I have the answer to reducing evaporation

[Sam Hopkins]

Hi Everyone,

First off let me say that normally I wouldn't post commercial
info on a newsgroup, but I think that we are all one big family here and
I'm not some person posting an ad and then never coming back. I just wanted
to post a message letting you all know of a new product my company has come
out with which reduces evaporation. Evaporation as you all know causes
countless top offs and as a few people here have posted, sometimes death
when we forget to turn the hose off. If you're a ponder with aquariums you
know that evaporation raises humidity and adds a certain smell to the room.
Evaporation is also responsible for countless other problems that we
generally don't associate it with.

The product is called "NO EVAPORATION!" and is available online
for purchase. It's pretty reasonable at $9.99 for a 30 week supply for ponds
and 100+ week supply for aquariums. For a limited time first time buyers can
get a bottle for free at our online store. It should also be available at
your local pet stores in the coming weeks.

You can order the product (or free bottle) or get more
information by going to our website at http://www.noevaporation.com

If you have any questions please let me know!

Sam

[Janet & Hugh]

Sounds just like the liquid solar blanket that is sold for swimming
pools....
Janet
Niagara Falls, ON


"Sam Hopkins" > wrote in message
.. .
> Hi Everyone,
>
> First off let me say that normally I wouldn't post
commercial
> info on a newsgroup, but I think that we are all one big family here and
> I'm not some person posting an ad and then never coming back. I just
wanted
> to post a message letting you all know of a new product my company has
come
> out with which reduces evaporation. Evaporation as you all know causes
> countless top offs and as a few people here have posted, sometimes death
> when we forget to turn the hose off. If you're a ponder with aquariums you
> know that evaporation raises humidity and adds a certain smell to the
room.
> Evaporation is also responsible for countless other problems that we
> generally don't associate it with.
>
> The product is called "NO EVAPORATION!" and is available
online
> for purchase. It's pretty reasonable at $9.99 for a 30 week supply for
ponds
> and 100+ week supply for aquariums. For a limited time first time buyers
can
> get a bottle for free at our online store. It should also be available at
> your local pet stores in the coming weeks.
>
> You can order the product (or free bottle) or get more
> information by going to our website at http://www.noevaporation.com
>
> If you have any questions please let me know!
>
> Sam
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 10/27/03

[Sam Hopkins]

Hi Janet,

The chemical compositions between the two products is quite
different. Our product is specifically meant for systems that contain
aquatic life.

Sam

"Janet & Hugh" > wrote in message
...
> Sounds just like the liquid solar blanket that is sold for swimming
> pools....
> Janet
> Niagara Falls, ON
>
>
> "Sam Hopkins" > wrote in message
> .. .
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > First off let me say that normally I wouldn't post
> commercial
> > info on a newsgroup, but I think that we are all one big family here
and
> > I'm not some person posting an ad and then never coming back. I just
> wanted
> > to post a message letting you all know of a new product my company has
> come
> > out with which reduces evaporation. Evaporation as you all know causes
> > countless top offs and as a few people here have posted, sometimes death
> > when we forget to turn the hose off. If you're a ponder with aquariums
you
> > know that evaporation raises humidity and adds a certain smell to the
> room.
> > Evaporation is also responsible for countless other problems that we
> > generally don't associate it with.
> >
> > The product is called "NO EVAPORATION!" and is available
> online
> > for purchase. It's pretty reasonable at $9.99 for a 30 week supply for
> ponds
> > and 100+ week supply for aquariums. For a limited time first time buyers
> can
> > get a bottle for free at our online store. It should also be available
at
> > your local pet stores in the coming weeks.
> >
> > You can order the product (or free bottle) or get more
> > information by going to our website at http://www.noevaporation.com
> >
> > If you have any questions please let me know!
> >
> > Sam
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.532 / Virus Database: 326 - Release Date: 10/27/03
>
>

[MattR]

You'll have to prove to me that this isn't complete noise. If it
prevents water from evaporating does it also prevent carbon dioxide from
evaporating? Does it prevent oxygen from entering the water? Most
evaporation probably comes from the same mechanism that aerates the
water (a water fall in my case) so how will this prevent water
evaporation in water falls? Not to mention that the water falls will
just continually rip it apart on the pond's surface. If it's only one
molecule thick and anything can poke through it, how will it smooth out
waves from the wind? Can you show me how much it will reduce
evaporation? Show me some independent analysis, not to mention what it
does to the ecosystem...

How will your product even out pond temperature? Evaporation cools a
pond during the day when there's more sun and heat than at night. Sounds
to me like your product will only keep the temperature higher, not more
even.

And about your "fish happy meter", based on the number of babies in my
pond, they're having too much fun as it is.

Matt


Sam Hopkins wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> First off let me say that normally I wouldn't post commercial
> info on a newsgroup, but I think that we are all one big family here and
> I'm not some person posting an ad and then never coming back. I just wanted
> to post a message letting you all know of a new product my company has come
> out with which reduces evaporation. Evaporation as you all know causes
> countless top offs and as a few people here have posted, sometimes death
> when we forget to turn the hose off. If you're a ponder with aquariums you
> know that evaporation raises humidity and adds a certain smell to the room.
> Evaporation is also responsible for countless other problems that we
> generally don't associate it with.
>
> The product is called "NO EVAPORATION!" and is available online
> for purchase. It's pretty reasonable at $9.99 for a 30 week supply for ponds
> and 100+ week supply for aquariums. For a limited time first time buyers can
> get a bottle for free at our online store. It should also be available at
> your local pet stores in the coming weeks.
>
> You can order the product (or free bottle) or get more
> information by going to our website at http://www.noevaporation.com
>
> If you have any questions please let me know!
>
> Sam
>
>

[Sam Hopkins]

Hi Matt,

Thanks for the questions. The membrane is O2 and CO2 permeable. It
reduces evaporation of water molecules. You are correct that evaporation
reduction probably will not occur in your waterfall and it definitely wont
when your water is blown into the air if you have a fountain. Any moving
water that is over 2-3 miles per hour will not be protected. However, most
waterfalls enter into one side of the pond. At the point where the water
would flow down and penetrate through the surface there would be no
protection, because as you state the surface is disrupted by a lot of force.
What would be protected is the rest of the pond. So if your pond was say 20
square feet and the waterfall disrupted 2 square feet when it re-entered,
you'd still have protection on the remaining 18 square feet. Remember,
evaporation is based on water surface area.

It smoothes waves from the wind by reducing surface tension. So to visualize
it think about the wind blowing over your water surface and slipping over it
opposed to pulling it and forming a wave. The product is non-toxic and
bio-degradable and has no impact to the eco-system.

We don't have an independent analysis but that's a good idea, thanks.

Evaporation reduction is up to 40%. To me at least, $9.99 for 40% less
topoffs is worth it.
Remember, this product is not meant to be placed into your pond and totally
eliminate all water maintenance. It is meant to reduce it and give you more
time to enjoy your fish.

Sam

"MattR" > wrote in message
...
> You'll have to prove to me that this isn't complete noise. If it
> prevents water from evaporating does it also prevent carbon dioxide from
> evaporating? Does it prevent oxygen from entering the water? Most
> evaporation probably comes from the same mechanism that aerates the
> water (a water fall in my case) so how will this prevent water
> evaporation in water falls? Not to mention that the water falls will
> just continually rip it apart on the pond's surface. If it's only one
> molecule thick and anything can poke through it, how will it smooth out
> waves from the wind? Can you show me how much it will reduce
> evaporation? Show me some independent analysis, not to mention what it
> does to the ecosystem...
>
> How will your product even out pond temperature? Evaporation cools a
> pond during the day when there's more sun and heat than at night. Sounds
> to me like your product will only keep the temperature higher, not more
> even.
>
> And about your "fish happy meter", based on the number of babies in my
> pond, they're having too much fun as it is.
>
> Matt
>
>
> Sam Hopkins wrote:
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > First off let me say that normally I wouldn't post
commercial
> > info on a newsgroup, but I think that we are all one big family here
and
> > I'm not some person posting an ad and then never coming back. I just
wanted
> > to post a message letting you all know of a new product my company has
come
> > out with which reduces evaporation. Evaporation as you all know causes
> > countless top offs and as a few people here have posted, sometimes death
> > when we forget to turn the hose off. If you're a ponder with aquariums
you
> > know that evaporation raises humidity and adds a certain smell to the
room.
> > Evaporation is also responsible for countless other problems that we
> > generally don't associate it with.
> >
> > The product is called "NO EVAPORATION!" and is available
online
> > for purchase. It's pretty reasonable at $9.99 for a 30 week supply for
ponds
> > and 100+ week supply for aquariums. For a limited time first time buyers
can
> > get a bottle for free at our online store. It should also be available
at
> > your local pet stores in the coming weeks.
> >
> > You can order the product (or free bottle) or get more
> > information by going to our website at http://www.noevaporation.com
> >
> > If you have any questions please let me know!
> >
> > Sam
> >
> >
>

[MattR]

"Bio degradable and non-toxic" is probably a good phrase you should put
somewhere on your web site. The 40% is also a good idea seeing as how
there are no numbers on your web site.

I can see this in an aquarium but in my pond most of the evaporation
occurs when the wind is blowing, and I'm close enough to Wyoming that
it's more than 3 miles/hour. It's more like 10-30mph for an average
windy day. The other thing that really increased evaporation is when I
had turbulent flow between my prefilter and biofilter. I could feel the
humidity from 5 feet away and this had nothing to do with the surface
area of the pond.

So, I'll pass, but good luck.

Matt


Sam Hopkins wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> Thanks for the questions. The membrane is O2 and CO2 permeable. It
> reduces evaporation of water molecules. You are correct that evaporation
> reduction probably will not occur in your waterfall and it definitely wont
> when your water is blown into the air if you have a fountain. Any moving
> water that is over 2-3 miles per hour will not be protected. However, most
> waterfalls enter into one side of the pond. At the point where the water
> would flow down and penetrate through the surface there would be no
> protection, because as you state the surface is disrupted by a lot of force.
> What would be protected is the rest of the pond. So if your pond was say 20
> square feet and the waterfall disrupted 2 square feet when it re-entered,
> you'd still have protection on the remaining 18 square feet. Remember,
> evaporation is based on water surface area.
>
> It smoothes waves from the wind by reducing surface tension. So to visualize
> it think about the wind blowing over your water surface and slipping over it
> opposed to pulling it and forming a wave. The product is non-toxic and
> bio-degradable and has no impact to the eco-system.
>
> We don't have an independent analysis but that's a good idea, thanks.
>
> Evaporation reduction is up to 40%. To me at least, $9.99 for 40% less
> topoffs is worth it.
> Remember, this product is not meant to be placed into your pond and totally
> eliminate all water maintenance. It is meant to reduce it and give you more
> time to enjoy your fish.
>
> Sam

[~ jan JJsPond.us]

Hmmm, I image if one had a skimmer it would remove all the product?
~ jan

>On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 11:37:00 -0500, "Sam Hopkins" > wrote:

>Hi Everyone,
>
> First off let me say that normally I wouldn't post commercial
>info on a newsgroup, but I think that we are all one big family here and
>I'm not some person posting an ad and then never coming back. I just wanted
>to post a message letting you all know of a new product my company has come
>out with which reduces evaporation. Evaporation as you all know causes
>countless top offs and as a few people here have posted, sometimes death
>when we forget to turn the hose off. If you're a ponder with aquariums you
>know that evaporation raises humidity and adds a certain smell to the room.
>Evaporation is also responsible for countless other problems that we
>generally don't associate it with.
>
> The product is called "NO EVAPORATION!" and is available online
>for purchase. It's pretty reasonable at $9.99 for a 30 week supply for ponds
>and 100+ week supply for aquariums. For a limited time first time buyers can
>get a bottle for free at our online store. It should also be available at
>your local pet stores in the coming weeks.
>
> You can order the product (or free bottle) or get more
>information by going to our website at http://www.noevaporation.com
>
> If you have any questions please let me know!
>
>Sam
>

See my ponds thru the seasons and/or my filter design:
http://users.owt.com/jjspond/

~Keep 'em Defrosted~
Tri-Cities, WA Zone 7a
To e-mail see website

[Sam Hopkins]

Hi Matt,

Point well taken. I'll have this info added to the FAQ. Wind can be
more than 3 miles per hour and the product will still work. I should have
said moving ripply water more than 3 mph like you find in a water fall
wouldnt work.

