>Most of us are stuck at work:/ Oh well. Y2K ended up being Y2Lame. At >least the overtime is nice:)
Makes one wonder if we're going to be seeing lawsuits aimed at consulting firms like Gartner and other slime that basically created and hyped the Y2k hysteria.
>One of my favorite "features" of the RAM disk was the ability to >complete warm restarts on the machine, which would leave the RAM disk >present for booting. Back in the floppy days, having your system disk >in RAM and then your games on disk certainly helped and sped things >up. I've never found the RAM disk features in other OS' quite as >appealing as those in AmigaOS. Oh well.
Well duh. The reason OS' quite as appealing as those in AmigaOS as you so stupidily put was the simple fact that other OS never *NEEDED* a ramdrive as badly as AmigaOS did. The Amiga floppy and hardrives had to have been some of the most expensive and slowest drives on the face of the planet.
>because DVDs are going to go away just like betamax
No great loss. DVD isn't all that much better than VHS. I can see the pixels in the so-called "superior" DVD format and it's not worth the price tag attached to the tech/hardware, especially when you can buy a 4-head stereo VHS recorder/player at Wal-mart for under $70 nowdays.
>I know, for european languages, you can set LC_ALL , and I know that >here are localized version of linux in Thai, Japanese, Chinese, but >until we have a single distribution of linux that can imput and >display all the major languages in every app, we're not finished. >There's more to it than meet the eye.
You'll never see such a beast. What'll you see is pretty much what you see now, customized versions of linux. Why? Because what you are suggesting simply doesn't work in the real world. The example of UNICODE and Chinese you gave is exactly why "internationalization" just isn't going to meet the needs of the people who need it.
>So he's right - there is lots of talk and lots of hype - just look at >ZDNet and the mainstream press. Witness the VA Linux and Redhat IPOs. >There's lots of hope too - Enlightenment and Gnome / KDE desktops are >rapidly evolving. ReiserFS, Ext3, and SGI's fs (whose name escapes me >at the moment) are all very fast filesystems.
Ah no. What Dvorak means by lots of talk ect,ect,ect is that he and his fellow Ziff-Davis flacks have little or no influence over the Linux movement in the same fashion they had with OS/2. People are laughing at the stuff coming out of PC Week Labs. Dvorak and the rest of that bunch thought they would be molders and shapers of people's opinions of linux, hence his little snipes at linux with comments like "there is lots of talk and lots of hype"
>If a lawyer wanted to take a person to court for losses due to a >software glitch in open-source software I don't think the GPL will >offer much protection to the authors or distributors ( the >distro's will most likely be sued first).
Really? Would Redhat for instance really be legally responsible for Sendmail in the same sense that Microsoft would be for software it outright owns?
>It's been done. It's VMS's versioning system. There are Unix >filesystem hacks for this.
>links?
Run mc (Midnight Commander). It has support for undeleting files under the Command drop-down menu [Undelete files (ext2fs only)]. F1 brings up the Midnight Commander help system where you can find information on using Undelete File System.
>Hooray and rejoice, we reinforce the fact that Linux is better than >Windows. But this is a double edged blade, and for this reason: with >the antitrust suit against MS going on, what happens when someone >judges that there is fair competition again Microsoft? The whole trial >could go down the shitter just because we won the ego war. I say, wait >till the trial is over and done with before proving what great >competition Linux is.
Windows and Linux users make up entirely diffrent markets and the DOJ trial was 99% concerned with the windows one.
>I'm not sure I understand what you mean. It is pretty easy (from a >client pov) to connect a win95/98 computer to an ISP. It's been a >while since I've done this, but I believe all one has to enter is your >own IP or specify get IP automatically. I don't think you even have to >set the DNS. Maybe you mean that the ISP does a lot of work on their
I suspect he means the problems MS_CHAP creates for people who aren't running win95/98. The fact that a lot of these NT-using ISP's are run by ignorant MSCE's doesn't help matters much either.
