Linux-Advocacy Digest #692, Volume #31 Wed, 24 Jan 01 00:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: A salutary lesson about open source ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistent. (.)
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance ("Les Mikesell")
Re: Poor Linux (J Sloan)
Re: Does Code Decay ("mmnnoo")
Re: The Server Saga (J Sloan)
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant (Lewis Miller)
Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) ) (Sgt
Detritus)
Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows
Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe ("nuxx")
Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe ("Chad Myers")
Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance ("Chad Myers")
Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows
Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 05:32:35 +0200
Reply-To: "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam>
"nuxx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:i_rb6.10$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > serious weakness (finally) and are working towards fixing it. I
believe
> > > that you will be able to unload the GUI in Whistler(?) so they are
> > hopefully
> > > improving the CLI.
> >
> > How?
> > Now this is something that I would like to know how it can be done.
> > I've Whistler beta 1, pro. How do I unload the GUI?
> > How much overhead does this remove? (Now this is interesting question.)
> >
> >
> I haven't tried it but read they were working on it somewhere. Can't back
> it up so it remains a rumor. As far as the overhead - very little RAM and
> virtually no CPU so it's almost a moot point anyway. My main point was
that
> I hope they are improving the CLI to Unix levels.
Then there would need to be something like clregedt.exe
Command Line Registry Editor (which should take a compotent coder about an
hour to write, I did, it looks a bit like DOS).
All in all, I agree that it's a Good Thing(tm).
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 05:34:50 +0200
Reply-To: "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 04:59:08 +0200, Ayende Rahien <Please@don't.spam>
wrote:
> >
> >They don't need to have special support to 2000, they need to treat it
like
> >ME (actually, it's the other way around, but it doesn't matter at the
> >moment.)
> >It should go like this:
> >A> Log on as administrator
> >B> Go to Start>Settings>Network & Dial Up Connection
> >C> double click Make New Connection
>
> ...wait for Win2K to dial the phone and waste quite a bit
> of time fetching the local "approved" ISP list for your
> area.
Ha? What are you talking about? I've *never* seen it happening.
What are you talking about.
I don't live in the US, so it might be the reason for it, but nonetheless,
I've never seen anything like you describe.
Unless you talk about the thing that appears the first time you try to
connect to the internet if you didn't set up a connection already?
> Then go to step D.
>
> >D> Click Next
> >E> Choose dial up to the internet and click next
> >F> (not logged as admin at the moment, doing it from memory) enter user
name
> >& password, ISP phone number, enter DNS & IP.
>
> Sounds like a ppp configuration applet I used in Linux in 1995.
>
> [deletia]
>
>
> --
>
> The term "popular" is MEANINGLESS in consumer computing. DOS3
> was more "popular" than contemporary Macintoshes despite the
> likelihood that someone like you would pay the extra money to
> not have to deal with DOS3.
>
> Network effects are everything in computing.
> |||
> / | \
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 05:36:20 +0200
Reply-To: "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 05:03:10 +0200, Ayende Rahien <Please@don't.spam>
wrote:
> >
> >"Russ Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 19:14:00 +0500, "Gary Hallock"
> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [deletia]
> >More difficult? Hah!
> >Exactly *how*?
> >
> >What do you mean by ftp? client? server?
> >PWS is a free http & ftp server for windows 9x, it is somewhere in the
CD.
> >IIS is for NT.
> >Both OS has a builtin text-based ftp client, as well as IE capable of
> >functioning as FTP client.
>
> Then please outline the procedure for initiating an
> upload with IE5...
Sure, open one window of explorer and navigate to the files that you want to
copy, choose then and press CTRL+C
Then either type F6 & the ftp adress or open a new windows and enter the ftp
adress in it.
Wait for it to login, press CTRL+V
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A salutary lesson about open source
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 05:37:27 +0200
Reply-To: "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam>
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Ryrb6.13067$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Chad Myers
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote
> > on Tue, 23 Jan 2001 14:08:14 GMT
> > <ifgb6.12896$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >
> > >"Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> Chad Myers wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Oh yeah, and by the way, what are they running on the back end that
> > >> > does all the searching?
> > >> >
> > >> > Yeah, that's right. It used to be NT, I think it's partly
NT/Solaris
> > >> > now. They might be migrating all to Solaris, but maybe not after
> > >> > the ebay debacle.
