Linux-Advocacy Digest #666, Volume #32 Tue, 6 Mar 01 02:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows... (Terry Porter)
Re: What does IQ measure? (Brock Hannibal)
Re: NT vs *nix performance ("JS PL")
Re: Virus Alert : "A Virtual Card for You" + "An Internet Flower For You" (Terry
Porter)
Re: The GPL if you are curious. ("Mike")
Re: Mircosoft Tax ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Windoze Domination/Damnation ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Moore's Law, continued... ("Mike")
Re: Answer this if you can... ("Jim Zubb")
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) ("nuxx")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Sometimes, when I run Windows...
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 06 Mar 2001 06:18:54 GMT
On Mon, 05 Mar 2001 13:16:26 +0000,
pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi Terry,
>
Hi pip, thanks for the well balanced reply, of course I just have to respond:)
>
>Well I _am_ actually using Linux as server,
It shows imho. This is not a critisism, just an observation. I have found that
actually *using* Linux as a workstation changes ones observations of Linux
when coming from a Windows environment(this may take a year or two however).
> but also as my programming
>workstation,
Howso, remote telnet via a Windowsworkstation ? (just guessing)
> so yes I am very familiar with a few of the GUI choices
>available. This was meant to be a humorous irony that may have been lost
>in the translation :-)
Sorry, I get a lil serious sometimes :(
>
>> >> Which printing subsystem, we have the BSD, and Cups, which one do you mean?
>> >
>> >Good point. Which indeed. That _is_ indeed the problem.
>> Nope its called 'diversity', 'progress' and 'choice'.
>
>As I said in another post, I regard printing as a OS subsystem, and as
>all good OS people should know - a simple consistent API is essential.
I'd say that a good consistent *user* interface is whats ultimately important,
after all, programmers hardships don't count in the long run ?
>To be honest I am not viewing this as a "user" but as a programmer.
You seem to jump between user and programmer to me, depending on your
argument at the time.
> I
>want to write the least code _but_ be sure that the end client has a
>working solution without the current pain (or at least - I have found it
>a pain as gs does not have a very good driver for my printer)
I can understand that, however nothing prevents you from writing your own
driver, why not try ?
I needed a programmer for a range of embedded chips about a year ago, nothing
existed that suited my needs, so I designed the circuit and wrote the code.
It wasn't that hard, in fact, it was easy, using the wealth of Linux tools
available.
As I created the specs for my burner, the code was easy, your printer may
be a proprietary device ?
If this is the case, it makes it damn hard for anyone not willing to sign a
NDA, to reverse engineer a driver, either yourself or anyone else.
>
>> >> Does the term 'lack behind' accurately describe a GUI thats natively able
>> >> to do *remote gui*, whereas Windows, without 3rd party apps,*cannot* do this ?
>> >
>> >Cheap shot. You should know that I am talking about HCI.
>> HCI ?
>
>Human Computer Interaction.
>
I found 9,100 hits yesterday when searching for 'windows gui inconsistent'
on Hotbot. Windows is *not* the leader in HCI.
>I use remote X extensively and it is a great tool - but I was not
>talking about the actual functionality, but overall UI consistency.
Please see above.
>
>
>
>> >> > Of course things are changing FAST
>> >> >and great programming toolkits are now available (read GTK+).
>> >> GTK has been available for years now, its not new.
>> >
>> >Gnome was not. Components were not.
>> You used GTK+ as your example.
>
>Yes - and Gnome uses GTK+ as the toolkit of choice combined with a new
>underlying CORBA architecture - which it a great thing and rather new in
>the Unix world (and I should state that "new" in the sense of proper
>deployment - not as in a new idea).
Fair enough :)
>
>> >> >Of course windows is restricting in MANY ways - but this gibberish above
>> >> >just goes to show how some Linux users are absolutely blind to the good
>> >> >points in the Windows OS.
>> >> Name just ONE?
