Searching \ for '[OT:] Is Linux the future or just nostalgic?' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: massmind.org/techref/index.htm?key=linux+future+just
Search entire site for: 'Is Linux the future or just nostalgic?'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT:] Is Linux the future or just nostalgic?'
2004\07\14@124111 by Randy Abernathy

picon face
Maybe I am missing something here but, it would seem that most of the  people
that are looking at or using Linux are some of us technical types.

In the real world, companies and people want something that they don't need
to think to use.  Mac and Windows seems to be going closer to that than
Linux.

Now I admit, I haven't been very active with Linux but I used a lot of
systems, and worked on them, that used UNIX and XENIX, both pretty much the same
types of operating systems and they became pretty much obsolete for some
reason,  it took specialized people to maintain them.  Linux is just a "free"  or
"shareware" version of UNIX from what I have learned.  Are we just  longing for
days gone by here?

It is fun to "re-invent" the wheel sometimes but I have yet to find any of
my major clients that will even consider using Linux or going back to a UNIX
type operating system.  They like how Windows seems to work for them.

Just asking a question here that has been proposed to me by a number  of my
clients that have seen Linux and wanted to know why someone would, more or
less, go backwards.

Randy  Abernathy
4626 Old Stilesboro Road NW
Acworth, GA 30101-4066
Phone /  Fax: 770-974-5295
Cell: 678-772-4113
E-mail: spam_OUTCnc002TakeThisOuTspamaol.com

I  furnish technical support, repair, and other related services for your
industrial woodworking machinery. My background as Senior Service Engineer for
the SCMI Group for nearly fifteen years with factory training, combines with
my  extensive background in electronics, mechanics, pneumatics, electrical and
CNC  machinery to offer you needed support for your  machinery.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
.....piclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspamspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@130224 by Alex Harford

face picon face
Flamewar begins in 3 2 1 ...

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 12:41:23 EDT, Randy Abernathy <cnc002spamKILLspamaol.com> wrote:
>
> It is fun to "re-invent" the wheel sometimes but I have yet to find any of
> my major clients that will even consider using Linux or going back to a UNIX
> type operating system.  They like how Windows seems to work for them.

It's not just that a Linux system is a UNIX clone, it's the Free
Software.  You don't have any vendor lock in since you have the source
code and you can get anyone to work on it if you don't like the
original.  There are thousands if not millions of developers out there
working on the kernel, GUI, browsers, etc that are constantly
improving the code.

For example, look at the Mozilla project with tabbed browsing, popup
blocking, flash blocking versus IE where the development has
stagnated.

Do your clients know that there is a competing browser or do they just
use IE because it was installed by default. :)

> Just asking a question here that has been proposed to me by a number  of my
> clients that have seen Linux and wanted to know why someone would, more or
> less, go backwards.

For a server, Linux is very suitable.  In our office here, we have
Linux systems running file servers and FPGA build servers since the
major FPGA vendors support Linux now.  And this was before I came to
the office, the IT guy is OS neutral, whereas I'm a Linux zealot. :)

Alex

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
.....piclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspamspam.....mitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@130430 by D. Jay Newman

flavicon
face
> Maybe I am missing something here but, it would seem that most of the  people
> that are looking at or using Linux are some of us technical types.

Agreed. There was a recent gathering of information about computers at
Penn State where Linux was *very* low on the list. Windows, then Mac.

> It is fun to "re-invent" the wheel sometimes but I have yet to find any of
> my major clients that will even consider using Linux or going back to a UNIX
> type operating system.  They like how Windows seems to work for them.

It depends on the use. I would rather use a Linux server than a Windows
one. On the other hand, I am typing this from a Windows machine (via
SSH to a Linux server).

> Just asking a question here that has been proposed to me by a number  of my
> clients that have seen Linux and wanted to know why someone would, more or
> less, go backwards.

I've been in the computing field for around 30 years. Yes, DOS has grown
up to have a fairly respectable user interface. I use a Windows machine
to do most of my programming on. Some of this programming is then
transferred to a Linux machine.
--
D. Jay Newman           ! DCX - it takes off and lands base first,
EraseMEjayspam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTsprucegrove.com     !       as God and Robert Heinlein intended.
http://enerd.ws/robots/ !

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
piclist-unsubscribe-requestspamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@130638 by John J. McDonough

flavicon
face
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Abernathy" <@spam@Cnc002KILLspamspamAOL.COM>
Subject: Re: [OT:] Is Linux the future or just nostalgic?


> Maybe I am missing something here but, it would seem that most of the
people
> that are looking at or using Linux are some of us technical types.

Very true

> In the real world, companies and people want something that they don't
need
> to think to use.  Mac and Windows seems to be going closer to that than
> Linux.

Also true.  In addition, in industry, companies want something they feel
they can count on.  Support is a big issue.  Although there is some support
for Linux, none of it is structured to deliver the sort of confidence that
M$ does.

> reason,  it took specialized people to maintain them.  Linux is just a
"free"  or
> "shareware" version of UNIX from what I have learned.  Are we just
longing for
> days gone by here?

Yes and no.  There is a lot of value in the old stuff.  In many ways,
Windows is just a new DOS with a fancy paint job.  Linux is only just
getting the paint job act together.

But there is one big difference ... Windows Applications, Windows, and PC's
conspire in an upgrade cycle that is getting very expensive.  Companies are
noticing this.  The Linux upgrade cycle is not nearly as expensive, either
in terms of actual dollar outlay, nor in terms of retraining and conversion.
With M$, every two or three years it's a new ball game.  This is very
expensive.  Next month we are going to get a "security upgrade" with few new
features that may be more expensive than the new operating system versions,
in terms of conversions, application upgrades, and retraining.

> It is fun to "re-invent" the wheel sometimes but I have yet to find any of
> my major clients that will even consider using Linux or going back to a
UNIX
> type operating system.  They like how Windows seems to work for them.

And the Linux enthusiasts still don't really get this.

> Just asking a question here that has been proposed to me by a number  of
my
> clients that have seen Linux and wanted to know why someone would, more or
> less, go backwards.

In some areas, it isn't a step backwards.  I think it is hard to argue that
it is an improvement for the desktop, other than dollar outlay.  But for
database servers, firewalls, file servers, web servers, etc. etc. etc.
Microsloth is scrambling to catch up.

For people who develop it is interesting how it is evolving.  Linux has
always had quite a complete development environment, which in many ways has
traditionally been more developer-friendly than M$.  But M$ has been upping
the ante there in a way that is hard for the open source community to match.
VS 2005 has developer features that are truly astonishing.  But it comes at
a breathtaking cost.  It will be interesting to see whether people will be
willing to make the investment to get the features.  I suspect that they
will, because the security features in particular are hard to ignore.  But
it looks as if Whidbey is poised to deliver developer productivity features
that are going to make it hard to compete.

--McD

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
KILLspampiclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspamspammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@132544 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
Randy Abernathy wrote:
> Maybe I am missing something here but, it would seem that most of the  people
> that are looking at or using Linux are some of us technical types.
>
> In the real world, companies and people want something that they don't need
> to think to use.  Mac and Windows seems to be going closer to that than
> Linux.
>
Actually, Randy, that's not true. Windows systems are forever getting
hammered with bugs, viruses, and poor software workmanship. When I had
an active company with 5 PCs, I spent at least 25% of my work time
dealing with Windows problems, from rebooting to upgrading. With MY
clients, IT costs when using Woindows were literally through the roof.

Linux systems do take some configuring (as do Windows systems). But once
configured, the systems are incredibly stable, and 99.99% immune to
viruses because the code is properly written. The software is mostly
open-source, which means that (1) the code is always open to peer review
 (bad code would be professionally embarassing), and (2) can be fixed
by anybody. The outcome is that poorly-written code is almost on-existent.

Companies are dropping Windows in droves. NO networked government system
is Windows-based (although some independent Windows CPUs are used). Did
you know that mainland China has chosen to NOT allow Windows on ANY of
its government-controlled servers?

I still have Win2K, but I am slowly weaning myself of software that
depends on Windows itself. So I can switch to Linux or a variant.

{Quote hidden}

That's amazing!

>
> Just asking a question here that has been proposed to me by a number  of my
> clients that have seen Linux and wanted to know why someone would, more or
> less, go backwards.

Wow, I guess you want lotsa replies...

--Bob

{Quote hidden}

--

Replier: Most attachments rejected
      --------------
        Bob Axtell
PIC Hardware & Firmware Dev
  http://beam.to/baxtell
      1-520-219-2363

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
TakeThisOuTpiclist-unsubscribe-requestEraseMEspamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@132957 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 12:41:23PM -0400, Randy Abernathy wrote:
> Maybe I am missing something here but, it would seem that most of the  people
> that are looking at or using Linux are some of us technical types.

You're missing the point.

>

> In the real world, companies and people want something that they don't need
> to think to use.  Mac and Windows seems to be going closer to that than
> Linux.

Mac OSX is a Unix operating system. So "lack of thinking to use" and Unix
style OS are orthogonal concepts.

>

> Now I admit, I haven't been very active with Linux but I used a lot of
> systems, and worked on them, that used UNIX and XENIX, both pretty much the
> same types of operating systems and they became pretty much obsolete for some
> reason,  it took specialized people to maintain them.  Linux is just a
> "free"  or "shareware" version of UNIX from what I have learned.  Are we
> just  longing for days gone by here?

A couple of points:

1) Comparing a current version of Linux to Unix/Xenix is like comparing WinXP
to MSDOS 6.2. There's a light year worth of difference between the two.

2) Open Source most closely describes Linux/FreeBSD and the others. You can
pay or get it free, but nearly all of the source code to generate it is
freely available to you.


{Quote hidden}

Ah. You're in the Atlanta area. You should come down to one of the Atlanta
Area Linux Enthusiasts group meetings and let them give you the tour. Info
can be found at http://www.ale.org

BAJ

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@132957 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Wed, 2004-07-14 at 12:41, Randy Abernathy wrote:
> Maybe I am missing something here but, it would seem that most of the  people
> that are looking at or using Linux are some of us technical types.
>
> In the real world, companies and people want something that they don't need
> to think to use.  Mac and Windows seems to be going closer to that than
> Linux.

Hehe, funny you mention Macs, since the latest Mac OS is just a
derivative of a BSD type OS, which is very Unix like...

Oh, and for the record, for someone who has been dabbling with Linux for
a while now, the latest incarnations of Linux are VASTLY easier to setup
and use then prior versions. Are they as easy as Windows? Nope, but they
are very close, especially considering efforts like Lindows/Linspire.

Give it some more time, Linux is very close to being perfect for
mainstream user use. I myself have converted 3 of the PCs on my network
to Linux, the only reason I still run windows on my main PC is the VPN
connection to work, and the fact that I can't find drivers for my ATI
AIW to use all it's fancy features. TTYL

-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
piclist-unsubscribe-requestEraseMEspam.....mitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@134044 by D. Jay Newman

flavicon
face
> > Maybe I am missing something here but, it would seem that most of the  people
> > that are looking at or using Linux are some of us technical types.

If you're getting your information from this and similar lists, well,
most of us are technical types.  :)

> Oh, and for the record, for someone who has been dabbling with Linux for
> a while now, the latest incarnations of Linux are VASTLY easier to setup
> and use then prior versions. Are they as easy as Windows? Nope, but they
> are very close, especially considering efforts like Lindows/Linspire.

Fully agreed. I can install Gentoo recompiling everything in my spare
time over a day (complete with both sleep and my day job).
And this is on a 1 MHz low-powered machine using NFS for source storage.
My next big robot will have a *much* faster motherboard.
--
D. Jay Newman           ! DCX - it takes off and lands base first,
EraseMEjayspamsprucegrove.com     !       as God and Robert Heinlein intended.
http://enerd.ws/robots/ !

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestEraseMEspamEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@134046 by Randy Abernathy

picon face
In a message dated 7/14/2004 1:31:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
RemoveMEbyronspam_OUTspamKILLspamCC.GATECH.EDU writes:

Ah.  You're in the Atlanta area. You should come down to one of the Atlanta
Area  Linux Enthusiasts group meetings and let them give you the tour. Info
can  be found at http://www.ale.org

BAJ



Might not be a bad idea to do that.

Randy  Abernathy
4626 Old Stilesboro Road NW
Acworth, GA 30101-4066
Phone /  Fax: 770-974-5295
Cell: 678-772-4113
E-mail: RemoveMECnc002TakeThisOuTspamspamaol.com

I  furnish technical support, repair, and other related services for your
industrial woodworking machinery. My background as Senior Service Engineer for
the SCMI Group for nearly fifteen years with factory training, combines with
my  extensive background in electronics, mechanics, pneumatics, electrical and
CNC  machinery to offer you needed support for your  machinery.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
EraseMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamspamspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@134254 by Randy Abernathy

picon face
In a message dated 7/14/2004 1:31:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
RemoveMEmailinglist2KILLspamspamFARCITE.NET writes:

Are they  as easy as Windows? Nope, but they
are very close, especially considering  efforts like Lindows/Linspire.



