Linux-Advocacy Digest #564, Volume #34 Thu, 17 May 01 00:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (GreyCloud)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux beats Win2K (again) (Greg Copeland)
Re: Information on Linux (Greg Copeland)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (GreyCloud)
Re: Why did Eazel shutdown? (GreyCloud)
Re: Why did Eazel shutdown? (GreyCloud)
Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU! (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Analysis of the Linux Report from MS (GreyCloud)
Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!! ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Why did Eazel shutdown? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Solaris 8 vs 7/2.x.... (Rich Teer)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:06:40 -0700
Jon Johansan wrote:
>
> "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Interconnect wrote:
> >
> > > [HUGE SNIP]
> > > > This is coming from a person who plays games on the server, ROFL!
> > > >
> > > > Matthew Gardiner
> > >
> > > What do you expect from a dedicated Windows *professional* :D
> >
> > Of course. Chad Myers is the sort of idiot who would user a server as a
> > workstation as well. On several occasions that was he said thats what
> > he also used the server for.
>
> This cracks me up coming from the linvocates who KEEP talking about linux
> being free and saving money is so important...
>
> Lets park a file/print share server in the closet and let it's CPU and Mem
> usage stay idle for years just cause a server is a server and a workstation
> is where you run things, never the two shall meet. Sheesh... while I don't
> see myself running many games on a server I #1) have no fear of doing it
> cause, it's a computer, it's there to do what you want it to when you want
> it to, it shouldn't be single tasked. #2) would do it just to piss off the
> server elitists who'd cringe at the idea and #3) cause sometimes having a 0
> ping kicks ass! <smile>
Nothing like having Jon, Chad and Eric in the same ng.... like watching
the three stooges in action!
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:07:43 -0700
Matthew Gardiner wrote:
>
> > This cracks me up coming from the linvocates who KEEP talking about linux
> > being free and saving money is so important...
> >
> > Lets park a file/print share server in the closet and let it's CPU and Mem
> > usage stay idle for years just cause a server is a server and a workstation
> > is where you run things, never the two shall meet. Sheesh... while I don't
> > see myself running many games on a server I #1) have no fear of doing it
> > cause, it's a computer, it's there to do what you want it to when you want
> > it to, it shouldn't be single tasked. #2) would do it just to piss off the
> > server elitists who'd cringe at the idea and #3) cause sometimes having a 0
> > ping kicks ass! <smile>
>
> Thanks, now I know why so many dot-con companys failed because people like you
> WEREN'T DOING ANY FUCKING WORK!
>
> Matthew Gardiner
Most of them are now wandering Seattles' 1st avenue hanging around the
soup kitchens on skid row! :-))
--
V
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux beats Win2K (again)
From: Greg Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 16 May 2001 22:07:46 -0500
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm bored of all these benchmarks, since benchmarks are just marks and
> meaningless out of context. So Win2K served up an extra transcation per
> second or Linux manages an extra web page per second? So what?
I agree. At this point, it's pretty clear that Linux can keep up with
Win's performance without problem. Likewise, Win is on the same page
as Linux. Uptime is a different issue. A sustained, high average load
is again, another issue.
>
> To get a better idea, you need to look at the real world.
>
> If you look in the real world, you see Linux having several spots in the
> top 100 fastest supercomputers. If Win2K/NT is so great and so scalable
> and gives such a great price/performance ratio, then why is there not a
> *single* Windows cluster in the top 100 supercomputers list?
Though I do believe that this somewhat makes your point, it's not entirely
fair. Win doesn't really have a high-end distributed computing solution
like Linux does (if one exists, please point it out to me). Likewise,
it doesn't really support clusters like MOSIX does. So, saying that Win
doesn't show up on the list, doesn't mean that it can't because of simple
performance and scalability issues, but rather, Win doesn't really have
the technologies to compete (no distributed computing and no clusters
[hot fail-over/redundancy makes a true cluster not]). That makes, I think,
another good point, but it is clearly a different point unto its own.
--
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
==================================================
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Information on Linux
From: Greg Copeland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 16 May 2001 22:09:29 -0500
The car radio story that you heard about it true. That
doesn't mean that you can install it on YOUR car radio. The
radio in question is really a computer running Linux as the
embedded OS. It plays CDs and MP3s. I don't remember the
full details, but you shouldn't have too many problems
finding info on it. You may even want to start by searching
slashdot's (http://www.slashdot.org) website.
"John Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hey!
>
> I hear linux is really great. Could someone please send me
> some information on it. Someone told me you can install it
> in your car-radio now, is that true? I want to play mp3s on
> my radio.
