Linux-Advocacy Digest #434, Volume #32 Fri, 23 Feb 01 17:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: Interesting Google Facts! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Interesting Google Facts! (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Hilter Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited (Woofbert)
Re: Does anyone know how much computer power we have/ ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Interesting article ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Where is suse 7.1? ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Does anyone know how much computer power we have/ ("Goober")
Re: Maximum Linux Magazine Is Going Out Of Business Ha Ha Ha (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Red Hat Fisher Beta (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Red Hat Fisher Beta (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Kulkis the newbie, its official! ("surrender")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Interesting Google Facts!
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 20:08:48 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Donal K. Fellows wrote:
>Charlie Ebert wrote:
>> Do a search on "Windows" - You see 24,900,000 references.
>
>How are you filtering out non-computer uses of the term?
>
>Donal.
>--
>Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>-- I could even declare myself a religion, if that'd help.
> -- Mark Loy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I'm giving them credit for all the Linux saches in lower botswana...
And if you buy that, I have a bridge to sell you.
But interesting point. There are several types of Windows and only
one kind of Linux.
--
Charlie
**DEBIAN** **GNU**
/ / __ __ __ __ __ __ __
/ /__ / / / \/ / / /_/ / \ \/ /
/_____/ /_/ /_/\__/ /_____/ /_/\_\
http://www.debian.org
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Interesting Google Facts!
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 20:35:11 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jasper wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Feb 2001 18:24:02 -0800, "Paolo Ciambotti"
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>It could also be 40,200,000 archived messages pleading for help
>>with installing Linux. But even that is a good general indication of uptake for
>>Linux. How goes that proverb, "Bad publicity is better than no
>>publicity"?
>>
>>You should visit the "Operating System Sucks-Rules-O-Meter" site for an
>>interesting evaluation of similar findings.
>>
>>http://srom.zgp.org/
>>
>>Ciao.
>
>Another interesting site:
>
>http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2001/January/os.html
>
>
I find it extremely fascinating to learn that Total Unix lost
over a million users from January 2000 thru January 2001 yet
we all know this wasn't the case. Sun is doing better
business now then they have in the last 10 years.
Further, how can you take these statistics seriously when
you have a block of over 12,000,000 OS's listed as unidentified
for January, 2001.
Hell, even back in January 2000 they had over 8 million unidentified...
If you add up the total computers you see 350 million world wide tally'd
for January 2001.
Then if you go back and tally up the TOTAL count they have for January 2000
you find these people added up 550 million computers.
My question to you is how do you go from 550 million a year ago to
less today of 350 million?
And anybody can see this.
Then I did ownership research on www.thecounter.com and came to the
conclusion that www.thecounter.com has a long tree of ownership leading
right back thru duke.com which is a know fanatical windows supporter.
This counter is totally worthless. Futher it fraudlent.
And it's so silly about the way it lies the *AVERAGE* person with
a calculator can indeed blow holes in it in just 5 minutes.
But it takes *YOU* the reader to use your brain and figure this out.
Add up the same numbers I did. Go backwards in the privacy policy statements
until you go backwards the 5-6 companies I did and find it is indeed owned
by duke.com and come to your own fucking conclusion.
The conclusion you should come to is your spreading monopoly wintroll crap.
It is my feeling thru internet research that Linux is approaching the 50% mark
this year. That means for every 2 Windows box you find @ WW, there will be one
Linux box.
The evidence is almost inescapable.
You can't generate 40 million web pages on Linux without having the need for
the traffic. And that exceeds windows.
So a 2 for 1 right now is a very conservative figure for Linux world
population.
And THERE HAS to be a reason Microsoft is bitching. They know how to lie,
they know their markets, they know their loosing their markets to Linux.
Otherwise, why the crap about open source and GPL lately.
I think it is wonderful news and I'm still believing by 2005 we will know
who the next globally dominate operating system will be.
It looks like it's going to be GNU/Linux.
--
Charlie
**DEBIAN** **GNU**
/ / __ __ __ __ __ __ __
/ /__ / / / \/ / / /_/ / \ \/ /
/_____/ /_/ /_/\__/ /_____/ /_/\_\
http://www.debian.org
------------------------------
From: Woofbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,demon.local
Subject: Re: Hilter Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 20:47:52 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Aaron Kulkis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You write like a retard.
> why is that?
So you can understand me.
--
Woofbert <woofbert at infernosoft dot com> -- http://www.infernosoft.com
"As any discussion of the Macintosh progresses, the likelihood of someone
claiming that the Mac UI was stolen from Xerox approaches 1. At this point,
the thread has degenerated to such an extent that it might as well end."
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does anyone know how much computer power we have/
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:56:57 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "mlw"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just posted about how I have 1000 times more RAM than my
> first PC/XT. not mentioning my CP/M machine.
>
> Lets face it: we are all running supercomputers. It is simply
> amazing how much computer power we have?
