Linux-Advocacy Digest #639, Volume #32 Sun, 4 Mar 01 16:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: How would you do this with Linux ? ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! ("Gary Hallock")
Re: State of linux distros ("Edward Rosten")
Re: .NET is plain .NUTS ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... (pip)
Re: It's here! IBM's new Linux ad! ("ono")
Goodwins Law: Thread now dead (Was: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else)
("Edward Rosten")
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... (pip)
Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time (Jim Richardson)
Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited (Jim Richardson)
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... ("Masha Ku'Inanna")
Re: NT vs *nix performance ("JS PL")
Re: NT vs *nix performance ("Quantum Leaper")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How would you do this with Linux ?
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 20:10:22 +0000
>>> Try 1 server with some low-cost linux workstations - terminals are
>>> very hard to find and Pentium 66 machines can be purchased used for
>>> about $40
>>
>>You haven't looked :-) Try www.wyse.com. Although P66 machines are
>>cheap, dumb terminals have no moving parts and are very reliable.
> You can find used VT220 termials for a song if you know the
> sources. I got a Vt100, two Rainbow 100s (they are computers with built
> in vt102 terminal emulation in rom) and a wyse-50. I did not pay a dime
> for any of these! using standard Rs232 you can use agetty from linux to
> run them.
True, but you might want to go for new stuff if you're fitting out a
business.
>>In fact, IIRC you can ge tlittle boxes with an ethernet port on one end
>>and a bunch of serial ports on the other end. That would be smaller and
>>more reliable than an old PC.
> Hmm. Interesting where do I get a 10base2 version of this box?
No Idea. I've seen them, but never used them.
> My lan is fully thin-net coax. How does one use agetty with these?
You probably don't use getty, much like you don't use getty for telnet
clients. But I've never actualy used them.
>>I don't think a P200 would wel server 100 dumb terminals, but a beefier
>>computer would. Or, you could beef up the terminal servers a bit and do
>>some processing on them.
> Wait a second. why would a Pentium 200 MHZ machine not be able
> to serve 100 terminals? Providing you can find a 100 port Serial card
> you certainly CAN! You did not mention how much Memory would be
You could use terminal servers, since the
x86 architecture would run out of interrupts rather soon. It might also
be a bit slow. Especially if you don't want to do everything in C.
A high end PC or mabey a low end Alpha or SPARC could run it at a
reasonable speed.
> required. with the way computers are stuffed with RAM (32MB, 64MB?) you
> can certainly serve ASCII.
> BTW the easiest install is simply a Vt100 or Vt102 sitting on
> a desk. This only needs to be setup and left alone!
Exactly. They're also really reliable too.
-Ed
--
| Edward Rosten
| u98ejr@
This argument is a beta version. | ecs.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 15:15:21 +0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Pete
Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <97t625$plg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>> No. Not at all. How is this the fault of Linux as you keep claiming?
>
> So apps think it's ok to have their own drivers?
>
> Shouldn't the OS decide that?
>
>> You keep saying it is the fault of the OS. How? it is nothing to do
>> with the OS. You are the one not listening. The OS has no control over
>> what the apps think they can do.
>
> The OS decides what apps can and cannot do.
>
As has been mentioned numerous times already, the same thing can and
does happen on Windows. Is Windows at fault for allowing apps to
provide their own printer drivers?
Gary
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: State of linux distros
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 20:25:26 +0000
>>If it does what you need it to, then it is perfectly good. Late 80s
>>hardware is perfect for low end jobs such as fire walls, routers,
>>print/mail servers etc. Why shell out �1000 for a new print server when
>>you have a good one hanging around?
>
> Cisco is still, AFAIK, selling a PIX with a P 200 inside. They charge a
> lot of money for it and can't keep up with the demand.
>
> I wonder why people will spend so much for "obsolete" hardware? :-)
Look at embedded hardware manufactureers (especially PC104 bus boards).
386 and ISA (well, PC104---it's pretty much the same) are still going
strong.
-Ed
--
| Edward Rosten
| u98ejr@
This argument is a beta version. | ecs.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: .NET is plain .NUTS
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 20:28:22 +0000
>> : I think that the only way out of this is to declare copyrights to be
>> dead,
>> : as there is no longer *ANY* practical way to enforce them.
>>
>> Not for books at least.
>
> Even books. You can scan them, run the bitmaps through optical
> character recognition software, and completely copy the book digitally
> with little chance of discovery (other than your own popularity).
