Linux-Advocacy Digest #727, Volume #33 Fri, 20 Apr 01 11:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day. (theRadical)
Re: What's the point (Roy Culley)
Re: Ctrl-Alt-Windows (Roy Culley)
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! (Roy Culley)
Re: What's the point (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Postgres 7.1 Released (Greg Copeland)
Re: SQL Server sales up 44% in Q1 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: What is 99 percent of copyright law? was Re: Richard Stallman (Barry Margolin)
Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company (Greg Copeland)
Re: SQL Server sales up 44% in Q1 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Nomen Nescio)
Re: Ctrl-Alt-Windows (Brian Langenberger)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company (Greg Copeland)
Re: Exploit devastates WinNT/2K security (Greg Copeland)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Ian Davey)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (theRadical)
Crossposted-To:
misc.survivalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles,alt.society.liberalism,talk.politics.guns
Subject: Re: Communism, Communist propagandists in the US...still..to this day.
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 13:47:26 GMT
On Fri, 20 Apr 2001 00:15:06 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>theRadical wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 20:26:13 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >theRadical wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, 17 Apr 2001 16:40:32 -0400, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
>> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >The captain wasn't even on the bridge. The HELMSMAN was steering the
>> >> >ship, not the Captain....
>> >> >
>> >> >In such circumstances, the Captain BELONGS off the bridge, because
>> >> >he only gets in the way of the Helmsman and the Officer of the Deck.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> good one. that is the stupidest fucking thing i have ever read.
>> >
>> >You have no idea how large craft actually operate, do you?
>>
>> more than you obviously.
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >> where did you pick that up, from all the merchant mariners you blow?
>> >
>> >What part of "The captain doesn't man the helm" do you not understand?
>>
>> i understand it completely. however, that in no way diminishes his
>> ultimate responsibility for the ship.
>>
>> >
>> >The HELMSMAN mans the helm (translation: he steers).
>> >The officer of the deck tells the helmsman what course to steer.
>>
>> and the captain is ultimately responsible for any and all moves made
>> by both of those people whether he is not he bridge or not.
>> therefore, and especially in hazardous areas, the captain is almost
>> always on the bridge.
>
>Wrong. In such areas, the a local professional navigator is ferried
>out to the ship. He then takes the helm because HE is the expert
>for those waters.
yes, i am well aware of how the pilot system works. however, that has
nothing to do with your contention that a captain is nothing more that
a glorified paper pusher who should not be on the bridge.
>
>
>
>>
>> >
>> >In dangerous waters, especially ports, straights, canals, etc., the
>> >captain has ZERO responsibility for the course of the ship...that is
>> >turned over to local navigators who know the local waters (depths,
>> >currents, wrecks, shoals, sandbars, etc.) thoroughly.
>>
>> agreed. i think the technical name you are so doltishly searching for
>> here is "pilot." you claim to be an expert in naval navigation and
>
>Spot the strawman
>I never made such a claim....
i know you are not a expert in any naval field because of your
ridiculous statements.
sarcasm is lost on the doltish. you have proved that.
>
>> don't even know that harbor pilots are called pilots?
>
>
>So, tell us...if the captain had not been in his wardroom, the helsman
>and the officer of the deck of the Exxon Valdez done what, exactly?
>
>Be precise. Accuracy counts.
how can i? you question make no sense. so much for your accuracy.
>
>
>>
>> >
>> >The captain's job is to see to it that the ship performs it's mission.
>>
>> yes, true.
>>
>> >For the most part, that means lots of paperwork. Conducting inspections
>> >throughout the ship, etc.
>>
>> what a fucking joke. most ship captains spend their time on the
>> bridge. i think you merchant marine customers have definitely lead
>> you astray.