Sam

"MattR" > wrote in message
...
> "Bio degradable and non-toxic" is probably a good phrase you should put
> somewhere on your web site. The 40% is also a good idea seeing as how
> there are no numbers on your web site.
>
> I can see this in an aquarium but in my pond most of the evaporation
> occurs when the wind is blowing, and I'm close enough to Wyoming that
> it's more than 3 miles/hour. It's more like 10-30mph for an average
> windy day. The other thing that really increased evaporation is when I
> had turbulent flow between my prefilter and biofilter. I could feel the
> humidity from 5 feet away and this had nothing to do with the surface
> area of the pond.
>
> So, I'll pass, but good luck.
>
> Matt
>
>
> Sam Hopkins wrote:
> > Hi Matt,
> >
> > Thanks for the questions. The membrane is O2 and CO2 permeable.
It
> > reduces evaporation of water molecules. You are correct that evaporation
> > reduction probably will not occur in your waterfall and it definitely
wont
> > when your water is blown into the air if you have a fountain. Any moving
> > water that is over 2-3 miles per hour will not be protected. However,
most
> > waterfalls enter into one side of the pond. At the point where the water
> > would flow down and penetrate through the surface there would be no
> > protection, because as you state the surface is disrupted by a lot of
force.
> > What would be protected is the rest of the pond. So if your pond was say
20
> > square feet and the waterfall disrupted 2 square feet when it
re-entered,
> > you'd still have protection on the remaining 18 square feet. Remember,
> > evaporation is based on water surface area.
> >
> > It smoothes waves from the wind by reducing surface tension. So to
visualize
> > it think about the wind blowing over your water surface and slipping
over it
> > opposed to pulling it and forming a wave. The product is non-toxic and
> > bio-degradable and has no impact to the eco-system.
> >
> > We don't have an independent analysis but that's a good idea, thanks.
> >
> > Evaporation reduction is up to 40%. To me at least, $9.99 for 40% less
> > topoffs is worth it.
> > Remember, this product is not meant to be placed into your pond and
totally
> > eliminate all water maintenance. It is meant to reduce it and give you
more
> > time to enjoy your fish.
> >
> > Sam
>

[Sam Hopkins]

Shouldn't. Most skimmers/pond filters can't filter down to the molecular
level. Portions of the product would get sucked in, go through the system,
re-enter the pond and be re-added to the membrane. You would need to add an
extra amount of the product to compensate for the product that would be
moving through the filtering system though. My guess would be another drop
or two.

Sam

"~ jan JJsPond.us" > wrote in message
...
> Hmmm, I image if one had a skimmer it would remove all the product?
> ~ jan
>
> >On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 11:37:00 -0500, "Sam Hopkins"
> wrote:
>
> >Hi Everyone,
> >
> > First off let me say that normally I wouldn't post
commercial
> >info on a newsgroup, but I think that we are all one big family here and
> >I'm not some person posting an ad and then never coming back. I just
wanted
> >to post a message letting you all know of a new product my company has
come
> >out with which reduces evaporation. Evaporation as you all know causes
> >countless top offs and as a few people here have posted, sometimes death
> >when we forget to turn the hose off. If you're a ponder with aquariums
you
> >know that evaporation raises humidity and adds a certain smell to the
room.
> >Evaporation is also responsible for countless other problems that we
> >generally don't associate it with.
> >
> > The product is called "NO EVAPORATION!" and is available
online
> >for purchase. It's pretty reasonable at $9.99 for a 30 week supply for
ponds
> >and 100+ week supply for aquariums. For a limited time first time buyers
can
> >get a bottle for free at our online store. It should also be available at
> >your local pet stores in the coming weeks.
> >
> > You can order the product (or free bottle) or get more
> >information by going to our website at http://www.noevaporation.com
> >
> > If you have any questions please let me know!
> >
> >Sam
> >
>
> See my ponds thru the seasons and/or my filter design:
> http://users.owt.com/jjspond/
>
> ~Keep 'em Defrosted~
> Tri-Cities, WA Zone 7a
> To e-mail see website

[REBEL JOE]

[Sam Hopkins]

Hello,

It's had over 2,000 hours of testing with live fish, plants and
even a turtle with no ill effects detected. It's important to note that the
product does not mix with water so the fish are not subjected to the product
(even though it is non-toxic).

Sam

"REBEL JOE" > wrote in message
...
Has this been tested over a long time to make sure it won't hurt the
fish. Since its so new. Or the plants.





http://community.webtv.net/rebeljoe/POND

[Kathleen]

Sam Hopkins wrote:

> Hello,
>
> It's had over 2,000 hours of testing with live fish, plants and even
> a turtle with no ill effects detected. It's important to note that
> the product does not mix with water so the fish are not subjected to
> the product (even though it is non-toxic).

2,000 hours. Just over 83 days. Not hardly long term from where I'm
sitting.

So this stuff just sort of floats on the surface of the water like an
oil slick?

What if you drop a fish through it from above, or a fish jumps through
it? Can it occlude their gills?

How does it affect reproduction? What does it do to eggs, insect
larvae, tadpoles?

Kathleen

[Skooch]

Kathleen wrote:
> Sam Hopkins wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> It's had over 2,000 hours of testing with live fish, plants and even
>> a turtle with no ill effects detected. It's important to note that
>> the product does not mix with water so the fish are not subjected to
>> the product (even though it is non-toxic).
>
>
> 2,000 hours. Just over 83 days. Not hardly long term from where I'm
> sitting.
>
> So this stuff just sort of floats on the surface of the water like an
> oil slick?
>
> What if you drop a fish through it from above, or a fish jumps through
> it? Can it occlude their gills?
>
> How does it affect reproduction? What does it do to eggs, insect
> larvae, tadpoles?
>
> Kathleen


;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) (~; (~;
(~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~;

Hey Sam

I bet you'll never find a better product testing, and critiquing group
than here @ rec.ponds.
If this group could test a lot of the products being made, we might not
have as many recalls
or hazardous items released upon the public.

Maybe this group should beta test Bill Gates new windows operating
system " Long horn "
perhaps it could help the public avoid getting "gored" by the bull...
ahem... I mean Bill again. ;~)

VIVA la Lixux!!!
I only use windoze when I have to.
I'm beginning to hate windoze more every day.
(Now if i can ever get SUSE 9.0 to ftp install )

Chagoi

Http://www.ourkoipond.com
(under construction)

;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) (~; (~;
(~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~;

[Sam Hopkins]

Hi Kathleen,

2,000 hours was deemed long enough because of the
characteristics of the product specifically:

* The product does not mix with water so the animal is not subjected to the
product.
* The product is only one molecule thick at any spot
* The product is non-toxic and bio-degradable
* The product contains compounds that are located within the animal itself

The product is not like an oil slick. The product floats on the surface of
the water but it is only one molecule thick. At this scale you can not see
it or feel it. The surface film on your pond is many thousand times thicker.
The product does not adhere to fish. If they would jump up through the
product they might have a few molecules on them while in the air but when
they re-entered the water these few molecules would detach and attempt to
rejoin the membrane above.

Sam

"Kathleen" > wrote in message
...
> Sam Hopkins wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > It's had over 2,000 hours of testing with live fish, plants and even
> > a turtle with no ill effects detected. It's important to note that
> > the product does not mix with water so the fish are not subjected to
> > the product (even though it is non-toxic).
>
> 2,000 hours. Just over 83 days. Not hardly long term from where I'm
> sitting.
>
> So this stuff just sort of floats on the surface of the water like an
> oil slick?
>
> What if you drop a fish through it from above, or a fish jumps through
> it? Can it occlude their gills?
>
> How does it affect reproduction? What does it do to eggs, insect
> larvae, tadpoles?
>
> Kathleen
>
>

[Sam Hopkins]

That's why I love this group. =)

Sam

"Skooch" > wrote in message
...
> Kathleen wrote:
> > Sam Hopkins wrote:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> It's had over 2,000 hours of testing with live fish, plants and even
> >> a turtle with no ill effects detected. It's important to note that
> >> the product does not mix with water so the fish are not subjected to
> >> the product (even though it is non-toxic).
> >
> >
> > 2,000 hours. Just over 83 days. Not hardly long term from where I'm
> > sitting.
> >
> > So this stuff just sort of floats on the surface of the water like an
> > oil slick?
> >
> > What if you drop a fish through it from above, or a fish jumps through
> > it? Can it occlude their gills?
> >
> > How does it affect reproduction? What does it do to eggs, insect
> > larvae, tadpoles?
> >
> > Kathleen
>
>
> ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) (~; (~;
> (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~;
>
> Hey Sam
>
> I bet you'll never find a better product testing, and critiquing group
> than here @ rec.ponds.
> If this group could test a lot of the products being made, we might not
> have as many recalls
> or hazardous items released upon the public.
>
> Maybe this group should beta test Bill Gates new windows operating
> system " Long horn "
> perhaps it could help the public avoid getting "gored" by the bull...
> ahem... I mean Bill again. ;~)
>
> VIVA la Lixux!!!
> I only use windoze when I have to.
> I'm beginning to hate windoze more every day.
> (Now if i can ever get SUSE 9.0 to ftp install )
>
> Chagoi
>
> Http://www.ourkoipond.com
> (under construction)
>
> ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) (~; (~;
> (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~;
>

[D Kat]