I was wondering about the Lindows thing.  I purchase quite a few  things from
TigerDirect and they offer a Lindows system PC that is quite  inexpensive.

Randy  Abernathy
4626 Old Stilesboro Road NW
Acworth, GA 30101-4066
Phone /  Fax: 770-974-5295
Cell: 678-772-4113
E-mail: Cnc002STOPspamspamspam_OUTaol.com

I  furnish technical support, repair, and other related services for your
industrial woodworking machinery. My background as Senior Service Engineer for
the SCMI Group for nearly fifteen years with factory training, combines with
my  extensive background in electronics, mechanics, pneumatics, electrical and
CNC  machinery to offer you needed support for your  machinery.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spamBeGonepiclist-unsubscribe-requestSTOPspamspamEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@134500 by David Koski

flavicon
face
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 12:41:23 EDT
Randy Abernathy <KILLspamCnc002spamBeGonespamAOL.COM> wrote:

> Maybe I am missing something here but, it would seem that most of the  people
> that are looking at or using Linux are some of us technical types.

It used to be that all computers were only used by technical types. Linux has
become much more user friendly and will continue to do so.

> In the real world, companies and people want something that they don't need
> to think to use.  Mac and Windows seems to be going closer to that than
> Linux.

Having gone through CP/M, MS-DOS, Windows, Linux over the years, I don't see why
you would have to think any more to use Linux than Windows unless you are stuck
on using a specific application.

> Now I admit, I haven't been very active with Linux but I used a lot of
> systems, and worked on them, that used UNIX and XENIX, both pretty much the same
> types of operating systems and they became pretty much obsolete for some
> reason,  it took specialized people to maintain them.  Linux is just a "free"  or
> "shareware" version of UNIX from what I have learned.  Are we just  longing for
> days gone by here?

Again, Linux is becomming more user friendly. But partly because of the
applications that are available for installing, administering, etc. The kernel,
which more than anything defines Linux, also is probably the biggest factor that
puts it in the same class as Unix. But I don't think most people choose an
operating system for its kernel.

> It is fun to "re-invent" the wheel sometimes but I have yet to find any of
> my major clients that will even consider using Linux or going back to a UNIX
> type operating system.  They like how Windows seems to work for them.

The number of governments and municipalities that are moving to Linux has grown.
And it makes sense to me. If you have to hire someone to administer a network of
computers regardless, why not hire a Linux admin? You can save the high cost of
software and accomplish the same thing.

> Just asking a question here that has been proposed to me by a number  of my
> clients that have seen Linux and wanted to know why someone would, more or
> less, go backwards.

They have the wrong idea of what Linux is. Why do they preceive it as a
backwards step? There is FUD about Linux. It is secure, I don't worry about
viruses and worms, and it is free. What more can you ask for?

--
David Koski
EraseMEdavidspamEraseMEKosmosIsland.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
@spam@piclist-unsubscribe-request@spam@spamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@135331 by Alex Harford

face picon face
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 13:42:38 EDT, Randy Abernathy <spamBeGonecnc002spamKILLspamaol.com> wrote:
> In a message dated 7/14/2004 1:31:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> .....mailinglist2spam_OUTspamFARCITE.NET writes:
>
> Are they  as easy as Windows? Nope, but they
> are very close, especially considering  efforts like Lindows/Linspire.
>
>
> I was wondering about the Lindows thing.  I purchase quite a few  things from
> TigerDirect and they offer a Lindows system PC that is quite  inexpensive.

They make it an easy to use system at the expense of security.
Everything runs as root (Administrator) which is a poor design
decision IMO.  Although it might be a good start to buy that PC since
you know that the hardware will be supported.  Since you can download
the distributions for free, or maybe borrow a copy from someone in the
local LUG, it's no big effort to try a bunch of distributions to see
which one you like best.

There are tons of Linux distros available (see recent flamewar :-) ).
A good page to check out the differences: http://www.distrowatch.org/

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
TakeThisOuTpiclist-unsubscribe-request.....spamTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@135746 by Vern Jones

flavicon
face
----- Original Message -----
From: Herbert Graf <TakeThisOuTmailinglist2KILLspamspamspamFARCITE.NET>
To: <.....PICLISTspamRemoveMEMITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 10:29 AM
Subject: Re: [OT:] Is Linux the future or just nostalgic?


If Linux is going away, why has Big Blue ported it to their Large MVS
Mainframes. Most large Enterprise servers run a flavor of UNIX. IBM-AIX,
HP-HPUX and SUN-Solaris. I don't recall a Windows OS running on any of
these.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Vern
{Quote hidden}

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spamBeGonepiclist-unsubscribe-request@spam@spamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@140408 by Randy Abernathy

picon face
In a message dated 7/14/2004 1:46:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
TakeThisOuTdavidspamspamKOSMOSISLAND.COM writes:

They  have the wrong idea of what Linux is. Why do they preceive it as  a
backwards step? There is FUD about Linux. It is secure, I don't worry  about
viruses and worms, and it is free. What more can you ask  for?




I can't argue that it is stable and secure, for now.  You and I  both know
that the more popular it gets, the less secure it will be.  Some  hacker will
start to produce viruses, trojan horses, worms, etc. that will  invade it.  Take
those government non-windows networks/servers that someone  mentioned in
another response.  How many times in the last several years  have we seen where a
virus has made it into that environment.

However, I do want to learn more about Linux for the stablility factor and
using it to develop machine controls.

Randy  Abernathy
4626 Old Stilesboro Road NW
Acworth, GA 30101-4066
Phone /  Fax: 770-974-5295
Cell: 678-772-4113
E-mail: Cnc002EraseMEspamaol.com

I  furnish technical support, repair, and other related services for your
industrial woodworking machinery. My background as Senior Service Engineer for
the SCMI Group for nearly fifteen years with factory training, combines with
my  extensive background in electronics, mechanics, pneumatics, electrical and
CNC  machinery to offer you needed support for your  machinery.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestEraseMEspamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@140409 by Randy Abernathy

picon face
In a message dated 7/14/2004 1:54:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
@spam@harfordRemoveMEspamEraseMEGMAIL.COM writes:

There  are tons of Linux distros available (see recent flamewar :-) ).
A good page  to check out the differences:  http://www.distrowatch.org/




Thanks, will do

Randy  Abernathy
4626 Old Stilesboro Road NW
Acworth, GA 30101-4066
Phone /  Fax: 770-974-5295
Cell: 678-772-4113
E-mail: EraseMECnc002spam@spam@aol.com

I  furnish technical support, repair, and other related services for your
industrial woodworking machinery. My background as Senior Service Engineer for
the SCMI Group for nearly fifteen years with factory training, combines with
my  extensive background in electronics, mechanics, pneumatics, electrical and
CNC  machinery to offer you needed support for your  machinery.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
@spam@piclist-unsubscribe-requestspam_OUTspam.....mitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@141600 by Vern Jones

flavicon
face
LINUX-UNIX types, have a look at this.

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5266768.html

Vern

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spamBeGonepiclist-unsubscribe-requestEraseMEspammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@143919 by Randy Abernathy

picon face
In a message dated 7/14/2004 2:17:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
soundresspamBeGonespamFOOTHILL.NET writes:

LINUX-UNIX types, have a look at  this.

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5266768.html

Vern



mmmmmmm sort of takes the edge off of Linux making everything a lot  less
expensive, doesn't it?

Randy  Abernathy
4626 Old Stilesboro Road NW
Acworth, GA 30101-4066
Phone /  Fax: 770-974-5295
Cell: 678-772-4113
E-mail: RemoveMECnc002@spam@spamspamBeGoneaol.com

I  furnish technical support, repair, and other related services for your
industrial woodworking machinery. My background as Senior Service Engineer for
the SCMI Group for nearly fifteen years with factory training, combines with
my  extensive background in electronics, mechanics, pneumatics, electrical and
CNC  machinery to offer you needed support for your  machinery.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
.....piclist-unsubscribe-request@spam@spamEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@144749 by David Koski

flavicon
face
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:03:03 EDT
Randy Abernathy <.....Cnc002RemoveMEspamAOL.COM> wrote:

> In a message dated 7/14/2004 1:46:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> .....davidSTOPspamspam@spam@KOSMOSISLAND.COM writes:
>
>> They  have the wrong idea of what Linux is. Why do they preceive it as  a
>> backwards step? There is FUD about Linux. It is secure, I don't worry  about
>> viruses and worms, and it is free. What more can you ask  for?
>
> I can't argue that it is stable and secure, for now.  You and I  both know
> that the more popular it gets, the less secure it will be.  Some  hacker will
> start to produce viruses, trojan horses, worms, etc. that will  invade it.  Take
> those government non-windows networks/servers that someone  mentioned in
> another response.  How many times in the last several years  have we seen where a
> virus has made it into that environment.

More oft' repeated FUD. Popular does not equal vulnerable. For example, compare
IIS (Microft's web server) to Apache (the open source web server). Apache enjoys
about two to three times more popularity last I checked.  But I don't remember
the last time there was a significant security issue with it. IIS is another
matter, however. See http://www.cert.org.

> However, I do want to learn more about Linux for the stablility factor and
> using it to develop machine controls.

<snip>

--
David Koski
davidEraseMEspam@spam@KosmosIsland.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@145410 by Randy Glenn

picon face
How do you mean? Big-iron servers have always cost more limbs than
most people have.

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:38:57 EDT, Randy Abernathy <spamBeGonecnc002KILLspamspam@spam@aol.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

--
-Randy Glenn
Computer Eng. and Mgt. Year IV, McMaster University
Chair, McMaster IEEE Student Branch

randy.glenn-at-gmail.com - glennrb-at-mcmaster.ca
randy.glenn-at-computer.org - randy_glenn-at-ieee.org
http://www.randyglenn.ca

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spamBeGonepiclist-unsubscribe-requestspam_OUTspamRemoveMEmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@150655 by Vern Jones

flavicon
face
The point is, if the big IRON is supporting and porting it, I don't think it
is going away very soon.

Vern
----- Original Message -----
From: Randy Glenn <.....randy.glennspamRemoveMEGMAIL.COM>
To: <PICLISTspam@spam@MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 11:45 AM
Subject: Re: [OT:] Is Linux the future or just nostalgic?


> How do you mean? Big-iron servers have always cost more limbs than
> most people have.
>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
EraseMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestRemoveMEspamSTOPspammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@151110 by Morgan Olsson

flavicon
face
Alex Harford 19:54 2004-07-14:
>Lindows system PC that is quite inexpensive.
>
>They make it an easy to use system at the expense of security.
>Everything runs as root (Administrator)

Only if you choose to!  (Like other distros)

I filled in admin and user details att install.
(Well a non-security-minded person would maybe skip that step, but the goal of the installer is to istall, not to educate... although IMHO it could well stress the issues and explain a little...)

So now i log in as user, and if i want to fiddle with the system or use that convenient Click-n-Run (one-click download-and-install-i-backround-while-updating-any-dependencies-and-let-me-do-other-things one of 1800+ programs) it asks me for root password.

Do the preinstalled Lindows PC:s boot you as root?
Then that might be to make it easier for first time users that are used to MSWindows lack of security thinking.  I hope there is a tip in the documentation for the preconfigured PC to set up users.  Lindows does not in any way demand you to run as root, unless - naturally - when you want to fiddle with the system.

(
For thoose that do not know: runnig as a normal user: even if you suceed in finding a Linux virus and forcefully try to run it, it can not harm your system as you - thus the programs you start - do not have permission to thoose files.  If you log in as root you and the program you start may do anything.  You should only run as root when you really need to, and know what you do (or test on a non mission critical system).
)

I am an occasonal Lindows user since version 2 something.

/Morgan
--
Morgan Olsson, Kivik, Sweden

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspamspamTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@151731 by Randy Abernathy

picon face
In a message dated 7/14/2004 3:12:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
spamBeGonedlistspam@spam@MORGANSREGLERTEKNIK.SE writes:

(
For  thoose that do not know: runnig as a normal user: even if you suceed in
finding a Linux virus and forcefully try to run it, it can not harm your
system as you - thus the programs you start - do not have permission to thoose
files.  If you log in as root you and the program you start may do  anything.
You should only run as root when you really need to, and know  what you do (or
test on a non mission critical  system).
)




I thought the whole idea of a virus was that you did NOT need ANY  permission
to run it but it worked it way into your system.  If it were  merely a matter
of permission, you could work that out in any system.  I am  sure there
aren't many more secure systems than those used by the military and  government but
viruses still get in there.  I would say permission would  have nothing to do
with it if the hacker really knows what he is doing

Randy  Abernathy
4626 Old Stilesboro Road NW
Acworth, GA 30101-4066
Phone /  Fax: 770-974-5295
Cell: 678-772-4113
E-mail: RemoveMECnc002spam_OUTspamaol.com

I  furnish technical support, repair, and other related services for your
industrial woodworking machinery. My background as Senior Service Engineer for
the SCMI Group for nearly fifteen years with factory training, combines with
my  extensive background in electronics, mechanics, pneumatics, electrical and
CNC  machinery to offer you needed support for your  machinery.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
piclist-unsubscribe-requestspamspammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@151939 by Randy Abernathy

picon face
In a message dated 7/14/2004 3:08:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
spam_OUTsoundresspam_OUTspamspam_OUTFOOTHILL.NET writes:

The  point is, if the big IRON is supporting and porting it, I don't think it
is  going away very soon.


