Linux-Advocacy Digest #255, Volume #35 Fri, 15 Jun 01 04:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Getting used to Linux (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed (GreyCloud)
Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed (GreyCloud)
Re: the world thinks there is only windows. yahoo sucks. (GreyCloud)
Re: "This will not happen again," said the Microsoft spokesperson. (GreyCloud)
Re: MSnbc calls MS on MS's FUD campain! (GreyCloud)
Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags (Marada C. Shradrakaii)
Re: Opera (Marada C. Shradrakaii)
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: So what software is the NYSE running ? ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?) ("Ayende Rahien")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 10:36:56 +0200
"Christopher L. Estep" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:OlaW6.81157$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > I highly doubt that... as UNIX and Apache are primarily the predominant
> > O/S and webserver software out there.
> > You need big iron for heavy volume trading.
> > So far that is all that is running,... BIG IRON.
>
> Did you know that a Windows 2000 variant of Apache exists?
Did you know that it's not very good?
> Also, the biggest reason why there is still lots of mainframe software and
> hardware is because of *old code* (the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"
> school was born in mainframe computing) that either doesn't convert well,
or
> convert at all, to a GUI environment (*any* GUI environment, including X).
Often enough, it's not cost effective to fix something that isn't broken.
> Mainframe compuing is *not* cost-effective compared to server farms
> clustered properly (this applies to *any* OS that supports clustering, not
> just Datacenter Server) as companies like DST Innovis
> (http://www.dstinnovis.com/partners) prove every day.
The problem with clusters is administration.
MS has a good solution for that, Application Server, if I recall the name
correctly.
But they certainly seems to be doing a lot of cover up to keep this product
under heavy cloak of secrecy.
I'm not aware of any other product that lets you manage clusters as easily
as Application Server should.
> Also, note that the top 50 machines in TPC-C and TPC-H benchmarks are
*not*
> mainframes.
>
> ASCI White, the second most powerful supercomputer on the planet, is *not*
a
> mainframe, but consists of 9,200 Intel Pentium Pros.
>
> Sandia has asked Microsoft to port XP Datacenter Server to their
> supercomputers.
Really? Where can I read about it? What was MS response?
As a note there won't be an XP Server/Advance Server/Datacenter, those are
being postphone and renamed Windows 2002.
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Getting used to Linux
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 00:40:37 -0700
drsquare wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2001 18:03:02 -0700, in comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> (GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>) wrote:
>
> >drsquare wrote:
>
> >> >I am afraid I had to go back to windows, becuase the software
> >> >I need to use is only on windows.
> >>
> >> I have to use windows because of my winmodem. This would never have
> >> happened if it wasn't for Microsoft.
> >
> >You can now get drivers for winmodems for linux. I have an external
> >modem that doesn't rob the CPU of its clock cycles. One simple modem
> >chip works better than any software and it won't get corrupted by any
> >file system accidents either.
> >Search the web for winmodem drivers for Linux.
>
> I have, but it's proving difficult to find anything.
Try http://www.linmodems.org/
They call 'em linmodems. Maybe you'll find what you're looking for
here.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 00:42:42 -0700
Greg Cox wrote:
>
> In article
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > Chad Myers wrote:
> > > Oh yes, this "Enterprise Linux" running on a bunch of home-grown
> > > boxes. I'm glad I'm not an employee of one of those companies. I'd
> > > have to use my stock options as toilet paper because it'd be cheaper.
> > >
> > > -c
> >
> > Your stock options are almost toilet paper as it is, seeing that from
> > over a year ago MS stock lost 2/3 of its value.
> >
> >
> Considering Microsoft's all time high was about 116 and closed today at
> 68.90 it's lost 41%, not 2/3. Of course, if we look at Redhat, its lost
> 96%, VA Linux has lost 99%, Sun has lost 76%, Oracle has lost 68%, and
> IBM has lost 16%. Looking at those numbers, Microsoft doesn't seem so
> bad off to me.