But you then have to print it. Bear in mind that a 650M CD is about 50p,
but to print a book without very specialised is quite expensive, and
depending on the book, lower quality.
It'll probably be cheaper to buy the book.
-Ed
--
| Edward Rosten
| u98ejr@
This argument is a beta version. | ecs.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 20:30:32 +0000
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> > OK, everyone knows this one. It's not a command shell. I'm speaking of
> > a full-featured command-line shell with filename completion, complete
> > with CLI tools, like awk, sed and grep.
>
> The CLI is the old way of doing things. It has it's place, but it's
> getting a bit long in the tooth. Long live the GUI!
No its not. Its the way people who _know_ a lot about computers like to
interact with it to achieve some things faster or better than in a GUI.
For people who are new to computing the CLI is a frightening place - but
for most of us here it is an expressive, sciptable and adaptable place.
CLI does not take up as much bandwidth as a Laplink session m8!
> > Windows doesn't have a true command line - it just has a DOS prompt.
>
> It doesn't need it thankfully!
OK - tell me something. I have copied a large amount of files from my cd
onto my hd. How do I make these files readable in the GUI (a single
recursive command). Using CLI it will be attrib -r -a -h -s /s
Go on then.... tell me how the shiny new toy will help me be faster. I
dare you....
> Long live the GUI!
>
> > Linux is more flexible, in that it's really easy to open multiple VC's
> > and switch between them.
>
> Linux has saddled itself with the old way of thinking. It works fine, but
> its not the shiny clicky advanced way of doing things.
Shiny clicky _is_ very important, but not for everything and everyone.
Most of the time I prefer clicky, but there are a large number of things
that you can't adequately express quickly via a GUI.
> > The DOS box command line is kinda hard to work
> > with, seeing as to how the default window manager on Windows (Internet
> > Explorer) doesn't allow you to work with virtual workspaces. You're
> > forced to work within the confines of the crippled environment Windows
> > gives you. Windows is stifling in that it forces you to program and/or
> > interact with a GUI 99% of the time.
>
> Because the GUI is the best way to work for 99% of the time! It's the CLI
> that is stifling! Even with virtual consoles.
hmmmmm. Lets examine this. I want to copy all text files in directory
c:\mystuff\downloads\arts to a:\backup\arts - how do i do this?
1) open explorer by using the start menu (1 layer of navigation). Not by
using windows-E as we are going the clicky route here.
2) click c
3) click mystuff
4) click downloads
5) click arts
6) select the sort order to file type (yes - you have enabled file
extensions to be views right?)
7) select the files using a click at the top, holding shift and a click
at the bottom
8) select the edit->copy menu function
9) click a:
10) click backup
11) click arts
12) select edit->paste
OK now cli in linux:
1) cp /home/pip/downloads/arts/*.txt /mnt/floppy/backup/arts
now remember that under BASH you have tab completion so that you don't
have to type hardly any of the above. Go work out the time difference
Pete and then tell me that GUI is faster.
Yeah - right.
Of course there are counter examples - but it just goes to show that
there is a REAL need for a direct expert interface.
> > And after all this, why even bother working with a crippled system with
> > an outrageous license like Windows?
>
> Because it's better!
better!=just gui
better==gui&&CLI
> > Of course, I will admit Windows has its good points. For example, all
> > the companies in the world support Windows, because it is so numerous in
> > quantity, and is so mainstream. Also, maybe the user interface is nice
> > at helping completely computer illiterate people use the computer. But
> > other than that, it's a crippled system. There are even better
> > alternatives for computer newbies, such as BeOS and Mac OS-X.
>
> I like BeOS, but BeOS is dead because of lack of applications. Mac OS-X
> is always on the sidelines.
Mac OS IS IN BETA...... right? has it even been released? Then this
comment make no sense right?
> As for the UI being nice and helping illiterate people, that's just plain
> bias on your part. I do a lot of GUI work and its certainly a bigger
> challenge, and a lot more usable than the old CLI prompt.
I don't quite get what you are saying: it is easier or harder?
------------------------------
From: "ono" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: It's here! IBM's new Linux ad!
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2001 21:21:35 +0100
> > http://www-1.ibm.com/servers/eserver/linux/passport.swf
> > --
> > "Never underestimate the power of a small tactical nuclear weapon."
>
> valid URL, but ust black-colored page .. :-(
>
You may need to install a proper browser. (like ie5.5 ;-).