>
> Please help.
>
--
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
==================================================
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:09:29 -0700
Dan Serban wrote:
>
> In article <3b027915$0$82829$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Jon Johansan"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Are you 12?
>
> > "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> Interconnect wrote:
> >>
> >> > [HUGE SNIP]
> >> > > This is coming from a person who plays games on the server, ROFL!
> >> > >
> >> > > Matthew Gardiner
> >> >
> >> > What do you expect from a dedicated Windows *professional* :D
> >>
> >> Of course. Chad Myers is the sort of idiot who would user a server as
> >> a workstation as well. On several occasions that was he said thats
> >> what he also used the server for.
> > This cracks me up coming from the linvocates who KEEP talking about
> > linux being free and saving money is so important... Lets park a
> > file/print share server in the closet and let it's CPU and Mem usage
> > stay idle for years just cause a server is a server and a workstation is
> > where you run things, never the two shall meet. Sheesh... while I don't
> > see myself running many games on a server I #1) have no fear of doing it
> > cause, it's a computer, it's there to do what you want it to when you
> > want it to, it shouldn't be single tasked. #2) would do it just to piss
> > off the server elitists who'd cringe at the idea and #3) cause sometimes
> > having a 0 ping kicks ass! <smile>
> >
No, he's just a swede!
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why did Eazel shutdown?
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:24:00 -0700
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Anonymous wrote:
> > >
> > > Why did Eazel shutdown?
> > >
> > > http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-5939697.html?tag=tp_pr
> > >
> > > What did it offer that the current Ximian GNOME 1.4
> > > doesn't?
> > >
> > > --------== Posted Anonymously via Newsfeeds.Com ==-------
> > > Featuring the worlds only Anonymous Usenet Server
> > > -----------== http://www.newsfeeds.com ==----------
> >
> > Its obvious why they shutdown... capital venture is drying up!
>
> Actually, Venture capital is not drying up. There are still lots of
> companies getting new vc. The difference is that they're going back to
> funding traditional models rather than questionable models with no solid
> source of revenue.
Its getting scarce, vc is. Very scarce! Its real scarce in Seattle
right now. The unemployment lines are growing. VC can be had, but one
had better have a good dog & pony show.
People are holding back on their spending and its the high-tech market
thats now taking it in the shorts. A lot of companies are laying off in
the high-tech sector. And then a long comes Seattle gov. and starts
hiking up the taxes to keep their coffers even at a bad time. Now
Boeing is starting to leave as its a business unfriendly environment.
At least the vc in seattle is about all but gone.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why did Eazel shutdown?
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:26:26 -0700
Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:SqAM6.1105$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Anonymous wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Why did Eazel shutdown?
> > > >
> > > > http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-5939697.html?tag=tp_pr
> > > >
> > > > What did it offer that the current Ximian GNOME 1.4
> > > > doesn't?
> > > >
> > > > --------== Posted Anonymously via Newsfeeds.Com ==-------
> > > > Featuring the worlds only Anonymous Usenet Server
> > > > -----------== http://www.newsfeeds.com ==----------
> > >
> > > Its obvious why they shutdown... capital venture is drying up!
> >
> > Actually, Venture capital is not drying up. There are still lots of
> > companies getting new vc. The difference is that they're going back to
> > funding traditional models rather than questionable models with no solid
> > source of revenue.
>
> No it certainly isn't drying up. You just have to have a solid business plan
> with realistic and conservative profitability forcasts. Read: You have to
> show realistic potential to provide dividends. Most of them got good and
> burned during the .COM rush (And they deserved it, IMHO). You have to show
> them you can produce money instead of ideas, now.
This is true. But when your state gov. makes business hard to do then
vc is going to look else where. A venture capitalist will also do a
risk analysis, and wash. state is now a bad investment. California is a
bad investment now... Texas maybe a good one as well as Illinois.
--
V
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft - WE DELETE YOU!
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 15:29:34 +1200
GreyCloud wrote:
> Jon Johansan wrote:
> >
> > "Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Interconnect wrote:
> > >
> > > > [HUGE SNIP]
> > > > > This is coming from a person who plays games on the server, ROFL!
> > > > >
> > > > > Matthew Gardiner
> > > >
> > > > What do you expect from a dedicated Windows *professional* :D
> > >
> > > Of course. Chad Myers is the sort of idiot who would user a server as a
> > > workstation as well. On several occasions that was he said thats what
> > > he also used the server for.
> >
> > This cracks me up coming from the linvocates who KEEP talking about linux
> > being free and saving money is so important...