>> >
>> >OLE, COM (DCOM), ActiveX, DirectX, Driver support, Software support, UI
>> >consistency.
>> I cannot comment on the first 4, because they are not something I have any
>> experience with. "Driver Support" and "Software support" are meaningless without
>> any further expansion. However the last example is plain wrong.
>
>Driver support means that I can but any hardware and not worry if I can
>also use it under linux without extensive research first. I had first
>hand problems with this recently when I purchased a USB web cam.
USB is a new 'white goods' consumer item, and as such Linux will lag behind
the commercial companies.
What can you do with USB that you couldnt do with tenbaseT ?
>
>Software Support means that companies use both Win32 and Linux as a base
>for their applications.
I dont understand why they would want to, the OS's are so different?
> I would very much like to run many of my Windows
>programs under Linux.
I have found better Linux apps than the Windows apps I used to use, but it
takes a while to locate them.
> I have tried VMWare and WINE, but both still have
>a long way to go (and I think that WINE makes more sense).
Of course WINE has a long way to go, Windows apps are a moving target.
(I've not tried VMWare, as I have no need for Windows apps)
>
>
>> Windows95 is replete with inconsistencies that cause confusion and frustration.
>> The My Computer folder is one such example. Microsoft considers it a "special"
>> folder, and therefore unlike all other folders, the user cannot add files or
>> folders to it, or remove objects from it.
>>
>> There are several such "special" objects in Windows95, such as icons that
>> cannot be removed from the desktop, and windows that do not support
>> drag-and-drop. In interface design terms, "special" means "inconsistent"
>> and "undesirable".
>
>Yes - these are all true. I am not (and never have) said that the GUI in
>Windows was the best.
Good, because I have those 9,100 hits (pls see above) to post here if you do ;-)
> It is however better than the hotchpotch of tools
>and utilities that face a new user to Linux.
Is it ?
I have to disagree, (not that you'd be shocked) as the Linux tools, while
copious and terse (in some cases), allow a freedom and ease of use once learned
that our mythical 'ex Windows user' can hardly imagine.
> Those are the people who I
>am concerned with. They would like to see a better OS - and the OS to
>them means the GUI.
You're concerned with 'new users' ?
Does this mean you are attempting to sell something to them ?
>
>> >Go read a dictionary.
>> I did, here are some of the results, btw I used the Linux Wordnet GUI to do
>> this on-line, its so very easy with linux :)
>
>nice comeback :-)
:)
>
>> >> Does a virii infested pc 'work' ?
>> >
>> >You are being stupid.
>> Your intelectual responses, are underwhelming me, at a rapid rate.
>
>We were not talking about viruses. I am well aware of this problem.
It was an example of 'works' :)
>> Perhaps the 'real issues' are not the same to you and I ?
>
>I think they are. What I would like is:
>1) Stability and reliability of OS (primarily)
We do have to break them into 2 groups here as the OS, and the apps that
use it, are 2 *different* things ?
> and userland apps
The quality here does depend on the programmer/artist/engineer I think ?
>2) A great programming platform based on an intelligent component design
Fair enough, but I dont use 'components', I mainly do embedded design.
>3) A great GUI
I prefer 22 great GUI's, as we all have our own preferences. For instance
I *hate* ICONS, and use a GUI that does not create them, on my 20 virtual
desktops.
>4) Powerful CLI tools (we already have these)
Only with Linux, Windows has no CLI tools of note.
>
>
>> This comment is interesting from one who advocates a closed, proprietary,
>> and unstable operating system.
>
>Sorry I am lost in your logic. Where do I advocate Windows?
You have claimed that I say Windows or MS is 'evil', you say it has its good
points. To me this is Windows advocacy.
>Do you mean when I say that M$ have got a great idea in component
>programming that I am advocating windows _use_?
No I wouldn't say so, given this exact statement above.
> That makes no sense.
Agreed.
>Especially when I also say that this is one of the great improvements
>that the Gnome team is giving to the Linux community.
Components or 'Windows Components' ?