>
What really gets me down is that we have all these shiny new
toys and do nothing with them. Bear with me as I tell my tale:
I started out on my brothers good old Commodore 64, playing
some games, wasting my time with its horrible BASIC. Then I
started fooling around with its hardware and assembly and
absolutely loved it. I then got my own, a C128, and started
fooling around with 2 assembly languages (6502 and Z80) and the
CP/M operating system. Cool!
Around the time I left home for the university, my brother (a
bit of a hacker BTW) bought a shiny new Amiga 1000 with a
whopping 256K of RAM, and started learning to program it in C. I
frequently borrowed his books and started getting interested in
this machine and this new way of looking at programming (GUI,
true multitasking), while at the same time seeing some UNIX in
action at the uni.
Unfortunately, just as I was getting the hang of C I had a fall
out with my family, I dropped out of the uni and spent some
years down on my luck. I did get back on my feet again
eventually and got, but basically most of the PC revolution
passed me by.
I got back last June, bought me a shiny new PC, looked at
windows for a bit and installed Linux on it (I actually bought
Red Hat 6.2 before I got my PC).
What really got me upset was that NOTHING HAD CHANGED!!! Sure
the GUIs looked a little slicker, sure I had 16bits sound, but
the basic underlying stuff hadn't changed in 10 years!! Windows
was the worst, it was so obviously based on DOS, it just felt
like crap, a bad joke, a crime against humanity to push THIS as
userfriendly, I felt it to be actually user-hostile!
Linux was a bit of a letdown as well, it was still the same old
UNIX underneath, but here I soon discovered that this was just a
solid foundation, and some real interesting stuff was happening
in the Linux world.
So, the whole point of this rant: we have faster computers sure,
but as long as we subject ourselves to just prettier pictures
over the same old stuff, we are WASTING all that power. As a
happy Linux user I think that Free Software is the logical
corollary (sp?) to Moore's law, and I think it's high time that
our software starts utilizing our hardware instead of dragging
it down.
Thanks for your patience,
Mart
--
YahDu (Yet another happy Debian user)
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting article
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 23:03:35 +0200
"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:7Pjl6.2012$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:973u4o$gks$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > : "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > : news:96v133$im8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > :>
> > :> It demonstrates exactly the opposite.
> >
> > : How do you get that? If it has to be done over it means it was done
> wrong
> > : the first time. Do you want to encourage users to make their own
> > : mistakes with the security of their files?
> >
> > Some things have to be done over and over even if they are done right
> > the first time, because circumstances change. In my example, you will
> > note, I described a department with new people coming into it that
> > weren't there when the groupd was first made.
>
> But when circumstances change, they change globally. Why would
> you want every individual to apply ACL's and have to update them
> on every file when the circumstances change as opposed to letting
> the system administrator take care of updating the groups as
> the groups change?
Only shows that you don't understand how ACLs works.
You can define ACLs for users or groups, so the *nix method has no advantage
over it.
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Where is suse 7.1?
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 22:15:43 +0100
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>> Suse 7.1 was to be released on feb 12. Still now the website
>> says, it will be available from mid-february? When is it going
>> to be released?
>
> Here in the UK, 7.1 was released on the 19th. I put my order in
> and received an EMail to say there was a problem with a batch
> of CD's and I could expect delivery within ten days.
>
Now Pete,
Here's a few words of experience frome one who has done it:
*don't* go and imediately start pushing SuSE to the max. Every
distro has a different 'feel' to it, and if you go in just
blindly assuming that it does things the same as Mandrake, you
*are* going to have another spate of problems.
Give yourself a change to get used to SuSE's idiosyncracies,
explore all its possibilities, but give it time, say about a
week (actually 2 weeks would be better). Then, when you start
feeling familiar with it, do whatever you bloody well want and
you'll find that you *can* get a good user experience out of a
Linux distro.
One other word of warning: watch out with installing, I believe
SuSE comes with nearly 7000 packages!
Mart
--
YahDu (Yet another happy Debian user)
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ]
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 23:25:33 +0200
"Klaus-Georg Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Se�n � Donnchadha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> >
> > You do have a point here. Because the old library isn't overwritten,
Unix
> > makes it easier to go back to it (just redirect the symbolic link). But
> > think about it for a minute. You've got hundreds of shared libraries on
your
> > system. You just installed an application that uses a bunch of them.
> > Actually, no, let's say you're a typical Web-happy power user who tries
out
> > a dozen new software packages (many of them betas) every week. All of a
> > sudden you notice that something you installed a few months ago has
stopped
> > working. How much investigative work do you think it'll take for you to
> > figure out exactly what library updates over the last few months caused
that
> > application to break? Would it be worth it? After all, even if you could
> > pinpoint the exact source of the problem, you have no clue what other
things
> > will break as soon as you change that symbolic link. It's a mess.
> >
> > Now think about how useful this "Unix advantage" is to someone who
doesn't
> > know a shared library from a public library.
