Linux-Advocacy Digest #742, Volume #31 Fri, 26 Jan 01 06:13:02 EST
Contents:
Best way to learn Linux? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The Server Saga (Pete Goodwin)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Does Code Decay ("kiwiunixman")
Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe ("kiwiunixman")
Re: Poor Linux ("kiwiunixman")
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant (Ian Davey)
Re: Microsoft is fired. ("Bobby D. Bryant")
Re: Microsoft is fired. ("Erik Funkenbusch")
(OT) linux ftp clients (was re: linux is crude and inconsistent) (Mart van deWege)
Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe (Shane Phelps)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Best way to learn Linux?
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 08:47:53 GMT
Spent last couple of years building well-known e-commerce sites using
Open Source code. Ran everything on Linux and had to teach jr.
programmers a lot about Linux. Found out most effective way was the so-
called Socratic method of question/answer. So, put together a website
www.codecity.com to explore this approach to teaching Open Source. Hope
to get some feedback/participation from this group. Hope this is
appropriate.
Jeff C.
www.codecity.com
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Server Saga
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 08:47:50 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nobody thinks you're lying because you say you like windows.
> Who ever said that? You're twisting things again Pete.
I don't believe so, it seems pretty clear here that if you're known to
like Windows, your information is immediately suspect.
> No, this whole business of mysterious network problems,
> ignoring the attempts to help, then your triumphant declaration
> that it was too late, you'd already destroyed the server and
> installed windows on the hardware - the possibility of deception
> does occur - after all, if the intent is to poison the newsgroup
> and wear out the Linux users, it would be more efficient to
> merely say you had the problems, rather than actually having
> the problems, eh?
My original post is written in the past tense, pretty much. I did say
there I finally installed Windows Millenium. I mean, it's there, how
often to I have to repeat myself?
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 09:19:01 GMT
The Ghost In The Machine writes:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, to sum up:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] Nothing is intuitive.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You need to consult a manual for everything???
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Intuitive" doesn't mean "not needing to consult a manual".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You have a better definition that is simple to understand?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about the one in the manual? Erm, I mean, dictionary? :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>> Apparently the definition wasn't intuitive to you.
>>>>>>>>>>> It wasn't supposed to be. The definition of a word -- in this
>>>>>>>>>>> case, 'intuitive' -- breaks down the word, in a sense, into
>>>>>>>>>>> a series of more easily digested concepts, or perhaps different
>>>>>>>>>>> concepts. Occasionally, a dictionary gets into loops (I remember
>>>>>>>>>>> one dictionary that defined 'nipple' as a 'teat', and a 'teat' as a
>>>>>>>>>>> 'nipple'; obviously, that gets nowhere fast -- of course, that
>>>>>>>>>>> particular dictionary was designed to fit into one's pocket; one
>>>>>>>>>>> can only do so much :-) ). Dictionaries also have slight problems
>>>>>>>>>>> with very general concepts: "go", "be", "have", "put".
>>>>>>>>>> But the fact that you needed to consult a dictionary meant that the
>>>>>>>>>> definition of "intuitive" wasn't intuitive.
>>>>>>>>> Correct.
>>>>>>>> Glad you agree.
>>>>>>>>>>> I understand the definition of "intuitive", based on my earlier
>>>>>>>>>>> learning and experience. It needn't be intuitive -- just
>>>>>>>>>>> understandable; that's all an interface needs to be, in order
>>>>>>>>>>> to be useful.
>>>>>>>>>> Irrelevant to the present discussion.
>>>>>>>>>>> (The original question, IIRC, was whether a power switch
>>>>>>>>>>> was intuitive.
>>>>>>>>>> Actually, the discussion goes back farther than that. The
>>>>>>>>>> power switch example came after Aaron declared nothing about
>>>>>>>>>> a computer is intuitive. That declaration came after my remark
>>>>>>>>>> that the use of hjkl for cursor movement is not intuitive.
>>>>>>>>> Both are correct. Nothing about a computer is intuitive,
>>>>>>>> Incorrect; consider the power switch. Or did you need to consult a
>>>>>>>> manual to determine how to operate it?
>>>>>>> Have it your way;
>>>>>> This isn't Burger King.
>>>>> Feh.
>>>> Ambiguous.
>>> Oh, you're a pedantic one.
>> What is allegedly pedantic about noting the ambiguity of your response?
> True.
That doesn't answer my question.
>>> Would you prefer a response such as:
>>>
>>> "I find the above response rather silly and beside the point"? :-)
>> I would prefer no response at all to an ambiguous response.
> So noted.
Then why did you provide a new ambiguous response above?
