Linux-Advocacy Digest #262, Volume #32 Sat, 17 Feb 01 06:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Interesting article (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux and QA ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Which Linux? ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: I will give MS credit for one thing (Peter Hayes)
Re: It's just too easy ("Edward Rosten")
Re: It's just too easy ("Edward Rosten")
Re: This is astonishing (MS/DRM/Hardware Control) ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Tim Hanson)
Re: It's just too easy ("Edward Rosten")
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Politics (was Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux 64 bit and Windows 32 bit ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux 64 bit and Windows 32 bit ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Wy Linux will/is failing on the desktop ("Edward Rosten")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 09:43:07 GMT
Said Charlie Ebert in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 17 Feb 2001
02:06:07 GMT;
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron Kulkis wrote:
>>
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>
>>> Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Flacco wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> > The market will speak on this. MS can't force people.
>>> >>
>>> >> ...unless they manage to outlaw open source software.
>>>
>>> > That's impossible in the US.
>>>
>>> > First Amendment.
>>>
>>> McCarthy hearings.
>>>
>>> Not only is it possible, but it has happened, is happening,
>>> and will happen again.
>>
>>McCarthy never abridged free speech.
Are you on drugs? If not, you should be; please see a psychiatrist as
soon as possible.
>>By the way...not only was McCarthy right about communist
>>infiltration of the State Department....he under-stated
>>the problem by nearly an order of magnitude.
>
>Now that we have the KGB records this is true.
>
>But the people he went after were the wrong people.
--
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: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 09:43:09 GMT
Said Erik Funkenbusch in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 16 Feb 2001
11:32:42 -0600;
>"Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:R16j6.724$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <AuMi6.610$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > "Bob Hauck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> On Wed, 14 Feb 2001 15:06:22 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > I think you're reading a lot more "into" the "plan" than is there.
>> >> > Yes, MS has a lot of dreams for what they would like to do, but I
>> >> > doubt even half of them will become reality. That doesn't mean .NET
>> >> > won't be useful and quite popular.
>> >>
>> >> The difference this time is that many of the "dreams" involve things
>> >> that are good for MS but bad for the user. This time even Winvocates
>> >> are hoping that some of the dreams _don't_ come true.
>> >
>> > This time? I didn't agree with Windows 3.x (I was an Amiga and OS/2
>> > user until Win95). I didn't agree with MS Bob. I prefer Quicken over
>> > MS Money. I grudgingly use Visual SourceSafe, mostly because it's easier
>> > to use, even if it frustrates me quite often.
>>
>> That particular program is the bane of our existance. We've had files
>> literally being checked out at random with SourceSafe refusing to let go
>> until the fix tool was run. We've had it completely ignore changes to
>> code. If there were another integrated solution, we'd shell out whatever
>> the asking price was to get it.
>
>There are plenty of integrated solutions. StarTeam is probably VSS's
>closest competitor in the same market.
>
>Having said that, I've found that most of the issues you mention are the
>result of flaky networks. It has no way to roll back transactions due to an
>error (such as a dial-up connection dropping) because it's file based rather
>than client-server. Most other file based version control has the same
>problem (PVCS, MKS SI, RCS, etc..). You should also run the analyze tool
>regularly to fix minor problems and compress the database. I really haven't
>seen the problems you've mentioned in years.
One must wonder, Erik, if you're knowledgeable enough to recognize it,
why you would bother to take the time to mention you "really haven't
seen the problems... in years". Do you honestly think the person seeing
the problems would care, or that anyone else would, either?
So "flakey networks", which I must presume means Microsoft's painfully
flawed networking software, is responsible; I'm sure Tom appreciates the
help. Why do you make a cry for alternatives supported by a
competitive market sound like an intro to a commercial for an unnamed
monopolist?
--
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: Whistler/.NET will Help Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 09:43:10 GMT
Said Mike Martinet in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Fri, 16 Feb 2001
>Bloody Viking wrote:
>>
><snipola>
>>
>> UNIX (in all flavours) is great!