> But I sense that
>you are looking at this as a expert user and not a programmer.
Im definetly not a systems programmer, and my systems code is crap, but hey
.... it works ;-);-)
> I think
>that is why you are having difficulty when you see that I "advocate"
>parts of Windows, thinking that I am actually saying "Hey - windows is
>better than Linux - lets all use it", which I am not.
No I dont think your saying that, in fact your arguments are on the whole,
fun to read, and respond to. I took issue with some of your terms ie 'works'
and 'GUI consistency' when refering to Windows.
>
>> Typical Wintroll rhetoric ...sadly.
>
>That is quite insulting.
Then I apologise :)
> I don't mind a lot of things but I do mind
>being branded as spewing "Wintroll rhetoric". If you don't like a
>Linux-user criticizing Linux then something in the community is lacking.
I have no problem with that, however it has to be informed critisism, or
I cant help but reply, and attempt to work thru the often emotive
statements, to get to the heart of the matter.
Here on COLA, we are in the midst of a great deal of clever Windows
advocacy posts, posted by people claiming to be Linux advocates, but
whom are in fact Windows advocates, using this methodology as a cover
to attempt to spread FUD about Linux.
I'm not claiming you're such a poster, but time will tell.
Please note, most of these people use Linux, post with Linux and know Linux
quite well.
>It is a simple matter of arguing for improvement and I am always
>surprised at how much resistance there is to change or not adopting
>great ideas because of their origin.
Why argue for change on COLA ???????????????????
(It's like rules in a knife fight! .. Butch Cassidy)
Surely if you wish to change some aspect of Linux, you would be emailing
the authors of the relevant area, or contributing/branching code yourself ?
Lets face it, Linux is HUGE, and one person can only input to a tiny segment
of this OS as regards new ideas. I find it inconsistent that Linux of all
OS's offers resistance to change, as we have the POWER to change whatever
we wish, together or alone. All the tools are at our disposal, along with
easy access (in most cases) to the authors of the Linux kernel and apps.
Change/improvements are apparent in Linux at every turn, look at the 22 odd
GUI's or Window Managers, here are 22 people or groups who were unsatisfied
with what existed before, and created what *they* felt was a better solution.
Natural selection tends to weed out the ones that wern't so hot.
Linux imho, is a seething cauldron of change, a cheetah like moving target,
that empowers anyone who's fired up, to make the changes they want.
COLA on the other hand is largly, a lions den of infighting, a place to be
when we *should* be doing our tax returns <groan>, and COLA is most definetly
NOT Linux :)
Terry
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 22:18:46 -0800
From: Brock Hannibal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What does IQ measure?
"." wrote:
>
> > > IQ-tests measure what psychologists call intelligence, which they
> > > represent with the symbol "g".
> > >
> > You mean like a Brit, a Canadian, Ozzy or American? They all speak
> > English, I guess your implying that only Americans can be proficient in
> you're
> > English?
>
> Actually, Americans I've met often pride themselves on speaking
> "American" rather than English, as it seems to be a bit of a different
> beastie.
>
> As for IQ tests, I've yet to see one that leaves me feeling confident it
> was somehow a test of my intelligence, as opposed to being a test of my
> learning. A vast majority of them are in English for starters, and I've
> seen some almost vocabulary-testing questions... this isn't an
> indication of how smart you are in my book. How well you learn ANY
> language is not a test of intelligence.
> A true IQ test would have to involve pictures and patterns, and perhaps
> have some mathematical basis, because these are the only ideas that
> translate well all over the world.
Do you mean like the Stanford Terman-Binet test?
--
Brock
"Put a $20 gold piece on my watch chain so the boys'll know I died
standin' pat"
------------------------------
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: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 01:23:24 -0500
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > 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?
