Linux-Advocacy Digest #178, Volume #33 Thu, 29 Mar 01 12:13:06 EST
Contents:
Re: What is the size of Linux 2.4.1 Kernel (Dave Blake)
Re: Kulkis not Chad, Gates (was Re Unix/Linux Professionalism) (chrisv)
Re: Microsoft abandoning USB? (Craig Kelley)
Re: All your PCI slot are belong to Microsoft. (Craig Kelley)
Re: Communism (Robert Sturgeon)
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> ("Paul 'Z' Ewande�")
Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP. (Eugenio Mastroviti)
Re: [Fwd: Piracy???? (KMM187962C0KM)] (Dave Martel)
Re: Communism (.)
Re: Microsoft abandoning USB? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure (T. Max Devlin)
Re: New worm infests Linux machines/Exposes root backdoor (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Linux dying (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Arrrrgh! Hoist the Jolly Roger! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> (T. Max Devlin)
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> (T. Max Devlin)
Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!> (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dave Blake)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: What is the size of Linux 2.4.1 Kernel
Date: 29 Mar 2001 14:50:55 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Alan Po <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear all
>
> Would you tell me the size of Linux 2.4.1 kernel? Is it very large?
Kernel source, about 100 MBytes.
Compressed, about 20 MBytes.
Kernel binary on my machines runs about 600kbytes.
--
Dave Blake
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: chrisv <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Kulkis not Chad, Gates (was Re Unix/Linux Professionalism)
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 15:18:00 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Translation: Chrisv can't jump, because he didn't jump
> when I told him to.
Translation into Chinese: Kulkis has lost all face, because his BLUFF
was CALLED.
OUTED! LOL!
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft abandoning USB?
Date: 29 Mar 2001 08:34:38 -0700
"Michael Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Said HIM in alt.destroy.microsoft on Wed, 28 Mar 2001 12:51:40 -0500;
> > >
> > >"Dave Martel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >
> > >> Looks like MS is betting the farm on content protection. Good. The
> > >> more they bet, the more they lose. :-)
> > >
> > >MS never bet the farm on anything. And probably never will.
> >
> > Other than the monopoly, we presume you mean. Watch what happens when
> > the stock hits $30.
> >
> > >And as far as
> > >content protection goes they could care less.Why would they?
> >
> > Because Bill Gates has always dreamed of being able to charge people for
> > using intellectual property.
>
> It is not a dream, it happens every day across multiple industries. Books,
> movies, music, software, etc. etc. The owner of intellectual property has
> every right, supported by existing law on the books today, to charge people
> for the use of their property. I've always been amazed by people (such as
> some Napster users) who don't believe the IP owner has the right to charge
> for his own property. Max, do you believe people have the right to download
> music (IP) they have not paid for without the artist's (owner's) approval?
> I'd like to know where you stand on this.
Do you want to have to get writtern permission in the form of a
one-time-use public key from NBC every time you tape a half-hour show?
It's not free intellectual property we're after, it's the right for
fair use.
What if every book came encoded with a different scheme and you needed
to purchase a device that only works for you to read them? What if
they stopped making traditional books in favor of this new "secure
initiative"? Would the free market be at work here?
> > He's described it clearly and directly, if
> > you've been paying attention. (Start with "The Road Ahead", if you're
> > catching up. A painful read, but with some very interesting parts.)
> > "Content protection" is just like "software piracy"; a rubric with which
> > IP use becomes IP licensing, and thus IP rental.
>
> Regarding IP rental, it will work in any industry with any product if it is
> convienient for users and provides value. If it doesn't, it will die. Look
> at DIVX (per use, rental charge for DVDs) for example. It wasn't convenient
> for users, was confusing in it's implementation, didn't provide value (i.e.
> was too expensive) and thus, it died a natural death in the marketplace.
So where is legal the alternative to Napster? They keep saying what
everyone *can't* do, but they never offer a better solution. In this
case the FREE MARKET created Napster to fill the void.
Who's to blame? I leave that as an exercise for the reader.
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: All your PCI slot are belong to Microsoft.
Date: 29 Mar 2001 08:42:20 -0700
Ray Chason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Go to http://www.pcdesguide.org/pc2001/default.htm .
>
> Download the PDF version of this design guide.
>
> Unzip the files and read Chapter 2, 02EZPC-2001.pdf .