> >
> > Lets park a file/print share server in the closet and let it's CPU and Mem
> > usage stay idle for years just cause a server is a server and a workstation
> > is where you run things, never the two shall meet. Sheesh... while I don't
> > see myself running many games on a server I #1) have no fear of doing it
> > cause, it's a computer, it's there to do what you want it to when you want
> > it to, it shouldn't be single tasked. #2) would do it just to piss off the
> > server elitists who'd cringe at the idea and #3) cause sometimes having a 0
> > ping kicks ass! <smile>
>
> Nothing like having Jon, Chad and Eric in the same ng.... like watching
> the three stooges in action!
> --
> V
They belong to the: Windows And Network Klub ---> or WANK for short :)
Matthew Gardiner
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Analysis of the Linux Report from MS
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:36:02 -0700
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Rob S. Wolfram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > [x-posted]
> >
> > I liked your analysis of the article, but then again, I am biased. Since
> > the serious Windows advocated don't hang around in COLA, I took the
> > liberty to cross-post this to COMNA. This is not ment as food for
> > trolls, just an attempt to trigger some real advocacy from both camps.
>
> Okay, I'll bite.
>
> > Chris Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > >Microsoft makes: Windows 2000, Windows ME (soon to have Windows XP for
> > >consumers) and Windows CE. In the Windows 2000 stable they have: Windows
> > >2000 Professional, Windows 2000 Server, Windows 2000 Advanced Server and
> > >Windows 2000 Data Centre. This is a fair range of products, which is a
> > >fair enough thing to do: each has it's own strengths and capabilities.
> > >However, this is no different than from the various Linux distribution.
>
> I would have to agree about that, even Linux has its 9x, Corel Linux.
>
> > >I would also dispute the fact that their are 188 distributions of Linux.
> > >Perhaps they would care to list these distributions? If you look at the
> > >Linux distribution market fairly then you will find that their are only
> > >a few key distributions: Debian Linux, RedHat Linux, Turbo Linux,
> > >Caldera Linux, Mandrake Linux and Slackware Linux. As you can see, their
> > >are not so many as Microsoft say. To put it bluntly, saying that their
> > >are 188 different distributions of Linux is ridiculous, as there are
> > >many hobbiest distributions (where someone has put together their own
> > >distribution: just because they could or just to see how the different
> > >components go together in Linux).
>
> That depend on how they count those distributions.
> www.linuxiso.org list 21 distributions.
> If they count distribution per platform (RH for x86, RH for PPC, RH for
> Alpha, etc), that pretty much explain the number. :-)
>
> > >When Microsoft writes "For example, there is no guarantee that any
> > >software you develop on one distribution will run under another
> > >distribution", this is a fair enough comment until you realise that all
> > >of the main Linux distributions keep up to date with packages and
> > >release upgrades to main programs as soon as they can package them.
> > >There is also a filesystem standard that most distributions adhere to
> > >fairly well; Linux development is incredibly portable as standard
> > >libraries are used and if you can compile on one system cleanly then you
> > >will be able to compile on another system. From here it is just a matter
> > >of "packaging" the developed program to the required distribution.
>
> What about binary distributed software? That is pretty much a big problem,
> because some dist has different FS layout, and (at least AFAIK, there is no
> (standard) way to find about this layout).
Caldera has their layout printed in their distributed handbook. Nice to
know feature.
I think about all distros will have minor variations to the layout.
> As for "incredibly portable as standard libraries are used", that is *pure
> bull*, if I use standard libraries, I can port code from windows to linux to
> unix to VMS to Mac to whatever you want, as long as it support the standard
> libraries (I mainly talk about C/C++ standard libraries, are you talking
> about something else?).
I've never seen a clean port of C written code to another platform.
Its always something tugging at you.
> There is a limit to how much you can do with those standard libraries,
> before you hit performance & usability limits. (Usability means that you
> just *can't* do some stuff using the standard libraries. Threading, GUI &
> networking, to name a few.)
>
> > ><quote>
> > >
> > >Less Secure
> > >
> > >"Open source" means that anyone can get a copy of the source code.
> > >Developers can find security weaknesses very easily with Linux. The
> > >same is not true with Microsoft Windows.
> > >
> > ></quote>
> > >
> > >Where do I start?
>
> You don't, I never understood this statement.
> s/Developers/Hackers
> I understand, but not the way this is now.
>
> > > What about the number of IIS holes that have needed to
> > >be patched - even recently!
>
> That is not fair, want to go over the list of Linux's programs that need
> patching?