I know but there are some that seem to push the Linux as a very cheap  thing,
and obviously if one is going to use it with the big boys, it is far from
cheap


Randy  Abernathy
4626 Old Stilesboro Road NW
Acworth, GA 30101-4066
Phone /  Fax: 770-974-5295
Cell: 678-772-4113
E-mail: Cnc002spam_OUTspamaol.com

I  furnish technical support, repair, and other related services for your
industrial woodworking machinery. My background as Senior Service Engineer for
the SCMI Group for nearly fifteen years with factory training, combines with
my  extensive background in electronics, mechanics, pneumatics, electrical and
CNC  machinery to offer you needed support for your  machinery.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestKILLspamspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@152149 by Randy Abernathy

picon face
In a message dated 7/14/2004 2:49:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
davidspamBeGonespam.....KOSMOSISLAND.COM writes:

More  oft' repeated FUD. Popular does not equal vulnerable. For example,
compare
IIS (Microft's web server) to Apache (the open source web server).  Apache
enjoys
about two to three times more popularity last I  checked.  But I don't
remember
the last time there was a significant  security issue with it. IIS is another
matter, however. See  http://www.cert.org.



And the name Microsoft might just be a bit more known that Apache,  right?
So which is really the more popular target?

Randy  Abernathy
4626 Old Stilesboro Road NW
Acworth, GA 30101-4066
Phone /  Fax: 770-974-5295
Cell: 678-772-4113
E-mail: KILLspamCnc002spam.....aol.com

I  furnish technical support, repair, and other related services for your
industrial woodworking machinery. My background as Senior Service Engineer for
the SCMI Group for nearly fifteen years with factory training, combines with
my  extensive background in electronics, mechanics, pneumatics, electrical and
CNC  machinery to offer you needed support for your  machinery.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spam_OUTpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@152810 by Morgan Olsson

flavicon
face
Randy Abernathy 20:03 2004-07-14:
>I can't argue that it is stable and secure, for now.

For years.
And there is no reason to believe that will not continue, especially as more and more resorces are put into developing Linux.

> You and I  both know that the more popular it gets, the less secure it will be.

Agreed: IF there is voulnerabilities in a OS the virus using them will spread faster the more system running that OS.

Today there are more Linux based servers on internet than Microsoft based ones, still IIS viruses are thousand (more i guess) more than Apache ones, so...

>Some hacker

You mean cracker

> will start to produce viruses, trojan horses, worms, etc. that will  invade it.

The opennes and that a lot of both competing and cooperating organizations and companies work on this, leads to much more opennes also about problems ore even potential problems.  History have also showed that important issues are more quickly solved on Linux than Windows.

And when there is no security hole it does not matter how many crackers there are trying to find it.

As opposed to Windows closed technology where it seems you can dig up hole after hole, some a cuple years old.

But -of course- admins need to know what they do configuring *any* OS.

/Morgan
--
Morgan Olsson, Kivik, Sweden

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestRemoveMEspamEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@153226 by Morgan Olsson

flavicon
face
Randy Abernathy 21:22 2004-07-14:
>And the name Microsoft might just be a bit more known that Apache,  right?

Absolutely, Microsoft is the only of thoose they warn on the news for.

>So which is really the more popular target?

The easy one.

/Morgan
--
Morgan Olsson, Kivik, Sweden

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
KILLspampiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@153641 by John J. McDonough

flavicon
face
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Abernathy" <Cnc002spamspamAOL.COM>
Subject: Re: [OT:] Is Linux the future or just nostalgic?


> And the name Microsoft might just be a bit more known that Apache,  right?
> So which is really the more popular target?

Probably not, at least among virus writers.  Anybody with a passing
acquaintance with the web has heard of Apache.  However, they are certainly
not as widely hated as M$.

However, this particular case is an outlier.  Some studies indicate that
Windows may even have less problems with viruses and trojans than Linux, but
that is decidedly not the case with IIS/Apache.  IIS has been an unmitigated
disaster from a security point of view, while Apache has been practically
bulletproof.  I think it has slowed a bit now, but for about two years
running IIS was seeing more bugs every week than Apache saw in it's entire
lifetime.  That's not just a popularity thing.

--McD

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamBeGonespamRemoveMEmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@153643 by John J. McDonough

flavicon
face
----- Original Message -----
From: "Morgan Olsson" <KILLspamdlistspamBeGonespamMORGANSREGLERTEKNIK.SE>
Subject: Re: [OT:] Is Linux the future or just nostalgic?


>  History have also showed that important issues are more
> quickly solved on Linux than Windows.

Show me the data.

--McD

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
@spam@piclist-unsubscribe-requestSTOPspamspam@spam@mitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@155129 by David Koski

flavicon
face
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 15:22:24 EDT
Randy Abernathy <Cnc002spamBeGonespamspamBeGoneAOL.COM> wrote:

> In a message dated 7/14/2004 2:49:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> spamBeGonedavid.nosphamspamKOSMOSISLAND.COM writes:
>
>> More  oft' repeated FUD. Popular does not equal vulnerable. For example,
>> compare IIS (Microft's web server) to Apache (the open source web server).
>> Apache enjoys about two to three times more popularity last I  checked.  But
>> I don't remember the last time there was a significant  security issue with
>> it. IIS is another  matter, however. See  http://www.cert.org.
>
> And the name Microsoft might just be a bit more known that Apache,  right?
> So which is really the more popular target?

Apache is no secret, and is probably as well known to hackers, who are motivated
to create the biggest disruption possible. I doubt further that it has much to
do with settling a score with MS.

<snip>

--
David Koski
spam_OUTdavid.nosphamSTOPspamspamKosmosIsland.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamspammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@155752 by Randy Abernathy

picon face
In a message dated 7/14/2004 3:53:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
TakeThisOuTdavidspamspamRemoveMEKOSMOSISLAND.COM writes:

Apache  is no secret, and is probably as well known to hackers, who are
motivated
to create the biggest disruption possible. I doubt further that  it has much
to
do with settling a score with  MS.




Touche'

Randy  Abernathy
4626 Old Stilesboro Road NW
Acworth, GA 30101-4066
Phone /  Fax: 770-974-5295
Cell: 678-772-4113
E-mail: KILLspamCnc002spamspamspam_OUTaol.com

I  furnish technical support, repair, and other related services for your
industrial woodworking machinery. My background as Senior Service Engineer for
the SCMI Group for nearly fifteen years with factory training, combines with
my  extensive background in electronics, mechanics, pneumatics, electrical and
CNC  machinery to offer you needed support for your  machinery.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
piclist-unsubscribe-requestRemoveMEspammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@160013 by Morgan Olsson

flavicon
face
Randy Abernathy 21:18 2004-07-14:

>I thought the whole idea of a virus was that you did NOT need ANY permission
>to run it but it worked it way into your system.

Absolutely.

And on linux there is generally better separation.

On MSWindows lots of viruses use woulnerabilities, mainly in applications made by the OS vendor.

MSWindows you enhance your security level much by just avoiding programs from Microsoft, as they are more integrated to the system.  One issue i read about is they use some unoficcial hooks into the heart of windows for speed reasons, but some of thoose had not good security...
The aternatives are often superior in user interface and technically anyway, plus they adhere more tostandards, and as extra plus the exactly same program are often available on MSWindows, Linux, sometimes MAC and Solaris, and other too.  That will make your transiiton easier.

Examples:

OpenOffice: Office suite. NOT a clone of Microsoft office, but a FLOSS rewrite of german Star Division´s Staroffice, todays Staroffice is owned by SUN and is based on OpenOffice.  Functions like MSO, but seem more adaptable.  Also includes nice vector drawing.  http://www.openoffice.org

Opera: Splendid internet browser, innovative mail, and more (commercial closed source) runs on MSWin, MAC, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, OS/2, handhelds, mobile phoones and more.  http://www.opera.com
Mozilla: Borwser, mail, HTML editor.  FLOSS. MSWin, Linux, MAC.
Firefox, fast browser only veriosn of Moz.  Camino for Mac.
Thunderbird is a mail-only spinoff.
http://www.mozilla.org

Lazy8: bookeeping that uses java and thus runs on lots of OS http://www.lazy8.nu

EAGLE: ECAD for Linux and MSwin

GIMP: something like Adobe photoshop or better, some say, mainly Linux, but ported to MSWin

Kaspersky antivirus runs on both Win and Linux.


etc...

>  If it were merely a matter of permission, you could work that out in any system.

On both Windows and Linux i guess most problems comes from not setting it up correctly.
Using Microsoft programs on Windows is one such mistake, IMHO... ;)

(curently writing this in an old Eudora on MSWin2k, with downloaded hundreds megabyte SP4 plus *plenty* of sucurity patches, antivirus updating daily, software firewall, and I am behind a proxy server, and a hardware firewall... puh!)

/Morgan

--
Morgan Olsson, Kivik, Sweden

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
EraseMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestSTOPspamspamRemoveMEmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@162452 by Randy Abernathy

picon face
In a message dated 7/14/2004 4:02:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
spam_OUTdlistRemoveMEspamEraseMEMORGANSREGLERTEKNIK.SE writes:

One  issue i read about is they use some unoficcial hooks into the heart of
windows  for speed reasons, but some of thoose had not good security...



Yep, that is what I have been told and those types of things will be  more
abundunt in the future as Microsoft attempts to be able to tell if your OS  or
applications are actually properly licensed by "peeping" into them over the
internet.  At least someone that worked for them told me that was something
they were working on.  May be that Windows 2003 already has it.

Anyway, I was just saying that no matter what OS you use, or how secure it
is now, some not too nice hacker will put his skills to underhanded use and
find  a way to crack into it.

Randy  Abernathy
4626 Old Stilesboro Road NW
Acworth, GA 30101-4066
Phone /  Fax: 770-974-5295
Cell: 678-772-4113
E-mail: TakeThisOuTCnc002RemoveMEspam@spam@aol.com

I  furnish technical support, repair, and other related services for your
industrial woodworking machinery. My background as Senior Service Engineer for
the SCMI Group for nearly fifteen years with factory training, combines with
my  extensive background in electronics, mechanics, pneumatics, electrical and
CNC  machinery to offer you needed support for your  machinery.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
EraseMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestRemoveMEspammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@162934 by Randy Abernathy

picon face
In a message dated 7/14/2004 3:33:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
spamdlist.....spamspamMORGANSREGLERTEKNIK.SE writes:

The easy  one.



Absolutely

Randy  Abernathy
4626 Old Stilesboro Road NW
Acworth, GA 30101-4066
Phone /  Fax: 770-974-5295
Cell: 678-772-4113
E-mail: Cnc002spam_OUTspam@spam@aol.com

I  furnish technical support, repair, and other related services for your
industrial woodworking machinery. My background as Senior Service Engineer for
the SCMI Group for nearly fifteen years with factory training, combines with
my  extensive background in electronics, mechanics, pneumatics, electrical and
CNC  machinery to offer you needed support for your  machinery.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
.....piclist-unsubscribe-requestspamspam.....mitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@163804 by Alex Harford

face picon face
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 15:37:07 -0400, John J. McDonough <wb8rcrKILLspamspamEraseMEarrl.net> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Morgan Olsson" <EraseMEdlist@spam@spam@spam@MORGANSREGLERTEKNIK.SE>
> Subject: Re: [OT:] Is Linux the future or just nostalgic?
>
> >  History have also showed that important issues are more
> > quickly solved on Linux than Windows.
>
> Show me the data.

It's not a level playing field, and it's easy to skew the numbers either way.

For example, if a problem with Apache is found and a patch released by
the Apache Group, it can be compiled and applied very quickly by
users.  Linux and other open source software is much quicker in that
regard.  Measured in the hours, maybe days.  You can't do that with
closed software, so it's not fair to compare it that way.

However if you look at the time that vendors take to release fixes, it
swings unfair the other way.

http://www.tunexp.com/news/windows-story-332.html

This study IMO is flawed because it compares the time between a public
disclosure of a security flaw to a vendor's fix being released.  This
is unfair to OSS because most (although not all) flaws are reported
privately to a vendor.  This gives the vendor time to fix it, and if
they do not, then it is released publicly to force the vendor to fix
it.

OSS is different because development is done in public via mailing
lists, IRC, web forums etc, so a bug is reported publically
immediately and then the developers go about fixing it.

Alex

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
@spam@piclist-unsubscribe-requestspamspamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@164745 by Josh Koffman

face picon face
Stuff like this is a frequent topic on Slashdot (which I read
regularly). One of the best comments I've seen recently brought up an
excelent point. Internet Explorer acts as a front end for the Windows
OS. You can use it to browse your files, access the control panel,
etc. It also happens to browse web pages as well (this is the
Microsoft "can't unbundle" argument). Most software has bugs, but
because this program has such incredible access to your system, bugs
in it are much more serious.