>
> Right there on Page 24:
>
> No user access to internal parts. All user-accessible expansion
> capabilities are external. User-accessible memory expansion is
> discouraged in the same manner. The system can have internal PCI,
> AGP, or memory slots to allow the manufacturer in the factory or
> the distributor to configure the system. However, these slots
> should not have quick-access mechanisms, and they should not be
> promoted as end-user expandable. If internal expansion or memory
> expansion is available, dealer or manufacturer service is
> available to perform the expansion.
>
> This is from the "Easy PC Initiative," supposedly about making the
> PC easier to set up and use. The copyright notice on the document
> names Intel and Microsoft.
>
> This item clearly isn't about deconfusing the newbie, who isn't
> likely to open up his PC anyway. It affects no one but the
> sophisticated user, the one who damn well knows how to add memory
> or upgrade a sound card.
>
> Have Microsoft and Intel forgotten why the PC rules the world and
> the Macintosh is a niche product? I can only speculate as to what
> Microsoft expects to gain. I could spin elaborate conspiracy
> theories about Microsoft trying to subvert the PC platform itself,
> so that no one else's software can ever run on it.
What does this mean exactly:
"PC 2001 requirements are expected to go into effect with the
release to manufacturing (RTM) of the next version of the Windows
operating system, code-named Windows "Whistler" in 2Q / 2001, for
PCs that will ship beginning in the second half of 2001."
That Whistler will be cheaper with these new PCs? That OEM deals are
only for these PCs? Hmmm.
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Robert Sturgeon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 07:43:21 -0800
On Fri, 30 Mar 2001 01:03:09 +1000, Mathew
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>On Wed, 28 Mar 2001, Gunner � wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 01:59:15 -0500, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >> Cuba has dedicated itself to the principle that, within its means, it
>> >> will try not to kill any human beings due to lack of food, shelter,
>> >> medical care, poor sanitation, etc.
>>
>> But they got real good at shooting down Cessnas......
>
>I wonder what Cuba would be like if Batista and the Mafia still ruled.
Las Vegas- and definitely a lot nicer place to live!
--
Robert Sturgeon-
Proud member of The Vast Rightwing Conspiracy.
http://www.vistech.net/users/rsturge/
------------------------------
From: "Paul 'Z' Ewande�" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 17:55:20 +0200
"David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit dans le
message news: 99vght$n06$[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
> >Remeber that they [Microsoft] sell the all those systems.
>
> Remember also that they earn significantly more profit on NT/W2k than on
> W9x, so they are not unbiased.
That's exactly my point, they should be then extolling the virtues of NT/2K
and hype it's superiority over Win9x, don't you think ?
<SNIP> A whole lot of stuff </SNIP>
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
From: Eugenio Mastroviti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I regretfully conclude that Linux is a piece of CRAP.
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:57:26 +0100
Brian Rourke wrote:
[huge snip]
I'm intrigued - I have recently had a comparable experience with a Dell
system we have had to send back to the manifacturer.
We have never been able to find out why, but NO version of Linux would
install on it. Nor would NT 4.0, which is the only other OS it's
possible to use in my company (software compatibility problems, some
pieces of software won't work on 95/98/ME). The only OS that would
install - without a problem - was, in fact, the crappiest: we didn't try
95, but 98 and ME worked without a hitch. Win 2000 install didn't even
boot.
Could you send me some more details about your system?
Thanks
Eugenio
------------------------------
From: Dave Martel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
soc.singles,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Piracy???? (KMM187962C0KM)]
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 08:59:16 -0700
On Thu, 29 Mar 2001 19:41:33 +1200, Matthew Gardiner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I knew atleast one person would find it humorous. When I saw it I though,
>WHAT, LINUX IS A COMPANY! WHERE THE FUCK IS MICROSOFTS EMPLOYEE'S TRAINED?
>Gee, I'll just ring up linus and ask the poor barstard whether I can load
>a linux kernel on more than one computer. Geeze, kids these days (well,
>thats what Microsoft employees are, kids) not even knowing basic computer
>industry knowledge in regards to licenses, influencial companies etc.
This does suggest a little tongue-in-cheek fun for someone with the
resources, though. Start a linux anti-piracy campaign and set up an
autoresponder for people to report "pirated" copies of linux and
open-source apps.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Communism
Date: 29 Mar 2001 16:13:26 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You are so badly brainwashed the the ONLY cure for you is 130 grains
> of copper-jacketed lead to your head.
Your death threat has been reported to yahoo. Sorry about that.