>>>>>>> a power switch is indeed intuitive in that:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - it's a natural action to push it
>>>>>>> - the effects are immediately noticeable
>>>>>>> - it is prominently placed in most instances.
>>>>>> Is that all you can think of?
>>>>> - It's been in use for decades.
>>>>> - They are manufacturered in the millions.
>>>>> - They're cheap.
>>>> How do those make a power switch intuitive?
>>> They make it widely available and well-known, perhaps.
>> Ball bearings have been in use for decades, they are manufactured in
>> the millions, and they're cheap. Does that make them intuitive?
> Obviously, you know what a ball bearing is. That makes it intuitive.
Illogical; knowledge of terminology does not make something intuitive.
> Or at least ubiquitous. Similarly for power switches.
Whether something is ubiquitous or not isn't the issue.
>>> That's close enough to "intuitive" -- one learns by doing, and the
>>> more things one sees, the more likely one will do the same thing
>>> when one sees something similar again -- to be useful.
>> Why not list that instead of the more recent three?
> Because I was not sufficiently knowledgable about what precisely it
> was you wanted in terms of a response in order to give that as my
> first response. Nobody's fault; these things happen.
You could have been sufficiently knowledgeable if you had bothered to
read and comprehend what I had written.
>>>>> I'm not sure what you're looking for, admittedly...did you have something
>>>>> specific in mind?
>>>> Yes, I did, and still do.
>>> Thank you. Mind sharing it with the rest of us?
>> I already have.
>>> Oh, wait, it's above, never mind.
>> Very good.
>>> I'll just have to look for it.
>> Does that pose a problem for you?
> Not at all.
Then why did you ask for me to share something that I had already
shared, and by your own admission?
>>>>>>>>> and hjkl for cursor movement is not intuitive. (Just extremely useful.)
>>>>>>>> Not necessarily useful.
>>>>>>> To me, it's useful. To you (and most others), the arrow keys may in fact
>>>>>>> be far more intuitive.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is not a problem.
>>>>>> Irrelevant, given that it wasn't described as a problem.
>>>>> Obviously, it is a problem.
>>>> "This is not a problem."
>>>> --Ghost
>>>>
>>>> Do make up your mind.
>> Note: no response.
> Since you have caught me in a contradiction, I will merely point out
> that it *is* a contradiction and leave it at that.
No attempt to resolve it?
> If you wish a response, please tell me what type of response you are
> expecting
One that resolves the contradiction.
> (so that I don't elicit yet another response informing me that I am in
> another contradiction).
I would inform you of another contradiction only if one occurred. I would
hope that you could resolve the first contradiction without creating another.
> We can then continue this discussion.
I'm ready.
>>>>> The problem is: how to most efficiently and/or intuitively move the cursor
>>>>> around in a document under construction.
>>>>> This is a problem. It's been solved multiple times, of course.
>>>> "This is not a problem."
>>>> --Ghost
>>>>
>>>> Do make up your mind.
>>> If you prefer, I can call it a solved problem, at least in my mind.
>>> Other minds may be of other minds about the issue. :-)
>> Does that mean it is or is not a problem?
> It is both; depends on how one looks at it.
Can you provide an example of each?
>>>>>>>>>>> One might remark "everyone knows what a power switch is" (and most
>>>>>>>>>>> do, by prior learning); hence, a power switch, being well-known,
>>>>>>>>>>> is something an interface designer can leverage for new designs
>>>>>>>>>>> of power switches -- and possibly other things. This makes the
>>>>>>>>>>> design useful.)
>>>>>>>>>> And perhaps even intuitive.
>>>>>>>>> Not by the dictionary definition. Of course, YMMV.
>>>>>>>> Whose dictionary, yours?
>>>>>>> Yes, mine.
>>>>>> And what dictionary do you have?
>>>>> The one in my head. Not horribly useful for you, admittedly,
>>>>> but it works for me. :-)
>>>> Makes sure you get the desired answer every time.
>>> Yes, although proving it to another person may be slightly difficult.
>> As you are finding out.
> I've known that for awhile. Doesn't bother me especially on most
> occasions.
Perhaps it should.
>>>>> I can also reference other dictionaries (www.dictionary.com is
>>>>> probably the simplest to remember). Which one is the most
>>>>> relevant and/or useful depends on the user.
>>>> Please do.
>>> I already did, above. Somebody -- probably me -- snipped it.
>> Shame.
> Oh well.
Perhaps you'll reconsider snipping things in the future?
>>> If you wish, I can provide it again, or simply point you to the
>>> URL of the definition:
>>>
>>> http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=intuitive&db=*
>>>
>>> for your reading pleasure.
>> You said you can reference other dictionarIES (emphasis on the plural).
>> You only provided a single reference.
> I would have to find more dictionaries.
