Linux-Advocacy Digest #662, Volume #32 Mon, 5 Mar 01 19:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... ("ono")
Re: NT vs *nix performance (.)
Re: Windows Owns Desktop, Extends Lead in Server Market (Bloody Viking)
Re: KDE or GNOME? (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: NT vs *nix performance (.)
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... ("ono")
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... (Karel Jansens)
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... (Karel Jansens)
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... ("ono")
Re: NT vs *nix performance (.)
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... (Charlie Ebert)
Re: NT vs *nix performance (.)
Re: GPL Like patents. ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Mircosoft Tax (.)
Re: Mircosoft Tax (.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "ono" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 00:01:32 +0100
> A couple did catch my eye as funny. WDW, the Windows driver Model, this is
a
> joke. It is a retrofit of the NT driver model to Windows, it started as
the
> miniport drivers ala SCSI and network, but they implemented more of it for
> Windows.
What is wrong with retrofiting something that works? I'm just glad they
didn't reinvent from scratch.
> Then there's DirectX which would be better done with OpenGL.
If you have a basic understanding what com is about, you will have no
problem with DX.
> People forget sometimes, Windows people usually only know Windows, Linux
> people, usually know Windows/NT well enough to hate it.
I've used all of the above API's. There is hardly any time left to have a
better look at linux. Altough I had a look at the kernel sources once (PCI
configuration) and wasn't overly impressed. (I then had a look at the
Adapted SCSI driver and was horrified!)
What I miss from Linux as a developer are the sdk's that I get from MS. If
you want do do
someting with windows, you can search MSDN, download and SDK and get going.
One example is the INet SDK. I think that most people would be amazed how
much ms really put into IE. I believe that ms did an excellent job there. It
just makes me mad when I have to do somethine for the net where there are
some 8% shitbrowser users left.
But basically you're right, I have some windows, embedded system, dos, vax
and very limited
linux, unix knowledge.
> In my case, I am, sometimes, a Windows kernel developer. I know both
Windows
> and NT/2K inside and out, and have published articles on how to write NT
kernel
> drivers.
Me too. Although I use NuMega Driver Studio (MS-Software seems free compared
to that).
Do you have a link for those articles? They are usually hard to come by.
> Lastly these APIs are not free, you pay for them when you are forced to
buy
> Windows.
Wrong, I earn money for the Software that I write. Our customers are the
ones that pay. (And they pay a lot more for our stuff then for windows :-).
------------------------------
From: . <[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: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 12:13:12 +1300
> > That's true, noone has the right to be sold any product. It is entirely
> > up to the seller whether they will sell it or not. However, it is up to
> > the CONSUMER what they BUY. If a customer says "I don't want Windows",
> > the supplier either GETS RID OF IT, or says "then I wont sell you the
> > computer".
>
> Then why all the whining about a supposed microsoft tax.
The best people to talk to about that would be the OEMs who had to pay
their MS tax whether Windows went out with the PC or not... hence so many
machines bundled with Windows.
[irrelevant (although accurate) consumer POV snipped]
> > These 'morons' were merely reading the license agreement, which states
> > quite clearly if you don't agree to the license agreement you are
> > entitled to return the product for a full refund.
>
> And because they were morons they very quickly found out the way the real
> world works.
Are you trying to imply that the license agreement is only so much
meaningless gibberish? That the words on it, that the customer clicked
to agree to (or not) are not valid either way?
I'm happy as all hell to support that viewpoint. Click-licenses are a
load of shit, and shouldn't be held legally binding.
Are they?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bloody Viking)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Windows Owns Desktop, Extends Lead in Server Market
Date: 5 Mar 2001 23:14:06 GMT
Masha Ku'Inanna ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: One customer asked about getting his/her hands on Office. I said, sure - how
: many computers will it be legally installed on?
: Or for that matter, how many computers will they install WinME or 2000 on,
: and if they're ready to technically purchase individual copies for each
: computer.
: Then mention linux.
: After explaining things in an incredibly in-depth manner, neutral to both
: sides, it is always amazing to watch their eyes light up as if the wool that
: had been pulled over their eyes was suddenly removed.
: Othertimes, people'd come in wanting to buy Red-hat linux, and I'd point 'em
: to the book-section. (Linux Bible series). They'd ask "Why not get the full
: version?.." I'd tell em "Why? This is still a full installation, for half of
: the retail box, and you get this thick 'manual' with it.."
: The expressions are always priceless..
It's always fun to tell people I use Linux. People find it hard to believe I'm
not using Windows of some kind.
--
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: 100 calories are used up in the course of a mile run.
The USDA guidelines for dietary fibre is equal to one ounce of sawdust.
The liver makes the vast majority of the cholesterol in your bloodstream.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Subject: Re: KDE or GNOME?
Date: 5 Mar 2001 23:17:17 GMT
On 05 Mar 2001 15:52:30 -0700, Craig Kelley wrote:
>Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>I like Python a lot, I just can't get over not having an EOL
>terminator.
