--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: ED200002Date: 09/01/97 From: LEE ROBERTS Time: 02:24am \/To: LARS HELLSTEN (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: To Linux or not to Linux, that's the02:24:4609/01/97 --- Maximus/2 2.02 * Origin: OS/2 Shareware BBS, telnet://bbs.os2bbs.com (1:109/347) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: ED200003Date: 09/01/97 From: LEE ROBERTS Time: 02:26am \/To: LARS HELLSTEN (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: To Linux or not to Linux, that's the02:26:3409/01/97 LR> What is "normal", and what does it have to do with this discussion? LH> Meaning people who aren't computer geeks. As for the relevance to this LH> discussion, it probably isn't - but you're the one who brought this up by LH> saying Windows is for "dummies". It is. Just ask Microsoft. It's specifically designed and targeted toward the non-technical computer user -- the user who has no idea what the system is doing and doesn't care to learn. If you want to extract some sort of personal insult out of that, it's hardly my problem. LR> tongue-in-cheek reference toa popular series of how-to books (the LR> Dummies series) that I was making, you're beyond help. LH> Umm... you're comparing an operating system to a book? If so, I think LH> you're beyond beyond help. I think the "I know you are but what am I" bit went out with Pee Wee Herman :) It was a facetious analogy and nothing more. Again, your obsession with it is not my problem. LR> onto Linux (someone is supposedly doing just that, by the way) and LR> I'd guess they'd be pretty close to equal. LH> Pretty close to equal in terms of what? Multitasking performance? Primarily, yes. They'd also be equal in terms of the functionality of the GUI, where OS/2 is currently way ahead. LH> As long as overall performance is adequate, it's one of the least of my LH> concerns when choosing an OS. It's not like I'm using a 286 or something. This would explain your attraction to Win95, I think. No one who is seriously concerned with multitasking would claim that Win95 is a superior multitasker. --- Maximus/2 2.02 * Origin: OS/2 Shareware BBS, telnet://bbs.os2bbs.com (1:109/347) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: ED200004Date: 08/31/97 From: KENNETH ABRAMS Time: 12:52pm \/To: ROBERT WHITE (Read 2 times) Subj: To Linux or not to Linux, RW> JS> Don't just leave it there, tell us WHY NT is MUCH better than RW> OS/2 JS> when it comes to multitasking? RW> Multi-tasking? Is that all you are going to pivck on? How about the RW> rest of it JACK? How about Security, and Networking? There are And yet again, you completely avoid answering the question. Why is that? kabrams@erols.com * RM 1.3 03106 * --- Platinum Xpress/Win/Wildcat5! v2.0 * Origin: BBS Networks @ bbsnets.com 301-863-5089 (1:2612/10) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: ED200005Date: 08/31/97 From: KENNETH ABRAMS Time: 01:00pm \/To: LARS HELLSTEN (Read 2 times) Subj: To Linux or not to L LH> JS> GUI's have been shown to be vastly unnecessary, and have been LH> Really? So how exactly would you go about editing an image? Lynx I'd edit an image in a CLI based environment the same way I'd do it in a GUI environment. I'd run an appropriate graphics editing application, depending on file format of the graphic in question. Where'd you get the delusional belief that a GUI was required to run graphical applications? LH> use WP for DOS, personally I never have used it, and never could use LH> anything other than a GUI, WYSIWYG word processor. Why not? With a word processor you're mostly dealing with text anyway. A GUI isn't all that necessary, it just makes playing games with fonts more convenient. kabrams@erols.com * RM 1.3 03106 * --- Platinum Xpress/Win/Wildcat5! v2.0 * Origin: BBS Networks @ bbsnets.com 301-863-5089 (1:2612/10) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: ED200006Date: 09/01/97 From: JUSTIN BAUSTERT Time: 10:40am \/To: KEITH DOUGLAS (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: OS/2, The Best Intranet Server Choic10:40:4009/01/97 KD> Justin, is this from a magazine or other copyrighted publication? If KD> so, please use selective quotes... fair use, you know. I pulled it down from the Inet, though I don't have the URL handy.. I'll make a note of the selective quotes for next time.. JB --- Telegard v3.02/mL * Origin: Courier Central \ Cashion, OK \ 405.433.2665 (1:147/92) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: ED200007Date: 09/01/97 From: JUSTIN BAUSTERT Time: 10:47am \/To: JACK STEIN (Read 2 times) Subj: Re: DOS > OS/2 < UNIX JS> No, because you can just run OS/2 and it will run your wonderful DOS JS> apps just fine. Porting them to OS/2 has no big advantages in most JS> cases. OS/2 is still the OS that is managing everything, unlike JS> DOS/WIN, where DOS still has to rear it's ugly head all the time. Lars doesn't have to port it, but I'd sure like to see it.. :> Especially if it was the shareware I've purchased that he's written.. JB --- Telegard v3.02/mL * Origin: Courier Central \ Cashion, OK \ 405.433.2665 (1:147/92) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: ED200008Date: 09/01/97 From: JACK STEIN Time: 10:00am \/To: KEITH DOUGLAS (Read 2 times) Subj: Pipes & GREP Keith Douglas wrote in a message to John Meroth: JM> KD> But grep doesn't look for file names. That's the whole point. JM> Yes it does. part of the grep command is the file name with JM> or without wildcards. KD> That's not good enough. (eg: sometimes you want DOES NOT KD> and so forth) That would be -L list files