Is that difficult?
> www.dictionary.com (and my own dictionary, www.theghostinthemachine.com
> :-), which you unfortunately won't find on the web,
Then why does it have a web-like name?
> only my own gray matter) do reference multiple other dictionaries, but
> that doesn't realy count.
Especially when they are unidentified.
> I have a Merriam-Webster's at home.
By all means consult it.
>>>>>>>>>>>> How were those definitions better and simpler to understand?
>>>>>>>>>>> Better and simpler to understand than what?
>>>>>>>>>> Than the one I gave.
>>>>>>>>>>> Pressing a button?
>>>>>>>>>> Forget the definition I suggested already?
>>>>>>>>> Yes. It has been "scrolled off" this news post and my newsreader (SLRN)
>>>>>>>>> can't view messages by reference ID, unlike Netscape.
>>>>>>>> No, it hasn't scrolled off, given that it has been retained in your
>>>>>>>> follow-up.
>>>>>>> Oh, OK. I guess that's my official definition of "intuitive", then.
>>>>>>> I hadn't realized that.
>>>>>> Non sequitur, given that we were talking about *my* "definition", which
>>>>>> you had erroneously assumed to have "scrolled off".
>>>>> Where is it in the above post, then?
>>>> Right after the first item in your summary.
>>>>> Or you can give me a message-ID for scanning purposes.
>>>> Unnecessary.
>>>>> I think I snipped it.
>>>> What you think is irrelevant. However, if you had, it would be your
>>>> problem.
>>>>> [snip]
>>>> Those who ignore history are destined to repeat it.
>>> Exactly. That's why we must all switch to BRIEF.
>> Non sequitur.
> Not necessarily. If hjkl is not intuitive and the arrow keys are,
> then the obvious conclusion is that vi users are all deluding
> themselves on how intuitive and powerful their tool is,
Intuition applies to something new. The category of "vi users"
doesn't include people who haven't used it before."
> and that we should switch to another editor, such as BRIEF, which
> never had the non-intuitive cursor key mapping.
You just changed your argument. First it was "must switch to BRIEF",
and now it is "should switch to another editor".
> Or, perhaps, Notepad, which is even more intuitive.
On what basis do you make that claim?
>>> Spot the Flaw.
>> Just did.
> Good.
You like producing flaws for us to spot?
------------------------------
From: "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Does Code Decay
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 09:34:21 GMT
I'd could never see an s/900z admin giving up his trusty Mainframe for a
piece of Microsoft shit.
kiwiunixman
"Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam> wrote in message
news:94p13t$ht0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:94oose$4e8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Also, there was a good article comparing Mainframe OS's with commercial
> OS's
> > such as Windows 2000 and Solaris, and the main reason why they have a
> > limited uptime when compared to mainfram OS's is due to the fact that
> > Mainframe OS's contain code scrubbers that ensure that less problems
occur
>
> Well, MS is targeting the mainframe market at the moment, it shows in W2K.
>
>
------------------------------
From: "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 09:36:29 GMT
hence, Microsoft has a agenda to ensure that it works....FUCK THE COST AND
MESS! MAKE IT WORK!....the words of win-zombies over-lord, Bill Gates.
kiwiunixman
"Conrad Rutherford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:3a6ec863$0$45732$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:94lfh7$ur$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I've actually talked to some inside Microsoft people, and Microsoft
> actually
> > sponsered the roll out etc, hence, not really a sign that Windows is
> > superior, just shows how much marketing and con-job muscle Microsoft
has.
> >
>
> I've talked to some people involved in the roll out and it was supported
by
> MS but hardly sponsored.
>
>
------------------------------
From: "kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Poor Linux
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 09:40:39 GMT
hmmm, 4 days and NO REPLY..yet again, I am proven correct! god this
win-zombie bashing is fucking easy!
kiwiunixman
"kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> well, what do YOU use it for?
>
> kiwiunixman
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 01:29:17 GMT, "kiwiunixman"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >don't use them, so I don't care!
> > >
> > >kiwiunixman
> >
> > The word "supported" when using in conjunction with the word Linux
> > takes on a whole new meaning.
> >
> >
> > Flatfish
> > Why do they call it a flatfish?
> > Remove the ++++ to reply.
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 09:51:33 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >I recompiled Netscape to disguise what platform I'm *actually* using.
>> >
>> >Security through obfuscation.
>>
>> Do you mean Mozilla? As far as I'm aware there weren't any working source
> code
>> releases of version 4, so how did you managed to recompile it?
>
>So, you're relying on the forged header to determine which version of
>Mozilla I'm using?
>
>Not smart, Ian...not smart at all.