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,alt.test,misc.test
Subject: Goodwins Law: Thread now dead (Was: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else)
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 20:34:03 +0000
>>>> The fact is that after the government privatised the railways, safety
>>>> went down the tube and they're having to bail out the company that
>>>> owns th railways with more public money.
>>>
>>> Lousy management is its own reward.
>>>
>>> Of course, since you guys have become sooooooo fucking socialist, all
>>> of
>>
>>Yeah, sure. Whatever.
>>
>>> your best managers left LONG ago for the United States.
>>
>>So its come down to "my country is better than yours" arguments. This is
>>my last word on this thread.
>
> I suppose we can throw in a gratuitous mention of Nazi conspiracies and
> Hitler.
>
> Ooops! I guess I killed the thread. :-)
<AK>
*******FUCK******* Goodwin
</AK>
> All discussions on Usenet will, no matter the original topic, devolve
> into an argument about one or more of a couple dozen recurring themes.
> These themes have been floating around the net for years and show no
> signs of dying.
Goodwin was right to an extent. All threads eventually turn in to a
discussion of one of a very limited number of topics. Nazis are just one
of those topics. I don't think there can be much more than about 6 of
them.
> All discussions will become cross-posted to more and more irrelevant
> newsgroups. If left unchecked, they would be cross-posted to every
> single newsgroup eventually.
Good idea :-)
-Ed
--
| Edward Rosten
| u98ejr@
This argument is a beta version. | ecs.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 20:35:54 +0000
Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> We've had this argument over and over. GUI's are good for newbies
> and when you can't quite remember what to do. Otherwise, the CLI
> and scripts rules.
Not just newbies.... my man program gets well used.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2001 12:10:50 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 4 Mar 2001 14:23:47 GMT,
Jay Maynard, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>On Sat, 03 Mar 2001 23:11:43 -0500, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>One man's freedom is another mans prison. Perspective has a very important role
>>in the definition of freedom. Should southern plantation owners have had the
>>freedom to run their farms as they see fit, or was slavery infringing on
>>another's freedom?
>
>Nice try, but even I (who considers himself a Southern gentleman) do not
>support the idea of slavery - for it does indeed harm others without their
>consent. Talk about persective: How does the BSD license even come close to
>the evil of slavery?
>
>>The BSD license is anarchy. A person can contribute code to the world. Someone
>>else can build upon this work, and not contribute. This means that someone is
>>gaining an advantage from something they do not own.
>
>As long as they are not harming you without your consent, they are not
>infringing on your freedom. You, by your insistence on the GPV, are
>infringing on others' freedom to profit from the fruits of their own labors
>by dictating the terms under which they can do so. This is not freedom. It
>is Communism.
Bull, the BSD licence is not slavery, and GPL is not communism, if you
choose to use code contributed by others, you should abide by their wishes
regarding how to use that code. If you don't like the conditions someone puts
on using their code, don't use it. It's that simple. Since both are voluntary,
there is no aspect of either slavery or communism (essentially the same thing
anyway) to either.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Information wants to be free, Revisited
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2001 12:22:48 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 04 Mar 2001 06:59:34 -0500,
Aaron Kulkis, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>
>
>"B.B." wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Marten Kemp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> @> But the fire-arms of the Cops had almost no effect on the bank-robbers
>> @> with full body-armour (and AK-47s) in LA a couple of years ago, they had
>> @> to wait for the SWAT team to kill them. Nor did they do anything to stop
>> @> that guy with the tank.
>> @>
>> @> Lars T.
>> @
>> @The tank was an M-60, IIRC. Top speed about 25mph. Today's M-1's top
>> @speed is a lot higher but probably not more than 40-45mph. Why try to
>
>US army *admits* to 60mph. (with the speed governor left intact).
>
>My bet is that it's near 100 mph....or faster than any driver can
>actually drive the thing without shaking himself into a giant
>ball of bruises.
>
>
>> @stop a tank when the speed is so low and the max range is so short? Keep
>> @out of the way an wait until they run out of fuel or run into something
>> @they can't get over. The time to get worried is when there's someone to
>> @use the guns.
>>
>> It was driving through a residential neighborhood. No time to
>> evacuate all those people. A good way to stop a tank is to make it drop
>> a tread. Toss something big/hard enough into the treads to knock them
>> off track or lock them up. Of course, something that big would probably
>> be too heavy to "toss." A bomb would work too.