I love Unix and have since 1970. Linux isn't there yet (NeXT was! and was
10 years ahead of its time). DK
"Skooch" > wrote in message
...
> Kathleen wrote:
> > Sam Hopkins wrote:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> It's had over 2,000 hours of testing with live fish, plants and even
> >> a turtle with no ill effects detected. It's important to note that
> >> the product does not mix with water so the fish are not subjected to
> >> the product (even though it is non-toxic).
> >
> >
> > 2,000 hours. Just over 83 days. Not hardly long term from where I'm
> > sitting.
> >
> > So this stuff just sort of floats on the surface of the water like an
> > oil slick?
> >
> > What if you drop a fish through it from above, or a fish jumps through
> > it? Can it occlude their gills?
> >
> > How does it affect reproduction? What does it do to eggs, insect
> > larvae, tadpoles?
> >
> > Kathleen
>
>
> ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) (~; (~;
> (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~;
>
> Hey Sam
>
> I bet you'll never find a better product testing, and critiquing group
> than here @ rec.ponds.
> If this group could test a lot of the products being made, we might not
> have as many recalls
> or hazardous items released upon the public.
>
> Maybe this group should beta test Bill Gates new windows operating
> system " Long horn "
> perhaps it could help the public avoid getting "gored" by the bull...
> ahem... I mean Bill again. ;~)
>
> VIVA la Lixux!!!
> I only use windoze when I have to.
> I'm beginning to hate windoze more every day.
> (Now if i can ever get SUSE 9.0 to ftp install )
>
> Chagoi
>
> Http://www.ourkoipond.com
> (under construction)
>
> ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) ;~) (~; (~;
> (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~; (~;
>

[D Kat]

Is there any reason to apply it this time of year?
"Sam Hopkins" > wrote in message
.. .
> Hi Everyone,
>
> First off let me say that normally I wouldn't post
commercial
> info on a newsgroup, but I think that we are all one big family here and
> I'm not some person posting an ad and then never coming back. I just
wanted
> to post a message letting you all know of a new product my company has
come
> out with which reduces evaporation. Evaporation as you all know causes
> countless top offs and as a few people here have posted, sometimes death
> when we forget to turn the hose off. If you're a ponder with aquariums you
> know that evaporation raises humidity and adds a certain smell to the
room.
> Evaporation is also responsible for countless other problems that we
> generally don't associate it with.
>
> The product is called "NO EVAPORATION!" and is available
online
> for purchase. It's pretty reasonable at $9.99 for a 30 week supply for
ponds
> and 100+ week supply for aquariums. For a limited time first time buyers
can
> get a bottle for free at our online store. It should also be available at
> your local pet stores in the coming weeks.
>
> You can order the product (or free bottle) or get more
> information by going to our website at http://www.noevaporation.com
>
> If you have any questions please let me know!
>
> Sam
>
>

[Sam Hopkins]

I guess it would depend where you are. If it's still hot where you are
(lucky) then yes. If you're someplace cold like in PA with me then probably
not. ;)

The product is also for aquariums so if you have aquariums or indoor ponds
you can use it.

Sam

"D Kat" > wrote in message
...
> Is there any reason to apply it this time of year?
> "Sam Hopkins" > wrote in message
> .. .
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > First off let me say that normally I wouldn't post
> commercial
> > info on a newsgroup, but I think that we are all one big family here
and
> > I'm not some person posting an ad and then never coming back. I just
> wanted
> > to post a message letting you all know of a new product my company has
> come
> > out with which reduces evaporation. Evaporation as you all know causes
> > countless top offs and as a few people here have posted, sometimes death
> > when we forget to turn the hose off. If you're a ponder with aquariums
you
> > know that evaporation raises humidity and adds a certain smell to the
> room.
> > Evaporation is also responsible for countless other problems that we
> > generally don't associate it with.
> >
> > The product is called "NO EVAPORATION!" and is available
> online
> > for purchase. It's pretty reasonable at $9.99 for a 30 week supply for
> ponds
> > and 100+ week supply for aquariums. For a limited time first time buyers
> can
> > get a bottle for free at our online store. It should also be available
at
> > your local pet stores in the coming weeks.
> >
> > You can order the product (or free bottle) or get more
> > information by going to our website at http://www.noevaporation.com
> >
> > If you have any questions please let me know!
> >
> > Sam
> >
> >
>
>

[Critical Popperian]

> I love Unix and have since 1970. Linux isn't there yet (NeXT was! and was
> 10 years ahead of its time). DK

I use it every day now, most of the day. The company I work at has moved all
of it's apps to web-based apps so the platform doesn't mean much anymore for
every day stuff.

[Offbreed]

"D Kat" > wrote in message >...
> I love Unix and have since 1970. Linux isn't there yet (NeXT was! and was
> 10 years ahead of its time). DK

Have you checked the *BSD branch of UNIX yet?

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 14:42:09 -0500
"D Kat" > wrote:

> I love Unix and have since 1970. Linux isn't there yet (NeXT was! and
> was 10 years ahead of its time). DK

?!? Shocking statement! Where is it that you think Linux is lacking in
regard to Unix?

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
"Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

[BenignVanilla]

"D Kat" > wrote in message
...
> I love Unix and have since 1970. Linux isn't there yet (NeXT was! and was
> 10 years ahead of its time). DK
<snip>

Linux is not ready for prime time as a desktop OS. Clearly.

BV.

[MattR]

<rant>

Not clear to me at all. The only thing linux is missing is acceptance
and the following application/driver base. The only time I have
problems with linux, compared to windows, is finding drivers for
whatever hardware I'm adding because most vendors don't include linux
drivers. Other than that linux is just as functional and quite a bit
more stable than windows.

On the other hand, if M$ gets their way with digital rights management
they'll be able to log into your machine and erase files, legally, and
without any recourse by you. And then they can complete their monopoly
by preventing any other software not written by them to read any files
generated by any of their products. I'd much rather try Sam's stuff.

</rant>

BenignVanilla wrote:
> "D Kat" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>I love Unix and have since 1970. Linux isn't there yet (NeXT was! and was
>>10 years ahead of its time). DK
>
> <snip>
>
> Linux is not ready for prime time as a desktop OS. Clearly.
>
> BV.
>
>

[Snooze]

What specifically is your product? Nowhere on your website, or your posts so
far have you said what the product is.

Other then something that floats on water and creates a 1-2 molecule film,
the same could be said about gasoline and vegetable oil. Could you share in
what the product is, chemically.

If you're going to claim patented or patent pending, please provide patent
number. If you're going to claim trade secret, please provide the materials
safety data sheet.

Sameer

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 21:54:22 -0500
"BenignVanilla" > wrote:

>
> "D Kat" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I love Unix and have since 1970. Linux isn't there yet (NeXT was!
> > and was 10 years ahead of its time). DK
> <snip>
>
> Linux is not ready for prime time as a desktop OS. Clearly.
>
> BV.
>
I record music from my old LPs to CD, create and manipulate graphics,
surf and post to the 'net, use office software (word processor,
spreadsheet, presentation), scan old pics, drop in new pics from the
digicam or from my memory keyfob, keep all my appointments (alarmed)
and address book, access my desktop remotely from any modem equipped
computer, write small scripts to help control my system, run a firewall,
have all my computers networked together, Linux and Windows (controlled
by a Linux machine), have many more options for desktop style, usage,
and configuration, and about 3500 software packages that came (free)
with my OS. I also have full control over everything my system does at
all times. Oh, yes, my system will also reinvent itself, updating not
only the OS but also every single software package when updates
become available, all by itself and free of charge. I have been using
Linux alone, no Windows, for a couple of years and do not miss Windows
at all, especially the crashes, hang ups, and BSODs. Currently my
GNU/Linux box has been up and running for 23 days, 18 hours, and
40 minutes. Some have run continuously for up to three years.
Where, again, is Linux lacking?
In the user base. That's the only place.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
"Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

[Chad]

> Linux is not ready for prime time as a desktop OS. Clearly.

I have been using linux for 7 years now.... for over two as my only OS
at home. I love the gnome x-windows environment, all my favorite
windows apps/functionality for free. Last year, had linux hooked up in
my car running my mp3's, gps and dvd's while I was one the road. It is
much more stable that windows ever was. I had my home pc up for over
400 days without reboot... until my daughter pulled the plug. I never
get infected by stupid windows viruses. I have much beter security.
Why, even right now I am securely running a remote desktop in which I am
posting this message in. It still has the speed as if I was sitting at
my desktop. By the way, my wife could be using it at home right now
too, since you can have as many different desktops running as your
hardware will support. I will admit that when I switched to linux you
needed to know some linux, but my recent experience with RedHat & SUSE
running both Gnome and KDE make me believe that it is ready.

....my non-techy wife uses my linux desktop more than her crash-every-day
windows desktop... It is getting to the point where I have to kick her
off my computer so I can use it... :)

[BenignVanilla]

"MattR" > wrote in message
...
> <rant>
>
> Not clear to me at all. The only thing linux is missing is acceptance
> and the following application/driver base. The only time I have
> problems with linux, compared to windows, is finding drivers for
> whatever hardware I'm adding because most vendors don't include linux
> drivers. Other than that linux is just as functional and quite a bit
> more stable than windows.
<snip>

Exactly my point. I do agree most all Unix kernels are more robust and more
stable then any MS kernel, but that does not make them ready for prime time
on the desktop. Servers maybe, desktops no way. Many people have trouble
configuring windows machines, and you can't get much simpler then that.
Linux is still far too complex.

> On the other hand, if M$ gets their way with digital rights management
> they'll be able to log into your machine and erase files, legally, and
> without any recourse by you. And then they can complete their monopoly
> by preventing any other software not written by them to read any files
> generated by any of their products. I'd much rather try Sam's stuff.
<snip>

That just sounds like typical anti-MS paranoia.

BV.

[BenignVanilla]

"Cybe R. Wizard" <Cybe_R_Wizard@WizardsTower> wrote in message
news:20031106051919.51d49799.Cybe_R_Wizard@Wizards Tower...
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 21:54:22 -0500
> "BenignVanilla" > wrote:
>
> >
> > "D Kat" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > I love Unix and have since 1970. Linux isn't there yet (NeXT was!
> > > and was 10 years ahead of its time). DK
> > <snip>
> >
> > Linux is not ready for prime time as a desktop OS. Clearly.
> >
> > BV.
> >
> I record music from my old LPs to CD, create and manipulate graphics,
> surf and post to the 'net, use office software (word processor,
> spreadsheet, presentation), scan old pics, drop in new pics from the
> digicam or from my memory keyfob, keep all my appointments (alarmed)
> and address book, access my desktop remotely from any modem equipped
> computer, write small scripts to help control my system, run a firewall,
> have all my computers networked together, Linux and Windows (controlled
> by a Linux machine), have many more options for desktop style, usage,
> and configuration, and about 3500 software packages that came (free)
> with my OS. I also have full control over everything my system does at
> all times. Oh, yes, my system will also reinvent itself, updating not
> only the OS but also every single software package when updates
> become available, all by itself and free of charge. I have been using
> Linux alone, no Windows, for a couple of years and do not miss Windows
> at all, especially the crashes, hang ups, and BSODs. Currently my
> GNU/Linux box has been up and running for 23 days, 18 hours, and
> 40 minutes. Some have run continuously for up to three years.
> Where, again, is Linux lacking?
> In the user base. That's the only place.

1) Your nick implies you have some computer knowledge, so I am not surprised
you are able to run Linux without an issue. What about the regular Joe
Schmoe's? Can they find and configure drivers easily on a Linux box like
they can on an MS box? I doubt it.