Nope, I never even looked at you headers. I remember a while back you said you
tried Netscape 6, but went back to version 4.75. I'm just curious how you'd be
able to recompile it, there's no open source version of 4. You can't even
recompile Netscape 6, as only Mozilla versions of the code exist (though it's
all but identical). So I'm guessing you're either just munging the headers on
a different newsreader (something like nn, tin or slrn), using a proxy or
actually using windows.
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft is fired.
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 04:00:42 -0600
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hmmm... They're having trouble again today. It sure takes MS a long time
> > to fix configuration errors.
>
> Today's problem was a DDoS attack on their routers. Apparently, some script
> kiddies wanted to make MS look even worse, never mind the fact that this is
> the sort of attack that crippled companies like Yahoo and AT&T not too long
> ago.
Ah. Much is explained.
I wonder what it will be tomorrow.
Bobby Bryant
Austin, Texas
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsoft is fired.
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 04:13:39 -0600
"Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> > "Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hmmm... They're having trouble again today. It sure takes MS a long
time
> > > to fix configuration errors.
> >
> > Today's problem was a DDoS attack on their routers. Apparently, some
script
> > kiddies wanted to make MS look even worse, never mind the fact that this
is
> > the sort of attack that crippled companies like Yahoo and AT&T not too
long
> > ago.
>
> Ah. Much is explained.
>
> I wonder what it will be tomorrow.
Actually, it was quite easy to figure out that this was a DDoS attack.
Traceroutes to microsoft IP addresses showed massive latency and dropped
packets even before entering MS's routers.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 11:06:59 +0000
From: Mart van deWege <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: (OT) linux ftp clients (was re: linux is crude and inconsistent)
T. Max Devlin wrote:
> TBH, five bucks on a $1800 computer is so little that, if I planned to
>
> use StarOffice, I just might pay them simply to have it pre-installed.
>
> But I don't mind waiting, either (or didn't, when I had Gozilla; does
>
> RH7's ftp client support resume?)
>
>
>
> [...]
Max,
To be fair, the default linux ftp client is just the good old
UNIX ftp command, it doesn't support resume. However, if you get
the full set of RH7 you might get lucky and get gFTP included, a
Gnome-based grapical client, and one of the best around.
Otherwise it is available in RPM format so you can download and
install it without a hassle.
If you have more questions, fire away. I am no linux guru, but
I've taken my knocks and I know a fair bit about both RH and
Debian, so I may be of some assistance.
Mart
------------------------------
From: Shane Phelps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 22:03:27 +1100
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> >
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > "Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > > Where's the URL mentioning that MS deliberately introduces instability
> > > > into the
> > > > non-server versions?
> > >
> > > Check MS' 99.999% page, search for "stability tax".
> >
> > I just tried. I can get to www.microsoft.com, but I get a DNS failure
> > when I try to search :-(
> >
> > Can you summarise it for me or provide the URL for the 99.999% page
> please?
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/guide/server/solutions/overview/reliabl
> e/default.asp
>
> "And the three offerings in the family-Windows 2000 Server, Advanced Server,
> and Datacenter Server-allow you to tailor your investment to provide the
> level of system availability that's appropriate for your various business
> operations, without overbuying for situations that don't require maximum
> uptime."
>
> Tell me what this tells you?
Ayende,
Thank you for the effort you've put into this response.
It's good to see somebody from either camp who can advocate without
mud-slinging or name-calling.
[it's been one of those days :-(]
For your information, I don't really think Microsoft deliberately introduces
instability into the non-server versions of their products. That was
just a rhetorical question in response to Chad's assertion that *workstation*
reliability is invalid. I actually agree that NT servers will be more stable
than desktop boxes, but Chad came at it entirely the wrong way :-)
The reason that servers will be more stable is because the hardware is
usually fairly tightly controlled and from one of the tier-1 suppliers
(Compaq, Dell, IBM, etc). Ancillary components will usually be more
tightly controlled as well, and the machines will usually be more rigidly
evaluated before deployment. Servers will usually run a much smaller software
rnage, and will be test-run for an extended evaluation period before deployment.
This is essentially what we did before deploying our NT 4 servers. The NFS
server software would consistently BSOD the server, so we changed to another
vendor.
MS's 5 nines page seems to mostly boil down to:
use good supported hardware
test everything before you deploy
hire good system admin staff
you don't have to reboot any more if you change or add something
You can administer remotely now
cluster your servers if you want good site uptimes.
That's a little disappointing, really. It implicitly acknowledges
that NT 4 needed more scheduled downtime than it should have (IP address
changes, installing packages, etc), and that W2K needs to be clustered to
give site reliability.
It doesn't seem to be in the same reliability class as the big HP or Sun
boxes (or VAXen), but then Sun's new Netras probably aren't either.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