> --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Only reporting what I've heard on CNN today.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux penetration MUCH lower than previously claimed
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 00:44:01 -0700
"Matthew Gardiner (BOFH)" wrote:
>
> GreyCloud wrote:
>
> > Peter K�hlmann wrote:
> >
> >>Chad Myers wrote:
> >>
> >>>Who cares what you run in your home. We're talking about
> >>>real businesses making critical decisions that effect their
> >>>bottom line. It appears that they don't chose Linux.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Yeah, yeah, Chad. By your definition IBM is no *real* business.
> >>
> >>Moron.
> >>
> >>Peter
> >>
> >
> > Chads just pissed because he didn't sell off his MS stock in time last
> > year.
> > He must have lost at least 2/3 of its original value by now.
> > By spreading FUD he is hoping his stock will improve.
> >
>
> I never invested in those crappy tech stocks, I have shares in Capital
> Properties, United Networks and Auckland Airport, where I earn 11%
> interest a year. Long term investments give the best return to those who
> are willing to wait.
>
> Matthew Gardiner
11%... is that all?? We were getting around 18-19% with utilities.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the world thinks there is only windows. yahoo sucks.
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 00:46:59 -0700
Paolo Ciambotti wrote:
>
> In article
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Yep! You're right! It does give a damn error message. I'm using
> > Solaris 8.
> > Well Yahoo can go piss up a rope!
>
> I think that's funny as hell. It displays the page in Mozilla perfectly,
> then goes off on that error message bullshit. I can reload the page from
> cache and Mozilla doesn't have any problem with it.
>
> Yet just another case of a dumb web designer. For the same reason I don't
> think you should be allowed to drive a car unless you can put gas in the
> tank, this guy shouldn't be allowed to design webpages unless he's proved
> he can do it with Notepad.
>
> I guess Yahoo's not paying as well these days.....
They aren't the only site that dishes out goofed up web pages. Some
give you a blank screen and says its done.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: "This will not happen again," said the Microsoft spokesperson.
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 00:48:38 -0700
"Matthew Gardiner (BOFH)" wrote:
>
> GreyCloud wrote:
>
> > Anonymous wrote:
> >
> >>http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-6270970.html?tag=tp_pr
> >>
> >>Hey everyone! Microsoft said they will NEVER
> >>make a botched patch again!
> >>How reassuring!
> >>
> >>Let's all set our watches now and see
> >>how long before this promise is broken!
> >>
> >> --------== Posted Anonymously via Newsfeeds.Com ==-------
> >> Featuring the worlds only Anonymous Usenet Server
> >> -----------== http://www.newsfeeds.com ==----------
> >>
> >
> > Hehehe... and Chad says that Sun screws up on patches... Bwahahahaha!
> >
> >
>
> Chads actually using Solaris 2.6, meaning he can't apply patches over
> files that are currently running or being accessed by other
> applications. Version 7 & 8 address these issues. If he really did know
> what he was doing, he would drop down into maintainance mode, which
> shuts off all services and unnecessary back groud tasks, then he will
> not have any problems applying the patches.
>
> Matthew Gardiner
Why don't they upgrade to solaris 8 then?
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: MSnbc calls MS on MS's FUD campain!
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 00:57:33 -0700
Linux Admin wrote:
>
> MSnbc (remember what the MS stands for) shines a light on MS FUD!
>
> http://www.msnbc.com/news/587140.asp?cp1=1
As I posted earlier, it appears that most of the UNIX companies are
embracing and including linux in their lineup. It appears that its the
rest of the world against MS in competition, and causes MS to be
concerned and have invested in a FUD campaign.
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marada C. Shradrakaii)
Date: 15 Jun 2001 07:57:58 GMT
Subject: Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags
>> > Person1: "The government is hiding UFO information."
>> > Person2: "Untrue - prove your claim!"
>> > Person1: "Prove they aren't."
>> > Person2: "Um, how? How can you prove they aren't? Impossible."
>> >
>> > Person 2 kills person1 to prevent stupidity from breeding.
Since Encarta is a closed set of information, and can be compared to F&W, it
can be verified.