>>
>
>I can't help but agree. I was a big fan of DOS until the day they
>rolled a SUN 360 into my work area and told me I was going to have to
>learn to use it. I knew a tiny bit about email and networking. When I
>got a moment to myself, I started exploring SunOS. I found the 'man'
>pages and then I found something called 'at' which, according to the man
>pages, would schedule jobs for later execution. I spent some time
>trying to enter an 'at' job, with no visible success. (I think I tried
>to schedule 'ls /' to run five minutes in the future.) I shut the
>machine down and went home.
>
>The next day, when I brought the 360 back up and logged in as 'root', I
>was dumbfounded - I HAD MAIL! The Operating System on this machine,
>connected to nothing other than power, shut off overnight, had LEFT ME
>MAIL! I couldn't believe it. As 'root' I had a message informing me
>that a cron job had failed to run.
>
>I've been in awe of Unix, in all its flavo(u)rs, ever since.
:-D
Great story, man.
--
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,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 09:49:32 GMT
Said Todd in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 17 Feb 2001 14:08:23 +0800;
[...]
>> *Unix* doesn't develop because it isn't a product. The technology only
>> changes when it serves a purpose; Unix hasn't gotten more
>> consumer-oriented, simply, because consumers don't have access to Unix,
>
>Consumers wouldn't *choose* UNIX... you can easily get UNIX off the net or
>in many stores (Linux) and even preloaded.
And somehow this isn't a choice?
>> due to Microsoft's illegal monopolization of the pre-load market.
>
>Nope. First of all, a monopoly isn't illegal.
Forgive me, but the law plainly and clearly says "monopolizing or
attempting to monopolize is a felony."
>Secondly, nobody is forced
>to preload Windows... if this were true, you wouldn't see Linux preloads.
"Nobody is forced to preload...." What an... innovative way of putting
it.
>The bottom line is this: The guys running the shops who need to make a
>living *know* that consumers would balk at Linux... heck, Linux doesn't even
>have a decent browser!
After ten years of monopolization, you expect to raise consumer
expectations as the issue? Linux has Netscape, which is as "decent" a
browser as Windows has, which is to say not much of one.
>Don't blame Linux' problems on MS. Linux is an open system and its problems
>are not in anyway MS' fault.
Sure they are; its an "open system" in a closed-source world. Why the
hell wouldn't I blame Microsoft for every problem which hasn't been
solved to my satisfaction in the last fifteen years? They're the ones
who have monopolized, preventing competition and innovation, that whole
time. Who else should I blame? The Justice Department, for acquiescing
to a limp-dick consent decree after five years of "hands off anti-trust"
FTC/DOJ investigation? No, sorry, MS is the one that broke the law; I
can't fault the inept would-be prosecutors for that.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux and QA
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 10:55:37 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
imekon@$$$remove$$$.freeuk.com wrote:
> What kind of testing is done on Linux distributions?
>
> Is it a manual test?
>
> A patently bad test as is obvious in Linux Mandrake 7.2?
>
> Is it automated?
>
> Are the scripts out there that can be run to verify a system?
>
> What "Quality Assurance" is done on Linux systems?
>
Pete,
That depends on the distirbution vendor. The kernel itself is
tested by the guys writing on it, and when they deem it stable
they release an x.y.z. version, where y is an even number. The
distro vendors then decide to incorporate it, test if it works
with their distro, make any changes needed and release it
themselves.
As for the distro as a whole, that is definitely vendor
dependent. Mandrake for instance, runs their 'cooker' program,
where users can download the most cutting-edge versions of their
rpms for the purposes of beta testing. I don't know what they do
for QA prior to release. I believe SuSE runs an
in-house testing team for QA, and Debian of course depends on
volunteer maintainers and a strict packaging/testing policy.
Of all approaches, I find the Debian one to be most reliable.
You get either a very high quality stable distro which is
slightly behind the times (stable), an up-to-date distro which
may have a few inconsistencies (testing) or a cutting-edge
distro which may break in a random manner (unstable). All
version are clearly marked, you know exactly what you're
getting. For instance, my printer worked perfectly well in
stable, the upgrade to testing broke it, as it seems there are a
few version conflicts and configuration changes. I was clearly
warned for that though.
Mart
--
Happily running Debian, posting with Pan
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Which Linux?