IMO having such a terminator is a misfeature (as much as I like C++).
A sensible default should be for each "line of code" to be on one line,
because that is how the typical line of code gos.
>I like Perl, but it takes discipline to write good perl. It has the
>notion of 'defined' and 'undefined' so that an exception is always
>detectable, even if the number zero is a valid response. It also has
>Java/C++ style exceptions and objects.
This is news to me! How do you do exceptions in perl ?
The objects really aren't the same as Java and C++. C++ and Java are
both statically typed and have protection mechanisms.
In terms of memory management, Java is GC, C++ has no memory management, Perl
is reference counted. This makes perl more like java -- all objects live in
dynamic memory, all access is indirect via references, and because of the
indirection, objects always behave polymorphically (since you can assign
derived class references to base class references)
>I always wish that regular expressions and strings were as easy in
>every language as they are in Perl. It really is a good language, but
>not as structured as I would prefer.
What I like most about Perl is that I've been able to dump bourne shell
scripting for everything besides init/Makefile scripts and autoconf macros.
I still wouldn't use perl for "real programming", but it serves very
well as a "better shellscript than shellscript".
> Perl 6 will change all that,
>plus give much better thread support and debugging.
Have you seen Ruby ? It looks and feels like Perl, but it has more of
a genuine OO look and feel.
What will perl 6 offer that makes it "more structured" ?
--
Donovan Rebbechi * http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/ *
elflord at panix dot com
------------------------------
From: . <[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: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 12:22:12 +1300
> That's also another reason no one likes [Linux]. It's
> touted as being free, but it's generally not.
Interesting assertion.
What do you mean?
If I don't pay for it, I consider it free. If I have to learn things
that are freely available (I don't have to pay anything extra to access
it), even though I must invest my time and brainpower, I still consider
it free.
Even if I have to pay $5 for the CD that linux comes on, I would still
consider it free, because I am not paying for the software, only the
media.
Most importantly, I know it will always BE free, in some form another. I
have the freedom to change it, tailor it to my needs, if necessary. I
have the freedom to give it to anyone who wants it. And it didn't cost
me anything other than time and an internet connection I was already
paying for.
------------------------------
From: "ono" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 00:11:40 +0100
> Can u tell me why I'd pay anything, let alone $200+, for Win2k to get
> the tools I can get for free with another product?
For those Tools I wouldn't pay anything too! But I'm sure that If you look
hard enough you will find some free or shareware extensions.
>
> WHy can't Microsoft put these same tools in Windows 98 or ME?
> Do I not deserve them if I'm not a sys admin or a corporation?
Not enough demand I guess. MS usually does only what people demand.
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 01:01:40 +0100
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> says...
> > > Because I can see them? Mostly they're of little interest, as they should
> > > be.
> >
> > Why?
>
> I have no interest in the raw workings of the machine I am using.
> Consider this - whilst driving your care, are you aware of what is
> happening in the engine? Is it relevant to you as you turn into
> somewhere?
>
I do like to have the occasional peek at RPM, engine temp, fuel level,
oil pressure and amps of the battery. Not constantly, mind (that would
mean my car trip would be quickly over), but it _is_ nice to know
everything is hunkadory under the hood.
So, I suppose you just drive around in your car until it stops, and then
you call a mechanic, right?
Or buy a new car?
> > > Oh, I don't have a problem with pipes and tees. I just have a problem
> > > with the whole cryptic command line.
> >
> > So you don't like to learn stuff, is that it?
>
> So we jump from 'cryptic' to 'learning stuff'. I see.
>
Heh. _Everything_ is cryptic until you learn what it means. (you could
at least put a man between your goal posts)
> > If "hotpotch' is your problem, you'll be pleased to learn that it is
> > perfectly possible in linux to build a desktop that has a nigh-perfect
> > consistency of interface between applications. It just depends on what
> > applications you pick (and what desktop, of course).
>
> And can I buy such a system ready made?
>
Depends on how much you're willing to pay for one...
But as it is linux you are criticising, the proper question would have
been: "And can I easily build such a system?"
> > Possibly, I wouldn't know. I don't pick my operating system on the basis
> > of how much applications I can choose from, but rather on whether it
> > will perform the tasks I want it to do.
>
> I switched from the Archimedes RISC OS to Windows for a couple of
> reasons: (i) floating point hardware on the Intel chips and (ii)
> applicatons.
>
Does that mean that there was an application you needed to run that
wasn't available for the Archimedes, or did you just switch "because
Windows has more applications"?
The former is what I said; the latter is naff.
> > The measure of success are viri, spam and monopolies????
>
> Unfortunately, yes.
>
Does it happen often to you that you let a marketing department hand you
definitions of words?
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================================================
"You're the weakest link. Goodb-No, wait! Stop! Noaaarrghh!!!"