It's like if Person1 in your example said
"This specific gov't folder contains/doesn't contain UFO Information Item X"
--
Marada Coeurfuege Shra'drakaii
Colony name not needed in address.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marada C. Shradrakaii)
Date: 15 Jun 2001 07:58:23 GMT
Subject: Re: Opera
My stability problem app is xawtv. Without the Xv extention, it works as
expected... but trying to move to the new standard often jams the system up.
Probably 1/2 to 3/4 of the time, Magic SysReq can at least shut my machine down
gracefully. I suspect there is still some compatibility problem.
--
Marada Coeurfuege Shra'drakaii
Colony name not needed in address.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 10:38:35 +0200
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Sounds an awful lot like a big FUD compaign. Seeing that all the big
> companies and Linux are coalescing with UNIX ,.... it should frighten MS
> real bad to spread this kind of FUD around.
Are you aware that Chad Myers is not MS?
I'm sure he would like to be, I certainly would, but I seriously doubt he is
Microsoft. That would require Cat's Paw like world, and I don't think we
have advance enough cyborgs/AI to do that.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 11:04:31 +0200
"Bill Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9gatie$ei9$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Dan Pop" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9gajdi$qea$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> ...
>
> > Operating system upgrades are usually supported for incremental
upgrades,
> > i.e. from version m.n to m.n+1. If the old system is old enough, an OS
> > upgrade may no longer be an option.
>
> Given the rate at which Microsoft releases new versions, for most people
> this has likely not been much of a problem. While I don't know, it would
> not surprise me if Win98 (even 2nd edition) could be installed as an
upgrade
> to a Win3.1 system (since Win95 could) - and even if that's not the case,
> one has to ask whether one really wants one's existing Win3.1 applications
> in a Win98 environment or whether it's time to bite the bullet and move
> forward a decade or so.
Well, you can't upgrade ME from 3.X. But I think that you can with Win98SE.
Here is interesting tidbit:
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycleconsumer.asp
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.arch,misc.invest.stocks
Subject: Re: The beginning of the end for microsoft
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 10:51:13 +0200
"Maynard Handley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <9g8jgt$gjh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bill Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >> > I still don't see how cloning the disk solves my problem.
> > > I don't want an IDENTICAL copy of machine A on machine B. After all,
> > > machine A is running an OS from 2 yrs ago on a CPU from 4 yrs ago. I
want
> > > a "conceptually" identical copy, but with the OS and hardware
targetted
> > > bits replaced. This means doing the right thing with all the
pre-loaded
> > > apps along with shared material like fonts and DLLs plus, of course,
the
> > > registry.
> >
> > Perhaps you missed the post where I explained that the way to accomplish
> > this (with the caveat that there may be some manual tweaking required in
> > *some* cases, though in many there won't be) is then to perform an
*upgrade*
> > installation of your new OS version on the new hardware after moving
over
> > the cloned original system.
> >
> > Microsoft certainly attempts to make this easy, and in at least many
cases
> > succeeds.
>
> I think the resolution we are coming to is that the way to do this in
> pretty much any situation (Win/Mac/UNIX) is
> (a) get the material from old machine to new (if necessary move the
> manual disk, otherwise use some sort of file copy)
> (b) install the OS that came with the new machine on top of the result
> from (a)
Actually, what I did was:
Take HD from old computer, shove it into the new computer.
Update drivers, and that was it.
> This sounds like it works for Mac and Linux. For MS it was my
> understanding that what you got with a new PC was NOT a set of disks
> adequate to install the OS but something rather lighter weight which, of
> course, does not allow us to preform step (b). Am I wrong in this---when
> you buy a new PC with say Win2000 pre-installed, do you get a full
> collection of Win2K disks which would allow you to install 2K on top of an
> earlier MS OS?
You can get a fully functional OEM copy of Win2K, but most places offers a
"restore disk".
The most common function of it is to repartition your HD, and copy an image
of the installed OS to the HD.
Disregarding everything else on its path, usually.