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 11:00:14 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I got a older 486 laptop with 5 meg of ram and a floppy drive,
> No CD-ROM. I want to install a version of Linux on it to get
> some experience for a job position I am applying for in Web
> Support. Which version should I install?
AFAIK, both Slackware and Debian are very good for minimalist
sytems. However, although Linux is not resource-intensive, it
will have trouble doing anything but server work on a
configuration like that. What were you going to do with it
exactly?
Mart
--
Happily running Debian, posting with Pan
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I will give MS credit for one thing
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 10:02:14 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 22:28:01 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:32:34 +0000, Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 01:43:43 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Hauck) wrote:
> >> On 15 Feb 2001 00:48:42 -0600, Donn Miller
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >>> I am no MS advocate. But, I will admit one thing: Windows Media
> >>> player is >much better than the video MPEG players I have used on
> >>> Linux.
> >>
> >> That's good. You're gonna be using it a lot if MS gets their way:
> >> <http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/16959.html>
>
> [quoting]
>
> > Microsoft's Secure Audio Path technology is designed at an operating
> > system level, allegedly) to keep the content encrypted right up until
> > the machine's sound card is actually playing it.
>
> Of more relevance to the subject of liking WMP or not liking it is the
> part about making deals with content providers to only release in the MS
> format.
>
>
> >As someone has already pointed out, all you need is a couple of croc-clips
> >across the speaker terminals, or even the amp input.
>
> Yeah, but you'd lose some quality.
True. But you've got your song.
> But the purpose of the scheme isn't
> to prevent that kind of piracy, but to give more control to providers in
> the same way that DivX was supposed to do for DVD's.
"Supposed" is the operative word. About the only place you *can't* buy
multi-region DVD players is in the high street. You'll find them in any
computer fair or Sunday market.
> >I'm not against musicians getting their dues. I just don't like the
> >prospect of MS controlling everything.
>
> Which was my point. They want to make WMP into a "standard" that they
> control. One way to do that would be to make deals with record and
> movie companies to only release computer versions in their format. To
> set up a cartel in other words. The bait for the record companies is
> the ability to have "pay for play", while MS can get a royalty for each
> recording put into their format. A great deal for everyone except the
> consumer.
I guess all that'll happen is that an MP3 underground will flourish, much
like the warez underground.
Sometimes, just sometimes, the consumer isn't as gullable as the marketing
drongos think they are. Much of the music buying public that this scam is
aimed at know full well what's going on.
Like Amstrad's e-mail box. Cheap, but 12p (8cents?) a minute to dial in for
your e-mail? "Other charges may apply". They aren't selling.
And like WAP phones. Dead in the water.
Nope, sometimes these droids outsmart themselves.
Peter
--
In the 19th century surveyors measured the height of Everest
from 500 miles away in India.
This cannot be done today. Everest is no longer visible from
the survey location due to increased atmospheric pollution.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: It's just too easy
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 10:18:04 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Pete Goodwin"
<imekon@$$$remove$$$.freeuk.com> wrote:
> "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in <96karo$1u9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>I installed a new NIC in a frien's RH 6.2 box today.
>
> I installed a new NIC in my own PC. On Windows, it asked for a driver
> disk. On Linux Mandrake, it didn't even notice it was there.
>
> I tried to configure it manually and it failed. I told it to use
> via-rhine, then it worked.
>
>>It's too easy. This has been my experience (more or less) with adding
>>hardware since RH5.2 (my forst distro). This is why I am skeptical about
>>the wintrolls with all these problems. I've simply never had them.
>
> You think your own experience is the norm?
Seeing as it keeps happening to me, and the people I know round here, yes.
>>All problems I have had have been with faulty hardware. All the other
>>problems have been with Win9X which is quite frankly awful.
>
> My own experiences have been the complete opposite of yours. Who is
> telling the truth here? You or me?
>
> Would it surprise you if I said both of us? And would you understand
> why?
I don't doubt you're telling the truth, but I've installed a fair number
of Linux Boxen and have never had the problems you keep talking about.
Then again, I have never used Mandrake, and after the problems you've had
with it, I don't think I ever will. Really, you should try switching. Try
RH. The package management is a bit sucky, but the rest is solid.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: It's just too easy
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 10:20:36 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Pete Goodwin"
<imekon@$$$remove$$$.freeuk.com> wrote:
> "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in <96karo$1u9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>I installed a new NIC in a frien's RH 6.2 box today.
