Switching to Linux? Not really! A Windows PC next to every Linux box!
Mike Cox
computers. But guess what? According to the article every person
will have a Windows PC next to that Linux machine so they can run
apps!!! I guess "switching" is only good for the press releases
because when it comes to real work, Windows and Intel get it done.
From the article:
""Although Lockheed is showing Solaris the door, Microsoft is still
welcome. "Every engineer has a Microsoft PC sitting next to their Sun
Blade," said our source. "That's for business applications, and Linux
is no threat there. It's Sun who has to worry." "
Article Link: http://neurocrat.com/2004/07/26/lockheed.shtml
washer of kegs
> Lockheed Martin is switching all osecretarialorkstations for Linux
If you look just above the above quote in the article you would have read
"Apparently Linux has no problem reliably running the fancy software that
the engineers use to design airplanes."
What they are saying is that if you have nothing but secretarial work
windows is fine but when you want to do real work, call Unix or Linux.
GreyCloud
If you had read the entire article you would've realized that Sun was
the primary target to get rid of. Also the article explained that the
fancy apps that engineers wanted to run would run on Linux. So much for
the M$ FUD that you spread.
--
---------------------------------
My other computer is a VAX.
tha...@dexter.glaci.com
> Lockheed Martin is switching all of its SUN workstations for Linux
> computers. But guess what? According to the article every person
> will have a Windows PC next to that Linux machine so they can run
> apps!!! I guess "switching" is only good for the press releases
> because when it comes to real work, Windows and Intel get it done.
I guess I'm a little confused. If they are not planing to use
those linux boxen for real work, what are they doing with them?
Playing Tux Racer?
Of course the cool thing about this move is they can still
converge to a single box on the desk... just run some sort
of VMWare type software and you can have a full-up windows
environment within Linux. They still have to pay for
Windows, Office, etc licensing, but they save money on
duplicate hardware. Also, it paves the way for an easier
migration away from Microsoft if they choose to do that.
Actually, I currently work in a similar situation. The
software engineers at my current client are developing
Linux software but must use Windows for many clerical
tasks. We are using a Linux client for a Windows terminal
server to avoid dual booting. One engineer had a really
slick solution for a while... two computers (one Linux,
the other Windows) sharing a single mouse and keyboard.
Input from one was slaved to the other (probably via VNC
or something along those lines). He could drag the mouse
from one monitor to the other and treat it like one big
desktop surface. I'd seen that done with dual head
systems, but not with two separate computers before.
Very cool.
Later,
Thad
--
Thad Phetteplace - GLACI, Inc.
http://www.GridSlammer.org - An open source video game toolkit
Freeride
They should just hide that swiss cheese hunk of shit Windows OS behind
Linux with VMWare, if they have to run those old legacy Winblows
applications.
Barry Margolin
washer of kegs <kegwa...@t-online.de> wrote:
> What they are saying is that if you have nothing but secretarial work
> windows is fine but when you want to do real work, call Unix or Linux.
Actually, the way I interpret it is that they're using Unix for the
engineering applications, and Windows for the business applications.
--
Barry Margolin, bar...@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE post questions in newsgroups, not directly to me ***
Henry Lerche Madsen
> Lockheed Martin is switching all of its SUN workstations for Linux
> computers. But guess what? According to the article every person
> will have a Windows PC next to that Linux machine so they can run
> apps!!! I guess "switching" is only good for the press releases
> because when it comes to real work, Windows and Intel get it done.
Im not sure that you are right in that. Munich Germany will switch to
Linux soon, will they do that whit no apps ? I don't think so. Bergen
Norway are soing the same way as well.
Here in Denmark some schools are using star-office case they can't
afford paying the high price for license MS
About Munich:
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-1010740.html?tag=nl
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5237356.html
Munich/Bergen:
http://www.linuxinsider.com/story/34566.html
Freeride
> What they are saying is that if you have nothing but secretarial work
> windows is fine but when you want to do real work, call Unix or Linux
More likely what they are says is that they an extremely stable platform
which they can rely on to do engineering work on.
Not a big deal if you loose a email that your typing up when your Winblows
machine blue screens. Different story when if you are working on a engine
design or running a big batch calculation job.
Frank Cusack
> Mike Cox wrote:
>
>> Lockheed Martin is switching all of its SUN workstations for Linux
>> computers. But guess what? According to the article every person
>> will have a Windows PC next to that Linux machine so they can run
>> apps!!! I guess "switching" is only good for the press releases
>> because when it comes to real work, Windows and Intel get it done.
>
> Im not sure that you are right in that. Munich Germany will switch to
> Linux soon, will they do that whit no apps ?
They've "been going to" do that for a long time. And it turns out Linux
is more expensive than Windows. You won't see that in the papers.
/fc
Rich Teer
> Of course the cool thing about this move is they can still
> converge to a single box on the desk... just run some sort
They could have done that if they'd stuck with Sun workstations,
by using the Sun PCi cards.
> Actually, I currently work in a similar situation. The
> software engineers at my current client are developing
> Linux software but must use Windows for many clerical
> tasks. We are using a Linux client for a Windows terminal
> server to avoid dual booting. One engineer had a really
> slick solution for a while... two computers (one Linux,
> the other Windows) sharing a single mouse and keyboard.
> Input from one was slaved to the other (probably via VNC
> or something along those lines). He could drag the mouse
> from one monitor to the other and treat it like one big
> desktop surface. I'd seen that done with dual head
> systems, but not with two separate computers before.
> Very cool.
Not as cool as using Sun PCi.
--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA
President,
Rite Online Inc.
Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-online.net
Ralph
Of course not, papers have to SUPPORT their claims with FACTS.
>
> /fc
Gary L. Burnore
Not the ones owned by Rupert Murdoch[sp].
