On Thu, 23 May 2024 00:45:47 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:

> On Thu, 23 May 2024 00:24:04 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
> <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote in <v2m2b3$1dnc0$1@dont-email.me>:
>
>> (Question: does anything from Apple qualify as a “*nix” system in this
>> sense? I think the answer is no.)
>>
> You must have never used a bash or zsh shell on a Mac. It's Unix.
>
> $ uname -a Darwin Mac-Studio.xxx 23.2.0 Darwin Kernel Version 23.2.0:
> Wed Nov 15 21:55:06 PST 2023; root:xnu-10002.61.3~2/RELEASE_ARM64_T6020
> arm64

Where does it say that, again?

On Thu, 23 May 2024 00:26:59 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On 22 May 2024 14:35:51 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 22 May 2024 07:42:14 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> Note one thing: AI Studio requires WSL2 to be installed!
>>
>> Without looking into it I assume it runs in Docker.
>
> No. Microsoft gave up on Docker for Windows a long time ago. On Windows,
> the Linux kernel is virtualized under Hyper-V.

It's a long way around the barn but if you set up Docker Desktop on
Windows it looks for the WSL instance to actually run the container.

> That, too, is something that could go away: just use the KVM facility
> built into Linux to virtualize Windows instead.

We have clients who are fully committed to Windows Server and use Stratus
everRun HA systems. Go poking around and all the shiny Windows VMs are
running on RHEL and KVM. At one time they used Xen but I think the
switchover was a Red Hat decision, not theirs.

https://www.linux.com/news/kvm-or-xen-choosing-virtualization-platform/

On Wed, 22 May 2024 18:16:21 -0400, Joel wrote:

> M$ replacing their kernel
> with the Linux kernel would do NOTHING. You don't know anything.
> Windows' kernel is no less sleek than Linux. The bloat is all on top.

Is this like that joke about how, inside a fat person, there is a thin one
screaming to get out?

To which June Whitfield in “Absolutely Fabulous” uttered the immortal
riposte:

“Just the one, dear?”

There is no longer any clear separation between the Windows “kernel” and
all the other crap. It’s all an irretrievable mess now, better abandoned
and replaced with something cleaner and more modern. Like Linux.

On 2024-05-22, Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote:
> RonB wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On 2024-05-22, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>> I suppose you’ve heard the big news about Microsoft’s new range of
>>> “Copilot+” PCs. These include an onboard NPU capable of at least 40
>>> trillion operations per second.
>>>
>>> The platform for developing applications for these machines was unveiled
>>> last year
>>><https://www.theregister.com/2023/12/14/windows_ai_studio_preview/>.
>>>
>>> Note one thing: AI Studio requires WSL2 to be installed!
>>>
>>> It was clear to me, from the beginning when WSL2 was introduced, that once
>>> a Linux kernel was introduced into a Windows install, it was going to make
>>> itself more and more indispensable, one way or another, until it
>>> eventually took over completely.
>>>
>>> This is I think another step on that road.
>>
>> Interesting, I didn't know that. My wife currently loves using AI on her
>> computer — hopefully that will wear off with time. I didn't realize that she
>> needed Linux to do it.
>>
>> I, personally, don't want any part of AI.
>
> Indeed. You get stuff like this:
>
> https://imgur.com/gallery/someone-swapped-out-jesus-s-face-with-charles-manson-s-i-knew-exactly-where-to-put-9V0t7Fu

Has Google ever gone back to allowing people to use their AI for drawing
people? I remember it was almost impossible to bypass "inclusivity" (which
meant no white people possible) a couple months ago. (So they blocked the
feature "temporarily.") It was weird seeing black and Asian Nazis and
Vikings.