>
> > >While security through obscurity may seem
> > >like a good thing, sooner or later someone is going to find a
> > >potentially compromising hole in your software. When you *are*
> > >compromised, how are you going to stop it again? you aren't able to
> > >analyse where the problem lies as you aren't able to analyse the source
> > >code. Instead you have to wait for Microsoft to release a service pack
> > >or individual patch. Although Microsoft are fairly fast at releasing
> > >these, it is unfair to say that open source is any less secure.
>
> I don't think they said that. They might have *meant* to say that, but they
> most certainly didn't say that.
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: EXTRA EXTRA MS ADMITS!!!!
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 22:46:49 -0500
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In article <TlqM6.31157$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, fmc
wrote:
> > > >
> > > >Take a look at Slashdot May 14, 2001:
> > > >http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/05/14/1858201 , the same
posting
> > that
> > > >someone claims proved this was a recent event. That page now
explains
> > that
> > > >it was old news, and even has a link to it:
> > > >http://slashdot.org/articles/00/04/14/0619206.shtml
> > >
> > > Well you would have to be a Microsoft Systems Administrator then.
> > >
> > > Humm. Well I guess Yahoo and Sun are both in alot of trouble then.
> >
> > Apparently they are. All the other major news services are carrying the
> > story about Yahoo "resurecting" the year old story.
> >
> > > Nope, sorry. I can't let this go. It is a new event sir.
> > > You can quit banging your head against the wall here for us.
> > >
> > > Thanks anyway.
> >
> > Because you're a moron. Are you still claiming that HP has been selling
> > Itanium systems for the last year?
>
> http://www.hp.com/products1/itanium/index.html
>
> Only if you are a business partner. From what I've read at HPs site,
> itanium is being used right now by developers.
Charlies been claiming for the last year that HP is selling Itanium's in
HP-9000's, and that Intel is in some kind of secret conspiracy with MS to
delay the Itanium until Windows can support it.
He's clearly whacked.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why did Eazel shutdown?
Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 22:47:39 -0500
"Matthew Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Actually, Venture capital is not drying up. There are still lots of
> > companies getting new vc. The difference is that they're going back to
> > funding traditional models rather than questionable models with no solid
> > source of revenue.
>
> I've got an idea, its called EFTPOS via the NET, aka, NETPOS, what will
> allow users to obtain an EFTPOS terminal from a distributor for around
$20,
> hook it up to their USB port, and purchase things off the net by using
there
> EFTPOS card. There are already several standards, such as VISA Interlink
> and PLUS that would allow anyone, anywhere in the world purchase items
like
> an over the counter transaction, thus allowing not only those with credit
> cards to purchase items, but, say teenagers to purchase goods off the net,
> as most teens don't have credit cards, thus the market is opened even
> wider. Also, eftpos transactions are cheaper than credit card ones, and
as
> soon as the transaction goes through, they (the retailer) instantly
receives
> the money, both of those advantages are beneficial to the consumer and
> retailer.
>
> Will a VC fund that idea? I already have interested parties, however,
since
> most VC's are US-centric, and they ignore the rest of the world, this idea
> will never go beyond the desing phase.
VC's don't fund "idea's", they fund buisiness plans.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris,staroffice.com.support.install.solaris,comp.unix.advocacy,alt.os.unix,alt.unix
From: Rich Teer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Solaris 8 vs 7/2.x....
Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 03:50:41 GMT
On Thu, 17 May 2001, C. Newport wrote:
> For Interesting Values Of
I see! (Sound of penny dropping)
> Which around here includes SLC (Yuk), SS1 .... up to SB1000 (lekker).
> The SB1000 seems to compile things almost as fast as the fully
> loaded E420.
That's interesting; I'd expect a half decently set up SB 1000 to eat
an E420 for lunch, CPU-speed wise. The E420 has four processors, but
they're 450 MHz US II, whereas the SB 1000 can have two 750 MHz US III
processors...
> I reckon that you can get a lot more bang for your buck by
> letting users share a well-configured cruncher rather than
> spreading the cash across many mediocre desktops. YMMV.
Given that these people would need a copmuter on their desk whether
they use the local CPU or just use it an Xterm, it might as well be
put to good use. If several developers are trying to build something,
the individual desktops would cope better than using a central server.
Of course, I'm assuming an adequate network topology (100 baseT), and
that the number of parallel builds >= the number of CPUs in the central
server.
Small servers tend to be cheaper than their bigger brothers; using
each desktop as a compilation station means that the server is "just"
doing NFS file serving, so it can be less well specified.
--
Rich Teer
President,
Rite Online Inc.
Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-online.net
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