>
>Most officer's work is paperwork. And the higher you go, the more
>there is of it.
true, but that does not mean that the captain is not ultimately
responsible for everything that happens on the ship.
you have made the claim that a ship captain is nothing more that a
glorified paper pusher. you also claim that there is no room on the
bridge for the captain for the helmsman and ood. both are false
claims. can you prove it? be precise. accuracy counts.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roy Culley)
Subject: Re: What's the point
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:08:49 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "spicerun"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I *have* to interject here, because I get a little tired of the constant
> RH bashing that is going on. This is *not* an RH thing; Debian configures
> X the same way, using XF86Config-4. The point? It allows you to install
> X4.0 in parallel wiht X3.3.6, a great advantage when you're trying to
> upgrade, or just don't know whether or not your graphics hardware is 100%
> supported by X4.0.
> Note that this is not a personal attack, but in my opinion RH gets a lot of
> undeserved flak, just because they are the most visible distro as market
> leaders.
I agree totally. I'm no redhat fan because I prefer debian and suse but
the flack thrown at redhat is absurd. They must be doing something
right if they are the dominant linux distro. And, as has been stated
many times, what they do develop for linux is openly available to
anyone including their competitors. I've always been disappointed
that suse don't follow this example, yast being the most obvious
example.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roy Culley)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Ctrl-Alt-Windows
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:34:01 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm damn sick of seeing those stupid "Windows" keys on
> every frikkin' keyboard I own, including on my
> laptop.
>
> Where can I get tiny penguin stickers to place
> over that eye-sore?
PC keyboards are crap full stop. Here I am typing on my Sun type-5
keyboard on a PC running linux. A mate built the adapter and it
works like a dream. Sun keyboards are second to none IMHO simply
because they have that wonderful keypad on the left.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roy Culley)
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:21:03 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <9bopmj$cca$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Fabulous software does not crash. Does vim crash?
Systems do crash and power failures do happen. I don't know about
vim but the number of times I've had a mail telling that I was
editing a file with vi when the system went down and do I want
to recover the edit. This feature has been there for years. Emacs
has had auto-save for years. It took Microsoft an age before
they implemented this feature yet vi and emacs had been around
for a long time. It appears they don't even learn from others
experience when designing their software.
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What's the point
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 02:00:30 +1200
The average user shells out $NZ3,500 for a computer. If all they were
to use it for was wordprocessing and internet, they would purchase a
typewriter and an internet appliance. However, people buy computers
because they can do more than that. So that they can harness the full
potential of their investment, they must learn. I understand that there
should be a region where by a user can use a computer with out any
experience, however, as there demands become more and more so does the
need for them to learn. For example, say if the average user, instead
of watching television, read a book and learnt how to use, say, StarWord
all the features that are applicable to their needs, that would be a
positive learning experience. Thus, over time, they will become more
productive resulting in less time doing work on the computer and more
time can be dedicated to doing what they really want to do, and that
could be playing games, watching foot ball on the television, or what
ever. Learning = efficiency gains. The more you learn, the more
efficient you become, resulting in more free time left to let the user
do what they want to do.
Matthew Gardiner
--
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
If you don't like it, you can go [# rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
Running SuSE Linux 7.1
The best of German engineering, now in software form
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Postgres 7.1 Released
From: Greg Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 20 Apr 2001 09:02:27 -0500
Sounds like a good reason to have a night batch job which updates a column
based on the row width in another column. Not sure how fast this can be
for you, but assuming that not all of your data is changing on a daily
basis, you might be able to simply update the rows that have changed on
that days business, which, assuming is a small piece of the pie, may
prove very doable. I'm, of course, assuming that we are talking about
MSSQL and not PostgreSQL. I know this violates one of the DB normalization
rules (don't store what can be derived), however, sometimes real-world
dictates otherwise.
Just out of curiousity, why would you be searching on the width of the
field? As another poster said, if you want any help talking about ways
to get this to run faster, feel free to drop me a line. I'm sure between
the three of us, we can figure out ways to make you somewhat happy! :)
Greg
"Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> : One feature I simply love about postgres is the ability to create an index
> : based on a function, as in:
>
> : create index fubar_ndx on table (function(column)) ;
>
>
> I've got users who need to efficiently search a table with 9 million
> records (and growing at 60%/year) on the *width* of the contents of a
> particular field.