Typical "not" free situation:
I don't know anyone with the exception of myself who would download a cd
distribution 600-1200mb of Linux. Therefore they simply pick it up off the
shelf at a retail outlet. Pay the cashier $30-$50. Take it home and install
it. Find out that the cheap winmodem that came with their shitty OEM system
doesn't even exist to Linux. At this point I'd guess 95% uninstall Linux and
go back to Microsoft Windows, 50 bucks smarter. The other 5% go back to the
store and get a hardware driven modem. Run Linux for a day, find out it
offers nothing more than Windows, and 4.7 of that 5% uninstall it after a
week. Everyone I've personally known who's used Linux has been down the
described path.
Besides, what's the price of Windows $50 or $100....$200 maybe depending on
what version you get? It's like....not much. It's worth $200 to me to NOT
fuck with hardware finding all of a nice Saturday afternoon.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Virus Alert : "A Virtual Card for You" + "An Internet Flower For You"
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 06 Mar 2001 06:23:36 GMT
On Mon, 5 Mar 2001 20:51:14 +0000 (UTC),
Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Does anyone else pine (no pun intended) for the days before
>viruses could reside in email messages? Those happier days when
>we could securely say that "no, you *can't* get a virus on your
>machine just by *reading* your email"...
>
>Perhaps we should thank Microsoft for turning what we
>once thought impossible into something both possible and
>probable. For that, I'd just like to say, "ILOVEYOU".
>
Hahahahahah LOL!!!!
Terry
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The GPL if you are curious.
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 06:28:22 GMT
"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> There has been much speculation on what rights and restrictions the GPL
gives
> and requires from you.
And much of the speculation is wrong. GPL is a remarkably clear legal
document, something that's uncommon these days. There are potential issues,
and it's never been tested in court (Business Week ran an article about it
around a year ago, as I recall, as part of an article about Red Hat), but in
a general sense it is very clear and easy to read. That anyone should
speculate about it speaks more about writer than of GPL.
It's really sad that something as easy to read as GPL isn't even given that
simple courtesy. Instead, opinions gush forth about what it says, often in
direct contradiction to the text.
GPL is only a few pages long. I suggest that anyone who says something like,
"GPL states that..." also publish the paragraph where it says "that". That
would end half the speculation.
The other half would be harder. Many posters believe that GPL says or
implies things that it doesn't say, and probably doesn't imply. For those
folks, there's probably not much that can be done. If someone believes GPL
says "White men can't jump," there probably isn't any proof - even the GPL
text - that's going to change their mind.
-- Mike --
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 00:34:06 -0600
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > 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.
Not apparent because you refuse to look.
> > 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?).
Not seen the LiveWare! drivers for the SB Live, have you? Each individual
driver may be fairly small (usually less than a meg), but when you have
thousands of them, they add up.
> Win 3.1 had wordpad
No, it had Write, a much inferior word processor (not that Wordpad is all
that, but it has a lot more than Write)
> a terminal proggy,
Nowhere near HyperTerm.
> a defragger
Nope, no defragger in Win 3.1.
> media player.
A wav and MIDI player/recorder. Hardly the full featured audio/video applet
that WMP is.
> No web server or plug and play, but I
> doubt 'plug and play' support accounts for any significant amount of
> space.
It's certainly takes code, and code takes 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.
I didn't even mention programs like NetMeeting, MSN Messenger, FrontPage
Express, and many more...
> So what accounts for the increase in size by a factor of 15 or more?
The architectural changes alone take up a lot. There's an entirely new API
with thousands of functions.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windoze Domination/Damnation
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 00:44:28 -0600
Actually, Dell sells servers without OS's. For instance, look here:
http://rcommerce.us.dell.com/rcomm/config.asp?order_code=PE1550a
Go to the OS dropdown and choose "No factory installed OS" they even
subtract $799.
Desktops and Laptops are a different story though.
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Trying getting a blank computer from dell, not possible, I even said
> they didn't have to give me a refund, but they insisted that I received
> a computer with Windows 98SE! wtf is up with that?
>
>
> Matthew Gardiner
>
> Pete Goodwin wrote:
> >
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> >
> > > The average Office-Depot shopping jerk cannot. And such comprise the
> > > bulk of the consumer market.