2) If Linux is so superior why are we all not using? Because is is only
superiour in some ways, and right now those ways do not out weigh the pro's
of windows.

BV.

[BenignVanilla]

"Chad" > wrote in message ...
> > Linux is not ready for prime time as a desktop OS. Clearly.
>
> I have been using linux for 7 years now.... for over two as my only OS
> at home. I love the gnome x-windows environment, all my favorite
> windows apps/functionality for free. Last year, had linux hooked up in
> my car running my mp3's, gps and dvd's while I was one the road. It is
> much more stable that windows ever was. I had my home pc up for over
> 400 days without reboot... until my daughter pulled the plug. I never
> get infected by stupid windows viruses. I have much beter security.
> Why, even right now I am securely running a remote desktop in which I am
> posting this message in. It still has the speed as if I was sitting at
> my desktop. By the way, my wife could be using it at home right now
> too, since you can have as many different desktops running as your
> hardware will support. I will admit that when I switched to linux you
> needed to know some linux, but my recent experience with RedHat & SUSE
> running both Gnome and KDE make me believe that it is ready.
>
> ...my non-techy wife uses my linux desktop more than her crash-every-day
> windows desktop... It is getting to the point where I have to kick her
> off my computer so I can use it... :)

Severel people have responded to my post, and all have talked about how
Linux is free and much more stable. I do not argue against that at all. I am
an IT professional. I understand the stability of the unix kernels. I get
it. My point is simply that the MS OS with bugs and all is easier for the
common (wo)man to manage in a day to day environment.

As for security and MS virus', I speculate that if Linux was on 90% of the
workstations in the world, we'd be reading about more Linux virus'. I agree
that MS has been lax in it's security and vulnerability protection, but
surely the number of machines running the OS make it a good statistical
target. Why attack a small number of computer savvy people if I can attack a
larger group not so savvy users?

BV.

[Bob]

Yes it is bad that you might have to read a little and learn something to learn
about
using Linux. I use it for about 90 percent of my work now including my
electronics
design and schematic programs at work and had never seen it until I went to
work
for the company I work for now 3 years ago. I did have to spend some time
reading
and learning but hey made me a little smarter. The latest releases are almost
self
installing almost as easy as windows and stability is fantastic. I also use
linux based
IPCop firewall for both the Knology connection at work and the dial up at home
and
with dial on demand I have three systems networked into it so all machines can
be
online at the same time. The best way is to set up an old computer and get a
copy
of RedHat and start playing with it you might surprise yourself and like it.
Course
still haven't figured out what this has to do with ponding!

Bob


BenignVanilla wrote:

> "Chad" > wrote in message ...
> > > Linux is not ready for prime time as a desktop OS. Clearly.
> >
> > I have been using linux for 7 years now.... for over two as my only OS
> > at home. I love the gnome x-windows environment, all my favorite
> > windows apps/functionality for free. Last year, had linux hooked up in
> > my car running my mp3's, gps and dvd's while I was one the road. It is
> > much more stable that windows ever was. I had my home pc up for over
> > 400 days without reboot... until my daughter pulled the plug. I never
> > get infected by stupid windows viruses. I have much beter security.
> > Why, even right now I am securely running a remote desktop in which I am
> > posting this message in. It still has the speed as if I was sitting at
> > my desktop. By the way, my wife could be using it at home right now
> > too, since you can have as many different desktops running as your
> > hardware will support. I will admit that when I switched to linux you
> > needed to know some linux, but my recent experience with RedHat & SUSE
> > running both Gnome and KDE make me believe that it is ready.
> >
> > ...my non-techy wife uses my linux desktop more than her crash-every-day
> > windows desktop... It is getting to the point where I have to kick her
> > off my computer so I can use it... :)
>
> Severel people have responded to my post, and all have talked about how
> Linux is free and much more stable. I do not argue against that at all. I am
> an IT professional. I understand the stability of the unix kernels. I get
> it. My point is simply that the MS OS with bugs and all is easier for the
> common (wo)man to manage in a day to day environment.
>
> As for security and MS virus', I speculate that if Linux was on 90% of the
> workstations in the world, we'd be reading about more Linux virus'. I agree
> that MS has been lax in it's security and vulnerability protection, but
> surely the number of machines running the OS make it a good statistical
> target. Why attack a small number of computer savvy people if I can attack a
> larger group not so savvy users?
>
> BV.

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 09:54:39 -0500
"BenignVanilla" > wrote:

> As for security and MS virus', I speculate that if Linux was on 90% of
> the workstations in the world, we'd be reading about more Linux
> virus'. I agree that MS has been lax in it's security and
> vulnerability protection, but surely the number of machines running
> the OS make it a good statistical target. Why attack a small number of
> computer savvy people if I can attack a larger group not so savvy
> users?
>
> BV.

Because one would have to logged in as root (/) which is the number one
no-no in the Linux world, just as in the Unix world. Otherwise a
cracker would need your root password which is fairly well protected.
As an IT professional I'm surprised you even asked. Unless, of course,
your IT career is mostly using Microsoft products? Not that this is a
bad thing. A whole lot of the internet would disappear if Microsoft
products suddenly did likewise.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
"Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 09:51:17 -0500
"BenignVanilla" > wrote:

> > Where, again, is Linux lacking?
> > In the user base. That's the only place.
>
> 1) Your nick implies you have some computer knowledge, so I am not
> surprised you are able to run Linux without an issue. What about the
> regular Joe Schmoe's? Can they find and configure drivers easily on a
> Linux box like they can on an MS box? I doubt it.

Therein lies the money maker for Linux-knowledgeable people. A small
shop selling Linux-compatible hardware, installing and setting up a
system with users already installed, permissions on users set to
disallow any messing with the system. It would be simplicity itself to
update/install software remotely on machines from your shop, lessons
could be given...
OTOH, my Libranet Linux distro (a variety of Debian for you propeller
heads) was easy to install, easy to use, easy to update or install new
software, has up to date hardware detection, will automatically set up a
dual-boot system if there is another OS already on the hard drive(s),
and has the look and feel of Windows to a large extent using the Ice
window manager.
>
> 2) If Linux is so superior why are we all not using? Because is is
> only superiour in some ways, and right now those ways do not out weigh
> the pro's of windows.
>
> BV.

Linux is not in popular use /in the US/ because Microsoft long had
exclusive use contracts with major manufacturers of computers, thereby
getting PC buyers used only to the Windows way. It is easier to do
nothing than to make an effort to load and learn a new system when
you already /have/ learned one. Today, after the recent lawsuit,
Microsoft is no longer allowed to hold these exclusive contracts but
most manufacturers still will not anger the giant by even releasing
hardware specs so Linux folks can write their own drivers, much less
write the drivers, themselves.

That said, it is possible to use a wide variety of Windows-only hardware
under Linux, just as it is possible to use lots of Windows-only software
because Linux coders aren't afraid to acknowledge the existence of other
OSs.

OTOH, there /is/ a steep learning curve, not because Linux is so hard,
but because it is not the same as Windows.
On the gripping hand, those who learn Linux first learn just as fast as
Windows users and will not even consider switching to such inferior
OSs as any of the Microsoft offerings, each new iteration of which has
its own learning curve.

BTW, have I said that I'm rebuilding my backyard pond? It's almost done
and will be ready for plants soon. I will be waiting for spring to put
in any fish, though.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
"Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 09:49:03 -0500
"BenignVanilla" > wrote:

> > On the other hand, if M$ gets their way with digital rights
> > management they'll be able to log into your machine and erase files,
> > legally, and without any recourse by you. And then they can complete
> > their monopoly by preventing any other software not written by them
> > to read any files generated by any of their products. I'd much
> > rather try Sam's stuff.
> <snip>
>
> That just sounds like typical anti-MS paranoia.
>
> BV.

Not at all, read up on the digital rights management system. It's
really scary if you imagine the uses to which it can be put.
Have you read your Microsoft EULA?

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
"Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

[BenignVanilla]

"Cybe R. Wizard" <Cybe_R_Wizard@WizardsTower> wrote in message
news:20031106103352.3e978bb0.Cybe_R_Wizard@Wizards Tower...
> On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 09:54:39 -0500
> "BenignVanilla" > wrote:
>
> > As for security and MS virus', I speculate that if Linux was on 90% of
> > the workstations in the world, we'd be reading about more Linux
> > virus'. I agree that MS has been lax in it's security and
> > vulnerability protection, but surely the number of machines running
> > the OS make it a good statistical target. Why attack a small number of
> > computer savvy people if I can attack a larger group not so savvy
> > users?
> >
> > BV.
>
> Because one would have to logged in as root (/) which is the number one
> no-no in the Linux world, just as in the Unix world. Otherwise a
> cracker would need your root password which is fairly well protected.
> As an IT professional I'm surprised you even asked. Unless, of course,
> your IT career is mostly using Microsoft products? Not that this is a
> bad thing. A whole lot of the internet would disappear if Microsoft
> products suddenly did likewise.

If you think the only way to hack at Unix is the root password, then you are
fooling yourself. There are more vulnerabilities then just a simple password
compromise. My career has been centered around MS, I will happily admit to
that. I do a lot of client server design and implementation and being an
integrator the MS platform is a joy to work with.

Just let me reiterate. I am not anti-Unix. I think Unix is fantastic, I am
just against bashing MS to bash MS. Both platforms has strengths and
weaknesses.

Both sink when tossed into your pond. :)

BV.

[BenignVanilla]

"Cybe R. Wizard" <Cybe_R_Wizard@WizardsTower> wrote in message
news:20031106105919.3555701c.Cybe_R_Wizard@Wizards Tower...
> On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 09:49:03 -0500
> "BenignVanilla" > wrote:
>
> > > On the other hand, if M$ gets their way with digital rights
> > > management they'll be able to log into your machine and erase files,
> > > legally, and without any recourse by you. And then they can complete
> > > their monopoly by preventing any other software not written by them
> > > to read any files generated by any of their products. I'd much
> > > rather try Sam's stuff.
> > <snip>
> >
> > That just sounds like typical anti-MS paranoia.
> >
> > BV.
>
> Not at all, read up on the digital rights management system. It's
> really scary if you imagine the uses to which it can be put.
> Have you read your Microsoft EULA?
<snip>

The day MS prevents any software from reading/writing to the PC, their OS
will cease to exist in the market. I agree that their tactics to date have
been less then desireable, but I can't see any value in them doing what you
are saying.

BV.

[D Kat]

Basically I don't have the time to learn the ins and outs. I spent hours
just trying to find the right app to change the default of boot up in LILO
(ended up going to a console app, grepping for Windows, using VI to edit the
..cfg file I found, then found a GUI app to effect changes in the .cfg file -
it was ugly). Because Linux is open software (which was an absolutely
wonderful thing with command line Unix) there are so many half baked GUI
apps loaded with the system that it is almost impossible to find the "right"
ones to use and more often than not the ones I try fail. There are at least
4 different GUI systems on the Linux that I installed on my machine and I
have yet to figure out the difference between them all.