>
> Postgres could do this without a problem by using the kind of index
> you described. MS SQL Server can't, and we're currently trying to
> figure out what sort of ugly kludge will be necessary in order to
> simulate the comparable functionality. More than likely, we'll have
> to create a separate field holding the width of the contents of the
> one we actually care about, but the work needed to keep it in sync
> with the contents will greatly complicate and slow down every other
> part of the program.
>
>
> Joe
--
Greg Copeland, Principal Consultant
Copeland Computer Consulting
==================================================
PGP/GPG Key at http://www.keyserver.net
DE5E 6F1D 0B51 6758 A5D7 7DFE D785 A386 BD11 4FCD
==================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: SQL Server sales up 44% in Q1
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:16:44 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew Gardiner says...
>> >
>> >Link please. I want evidence, please.
>>
>> http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-5669586.html?tag=mn_hd
>
>That talks about a 44% year-over-year increase, not the same as the 44%
>increase from previous quarter implied by your subject line and use of
>the word "spike".
Strawman. Nothing like that was implied.
Financial results are always measured on a year-over-year basis, to factor in
seasonal fluctuations.
>
>Upgrades from MSFT SQL 7 are the most obvious explanation for a sales
>increase as compared to Q1 CY2000.
>
Sure...
------------------------------
From: Barry Margolin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: What is 99 percent of copyright law? was Re: Richard Stallman
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:19:57 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Isaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 15:17:03 GMT, Barry Margolin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>Tim Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On Mon, 09 Apr 2001 04:11:07 GMT, Les Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>Try to find the history of why it was necessary for RIPEM to
>>>>duplicate the gmp library as fgmp in order to release their
>>>>work without distribution restrictions. The only thing that
>>>
>>>The RIPEM authors did that to make FSF happy. They didn't *have* to do
>>>it to satisfy any legal requirements for distribution of their code, so
>>>it was not "necessary".
>>
>>Since it never went to court, we don't really know whether it was legally
>>necessary or not.
>>
>
>I think both of you are using a definition of "necessary" far more
>stringent than the original poster intended. I don't believe the
>FSF was bluffing when they suggested that they were willing to sue
>over the issue, so assuming that the author of RIPEM didn't wanted
>to be sued over something he was distributing for free, as source,
>with as few restrictions as he could legally impose, finding a way to
>accomodate the FSF's position was necessary.
My interpretation of Tim Smith's comment is that he claims the RIPEM
authors thought they could have won the lawsuit, but decided to acceded to
the FSF's demands to be nice. I'm perfectly willing to believe this is
true. But the RIPEM authors' belief that they would have won is as valid
as the FSF's belief that they would have won. Both presumably had
competent counsel telling them that they had a good case. But they
obviously couldn't both be right, and only an actual court case can settle
the general issue.
--
Barry Margolin, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Genuity, Burlington, MA
*** DON'T SEND TECHNICAL QUESTIONS DIRECTLY TO ME, post them to newsgroups.
Please DON'T copy followups to me -- I'll assume it wasn't posted to the group.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company
From: Greg Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 20 Apr 2001 09:20:41 -0500
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Terry Porter wrote:
>
> >> Of course it works fine under Windows.
> >
> > Please leave out the 'of course' as Windows does not always work 'fine'.
>
> It does for me.
>
> > For instance,in both Win95 *and* Win98, Windows is simply not able to
> > find the interrupt settings of my NE 2000 ISA cards. Linux does not need
> > manual intervention here, as Windows does.
>
> Well, stop using ISA and switch to PCI as it works?
>
Correction. Depending on the card and how it's set, it may *require* manual
intervention regardless of the OS. This has NOTHING to do with the OS,
rather, it's a simple fact of life when you are trying to use ISA devices.