--
[Self-centered, Woke] "pride is a life of self-destructive fakery, an
entrapment to a false and self-created matrix of twisted unreality."
"It was pride that changed angels into devils..." — St. Augustine

On 2024-05-22, candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> wrote:
> RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com> wrote at 11:12 this Wednesday (GMT):
>> On 2024-05-22, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>> I suppose you’ve heard the big news about Microsoft’s new range of
>>> “Copilot+” PCs. These include an onboard NPU capable of at least 40
>>> trillion operations per second.
>>>
>>> The platform for developing applications for these machines was unveiled
>>> last year
>>><https://www.theregister.com/2023/12/14/windows_ai_studio_preview/>.
>>>
>>> Note one thing: AI Studio requires WSL2 to be installed!
>>>
>>> It was clear to me, from the beginning when WSL2 was introduced, that once
>>> a Linux kernel was introduced into a Windows install, it was going to make
>>> itself more and more indispensable, one way or another, until it
>>> eventually took over completely.
>>>
>>> This is I think another step on that road.
>>
>> Interesting, I didn't know that. My wife currently loves using AI on her
>> computer — hopefully that will wear off with time. I didn't realize that she
>> needed Linux to do it.
>>
>> I, personally, don't want any part of AI.
>
>
> I'm tired of it being everywhere.

Me too.

--
[Self-centered, Woke] "pride is a life of self-destructive fakery, an
entrapment to a false and self-created matrix of twisted unreality."
"It was pride that changed angels into devils..." — St. Augustine

On Thu, 23 May 2024 00:45:47 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:

> "Unix" or "a Unix" are perfectly acceptable descriptions of POSIX
> operating systems.

I forget what *nix was on the PDP-11 when I was at Orion. It was prior to
the ATT breakup so it was something that fell off the back of a truck. I
don't know about the rest of the country but that happened frequently in
the Boston area.

On 2024-05-22, Diego Garcia <dg@chaos.rocks> wrote:
> On Wed, 22 May 2024 16:25:09 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>
>>>
>>> I, personally, don't want any part of AI.
>>
>>
>> I'm tired of it being everywhere.
>>
>
> You don't consider the legions of brain-dead secretaries, office workers,
> and middle managers, who populate the global corps both big and small,
> that will be titillated to no end with this "fascinating" new AI fad.

They'll get disillusioned with it when AI replaces them. Most letters
(emails) written from corporations are already boilerplate and usually don't
deal with the actual subject anyhow.

> These retards are Microslop's bread and butter and they must keep them
> entranced.
>
> Thank the gods for GNU/Linux. It is truly the savior of truly intelligent
> people.
>
> But it won't be long before Ubuntu and its ilk begin to imitate Microslop.
>
> Fuck Ubuntu and its fucking ilk!

--
[Self-centered, Woke] "pride is a life of self-destructive fakery, an
entrapment to a false and self-created matrix of twisted unreality."
"It was pride that changed angels into devils..." — St. Augustine

On 23 May 2024 01:40:04 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> We have clients who are fully committed to Windows Server ...

Have they been keeping an eye on Microsoft’s (on-prem) Windows Server
roadmap? I don’t think it’s looking good.

On 23 May 2024 01:59:24 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> ... was something that fell off the back of a
> truck. I don't know about the rest of the country but that happened
> frequently in the Boston area.

Bumpy roads?

(Sorry, couldn’t resist.)

On Thu, 23 May 2024 01:38:21 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
<ldo@nz.invalid> wrote in <v2m6mc$1e6e8$2@dont-email.me>:

> On Thu, 23 May 2024 00:45:47 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 23 May 2024 00:24:04 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
>> <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote in <v2m2b3$1dnc0$1@dont-email.me>:
>>
>>> (Question: does anything from Apple qualify as a “*nix” system in this
>>> sense? I think the answer is no.)
>>>
>> You must have never used a bash or zsh shell on a Mac. It's Unix.
>>
>> $ uname -a Darwin Mac-Studio.xxx 23.2.0 Darwin Kernel Version 23.2.0:
>> Wed Nov 15 21:55:06 PST 2023; root:xnu-10002.61.3~2/RELEASE_ARM64_T6020
>> arm64
>
> Where does it say that, again?