>
> I installed a new NIC in my own PC. On Windows, it asked for a driver
> disk. On Linux Mandrake, it didn't even notice it was there.
Have you switched on hardware autodetection?
I haven't installed it on my RH5.2 box, but even though the setup isn't
automagig, it is still very easy to do.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: This is astonishing (MS/DRM/Hardware Control)
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 11:15:42 +0100
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Flacco"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I think that'll go for many, many people. Just hastens the day
>> the world becomes Microsoft free.
>
> Unfortunately the Linux community thinks this will happen
> without catering to current MS addicts' needs.
>
> A targeted "Windows Migration" distro is really needed in order
> to capitalize on MS's heavy-handedness here.
>
Well,
Someone is working on it:
http://www.redmondlinux.org
This is actually a serious effort, I do think however that they
are too small-scale to really make a dent, however the beauty of
Open-Source: If they get an official release out, other vendors
can profit from their experiences.
I for one wouldn't touch this (I hate it that they took that 'My
Computer' metaphor from MS. I *know* it's my computer, I don't
need my bloody OS to tell me).
Mart
--
Happily running Debian, posting with Pan
------------------------------
From: Tim Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 10:23:01 GMT
What I like most about c.o.l.a is that I can stay caught up on all the
technical terms.
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
<snip>
> >
> >Twisty!
>
> Gotcha!
>
> >>>> Dufus.
> >>>
> >>>Dweeb.
> >>
> >>Dupe.
> >
> >Belgian!
>
> Bwah-ha-ha-ha-ha!
>
--
Numeric stability is probably not all that important when you're
guessing.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: It's just too easy
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 10:25:53 +0000
> Here's my account of adding a NIC (Ne2000isa) to Win98 box yesterday.
> 1/ open case
> 2/ plug in NIC
> 3/ powerup pc
> 4/ No hardware detected automatically so go to CONTROL-PANEL, DEVICE-MGR
> ADD-NEW-HARDWARE, Select from list (auto detect hangs pc), Novel/Anthem
> 5/ alter settings, suggested by Win98 as the interrupt and i/o are wrong
> 6/ reboot (long wait)
> 7/ set up tcpip settings, dns etc for the new NIC
> 8/ reboot (long wait)
> 9/ test it works
>
> Easy hey ;-)
>
> Ill take a linux box over a Windows box anyday!
The notwork card in my box is a NE2000 PCI klone, about as standard as
you can get. Win 95 refuses to believe that the devce is working
properly. After hours of fiddling, I got it to work, but it still had a
yellow ! by it in hardware profiles. I tried both the dirvers supplied
with the disk [*] and windows' own drivers, but no luck either way.
Under Linux, 10 minutes and I was away.
-Ed
[*] I can't remember the brand or the card, but it had drivers on the
disk for:
NT 3.5
NT 4
Win 95/8
SCO
FreeBSD
Linux
Netware
DOS, Lanman
And a couple of others that have slipped my mind.
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 10:09:41 +0000
Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> did eloquently scribble:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : That's why Materialism is hopelessly flawed. We all know that JFK
> : was shot, but can't repeat the experiment. How do we go about
> : proving a historical event.
> WTF does that have to do with materialism?
I was wondering the same thing. I think he got his words mixed up...
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| |
| in | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
| Computer Science | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
==============================================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 10:12:32 +0000
Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> did eloquently scribble:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Robert Surenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : My comments where not being used as a proof. I am bored by Materialist
> : because their phylosophy is so easily shown to be false.
> Nobody's done it yet. WTF are you talking about?
I think we need to help him here... He appears not to know what the word
materialism means...
The goal of materialism is to acquire money and things to improve your
quality of life at the cost of moral/spiritual/whatever health...
--
______________________________________________________________________________
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't |
| in | suck is probably the day they start making |
| Computer science | vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge |
==============================================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Politics (was Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else)
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 10:15:34 +0000
Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> did eloquently scribble:
>> I am a Democrat. Please take your politics to a political forum.
>>
> Fuck off, Socialist.