>Instead of taking the attitude that online business are getting a free >ride by not having to apply taxes, try looking at it from the >perspective that the local stores are getting screwed by having to tax >their customers. Why would you want to be taxed in either situation, >much less both?
How about the fact that unlike you, I don't have a real problem with it. Grow up. Taxes are a fact of life.
>I'm sorry, but it is. I mean, who cares? >Oooh, Redhat has instructions on how to remove Windows. >Why don't you guys search MSKB for articles on linux, (forgetting the >frontpage extensions ones) there are other useful articles like how to >remove LILO using FDISK/MBR - something often asked on linux chat >channels, Often by Astrotufers like yourself that work for Mircosoft. BTW haven't you noticed that for the most the part the microsoft frontpage extensions articles are a lot like this one, which is to say full of errors and other such crap?
>I'm so pissed off with/. for posting this and for everyone making >such a big deal out of it.
Yeah, you Mircosoft PR hacks must be catching a lot of flack because another of your silly anti-linux plots blew up in your face again. This makes how many such attempts now?
And of course the guys over at DOJ must be laughing themselves sick....
>Some people would give life-saving medicine only to "the good guys" >[read: their own team]. This is a selfish, destructive, and thus >inherently EVIL way to live. Deny no man who thirsts the water he so >earnestly desires, be he friend or be he foe. If we must pass >judgment, then let us judge the goodness of a man, of a state, of any >enterprise--not by how they treat their favorites, but by how they >treat their downtrodden, their dissenters, their outcasts, the most >despised segments of their communities.
>That is why we should be happy that Microsoft had made good use from >BSD code.
Why does this bring to mind the old saying "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
> What a fucking selfish attitude! Do you know what an "Indian giver" >is? You should. You're just as bad as the wicked proprietary software >vendors. Worse, actually, because they don't cloak themselves in >pontificating doubletalk. > >Can you imagine if a scientist said, "Ok fine, here are the results of >my research, but you aren't allowed to use them to make money with." > >Give me a break.
Why? It's not the same thing. A perfect example of what's wrong with the BSD licence agreement is Microsoft's use of the BSD TCP/IP code. Microsoft got use of some fairly decent code. What did you BSD guys and the rest of the world get back? MS-CHAP.
>It's a way for users of Unix-like OSes to be able to use Windows apps. >The fact that it gets a lot of attention certainly says something.
Not really. UAE (An Amiga emulator that runs under MSDOS,Linux,Unix,Windows generates pretty much the same amount of attention, as does the game system emulator software.
>The Linux community really should be more careful about dealing with >International Business Machines. You would think that Alan Cox would >especially be more careful about who/what he accepted patches from.
What's your real beef with IBM? The fact that they won't let you rip-off artists steal their work? Or could it be the fact that the "Linux community" prefers dealing with IBM rather than Microsoft is what that is driving you nuts? If Alan,Linus and the rest of the kernel people doesn't seem to have a problem with the IBM patches, you shouldn't either. The fact you do makes me wonder that you're a paid Microsoft Astroturfer rather than someone who's really concerned about the "Linux community"
> Why not use CDDB as a model for this sort of thing. Keep the monitor >specific parameters on line somewhere, and make a generic setup >utility that fits on a 640X480 screen which all monitors do. Then pull >down the virtual.inf file from the site, compare to a similar site >for video, (same site) and then compare them, and present the use
Because you have to force people to have an connection to the internet, which is a very bad idea for any sort of install program.
>Linux, of course, is getting much better very quickly (and one of the >projects that I am on the periphery of at SGI is working on this). The >zone memory allocator and underpinnings of NUMA support are excellent >first steps. Even so, I don't think you'll see a 512 processor single >system image Linux machine that has reasonable scaling any time soon. >Basically, Linux scales well on the "low end" but not the high end.
True, but an interesting point has been brought up here. Will we see really see benchmarks from Mindcraft and PC Week that truthfully deal with Linux and BSD now that both are running on hardware that NT/Windows 2000 doesn't support or will they just keep performing their rigged tests on PC hardware and claiming it's still an accurate performance test of Linux,BSD and other non-Mircosoft OS and software?