Not exactly a Microsoft vs Linux argument, but something I found very
interesting reading, and not too far fetched.

Josh
--
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools.
       -Douglas Adams

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spamBeGonepiclist-unsubscribe-requestRemoveMEspamEraseMEmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@173304 by Morgan Olsson

flavicon
face
John J. McDonough 21:37 2004-07-14:
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Morgan Olsson" <RemoveMEdlistKILLspamspamRemoveMEMORGANSREGLERTEKNIK.SE>
>Subject: Re: [OT:] Is Linux the future or just nostalgic?
>
>
>>  History have also showed that important issues are more
>> quickly solved on Linux than Windows.
>
>Show me the data.

Several places.  Try google.  To give you some credit, some reports find Microsoft to be fastest, example: www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1557459,00.asp
" Microsoft Corp., however, fixes security problems the quickest—which is a good thing, since it also has the most major security holes."
So even IF Microsoft do solve problems faster the integrated effect of all problems is still much higher.

In another report they said: generally, the really important problems on Linux was solved in a couple of days, while less important issues naturally have less priority.

Microsoft seemed to take about double time for criticalproblems, but generally a little quicker on less important ones.  Microsoft sends out many times more patches, but that has reasons... ;)

Another: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1490382,00.asp

Related:http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1622086,00.asp

Anyway:
Linux have alrady proven it is capable of being most secure servers - not only theoretically.
Linux is today proving it can be a desktop OS too.
If you think the most used systems get viruses just because they are most used, then use Linux, MAC OSX, FreeBSD, Solaris, whatever on your own desktop...

The examples was just some articles from one site.
Happy googling...  Godnight.
/Morgan
--
Morgan Olsson, Kivik, Sweden

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
TakeThisOuTpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@173921 by Ryan Underwood

flavicon
face
part 1 994 bytes content-type:text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 (decoded quoted-printable)


On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 03:18:15PM -0400, Randy Abernathy wrote:
> > I thought the whole idea of a virus was that you did NOT need ANY  permission
> to run it but it worked it way into your system.

Right.  If a virus gets onto your system, even if running as a normal
user, it is usually easy to find a local exploit that affects the current
kernel.  That way, getting root is a two step process, but not really
that difficult as long as you can get the user to run your code somehow.

Now, Windows used to have many more gateways to "Administrator" from an
unprivileged account due to its design priorities of ease-of-use over
security, and probably still does.  But history shows that Unix is not
nearly as invulnerable to local privilege escalation as we would like.

-- Ryan Underwood, <spamBeGonenemesisKILLspamspamTakeThisOuTicequake.net>

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
EraseMEpiclist-unsubscribe-request.....spamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu




part 2 190 bytes content-type:application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" (decode)

2004\07\14@184927 by Matthew Brush

flavicon
face
I used to sell computers to regular users.  On more than one occasion I
though about installing Linux on the systems so I could offer the
computers for over $150 less that usual.  After some serious thinking I
decided against this, because I would've had spend much more than $150
worth of time per system just helping users install they're new webcam,
or install the latest game.  So Windows 98SE it was (at the time), it
was reliable, rarely crashed, and everyone could figure out how to use it.

I think of Linux as the operating system built by and for computer
geeks.  They don't want every Joe Schmoe using the operating system,
because then they wouldn't be as "exclusive" in their job.  Job Security
I I guess.  Another thing I notice is that the Linux people (mostly
younger, newer users) get this condescending attitude about Linux, like,
if you're using Windows, you are so much less intelligent or something.
That attitude pisses me off to no end.

I think Linux could be the operating system of the future, all they need
to do is make a better graphical interface and the rest of the world
would run to it.  Because, my aunt Jane doesn't want to compile source
code to get her new scanner installed, and my friends sister doesn't
want to drop to the command line to get the latest messenger program
running.  If only Linux had the funding that MacOS has, Linux would be
THE operating system to use.  As far as I know Mac is just a superb GUI
sitting on BSD or some other *nix type operating system.

That's my two cents.  Not that anyone cares :)

Cheers

MJ Brush

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spampiclist-unsubscribe-requestspammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@193324 by Michael Olson

flavicon
face
> From: Matthew Brush <matthewbrushSTOPspamspamYAHOO.CA>
>
> I used to sell computers to regular users.  On more than one occasion I
> though about installing Linux on the systems so I could offer the
> computers for over $150 less that usual.  After some serious thinking I
> decided against this, because I would've had spend much more than $150
> worth of time per system just helping users install they're new webcam,
> or install the latest game.  So Windows 98SE it was (at the time), it
> was reliable, rarely crashed, and everyone could figure out how to use it.

That was probably a wise choice, most home users are not particularly
interested in the details under the hood, they want it to run. Particularly,
they probably want it to run the software available on the shelves of their
local stores.

> I think of Linux as the operating system built by and for computer
> geeks.  They don't want every Joe Schmoe using the operating system,
> because then they wouldn't be as "exclusive" in their job.  Job Security
> I I guess.

Well, it may be by and for geeks, but you're reaching a lot to suggest that
"they" have purposely built it unfriendly for job security. Linux has been
built by a community effort, each striving to make it best for what they want.
I'm sure Redhat, Mandrake, Linspire, Novell, TurboLinux, Connectiva, and
so on are more interested in customers than job security. I'd also like to
point out that given it's Unix roots, I think it's the easiest to
use *nix like platform there is. It's defining friendly for the *nix world.
(No I don't count MacOS X as a *nix like, it's a Mac like with a lot of *nix
in it. NextStep born again. If you disagree, feel free to count Linux as the
second easiest to use *nix like.)

> Another thing I notice is that the Linux people (mostly
> younger, newer users) get this condescending attitude about Linux, like,
> if you're using Windows, you are so much less intelligent or something.
> That attitude pisses me off to no end.

Perhaps, But I see no reason to associate users attitudes with the
projects themselves. If you beleive that this is unique to Linix I think
you would be mistaken, I have observed the same behavior in "advocates" of
Windows, OS/2, Solaris, Linux (And each of it's distros in turn), and MacOS.
It's worth noting that if you make statements like the above one, that you
may find normally helpful Linux people turning away from you and the trolls
attacking.

> I think Linux could be the operating system of the future, all they need
> to do is make a better graphical interface and the rest of the world
> would run to it.  Because, my aunt Jane doesn't want to compile source
> code to get her new scanner installed, and my friends sister doesn't
> want to drop to the command line to get the latest messenger program
> running.  If only Linux had the funding that MacOS has, Linux would be
> THE operating system to use.  As far as I know Mac is just a superb GUI
> sitting on BSD or some other *nix type operating system.

I'm not clear on why people would flock to it, but then I've never understood
the consumer market that well. I think Linux is fine the way it's going.
Which as I see it, is were the people who are working on it or paying to
have it worked on want it to go. When I think Linux I think of the whole
range of purposes being worked towards, NOS, Application Servers, EmbeddedOS,
RTOS (Not saying it's there yet, just thats it's being worked towards).

The good news for your vision is there are those who want to it to become the
new Windows (Linspire, CodeWeavers, and Transgaming come to mind). If people
keep funding or working towards those goals it'll probably get there.

I didn't mean to get on such a rant, but I felt a rather generous group of
people were being disparaged.

-- Mike

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
piclist-unsubscribe-requestSTOPspamspamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@195613 by Wesley Moore

flavicon
face
There is a lot more to Mac OS X than just a well made user interface. It
also isn't just sitting on BSD either. It uses Darwin which itself is
a derivative of Mach and FreeBSD. It also includes a number of GNU tools,
including the GNU Compiler Collection as the development environment.

On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 06:49:11PM -0400, Matthew Brush wrote:
> running.  If only Linux had the funding that MacOS has, Linux would be
> THE operating system to use.  As far as I know Mac is just a superb GUI
> sitting on BSD or some other *nix type operating system.
>
> That's my two cents.  Not that anyone cares :)
>
> Cheers
>
> MJ Brush

--
Wesley Moore - @spam@wmoore.....spamspamfreeshell.org - http://wmoore.no-ip.info/
Free Email provided by: SDF Public Access UNIX System http://sdf.lonestar.org/

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spampiclist-unsubscribe-request.....spam.....mitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@210850 by Jason S

flavicon
face
Since you seem to be an OS X fan from its unix roots point of view, maybe
you can help.

How can I do things from the command line that require root access.  For
example, I want to move a file from one user's account to another.  In the
GUI, I would log in as the user who has the file, move it to the shared
folder, then log in as the user who should receive the file and move it into
their file space.

That is quite a pain, especially when the user accounts are owned by real
people and not my own accounts.

In linux, I'd just su to root, move the files and chown them.  There doesn't
seem to be a way to do that in OSX.

Do you have any ideas?


{Original Message removed}

2004\07\14@213420 by M. Adam Davis

flavicon
face
No one has compiled complete data to show it either way.  In many cases,
if not most, the organization that finds the bug notifies the
responsible party before publicly releasing information.

I suspect that's the case with the new severe PHP bug that was fixed
today.  I hadn't heard of the security problem, just as I hadn't heard
of MS's latest ADODB bug fix that was also released today.

The problem with MS bugs is that explorer and internet exploere share a
huge number of DLLs and code, and are given the same priveledges in
accessing the hardware of the system.  A simple internet or email bug
can radically affect the computer.  A bug in PHP or Apache can only
affect those applications and the system only where they've explicitly
been given access.

The problem will become worse for Linux as people and distributions take
shortcuts to make it easier for the end user.
The problem will lesson for MS as they seperate functional components of
the system.

Some software development study statistically showed that even
well-scrutinized code still had some 60 errors per 1000 lines of code.
With the amount of code it takes to run today's applications (and
whiz-bang features) I suspect that Linux and MS (and every other large
OS project being actively developed for a typical consumer end user will
approach the same level of security.

We're a little behind the curve now, but in 10 years you simply aren't
going to see the kind of spyware/malware/adware/virus/trojan/spam/etc
infections that we see now.  This may be because better firewalls that
watch streams actively are developed, or because software will now be
built with these problems in mind, or etc.

We'll still have those problems because, in the end, a computer runs
programs that the user asks it to run, and users are stupid.  But they
simply will not be on the scale and problem level that we have today.
And of course we'll see entirely new classes of intrusions.

-Adam

John J. McDonough wrote:

>{Original Message removed}

2004\07\14@214249 by Robert B.

flavicon
face
Open source is the future.  IMHO eventually all information will be free,
including OS's and software.  M$ has a big market right now, and fortunate
for them Linux hasn't been easy to use for the layman.  One day open source
will surpass M$, and all they'll have left to prop themselves up on is NTFS
and their other proprietary hardware layers.  The internet lets the good
people of the world unite and create things that couldn't otherwise be
possible.  Imagine developing open source by mailing stacks of floppies
around... lol.  Enter gigabit+ internet, exit $1000 software licenses.  The
things that will generate income will be support, hardware, and security.

But until then, Windows is objectively superior in terms of ease of use /
installation, and maintenance.  Hence they can charge for it.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
piclist-unsubscribe-request.....spammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@221028 by Wesley Moore

flavicon
face
Its very easy, you just use the sudo command so to move a file as root you
do: sudo mv file.txt ~/fred/

You will be asked for a password, this is YOUR password not the root password
(since the root account is disabled from logins by default in OS X)

sudo can do other stuff as well, there more info in the man pages.

Wes

On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 06:13:15PM -0700, Jason S wrote:
{Quote hidden}

--
Wesley Moore - KILLspamwmoorespam_OUTspamfreeshell.org - http://wmoore.no-ip.info/
Free Email provided by: SDF Public Access UNIX System http://sdf.lonestar.org/

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
spam_OUTpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamTakeThisOuTmitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@224642 by Randy Abernathy

picon face
In a message dated 7/14/2004 7:35:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
.....olson.....spamRemoveMECS.ODU.EDU writes:

I'm not  clear on why people would flock to it, but then I've never understood
the  consumer market that well. I think Linux is fine the way it's going.
Which  as I see it, is were the people who are working on it or paying to
have it  worked on want it to go. When I think Linux I think of the whole
range of  purposes being worked towards, NOS, Application Servers, EmbeddedOS,
RTOS  (Not saying it's there yet, just thats it's being worked towards).

The  good news for your vision is there are those who want to it to become
the
new Windows (Linspire, CodeWeavers, and Transgaming come to mind). If  people
keep funding or working towards those goals it'll probably get  there.

I didn't mean to get on such a rant, but I felt a rather  generous group of
people were being  disparaged.




Therein may lie the real future for Linux or *nix type OS.  Many  companies
such as Oracle, and I think Sun and others are/were pushing that you,  in fact,
don't even install programs, drivers, etc. on a personal Computer but  use
the Internet for all your program executions, file storage, printing, and so  on
and so on.

A few years ago I was watching a special on TV where an executive of Oracle
and I believe one from Sun Microsystems were esposing that exact  philosophy.
In this environment OS like Linux would be the leader for  sure.

In that same special someone from Microsoft actually admitted that the
"personal" Computer as we know it would become obsolete and we would have
"terminals" and everything would be done on the internet.