--
gburnore@databasix dot com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary L. Burnore | нлГКнГоГКнГГнлКнГоГКнГнГоГКнГннлГ
| нлГКнГоГКнГГнлКнГоГКнГнГоГКнГннлГ
DataBasix | нлГКнГоГКнГГнлКнГоГКнГнГоГКнГннлГ
| нлГ 3 4 1 4 2 нГоГ 6 9 0 6 9 нлГ
Black Helicopter Repair Svcs Division | Official Proof of Purchase
===========================================================================
Want one? GET one! http://signup.databasix.com
===========================================================================
Frank Cusack
hahahaha since when?
These kind of issues are press releases, not news.
If you do your research you'll find that the ultimate solution (for Munich)
is more expensive and the interim (both Windows and Linux) is *obviously*
more expensive. But they are pressing on anyway, last I read about it.
/fc
Ralph
> On Fri, 30 Jul 2004 18:12:35 -0700, Ralph <not...@doing.com> wrote:
>
>>Frank Cusack wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 02:23:41 +0200 Henry Lerche Madsen
>>> <ler...@aarstiden.dk> wrote:
>>>> Mike Cox wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Lockheed Martin is switching all of its SUN workstations for Linux
>>>>> computers. But guess what? According to the article every person
>>>>> will have a Windows PC next to that Linux machine so they can run
>>>>> apps!!! I guess "switching" is only good for the press releases
>>>>> because when it comes to real work, Windows and Intel get it done.
>>>>
>>>> Im not sure that you are right in that. Munich Germany will switch to
>>>> Linux soon, will they do that whit no apps ?
>>>
>>> They've "been going to" do that for a long time. And it turns out Linux
>>> is more expensive than Windows. You won't see that in the papers.
>>
>>Of course not, papers have to SUPPORT their claims with FACTS.
>
> Not the ones owned by Rupert Murdoch[sp].
>
>
I don't think that is what he ment.
Ralph
I HAVE done my research and don't find the same conclusion. I see that they
are planning on saving money IN THE LONG RUN, That means they are looking
ar more than just the cost of the SWITCH. Only narrowminded trolls would
only look at the cost of just the cutover, you? are you such a troll?
>
> /fc
Ralph
To back up MY claim:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,1110809,00.asp
begin quote
"The city of Munich believes that from a long-term perspective they are by
far better positioned if they use Linux and open-source software. ..."
"The city clearly sees Linux not just as cost savings over costly,
proprietary software, but also as the best tool for the job-bringing
security, stability, flexibility and privacy not available to them before,"
Seibt said.
end quote
Of course there are those that seem to think there is some hidden conspiracy
involving the press, governments, business to spread false positive news
about Linux, is that you? Looking for black helecopters under every rock
and behind every tree?
Erik Heil
Hmm. More expensive than Windows? Where is this stated? I've never heard
such claims. Rather comfused though. I would expect that Linux would e
cheaper, since Linux actually costs nothing up front to the user except
the hardware which is to run the OS.
--
Erik Heil <eh...@va3duk.serveftp.com>
Phone: (865) 673-0542
Linønut
>> What they are saying is that if you have nothing but secretarial work
>> windows is fine but when you want to do real work, call Unix or Linux.
>
> Actually, the way I interpret it is that they're using Unix for the
> engineering applications, and Windows for the business applications.
Ha ha. I would bet that the primary use for the engineer's Windows boxes is to
do their timesheets and maybe manage their calendars.
--
Free as in freedom
Power as in empowerment
Linønut
> If you do your research you'll find that the ultimate solution (for Munich)
> is more expensive and the interim (both Windows and Linux) is *obviously*
> more expensive. But they are pressing on anyway, last I read about it.
All this is true. Which tells you something about the trust Munich places in
Microsoft software and in Microsoft's treatment of customers once they've got
them.
Linønut
> Hmm. More expensive than Windows? Where is this stated? I've never heard
> such claims. Rather comfused though. I would expect that Linux would e
> cheaper, since Linux actually costs nothing up front to the user except
> the hardware which is to run the OS.
It is more expensive, I believe, primarily because it is a switch. Any switch
from one platform to another will incur expenses.
And, to make Linux even more expensive relative to Windows, Microsoft CEO Steve
Ballmer flew to Munich and made it clear that Munich would get steep discounts
of Microsoft software.
Yet Munich still went with UNIX. Why? Because you don't buy cheap cars from a
sheister.
Hamilcar Barca
2004 00:52:05 +0000), Patricia wrote:
> LM is a big defense contractor as well as a contractor to the FAA so they
> are bound by gazillions of specifications.
That's one of the reasons they've run Solaris and they're going to run
Linux. Knowing Microsoft's continuing refusal to properly implement any
standard, such as IP, PPP, Kerberos, ad nauseum, Lockheed Martin needs a
reliable operating system.
Serge
<...>
> Actually, I currently work in a similar situation. The software engineers
> at my current client are developing Linux software but must use Windows
> for many clerical tasks. We are using a Linux client for a Windows
> terminal server to avoid dual booting. One engineer had a really slick
> solution for a while... two computers (one Linux, the other Windows)
> sharing a single mouse and keyboard. Input from one was slaved to the
> other (probably via VNC or something along those lines). He could drag
> the mouse from one monitor to the other and treat it like one big desktop
> surface. I'd seen that done with dual head systems, but not with two
> separate computers before. Very cool.
It may be...
http://synergy2.sourceforge.net/index.html
<quote>
Synergy lets you easily share a single mouse and keyboard
between multiple computers with different operating systems,
each with its own display, without special hardware. It's
intended for users with multiple computers on their desk
since each system uses its own monitor(s).
Redirecting the mouse and keyboard is as simple as moving
the mouse off the edge of your screen. Synergy also merges
the clipboards of all the systems into one, allowing cut-
and-paste between systems. Furthermore, it synchronizes
screen savers so they all start and stop together and, if
screen locking is enabled, only one screen requires a
password to unlock them all. Learn more about how it works.
Synergy is open source and released under the GNU Public
License (GPL).
<end quote>
Never tried it thou. Don't know how well it works.
> Later,
>
> Thad
-Serge
washer of kegs
> Error BR-549: MS DRM similarects the following post from Barry Margolin:
>
>>> What they are saying is that if you have nothing but secretarial work
>>> windows is fine but when you want to do real work, call Unix or Linux.