> > >>
> > >> Garsh. I almost find myself tempted to ask why they're migrating to
> Solaris
> > >> rather than to W2K.
> > >
> > >Sun probably paid them a bunch to do it.
> >
> > I could see Sun giving them a discount to an aggressive purchasing
> > agent on a large piece of hardware, or a large farm of smaller
> > hardware, but I doubt they would pay Yahoo unless they expected
> > advertising revenue.
>
> That's what I meant, incentives, sorry. Although I wouldn't put signed
> checks past Sun.
What about Yahoo buying from Sun and paying by advertising them? Doesn't
sound too far fetched to me.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistent.
Date: 24 Jan 2001 04:00:30 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Ayende Rahien <Please@don't.spam> wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:94ksde$prf$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> > On 23 Jan 2001 16:32:47 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> >>In comp.os.linux.advocacy T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>> Said Kyle Jacobs in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 23 Jan 2001
> 04:35:45
>> >>> [...]
>> >>>>I think distributing PDF format files is an excelent idea. Even if it
> does
>> >>>>max bandwidth. [...]
>> >>
>> >>> PDF files are generally much smaller than their Word document
>> >>> counterpart.
>> >>
>> >>In this vein, guess what happens to a W2K machine when you use
> office2000
>> >>to read a document you converted in staroffice from .rtf to .doc?
>>
>> > Now, why exactly would you bother?
>>
>> Because someone a few levels above me does not understand that unix exists
>> at all, let alone is an operating system that I use daily on my main
> workstation;
>>
>> I sent him an .rtf document and he returned it saying "I cant open
> anything thats
>> not a .doc" (why is it that he clicks on every goddamn .exe he sees, even
> if its
>> called "thisisavirusdontclickonit.exe", yet he refuses to double-fucking
> click
>> on an .rtf?) Anyhow, I get it back, do the conversion in staroffice under
> Solaris,
>> send it back and get a phone call.
> Why?
> Just rename the document's extention, that would open word, and word can
> most certainly handle rtf files, unless someone has been messing *really*
> hard on hte convertors during install.
No. RTF has a different encoding mechanism than DOC; (i.e. none)
far, FAR less complex.
=====.
------------------------------
From: "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 04:01:29 GMT
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:ljgb6.12899$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > Reiserfs is quite stable IME. I've seen it running on several production
boxes
> > doing web caching. I performs very well.
>
> Well, your personal opinion doesn't count for much. I've not seen Red Hat
> attempt to sell it as a solution to their enterprise customers. Right now,
> they're still shafting them with ext2fs. Reiser is clearly superior to
> ext2fs, why isn't Red Hat selling that to them?
You don't understand the concept of free software do you? Red Hat doesn't
have to sell it, and unlike that that other company, can't extort vast sums
of money from their customers for something claimed to be slightly better.
If someone wants ReiserFs on their RedHat system they just drop it
in themselves for free in less time than it would take to read a glossy
brochure and discuss license fees with a sales drone.
> > NTFS seems to be a decent FS. I have no real complaints about it -
except for
> > the problems with fragmentation.
>
> Which isn't much of a problem, especially on Win2K.
>
> > Oh - there's also that little problem with the MFT growing and growing
and...
>
> Which has never been a problem except in lab tests. The 4 million file bug
> was discovered by a guy who wrote a program to test it. It's never been
> a problem in the Real World. Anyhow, it was fixed in NT 4 SP4 and isn't
> an issue AT ALL now.
I had an NTFS that accumulated enough files that chkdsk couldn't fix it
after
running over a three day weekend and there wasn't anywhere near 4 million
files. In fact the Linux box that replaced it has collected another couple
year's worth without any trouble.
> > And I have seen systems get hosed when they're not shut down correctly.
>
> I've never seen that, well not after NT4 SP3 anyhow.
I've had that too, although it was a box with hardware problems that crashed
several times before I realized it wasn't just the typical windows behavior
and fixed it.
> It's certainly not
> a problem on Win2K. Have you ever shut down a Linux box with ext2fs
> incorrectly? God help you. You have a 90% chance of completely hosing
> your fs. Not much of an enterprise file system IYAM.
Maybe a 1% chance... You might have to run e2fsck by hand about 20% of
the time.