LOL! That's a good one... Calling an american "Democrat" a socialist...
ROTFL! There's no such thing as a socialist in america. (Not in any serious
political position anyway). They're both as bad as each other.
Oh, and fuck off arsehole... Lose that fucking sig!!!!
(how many times have you been told about that now?)
--
=============================================================================
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
| in |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
| Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
=============================================================================
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux 64 bit and Windows 32 bit
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 10:31:07 +0000
>> > Edward Rosten wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > It seems unlikely that the Itanium code can be called finished
>> >> > until the chip ships.
>> >>
>> >> In case you hadn't noticed, the Itanium is shipping now, in HP
>> >> computers.
>> >>
>> >> MS somehow coerced intel in to not releasing it for lower end stuff
>> >> until MS were finished.
>> >
>> > To the benefit of AMD.
>> >
>> > I'll bet this is the LAST time Intel ever makes a deal like that.
>>
>>
>> I hope so. If the 64 bit AMD cpus hit the market soon, they could make
>> a really big impact.
>>
>> This is one thing Linux is *really* good for. Since it is so portable,
>> it meand that every CPU around can have a very high quality, highly
>> avaliable OS developed in a very short time. The result should be much
>> greater competition in the CPU market, since CPU vendors don't need a
>> whole new OS to be made.
>
> But the market for Linux is small. Yes, that's right, compared to the
> consumer market (where almost nobody really *uses* Linux), the Linux
> showing is small.
>
> New CPU vendors would definitely need to target the mass market... and
> the mass market runs Windows.
So all thous clusters out there running Linux and all those UNIX
workstations don't count?
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux 64 bit and Windows 32 bit
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 10:36:27 +0000
>> >> > It seems unlikely that the Itanium code can be called finished
>> >> > until the chip ships.
>> >>
>> >> In case you hadn't noticed, the Itanium is shipping now, in HP
>> >> computers.
>> >>
>> >> MS somehow coerced intel in to not releasing it for lower end stuff
>> >> until MS were finished.
>> >
>> > To the benefit of AMD.
>> >
>> > I'll bet this is the LAST time Intel ever makes a deal like that.
>>
>> I hope so. If the 64 bit AMD cpus hit the market soon, they could make
>> a really big impact.
>
> I believe they already are...
Can you buy a 64bit AMD computer?
Do they run Linux yet?
How much are they?
I wouldn't mind a link.
You see, I'm reccomending a computer for someone for number crunching.
They've already decided to use Linux, so if there are reasonably priced
64 bit computers out there, one would be worth getting instead of a 32
bit computer.
> This was the original reason why Kernighan and Ritchie came up with the
> C language...after the first time Unix was ported (around
> 1970) from a PDP-8(?) to a PDP-11, the Unix team decided that they
> NEVER wanted to port an assembly-language kernel ever again.
Yep. UNIX was the first portably (ie non assebmer) OS ever written.
> C was invented so that they could rewrite the kernel in C, and then,
> when new hardware came along, 90% of the code would be ported by simply
> writing a compiler.
> And because of this is why DARPA (US Defence Advanced Research Projects
> Agency) picked Unix for the highly-portable operating system
> project.....better known as BSD Unix.
There is a very good reason thet UNIX has been around as long as it has.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Wy Linux will/is failing on the desktop
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 10:48:35 +0000
>> > Um, my Windows box plays several MP3s at once without any problem.
>> > Perhaps your hardware is not up to the task? Most modern soundcards
>> > will mix up to
>> > 64 streams of audio IN HARDWARE, and yes, Windows does allow it.
>> >
>> > Unless of course my Windows box is MAGICAL.
>>
>>
>> Why do you play several MP3s at once? It must sound truly awful. Please
>> explain this to me.
>
> Duh. It's not that he *does*, it's that he *can*. Or more importantly,
> that Windows 2000 can. Easily.
So? I expect Linux box does, since the process load is way under half
playing 1 mp3, it should be able to handle more. But I'm not going to try
because it must sound truly awful.
-Ed
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold|Edward Rosten
weather is because of all the fish in the atmosphere? |u98ejr
- The Hackenthorpe Book of lies |@
|eng.ox.ac.uk
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