>>
>> Actually, the way I interpret it is that they're using Unix for the
>> engineering applications, and Windows for the business applications.
>
> Ha ha. I would bet that the primary use for the engineer's Windows boxes
> is to do their timesheets and maybe manage their calendars.
>
Our mechanical design department works similar to the one in the article.
2D and 3D CAD is done on the Unix machines (formerly Sun now Linux on
intel) along with flow and stress calculations which can run all night on a
solution (no luck getting them to make the department a cluster). The
windws box next to that is used to run outlook for mail and appointments
and excel is used to fill out the time sheets using a VB macro that only an
accountant could love. The only science or engineering program running on
the windows box is MathCad as that does not run natively on linux and wine
makes no sense if you have the other box there and running anyway. The
rest of the engineering department has a couple of programs we use for
inventory, project, document, or requirement management. Most of these
programs are unstable bloatware running on windows but the real work is
done on the Unix stations.
Thomas Dehn
Unfortunately, that Microsoft-funded study you are referring to
somehow "forgot" to take into account costs for bluescreens, viruses,
worms, and general security issues. And it also somehow "forgot"
to mention that when users move from Office 95/98 to Office XP,
they need training, too. Plus all the existing data has to be
converted anyway.
Thomas
Geoff Lane
> And it also somehow "forgot"
> to mention that when users move from Office 95/98 to Office XP,
> they need training, too. Plus all the existing data has to be
> converted anyway.
What's all this "training" that people talk about.
Could it be possible that the current GUI based user interfaces are NOT as
User Friendly as claimed :-)
--
Geoff Lane
Elwood: What kind of music do you play here?
Bar lady: Oh, we've got both kinds, Country _and_ Western.
Thomas Dehn
"Geoff Lane" <zza...@buffy.sighup.org.uk> wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Thomas Dehn <thomas...@arcor.de> wrote:
> > And it also somehow "forgot"
> > to mention that when users move from Office 95/98 to Office XP,
> > they need training, too. Plus all the existing data has to be
> > converted anyway.
>
> What's all this "training" that people talk about.
>
> Could it be possible that the current GUI based user interfaces
> are NOT as User Friendly as claimed :-)
Its always the same: the 5-15% of really skilled users
will get along with any reasonable interface. The
majority will struggle even with training.
The other main aspect is that most computer users do not
want to get bothered by authentication, nor by any other
complex tasks. Thus, software vendors such as Microsoft have
tried to obscure the existing software complexity by putting layers
of nice-looking interfaces on top of it, while leaving the
complexity itself in the software, as the complexity
is their main argument to sell their product. And they
continuously add complexity to push users to buy an upgrade.
The sad truth is that customers don't buy an upgrade just
to get the same functionality a little bit more efficient, with
a few less bugs. In the end, Microsoft's insecure bloatware
just delivers what the market demands.
15 year old WordPerfect 5.1 is quite sufficient for any normal
user's word processing tasks. Most users do not need anything newer.
To sell anything newer, the software vendors have to create
the illusion that all those completely unnecessary additional
features which 99% of the users don't even know are
a compelling reason to buy new software.
Thomas
Byron A Jeff
Mike Cox <mikeco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
-Lockheed Martin is switching all of its SUN workstations for Linux
-computers. But guess what? According to the article every person
-will have a Windows PC next to that Linux machine so they can run
-apps!!! I guess "switching" is only good for the press releases
-because when it comes to real work, Windows and Intel get it done.
-
-From the article:
-
-""Although Lockheed is showing Solaris the door, Microsoft is still
-welcome. "Every engineer has a Microsoft PC sitting next to their Sun
-Blade," said our source. "That's for business applications, and Linux
-is no threat there. It's Sun who has to worry." "
A few points:
1) That's a preexisting situation between Sun and M$. The Windows boxes are
already there.
2) The Linux boxes are being put in to help the engineers design airplanes.
See Lockheed Martin designs stuff like airplanes. Linux: designs airplanes,
Windows: E-mail and calendars. Hmmmm.
3) The setup is nonsensical from both a cost and space utilization perspective.
Presuming that the existing Windows hardware can handle the demands of the
engineering apps, then a more cost/space effective way to convert would be to
ditch the Suns, convert the Windows boxes to the Linux engineering stations,
then create a Windows Terminal Server Applications farm somewhere out on the
network. Then use rdesktop to access the Windows Applications server farm.
That way there's only one box on the desktop, and the existing hardware is
repurposed for maximum utilization, which is designing airplines.
BAJ
Donn Miller
>
> Lockheed Martin is switching all of its SUN workstations for Linux
>
>
> ""Although Lockheed is showing Solaris the door, Microsoft is still
>
I've got an Ultra-2 here running Solaris 8 (which was a free download
for personal use). From my bedroom, I have an x86 laptop running
Gentoo. I use X -broadcast to connect to the CDE desktop on my
Ultra-2. Pretty nice machine, actually, for $52.01. I like it. You
won't find Windows running anywhere here. On my personal machines, it's
Microsoft, not Sun, that has to worry. I mean, hell, I got the Ultra-2
and a bunch of other stuff I needed for a price less than Windows XP
home edition. The Gentoo I didn't have to pay for either (although I
could donate). And yet Microsoft doesn't have to worry. Ironic, isn't
it?
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Linønut
>>What's all this "training" that people talk about.
>>Could it be possible that the current GUI based user interfaces are NOT as
>>User Friendly as claimed :-)
>
> Of course they aren't. When people talk about Windows being User Friendly,
> what they actually mean is that it's familiar. having recently been forced to
> have a Windows box on my desk at work, I find the loathsome thing drives
> me incoherent with rage.
Me too. Slow, unresponsive, and sometimes it works in a different way, for no
apparent reason. And I miss the features of my GNU/Linux boxes.
Linønut
> 3) The setup is nonsensical from both a cost and space utilization perspective.