> > Nothing is perfect in this world. However, I tend to be more impressed
with
> unix
> > solutions than with Windows ones. MS just seems to have a knack of
making more
> > work for Administrators. :-)
>
> Well, then you aren't very educated on the MS front then. Perhaps you
should
> know
> what you're talking about before making conclusions.
Where's cron, where's rsh/ssh, rsync, and on and on? How do you write
simple programs that you can test using stdin/stdout and use them as
services, print filters, etc.?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Poor Linux
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 04:01:31 GMT
Kyle Jacobs wrote:
> Oh, definitively Windows 2000.
Oh please - so predictable, just parroting the party line...
> Linux used to make my hard drive do a tap
> dance when performing high-memory operations (creating big pictures under
> GIMP), yet Windows 2000, similar software, similar application sizes.
Of course you'd swear to the above, regardless of whether it
actually happened...
> Windows 2000 loaded a majority of the program into psychical memory,
> removing what seemed to have been my other programs (even the ones I had
> been working in) to VRam.
>
> Chalk it up to dynamic process resource reallocation under 2000!
That's something Unix users have enjoyed for years.
Sorry Kyle, your testimony is that of a shill.
jjs
------------------------------
From: "mmnnoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Code Decay
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 04:02:40 GMT
Well, that is a good definition of 'code decay,' so I don't see the need
for the 'no' part. I would also add that code left untouched also seems
to decay, gradually compiling and running only partially, then not at
all - not because it has changed, but it is unfit for the evolved
environment and has 'decayed' relative to everything around it.
Tissue without blood cannot grow and gangreen (decay) can set in.
What linux suffers from, if anything, is more like cancer, which is out
of control growth, i.e. somebody rewrites the c-standard library
just for kicks or firewalling & filtering gets transformed from
ipfwadm through ipchains to iptables in quick succession. Companies
don't like to 'waste' money reworking functional code but it can be
fun for the programmer to rip out old stuff and remake it in their own
image and ln Linux this happens all the time.
But Linux' growth has more advantages than disadvantages, as new stuff is
accepted by the community only if it is actually better (like iptables
seems to be) and there is little pressure to quickly upgrade.
In article <_Rrb6.2207$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes and no. Code itself doesn't decay, but it's associations can.
>
> For instance, an interface the code uses can be changed, and thus the
> code breaks despite no actual decay in the program itself.
>
> Over time, architectures become clouded and brittle when there are many
> changes. We've all seen a house that's had addition after addition
> added on to it, and after a while it looks like a frankenstein's
> monster. The same is true of code that is hacked or patched but not
> rewritten.
>
> "Russ Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> I'm cross posting this to the linux and nt groups as it seems pertinant
>> to both.
>>
>> Recently MS had a lowkey campaign to get customers to replace NT with
>> W2k because Nt suffered from code decay. I came across an article
>> "Does Code Decay? Assessing the Evidence from Change Management Data"
>> by Stephen G. Eick, on the IEEE site. You can get the article at
>> <http://wwww.computer.org/tse/ts2001/e1toc.htm>.
>>
>> For those who don't have time or can't read the large PDF file, the
>> authors looked at a system having 100,000,000 lines of C/C++ source and
>> 100,000,000 lines of header and make files. They came to the conclusion
>> that code does decay. Some symptoms they listed are :
>> 1. Excessively complex(bloted) code - the system could be rewritten
>> with
>> many fewer LOC
>> 2. A history of frequent changes
>> 3. A history of faults
>> 4. Widely dispersed changes - fixes hit lots of modules or have a
>> large
>> size
>> 5. Numerous interfaces(entry points)
>>
>> I especiall like #2. Now everyone who complains about Linux 2.4 kernel
>> taking so long, know why.
>>
>> Too late for NT, but Linus needs to keep this in mind. Keep the kernel
>> simple and compact.
>>
>> --
>> Russ
>> <http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
>> Not powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Server Saga
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 04:07:18 GMT
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> By why do you help someone out in the wrong group?
I'm not sure what you mean by "wrong group", Linux users
tend to be generous and willing to help, regardless of "group".