It also ties you to the hardware of your computer, so if you try to install
it on a computer with a larger HD, it won't install.
I would refuse to touch such a disk, and I don't think that anyone should,
either.
Its one advantage is that it makes reinstalling Windows *very* simple.
(AOL-level simple)
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So what software is the NYSE running ?
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 10:51:55 +0200
"Rotten168" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> > "Rotten168" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Michael Vester wrote:
> > >
> > > > Exactly the reason that Microsoft would not attempt a fool hardy
project
> > > > like converting NASDAQ to losedos. They still have not proven that
Hotmail
> > > > is running 100% on losedos. Speaking of Hotmail, I have abandoned
my
> > > > Hotmail account because it was unavailable too many times. If
converting
> > > > Hotmail, which is simply web enabled email, was such a difficult
task; how
> > > > could they possibly convert NASDAQ to losedos? In a 6 1/2 hour
trading day
> > > > with 2 billion trades (a real busy day), the system has to process
85,470
> > > > trades per second. Of course, trading is done with mainframe, not
> > > > losedos.
> > >
> > > I abandoned Hotmail too, but not for that reason. Microsoft
suspiciously
> > > does not allow POP access for any other mail reader than OL/OLE.
That's
> > > bull5hit IMO. So I blocked all incoming letters and got a Yahoo
account.
> > >
> > > Usually I don't mind MS, but sometimes their greed is just
transparent.
> >
> > Greed? A free service? Used only through a free client?
>
> Why not allow POP access?
Because they need some revenue from this, you know.
Presumebly, they get the revenue from ads on the web pages.
I don't know how they handle OE clients, though.
Any ideas?
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Microsft IE6 smart tags
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 10:56:27 +0200
"GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I've already tried. Product is too old for them to update and I can't
> download 175Mb of sp5 down over a 28.8 link. I was even willing to
> spend a mere $5 on a CD and MS refused because I didn't renew my msdn
> subscription. I will move over to Metrowerks in due time as its found
> on a lot of different platforms.
I got as far as https://dm.one.microsoft.com/PIDValidation.asp, as I don't
have VC installed on this computer.
Where does it says that you need to have MSDN subscription? It says that you
would get it already if you've MSDN subscription.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The usual Linux spiel... (was Re: Is Open Source for You?)
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 11:00:10 +0200
"Christopher L. Estep" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:sxaW6.81163$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > "Rob S. Wolfram" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > > <low blow> Windows NT /was/ written with protability in mind (Mach
> > > > microkernel, HAL), but it looks like MS has abandoned that path...
> > > > </low blow>
> > >
> > > Not really.
> > > There are going to be two version of WinXP & 2K for 64 bits.
> > >
> > > Who want to bet on how long it would take to x86 proper to die?
> > > I set the bet on five to ten years from the moment I can get Itanuim &
> > > x86-64 on today's mid-high end prices.
> > > Unless Intel decide to cut 32 bits and just do 64bits.
> >
> > It is apparent that MS has to write two completely different o/ses...
> > one 32-bit and the other 64-bit. I won't bet on the ia-32s future...
> > with marketing and $ in their eyes its going to be pricey 64-bit
> > machines in the future... and repeat the cycle of the same old software
> > again only in new packaging and more colorful advertising.
>
> Microsoft has to write a completely different OS for Itanium because
*Intel*
> made a relevant and rational decision to leave IA-32 backward
compatibility
> out of Itanium altogether.
No, they don't have to write a completely different OS.
NT is portable. So they don't need to write the whole thing from scratch.
*Yes*, they probably wouldn't be able to just re-compile it to IA-64.
But the amount of modifications that they need to do is minimal.
I can assure you that the difference between x86 & ia-64 are smaller than
those between x86 & Alpha, PPC & MIPS.
> Also notice what features are *missing* from the Itanium version of XP
> Professional that are *in* the IA-32/AMD version of the same OS.
Such as?
> Further, Itanium is intended to be the replacement for Xeon, not the
> "commodity" processors that are P-III and P-IV.
For now, it will get to consumer level in a couple of years.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