> Presuming that the existing Windows hardware can handle the demands of the
> engineering apps, then a more cost/space effective way to convert would be to
> ditch the Suns, convert the Windows boxes to the Linux engineering stations,
> then create a Windows Terminal Server Applications farm somewhere out on the
> network. Then use rdesktop to access the Windows Applications server farm.
> That way there's only one box on the desktop, and the existing hardware is
> repurposed for maximum utilization, which is designing airplines.
However, the Pointy-Haired Bosses just love having the extra boxes to
first add to the value of their fiefdom, and then to depreciate later.
Linønut
> Synergy lets you easily share a single mouse and keyboard
> between multiple computers with different operating systems,
> each with its own display, without special hardware. It's
> intended for users with multiple computers on their desk
> since each system uses its own monitor(s).
>
> Never tried it thou. Don't know how well it works.
I see that it is part of the gentoo portage system.
I'm hoping it will work with this Win NT 4 box I have, as I have
to rebuild some old software using Visual C++ 6, and I don't
really have room anywhere for another monitor and keyboard.
Peter Jensen
Hash: SHA1
Linųnut wrote:
>> Of course they aren't. When people talk about Windows being User
>> Friendly, what they actually mean is that it's familiar. having
>> recently been forced to have a Windows box on my desk at work, I find
>> the loathsome thing drives me incoherent with rage.
>
> Me too. Slow, unresponsive, and sometimes it works in a different
> way, for no apparent reason. And I miss the features of my GNU/Linux
> boxes.
It's just plain horrible to sit down at a Windows box after having use
Linux for a few months. I quickly find a lot of missing features, and
everything seems to take much longer to do. The poor excuse for a
command line Windows has is probably a big part of the reason. I type
much faster than I could ever navigate a menu. I don't expect there are
many willing converts in the Linux -> Windows direction ...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFBC+ZOd1ZThqotgfgRAuEoAKC5viVrkFALo8Idkkt9qwAD5QZvswCgkGPf
21OQWWgtI5DlEys8kMKt41w=
=KkPZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
PeKaJe
transfer, n.:
A promotion you receive on the condition that you leave town.
Peter Jensen
Hash: SHA1
washer of kegs wrote:
> The only science or engineering program running on the windows box is
> MathCad as that does not run natively on linux and wine makes no sense
> if you have the other box there and running anyway.
MathCAD is the one app I really miss. It's an engineering app I've used
quite a lot over the years. I've never got it to run with WINE, and no
reports on the Internet indicate success with that. I'd gladly pay for
it again if they would provide a Linux version. Of course I'd rather
see an OSS alternative as I don't like having my data held hostage by a
closed format (at least it was last I checked).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFBC+gYd1ZThqotgfgRAgIMAKCUqg1nECHL4yPkATBpE0ljnYmOcQCfbogD
VW71vLloJrl5jAzfMEDtbeo=
=yaVP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
PeKaJe
All seems condemned in the long run to approximate a state akin to
Gaussian noise. -- James Martin
Paul Eggert
> having recently been forced to have a Windows box on my desk at
> work, I find the loathsome thing drives me incoherent with rage.
You mean, like having to push the "Start" button to turn the thing off?
For some more-entertaining stuff along these lines, please see:
Sean Parsons
Why MS Windows isn't ready for the Desktop
The Linux Box (2004-07-30)
http://thelinuxbox.org/Desktop.php
Justin Stanczak
> What they are saying is that if you have nothing but secretarial work
> windows is fine but when you want to do real work, call Unix or Linux.
Why can't secretarial work be done on a *nix. All the apps are there.
Email, calendar, office suite, desktop publishing, graphics, etc... I use
them all with no problem. The only one I've found no good sub for is Flash
editor and Crossover/Wine fixed that easy.
Peter Bilt
> Lockheed Martin is switching all of its SUN workstations for Linux
> computers. But guess what? According to the article every person
> will have a Windows PC next to that Linux machine so they can run
> apps!!! I guess "switching" is only good for the press releases
> because when it comes to real work, Windows and Intel get it done.
>
> From the article:
>
> ""Although Lockheed is showing Solaris the door, Microsoft is still
> welcome. "Every engineer has a Microsoft PC sitting next to their Sun
> Blade," said our source. "That's for business applications, and Linux
> is no threat there. It's Sun who has to worry." "
>
> Article Link: http://neurocrat.com/2004/07/26/lockheed.shtml
That's quite idiotic. I can tell their IT staff has been contaminated
with a couple of histeric Linux hippies, pretty soon the whole IT
staff is going to waste months learning Linux only to find out that
Linux sucks.
BTW, a Linux hippie installed Redhat Enterprise ES 3.0 on a server at
work and the rest of the IT staff were asking where on RH Enterprise
ES are the GUIs for directory services, enterprise group policy and
email server configuration: please don't tell me you need to use text
mode command-line to manage enterprise directory serivices, group
policy and email server config.
George W. 2004!
Peter Bilt, American!
MCSE+ Internet
Windows Server 2003
Born in the USA!
Gary L. Burnore
wrote:
Webmin works just the same on Solaris as it does on RH. So that
argument is moot. There are places for each of Solaris, Windows and
Linux. Being bigoted to one gives you less employment opportunities
and in the current mess, created by Bush, you may just find you need
it.
>George W. 2004!
Washington is dead.
>
>Peter Bilt, American!
>MCSE+ Internet
Wow, you know internet? I'm impressed. :)
>Windows Server 2003
>Born in the USA!
--
gburnore@databasix dot com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary L. Burnore | нлГКнГоГКнГГнлКнГоГКнГнГоГКнГннлГ
| нлГКнГоГКнГГнлКнГоГКнГнГоГКнГннлГ
DataBasix | нлГКнГоГКнГГнлКнГоГКнГнГоГКнГннлГ
| нлГ 3 4 1 4 2 нГоГ 6 9 0 6 9 нлГ
Black Helicopter Repair Svcs Division | Official Proof of Purchase
===========================================================================
Want one? GET one! http://signup.databasix.com
===========================================================================
Sinister Midget
I don't think the point was that linux/UNIX can't, but that it's the
one area where Windoze can (assuming we ignore a lot of cruft, bugs and
instability).