not containing matches only. Jack --- timEd/2-B11 * Origin: Jack's Free Lunch 4OS2 USR16.8 Pgh Pa (412)492-0822 (1:129/171) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: ED200009Date: 09/01/97 From: JACK STEIN Time: 10:07am \/To: KEITH DOUGLAS (Read 2 times) Subj: Pipes and Grep Keith Douglas wrote in a message to Jack Stein: JS> Pipes and redirection hardly creates more work than JS> necessary, how do you arrive at that? KD> It would be easier if things just talked to each other, no? KD> rather than have you explicitly do it all the time. I sure don't know what you mean. That IS talking to each other, using output from one app as input to another app. Unix does this very well, and very easily. JS> Sure it does. Grep -l "keith douglas" *.txt will list the JS> filename of every file found that contains the string. KD> and doesn't allow me to do negative searches; You keep wiggling around, but, grep will easily do negative searches. Switch L will list all files not containing a match. Switch v will list all files and all lines not containing a match. KD> and forces me to use a certain naming scheme, and so forth. Your not forced to use a certain naming scheme at all? JS> Not with a mouse they don't, and they don't know that a JS> picture of a fish represents a recipe application, or JS> whatever. KD> You make it sound like there are no names to anything. No, your making it sound like names are obsolete. In fact, thats pretty much what you said that got me started on this thread. KD> And you STILL have't responded to Tog. I not recall Tog, what is Tog? JS> KD> Could have fooled me. (Witness any ISP that allows shell JS> KD> access) JS> Shell access is just that, access to one shell, one JS> directory, they can't do any damage to the system from a KD> I have access to lots of shells and directories. (And, no, KD> I'm not root) Welp, as long as you don't have root access, then your access is limited, and you can do no damage to the system, only to the shells you have access too. JS> Replacing a HD obviously can't be done remotely, but so JS> what, the system will still be running off another server, JS> so no one will know the difference. KD> People will eventually - 'hey, where did the webserver go'? KD> etc. Nope, the second server would look and act exactly as the original server, far as I know. I've never used this technique, we didn't have the hardware needed to do it for one thing, but, considering we were up for 8+ years with not one problem other than one HD failure on one system, it was not needed anyway. If we were an ISP making big money on the dependability of our systems, both our systems and our backup methods would have been different, I suppose. Even with a HD replacement, it took a full 2 hours to get a new drive installed, completly restored from tape. The users took a long lunch or did other work. My ISP at home was down for over a week once, not letting anyone log on that used the default OS/2 dialer. They were a paid ISP, and a rather large one, AT&T. They denied they had a problem until they fixed it. Jack --- timEd/2-B11 * Origin: Jack's Free Lunch 4OS2 USR16.8 Pgh Pa (412)492-0822 (1:129/171) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: ED200010Date: 09/01/97 From: JACK STEIN Time: 10:34am \/To: KEITH DOUGLAS (Read 2 times) Subj: Naming Conventions Keith Douglas wrote in a message to Jack Stein: JS> KD> It strikes me as some UNIX programs only want to deal with JS> KD> (by default) certain extensions of files. (eg: a linker .o JS> KD> files) JS> KD> This is annoying. JS> Thats the application, not Unix itself. My Borland compiler JS> wants .obj files by default. Why on earth would you find JS> what a compliler names object files annoying? KD> You just finished saying that I can name things what I want. KD> If applications don't let me, what good is it? You can name the application anything you want. What the Unix compiler uses as the default extension for it's object files should NEVER matter to you as a programer, unless you are looking to get rid of a bunch of object files that your compiler no longer needs. You are making no sense on this Keith. Are you saying compilers in you MAC use no naming conventions when linking and compiling code? Jack --- timEd/2-B11 * Origin: Jack's Free Lunch 4OS2 USR16.8 Pgh Pa (412)492-0822 (1:129/171) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 129 OP. SYS DEBATE Ref: ED200011Date: 09/01/97 From: JACK STEIN Time: 10:40am \/To: KEITH DOUGLAS (Read 2 times) Subj: Unix Shells Keith Douglas wrote in a message to Jack Stein: JS> Of course you can. What the system does for the user and JS> what the user can do themselves is NOT the same thing. KD> True, but I now (as of the below) know how restricted your KD> access really is. I'll get back to you when you start KD> comparing systems closed or open to the same degree. That's silly. The whole REASON for this discussion is based on the openess of your system vs the openess of my system to the user. My users do NOT have a restricted shell, which only gives there shell access to certain commands. Their shell can use any shell commands, but they don't have a command-line ever to use them, the commands are issued from their applications that use the commands for specific purposes. They cannot escape from their log on menus, or the applications that they can run from them, other than to a logon prompt. JS> The user can't do any of this (on my system) The KD> As above. As above, I don't get your point at all? Jack --- timEd/2-B11 * Origin: Jack's Free Lunch 4OS2 USR16.8 Pgh Pa (412)492-0822 (1:129/171)