Of course the other big thing for these *nix OS is huge servers within a
large corporation, etc.  There is no denying that they are far more stable  and I
would think faster than a GUI OS, as we know them

Randy  Abernathy
4626 Old Stilesboro Road NW
Acworth, GA 30101-4066
Phone /  Fax: 770-974-5295
Cell: 678-772-4113
E-mail: spam_OUTCnc002TakeThisOuTspamEraseMEaol.com

I  furnish technical support, repair, and other related services for your
industrial woodworking machinery. My background as Senior Service Engineer for
the SCMI Group for nearly fifteen years with factory training, combines with
my  extensive background in electronics, mechanics, pneumatics, electrical and
CNC  machinery to offer you needed support for your  machinery.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
EraseMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamBeGonespamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\14@230134 by Jake Anderson

flavicon
face
the argument against big centeralised things like that is people want
independance (part of linuxes appeal) and mechanics.
If you look at gaming, perhaps the biggest driver of consumer computing and
the workload that places on computers, video cards and the like it becomes
pretty apparent that centeralising wont work too well.

Its a fairlry common trend within PC's now too.
video cards have simmilar performance to CPU's in terms of transistor count
and clock speed and this is all geared to one specific task. sound cards
(like the aureal vortex series anyway ;-P) have complete on board sound
environment rendering. (to the point where blind people can play quake
against sighted people and actually do fairly well).

what is also happening is "low end" peripherals are being integrated into
high performance blocks
the chipset on a motherboard now incorperates (basic) sound and video,
modem, network, IDE, IDE-RAID etc etc.

I dont think it will be possible to centeralise that untill you can have
enough computing power to totally fill many humans "input" systems and the
bandwidth to throw that around.


> {Original Message removed}

2004\07\14@232702 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Wed, Jul 14, 2004 at 06:49:11PM -0400, Matthew Brush wrote:
> I used to sell computers to regular users.  On more than one occasion I
> though about installing Linux on the systems so I could offer the
> computers for over $150 less that usual.  After some serious thinking I
> decided against this, because I would've had spend much more than $150
> worth of time per system just helping users install they're new webcam,
> or install the latest game.  So Windows 98SE it was (at the time), it
> was reliable, rarely crashed, and everyone could figure out how to use it.

Good choice. Any situation where there is a Windows substitution situation
is a recipie for disaster. It's important for the target audience to
understand that Linux (and other non-Windows OSes) are different. Whenever
the expectation is that it'll behave the same, that's when the trouble starts.

A better resolution in that situation may be to offer Linux as an option
giving a clear listing of the differences. Then allow users to make a
[somewhat] informed decision about which to choose.

>
> I think of Linux as the operating system built by and for computer
> geeks.

By yes. For... not exactly. If that were the case we'd probably all still be
using 80x25 green monochrome terminals.

Several efforts in browsing, E-mail, desktop, and Office systems are clearly
geared for the average non-geek user.

>  They don't want every Joe Schmoe using the operating system,
> because then they wouldn't be as "exclusive" in their job.
> Job Security I guess.


I definitely disagree with this assertion. I really (I mean REALLY!) wish
that all my family, friends, colleagues, and students used Linux on a regular
basis. I would beg Joe Schmoe to use it.

But I know that the user base hasn't yet reached the critical mass for that
to occur.

>  Another thing I notice is that the Linux people (mostly
> younger, newer users) get this condescending attitude about Linux, like,
> if you're using Windows, you are so much less intelligent or something.
> That attitude pisses me off to no end.

It's the typical zealotry of the newly converted. Often when one achieves a
paradigm shift in thinking, their first reaction is to attempt to convert
everyone around them. But change is a slow process, so they get frustrated
and lash out. Not good I admit, but a somewhat natural human reaction.

>
> I think Linux could be the operating system of the future, all they need
> to do is make a better graphical interface and the rest of the world
> would run to it.

Won't happen that way. To indiviual users, it's all about applications.
Conversion will occur when the application set available on Linux mostly
matches the needs of the user base.

BTW can you explain in what ways that the graphical interface can be made
better?

>  Because, my aunt Jane doesn't want to compile source
> code to get her new scanner installed, and my friends sister doesn't
> want to drop to the command line to get the latest messenger program
> running.

I'm confused by both of the above examples. Nearly every current Linux
distribution has scanner software ready to go, and point/click install
mechanisms. The only exceptions are the few true geek distrubtions such
as Slackware or Gentoo.

For example check out packages such as kpackage, synaptic, or gnome-apt for
point/click graphical package management.

>
> That's my two cents.  Not that anyone cares :)

I do care. Because like most things in life, perception is reality. So
changing perceptions about Linux is critical to build the reality many of
us Linux users would like to see.

I have a suggestion. Come up with a short list of activities that an average
user would like to do. Don't define these by application, but by the activities
the applications perform. Also for the sake of this experiment, leave software
installation off the list.

Then pull down a burn the latest Knoppix CD from one of the mirrors listed
on this page: http://www.knopper.net/knoppix-mirrors/index-en.html and burn
it.

Drop CD into a machine and boot it. Please note that you must boot the CD,
not load it from Windows. Just hit return at the boot prompt for starters.

Then try working through the items on your list. See how well (or not well)
it works.

I feel that a lot of the negative perceptions about Linux stem from 3 things:

1) The superior snotty attituted that some users portray as listed above.
2) A fixed perception of a moving target. As Jason pointed out yesterday that
  something that he struggles with today is automagic 6 months from now.
3) The expectation that if it doesn't behave exactly the way they you are
  used to, that be definition that it must be inferior.

Personally I wish I could take every "My OS is better than yours, you geek!"
person and give them a good swift kick where it hurts. Each serves a need. Each
has flaws. Each has limitations.

I like to show Knoppix not because it's the best, but because it's a good
blend of a lot of current software along with painless, drop in setup.

Take it for a spin. You may be surprised at the progress.

BAJ

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestspamBeGonespamspammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\15@025833 by Matthew Brush

flavicon
face
> BTW can you explain in what ways that the graphical interface can be made
> better?

For one, it's slow.  I can run WinXP on my 200MHz system without a hitch.  As soon as I put Mandrake 9 on and get into KDE (I think), the entire user interaction is so slow it's painful.  Every application, screen, window and everything takes SO long to load and do it's thing.

Secondly, I find that the configurations utilites are scattered about with no real direction given to the user on where you can change a setting.  My last attempt with Linux ended with me changing the screen resoltution to an incompatible (I assume) value and getting locked out of the GUI for good.  There was no mechanism of testing like windows does where it gives you 15 seconds and then reverts back to the old resolution.  Another thing is that if by some chance linux doesn't pick up a piece of hardware (which I found was pretty rarely), it's very much a pain in the butt to get the driver and get it installed, unless it's in an RPM thing (compared to windows anyway).

Thridly, most basic (common) users don't EVER want to EVER compile anything, nor do they want to open a config file in a text editor to change settings.  Every single bit of configuration needs to be centralized with a purdy GUI for most home users.  I've had quite a few years experience dealing with the "Average Home Computer User", and trust me, they want to do anything more than double click a file and maybe click Next without ever reading a screen.

> I'm confused by both of the above examples. Nearly every current Linux
> distribution has scanner software ready to go, and point/click install
> mechanisms. The only exceptions are the few true geek distrubtions such
> as Slackware or Gentoo.

This is not true in my experiences, which are EXTREMELY limited.  I've only ever used Mandrake and RedHat (both past versions 6).  What I found is that if the OS installation process doesn't recognize your hardware and you can't get an RPM (or whatever) then you are pretty much stuck with trying to figure out how to use some program named 'make' or 'gcc' to try and compile some files from the manufacturer.  The "average" (more basic I guess) doesn't want to do anything more than click on a file and have a GUI hold their hand throughout the entire installation process.

> I have a suggestion. Come up with a short list of activities that an average
> user would like to do. Don't define these by application, but by the activities
> the applications perform. Also for the sake of this experiment, leave software
> installation off the list.

Well, software/driver installation is defintively the biggest, but...

A quick list from my experiences as a computer tech/sales:

1. Look at porn. (ie. browse the WWW)
2. Check/Send email
3. Buy little gadgets like webcams, mp3 players, and other fun toys
4. Type out resumes, newsletters, etc.
5. Install kids games from the back of a cerial box
6. Play solitaire

Based on this short list, I can say for sure that within 10 minutes of installing Madrake 9 I was able to do numbers 1,2 and 4 after sifting throught the "start button" type thing.  I just find that anything beyond the BASICS becomes a struggle for people, and most people don't want to read a book to use a program or whatever.

> I like to show Knoppix not because it's the best, but because it's a good
> blend of a lot of current software along with painless, drop in setup.

I will try this dist. for sure.  Hopefully it's not like the new mandrake which gives me problems installing because my old computer isn't good enough anymore.  I've known there were much more user friendly distributions out there, but I get very confused by the sheer amount of them that I just say forget it.

Please don't anyone take my above comments as trashing Linux, because as I said I haven't had much of a chance to play with it because, for the most part, I just need a system that works without a lot of configuration or anything else, and I'm so accustomed to the GUI that Linux doens't make sense yet for me.  The good thing is, that I've found a GOOD open source replacement for all of the software I use, and I think that'll make my ultimate and eventual switchover much easier.  It's hard to mess around learning new stuff on a computer when as it is you spend 8+ hours a day working on one.

In parting I would like to list some of the opensource/free packages I have found for windows that have replaced most of my "pay" software:
1. Internet Explorer -> Firefox (duh!) ... Outlook/Outlook Express -> Thunderbird
2. Photoshop -> The Gimp (found a windows binary out there)
3. MSN, ICQ, AIM -> Trillian (not sure if it's open source, but it's free, no ads) or aMSN (on source forge)
4. Microsoft Office -> OpenOffice.org
5. Macromedia Dreamweaver -> NVU

I have almost replaced all my "pay" software with opensource/freeware, and it feels good not have to crack software or download it from Shareaza or whatever.  I'm on my way to being almost liberated from software costs, except for Windows.

Sorry this post was so long, it's late and I can't sleep so ...

Thanks for the tip on the linux dist. Byron.  And as a final note, if anyone cares, I found a great site called oldversion.com ... hehe ... it's so great.

Peace, Cheers

P.S. Please don't tear my posting apart and point out all kinds of flaws etc ... those are just my views/opinions as a regular joe whos lost his patience with Howtos and the likes.  I know I'm very ignorant when it comes to Linux, I don't need to be told that again.  Thanks :)

MJ Brush

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@034450 by Wesley Moore

flavicon
face
I feel the need to note that Knoppix is primarily targeted as a Live CD. A CD
that you boot a PC from without anychanges being made to you hard drive. It
allows you to try Linux out or use Linux for something that you want to do
every so often without the need to actually install it. Since it doesn't
make any changes to your system it makes a good demo to give to people who
are curious about Linux.

It uses a compression scheme on the CD that allows nearly 2Gb of data to be
stored on a single CD. This allows them to include a vast array of Linux
software. It includes things like Mozilla, OpenOffice, Audio composition
software. The list goes on and on. More info?

http://www.knopper.net/knoppix/index-en.html

On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 02:59:30AM -0400, Matthew Brush wrote:
{Quote hidden}

--
Wesley Moore - @spam@wmoorespamspamfreeshell.org - http://wmoore.no-ip.info/
Free Email provided by: SDF Public Access UNIX System http://sdf.lonestar.org/

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@035731 by Wouter van Ooijen

face picon face
> I feel the need to note that Knoppix is primarily targeted as
> a Live CD. A CD
> that you boot a PC from without anychanges being made to you
> hard drive. It
> allows you to try Linux out or use Linux for something that
> you want to do
> every so often without the need to actually install it. Since
> it doesn't
> make any changes to your system it makes a good demo to give
> to people who
> are curious about Linux.

At school we use a modified Knoppix CD as C development system. Each
student has a CD, and either a floppy or an USB stick to store the files
he/she creates. Never a problem with the software on the PC that is not
as it should be, and the student has exactly the same environmment
everywhere he goes (including at home). Never mind what is on the HD of
the PC, it might as well be empty.

Wouter van Ooijen

-- -------------------------------------------
Van Ooijen Technische Informatica: http://www.voti.nl
consultancy, development, PICmicro products

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@043751 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
> I have a suggestion. Come up with a short list of activities that an
average
> user would like to do. Don't define these by application, but by the
activities
> the applications perform. Also for the sake of this experiment, leave
software
> installation off the list.

Unfortunately the one thing you cannot leave off the list is drivers, as
they are so intimately involved with almost anything you want to do. Things
have already been said about video drivers, so I won't start there.

One of the things that (to me anyway) stops Linux overtaking Windows in all
its forms is printer installation. If this had been sorted out in the days
when Windows was still in nappies (diapers to our American friends) then
*nix would have made a lot more market penetration. In windows there is a
standardised interface for the printer, so every printer driver uses the
same commands to set bold, underline etc. My past experience with *nix (and
this is going back some years) is that each application needed its own
printer drivers, and you bought your printer according to the drivers the
application had. If you wanted to do fancy things with more than one
application, then you needed to make sure all the applications had drivers
for a printer that you could obtain, which may not be the optimal printer
for what you want to do.