>Why the heck would anyone spend the kinda huge >$$ it takes to run a 390 series machine or a >Fujitsu or other 3rd party VM processor and >then run freeking Linux? What kinda moronic >place would RUN this???
A place not stupid enough to hire *YOU* or run Windows 2000...
Wondered when you MicroSoft Astrotufers would show up
>One thing I'd like to see is an instant messaging client that converts >messages into email and sends them to you. Then I could just check my >inbox rather than inbox plus several messaging programs. Coping with >outgoing messages would be more complex, but probably the Reply-To: >address on the message would be something like >'icq-4929392@localhost', which the client could then pass on to ICQ.
Just Great. Just what the world needs. A new tool for you spammer WannaBe's
>so why do you people feel so insulted when your particular >distribution doesn't score as well as others? Would you honestly be >happier if your distro score as well as others?
How about the fact that the C-Net "article" uses a "scoring system" that doesn't make any damned sense? Or that C-Net is full of jackasses who don't know anything about Linux or Linux-related matters but try to come off sounding like they do? The truth of the matter is that C-Net has never truely supported non-Windows users and never will. Their Linux "support" is just a scam pure and simple. Linux along with the BSD's *don't* really need "support" from outfits like C-Net that caters to the Windows crowd. After all, look how far both Linux and BSD has come in the last year *WITHOUT* the blessings of you C-Net wankers. In other words, we don't *need* you and stop pretending that we do.
Slashdot Mirror
>Most of us are stuck at work :/ Oh well. Y2K ended up being Y2Lame. At :)
>least the overtime is nice
Makes one wonder if we're going to be seeing lawsuits aimed at consulting firms like Gartner and other slime that basically created and hyped the Y2k hysteria.
>One of my favorite "features" of the RAM disk was the ability to
>complete warm restarts on the machine, which would leave the RAM disk
>present for booting. Back in the floppy days, having your system disk
>in RAM and then your games on disk certainly helped and sped things
>up. I've never found the RAM disk features in other OS' quite as
>appealing as those in AmigaOS. Oh well.
Well duh. The reason OS' quite as appealing as those in AmigaOS as you so stupidily put was the simple fact that other OS never *NEEDED* a ramdrive as badly as AmigaOS did. The Amiga floppy and hardrives had to have been some of the most expensive and slowest drives on the face of the planet.
>W2k Pro runs fine on my P 200 with 64MB of RAM as well.
Just like Win95 ran fine on a 486 DX50 with 16 megs of ram, eh?
>because DVDs are going to go away just like betamax
No great loss. DVD isn't all that much better than VHS. I can see the pixels in the so-called "superior" DVD format and it's not worth the price tag attached to the tech/hardware, especially when you can buy a 4-head stereo VHS recorder/player at Wal-mart for under $70 nowdays.
>I know, for european languages, you can set LC_ALL , and I know that
>here are localized version of linux in Thai, Japanese, Chinese, but
>until we have a single distribution of linux that can imput and
>display all the major languages in every app, we're not finished.
>There's more to it than meet the eye.
You'll never see such a beast. What'll you see is pretty much what you see now, customized versions of linux. Why? Because what you are suggesting simply doesn't work in the real world. The example of UNICODE and Chinese you gave is exactly why "internationalization" just isn't going to meet the needs of the people who need it.
>So he's right - there is lots of talk and lots of hype - just look at
>ZDNet and the mainstream press. Witness the VA Linux and Redhat IPOs.
>There's lots of hope too - Enlightenment and Gnome / KDE desktops are
>rapidly evolving. ReiserFS, Ext3, and SGI's fs (whose name escapes me
>at the moment) are all very fast filesystems.
Ah no. What Dvorak means by lots of talk ect,ect,ect is that he and his fellow Ziff-Davis flacks have little or no influence over the Linux movement in the same fashion they had with OS/2. People are laughing at the stuff coming out of PC Week Labs. Dvorak and the rest of that bunch thought they would be molders and shapers of people's opinions of linux, hence his little snipes at linux with comments like "there is lots of talk and lots of hype"
>Congratulations. You've written something with no coherent meaning
>whatsoever.