You amused yourself by abusing that generosity. Your style
is different from the other wintrolls (flatfish, chad, and kyle) but
you're cut from the same cloth.
jjs
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lewis Miller)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant
Date: 24 Jan 2001 04:07:52 GMT
Aaron R. Kulkis was heard ranting about <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in
alt.linux.sux on 23 Jan 2001
>Lewis Miller wrote:
>>
>> Aaron R. Kulkis was heard ranting about <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> in alt.linux.sux on 22 Jan 2001
>>
>> >Lewis Miller wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Aaron R. Kulkis was heard ranting about
>> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in alt.linux.sux on 19 Jan 2001
>> >>
>> Windoze makes for a pretty disposable easily
>> replaceable
>> box.
>
>
>Why would you want to treat perfectly good equipment as "disposable"
>????
Because it is. Have you worked in an office recently? The machines are
circulated out every so many months. For newer fast machines. Windows is
easy to toss on, and if there is a problem. I just run image cast and in
about 5-10 minutes the workstation is just like how it started. And hey no
prob, all their files are on the server,or at least they should be.
>> That's what a workstation is all about. The server does all the real
>> work.
>
>Reaaaaaally. So, like, when a designer at GM is sitting at his
>workstation using UniGraphics or SDRC I-DEAS, the workstation is merely
>a front-end for the server???
No. That sounds a lot like a CAD machine to me. A Workstaion, may as well
be a term server, it's a KIOSK, it's what goes on everyones desk. The
office ppl, who are sometimes rotated out as often as the machines. And
anybody can log onto any machine and do what they need. A workstation is
the crap you fill the English typing lab with. These are not mission
critical machines. A CADD Station, Is a server almost. It is NOT a
workstation.
>Not even close...dipshit.
Hey Aaron, quit being an ass with the name calling. I'm the pro-linux one
here. K?
--
l8r
-LJM
a.k.a. Jaster Mereel
a.k.a. MrBobaFett
"Little things used to mean so much to Shelly. I used to think
they were kind of trivial. Believe me, nothing's trivial. "
-- Eric Draven, The Crow
------------------------------
From: Sgt Detritus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.microsoft.sucks
Subject: Re: Global Configuration tool (WAS: Re: linux does NOT suck (oh yes it does) )
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 04:01:40 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jure Sah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> > > ?????? Tell me of a OS that crashes on it's own!!!!!!!!!!!
Moron...
> >
> > Windows. I've seen it crash more than once before even getting
> > to the fucking LOGIN screen.
> >
> > Can't get any more "crashes on it's own" than that now, can you...
>
> TIME is beyond your capacity of understanding? Did you have any
software
> runing before?
>
Try this twit. Windows, all programs shut down. only explorer and
systray in the task list. EVEN THE SCREENSAVER AND POWER MANAGEMENT WAS
TURNED OFF. Walked away for two hours and came back to a blue screen!
--
Any man agitated enough to lift a 300lb. ape
without noticing is a man with way too much on
his mind.
~~Terry Pratchett, Guards, Guards~~
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 04:10:24 -0000
On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 05:36:20 +0200, Ayende Rahien <Please@don't.spam> wrote:
>
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 05:03:10 +0200, Ayende Rahien <Please@don't.spam>
>wrote:
>> >
>> >"Russ Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 19:14:00 +0500, "Gary Hallock"
>> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> [deletia]
>> >More difficult? Hah!
>> >Exactly *how*?
>> >
>> >What do you mean by ftp? client? server?
>> >PWS is a free http & ftp server for windows 9x, it is somewhere in the
>CD.
>> >IIS is for NT.
>> >Both OS has a builtin text-based ftp client, as well as IE capable of
>> >functioning as FTP client.
>>
>> Then please outline the procedure for initiating an
>> upload with IE5...
>
>Sure, open one window of explorer and navigate to the files that you want to
>copy, choose then and press CTRL+C
>Then either type F6 & the ftp adress or open a new windows and enter the ftp
>adress in it.
>Wait for it to login, press CTRL+V
...so much for drag & drop...
--
------------------------------
From: "nuxx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 12:11:35 +0800
> A checkbutton in the installer that would yield a fully
> functional version of the service. (unobsfuscations
> excepted of course)
>
That would be nice. Unfortunately as it stands, it takes a skilled
administrator about an extra 30 seconds to configure this service on
install.
nuxx.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 03:55:59 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 02:48:14 GMT, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >
> >"Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:94kpnb$13e0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> : Not only would they have less performance, less reliability, and
> >> : less remote management capability (Win2K terminal services rocks),
> >>
> >> Anyone who thinks Windows has better remotability than UNIX is
> >> either ignorant or lying.