>
> If you install an application in Unix, you can be pretty darn shure it
> won't mess with installed systemlibraries. Apps are mostly
> self-contained, and if they have DSOs, they get installed in a
> directory which is private to the app. Thus no problem if you install
> new apps.
>
> This is even true for something as big as DB2 UDB.
>
> Contrast that with the situation in Windows, where every app dumps
> their DLLs in system32.
Wrong, applications are supposed to put their shared libraries in \Program
Files\Common Files\<Company Name>\
> You might have problems if you upgrade _library versions_. But then
> you expect the problems and are prepared to go back to the old one.
>
> Notable exceptions to this rule? Gcc comes to mind...
------------------------------
From: "Goober" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does anyone know how much computer power we have/
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:28:03 -0000
It still takes longer to load a game from scratch on my PC than it does in
my spectrum.
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Maximum Linux Magazine Is Going Out Of Business Ha Ha Ha
Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 10:41:13 +1300
it (Slackware) will survive, however, It wont be one of the big 4, not
only because of its marketing, but because of its ammaturish
installation, configuration, etc. When compared to other Linux distro's,
and even commercial UNIX's, it lacks the ease of use that many Linux
users have become accustomed to. I use Solaris 8 x86, however, from the
standpoint of functionality, hardware support etc, Linux wins hands down.
There will always be obscure/fridge distro's of Linux, however, you will
find that the main stream user will tend to stick to the big four.
Matthew Gardiner
Donn Miller wrote:
> Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
>> Hear! hear! I must agree. The projected theory is becoming reality, can't
>> remember the person who said it, but the conclusion was made that although in
>> the short term there are ALOT of distro's, the number will decrease to a small
>> number, in around 2 to three years time (depending upon market conditions,
>> the main distro's left will be Redhat, SuSE, Debian and if MacMillian doesn't
>> drop it, Mandrake.
>
>
> What about Slackware? Don't think Slack is going anywhere anytime soon,
> at least as long as P. Volkerding is willing to keep the distro going.
> Slack is one of my favorite distros, and has been since 1995!
>
>
> -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
--
�?f
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:43:41 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ayende Rahien
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 23 Feb 2001 01:48:59 +0200
<974ans$lcr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
>message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
>> Failing that, we could try to run NT on SPARCs. (Um...there's just
>> a slight problem with that... :-) )
>
>Yes, you would have to convice MS to give you the SPARC port.
Sell, perhaps. (And not the source code, either.)
Someone then sets up a benchmark and we'll see which is better. :-)
But OK, sounds like someone did a little work already.
(However, I was under the impression that the part(s) of Windows
ported to SPARC sat on top of Solaris.)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 18d:22h:29m actually running Linux.
Linux. The choice of a GNU generation.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Red Hat Fisher Beta
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:46:15 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Edward Rosten
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 23 Feb 2001 00:29:08 +0000
<974ata$128$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "The Ghost
>In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Edward Rosten
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote
>> on Tue, 20 Feb 2001 09:41:04 +0000
>> <96te46$2te$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>>> bad.... I've spent more time getting a modem to work under Win NT.
>>>>
>>>> Then you don't understand what you are doing. You should be even
>>>> touching a computer in an administrative capacity.
>>>
>>>Then you've never administered more than a few computers ever. Hardware
>>>can be a problem under any OS. Win NT is an exception.
>>
>> Um...not to be a wet blanket or anything, but ... how is NT's dealing
>> with bad hardware (the BSOD) better than a kernel panic under Unix or
>> bombs under MacOS or ... ??
>
>mega thinko-typo-brainfart.
>
>s/an/no/
*chuckles* Ah! Now it makes sense.
>
>
>
>> Or are you saying NT crashes regardless of hardware? :-)
>
>That too :-)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 18d:02h:18m actually running Linux.
You were expecting something relevant down here?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Red Hat Fisher Beta
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:49:05 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Matthew Gardiner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Fri, 23 Feb 2001 10:17:18 +1300
<973vns$o36$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Windows NT Admin: Point-click, Point-click, Point-click, Point-click,
>Point-click, Point-click
More like "point-click point-clicky-click point-um, where's that option?-
clicky-clicky-point crap, that's not what I want pointy-pointy-click-
clicky-pointy-oh shit it just crashed AGAIN!". :-)
[rest snipped]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- mind you, that's just an opinion
EAC code #191 18d:02h:19m actually running Linux.
It's a conspiracy of one.
------------------------------
From: "surrender" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Kulkis the newbie, its official!
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2001 21:47:13 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "woof"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote something like:
> I was on Irc #linux channel when Kulkis comes in and asks how do list
> files in his directory!
>
> Kulkis: Hello everyone, can someone help me? how do i list files in my
> directory? I dont know anything about Linux as im as thick as pig shit
> Please help, i feel lonely
Man u're funny
5 threads to say that you hate Kulkis. Okay, good for you.
Personnaly I see nothing wrong about him...
PS My English sucks, I'm aware of that :)
--
Greets
surrender
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