Now things may have changed here, but I am not aware of it. If it hasn't
changed then perhaps the way forward is to start with whatever OSX has
defined, and come up with a standard printer interface from there. Maybe
this has already been done, but I don't see Linux drivers on the disks that
come with printers I have bought.

Just my 2 pence, and happy to pay it for any enlightenment.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@050942 by Don Taylor

flavicon
face
> I have a suggestion. Come up with a short list of activities that an
> average user would like to do. Don't define these by application, but
> by the activities the applications perform. Also for the sake of this
> experiment, leave software installation off the list.

I think this is an activity an average user would like to do and is
an activity an application would perform.

Get two Linux boxes communicating with each other, sharing files and
printers and internet connections, in five minutes or less while not
being already skilled in doing this job, and not leaving open any
gaping security holes for exploit by net vandals.

Triple bonus points if this can be done with a new Linux box needing
to connect to an existing WinXP box to provide to these services, as
opposed to throwing out all your software with licenses to run under
Windows and finding replacements for all that.  (I spent a couple of
months trying to accomplish this, asking for help, searching the net,
reading books, offering to pay to have this done.  I finally gave up,
and I had some advantage over the typical new user in that I spent
most of a decade using BSD and even doing system administration back
in the stone age before networking was omnipresent.  I would caution
anyone about the kinds of responses you will get if you naively start
asking for help with this.)

And I LIKE unix.  I still use the MKS copy of unix tools for much
of what I do when sitting inside an XP cmd shell.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@051529 by Shawn Tan Ser Ngiap

flavicon
face
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thursday 15 July 2004 16:37, Alan B. Pearce wrote:
> Now things may have changed here, but I am not aware of it. If it hasn't
> come with printers I have bought.
>
> Just my 2 pence, and happy to pay it for any enlightenment.

Maybe what you need now is CUPS (Common UNIX Printing System)?? http://www.cups.org. Granted, there are some "WinPrinters" out there that do not have printer drivers under Linux but most common printers should work fine..

- -- with metta,
Shawn Tan

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA9khMUgUYbQRKphMRAi1+AJwLGdLJMLjr9GvVXc8UERyxg0UVhQCfevhX
8d77mnhglZcR9FNYLnUsm74=
=d3Fk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@053645 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>Maybe what you need now is CUPS ...

OK, Then it looks like I may be OK to do what I want.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@074426 by Michael Olson

flavicon
face
Alan B. Pearce wrote:

>>Maybe what you need now is CUPS ...
>>
>>
>
>OK, Then it looks like I may be OK to do what I want.
>
>--
>http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
>[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
>
>
CUPS really is a savior for providing access to all the nifty printer
options but it's still geared towards PostScript printers which are
something of a rarity in the consumer market. Adding non postscript
printers to CUPS is very doable, but bot the most pleasent of tasks. I'm
not sure how other distros are doing it these days but RedHat 8 and
above have an incredible printer install tool (redhat-config-printer)
that can install very near any printer Linux can support in a minute,
share it, run a test page, etc...  It's got a GUI and a curses interface
as well.

In a corporate environment CUPS can be like the magic printer fairy, set
it up on all the machines to share printer information over the network
and then just plug a new machine in and every printer on your network
will magically show up in the machines queue list. Really sweet. Another
plus is that tools like qtcups
can be used in place of lp/lpr commands in old apps. Then when it goes
to print you are presented with a graphical print setup screen not
unlike Windows.

And of course, if you prefer to just print with no setup screens, you
can still just use lp commands. Kind of a best of all worlds right up
till you need to add
you new non PostScript printer that isn't supported by your distros
install tools.

-- Mike

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@084445 by Byron A Jeff

face picon face
On Thu, Jul 15, 2004 at 09:37:41AM +0100, Alan B. Pearce wrote:
> > I have a suggestion. Come up with a short list of activities that an
> average
> > user would like to do. Don't define these by application, but by the
> activities
> > the applications perform. Also for the sake of this experiment, leave
> software
> > installation off the list.
>
> Unfortunately the one thing you cannot leave off the list is drivers, as
> they are so intimately involved with almost anything you want to do. Things
> have already been said about video drivers, so I won't start there.

There are two separate issues: driver availability and driver configuration.
Let's take on the latter first. This area has definitely gotten better. It's
one of the reasons that I push Knoppix to new users. Drivers are automatically
loaded and configured upon device detection.

Linux has made progress on all buses that have auto device detection: PCI, USB,
CardBus, Firewire. It's very close to plug and play with tools like HotPlug
and the like.

Now driver availablity is a separate issue. The simple fact is that there are
a bunch of devices that simply don't have drivers. It's a confluence of a
lot of factors:

1) Devices are too new.
2) Manufacturers won't/can't release enough information to write a driver.
3) No one in the community has picked up the flag to write a driver.

This aspect requires a mindset change on the part of the user. And frankly
some users don't want to hear it. That's OK I guess. It's not a fair assessment
of Linux though. BTW the mind change is to check for driver availablity before
purchasing a product. For example the school where I work offered new Dell
Latitude D800 laptops to the faculty. A laptop with a sticker "Designed for
Windows XP" on it. So of course XP is going to have the drivers for all of the
new gadgets (Smartcard reader, Integrated Wireless, latest NVidia card, etc.)

The first thing I did when I learned of the possible change was to check Google
to see if there was a D800 Linux compatibility page. First hit is here:

http://www.mikehardy.net/linux_latitude_d800

The quick overview is that most of the stuff is supported. So I went with it.
I still have some issues with proper dual display on the LCD and video port
at the same time, but I have the similar problems under XP too.

{Quote hidden}

There has been a significant change in this process. The answer is
pretty standard now:

1) Configure CUPS for your printer.
2) Use CUPS for every application.
3) Smile at your printouts.

It's even cooler because every CUPS printer becomes a transparaent network
printer too with no additional configuration. The config is a web based
interface. And very nearly every printer that is more than 6 months old has
a driver. Again check for availability before you buy.
http://www.linuxprinting.org/ is an invaluable site for the process.

Again Knoppix uses CUPS, so for testing is pretty simple. Be aware that
Knoppix does some configuration for you behind the scenes, so be sure to use
the Knoppix configuration Wizard under the K->KNOPPIX->Configure menu.

>
> Now things may have changed here, but I am not aware of it. If it hasn't
> changed then perhaps the way forward is to start with whatever OSX has
> defined, and come up with a standard printer interface from there.

Um. OSX uses CUPS. It's the same interface.

>Maybe
> this has already been done, but I don't see Linux drivers on the disks that
> come with printers I have bought.

And you won't. Linux has a centralized driver structure. The drivers comes
with the kernel/Print/Video subsystems, and not with the hardware. So if a
driver exists, then everyone gets it with their distribution instead of with
the hardware. So don't look in the box. Check out driver availablity online.
I'm come to prefer this method, because it's true plug and play. The driver
is just there.

>
> Just my 2 pence, and happy to pay it for any enlightenment.

Hope this helps,

BAJ

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@090327 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>> Just my 2 pence, and happy to pay it for any enlightenment.
>
>Hope this helps,
>
>BAJ

Yeah, sure does. Thanks for the resume of howto and the goings on behind.
Worth the two pence.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@112404 by Alex Harford

face picon face
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 02:59:30 -0400, Matthew Brush <TakeThisOuTmatthewbrushKILLspamspam@spam@yahoo.ca> wrote:
> > BTW can you explain in what ways that the graphical interface can be made
> > better?
>
>
> Secondly, I find that the configurations utilites are scattered about with no real direction given to the user on where you can change a setting.  My last attempt with Linux ended with me changing the screen resoltution to an incompatible (I assume) value and getting locked out of the GUI for good.  There was no mechanism of testing like windows does where it gives you 15 seconds and then reverts back to the old resolution.

This has been fixed in KDE3.2, because it was a major thorn in the
side of people using the GUI.  Unfortunately KDE's not made for slow
systems.  Most people run a stripped down window manager like
WindowMaker rather than a full desktop environment on old machines.

It's one of the problems with running a GUI that is separated from the
kernel.  But the advantage is that you don't take down the whole
machine when the GUI freaks out.

Alex

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@141353 by Peter L. Peres

picon face
Randy Abernathy <.....Cnc002RemoveMEspamAOL.COM> wrote:
>Maybe I am missing something here but, it would seem that most of the
>people that are looking at or using Linux are some of us technical types.

Let's put it this way: Those people who are not technology-oriented and
use Windows are 'married' to an IT guy or the local computer shop so
someone reinstalls whatever is to be reinstalled every two weeks or so.
Those who are not technologically oriented and use Linux are married to
the IT guy or the local computer shop who changes configs for them every 3
months or more or so.

And thos types who are technologically oriented and do their own installs
and upgrades can make a choice for themselves.

Computers that are easy to use (once set up) are a reality. Computers that
are easy to set up are a myth (at least in the PC world). And exceptions
confirm the rule, as always. For example knoppix is an exception ;-)

>In the real world, companies and people want something that they don't
>need to think to use.  Mac and Windows seems to be going closer to that
>than Linux.

Yes, and they better use something that works when turned on / clicked on
and does not need a 24/7/52 IT staff that represents 10% of the workforce
just to keep the servers from crashing and desktops from wiping
themselves.

Incidentally the latest Mac OS is based on unix. OS X has BSD unix running
'under the hood'. Most Linux applications can be ported by just
recompiling them on it.

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@150959 by Neil Cherry

picon face
Michael Olson wrote:
> Alan B. Pearce wrote:
>
>>> Maybe what you need now is CUPS ...
>>>
>>>
>>
>> OK, Then it looks like I may be OK to do what I want.
>>
>> --
>> http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
>> [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads
>>
>>
> CUPS really is a savior for providing access to all the nifty printer
> options but it's still geared towards PostScript printers which are
> something of a rarity in the consumer market. Adding non postscript
> printers to CUPS is very doable, but bot the most pleasent of tasks.

Weird, I have a HP500, HP500C, HP682, a Panasonic dot matrix printer
and a old Oki. I'm pretty sure none of them are Postscript capable.
I've also setup a Lexmark real printer (not a winprinter) with Linux
all work great with CUPS. Tonight I'll be getting my hands on an
Epson professional printer (don't know the model). Now that one may
be a postscript.

--
Linux Home Automation         Neil Cherry        KILLspamncherryspamTakeThisOuTcomcast.net
http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/               (Text only)
http://linuxha.sourceforge.net/                 (SourceForge)
http://hcs.sourceforge.net/                     (HCS II)

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@153919 by Neil Cherry
picon face
Randy Abernathy wrote:
>> In a message dated 7/14/2004 3:08:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>> TakeThisOuTsoundresspamspam_OUTFOOTHILL.NET writes:

>> The  point is, if the big IRON is supporting and porting it, I don't think it
>> is  going away very soon.

> I know but there are some that seem to push the Linux as a very cheap  thing,
> and obviously if one is going to use it with the big boys, it is far from
> cheap

I'm currently working on taking Floppy Firewall

       http://www.zelow.no/floppyfw/

moving it to flash (I'll probably get 16M as they're cheap). On there
I intend to add the snmpd, xterm (for remote display), ssh & scp,
Ethereal (sniffer), and some wireless access point software. I may
need a few other things but I can work that out later. Currently
I have a version running on a 400MHz K6 with 256M of RAM. I only
seem to be using 10M so far (the 256M was already in the machine).
I'll probably drop that down to a 266MHz machine later when I
make that available.

Yes this will take a lot of knowledge but this isn't your average
consumer machine. This gets to play with the big boys (Cisco) in
terms of IP features. I'll work on configuration and see what I
can do. That's going to be difficult as how do you hand someone
the keys to a Ferrari and expect them to be able to handle that
power? the key will be only giving it to them when they need it.

BTW, don't try this with Windows I doubt it will run too well. ;-)

--
Linux Home Automation         Neil Cherry        RemoveMEncherryspamspamSTOPspamcomcast.net
http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/               (Text only)
http://linuxha.sourceforge.net/                 (SourceForge)
http://hcs.sourceforge.net/                     (HCS II)

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@155202 by Neil Cherry

picon face
Randy Abernathy wrote:
> In a message dated 7/14/2004 1:46:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> .....davidEraseMEspamKOSMOSISLAND.COM writes:
>
> They  have the wrong idea of what Linux is. Why do they preceive it as  a
> backwards step? There is FUD about Linux. It is secure, I don't worry  about
> viruses and worms, and it is free. What more can you ask  for?

> I can't argue that it is stable and secure, for now.  You and I  both know
> that the more popular it gets, the less secure it will be.  Some  hacker will
> start to produce viruses, trojan horses, worms, etc. that will  invade it.  Take
> those government non-windows networks/servers that someone  mentioned in
> another response.  How many times in the last several years  have we seen where a
> virus has made it into that environment.

As Linux gets more popular the problem will no be the security of the
product but the lack of ability of the users. Windows has this
problem now. And before you answer with training let me say that I
can not keep up with the problem with MS and it's products and I
know this stuff, 26 years worth of background in computers. The
corporation I work for has an IT department that approves the
fixes MS has released. They haven't approved them all and they have
given us work-a-rounds or told us out right don't do that. I've had
much better luck working with Linux.