Guy must have been on the Star Trek:The Next Generation production staff.....
>If a lawyer wanted to take a person to court for losses due to a
>software glitch in open-source software I don't think the GPL will
>offer much protection to the authors or distributors ( the
>distro's will most likely be sued first).
Really? Would Redhat for instance really be legally responsible for Sendmail in the same sense that Microsoft would be for software it outright owns?
>It's been done. It's VMS's versioning system. There are Unix
>filesystem hacks for this.
>links?
Run mc (Midnight Commander). It has support for undeleting files under the Command drop-down menu [Undelete files (ext2fs only)]. F1 brings up the Midnight Commander help system where you can find information on using Undelete File System.
>I also think it's great that "security through obscurity" is being >attacked so dead-on, especally in ZDNet.
The only reason you're seeing this from ZDNET is because they got so badly burned by the fallout from PC Week's "security testing" of Linux and NT
>Hooray and rejoice, we reinforce the fact that Linux is better than
>Windows. But this is a double edged blade, and for this reason: with
>the antitrust suit against MS going on, what happens when someone
>judges that there is fair competition again Microsoft? The whole trial
>could go down the shitter just because we won the ego war. I say, wait
>till the trial is over and done with before proving what great
>competition Linux is.
Windows and Linux users make up entirely diffrent markets and the DOJ trial was 99% concerned with the windows one.
>I'm not sure I understand what you mean. It is pretty easy (from a
>client pov) to connect a win95/98 computer to an ISP. It's been a
>while since I've done this, but I believe all one has to enter is your
>own IP or specify get IP automatically. I don't think you even have to
>set the DNS. Maybe you mean that the ISP does a lot of work on their
I suspect he means the problems MS_CHAP creates for people who aren't running win95/98. The fact that a lot of these NT-using ISP's are run by ignorant MSCE's doesn't help matters much either.
>Swell - now that Voyager's the only thing worth watching on TV
My God. You must have no life at all.
>Instead of taking the attitude that online business are getting a free
>ride by not having to apply taxes, try looking at it from the
>perspective that the local stores are getting screwed by having to tax
>their customers. Why would you want to be taxed in either situation,
>much less both?
How about the fact that unlike you, I don't have a real problem with it. Grow up. Taxes are a fact of life.
>I'm sorry, but it is. I mean, who cares? /MBR - something often asked on linux chat
/. for posting this and for everyone making
>Oooh, Redhat has instructions on how to remove Windows.
>Why don't you guys search MSKB for articles on linux, (forgetting the
>frontpage extensions ones) there are other useful articles like how to
>remove LILO using FDISK
>channels,
Often by Astrotufers like yourself that work for Mircosoft. BTW haven't you noticed that for the most the part the microsoft frontpage extensions articles are a lot like this one, which is to say full of errors and other such crap?
>I'm so pissed off with
>such a big deal out of it.
Yeah, you Mircosoft PR hacks must be catching a lot of flack because another of your silly anti-linux plots blew up in your face again. This makes how many such attempts now?
And of course the guys over at DOJ must be laughing themselves sick....
>2) give the developers of all distros the hint to make dual-booting
>the DEFAULT option when installing Linux.
Umm...Most linux distros default to dual-booting. That's what lilo basically is for.
>Some people would give life-saving medicine only to "the good guys"
>[read: their own team]. This is a selfish, destructive, and thus
>inherently EVIL way to live. Deny no man who thirsts the water he so
>earnestly desires, be he friend or be he foe. If we must pass
>judgment, then let us judge the goodness of a man, of a state, of any
>enterprise--not by how they treat their favorites, but by how they
>treat their downtrodden, their dissenters, their outcasts, the most
>despised segments of their communities.
>That is why we should be happy that Microsoft had made good use from
>BSD code.