=====.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Microsoft abandoning USB?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:22:09 GMT
Said Craig Kelley in alt.destroy.microsoft on 28 Mar 2001 15:28:01
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cray Drygu) writes:
>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (WesTralia) wrote in
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>> >The next 5 years are going to be very interesting years watching how this
>> >plays out. It is my hope that the Internet, true to form, grows around
>> >any obstacle put in its way.
>>
>> "The internet views censorship as damage, and routes around it."
>>
>> You're right, it's going to be a very interesting time. What concerns me
>> more is why there's some kind of content control in 1394. Isn't it just
>> supposed to be a way of transferring data? What's next, ethernet with
>> content control extensions in the NICs?
>
>You better believe it.
>
>They already have monitors and speakers ready to go. Soon it will
>flow from the RIAA's slaves/musicians right out your legally licensed
>speaker system.
>
>Not only that, but it will be hard to have unlicensed music (ie,
>everything will be considered copyrighted until proven *otherwise*).
>This is all bad news for open source people because they will never
>give us the means to view their "content" [see Quicktime and Windows
>Media Player].
Yea, right. Like that'll ever happen! No way.
--
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: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: US Navy carrier to adopt Win2k infrastructure
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:22:10 GMT
Said Michael Marion in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 28 Mar 2001
>Jan Johanson wrote:
>
>> YOU check google - then spend time on the tivo avs forum and read ALL about
>> how it happens.
>
>As a Tivo owner (I've bought 4 myself.. 2 as gifts and 1 was eventually given
>as a gift when I upgraded) and linux user, I can admit that yes, mine does
>pause now and then (perhaps 4 times over 4 or so hours some nights), and it's
>so fast it's barely noticable. However, it never paused until after I hacked
>my unit. I added a 60Gig disk into mine (and replaced the A drive with a copy
>for backup purposes). This was something I knew could happen, but I had a
>choice... and the ability to hack Tivos is one of the strong points of the
>unit. It's great to know that I can do it again in the future and add a
>larger disk if I wanted to. I've also found that operation of the unit is
>rock solid.. I'm up over 60 days now (pic from early last week:
>http://miguelito.org/tivo/sys_info_uptime.jpg). The uptime would be more, but
>I had to move all my AV stuff to put my new DVD player into it's spot. Also,
>I have only seen one crash which occurred after the hack, and when I tried to
>triple fast forward live TV... which has never caused another issue, but I
>think I pushed the button 3 times before the IR reading process was awakened
>by the scheduler.. plus it was doing the phone call at the same time).
Sounds like a bug; report it to the manufacturer immediately.
>I've also been able to do much of the other hacking stuff: Bash prompt on the
>serial port, added logging info (see pics on my site if you want), etc.
>
>I wouldn't trade my Tivo for anything now. I'm more then willing to trade
>occasional pauses and the hackability of the unit for the ease of use and
>flexibility that Tivo gives over a VCR...
>
>Anyone want to guess if the UTV units will be hackable for those that dare?
>I'd bet against it.
No doubt it would put medieval chastity belts to shame; more proprietary
than Greek Fire. More secret than what I vomited last Thanksgiving
after eating bad turkey.
--
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: New worm infests Linux machines/Exposes root backdoor
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:22:11 GMT
Said Peter K�hlmann in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 28 Mar 2001
>Chad Myers wrote:
[...blah, blah, blah...]
>Just to refute your insane claims that "we linux guys" don�t know what
>we�re talking about.
>You imbecile, we know just way too good what we�re talking about.
That was very well said, Peter.
Really. I think I'll use it. "We know just way too good what we're
talking about." Elegant, but straight-forward. I love it.
--
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: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux dying
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:22:12 GMT
Said Chad Everett in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 28 Mar 2001 21:05:44
GMT;
>On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 18:44:41 GMT, Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>"WesTralia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> Chad Everett wrote:
>>> >
>>> > This is taken directly from microsoft.com and it's .NET hype pages:
>>> >
>>> > " Activities that are still hard now-like reconciling statements
>>> > from a number of different banks, credit-card companies, and billing
>>> > agents so that you can pay your bills and file your expense reports-will
>>> > become much easier as user data can be linked across sites and applications.
>>> > ...Their data will live securely on the Internet."