> >> I'm coming to a simple conclusion about Linux - it's a half baked
> >> solution created by a bunch of amateurs and as such, it shows, believe me
> >> it shows.
> >
> > Goodwin, your own lack of experience with Linux is what shows.
>
> No, it is Linux + KDE that is the problem. Don't blame me, I'm just a
> messenger.
>
> >> Some bits and pieces are pretty good - Apache for instance, but some bits
> >> are real ropey. KDE for instance. Some of the crashes I've seen with it
> >> beggar belief:
> >
> > I've been telling you for ages now, KDE is under development, use
> > something that is stable and reliable. I use Blackbox and this is fast and
> > easy to use.
>
> THEN WHY IS IT NOT MARKED AS UNDER DEVELOPMENT???
>
There are two valid points here!!! KDE IS NOT LINUX. Having said that, KDE
is rather stable. Depending on what version you are running. The latest
version of KDE (what, 2.1?) works very well. If it's exploding, then it can
only be one of the following: You didn't install it correctly, the distro
is hosed (perhaps a dependency issue during the install???), you installed
a beta release, you installed an old, unstable version (in which case, if
it came with the distro, blame it). In short, KDE and Gnome are both pretty
stable. If you get the right release, they are very stable. Having said
all that, let me say it again, Linux is not KDE or Gnome. Linux is Linux.
The distinction here is that you are free to install any WM on X that you
want. That's the point. If you have one that broken, install one that
works or get a working version of the program (this is true of ANY OS;
if a program is lame, broken, or simply doesn't work right, get a newer
version or find something else that does what you need. This is not an
OS problem.) Remember, the GUI crashing is NOT a Linux problem. In fact,
even if X is crashing, it is more than likely not a Linux problem. You
have three or four choices for X11 implementations under Linux. If XF86
doesn't work for you, you still have two or three others to choose from.
It all boils down to choice. At least with Linux, you have these choices.
> > Sure it doesnt have the eye candy of KDE or Gnome, but I use my pc for
> > *work*, not purely entertainment.
>
> And what do you think I use my PC for?
>
> Sure I play games on it, but not all the time.
>
> > Don't use KDE ?
>
> Suddenly the so called choices on Linux start to drop. GNOME is the
> alternative. What happens if I don't like GNOME? Tough, is that it?
Oh brother. What choices do you have under Windows? One. Funny I
wrote the above part about having choices before I even read this part.
In Linux, you have tons of choices. Losing one or two still means you
have a dozen or so to pick from. Losing a choice on GUI's with Windows
means you have none. Ya, I know there are a couple of crappy other
options with Windows, but they really are crappy. At least, all of the
second rate GUI's I've seen for Windows really don't compare to what
Windows. So, I don't really consider them to be a real option. If you
decide otherwise, that fine.
>
> >> Windows crashes, Windows isn't stable, but I see much worse with KDE.
> > I believe you.
> >
> > KDE *is not* Linux.
>
> Ah here we go again.
Remember, Windows is *TIED* to it's GUI option. Specifically so. This
is why its GUI is considered to be part of the OS (for both marketing and
technical reasons). In short, the GUI is a part of Windows. This is
simply not true for Linux. In fact, you can get GUIs for Linux that does
not even require X. Linux is not even tied to a GUI. It's a add on.
If you can't understand this issue, you have yielded your right to further
comment on the topic.
--
Greg Copeland, Principal Consultant
Copeland Computer Consulting
==================================================
PGP/GPG Key at http://www.keyserver.net
DE5E 6F1D 0B51 6758 A5D7 7DFE D785 A386 BD11 4FCD
==================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: SQL Server sales up 44% in Q1
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:20:43 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Matthew Gardiner says...
>
><snype>.
>> >
>>
>> A cynic would conclude that you're burying your head in the sand. A 44% spike in
>> a deflating market, dot.com collapse and all, cannot be attributed to
>> "upgrades".