I keep sticking my nose in the door to check things out because unix is
still the most powerful OS for manipulating files and data but until things
are more user friendly or I have the time to invest to learn from the bottom
up I will stick to Windows (the KMart product that made computer uses for
the masses possible).

DK


"Cybe R. Wizard" <Cybe_R_Wizard@WizardsTower> wrote in message
news:20031105195553.0f87fa7b.Cybe_R_Wizard@Wizards Tower...
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2003 14:42:09 -0500
> "D Kat" > wrote:
>
> > I love Unix and have since 1970. Linux isn't there yet (NeXT was! and
> > was 10 years ahead of its time). DK
>
> ?!? Shocking statement! Where is it that you think Linux is lacking in
> regard to Unix?
>
> Cybe R. Wizard
> --
> Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
> Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
> "Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
> Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

[D Kat]

I'm not quite sure how to get this across to you. I am computer literate
compared to 90% of computer users and I really, really like Unix. The OS I
learned on was Unix, I program in C/C++. I was at Bell Labs when Unix/C
were beginning. However, I have limited free time to invest in much of
anything and I probably have more than many people. I'm not brilliant but I
am, it turns out, a tad smarter in this domain than a great many people. If
I'm not able to manage this OS, how can you possibly expect most naive
computer users to use it? It is great that you are successfully using
Linux. Many people are. No one is bad mouthing Linux. We are just saying
it isn't ready yet for the average user.

DKat

"Bob" > wrote in message
...
> Yes it is bad that you might have to read a little and learn something to
learn
> about
> using Linux. I use it for about 90 percent of my work now including my
> electronics
> design and schematic programs at work and had never seen it until I went
to
> work
> for the company I work for now 3 years ago. I did have to spend some time
> reading
> and learning but hey made me a little smarter. The latest releases are
almost
> self
> installing almost as easy as windows and stability is fantastic. I also
use
> linux based
> IPCop firewall for both the Knology connection at work and the dial up at
home
> and
> with dial on demand I have three systems networked into it so all machines
can
> be
> online at the same time. The best way is to set up an old computer and
get a
> copy
> of RedHat and start playing with it you might surprise yourself and like
it.
> Course
> still haven't figured out what this has to do with ponding!
>
> Bob
>
>
> BenignVanilla wrote:
>
> > "Chad" > wrote in message ...
> > > > Linux is not ready for prime time as a desktop OS. Clearly.
> > >
> > > I have been using linux for 7 years now.... for over two as my only OS
> > > at home. I love the gnome x-windows environment, all my favorite
> > > windows apps/functionality for free. Last year, had linux hooked up
in
> > > my car running my mp3's, gps and dvd's while I was one the road. It
is
> > > much more stable that windows ever was. I had my home pc up for over
> > > 400 days without reboot... until my daughter pulled the plug. I never
> > > get infected by stupid windows viruses. I have much beter security.
> > > Why, even right now I am securely running a remote desktop in which I
am
> > > posting this message in. It still has the speed as if I was sitting
at
> > > my desktop. By the way, my wife could be using it at home right now
> > > too, since you can have as many different desktops running as your
> > > hardware will support. I will admit that when I switched to linux you
> > > needed to know some linux, but my recent experience with RedHat & SUSE
> > > running both Gnome and KDE make me believe that it is ready.
> > >
> > > ...my non-techy wife uses my linux desktop more than her
crash-every-day
> > > windows desktop... It is getting to the point where I have to kick her
> > > off my computer so I can use it... :)
> >
> > Severel people have responded to my post, and all have talked about how
> > Linux is free and much more stable. I do not argue against that at all.
I am
> > an IT professional. I understand the stability of the unix kernels. I
get
> > it. My point is simply that the MS OS with bugs and all is easier for
the
> > common (wo)man to manage in a day to day environment.
> >
> > As for security and MS virus', I speculate that if Linux was on 90% of
the
> > workstations in the world, we'd be reading about more Linux virus'. I
agree
> > that MS has been lax in it's security and vulnerability protection, but
> > surely the number of machines running the OS make it a good statistical
> > target. Why attack a small number of computer savvy people if I can
attack a
> > larger group not so savvy users?
> >
> > BV.
>

[D Kat]

The fact that all Unix base systems have the administrator login as "ROOT"
makes it ideal for a hacker. You already know the login... just have to
make a program to generate passwords.

"Cybe R. Wizard" <Cybe_R_Wizard@WizardsTower> wrote in message
news:20031106103352.3e978bb0.Cybe_R_Wizard@Wizards Tower...
> On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 09:54:39 -0500
> "BenignVanilla" > wrote:
>
> > As for security and MS virus', I speculate that if Linux was on 90% of
> > the workstations in the world, we'd be reading about more Linux
> > virus'. I agree that MS has been lax in it's security and
> > vulnerability protection, but surely the number of machines running
> > the OS make it a good statistical target. Why attack a small number of
> > computer savvy people if I can attack a larger group not so savvy
> > users?
> >
> > BV.
>
> Because one would have to logged in as root (/) which is the number one
> no-no in the Linux world, just as in the Unix world. Otherwise a
> cracker would need your root password which is fairly well protected.
> As an IT professional I'm surprised you even asked. Unless, of course,
> your IT career is mostly using Microsoft products? Not that this is a
> bad thing. A whole lot of the internet would disappear if Microsoft
> products suddenly did likewise.
>
> Cybe R. Wizard
> --
> Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
> Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
> "Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
> Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

[MattR]

BenignVanilla wrote:

>>On the other hand, if M$ gets their way with digital rights management
>>they'll be able to log into your machine and erase files, legally, and
>>without any recourse by you. And then they can complete their monopoly
>>by preventing any other software not written by them to read any files
>>generated by any of their products. I'd much rather try Sam's stuff.
>
> <snip>
>
> That just sounds like typical anti-MS paranoia.

This isn't black helicopters. Google "palladium tcpa". Palladium
includes hardware and software that controls who can use any data on
your machine (Longhorn and office 2003 are starting to use it). MS, and
others, have tried to make legislation that requires any device that
contains IP to contain palladium hardware (Not sure where that is now,
and I hope it failed, but this is obviously what MS wants done). This
hardware allows commands from the originator of the IP to erase files
from your machine and control other things.

So, if you post messages to rec.ponds using IE, then MS could enforce
that I only read your messages using IE. Note that MS can inforce this;
I could understand if the creator of the message wanted to control who
reads their info (well, not in this case but in general) but why should
MS be able to control it? Since most people reading rec.ponds use IE
than I'd have to buy windows and IE to read rec.ponds. This is what I
mean by completing the monopoly.

Anyway, this whole thing is way beyond just MS, is very complicated, and
worth looking at.

Here's some info that goes into more detail:
info on palladium: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html

info on how office 2003 is starting to use it:
http://www.silicon.com/software/os/0,39024651,10005843,00.htm

[Philip Edward Lewis]

"D Kat" > writes:
>unix is still the most powerful OS for manipulating files and data
>but until things are more user friendly or I have the time to invest
>to learn from the bottom up I will stick to Windows

A good compromise is to use cygwin (www.cygwin.com).

lots of packages, including Xwindows.

(grasping for OB rec.pond - Anyone use mysql or postgres under linux
to track pond data? ;)

--
be safe.
flip

UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things,
because that would also stop you from doing clever things.
- Doug Gwyn

[Theo van Daele]

I can't believe I'm actually answering here... but, see "Unix Haters
Handbook" for discussions about unix safety.

FWIW BV, you're wording about 95 % of what I believe to be true, but then
again I only have 17 years IT experience, and have tried Red Hat, SuSe et
all, only to be utterly disappointed (and YES, I did want it to work, and NO
you Linux groupies are not smarter than I am ;-) )

Linux has it's merits, but so do Pseudomonas.

Whirrrrr... ;-)

Back to ponds for me.

Theo

[[email protected]]

excuse me, but most of my friends cannot configure drivers to work with windows and
heaven help them if they get a new puter cause most of the software they been using
is out of date and wont work with each upgrade. I am talking people with old
printers and old label software that is exactly what they need and had to dump it and
buy new to work, older small business software that is no longer functional. some of
those older programs, older printers were much much better and didnt break down, the
software was soooo much easier to use. several friends are tearing their hair out.
I tell em to just have XP wiped off the puter and go back to win 98 so they can use
their older equipment and software.
If every computer out there shipped with linux, there wouldnt be any market for
windows. And Mac people are fanatics about their OS.
I keep swearing I am going to switch, and this next puter I build is going to be the
one cause win98 will not work with more than 526 ram and I am not going to spyware
XP. Ingrid

"BenignVanilla" > wrote:
>1) Your nick implies you have some computer knowledge, so I am not surprised
>you are able to run Linux without an issue. What about the regular Joe
>Schmoe's? Can they find and configure drivers easily on a Linux box like
>they can on an MS box? I doubt it.
>
>2) If Linux is so superior why are we all not using? Because is is only
>superiour in some ways, and right now those ways do not out weigh the pro's
>of windows.
>
>BV.
>



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List
http://puregold.aquaria.net/
www.drsolo.com
Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Unfortunately, I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other
compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the
endorsements or recommendations I make.

[Snooze]

"D Kat" > wrote in message
et...
> The fact that all Unix base systems have the administrator login as "ROOT"
> makes it ideal for a hacker. You already know the login... just have to
> make a program to generate passwords.
>

And in windows NT/2000/etc you login as Administrator, in the Cisco world
your goal is enable access. Knowing the goal and reaching it are two
different things.

Everyone knows where Mount Everest is, you just have to walk straight up to
place your flag there....

Sameer

[Sam Hopkins]

Hi Sameer,

Unfortunately I can not share what the product composition is
because it's a trade secret at this point. The product is in the patent
process so we have not yet received a patent number. However once the patent
number is assigned I will be more than happy to pass it along. It will also
be posted on our website.

Thanks,

Sam


"Snooze" > wrote in message
om...
> What specifically is your product? Nowhere on your website, or your posts
so
> far have you said what the product is.
>
> Other then something that floats on water and creates a 1-2 molecule film,
> the same could be said about gasoline and vegetable oil. Could you share
in
> what the product is, chemically.
>
> If you're going to claim patented or patent pending, please provide patent
> number. If you're going to claim trade secret, please provide the
materials
> safety data sheet.
>
> Sameer
>
>

[Chad]

>And Mac people are fanatics about their OS.

You know... Mac OS X is Unix based... its very popular and is in the
public's hands-- for 3 years now. All these artsy fartsy desingers are
really using unix... and I wouldn't really call them techy. Many just
know how to use the design programs vs. knowing how to configure any
type of computer(PC, Mac, AS400, Mainframe) :) They made or are making
the change. hmmm... I cant believe this wasn't brought up in this
thread. Probably, because like most, I used to think Mac was a 4 letter
word.

[D Kat]

I actually run a lot of my own programs (doing speech, data collection and
data analysis) and use many berkeley Unix DOS utilities in DOS . Windows
Excel has served as a nice replacement for many Unix command line programs
that DOS never was able to do. I was never able to beat Unix into doing the
RealTime processes that I had to be able to do (I have to play auditory
files one sample point at a time).