> >
> > But that still doesn't stop them doing buying blank machines!
> >
> > --
> > Pete
> > All your no fly zone are belong to us
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Moore's Law, continued...
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 06:46:26 GMT
An interesting article in ZDNet news today, that fits in with a thread from
a few weeks back.
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/zd/20010305/tc/what_is_the_limit_to_moore_s_law
__1.html
We were discussing various power issues that arose from a talk by Patrick
Gelsinger at ISSCC in early February. He predicted that in ten years,
microprocessors would contain 1B transistors, run at 20-30GHz, and perform
over 1T operations per second (and burn over 10kW). Gelsinger didn't offer
the 10kW number as a prediction, but he showed slides during his talk that
extrapolated the power of today's processors out to 2010, and showed power
exceeding 10kW. The fundamental problem is that we don't have anything to
replace silicon dioxide as a gate insulator in a MOS transistor, and its
breakdown voltage limits the maximum operating voltage of a chip. As the
voltage drops, the leakage current increases (and it gets worse on fast
processes, where the MOS threshold voltage is reduced to give the transistor
more drive when it's turned on).
In the article above, Gerald Marcyk of Intel points out that, "Intel
researchers have already demonstrated good results for a new class of
materials called high K gate dielectrics to replace silicon dioxide." The
importance of this is that the supply voltage may not have to shrink for
future devices. This means more power lost during switching (where the power
is proportional to the supply voltage squared), but less power lost to
leakage (where the power is proportional to the supply voltage - not
squared). This will become important within a few years, since the switching
power is increasing at a lower rate than the power from leakage. Without a
change, the leakage current will exceed the switching current before long.
The result is that the power will increase, but will come in below the 10kW
value that an extrapolation from today's processes would predict.
And, it just might keep Moore's Law running for a few more years.
-- Mike --
------------------------------
From: "Jim Zubb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Answer this if you can...
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2001 23:03:45 -0800
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2001 22:58:46 GMT, imekon@$$$REMOVE$$$.freeuk.com (Pete
> Goodwin) wrote:
>
>
>>Cut and paste are there, if you know how to use it. I remembered it
>>vaguely from my time with X Windows on OpenVMS.
>
> Not consistant between applications. Try using a combination of menues
> and the mouse with Netscape and kedit and see what happens.
>
>
Works OK for me, though I use gnome instead of KDE so YMMV. About the
only inconsistancy is the shortcut key combo switches between ctrl and
alt between apps.
------------------------------
From: "nuxx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 15:03:44 +0800
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:97miug$8dr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> >> Well, not everything is perfect on Linux. For instance yesterday,
> >> >> while I was testing the NIC of a new laptop, it continuously
> >> >> complaining about network being unreachable, instead of telling me
> >> >> plainly that the network cable I was using was unplugged at the
> >> >> other side. :-)
> >>
> >> > That's only because the your NIC manufacturer didn't include the Time
> >> > Domain Reflectometer option . :-)
> >>
> >> They did but It(tm) is Only(tm) Avaliable(tm) under Micros~1(R) Windows
> >> (tm).
> >>
> >> -Ed
> >
> > Well, I've not yet wiped clean the Win(tm) 98(tm) the laptop came with.
> > Tomorrow I'll test in the same conditions with Micros~2(R) Windows(tm)
> > 98(tm), and I'll let you know. After all, I had to pay for it, so I can
> > use it.
>
>
> If you read the docs very carefully, you'll find that they haven't
> implemented this new feature yet :-)
>
> As an aside, I don't know why NIC card manufacturers haven't put a
> machanism on the crads to detect an unplugged cable. It shouldn't be too
> hard since when plugged in, the cable is plugged in to a matched load, so
> no reflections occur. When it is unplugged, the signals should get
> reflected, which should not be too hard to detect.
>
Win2k has this built in - disconnect the cable and see what happens. Works
well.
nuxx.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