Why does this bring to mind the old saying "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
> What a fucking selfish attitude! Do you know what an "Indian giver"
>is? You should. You're just as bad as the wicked proprietary software
>vendors. Worse, actually, because they don't cloak themselves in
>pontificating doubletalk.
>
>Can you imagine if a scientist said, "Ok fine, here are the results of
>my research, but you aren't allowed to use them to make money with."
>
>Give me a break.
Why? It's not the same thing. A perfect example of what's wrong with the BSD licence agreement is Microsoft's use of the BSD TCP/IP code. Microsoft got use of some fairly decent code. What did you BSD guys and the rest of the world get back? MS-CHAP.
>It's a way for users of Unix-like OSes to be able to use Windows apps.
>The fact that it gets a lot of attention certainly says something.
Not really. UAE (An Amiga emulator that runs under MSDOS,Linux,Unix,Windows generates pretty much the same amount of attention, as does the game system emulator software.
>The Linux community really should be more careful about dealing with
>International Business Machines. You would think that Alan Cox would
>especially be more careful about who/what he accepted patches from.
What's your real beef with IBM? The fact that they won't let you rip-off artists steal their work? Or could it be the fact that the "Linux community" prefers dealing with IBM rather than Microsoft is what that is driving you nuts? If Alan,Linus and the rest of the kernel people doesn't seem to have a problem with the IBM patches, you shouldn't either. The fact you do makes me wonder that you're a paid Microsoft Astroturfer rather than someone who's really concerned about the "Linux community"
> Why not use CDDB as a model for this sort of thing. Keep the monitor .inf file from the site, compare to a similar site
>specific parameters on line somewhere, and make a generic setup
>utility that fits on a 640X480 screen which all monitors do. Then pull
>down the virtual
>for video, (same site) and then compare them, and present the use
Because you have to force people to have an connection to the internet, which is a very bad idea for any sort of install program.
>Linux, of course, is getting much better very quickly (and one of the
>projects that I am on the periphery of at SGI is working on this). The
>zone memory allocator and underpinnings of NUMA support are excellent
>first steps. Even so, I don't think you'll see a 512 processor single
>system image Linux machine that has reasonable scaling any time soon.
>Basically, Linux scales well on the "low end" but not the high end.
True, but an interesting point has been brought up here. Will we see really see benchmarks from Mindcraft and PC Week that truthfully deal with Linux and BSD now that both are running on hardware that NT/Windows 2000 doesn't support or will they just keep performing their rigged tests on PC hardware and claiming it's still an accurate performance test of Linux,BSD and other non-Mircosoft OS and software?
>Why the heck would anyone spend the kinda huge
>$$ it takes to run a 390 series machine or a
>Fujitsu or other 3rd party VM processor and
>then run freeking Linux? What kinda moronic
>place would RUN this???
A place not stupid enough to hire *YOU* or run Windows 2000...
Wondered when you MicroSoft Astrotufers would show up
>One thing I'd like to see is an instant messaging client that converts
>messages into email and sends them to you. Then I could just check my
>inbox rather than inbox plus several messaging programs. Coping with
>outgoing messages would be more complex, but probably the Reply-To:
>address on the message would be something like
>'icq-4929392@localhost', which the client could then pass on to ICQ.
Just Great. Just what the world needs. A new tool for you spammer WannaBe's
>so why do you people feel so insulted when your particular >distribution doesn't score as well as others? Would you honestly be >happier if your distro score as well as others?
How about the fact that the C-Net "article" uses a "scoring system" that doesn't make any damned sense? Or that C-Net is full of jackasses who don't know anything about Linux or Linux-related matters but try to come off sounding like they do? The truth of the matter is that C-Net has never truely supported non-Windows users and never will. Their Linux "support" is just a scam pure and simple. Linux along with the BSD's *don't* really need "support" from outfits like C-Net that caters to the Windows crowd. After all, look how far both Linux and BSD has come in the last year *WITHOUT* the blessings of you C-Net wankers. In other words, we don't *need* you and stop pretending that we do.