BTW, on your comments on Apache & IIS. I think Apache is the more
common of the 2.

--
Linux Home Automation         Neil Cherry        spamBeGonencherryspamRemoveMEcomcast.net
http://home.comcast.net/~ncherry/               (Text only)
http://linuxha.sourceforge.net/                 (SourceForge)
http://hcs.sourceforge.net/                     (HCS II)

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@184017 by Nate Duehr

face
flavicon
face
On Jul 14, 2004, at 11:04 AM, John J. McDonough wrote:

> But there is one big difference ... Windows Applications, Windows, and
> PC's
> conspire in an upgrade cycle that is getting very expensive.
> Companies are
> noticing this.  The Linux upgrade cycle is not nearly as expensive,
> either
> in terms of actual dollar outlay, nor in terms of retraining and
> conversion.
> With M$, every two or three years it's a new ball game.  This is very
> expensive.  Next month we are going to get a "security upgrade" with
> few new
> features that may be more expensive than the new operating system
> versions,
> in terms of conversions, application upgrades, and retraining.

This leads back to a root cause - Unix is Unix.  You can put all the
GUI's over the top you want, but if you can drive a command line with
awk, sed, a shell, and a text editor, you can get your work done
still... even if the entire GUI environment changes.  On Windows, you
don't have that option.  Things you learned yesterday are rarely
applicable to tomorrow.  Things you learn at the command-line in Unix
last a lifetime.

--
Nate Duehr, .....nateEraseMEspamnatetech.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@190132 by John J. McDonough

flavicon
face
----- Original Message -----
From: "Nate Duehr" <spamnatespam_OUTspam@spam@NATETECH.COM>
Subject: Re: [OT:] Is Linux the future or just nostalgic?


> Things you learn at the command-line in Unix
> last a lifetime.

hehe ... and not all of them are limited to Unix.  I've used emacs on DOS,
UCSD, VMS, Linux, OS/2, Windows since Win95 ... maybe even RSX/11M, kinda
tough to remember that far back...  still hard to find an editor to beat it.

Actually, when I do development "for me", I use gcc, either on Linux or on
Windoze under Cygwin, depending on what I need it for.  I've had a lot of
the basic tools installed natively on OS/2 and various flavors of Windoze.
Pretty darned handy to have all the basic tools, at least, under whatever OS
comes along, and under Cygwin you get most of them.

--McD

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@190133 by Nate Duehr

face
flavicon
face
On Jul 14, 2004, at 12:38 PM, Randy Abernathy wrote:

> In a message dated 7/14/2004 2:17:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> spamsoundres@spam@spamSTOPspamFOOTHILL.NET writes:
>
> LINUX-UNIX types, have a look at  this.
>
> http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103_2-5266768.html
>
> Vern
>
>
>
> mmmmmmm sort of takes the edge off of Linux making everything a lot
> less
> expensive, doesn't it?

In either Windows or Unix - you get what you pay for.

Hire a cheap fresh-out-of-college kid to administer either one...
you'll probably have some major screw-ups to clean up down the road.
Buy a cheap PC to run a 24/7 business application on, you'll definitely
regret it later.

I was actually going to quote that same article in response to the
original question -- is Linux the future?  IBM's *making* it their
future, so a lot of other folks will probably follow along...

And that's probably as good an answer as anyone can give... if you
choose to make either one (or both) OS's your future, it will be.  ;-)

As far as pricing goes... I've always contended that there's FUD on
both sides of that argument... there's a small percentage of Linux
zealots that claim Linux will be cheaper long-term.  I disagree.
Computing of any sort costs about the same - but the distribution of
the money is the big difference.

Linux software is certainly cheaper for the base OS, but an experienced
person to do great things with it for your company is not.

So it's a matter of whether you want to give your money to MS or to
your employees... which one will garner harder work, more loyalty, and
better conditions for everyone on the team?

(This argument also applies to whether or not to use a commercial Unix
and send money to Sun, HP, etc...)

I have done enough remote Linux support that I was able to tell last
night on the phone with someone far away with no access to the system
that he had a motherboard with a broken DMA implementation that was
crashing his Linux server whenever he ran disk-intensive applications.
The error messages did NOT say this, they pointed somewhere else
completely.  An hdparm -d 0 /dev/hda later, and his system stopped
flaking out permanently.  (And then I told him how to make that a
permanent change at the next reboot, which he didn't need to do at this
time.)

It took five minutes and asking about the error messages in three
files.  That level of expertise (if he wasn't a friend and that was a
consulting gig instead of just helping a buddy out) doesn't come cheap
in any environment... because it's based in experience, not in
book-learning.

So I give the whole TCO measurement a thumbs-down as an accurate way to
measure an OS's success.  It's just another number for managers to play
with, but virtually meaningless because it can't measure the knowledge
level, dedication to professionalism, or overall motivation of the guy
actually administering the systems... whether they're Windows *or*
Linux-based.  And an admin with high levels of all three of those will
whallop the ball out of the ballpark for your company every time, while
the same admin (even at the same price) without those three will just
produce mediocre systems that work "okay" but never really help the
company's bottom line.

--
Nate Duehr, spamBeGonenatespamBeGonespam@spam@natetech.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@190340 by Nate Duehr

face
flavicon
face
On Jul 14, 2004, at 1:32 PM, Morgan Olsson wrote:

> Randy Abernathy 21:22 2004-07-14:
>> And the name Microsoft might just be a bit more known that Apache,
>> right?
>
> Absolutely, Microsoft is the only of thoose they warn on the news for.

Sorry this doesn't hold water.  The reputable security announcement
locations (CERT, SecurityFocus, etc.) don't play favorites.   It would
kill their credibility.

--
Nate Duehr, RemoveMEnateRemoveMEspamRemoveMEnatetech.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@190753 by Nate Duehr

face
flavicon
face
On Jul 14, 2004, at 2:01 PM, Morgan Olsson wrote:
> OpenOffice: Office suite. NOT a clone of Microsoft office, but a FLOSS > rewrite of german Star Division´s Staroffice, todays Staroffice is > owned by SUN and is based on OpenOffice.  Functions like MSO, but seem > more adaptable.  Also includes nice vector drawing.  
> http://www.openoffice.org

Sun recently (and amazingly quietly in the computer press) accepted a $2 billion dollar payoff from Microsoft to discontinue StarOffice development.  Right after kicking Microsoft in the shins in court over Java.

One of the only people to cover it was John C. Dvorak in PC Magazine.  (He also mentioned he thought it was odd that no one else said anything about it.)

Shows how desperate Sun is for cash, for sure.  Indirect business indications like that are usually indicators of bigger problems.  Sun's getting whalloped by IBM and HP at the moment, and it doesn't look like that will relent any time soon.

--
Nate Duehr, nateKILLspamspamspamnatetech.com

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@204330 by Randy Glenn

picon face
The $2 billion "payoff" was a settlement of an antitrust suit.
StarOffice development continues.

Besides which, if Sun were to pull the plug on StarOffice, OpenOffice
would continue - it's Open Source. It's my understanding that as
licensed, anyone can do anything they want with the code so long as
they don't deviate from the OpenOffice.org file format and API specs.

Dvorak's article -
www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1618813,00.asp?kc=PCRSS03079TX1K0000585
- seems more speculation than anything.

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 17:08:47 -0600, Nate Duehr <spam_OUTnate@spam@spamnatetech.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

-- -Randy Glenn
Computer Eng. and Mgt. Year IV, McMaster University
Chair, McMaster IEEE Student Branch

randy.glenn-at-gmail.com - glennrb-at-mcmaster.ca
randy.glenn-at-computer.org - randy_glenn-at-ieee.org
http://www.randyglenn.ca

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@225228 by Michael Olson

flavicon
face
Neil Cherry wrote:

> Michael Olson wrote:
>
>>
>> CUPS really is a savior for providing access to all the nifty printer
>> options but it's still geared towards PostScript printers which are
>> something of a rarity in the consumer market. Adding non postscript
>> printers to CUPS is very doable, but bot the most pleasent of tasks.
>
>
> Weird, I have a HP500, HP500C, HP682, a Panasonic dot matrix printer
> and a old Oki. I'm pretty sure none of them are Postscript capable.
> I've also setup a Lexmark real printer (not a winprinter) with Linux
> all work great with CUPS. Tonight I'll be getting my hands on an
> Epson professional printer (don't know the model). Now that one may
> be a postscript.
>
I've used it mainly with non-PS printers, but you can't just drop a ppd
file in it and have it pick it up. Tools like cups-o-matic (or the
distros print configuration tools) make it easier. Also, I've
ocasionally had problems with using the gimp-print based drivers and
CUPS, ocassionaly a job will lock up and I end up having to cancel the
job and restart the queue to get it going.

-- Mike

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@225639 by Michael Olson

flavicon
face
John J. McDonough wrote:

>>hehe ... and not all of them are limited to Unix.  I've used emacs on DOS,
>>UCSD, VMS, Linux, OS/2, Windows since Win95 ... maybe even RSX/11M, kinda
>>tough to remember that far back...  still hard to find an editor to beat it.
>>
>>
I'm not going to be a jerk here and say, "vi (or vim)", (which means you
didn't just read that), but I am going to think it real hard and smirk.

-- Mike

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\15@231546 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2004-07-15 at 22:57, Michael Olson wrote:
> John J. McDonough wrote:
>
> >>hehe ... and not all of them are limited to Unix.  I've used emacs on DOS,
> >>UCSD, VMS, Linux, OS/2, Windows since Win95 ... maybe even RSX/11M, kinda
> >>tough to remember that far back...  still hard to find an editor to beat it.
> >>
> >>
> I'm not going to be a jerk here and say, "vi (or vim)", (which means you
> didn't just read that), but I am going to think it real hard and smirk.

Hehe, as "sacriligeous" (simpson's word) as it may seem, I prefer vile
(vi like emacs), once you get used to it it is incredible, all the power
of vi, with a touch of the better stuff in emacs. Plus, it can edit
files of almost any size (as can vi and vim), I routinely edit 500MB
text files with vile, try getting any other non vi type editor to do
that without a hiccup... :) I still end up with vi at times (since
almost every *nix system has it), the first thing I do after installing
a new OS (whatever it is) is compile vile for it. TTYL

-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

2004\07\16@043203 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>I was actually going to quote that same article in response to the
>original question -- is Linux the future?  IBM's *making* it their
>future, so a lot of other folks will probably follow along...

Consider this one - IBM provided the original open Source operating system.
You bought the hardware for megadollers, and got an operating system thrown
in for free - complete with all source code. It was only when other
companies started providing hardware that would run the same operating
systems as IBM provided that IBM started charging for it.

So to see IBM now going with an open source *nix is perhaps not surprising.
I don't know how much there VMS and other systems were improved by customer
feedback, but perhaps they see advantages in going this way, beyond the
costs being paid to M$. Maybe the ability to do their own scaling to suit
the hardware is part of it, or being able to compile onto a new processor
family. Be interesting to find out just what the rational was in going this
way.

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\07\16@084110 by John J. McDonough

flavicon
face
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan B. Pearce" <KILLspamA.B.Pearce.....spamTakeThisOuTRL.AC.UK>
Subject: Re: [OT:] Is Linux the future or just nostalgic?


> So to see IBM now going with an open source *nix is perhaps not
surprising.
> I don't know how much there VMS and other systems were improved by
customer

VMS was an operating system from Digital Equipment, I think it is still
available from HP.  Probably you are thinking of MVS.  In many ways, both
Linux and Windows have a very long way to go to catch up with MVS.  However,
MVS is breathtakingly expensive and I think it's now back to only running on
big iron. (For a while there was a PC version!)

> Be interesting to find out just what the rational was in going this
> way.

I don't think there is any secret here.  IBM is getting pretty much all
their income from services these days.  They have an edge on other
consultants because they can provide huge iron.  Although they don't make a
ton of money from the hardware side of the business, open source operating
systems provide them with a way to make the cost of ownership of big iron
cheaper, and they can leverage it against a number of hardware
architectures.

IBM Global Services seems to be taking over the I/T consulting business,
probably because they can offer a huge range of compatible boxes while also
offering a complete range of consulting/outsourcing services.  Compared to
their service income, there's no money at all to be made on operating
systems, so why not let somebody else do it?

I hadn't realized it before, but they offer probably a wider range of
services in consulting as well as hardware than you can get anywhere else.
You can call on IBM for a little PC problem or to outsource an entire
business process.  You can buy a microprocesor from them or a monster
mainframe.  Being able to do that on a single operating system has to really
help with their costs.

They are amazingly ecumenical on what they will support.  They will be happy
to help you with a Windows problem, or an OpenVMS problem.  The company I
used to work for had IBM running it's web site on Solaris because that's
what they wanted.  IBM was happy to do whatever it took to make a buck.  Of
course, they try to drive as much as possible to Linux to manage their own
costs, but they will do almost anything.