>>
>> --
>> B.B. --I am not a goat! [EMAIL PROTECTED] @airmail.net
>
>--
2 points, on the tank driving in San Diego incident, the driver got hung up on
a freeway divider (I guess he thought the tank would bust through it or
something.) and the cops blew the back of his head off with a shotgun because
the idiot hadn't latched the hatch.
Regarding the lala land bank robbers, the cops were fucked until they went to
a local gunstore (which the city has been trying to shut down for years) and
borrowed some rifles with clout. 5.56 just doesn't cut it.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 20:45:56 +0000
> In many respects Unix is amateurish. Toolkits, printing subsystems and
> GUI all lack behind at the moment. Of course things are changing FAST
> and great programming toolkits are now available (read GTK+).
[About printing]
lag behind what?
The printing subsystem on linux works better in general than under
windows.
For instance if you want several settings for one printer, you have to
manually change them each time under Windows.
The printing drivers are not accesible from the commandline `print'
command
You can't print a device independant file, you can only do it for a
specific printer.
It doesn't seem to have any print filtering machanism
IMO UNIX printing is several steps ahead.
-Ed
--
| Edward Rosten
| u98ejr@
This argument is a beta version. | ecs.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: "Masha Ku'Inanna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2001 15:50:10 -0500
Reply-To: "Masha Ku'Inanna" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<snip>
> You're a throwback. You like to stay with the command line and stagnate.
>
No, it can be more effecient to use a single command than multiple
mouse-clicks to accomplish the same task.
<snip>
> With Linux I can feel the restraints of too many toolkits and the
> ugliness of multiple window managers all straining to get their fingers
> on me.
And uner Windows, it only takes one GUI to make me feel the same "ugliness."
> On Windows, I couldn't care less what is running.
Until it inevitably crashes?
> Even on Linux, I bet you can get a process that won't die.
>
In my use, any application, or process under UNIX/Linux can be killed. The
OS will not refuse to allow it, as under Windows.
> On Windows I can keep on killing a process until either it dies or I take
> out the whole shebang!
I know for a fact out of experience that this is certainly not the case. You
should not have to take out the whole shebang when a single application
consumes 95-100% CPU time. and then refuses to allow you to kill it.
> > Unix is an example of an operating system that was designed properly the
> > first time. Windows 9x and NT seem amateurish by design. They are
> > designs that assume every computer user is an idiot, and that all
> > computer users like using something just because a company tells you
> > it's good, or because it's popular.
>
> UNIX is an example of a system that was designed too long ago, and got
> many things wrong. Every piece is a hotpotch affair, all pulling in
> different directions.
And has had 25 years of development to result in an OS that is flexible,
elegant, powerful, and stable.
> Windows 9x is a botched design, a quick hack to keep the punters happy.
> Windows NT is where we should be, and maybe with Whistler, if they don't
> impose this silly key system on us.
Windows is still Windows, regardless of what new version you're expected to
pay for. It's still bloated. It's still unstable.
> In Windows there is so much to choose from, so much innovation and fresh
> air; in Linux everything is old and crumbling and reeks of yesterday.
You've bought into the recent slew of MS commercials lately, haven't you?..
> Windows gets better every release and has long run away from the plodding
> lumbering juggernaut that is UNIX.
Juggernaut.. That is so true. MS has not been able to squash it no matter
how hard they've tried.
------------------------------
From: "JS PL" <js@plcom>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2001 15:47:21 -0500
"Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> JS PL wrote:
> >
> > Two clicks from one of the most visited pages on earth is monopoly
> > prevention:
> >
http://dir.yahoo.com/Computers_and_Internet/Software/Operating_Systems/
> > and always has been.
>
> Nice link, what does it have to do with the subject? The word monopoly
> doesn't appear in that page.
It can't because all the choices of operating systems on that page would
drown it out.
And as far as the subject goes, it has everything to do with the subject.
Victims of a monopoly don't have the kind of choices that have always been
available to pc users.
> I'd suggest you to try:
>
> http://www.fiat.com/
>
> Nothing to do with the subject either, but It has nicer colors.
tee hee...It has a little to do with the subject, they're using IIs5 on
Win2K.
------------------------------
From: "Quantum Leaper" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2001 20:49:03 GMT
"Aaron Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> JS PL wrote:
> >
>
>
> > But your IQ theory only applies to those in the 50 to 120 range.
> > Since I'm 160 I can see the obvious. There's no possible monopoly
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Is your IQ scored in dog points?
Do either of you know what an IQ test really measures? (Hint it not how
smart you are...)
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