>>> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>> >
>>> > Now really, does the idea of putting all your banking, credit-card,
>>> > social-security, etc. info to live "securely on the Internet" (i.e.Microsoft
>>> > hard drive somewhere), really sound like a good idea to you? How about
>>> > just giving that information to me. I'll take good care of it. Honest.
>>>
>>>
>>> Microsoft is just an outright riot! These people know nothing about
>>> network security and they want people to put personal data on the Internet!
>>
>>Please show where MS's databases have been compromised.
>>
>>Until then, please stop talking from your ass.
>>
>
>Wow! That was the easiest challenge yet! Here ya go:
>
> http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/2000/42/ns-18719.html
>
>The article begins like this:
>
> Fri, 27 Oct 2000 09:35:42 GMT
> Matthew Broersma
>
> Hackers burgle Microsoft source code
> ------------------------------------
>
> Company reveals hackers have stolen source code to applications and
> operating system, but says code has not been altered
>
> Software giant Microsoft said hackers had broken into the company's
> computers, in what a spokesman called "a deplorable act of industrial
> espionage", and were believed to have gained access to the source code of such
> software as Windows operating systems and the Office software suite
> ......
>
>
And you just know Myers and his handlers are furiously considering
whether or not to use the "this isn't a database" denial....
--
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: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Arrrrgh! Hoist the Jolly Roger!
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:22:14 GMT
Said GreyCloud in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Wed, 28 Mar 2001 14:50:30
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>>
>> Said GreyCloud in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Tue, 27 Mar 2001 15:54:19
>> >Craig Kelley wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >>
>> >> > As if anyone really cares:
>> >> >
>> >> > http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/howtotell/
>> >> >
>> >> > This URL appears at the bottom of a Sony VAIO
>> >> > ad. I wonder why this URL is there... has
>> >> > Sony been accused of chicanery with Illegal
>> >> > Copies of Windows?
>> >> >
>> >> > Make sure your COA is genuine!
>> >> >
>> >> > http://www.microsoft.com/piracy/howtotell/how/default.asp
>> >>
>> >> [snip]
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > I'm tempted to be utterly juvenile, and send a note
>> >> > to the e-mail above stammering that somehow Linux
>> >> > got onto my Windows box. What am I to do????
>> >>
>> >> Try to buy a Vaio without Windows.
>> >>
>> >> Try to buy a Vaio without Microsfot Word.
>> >>
>> >> Try to buy a Vaio using anything other than Internet Explorer.
>> >>
>> >> Are not these crimes as well? Why should we pay for Word more than
>> >> once?
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
>> >> Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
>> >
>> >From what I've heard, down in Autralia, a group of people sued Toshiba.
>> >They wanted a refund on the microsoft O/S as they didn't want that O/S.
>> >They wanted Linux instead.
>> >Toshiba refunded!
>>
>> That's an urban legend. The real story is more interesting. Do some
>> research.
>>
>> --
>> T. Max Devlin
>> *** The best way to convince another is
>> to state your case moderately and
>> accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
>
>So its an urban legend... As I said "From what I've heard" which
>implies no research at all.
I was honestly hoping you'd do some research. No bother then.
What actually happened was that some people noticed that the Windows OEM
EULA (sic) claimed that you could "return the product" if you didn't
agree to the license. Unfortunately, they didn't notice that the
license also defined "the product" as "a computer", including both
hardware and OS. How MS came to be able to license OEM's PCs, I do not
know, but the way the license reads you can only get a refund if you
return the whole computer. A bunch of people missed this bit, and tried
to claim refunds from OEMs, from what I heard. But all I know is
hearsay of such occurrence. So far, I've been told there was an
organized demonstration in Cleveland, and in New Zealand, at least one
spontaneous demonstration against an unnamed major OEM, and an exchange
of letters between some Usenet kook and Toshiba. I haven't any hard
facts on the subject, which is why I was hoping you'd do some research.
Thanks for your time. Hope it helps.
--
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: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:30:09 GMT
Said Paul 'Z' Ewande� in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 29 Mar 2001
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit dans le message news:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
><SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
>
>> >Indeed, it's quite trivial, on this we agree. But it damages the argument
>> >that Windows of any stripe can't format an floppy and do something at the
>> >same time, now does it ?
>>
>> "Damages", no. "Demolishes", perhaps. Also, perhaps "has no effect
>> on". Depends on the argument, rather than its object. It may be like
>> whether indeed Windows can't format a floppy without slowing to a crawl,
>> which appears to depend on the phase of the moon, apparently, or some
>> other equally immaterial issue; sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't.