>>
>> Were you a Lotus executive in a previous life ? :-)
>
>Nope, I wasn't a Lotus executive. I'd be interested who their big
>customers were, also, if they were new, what did they migrated from, and
>how many were upgrades and how many of them were new sales. It is very
>easy to give xyz figures, however, unless you have any basis for you
>assumptions, then I suggest that you keep your trap shut.
>
>
One can come to a conclusion that even a 2-hour session with MS accountants
would leave you "unconvinced".
------------------------------
From: Nomen Nescio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Crossposted-To: soc.singles,alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 16:20:06 +0200 (CEST)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey) eeped:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nomen Nescio
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> clacked:
> >> <snype>
> >> >
> >> > because it would cost them more than they paid for thier machine in the
> >> > first place
> >> > ya retard
> >> > jackie 'anakin' tokeman
> >> >
> >> > men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
> >> > more even than death
> >> > - bertrand russell
> >> Upgrading a kernel. Well, I have SUSE Linux, I goto the suse ftp site,
> >> download the latest rpm kernel, drop into super user mode, then rpm -Uvh
> >> kernel.rpm and voila, reboot, and I have a new kernel. Is it that hard,
> >> no, so stop spreading FUD on issues you have no experience.
> >
> >why look, it's another lying sack of shit unix headcase! he snips the
> >context and then accuses me of ignorance! way to go fuckhead. if you
> >ever wonder why linux has gone nowhere with endusers reread yourself.
>
> We should just count ourselves lucky we don't have you as an advocate...
i don't do advocacy dimwit
> you're getting far too wound up for usenet, it's not that important, take a
> few valium and relax. It'll all seem better in the morning.
you write like a homosexual
jackie 'anakin' tokeman
men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
more even than death
- bertrand russell
------------------------------
From: Brian Langenberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Ctrl-Alt-Windows
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:26:06 +0000 (UTC)
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Roy Culley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
:> I'm damn sick of seeing those stupid "Windows" keys on
:> every frikkin' keyboard I own, including on my
:> laptop.
:>
:> Where can I get tiny penguin stickers to place
:> over that eye-sore?
: PC keyboards are crap full stop. Here I am typing on my Sun type-5
: keyboard on a PC running linux. A mate built the adapter and it
: works like a dream. Sun keyboards are second to none IMHO simply
: because they have that wonderful keypad on the left.
Or, for $60(US), get a nice Sun Type 6 keyboard with USB:
http://store.sun.com/catalog/doc/BrowsePage.jhtml?catid=32807
I'm sure the latest kernels would have no trouble with it.
Personally, I'm sick of having to map "caps lock" to a
proper control key, so I've stuck with a Pfuca keyboard
(also without any obnoxious Windows keys).
Non-crap keyboards cost a fair bit more than their crap
counterparts, but since they're one of the components that
I'll use most often (and probably become obsolete the slowest,
along with mice and monitors) I figure the expense is worth it.
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.singles,alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 02:28:03 +1200
Nomen Nescio wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey) eeped:
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nomen Nescio
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> clacked:
> > >> <snype>
> > >> >
> > >> > because it would cost them more than they paid for thier machine in the
> > >> > first place
> > >> > ya retard
> > >> > jackie 'anakin' tokeman
> > >> >
> > >> > men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth - more than ruin,
> > >> > more even than death
> > >> > - bertrand russell
> > >> Upgrading a kernel. Well, I have SUSE Linux, I goto the suse ftp site,
> > >> download the latest rpm kernel, drop into super user mode, then rpm -Uvh
> > >> kernel.rpm and voila, reboot, and I have a new kernel. Is it that hard,
> > >> no, so stop spreading FUD on issues you have no experience.
> > >
> > >why look, it's another lying sack of shit unix headcase! he snips the
> > >context and then accuses me of ignorance! way to go fuckhead. if you
> > >ever wonder why linux has gone nowhere with endusers reread yourself.