However, the other point, that Winders *can't* be used for anything
serious with any certainty of successful completion, is accuarate and
irrefutable.
--
Microsoft: The company that made email dangerous. And web surfing. And
midi files. And MP3s. And on-line banking. And instant messaging.
And.....
BarryMcOckner
<snip>
My nym's better than yours.
all mail refused
>I'm talking about dialogue boxes that seize the input focus and will
And you have to reboot to change an IP address. Handy feature you know.
Then there's the long search for a Windoze program that does anything
you want done.
BTW someone asked me a few hours ago whether it's you trying to
crack passwords in SSH - is it ? I said I thought not - in fact
I'm tempted to post his phone number here so he can explain himself.
--
Elvis Notargiacomo master AT barefaced DOT cheek
http://www.notatla.org.uk/goen/
The Voice of Reason
> Error BR-549: MS DRM 1.0 rejects the following post from Barry Margolin:
>
> >> What they are saying is that if you have nothing but secretarial work
> >> windows is fine but when you want to do real work, call Unix or Linux.
> >
> > engineering applications, and Windows for the business applications.
>
> Ha ha. I would bet that the primary use for the engineer's Windows boxes is to
> do their timesheets and maybe manage their calendars.
It says a lot for Linux when it can't even perform such simple everyday tasks.
Linønut
> MathCAD is the one app I really miss. It's an engineering app I've used
> quite a lot over the years. I've never got it to run with WINE, and no
> reports on the Internet indicate success with that. I'd gladly pay for
> it again if they would provide a Linux version. Of course I'd rather
> see an OSS alternative as I don't like having my data held hostage by a
> closed format (at least it was last I checked).
http://symaxx.sourceforge.net/
That's a GUI front-end for Maxima.
Here's another interesting-looking package: Scilab
Linønut
> In article <cegusd$m0h$1...@anubis.demon.co.uk>, Huge wrote:
>
>>I'm talking about dialogue boxes that seize the input focus and will
>
> And you have to reboot to change an IP address. Handy feature you know.
Actually, you don't have to reboot to change the IP on a Windows 2000/XP box
**if** you don't disable the network. Leave it enabled, then change the IP.
Stumbled onto that little trick one day.
> Then there's the long search for a Windoze program that does anything
> you want done.
The thing that's bugging me lately is I can't find the GUI entry that let's you
turn off the "confirm to delete files" in Windows Explorer. There used to be
one, now where did it go?
Linønut
> Linųnut <linųn...@bone.com> wrote in message news:<SuudnYEX0IH...@comcast.com>...
>>
>> Ha ha. I would bet that the primary use for the engineer's Windows boxes is to
>> do their timesheets and maybe manage their calendars.
>
> It says a lot for Linux when it can't even perform such simple everyday tasks.
No, it says a lot for idiot programmers who write Java apps that won't even run
on an operating system other than Windows. Or who needlessly check for usage
of only a couple of Windows browsers and a Mac browser before rejecting your
perfectly good browser's attempts to do your time sheet.
Linux can do those tasks, of course, you're just playing stoopid.
Donn Miller
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> washer of kegs wrote:
>
> > The only science or engineering program running on the windows box is
> > MathCad as that does not run natively on linux and wine makes no sense
> > if you have the other box there and running anyway.
>
> MathCAD is the one app I really miss. It's an engineering app I've used
> quite a lot over the years. I've never got it to run with WINE, and no
> reports on the Internet indicate success with that. I'd gladly pay for
> it again if they would provide a Linux version. Of course I'd rather
> see an OSS alternative as I don't like having my data held hostage by a
> closed format (at least it was last I checked).
MathCAD seemed like it was a very clever, and well-designed app. I
remember when they started adding all the word-processor features to
"text regions". Seems like MathCAD started suffering from feature-bloat
at that point forward, but it was still a useful app nonetheless. I
remember when features were added that allowed you to export to and from
C code. I started using Maple at that point, which was 1993. Maple V
had all these odd quirks, like sometimes it made Windows 3.1 exit to a
DOS prompt when it crashed. Still, who can deny the usefulness of
computing 17 million factorial? :-)
Paul Hovnanian P.E.
>
> Lockheed Martin is switching all of its SUN workstations for Linux
> computers. But guess what? According to the article every person
> will have a Windows PC next to that Linux machine so they can run
> apps!!! I guess "switching" is only good for the press releases
> because when it comes to real work, Windows and Intel get it done.
That's pretty dumb. Its not very difficult to run Windows apps on a W2K
server and export the entire Windows desktop over the X11 protocol
(Citrix makes one app. to do this).
I had a Linux system for a desktop for years while I was at Boeing and
this worked quite nicely. The server farm that ran the MS apps could
load share between a number of users, effectively allowing users to
share Windows licenses. It was unusual to have to fire up the Windows
desktop more then once or twice a week, so the license sharing
efficiency was quite considerable.
The other advantage was that all the Windows machines were located at
server rooms making access for patch installation, rebooting and other
troubleshooting more efficient.
Granted, this type of installation only makes sense for someone doing a
considerable amount of engineering work. Those who did "PowerPoint
Engineering" would be given native Windows desktops and an X server app
for the occasional *nix app. In fact, this was an easy way to tell who
actually did engineering work (as opposed to pushing memos around).
Engineers typically had Sun, AIX and (more and more) Linux systems.
Clerks had Windows.
--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:Pa...@Hovnanian.com
note to spammers: a Washington State resident
------------------------------------------------------------------
SHIFT TO THE LEFT! SHIFT TO THE RIGHT!
POP UP, PUSH DOWN, BYTE, BYTE, BYTE!
Paul Hovnanian P.E.
>
> At 31 Jul 2004 12:41:44 GMT, hu...@ukmisc.org.uk (Huge) writes:
>
> > having recently been forced to have a Windows box on my desk at
> > work, I find the loathsome thing drives me incoherent with rage.