>> The fact that you found an instance of "doesn't" doesn't demolish the
>> issue of "sometimes does" at all, not in the least bit.
>
>But the issue wasn't *sometime* does, the issue was that it couldn't,
>without any qualifier. Since you and I agree that it sometime does, there's
>nothing much to add.
The issue was that it does. The issue of whether it always does is only
brought up as an argument from ignorance, by the people who apologize
for the monopoly.
>> >> That's not too shabby for a DOS based piece of crap. And having
>> >> switched back now from NT to 9x again, I can confirm that NT's
>> >> multi-tasking actually is almost as crappy as WinDOS'.
>> >
>> >I *won't* touch this one. :)
>>
>> Then we'll assume you agree, eh?
>
>Assume what you wish. It just mean that I won't touch this one. BTW, is that
>a royal we ?
No, it is a Usenet we, meant to include everyone reading my words, and
colloquially understood to include only those readers which agree.
--
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: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:36:11 GMT
Said Paul 'Z' Ewande� in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 29 Mar 2001
>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit dans le message news:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
><SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
>
>> >What I mean is that Win9x is always are always ridiculed, but they really
>> >aren't *that* bad.
>>
>> In comparison to....?
>
>The other OSes which are in his segment. Read, those that regular people use
>to do their mundane tasks, not to run webservers or datacenters.
Other than Windows (and not counting Apple), I know of no such product.
So I will repeat my question. In comparison to....?
[...]
>> Everything is dependant on everything else: it is a single computer,
>> regardless of how many real or abstract components it may have. The OS
>> is proprietary, and behaves non-deterministically, and you want me to
>> simply *assume* that some undefined and vague "hardware" dependency,
>
>Why not ? You want me to assume "Remarkably pathetic, as I suggested,
>considering how bad WinDOS does in this department." without offering no
>back up whatsoever. <shrug>
No, I want you to *recognize* "remarkably pathetic [et. al,]"; no
assumption is necessary. Just open your eyes and put away your
prejudices, and compare the products.
>> rather than MS's crappy design which allows such putative "hardware"
>> dependencies to exist, is at fault?
>>
>> Nope, sorry, can't blame hardware. Not unless you can point to
>
>I can't. Watch me: I've seen different behaviours on various systems with
>different versions of
And made assumptions about the variables that are entirely unsupported,
and in fact ridiculous, no doubt. Like my old buddy Roger, who had to
replace his video *hardware* to get *IE* to work, and acted as if it was
a hardware failure.
>> *specific* hardware. By name and model number.
>
>The irony meter just pegged. I find you quite demanding for someone who post
>things like :
>"And having switched back now from NT to 9x again, I can confirm that NT's
>multi-tasking actually is almost as crappy as WinDOS'" without offering no
>back up *whatsoever* as to how and in comparison to what NT's multitasking
>is crappy. Before looking at the straw in my eye, try to remove the beam in
>yours. <roll eyes>.
Shrugs, rolling of eyes; no doubt next you'll <sigh>.
So you can't name any such hardware, is that right?
--
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: German armed forces ban MS software <gloat!>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 16:40:19 GMT
Said David Brown in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 29 Mar 2001 09:56:23
>I don't care what some benchmarks say - I am interested in using computers
>rather than just looking at some artificial numbers. The fact is that NT is
>significantly faster for a "power user" than Win9x. I have NT on a 300 MHz
>machine at work, and 98SE on an 800 MHz machine at home, and I know which
>one is faster for real work (web development stuff, programming, database
>serving, Delphi, text file editing, Python, PHP, etc. all at much the same
>time).
I'm sure you do. But which machine is faster doesn't resolve to which
OS is faster, I'm afraid. NT itself isn't really much faster than
WinDOS, though it was multi-tasking behavior, not raw performance, that
was being discussed.
>Win9x can stop up entirely while waiting for some operations. NT
>(mostly) keeps on going, and if something does go wrong, it is (normally)
>easy to kill rogue processes without restarting the whole machine, and it is
>easy to change priorities of processes. As for floppy disk access, NT does
>it happily in the background, while Win98SE takes a break. In fact, my
>Win98 machine often hangs while copying back and forth on an IDE ZIP drive.
I haven't noticed much difference between the two, to be honest. NT is
certainly faster, and better able to handle I/O and multi-tasking. The
argument is simply whether or not it is a significant amount. And
generally its not.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
