, the platters start to
sllllloooooooow dowwwwwwwn, which makes for all kinds of errors
when trying to read the same data at normal speed....SHIT-FOR-BRAINS.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: Re: Please tell me your motherboard name if it works properly in Linux
Date: 22 Jan 2001 22:45:24 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 21 Jan 2001 17:26:07 +0800,
Jerry Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I want to gather information on the compatibility of Motherboards on
>Linux.
>
1) Gigabyte GA6BXD running dual PIII 450/100 - running well for two
years starting with RH5.2 upgraded thru RH6.2
2) Abit BP6 running dual Celery 366/66 - running debian's 'unstable'
distribution very stabley for a year and a half...most of the time
overclocked to 523/95 with no trouble whatsoever (550/100 won't post
though, darn). Also dual booting W2K for about a year, with
instability consistent with the expected 120 day MTTF at (at normal
clock speed).
I wouldn't recommend either of these though, as they have become
slightly dated. The GA6BXD won't run more than Katmai 600/100. The BP6
is limited to a celery PPGA 533/66 (possibly overclocked to 800/100),
unless you get a FC-PPGA adaptor but then it won't support
SMP. However, with the luck I've had with these boards, my next board
(itching to upgrade soon) will either be a Gigabyte GA-6VXDC7 or a
Abit VP6:
http://www.abit-usa.com/english/product/motherboards/vp6.htm
http://www.giga-byte.com/products/6vxdc7.htm
Hope that helps
Perry
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: "Linux is no Windows killer"
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 17:53:29 -0500
"Joseph T. Adams" wrote:
>
> Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : Yeah, the guy claims he designs web pages and doesn't seem to know HTML.
> : Sounds more like a kiddie than a geek by trade.
>
> The Winblows world is filled with people who think they're Web site
> designers because they can click a few buttons in FrontPage, or
> programmers because they can paint controls onto a form in VB.
>
> And then people who really are Web designers and programmers have to
> come in and clean up the mess they make, which is invariably an order
> of magnitude more expensive than it would have been to pay a qualified
> person to do the job right.
>
> I'll bet the jerkoff who wrote this article wouldn't know what a Web
> page was if one bit him in the ass. Most of the "Web" pages produced
> by people like him are not Web pages, but IE pages, and will
> mercifully die once Winblows desktops are no longer the dominant tool
> used for Web browsing. One can only hope that their "authors" will
> then take the hint and find some other form of employment for which
> they are qualified, but more than likely, they won't; they'll probably
> hunt down the very worst "bad HTML" generation tool available for
> whatever new platform they choose, and continue to pollute the Web and
> everything else they touch with stuff whose quality makes Winblows
> itself look good by comparison.
>
> My gripe is not against the idea of tools that make hard things
> simpler. Any good tool does that. Nor is it against those who use
> such tools. As a software developer I use some such tools and develop
> others. My problem is with the incredibly poor quality of "tools"
> that claim to produce Web pages or mission-critical database
> applications, but instead produce garbage, and with those who refuse
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> to do even the minimal amount of learning about their own chosen
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> profession to realize that the output produced by those tools is
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> garbage.
^^^^^^^^
*That* is the crux of the problem. If these fools understood that
their "tools" were crap, they would:
a) fix up the HTML afterwords, and/or
b) start searching for high-quality tools.
>
> Joe
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jorgen)
Subject: future of linux pda
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 22:33:17 GMT
what will the future be ? who will surive of agandea and yada ? what
tools and hardawre will we see ? what do you whis for youer linux pda
? will it come any kde based linux pda ?
------------------------------
From: Mark Styles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why "uptime" is important.
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 17:59:19 -0500
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 21:20:49 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] () wrote:
>On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:15:08 GMT, Mark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>* Office applications - I've tried StarOffice, I've tried Applixware,
>>and I've tried a couple of other smaller offerings, but none of them
>>seem to match up with office applications for Windows. MS Office is
>>SLOW, but StarOffice is slower, and Applixware crashed almost every
>
> I've known Windows users to disagree on this point. Bear in
> mind that StarOffice is more sluggish under Win32 than it is
> being sent across a LAN via X.
I haven't tried the win version, but the X version seemed very slow
and bloated (not quite as bloated as MS office, but still!)
> Beyond those "my experience is different than yours" objections,
> you've not mentioned anything regarding actual functional details.
> This is common to the point of being an annoyance.
To be honest, I haven't used them enough to compare functionality, I'm
not a big word-processor user. Star Office seemed as functional as MS
office, but it was just too slow to do anything with. I've recently
upgraded the memory in my linux machine, so maybe I'll give it another
go (was running in 32Mb before).
>>time I used it. I've yet to find any decent accounting package for
>>Linux.
You didn't comment on this, I'll comment further below
>>* Frustrating installations - I've noticed with many graphical
>>products for Linux that installation is not straight forward. I think
>
> ???
>
> Just run the installer like you would an installshield script.
>
> What are these "many" you are refering to?
When I was looking for an accounting package, almost every graphical
package I downloaded wanted something extra that I didn't have, mainly
the graphical toolkits that make the development of X software easier.
Being a software developer I can understand the need for such things,
but joe public user will just be frustrated that the package he
downloaded didn't contain everything he needed.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