> >
> >Have you seen Windows terminal services?
>
> What difference would that make?
>
> At best,even swallowing Microsoft's own propaganda, it
> would only buy you faster visual connectivity on low
> bandwidth connections.
>
> OTOH, it is particular to Microsoft. Whereas telnet/X/ssh
> clients and servers are widely available on multiple
> platforms from VMS to Macintosh.
Which doesn't matter much since 90+% of the machines out
there are running Windows anyhow.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 Major Advance
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 03:57:10 GMT
"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Chad Myers wrote:
> > >
> > > > Now, (I know you can't answer this, but just think about it), how many
> > > > articles/100 about Microsoft are favorable, or at least non-bashing?
> > >
> > > c't is a mainstream computer magazine, probably #1 in Europe.
> > > Your theory is full of holes, do you think they can make money
> > > by being devoted to windows bashing?
> > >
> > > > I bet it would be significantly lower, if not zero, than any of the
> > > > mainstream tech magazines (PC World & Magazine, Wired, etc).
> > >
> > > This proves the integrity of c't. They aren't bought by microsoft
> > > advertising dollars, they tell it like it is, and that's why c't readers
> > > trust them technically.
> > >
> > > > Are there any benchmarks showing Microsoft leading anything?
> > >
> > > You mean mindcraft? haven't you heard, that organization has
> > > been discredited - they were nothing more than a microsoft puppet.
> >
> > <sigh>
> >
> > in c't
> >
> > Please follow the thread, or don't post, sir.
>
> Please show some Mindcraft tests that are critical of Microsoft.
Who said anything about Mindcraft. Throw them out of this
discussion too if it makes you feel better, it won't change the
outcome any.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 04:12:35 -0000
On 23 Jan 2001 21:32:08 -0600, Michel Catudal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Chad Myers a �crit :
>>
>> all I did in Windows
>> 95/98/NT/2000 was add a new dial-up connection, type in my user name
>> and password and everything worked. I didn't have to fill in any
>> IPs, DNS addresses, ppp scripts, anything. It all used MS-CHAP or
>> CHAP for authentication automatically. No rebooting required on
>> any of the aforementioned OSes. This is easier than Linux. Yes,
>> Linux is more difficult than Windows.
>>
>
>Even on winblows I enter the DNS numbers because it connects faster
>that way. With the SuSE default install you don't need you to enter any DNS.
>I enter them anyway but the one who wants the easy install just has
>to type in the isp address, his login and password and he's on the net.
>
>As for setting up a firewall, it took me a few entries with yast and
>my son's computer was connecting to the net a few minutes later.
There are also various other character cell and graphical
ease of use tools to help you set up a firewall or NAT.
Mandrake has one of it's own and there are several for
ipchains.
My current favority is pmfirewall.
[deletia]
--
Common Standards, Common Ownership.
The alternative only leads to destructive anti-capitalist
and anti-democratic monopolies.
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 23:11:41 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 19:14:00 +0500, "Gary Hallock"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Sure, after waiting a few days for the CD to be shipped in the mail.
> >You totally missed the point.
> >
> >Gary
>
> No YOU missed the point Gary.
> Earthlink provides software on the CD that he can't use because it
> doesn't run under Linux. It's more for a family, or newbie, but it is
> useful none the less. Oh yea it also includes the latest version of IE
> 5.5 a quality browser instead of that piece of trash Netscape.
> And BTW the Windows user can connect just as easily by calling them,
> and guess what it takes about 10 minutes because the person on the
> other end of the phone will know exactly how to assist you in setting
> up your system.
> Most of his hour was probably spent waiting for Earthlink to find the
> one person in the support department who knows anything about Linsux.
Conversely, with Linux, you don't need any CD full of shit because
Linux has *ALL* of it ALREADY.
plug in the IP address and you're ready to roll.
>
> So it is YOU who, once again miss the picture.
Says the man who can't even find the fucking museum.
>
> Flatfish
> Why do they call it a flatfish?
> Remove the ++++ to reply.
--
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.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