==============================================================
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 01:04:28 +0100
Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> In article <97u9in$f0g$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> > > 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.
>
> "A picture paints a thousand words".
>
> Ever tried to edit a graphic with a CLI?
>
Have you ever run Autocad?
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================================================
"You're the weakest link. Goodb-No, wait! Stop! Noaaarrghh!!!"
==============================================================
------------------------------
From: "ono" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 00:22:51 +0100
>
> The console under Windows really sucks. It is slow and you can't easily
> change its width.
The console is only there to give diehard ex. unix guys an easy entry into
gui-land. Once they are fully there, the cli seems like a bad dream.
> > Because Windows has better apps.
>
> I have more useful apps under Linux than windows.
Didn't know they have apps there too. I thought that there is just the
kernel, the compiler and the cli.
------------------------------
From: . <[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: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 12:34:34 +1300
> Apple has a decent and sizable chunk of the personal computing market.
> The iMac has been very successful. Macintosh hardware maintains a sizable
> space in both Best Buy and Circuit City among others. You could argue
> that Linux's trival shelf space in the stores wouldn't count against
> MS's "monopoly", but Apple's does. In the Circuit City down here,
> Apple has about as large a space as the PC section does (not counting
> laptops). It could be argued that MS may have a monopoly on the PC,
> but that is irrelevant because the Mac provides similar functionality
> and is a reasonable and readily available alternative and competitor.
Apple used to run a monopoly of their own. Grossly inflated hardware
prices, and no clones allowed.
I seem to remember at some stage they decided to let cloners clone their
hardware... is this still happening? Who produces macpatible hardware?
[the Apple argument does not help software developers trying to fulfil
their customers needs and deal with the monopoly at the same time... if
90 or 95% of the population uses one sort of computer, advocating
changing YOUR computer is of no use if you still have customers in the
90-95%. Apple isn't going to break the monopoly]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 23:54:35 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brent R wrote:
>Pete Goodwin wrote:
>
> Long live the GUI! [basically]
>
Pete,
You have only slightly less intelligence than a Windows Systems Administrator.
Why don't you go start a rock garden somewhere and leave computers to
the big boys.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.linux.sux,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 13:00:21 +1300
> But I'd hazard a guess that the web hits being measured by JJS are not the
> same thing as measured by TPC benchmark which is really measuring database
> lookups when front-ended by webservers, not simply hit/s a-la Webstone. I
> ran some Webstone tests a few years on an NT 3.51/Netscape combo and got
> numbers not dissimilar to those that JJS gets, but its not the same
> benchmark or even close.
Of course not, I never claimed a scenario that was the same as the TPC, I
only jumped in because it pisses me off when someone says "blabla is just
NOT POSSIBLE" (such as 'a PPro200 cannot POSSIBLY do this because of
bullshit X') when it clearly is possible, if you just use your brain a
little bit, and pay attention to what was said...
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: GPL Like patents.
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 00:04:05 +0000
> Besides, it was a bad example because protcols are not GPL'd AFAIK
You can not GPL protocols. GPL applies to software, protocols are
specifications. You can GPL an implementation of a protocol, but not the
protocol itself.
-ed
--
| Edward Rosten
| u98ejr@
This argument is a beta version. | ecs.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 13:06:52 +1300
> > I mean, ignoring the obvious and inane, like "run 32 bit apps" or "click
> > the start button", assuming you haven't installed any apps at all, what
> > bonuses does ME give you over 3.0?
>
> I'm not really sure what you're looking for. What can you do in Red Hat 7.0
> that you couldn't do in 6.2? What can you do in MacOS 9 that you couldn't
> do in 8?
Other operating systems aren't relevant. It's Windows that went from 6
floppies to 150Mb with no apparent improvement in the environment.
> Well, there are many new applets. ME does include a Windows Movie Maker,
> Wordpad, HyperTerminal, disk defragmenter, Windows Media Player, Personal
> Web Server, Plug N Play, Thousands of devices that WIndows 3.x can't use,
> such as Winmodems and the like, DirectX, etc...
Hardware support is also not that big an issue. Drivers are small, and
easily written (easily written badly?). Win 3.1 had wordpad, a terminal
proggy, a defragger, media player. No web server or plug and play, but I
doubt 'plug and play' support accounts for any significant amount of
space.
So, (apart from architectural improvements... you wont catch me claiming
3.1 is a more stable work environment than 9x) they've added a web server
and a browser, and some new hardware drivers.
So what accounts for the increase in size by a factor of 15 or more?
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 13:10:34 +1300
> You were comparing RH7 to RH6 and WinME to Win311. So what coan WinME do
> that Win98 can't?
For the record, I never asked to compare windows with linux, or anything
else. I asked solely about the differences between the 6 floppy win3.1
and the 150-odd megabyte windows ME.
[I've only just noticed the crosspost to pro and anti-linux groups, so I
apologise for any confusion]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