I went to the BSD site after you mentioned it and I'm now trying to figure
out how to incorporate it into our lab. The Berkeley Dos Unix utilities are
nice but they just don't quite cut it. At this point I find that each OS has
something to offer that the others don't (though I am now running real time
data collection in WinNT with a windows app I was able to put together with
BuilderCPP and CDX - In which case Windows is the only OS that will do
everything I need - I just feel loyal to Unix) DK

"Offbreed" > wrote in message
om...
> "D Kat" > wrote in message
>...
> > I love Unix and have since 1970. Linux isn't there yet (NeXT was! and
was
> > 10 years ahead of its time). DK
>
> Have you checked the *BSD branch of UNIX yet?

[Snooze]

"Sam Hopkins" > wrote in message
.. .
> Hi Sameer,
>
> Unfortunately I can not share what the product composition is
> because it's a trade secret at this point. The product is in the patent
> process so we have not yet received a patent number. However once the
patent
> number is assigned I will be more than happy to pass it along. It will
also
> be posted on our website.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Sam

Patent applications are searchable online.
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html

I find nothing that jumps out at me, when I searched for
Sam Hopkins
Tiversa Membrane
noevaporation
no evaporation

I'm sorry, your product or idea may be a good one, but I'm having a hard
time proving to myself that this isn't anything more then snake oil.

Sameer

[Cichlidiot]

D Kat > wrote:
> Basically I don't have the time to learn the ins and outs. I spent hours
> just trying to find the right app to change the default of boot up in LILO
> (ended up going to a console app, grepping for Windows, using VI to edit the
> .cfg file I found, then found a GUI app to effect changes in the .cfg file -
> it was ugly). Because Linux is open software (which was an absolutely
> wonderful thing with command line Unix) there are so many half baked GUI
> apps loaded with the system that it is almost impossible to find the "right"
> ones to use and more often than not the ones I try fail. There are at least
> 4 different GUI systems on the Linux that I installed on my machine and I
> have yet to figure out the difference between them all.

> I keep sticking my nose in the door to check things out because unix is
> still the most powerful OS for manipulating files and data but until things
> are more user friendly or I have the time to invest to learn from the bottom
> up I will stick to Windows (the KMart product that made computer uses for
> the masses possible).

Have you tried Slackware Linux? It is often referred to as the most "Unix"
of the Linux distributions. It also relies mostly on the command line (ie
editors and simple config scripts) to edit configuration files instead of
GUIs. It tends to be lean when it comes to programs included, although it
does offer many choices of XWindows managers. Many people also say it is
more stable than other distributions, probably due to the fact it doesn't
include those "half baked GUI apps". Pat tends to stick to stable software
to include in the distro. Check it out if you have the time,
www.slackware.com, sounds like it might be up your alley.

I've been using Slackware 8.x as my primary desktop for the last 2 years.
I have no problems doing most tasks except a few games, and that's just
because I haven't taken the time to install something like WineX for
gaming. I just keep around a Windows box for gaming. I also do my
presentations with PowerPoint, but that's just because again, I've been
too lazy to install OpenOffice and also it's easier for my research
advisor if I use the same version of PowerPoint as he does for all those
"could you make some slides for <blah> project?" incidents. Overall, I
spend about 80% of my time in Linux (more like 95% if you discount the
gaming time).

[Cichlidiot]

Cybe R. Wizard <Cybe_R_Wizard@wizardstower> wrote:
> On the gripping hand, those who learn Linux first learn just as fast as
> Windows users and will not even consider switching to such inferior
> OSs as any of the Microsoft offerings, each new iteration of which has
> its own learning curve.

Ooo.. gripping hand... I sense a Niven and Pournelle reader in our midst
:)

[Cichlidiot]

BenignVanilla > wrote:

> Severel people have responded to my post, and all have talked about how
> Linux is free and much more stable. I do not argue against that at all. I am
> an IT professional. I understand the stability of the unix kernels. I get
> it. My point is simply that the MS OS with bugs and all is easier for the
> common (wo)man to manage in a day to day environment.

Easier to manage? Bwhahahaha... *gasps for breath* oh man, you need to
spend a month in my old job... let's see... typical day... 50% dealing
with how the web developers (all on Windows machines) had messed up their
machines or servers that day (or the virus of the day/week), 10% trying to
convince the boss he really should let me apply these critical patches to
the system, 10% cleaning out the Cisco router half-open cache because xyz
Windows user fuzbarred it up trying to listen to a net radio, 25% reading
the security mailing lists to compile the list of patches to present to
the boss (again), and maybe 5% checking in on the Linux boxes and making
sure they were all a-okay. Every time I got paged at home for a server
issue, it was the Windows boxes or the latest virus/worm making the
rounds. Oh yeah, and the Linux box I had that would automate my "the
machine is down" pages never itself went down unless the power failed long
enough that the UPS went down.

Even now at my university... I spend hours a week applying patches to the
Windows box I keep on campus. Click on pretty executable, click some more
through a EULA and rather unneccessary dialog boxes, reboot, repeat ad
naseum. Compared to my Linux box... upgradepkg <package> then
/etc/rc.d/rc.<package> restart or kill -HUP <process_id>.... taking all of
about 5 minutes (not counting the time to download the packages). Only
time I have to reboot is when I upgrade/update the kernel itself.

> As for security and MS virus', I speculate that if Linux was on 90% of the
> workstations in the world, we'd be reading about more Linux virus'. I agree
> that MS has been lax in it's security and vulnerability protection, but
> surely the number of machines running the OS make it a good statistical
> target. Why attack a small number of computer savvy people if I can attack a
> larger group not so savvy users?

People have been saying that, but really, would it be true? What is the
issue on Windows boxes? Mostly that people don't apply the patches.
Probably because the patches have a tendancy to be rather, well, unstable.
My poor home Windows box constantly crashes during my favorite game once I
put on all the latest security patches. It was fine before. I put up with
it because I prefer a patched Windows box that crashes occasionally to one
that is unpatched and gets hit with the latest virus of the week. Most
regular users would get fed up with the crashing and either reinstall to
the CD version (unpatched) or remove the patch. Also, finding the patches
can sometimes be very difficult, especially if the machine does not have
access to Windows Update at that time. It took me several days to finally
find the TechNet search engine that will return all critical patches for a
Microsoft product. Now, imagine a non-techie trying that... hah. Anyways,
it leaves a lot of unpatched systems running out there.

Now, compare this to Linux. With my distro of choice, the updated packages
rarely cause stability problems and if they do, the maintainer usually has
an updated and fixed version of the package that remedies the stability
problem in a day or two. Many Linux distros also come with tools that
allow the user to get and install the most recent packages from their
preferred FTP sites with a simple command. My distro of choice also puts
all their patches in one subdirectory of the release (ie 9.0/patches) on
their FTP site with a ChangeFile that explains what each patch is and why
it is there. These sort of tools make it much easier for an automatic
method to be added that would go out, grab patches and apply them without
the user having to lift a finger. This would protect the non-saavy user,
while the saavy user could have the option to disable this automatic
feature and do it manually if he/she so desires.

There is also the issue of the initial security of the system, ie what
services does the machine make available to the world by default. In this
realm, Windows is really bad. For example, I cannot disable RPC on my
Win2k machine without disabling very important features on my desktop,
like the right click pop Properties box. Yet RPC is not a good service to
have out there available on the Internet. There are many issues with it.
While I have not seen Windows make much of a response to this issue, I
have noticed that almost every single recent Linux distribution has been
turning off many Internet available services by default. This is a good
thing. Personally, I think a workstation should start with no ports open
to the world and the user should only turn things like web servers and SSH
on if/when they need them.

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 02:30:55 +0000 (UTC)
Cichlidiot > wrote:

> Cybe R. Wizard <Cybe_R_Wizard@wizardstower> wrote:
> > On the gripping hand, those who learn Linux first learn just as fast
> > as Windows users and will not even consider switching to such
> > inferior OSs as any of the Microsoft offerings, each new iteration
> > of which has its own learning curve.
>
> Ooo.. gripping hand... I sense a Niven and Pournelle reader in our
> midst :)

Guilty as charged.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
"Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

[Sam Hopkins]

Hi Sameer,

Patents are only searchable when a patent number is assigned.
They only get assigned once the entire patent process is completed so you
wont find it on PTO's website.

I can understand your hesitation about the product since it is
new and its technology is new. The only thing I can suggest is to get the
free bottle offered on the website and try it for yourself.

Thanks,

Sam

"Snooze" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Sam Hopkins" > wrote in message
> .. .
> > Hi Sameer,
> >
> > Unfortunately I can not share what the product composition
is
> > because it's a trade secret at this point. The product is in the patent
> > process so we have not yet received a patent number. However once the
> patent
> > number is assigned I will be more than happy to pass it along. It will
> also
> > be posted on our website.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Sam
>
> Patent applications are searchable online.
> http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/search-bool.html
>
> I find nothing that jumps out at me, when I searched for
> Sam Hopkins
> Tiversa Membrane
> noevaporation
> no evaporation
>
> I'm sorry, your product or idea may be a good one, but I'm having a hard
> time proving to myself that this isn't anything more then snake oil.
>
> Sameer
>
>

[Susan H. Simko]

> Cichlidiot > wrote:

>>Ooo.. gripping hand... I sense a Niven and Pournelle reader in our
>>midst :)

Cybe R. Wizard wrote:

> Guilty as charged.

You may be happy to know then that Larry's and Marilyn's house survived
the fires in CA. Fires came right up to the house but didn't touch it.

Susan
shsimko (at) duke<dot>edu

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Fri, 07 Nov 2003 11:18:27 -0500
"Susan H. Simko" > wrote:

> > Cichlidiot > wrote:
>
> >>Ooo.. gripping hand... I sense a Niven and Pournelle reader in our
> >>midst :)
>
> Cybe R. Wizard wrote:
>
> > Guilty as charged.
>
> You may be happy to know then that Larry's and Marilyn's house
> survived the fires in CA. Fires came right up to the house but didn't
> touch it.
>
> Susan

Indeed, I am! Thanks you very much for that info.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
"Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

[D Kat]

:) yep... don't know what space my brain was in.... it frequently takes off
on its own. DK
"Snooze" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "D Kat" > wrote in message
> et...
> > The fact that all Unix base systems have the administrator login as
"ROOT"
> > makes it ideal for a hacker. You already know the login... just have to
> > make a program to generate passwords.
> >
>
> And in windows NT/2000/etc you login as Administrator, in the Cisco world
> your goal is enable access. Knowing the goal and reaching it are two
> different things.
>
> Everyone knows where Mount Everest is, you just have to walk straight up
to
> place your flag there....
>
> Sameer
>
>

[BenignVanilla]

"Cichlidiot" > wrote in message
...
> D Kat > wrote:
<snip>
> Have you tried Slackware Linux?
<snip>

Slackware? Really? If I remember correctly, Slackware is the version of
Linux I ran for fun, back when Linux was not cool.

BV.

