The "NT vs. Linux" thread not the issue...real issue elsewhere

The "NT vs. Linux" thread not the issue...real issue elsewhere

Post by apa.. » Thu, 19 Jun 1997 04:00:00



OK, before I get nailed from either "side" for this post, keep in mind that
this was just an  observation from a few days back.

I have examined comp.os.windows.nt.advocacy, and found it to be filled
with...linux threads!  That's right, there's no war going on over there, and
in fact, people seem to be discussing the relative merits of Linux!  To top it
off, there was little cross-posting that I recognized, and what little there
was about NT was, well, pathetic.  Frankly, what I see are a small group of
people in this group making a big noise so that they can say "we were right,
they are wrong".

There's no right or wrong in this post, just what suits people.

<Soapbox Rant - Not to be taken Seriously>

Although I do have to agree that 70% of people who are exposed to computers
assume, like the old saying "clothes make the man", that "Windows makes the
machine".  Until they are exposed to something totally beyond their
comprehension...which changes their perceptions.  The REAL reason MicroSux
hasn't collapsed under it's lack of brainpower is they've "borrowed",
"assimulated", and "plundered" every standard that I can think of; they even
went after their own DOS system in Windows 3.1 (who wants 8.3 filenames for
their then-new zam-zowwy windowing system?); AVI/WAV files can be traced back
to IFF, an Amiga format (no joke, I saw this in a multimedia format book!);
Unix standards, such as TCP/IP, DNS, and a few others, are now "new" additions
to Windows NT; and so on.  Can't they do something ORIGINAL in thought and
execution?  How can corporate America simply be lead around the ring by the
nose like this?  Crimany, Billy-Boy himself has to go to Wall Street to
convince people to buy his OS; I can just see it now...

        "Please sir, more gruel..."

        Oops, that's from*ens, let's try again.

        "If you buy my shiny new OS today, all your troubles will be solved.  
Never mind that it will require an increase in the number of servers on your
network; never mind that you will have to upgrade ALL your Win16 apps at
roughly $100 a pop; never mind that it crashes, even though we say it will
not; never mind anything; just line my pockets, dudes!"

<Stepping down from Soapbox; feeling calmer, saner>

Flames to /dev/null.  For those rare Amiga users that were forced to convert
but were able to avoid Windows, that's NIL: to you. :-)  The resistence still
lives...

 
 
 

The "NT vs. Linux" thread not the issue...real issue elsewhere

Post by James Youngma » Thu, 19 Jun 1997 04:00:00



> I have examined comp.os.windows.nt.advocacy, and found it to be
> filled with...linux threads!  That's right, there's no war going on
> over there, and in fact, people seem to be discussing the relative
> merits of Linux!  To top it off, there was little cross-posting that
> I recognized, and what little there was about NT was, well,
> pathetic.  Frankly, what I see are a small group of people in this
> group making a big noise so that they can say "we were right, they
> are wrong".

I think I'll head off over there then.  Bye all!

 
 
 

The "NT vs. Linux" thread not the issue...real issue elsewhere

Post by Chuck Bermingha » Thu, 19 Jun 1997 04:00:00



Quote:>    "Please sir, more gruel..."

>    Oops, that's from*ens, let's try again.

>    "If you buy my shiny new OS today, all your troubles will be solved.  
> Never mind that it will require an increase in the number of servers on
your
> network; never mind that you will have to upgrade ALL your Win16 apps at
> roughly $100 a pop; never mind that it crashes, even though we say it
will
> not; never mind anything; just line my pockets, dudes!"

--so that means, if someone in the LInux community can "wow" the corporate
evaluators, and lay down enough cash, the average corporate Joe will take
interest?

In the latest issue of Byte, in the letters section, I found this from
Roger Fedyk:

"We loved it when IBM got its comeuppance, and now we, and McNealy, want
Gates and Co. to get theirs.  And one day, it will be Sun's turn when the
next bright new thing comes along."

Gates himself expressed just this kind of awareness when interviewed for a
computer history program on PBS.

Linux may very well be that "bright new thing", or at least a part of it.
I think the people who would have their pockets lined are*ing their
lips, quietly.

 
 
 

1. ksh - no "read" from pipe, but not common "subshell" issue

I apologize for resubmitting this, but I fear that many of you skipped
over it, assuming that it was the same "ksh - no "read" from pipe"
issue that has been previously discussed ad nauseam by this forum.  I
don't think this problem is caused by the "read" executing in a
subshell..

On my PowerMac G5, in a "Terminal" window configured to launch with the
ksh '93 shell that comes with Mac OS 10.4.3, I find that ksh's built in
"read" does not read from a pipe.  For example, neither of the
following produces output:

$ print "Hello World." | { read; print "$REPLY"; }

$ print "Hello World.\nHow's things?" | while read; do print "$REPLY";
done

I very seriously doubt that the problem is that the "read" is in a
subshell below the shell of the "print".

The above commands **do** produce the expected output on my Windows PC,
using the ksh '93 that that's part of UWIN.

My Mac is a PowerMac G5, running OS X 10.4.3, with all recent updates:

$ uname -a
Darwin Dans-Computer.local 8.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 8.3.0: Mon Oct
3 20:04:04 PDT 2005; root:xnu-792.6.22.obj~2/RELEASE_PPC Power
Macintosh powerpc

The ksh version that came with Mac OS 10.4.3:

$ print ${.sh.version}
Version M 1993-12-28 p

I downloaded the latest "q" build from the AT&T site, but I got the
same results.

Any suggestions?

Thanks,
Dan R.

2. What kind of network

3. "umsdos" vs "vfat" vs "looped ext2"

4. FNS and NIS+ - proceed with caution

5. starting X programs without first issuing "startx" or "xinit"

6. Solaris Ressource Manager

7. "Login" and "su" issue with root password

8. RC5-64 and AMD K6-2 400

9. Since when UNIX is the "real" system that runs the "real" machines?

10. GETSERVBYNAME()????????????????????"""""""""""""

11. "device not configured" & other issues

12. """"""""My SoundBlast 16 pnp isn't up yet""""""""""""

13. Which script does Linux read when I issue a "reboot"