>
> You mean, like having to push the "Start" button to turn the thing off?
I mean why can't I cut and paste using the mouse buttons alone? Why must
I use a pull-down menu selection, or a couple of extra keystrokes?
--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:Pa...@Hovnanian.com
note to spammers: a Washington State resident
------------------------------------------------------------------
Q: Why do mountain climbers rope themselves together?
A: To prevent the sensible ones from going home.
Erik Heil
design a GUI-based environment. Microsoft Windows could have bee much
better, if they simply would have payed attention to security issues, take
them more seriously, and most important, not breaking standards. Doing so
just creates more problems and is bad for Microsoft, but for end users and
administrators alike. Honestly though, the best thing that ould have
happened to Windows if it were put under the GNU license. Would Windows
get better? Worse? I have no idea. But it would certainly be the best
choice for end users.
--
Erik Heil <eh...@va3duk.serveftp.com>
Phone: (865) 673-0542
Paul Hovnanian P.E.
>
> "Geoff Lane" <zza...@buffy.sighup.org.uk> wrote:
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Thomas Dehn <thomas...@arcor.de> wrote:
> > > And it also somehow "forgot"
> > > to mention that when users move from Office 95/98 to Office XP,
> > > they need training, too. Plus all the existing data has to be
> > > converted anyway.
> >
> > What's all this "training" that people talk about.
> >
> > Could it be possible that the current GUI based user interfaces
> > are NOT as User Friendly as claimed :-)
>
> will get along with any reasonable interface. The
> majority will struggle even with training.
This was explained to me many years ago when I started working for
Boeing, by someone who has made it quite a ways up their management
ladder (don't read any further if you don't want to develop a fear of
flying).
In order to foster an atmosphere of camaraderie and promote teamwork, it
is necessary to make everyone feel that they are an equally valued
member of the group. Anyone who stood out ran the risk of offending
co-workers (or cow-orkers as they were known, thanks to a common typo).
Windows was put forth as a system that was "easy enough" for most people
to use and by standardizing on that as a desktop, nobody could identify
those doing the heavy duty engineering work from those with a purely
clerical function and attach any special status to the former group.
Linux actually turned out to be a rather interesting solution to this
problem. When it proved to be impossible to port serious apps to Windows
(thus halting the 'common desktop' movement), using Linux on hardware
identical to the Windows desktops made it difficult for the casual
observer to identify who was running which desktop.
--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:Pa...@Hovnanian.com
note to spammers: a Washington State resident
------------------------------------------------------------------
You can discover what your enemy fears most by observing the
means he uses to frighten you. -- Eric Hoffer
Bob Hauck
<i_hat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Linųnut <linųn...@bone.com> wrote in message
> news:<SuudnYEX0IH...@comcast.com>...
>> Ha ha. I would bet that the primary use for the engineer's Windows
>> boxes is to do their timesheets and maybe manage their calendars.
>
> It says a lot for Linux when it can't even perform such simple
> everyday tasks.
Actually, it says a lot about the consequences of using a proprietary
programming language for your workflow apps.
--
-| Bob Hauck
-| To Whom You Are Speaking
-| http://www.haucks.org/
DFS
What's particularly funny is the "clerks" running Windows are the ones who
hire and fire the engineers.
> Linux actually turned out to be a rather interesting
> solution to this problem.
Interesting, in a problematic sort of way.
> When it proved to be impossible to port
> serious apps to Windows (thus halting the 'common desktop' movement),
I think you're lying. The Boeing 777 jet was designed on Dassault Systemes
CATIA program, which runs on Windows and Unix (but not Linux - not then, and
not now).
http://www.pcquest.com/content/topstories/103040301.asp
http://plm.3ds.com/10+M54d156b94e5.0.html#software_requirements
> using Linux on hardware identical to the Windows desktops made it
> difficult for the casual observer to identify who was running which
> desktop.
You can always tell by the grimace on the faces of the Linux users.
Rich Teer
> identical to the Windows desktops made it difficult for the casual
> observer to identify who was running which desktop.
Really? I would have thought that the blue screen of death
would have given the game away very quickly. :-)
--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA
President,
Rite Online Inc.
Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-online.net
Linønut
> Hi their. I totally agree with you people.
Heil's sig is simple.
Thomas Dehn
"Rich Teer" <rich...@rite-group.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Jul 2004, Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
>
> > identical to the Windows desktops made it difficult for the casual
> > observer to identify who was running which desktop.
>
> Really? I would have thought that the blue screen of death
> would have given the game away very quickly. :-)
Never saw, say, the cascade virus as a screensaver?
Combine that with Windows RG in your browser,
and the BSOD as the background. ;-)
Thomas
Joerg Schilling
Paul Hovnanian P.E. <Pa...@Hovnanian.com> wrote:
>Paul Eggert wrote:
>>
>> At 31 Jul 2004 12:41:44 GMT, hu...@ukmisc.org.uk (Huge) writes:
>>
>> > having recently been forced to have a Windows box on my desk at
>> > work, I find the loathsome thing drives me incoherent with rage.
>>
>> You mean, like having to push the "Start" button to turn the thing off?
>
>I mean why can't I cut and paste using the mouse buttons alone? Why must
>I use a pull-down menu selection, or a couple of extra keystrokes?
>
M$ Windows is a real nightmare. I'v never got cut/paste to work with a
Cygwin shell window..... should't Cut/paste be built into the dark deep
of the window system?
--
EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
j...@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1
schi...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) chars I am J"org Schilling
URL: http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
Rich Teer
> You can get that crap on Linux trash too, Rich.
> But I can't understand why anyone would be so stupid
> as to switch away from a rock solid OS like Solaris
> and rock solid hardware like Sun's. You'd have to be
> as dumb as Plugger to do that.
Couldn't agree more.
--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA, author of "Solaris Systems Programming",
publishing in August 2004.
President,
Rite Online Inc.
Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich
Jerry McBride
> Lockheed Martin is switching all of its SUN workstations for Linux
> computers. But guess what? According to the article every person
> will have a Windows PC next to that Linux machine so they can run
> apps!!! I guess "switching" is only good for the press releases
> because when it comes to real work, Windows and Intel get it done.
>
> From the article:
>
> ""Although Lockheed is showing Solaris the door, Microsoft is still
> welcome. "Every engineer has a Microsoft PC sitting next to their Sun
> Blade," said our source. "That's for business applications, and Linux
> is no threat there. It's Sun who has to worry." "
>
> Article Link: http://neurocrat.com/2004/07/26/lockheed.shtml
A micosoft schill.... PLONK! Number 11
--
******************************************************************************
Registered Linux User Number 185956
FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004
Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net
Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00!
10:40pm up 104 days, 1:22, 7 users, load average: 0.05, 0.09, 0.09
Jerry McBride
--- sip ---
> That's quite idiotic. I can tell their IT staff has been contaminated
> with a couple of histeric Linux hippies, pretty soon the whole IT
> staff is going to waste months learning Linux only to find out that
> Linux sucks.
>
You are number 10 in my kill file. You have NOTHING to do with linux
advocacy... Congratulations...
--
******************************************************************************
Registered Linux User Number 185956
FSF Associate Member number 2340 since 05/20/2004
Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net
Buy an Xbox for $149.00, run linux on it and Microsoft loses $150.00!
10:38pm up 104 days, 1:20, 7 users, load average: 0.06, 0.10, 0.09
Freeride
> Wow, you know internet? I'm impressed. :)
You get the +Internet for knowing how to install IIS. :)
washer of kegs
>
>> What they are saying is that if you have nothing but secretarial work
>> windows is fine but when you want to do real work, call Unix or Linux.
>
> Why can't secretarial work be done on a *nix. All the apps are there.
> Email, calendar, office suite, desktop publishing, graphics, etc... I use
> them all with no problem. The only one I've found no good sub for is Flash
> editor and Crossover/Wine fixed that easy.
In our case the problem is that there are programs from the dark ages where
someone wrote and the company paid money for piles and piles of Lotus123
macros that are the base for the project accounting. The company finds it
cheaper to keep these antique versions of lotus on every ones computer than
to pay someone to translate the macros and years of data into something
modern.
Thomas Dehn
"Anthony Mandic" <a...@start.com.au> wrote:
> You can get that crap on Linux trash too, Rich.
> But I can't understand why anyone would be so stupid
> as to switch away from a rock solid OS like Solaris
> and rock solid hardware like Sun's. You'd have to be
> as dumb as Plugger to do that.
I've seen the beancounters do worse.
The beancounters can easily force you into
buying a system you know is broken, just
because the broken system is "significantly
cheaper" than the system which could do the job.
Thomas
Thomas Dehn
Installing IIS will get you a lot of internet activity directly
onto your Windows box in no time at all, with
no additional effort required :->>>.
Thomas
Leon Workman
> Lockheed Martin is switching all of its SUN workstations for Linux
> computers. But guess what? According to the article every person
> will have a Windows PC next to that Linux machine so they can run
> apps!!! I guess "switching" is only good for the press releases
> because when it comes to real work, Windows and Intel get it done.
>
> From the article:
>
> ""Although Lockheed is showing Solaris the door, Microsoft is still
> welcome. "Every engineer has a Microsoft PC sitting next to their Sun
> Blade," said our source. "That's for business applications, and Linux
> is no threat there. It's Sun who has to worry." "
>
> Article Link: http://neurocrat.com/2004/07/26/lockheed.shtml
You've got it backwards. I've worked in aerospace, and they use their
PCs primarily for e-mail and websurfing, since you don't have to have
that reliable of a machine for those tasks. For such non-essential
tasks, it doesn't matter if your machine crashes or freezes up 10
times per day (or gets viruses on a regular basis).
For the real heavy-duty stuff, Linux and Unix are the only answer.
When you stake that much time and money on your engineering efforts,
you want something that isn't going to crash at a critical point and
lose your unsaved work.
Leon
The Ghost In The Machine
<eh...@va3duk.serveftp.com>
wrote
on Fri, 30 Jul 2004 21:51:23 -0400
<Pine.LNX.4.60.04...@va3duk.serveftp.com>:
> On Fri, 30 Jul 2004, Ralph wrote:
>
>> Frank Cusack wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 02:23:41 +0200 Henry Lerche Madsen
>>> <ler...@aarstiden.dk> wrote:
>>>> Mike Cox wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Lockheed Martin is switching all of its SUN workstations for Linux
>>>>> computers. But guess what? According to the article every person
>>>>> will have a Windows PC next to that Linux machine so they can run
>>>>> apps!!! I guess "switching" is only good for the press releases
>>>>> because when it comes to real work, Windows and Intel get it done.
>>>>
>>>> Linux soon, will they do that whit no apps ?
>>>
>>> They've "been going to" do that for a long time. And it turns out Linux
>>> is more expensive than Windows. You won't see that in the papers.
>>
>> Of course not, papers have to SUPPORT their claims with FACTS.
>>
>>>
>>> /fc
>>
>>
> Hmm. More expensive than Windows? Where is this stated? I've never heard
> such claims. Rather comfused though. I would expect that Linux would e
> cheaper, since Linux actually costs nothing up front to the user except
> the hardware which is to run the OS.
I have...though I've no idea how accurate they are.
TCO, after all, is a multifaceted concept (there is
a grain of truth in all this):
- conversion, a one-time cost
- training, ditto
- day-to-day operations, which might vary depending on whether
one's being inundated with malware :-)
- upgrade costs after initial conversion
- cost per gigabit/second of salable server bandwidth (as opposed to
stuff primarily intended for internal consumption, such as
SNMP traps, routing packets, departmental E-mails, and incoming spam).
- cost per megawatt
- cost per gigabyte of storage
There's a host of others, of course.
--
#191, ewi...@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.