[BenignVanilla]

> wrote in message
...
<snip>
> If every computer out there shipped with linux, there wouldnt be any
market for
> windows. And Mac people are fanatics about their OS.
<snip>

If every computer out ther shipped with Windows, there wouldn't be any
market for Linux. Oh but nearly all do, and there still is a market...There
will always be a market.

BV.

[~ jan JJsPond.us]

>2) If Linux is so superior why are we all not using? BV

Marketing? ~ jan
See my ponds thru the seasons and/or my filter design:
http://users.owt.com/jjspond/

~Keep 'em Defrosted~
Tri-Cities, WA Zone 7a
To e-mail see website

[Offbreed]

"D Kat" > wrote in message >...
> I actually run a lot of my own programs (doing speech, data collection and
> data analysis) and use many berkeley Unix DOS utilities in DOS . Windows
> Excel has served as a nice replacement for many Unix command line programs
> that DOS never was able to do. I was never able to beat Unix into doing the
> RealTime processes that I had to be able to do (I have to play auditory
> files one sample point at a time).

Roll your own? <G> Probably faster than paging through all the ports
and packages availible in Linux and BSD.

> (though I am now running real time
> data collection in WinNT with a windows app I was able to put together with
> BuilderCPP and CDX - In which case Windows is the only OS that will do
> everything I need - I just feel loyal to Unix) DK

There's several minor OS's around loosly based on UNIX, and at least
one of them claims to be "The ONLY realtime OS made". Paid no
attention as I have not the foggiest idea what that was all about.
Might be a waste of time trying to chase them down to check out, but I
really doubt the latest virus is going to do anything to them (which
is why I was looking at them). Drivers, though...

(shrug) Windows works just fine for me, as long as I keep it away from
the net and run mantanance on it now and then. LOL, good luck on
killing the net connection.

"Ponding" is your "Zen Garden"? Makes sense. I lurk for pointers on a
small agriculture pond, not that I have one or am likely to actually
build one.

Ugh, work calls in a shrill and unpleasent voice.

[Cichlidiot]

BenignVanilla > wrote:

> "Cichlidiot" > wrote in message
> ...
>> D Kat > wrote:
> <snip>
>> Have you tried Slackware Linux?
> <snip>

> Slackware? Really? If I remember correctly, Slackware is the version of
> Linux I ran for fun, back when Linux was not cool.

If you meant that as a "really? it's still around?" then yeah. Pat just
released 9.1 about a month ago. ISOs are available on the FTP sites or you
can order a boxed set via store.slackware.com.

If that's a "really? people still use Slackware?" then also yeah. It has a
pretty dedicated group of regulars that hang out in
alt.os.linux.slackware. It's also in either the top 5 or 10 most popular
Linux distros (depending on who is running the survey). For example, Linux
Counter has about 11% of registered users saying they use Slackware, about
the same as SUSE, 4th after Red Hat, Debian and Mandrake.

[mad]

this is why MACs never went to the top of the charts--apple's stupid
marketing tricks.
mad, who luvs her mac
--
Televangelists: the pro-wrestlers of religion

> From: ~ jan JJsPond.us >
> Organization: Newsfeed.com http://www.newsfeed.com 100,000+ UNCENSORED
> Newsgroups.
> Newsgroups: rec.ponds
> Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 21:38:33 -0800
> Subject: Re: OT Linux
>
>> 2) If Linux is so superior why are we all not using? BV
>
> Marketing? ~ jan
> See my ponds thru the seasons and/or my filter design:
> http://users.owt.com/jjspond/
>
> ~Keep 'em Defrosted~
> Tri-Cities, WA Zone 7a
> To e-mail see website



-----= 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! =-----

[mad]

to quote maynard g. krebs: WORK?

work is a 4-letter word. :-D
mad
--
A truly happy person is one who can enjoy the scenery on a detour.

> From: (Offbreed)
> Organization: http://groups.google.com
> Newsgroups: rec.ponds
> Date: 7 Nov 2003 22:19:38 -0800
> Subject: Re: OT Linux
>
> Ugh, work calls in a shrill and unpleasent voice.



-----= 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! =-----

[john rutz]

BenignVanilla wrote:
> "D Kat" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>I love Unix and have since 1970. Linux isn't there yet (NeXT was! and was
>>10 years ahead of its time). DK
>
> <snip>
>
> Linux is not ready for prime time as a desktop OS. Clearly.
>
> BV.
>
> i beg to differ I have been using suse linux on my desktop

for three years and love it
I'm on someone elses puter now ewith winderz and hate it

John Rutz

[Bonnie]

john rutz wrote:

> for three years and love it
> I'm on someone elses puter now ewith winderz and hate it
>
> John Rutz

You may have it, but we're glad to see you posting!

-
Bonnie
NJ

[BenignVanilla]

"Cichlidiot" > wrote in message
...
> BenignVanilla > wrote:
>
> > "Cichlidiot" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> D Kat > wrote:
> > <snip>
> >> Have you tried Slackware Linux?
> > <snip>
>
> > Slackware? Really? If I remember correctly, Slackware is the version of
> > Linux I ran for fun, back when Linux was not cool.
>
> If you meant that as a "really? it's still around?" then yeah. Pat just
> released 9.1 about a month ago. ISOs are available on the FTP sites or you
> can order a boxed set via store.slackware.com.
<snip>

Yeah that is what I meant. I dabbled with Linux in the pre-win95 days. I
never used it for business purposes, but it was fun to play with. I didn't
realize Slackware was still around. That's cool.

BV.

[BenignVanilla]

"mad" > wrote in message
...
> this is why MACs never went to the top of the charts--apple's stupid
> marketing tricks.
> mad, who luvs her mac
<snip>

I'd argue their lack of marketing. They never let anyone build clones. If
they had, we'd all be using MAC's running Linux right now, without a doubt.
Marketing definately plays a roll.

BV.

[BenignVanilla]

"john rutz" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> BenignVanilla wrote:
> > "D Kat" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >>I love Unix and have since 1970. Linux isn't there yet (NeXT was! and
was
> >>10 years ahead of its time). DK
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > Linux is not ready for prime time as a desktop OS. Clearly.
> >
> > BV.
> >
> > i beg to differ I have been using suse linux on my desktop
>
> for three years and love it
> I'm on someone elses puter now ewith winderz and hate it

I plan to switch OS's when someone delivers a way for me to harnes my entire
network. I have 6 or 7 machines always running, and if I could harness all 7
to compile video, or compile code, I'd switch tomorrow.

BV.

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 17:40:53 -0500
"BenignVanilla" > wrote:

>
> I plan to switch OS's when someone delivers a way for me to harnes my
> entire network. I have 6 or 7 machines always running, and if I could
> harness all 7 to compile video, or compile code, I'd switch tomorrow.
>
> BV.
>
Google for "Beowulf clusters." Linux will do that.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
"Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

[mad]

that is exactly what i mean. a stupid marketing trick.
mad


> From: "BenignVanilla" >
> Newsgroups: rec.ponds
> Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 17:39:21 -0500
> Subject: Re: OT Linux
>
> They never let anyone build clones.
--
"We are all born mad. Some remain so."
Irish playwright Samuel Beckett



-----= 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! =-----

[Snooze]

"Cybe R. Wizard" <Cybe_R_Wizard@WizardsTower> wrote in message
news:20031109190031.69299e5e.Cybe_R_Wizard@Wizards Tower...
> On Sun, 9 Nov 2003 17:40:53 -0500
> "BenignVanilla" > wrote:
>
> >
> > I plan to switch OS's when someone delivers a way for me to harnes my
> > entire network. I have 6 or 7 machines always running, and if I could
> > harness all 7 to compile video, or compile code, I'd switch tomorrow.
> >
> > BV.
> >
> Google for "Beowulf clusters." Linux will do that.
>

This thread needs to end, there are plenty of linux groups that are better
suited to this discussion, for example comp.os.linux.advocacy, rec.ponds is
better suited for ponding.

Anyways to answer the question, a beowulf cluster probably isn't the best
solution. The bottleneck with code compilation is typically disk-io, not cpu
time. The original poster might have better luck just copying the code to a
ram disk, and compiling in ram, then copying the results back to disk. Of
course this assumes the original poster is writing code that can be compiled
anywhere, and not writing Win32/MFC/.NET specific products.

If disk-io is the bottleneck, distributed compilation of code on a network
filesystem, such as NFS, or CIFS via either rsh/ssh or a beowulf cluster, is
just goign to make things worse.

As for for the rendering of video, to my knowledge, beowulf is again not the
best solution for that either, several products, such as Muster by Virtual
Vertex, distribute the rendering for Maya, Lighwave and XSI. Of course none
of these products are cheap.

Sameer

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 07:24:46 GMT
"Snooze" > wrote:

> This thread needs to end, there are plenty of linux groups that are
> better suited to this discussion, for example comp.os.linux.advocacy,
> rec.ponds is better suited for ponding.

<Reply To: header re-changed back to rec.ponds instead of cola>

You are right about there being more informed forums for these kinds of
discussions and it's a good thing to point us to them. Thank you.
That said, for a lot of us ponders, colder weather has arrived and our
thoughts turn to other things. It's only natural that we discuss these
things with our ponding friends. Heck, it happens every time cold
weather comes around. I wish it were warmer as I have a big pond in my
Mom's backyard that really needs some more work before fish are
re-introduced, but it looks as if that will have to wait for spring.
Should I, perhaps, un-subscribe to rec.ponds for the duration? Heck,
no, I have friends here!
We have a wide range of interests in here and don't usually bother too
much if things go Off-Topic (that little OT there in the subject line is
included just so folks can fail to read these messages if they so
desire), especially since some on here are a bit sluggish in learning
how to do new things with their computers and are just lucky to find and
keep on finding rec.ponds.
Just pass on by if you see that 'OT' in the subject line and you, along
with the rest of us and rec.ponds, will be just fine.

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
"Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

[Anne Lurie]

Cybe is clearly smarter than I am, to pick up on Sameer's sleazy trick of
changing the "reply to" headers. Will someone please remind me how one
killfiles posts from someone like this? Clearly, this is an example of the
need for doing this.

Anne Lurie
Raleigh, NC

"Cybe R. Wizard" <Cybe_R_Wizard@WizardsTower> wrote >

<Reply To: header re-changed back to rec.ponds instead of cola>

[Snooze]

"Anne Lurie" > wrote in message
.com...
> Cybe is clearly smarter than I am, to pick up on Sameer's sleazy trick of
> changing the "reply to" headers. Will someone please remind me how one
> killfiles posts from someone like this? Clearly, this is an example of
the
> need for doing this.
>
> Anne Lurie
> Raleigh, NC
>

It's not a sleazy trick, especially when I say I'm redirecting the
follow-ups for a particular post to a different newsgroup. In the future,
all you have to do, is look at the headers, for:
Followup-to:

In the previous message you saw this:
From: "Snooze" >
Newsgroups: rec.ponds
Followup-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy

The "From:" line is who posted it, which contains my modified email address.
The "Newsgroups:" line tells what newsgroup it was posted to, and Follow-ups
means, whoever follows up to that particular post will post in the new
newsgroup.