--McD

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\07\16@093239 by cisco J. A. Ares

flavicon
face
anyone seen this?

http://www.penguincomputing.com/

just a reminder that the biggest/fastest/newest clusters in the world runs Linux

;-)

Francisco

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics
(like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics

2004\07\17@034423 by Peter L. Peres

picon face
>Maybe the ability to do their own scaling to suit the hardware is part of
>it, or being able to compile onto a new processor family. Be interesting
>to find out just what the rational was in going this way.

I think that the (initial) cost of PCs is at the point where the software
and the hardware cost about equally much. If any computer hardware firm
will accept this state of matters, then they will effectively accept to
play second, third, N-th fiddle and lose any kind of control on the
market. This is why they are looking for alternatives. Not to mention that
Windows cannot be scaled to server farms and clusters.

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2004\07\17@034428 by Peter L. Peres

picon face
>VMS was an operating system from Digital Equipment, I think it is still
>available from HP.

OpenVMS is downloadable and runs on i386 (pentium pc etc) hardware. I do
not like the command line ui (I used it only a few times).

Peter

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2004\07\17@035915 by Jake Anderson

flavicon
face
mmm yes it can
win2k advanced and up support clustering.

a server farm is just a bunch of computers that all happen to be togther,
nothing special there.
you could have a dos 6.02 server farm if you wanted to. (that version
supports networking i think)
there are many doze server farms in existance i know i have websites hosted
in them.


look into the bigger versions of windows.



> {Original Message removed}

2004\07\17@053200 by Lee Jones

flavicon
face
>> VMS was an operating system from Digital Equipment, I think
>> it is still available from HP.

It is.

> OpenVMS is downloadable and runs on i386 (pentium pc etc) hardware.

I don't believe it is downloadable.  Installation is via CD.  It
does NOT run on Intel Pentium CPUs.  VMS runs on VAX CPUs (32-bit
CISC architechture) or Alpha CPUs (64-bit RISC architechture).  HP
has announced that it it will port VMS to Intel's new 64-bit CPU.

> I do not like the command line ui (I used it only a few times).

I like it very much.
                                               Lee Jones

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2004\07\17@072238 by John J. McDonough

flavicon
face
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter L. Peres" <TakeThisOuTplpEraseMEspamRemoveMEACTCOM.CO.IL>
Subject: Re: [OT:] Is Linux the future or just nostalgic?


>Not to mention that Windows cannot be scaled to server
> farms and clusters.

I think you will find that most of the world's largest corporations run
Windows server farms.  You won't find a lot of clusters because they are
only interesting in unique cases.  Once upon a time they sounded like the
cure for world hunger but that didn't pan out.

--McD

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2004\07\17@072902 by John J. McDonough

flavicon
face
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Jones" <spam_OUTleeRemoveMEspam.....FRUMBLE.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Subject: Re: [OT:] Is Linux the future or just nostalgic?


> It does NOT run on Intel Pentium CPUs.

> > I do not like the command line ui (I used it only a few times).
>
> I like it very much.


Years ago there was a thing called PC-VMS that provided a VMS-like shell for
the PC.  It wasn't all that useful, but it was nice to have DCL on the PC.

You gotta admit, though, there is a huge difference between the *nix command
line and the VMS command line.  Unix is terse and cryptic.  VMS is for
people who really like to type!

--McD

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2004\07\17@164334 by Bill Couture

picon face
On Sat, 17 Jul 2004, John J. McDonough wrote:

> Years ago there was a thing called PC-VMS that provided a VMS-like shell for
> the PC.  It wasn't all that useful, but it was nice to have DCL on the PC.

PC-VMS was by Wendin, which also made PC-UNIX and later Wendin DOS.

I used to work for them, and worked on Wendin DOS.

I still have the source code for all of that, if anyone is interested.

Bill

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: The PICList is archived three different
ways.  See http://www.piclist.com/#archives for details.

2004\07\18@083139 by Nate Duehr

face
flavicon
face
On Saturday 17 July 2004 01:58, Jake Anderson wrote:
> mmm yes it can
> win2k advanced and up support clustering.

At what price?

Per-system or per-CPU licensing would eat any large clustered project alive.

--
Nate Duehr, spamnateKILLspamspamKILLspamnatetech.com

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email spamlistservspam_OUTspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2004\07\18@115209 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Bob,

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 10:25:47 -0700, Bob Axtell wrote:

> > In the real world, companies and people want something that they don't need
> > to think to use.  Mac and Windows seems to be going closer to that than
> > Linux.
> >
> Actually, Randy, that's not true. Windows systems are forever getting
> hammered with bugs, viruses, and poor software workmanship. When I had
> an active company with 5 PCs, I spent at least 25% of my work time
> dealing with Windows problems, from rebooting to upgrading. With MY
> clients, IT costs when using Woindows were literally through the roof.

Indeed, that's my experience too.  When the firm I worked for installed its first network (in fact *I*
installed it! :-) it was Novell Netware, with one server and a PC per desk in the department (about 30 desks,
about twice as many people, hot-desking).  This worked for years with only a part-time support person (me or
another) in the office, helping people and fixing the odd problem, and with no central help at all.  The
support person spent up to an hour a day doing this, never more, and most of that was "How do I do a table in
Word Perfect?" rather than anything to do with the network.  Backups were done by the receptionist changing
the tape every day.  Support cost was very small indeed.

Then the Group Edict came along that everyone was going to use Windows NT Servers, centrally located and
supported (and out of the control of the "locals") and suddenly there was a central support group of at least
half a dozen full-timers plus a manager, and each department had a part-time local support person, who spent
about half their time on fixing technical problems.  And instead of calling across a couple of desks for help,
users now had to log a call with the support group, who would get back to them later, and they didn't do "How
do I?" type questions anyway.  Net result was that users had a great reduction in the service they got, and
support costs were amazingly high, and somehow nobody seemed to notice!  MS-driven politics won, everything
else lost...

Cheers,




Howard Winter
St.Albans, England

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email STOPspamlistservspam_OUTspamspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2004\07\18@121714 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Morgan,

A couple of additions...

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 22:01:10 +0200, Morgan Olsson wrote:

> Mozilla: Borwser, mail, HTML editor.  FLOSS. MSWin, Linux, MAC.

...and OS/2!

> Kaspersky antivirus runs on both Win and Linux.

And Norman Virus Control (http://www.norman.com/) has versions for Linux, Windows clients, servers, Lotus
Domino (Notes servers), MS Exchange server, OS/2, and others.  And they seem to be more responsive than the
other major anti-virus companies, in my experience, getting a new detector/cleaner out very fast after a new
virus is identified.

And, Morgan, judging from your surname they are from the same area of the World as yourself!  :-)

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email spam_OUTlistservspamspamBeGonemitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2004\07\18@124214 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Randy,

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 16:25:44 EDT, Randy Abernathy wrote:

> Anyway, I was just saying that no matter what OS you use, or how secure it
> is now, some not too nice hacker will put his skills to underhanded use and
> find  a way to crack into it.

They may certainly try, but if the system is designed with security in mind from the start and built with the
required skill, there is nothing to say that they will succeed.

Banks are robbed every day, but Fort Knox, the Bank of England and so on, do not have people walking away with
wheelbarrows full of gold.  As far as I am aware neither have been robbed successfully, and that is not
because it's impossible, but because security is so well-designed and maintained that the effort needed to
pull it off is too great and the risk of success too small.

There is no such thing as an uncrackable Safe, nor a completely secure operating system, but it possible to
build something which is so hard to crack that it's unlikely to be worth doing, and the few who try do not
succeed.

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email EraseMElistservspamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2004\07\18@132135 by Bob Axtell

face picon face
Howard, I've always cherished your comments, they tend to always hit the
mark, and this subject is no exception! More..

Howard Winter wrote:
{Quote hidden}

Yes indeed.

The fact is that a purchaser expects a minimal level of software
performance, regardless of who makes it, or what it is. Over 16 years,
MS products have proven to be expensive, consistently buggy and poorly
written. Yet, over same 16 years, I have bought Borland Turbo Pascal
3.0, 5.0, 7.0, etc etc, Borland Delphi D4, D5, D6, D7, etc etc, and was
NEVER ONCE disappointed; not ONE bug did I ever find.

I bought Win3, then Win3.1, then Win95, then WinNT, then WinME, then
Win2K. Everytime, MS promised a decent return on the money I spent, but
all I got was fluff and mirrors. If I had all the money I spent on
Windows, I could have afforded alimony for another wife or two, and
wouldn't have stopped at just 5.

Not until Win2K arrived did Windows even REMOTELY approach its promised
performance. And in my humble opinion, NO improvements would have been
made in Windows AT ALL if the world wasn't suing it.

The future belongs to Linux. Not because it is somehow brilliant or
dazzling.... LINUX wins because it simply WORKS AS PROMISED.

--Bob

--

Replier: Most attachments rejected
      --------------
        Bob Axtell
PIC Hardware & Firmware Dev
  http://beam.to/baxtell
      1-520-219-2363

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email EraseMElistservRemoveMEspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2004\07\18@183213 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Bob,

On Sun, 18 Jul 2004 10:19:02 -0700, Bob Axtell wrote:

> Howard, I've always cherished your comments, they tend to always hit the mark

Good grief, and I thought everyone just ignored me!  :-)

Thanks!  :-)))


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email .....listservspamspam_OUTmitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2004\07\18@194837 by Jinx

face picon face
> Good grief, and I thought everyone just ignored me!  :-)

No ignoring, bit of a cock-up on the discernment front

YKWIM ;-)

--
http://www.piclist.com#nomail Going offline? Don't AutoReply us!
email @spam@listservEraseMEspamspammitvma.mit.edu with SET PICList DIGEST in the body

2004\07\19@084523 by Morgan Olsson

flavicon
face
Howard Winter 18:15 2004-07-18:

>And Norman Virus Control (http://www.norman.com/) has versions for Linux, Windows clients, servers, Lotus Domino (Notes servers), MS Exchange server, OS/2, and others.  
Thank you for the tip, have not tried them, but might do when my current license expires :)

>And they seem to be more responsive than the other major anti-virus companies, in my experience, getting a new detector/cleaner out very fast after a new virus is identified.

Kaspersky is the best i have tried this far.  Efficient in CPU, efficient download and update, quick fix, good standalone free virus cleaner, good informaiton, good vorus finding (also the consumer group here in sweden Råd & Rön rated them best).  Norton was by far the worst, yet i once installed it for a customer because he wanted it - not anymore...  Was worse than the virus i first cleaned in words of CPU load and program blocking...!


>And, Morgan, judging from your surname they are from the same area of the World as yourself!  :-)

Yep, neighbouring countries.

/Morgan
--
Morgan Olsson, Kivik, Sweden

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
piclist-unsubscribe-requestTakeThisOuTspamKILLspammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\19@090014 by cisco J. A. Ares

flavicon
face
www.top500.org/
http://www.computerworld.com/hardwaretopics/hardware/story/0,10801,94564,00.html

John J. McDonough wrote:

>{Original Message removed}

2004\07\19@194202 by Morgan Olsson

flavicon
face
Howard Winter 18:15 2004-07-18:
>> Mozilla: Borwser, mail, HTML editor.  FLOSS. MSWin, Linux, MAC.
>...and OS/2!

To be picky, you missed some ;) http://www.mozilla.org/ports/
Like Firefox for BeOS http://www.bebits.com/app/3143
I forgot, Opera is/was for BeOS also, old 3.62 version.

BeOS, BTW...
-curiously- anybody here have experience from Beos or the new brands of it?

I read about BeOS some years back, ant it seemed real cool then.
They had marketing difficulties (i will not elaborate), but i now found through Google that BeOS is being reenginneered and boult further upon both by commercial corporation (http://www.yellowtab.com/) and several free and open verisons http://www.beunited.org/.
Lots of pretty modern apps are available, and I also found a note that GTK+ is ported in alph astage, so more apps will probably be available.  There are books, development tools...

Some history
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=7265

Some details of BeOS are really interesting, i read here about the file system BFS: http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=421&page=13

More BeOS
http://www.bebits.com/ , http://www.bebits.com/beosresources
http://www.betips.net/ , http://lebuzz.com/, http://www.bedrivers.com/ , http://forums.begroovy.com/ , http://www.beosmax.org/html/


For more interesting-to-know alternatives i found a listing on left of
http://www.microsuck.com (Personally i find that site too much in some ways, but some things are well done)

/Morgan
--
Morgan Olsson, Kivik, Sweden

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: To leave the PICList
RemoveMEpiclist-unsubscribe-requestTakeThisOuTspammitvma.mit.edu

2004\07\20@025634 by Wesley Moore

flavicon
face
I installed the free version when BeOS was still a company. It was ok it
all worked as prescribed but there was a distinct lack of software
available. I know it has a lot of technical merits in particular the
file system. That is about where my experiences with it ended.

Wes

On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 01:41:17AM +0200, Morgan Olsson wrote:
{Quote hidden}

--
Wesley Moore - @spam@wmooreSTOPspamspamfreeshell.org - http://wmoore.no-ip.info/
Free Email provided by: SDF Public Access UNIX System http://sdf.lonestar.org/

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2004 , 2005 only
- Today
- New search...