The Ghost In The Machine
<leonwork...@yahoo.com>
wrote
on 2 Aug 2004 14:36:34 -0700
<ad51673f.04080...@posting.google.com>:
I generally agree, but there is a caveat. I'm assuming here that
the PC can be used as sort of a "superterminal", analyzing data from
the mainframe and generating charts and graphs and pretty whatnot.
So now the PC is infected with a virus that makes it unusable. We
now have a minor IT problem, and an impact on productivity.
(The mainframe may also have these tools, of course. I am not in
aerospace so can't say.)
Also, not being able to receive E-mails won't help productivity either.
Suppose one misses a meeting?
I'm hopeful that in several years Linux will be widely accepted
(ideally, it would be widely accepted now!) and they won't need
2 PCs to do the job that 1 can do with appropriate software.
>
> Leon
Paul Hovnanian P.E.
>
> Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
[snip]
> > When it proved to be impossible to port
> > serious apps to Windows (thus halting the 'common desktop' movement),
>
> I think you're lying. The Boeing 777 jet was designed on Dassault Systemes
> CATIA program, which runs on Windows and Unix (but not Linux - not then, and
> not now).
Just the structural design. CATIA doesn't do computational fluid
dynamics, electrical systems analysis or numerous other tasks. When the
777 was designed, Boeing used CATIA on AIX. At the request of the IT
department, engineering did look at CATIA on NT. But they rejected it
based on performance.
Whether CATIA is ported to Linux is out of Boeing's hands. They won't be
doing much of the engineering on the next model.
--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:Pa...@Hovnanian.com
note to spammers: a Washington State resident
------------------------------------------------------------------
My inner child can beat up your inner child.
-- Alex Greenbank
DFS
> DFS wrote:
>>
>> Paul Hovnanian P.E. wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>> When it proved to be impossible to port
>>> serious apps to Windows (thus halting the 'common desktop'
>>> movement),
>>
>> I think you're lying. The Boeing 777 jet was designed on Dassault
>> Systemes CATIA program, which runs on Windows and Unix (but not
>> Linux - not then, and not now).
>
> Just the structural design.
_Just_ the structural design? That's all, eh?
> CATIA doesn't do computational fluid
> dynamics, electrical systems analysis or numerous other tasks. When
> the 777 was designed, Boeing used CATIA on AIX. At the request of the
> IT department, engineering did look at CATIA on NT. But they rejected
> it based on performance.
There are any number of high-performing Windows-based programs to do:
computational fluid dynamics...
SC/Tetra v5 for Windows http://www.sctetra.com
CFDStudio for Windows http://www.acricfd.com/software/CFDStudio/default.htm
FLUENT 6.1 for Windows
http://www.fluent.com/software/platform/fluent_hw.htm?path=/WWW/htdocs/fluent/software/platform/&prod=fluent_6.1.22.whw
....and electrical systems analysis....
Power*Tools for Windows (v. 4.5) http://www.skm.com/classes/
(thousands of others at
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=mozclient&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&q=electrical+systems+analysis+Windows+software)
... and any other engineering task you can name:
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=mozclient&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&q=Windows+engineering+apps
Anyway, that wasn't the issue. You said "When it proved to be impossible to
port serious apps to Windows..." which is a total and complete lie, as the
Dassault
Systemes CATIA program is a very serious app (among thousands of other
serious engineering apps), and it runs on Windows 2000 and Windows XP.
You're another Linux moron who can't prop up Linux without lying about
Windows.
> Whether CATIA is ported to Linux is out of Boeing's hands. They won't
> be doing much of the engineering on the next model.
Boeing won't be engineering their next model jetplane, or they won't be
using Dessault CATIA?
Paul Hovnanian P.E.
>
[snip]
>
> Anyway, that wasn't the issue. You said "When it proved to be impossible to
> port serious apps to Windows..." which is a total and complete lie, as the
> Dassault
> Systemes CATIA program is a very serious app (among thousands of other
> serious engineering apps), and it runs on Windows 2000 and Windows XP.
..like an overweight pig. It was unusable at Boeing. But I guess you can
officially claim that it runs on Windows. Just not well enough to
actually get work done with it.
And you can find some version of most engineering apps that run on
Windows as well. You can do CFD with a Windows machine....on a ping-pong
ball. But not an airplane wing with sufficient resolution to do serious
design work.
The systems that Boeing uses for this kind of work include systems like
Crays and Linux arrays. When I worked there, they had a few 64 processor
Beowulf systems.
> You're another Linux moron who can't prop up Linux without lying about
> Windows.
I've worked in an environment where simple things like Exchange servers
for e-mail required large administrative staffs to keep running while I
ran a couple of *NIX systems (as a sideline to my engineering work) that
supplied engineering data to all the plants and barely had to pay
attention to them.
And I've run some engineering applications on a Dell 166 running Linux
that practically killed a 4 processor NT server feeding it data while
the load monitor on my desktop barely climbed.
> > Whether CATIA is ported to Linux is out of Boeing's hands. They won't
> > be doing much of the engineering on the next model.
>
> Boeing won't be engineering their next model jetplane, or they won't be
> using Dessault CATIA?
Boeing won't be doing the engineering on their next airplane (the 7E7).
Its all being subcontracted out.
--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:Pa...@Hovnanian.com
note to spammers: a Washington State resident
------------------------------------------------------------------
E-mail returned to sender -- insufficient voltage.
Linønut
> Boeing won't be doing the engineering on their next airplane (the 7E7).
> Its all being subcontracted out.
7E7? Boeing's now using hex digits?
Paul Hovnanian P.E.
>
> Error BR-549: MS DRM 1.0 rejects the following post from Paul Hovnanian P.E.:
>
> > Boeing won't be doing the engineering on their next airplane (the 7E7).
> > Its all being subcontracted out.
>
> 7E7? Boeing's now using hex digits?
Just this once. All future model names will use either Cyrillic or
Chinese characters.
--
Paul Hovnanian mailto:Pa...@Hovnanian.com
note to spammers: a Washington State resident
------------------------------------------------------------------
Have a pleasant Terran revolution.