Most newsreader software will warn you that you're posting into a different
newsgroup, incase you didn't notice the follow-up line. A killfile general
blocks entire threads, or posters. If you want to add me to your kill file,
here are the directions for the newsreader you appear to be using: Microsoft
Outlook Newsreader

Click once on the message, go to the message menu, go down to 'block
sender', then you will see no further posts from me.

Sameer

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 01:27:30 GMT
"Snooze" > wrote:

> It's not a sleazy trick, especially when I say I'm redirecting the
> follow-ups for a particular post to a different newsgroup.

I, for one, don't think it was a sleazy trick nor probably intentional
that you /did not/ mention that you were changing the reply to: header.
But, still, you didn't mention it at all, merely said the discussion
belonged there. Here is a quote from your original message:

"This thread needs to end, there are plenty of linux groups that are
better suited to this discussion, for example comp.os.linux.advocacy,
rec.ponds is better suited for ponding."

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
"Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

[Offbreed]

mad > wrote in message >...
> to quote maynard g. krebs: WORK?

<G> Dumb kids these days just give me a funny look when I quote Maynard.

[Offbreed]

"Snooze" > wrote in message >...

> This thread needs to end, there are plenty of linux groups that are better
> suited to this discussion, for example comp.os.linux.advocacy, rec.ponds is
> better suited for ponding.

Ever consider the demographics of who can afford ponds and who would
find ponds to be most relaxing? <G>

(I had not, until I saw the quality of responses to the original
post.)

[mad]

ah well, age kicks a** sometimes. i am in awe of those who have lived more
and know more than i do. someday those same dumb kids will realize...
:-D
mad
--
"We are all born mad. Some remain so."
Irish playwright Samuel Beckett


> From: (Offbreed)

>
>> mad > wrote in message
>> >...

>> to quote maynard g. krebs: WORK?
>
> <G> Dumb kids these days just give me a funny look when I quote Maynard.



-----= 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! =-----

[~ jan JJsPond.us]

>"Snooze" > wrote in message news:
>
>> This thread needs to end, there are plenty of linux groups that are better
>> suited to this discussion, for example comp.os.linux.advocacy, rec.ponds is
>> better suited for ponding.
>
>On 10 Nov 2003 19:46:25 -0800, (Offbreed) wrote:
>Ever consider the demographics of who can afford ponds and who would
>find ponds to be most relaxing? <G>
>
>(I had not, until I saw the quality of responses to the original
>post.)

I agree. Where would rec.ponds be without our computers, we couldn't
cyberpond? Seems to me the conversation is On Topic. Rec.ponds & Computers
go hand in hand, if you asked me. ;o) ~ jan (the pond geek living in a
household with 3 computer *Linux their specialty* geeks.)


See my ponds thru the seasons and/or my filter design:
http://users.owt.com/jjspond/

~Keep 'em Defrosted~
Tri-Cities, WA Zone 7a
To e-mail see website

[Anne Lurie]

"Snooze" > wrote

[snippage hopefully at least close to correct]

> In the previous message you saw this:
> From: "Snooze" >
> Newsgroups: rec.ponds
> Followup-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy

Nope. Since I'm using [the obviously-lacking] Outlook Express for email and
newsgroups, what I saw on your post was "Snooze" to "rec.ponds" re: "OT
Linux". period. And, when I hit "Reply Group", it showed (and still does
show) "rec.ponds" as the recipient of [any email I cared to send] with :
yada-yada-yada OT Linux as the subject.

> The "From:" line is who posted it, which contains my modified email
address.

Nope. Lame-o Outlook Express just ID's you as Snooze.

> The "Newsgroups:" line tells what newsgroup it was posted to,

I wish!!! Good ole OE just says "To: rec.ponds"

>and Follow-ups
means, whoever follows up to that particular post will post in the new
newsgroup.>

Well, if that showed up in not-so-good lame-o Outlook Express, I might have
been able to figure that one out for myself.

I was wrong to talk about killfiling your posts; I apologize. Although
there may come a time when I do need to kill-file newsgroup posts because
they are egregiously offensive -- this thread has not reached that limit.
Again, I apologize for not having my priorities straight.

Also, from now on, I will double-check the "recipients" of any replies,
because it seems that ever-increasing vigilance is in order.

Anne Lurie
Raleigh, NC

[Snooze]

"~ jan JJsPond.us" > wrote in message
...
> >
> I agree. Where would rec.ponds be without our computers, we couldn't
> cyberpond? Seems to me the conversation is On Topic. Rec.ponds & Computers
> go hand in hand, if you asked me. ;o) ~ jan (the pond geek living in a
> household with 3 computer *Linux their specialty* geeks.)

OT threads are fun, but the linux vs windows thread is so old, I find it
truely boring. I started using linux when I was a freshmen in college,
around '93.

Then in '97 I switched to FreeBSD, because the version of gcc/g++ I had at
the time did not support the C++ standard template library. At the time, my
choices were
1: wait a week to download the latest version of slackware over a 14.4 modem
2: spend a week compiling a newer version of gcc so I could upgrade my libc,
so that I could compile the latest version of gcc, then recompile all the
stuff that broke, when I upgraded the libc.
3: install FreeBSD off the cd.

I've been happy with it since, although linux has made a lot of improvements
since then, but I'm lazy, and rewriting and recompiling all of my stuff on a
linux system is too much for marginal gain.

Sameer

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 00:48:29 GMT
"Snooze" > wrote:

> OT threads are fun, but the linux vs windows thread is so old, I find
> it truely boring.

Lots of folks here don't have those years of /technical/ computer
experience. Informed choice should never go out of style. If it bores
one, one may opt out of reading plainly marked OT threads but might
re-think netcopping those who are still involved with freeing the
ability of people to make informed choice.
Boring or not there are serious questions about the Microsoft
organization and its products. These need to be brought to the
attention of computer users if only for their own edification.

Cybe R. Wizard -impressed that Snooze used Linux /before/ the version 1
release!
--
Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
"Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

[jr]

BenignVanilla wrote:
> "john rutz" > wrote in message
> ....
>
> I plan to switch OS's when someone delivers a way for me to harnes my entire
> network. I have 6 or 7 machines always running, and if I could harness all 7
> to compile video, or compile code, I'd switch tomorrow.
>
> BV.
>
>
hmmm do youu mean use linux for the network? I had three puters networked
on suse linux neat thing is suse can even read/copy windows partition

[BenignVanilla]

"jr" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> BenignVanilla wrote:
> > "john rutz" > wrote in message
> > ....
> >
> > I plan to switch OS's when someone delivers a way for me to harnes my
entire
> > network. I have 6 or 7 machines always running, and if I could harness
all 7
> > to compile video, or compile code, I'd switch tomorrow.
> >
> > BV.
> >
> >
> hmmm do youu mean use linux for the network? I had three puters
networked
> on suse linux neat thing is suse can even read/copy windows partition

I design/build client server apps for a living. I have a 100baseT network in
the house, with several servers, and clients so I closely replicate
environments I work in for customers. My frustration, admitedly among
others, is that often my windows machines are just sitting there. If I am
compiling some code, or rendering some home videos, I'd love to be able to
configure all machines on my network to allow ticks to be doled out to other
machines that ask for them. Use the processors.

BV.

[Snooze]

"Cybe R. Wizard" <Cybe_R_Wizard@WizardsTower> wrote in message
news:20031114205707.1ea70fed.Cybe_R_Wizard@Wizards Tower...
>
> Cybe R. Wizard -impressed that Snooze used Linux /before/ the version 1
> release!

Completely unintentionally too! I think I started with 0.99pl?? but i
forget the patch level number. Funny story how I go introduced to linux.

Sameer

[Cybe R. Wizard]

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 08:30:42 GMT
"Snooze" > wrote:

>
> "Cybe R. Wizard" <Cybe_R_Wizard@WizardsTower> wrote in message
> news:20031114205707.1ea70fed.Cybe_R_Wizard@Wizards Tower...
> >
> > Cybe R. Wizard -impressed that Snooze used Linux /before/ the
> > version 1 release!
>
> Completely unintentionally too! I think I started with 0.99pl?? but i
> forget the patch level number. Funny story how I go introduced to
> linux.
>
> Sameer
>
Since this is still OT, share?

Cybe R. Wizard
--
Unofficial "Wizard of Odds," A.H.P.
Original PORG "Water Wizard," R.P.
"Wize(ned) Wizard," A.P.F-P-Y.
Barely Tolerated Wizard, A.J.L & A.A.L

[Offbreed]

"BenignVanilla" > wrote in message >...

> My frustration, admitedly among
> others, is that often my windows machines are just sitting there. If I am
> compiling some code, or rendering some home videos, I'd love to be able to
> configure all machines on my network to allow ticks to be doled out to other
> machines that ask for them. Use the processors.

I just discovered the convenience of removable hard drives. Sure, I
could partition the 40Gig drive, but switching drives *feels* a safer
thing to do. Especially since the last dual boot drive went bad in the
other OS, and the problem ate the one habitually used. Or, so it
seemed at the time.

(smacksmacksmack Backup! smacksmacksmack Backup!!)

Isn't that SETI network software meant for that sort of thing? Haven't
paid much attention to it, but I have not noticed any mention of
"Linux only".

[Snooze]

"Cybe R. Wizard" <Cybe_R_Wizard@WizardsTower> wrote in message
news:20031116095449.3ad685b5.Cybe_R_Wizard@Wizards Tower...
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 08:30:42 GMT
> "Snooze" > wrote:
> >
> > Completely unintentionally too! I think I started with 0.99pl?? but i
> > forget the patch level number. Funny story how I go introduced to
> > linux.
> >
> Since this is still OT, share?
>

Somewhere in the fall of freshmen year or summer post high school
graduation, I got a 540mb hard drive as a replacement for the 40mb hard
drive I had in my 386. At the time I had ms-dos 3.3 installed on the
computer, but dos at the time couldn't access a partition greater then 33mb.
A buddy of mine, had a 486, and a larger hard drive, so I went to his house,
and we copied all of my hard drive to his system using laplink (an all night
task). Afterwards using the linux fdisk, and the format that came with
ms-dos 5.0, we were able to partition the disk into two 220mb partitions.

First we rebuilt the dos side, then my friend showed me this cd, that
installed this program called linux onto the computer. So he installed it
for me. At the time I had never even heard of linux or unix, but since it
was a computer program, and I suddenly had more disk space then I ever knew
what to do with, why not?

Anyways he showed me how to boot into linux or dos using LILO. I went into
linux a few times, but I kept getting stuck in ed or vi, although at the
time I didn't know it was vi. But I knew that hitting control-alt-delete
when I got a screen full of ~ fixed the problem.

At the time I thought linux was a dos program, because all the dos commands
sort of worked. Slowly over time I started to learn how to navigate around
in linux, and learned enough to mess up the install to the point it where
didn't boot. Eventually another friend of mine reinstalled slackware on my
system, and showed me how to do things like recompile the kernel. On a 386,
you start the kernel recompile at breakfast time, and it might be finished
by dinner time.

I think the kernel was around 1.2.x by the time I was familiar with the way
things worked.

Sameer