> >
> > We should just count ourselves lucky we don't have you as an advocate...
>
> i don't do advocacy dimwit
>
> > you're getting far too wound up for usenet, it's not that important, take a
> > few valium and relax. It'll all seem better in the morning.
>
> you write like a homosexual
> jackie 'anakin' tokeman
Now that wasn't called for :(
Matthew Gardiner
--
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
If you don't like it, you can go [# rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
Running SuSE Linux 7.1
The best of German engineering, now in software form
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Pete Goodwin is in good company
From: Greg Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 20 Apr 2001 09:29:21 -0500
Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> My only criticism of SuSE is SAX/SAX2 which is utter rubbish. I needed
> several goes to get the resolution and depth I wanted. It never did succeed
> on my laptop, merely crashing and locking up the whole machine. I'd to hack
> XF86Config by hand to get it to work. SuSE really need to re-write this
> abomination, especially as everything else works so well, if a little
> slower than Mandrake.
>
> Peter
Hate to say it, but this is just a bad user choice. It is well known that
XF86 generally sucks for Laptops because the manufacturers generally do non-
standard things with their video hardware and often, don't properly support
it and/or release programming details on it. This is why there are two
commercial options here (one specifically targets Laptops) to fill the void.
In short, this is a crappy hardware and idiotic hardware people and not a
Linux issue. You might argue that it's a X issue, however, XF86 makes a
best effort to support this crappy hardware the best they can considering
what they have to work with (often, next to nothing and trial and error).
In short, complaining about bad hardware and the choice of X that you
wanted to run on it is just low class. In my mind, it's the same thing
as someone doing you a favor and then you complain about it because you
made a bad choice in video hardware. Seems somewhat ungrateful to me.
--
Greg Copeland, Principal Consultant
Copeland Computer Consulting
==================================================
PGP/GPG Key at http://www.keyserver.net
DE5E 6F1D 0B51 6758 A5D7 7DFE D785 A386 BD11 4FCD
==================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Exploit devastates WinNT/2K security
From: Greg Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 20 Apr 2001 09:44:05 -0500
Hate to burst your bubble, but SMB is based on IBM's technology. Microsoft
simply ran with it. Having said that, after you kick IBM and Microsoft,
I do agree that NFS should of been what they used.
Here's a interesting note. Most people don't realize the NFS tends to scale
better than SMB on both network resources AND host CPU load. Back in the
days when SMB was first picked up, most computers couldn't saturate a 10Mb link,
because the bus was maxed, as was the CPU. These days, it's a different picture.
In short, for VERY large file servers, NFS, while tends to support a slightly
lower per-client transfer rate than SMB implementations, tends to support MANY
more clients on a single host without being CPU bound than do SMB file servers.
Enjoy,
Greg
Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Roy Culley wrote:
> >
> > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/8/18370.html
> >
> > Here's a snippet:
> >
> > "However, if for some reason it's necessary for you to use the many thrilling
> > features of Windows networking without NTLMv2, then there is absolutely
> > nothing you can do but pray."
>
> Microsoft love re-inventing the wheel over and over again. There was a
> perfectly adequate file sharing protocol, called NFS which all UNIX's
> had, from IRIX to Solaris, you were guaranteed that they could
> inter-operate, but no, Microsoft had to be different, and now they are
> facing the consequences for their arrogance. Do I have any sorrow for
[snip]
--
Greg Copeland, Principal Consultant
Copeland Computer Consulting
==================================================
PGP/GPG Key at http://www.keyserver.net
DE5E 6F1D 0B51 6758 A5D7 7DFE D785 A386 BD11 4FCD
==================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: soc.singles,alt.linux,alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 14:46:14 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nomen Nescio
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> you're getting far too wound up for usenet, it's not that important, take a
>> few valium and relax. It'll all seem better in the morning.
>
>you write like a homosexual
You write like someone who doubts their sexuality, it's normally the ones in
the closet who go around calling everyone else homosexual.
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