On the Mac Studio I bought for my wife.

Kind of a cross between a Mac Mini and a Mac Pro.

https://www.apple.com/mac-studio/

$ bash --version
GNU bash, version 3.2.57(1)-release (arm64-apple-darwin23)
Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.

"darwin" is the FreeBSD version that runs on Macs.

--
-v

On Thu, 23 May 2024 03:50:02 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:

> $ bash --version GNU bash, version 3.2.57(1)-release
> (arm64-apple-darwin23) Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>
> "darwin" is the FreeBSD version that runs on Macs.

Where does it say it is “Unix”, again?

On Thu, 23 May 2024 03:57:33 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
<ldo@nz.invalid> wrote in <v2merd$1ja60$1@dont-email.me>:

> On Thu, 23 May 2024 03:50:02 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:
>
>> $ bash --version GNU bash, version 3.2.57(1)-release
>> (arm64-apple-darwin23) Copyright (C) 2007 Free Software Foundation,
>> Inc.
>>
>> "darwin" is the FreeBSD version that runs on Macs.
>
> Where does it say it is “Unix”, again?

I'm not going to get drawn into an argument for
the sake of arguing -- if you don't think FreeBSD
is Unix, that's fine, have fun with that.

Peace out.

--
-v

On Thu, 23 May 2024 03:05:31 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On 23 May 2024 01:40:04 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> We have clients who are fully committed to Windows Server ...
>
> Have they been keeping an eye on Microsoft’s (on-prem) Windows Server
> roadmap? I don’t think it’s looking good.

Yeah, interesting times ahead. Even better, because of the nature of some
of the information it can't be just any old cloud server.

On Thu, 23 May 2024 04:33:21 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:

> I'm not going to get drawn into an argument for the sake of arguing --
> if you don't think FreeBSD is Unix, that's fine, have fun with that.

Apple is not even FreeBSD. FreeBSD can compile *nix stuff, Apple can’t.

E.g. from the Blender build script:

if(UNIX AND NOT APPLE)
include(platform_unix)
elseif(WIN32)
include(platform_win32)
elseif(APPLE)
include(platform_apple)
endif()

On Thu, 23 May 2024 03:06:49 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> On 23 May 2024 01:59:24 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> ... was something that fell off the back of a truck. I don't know about
>> the rest of the country but that happened frequently in the Boston
>> area.
>
> Bumpy roads?

Lots of pot holes... DEC did a lot of product placement in the local
universities and genuine (tm) Unix was available to academic institutions.
Somehow it sort of snuck out of the ivy covered walls.

I don't think ATT really gave a damn. They had much bigger problems than
OS bootlegs as the anti-monopoly crew closed in.

On Thu, 23 May 2024 04:46:32 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro
<ldo@nz.invalid> wrote in <v2mhn8$1jofr$1@dont-email.me>:

> On Thu, 23 May 2024 04:33:21 -0000 (UTC), vallor wrote:
>
>> I'm not going to get drawn into an argument for the sake of arguing --
>> if you don't think FreeBSD is Unix, that's fine, have fun with that.
>
> Apple is not even FreeBSD. FreeBSD can compile *nix stuff, Apple can’t.
>
> E.g. from the Blender build script:
>
> if(UNIX AND NOT APPLE)
> include(platform_unix)
> elseif(WIN32)
> include(platform_win32)
> elseif(APPLE)
> include(platform_apple)
> endif()

XNU stands for "X is Not Unix" -- so sure, it's "not Unix", just
like "GNU's Not Unix" -- but a hybrid of FreeBSD running on the Mach
microkernel.

https://github.com/apple/darwin-xnu

--
-v

On 23 May 2024 04:53:39 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> I don't think ATT really gave a damn. They had much bigger problems than
> OS bootlegs as the anti-monopoly crew closed in.

Certainly Unix became a big money-earner for them after divestment.

But even before then, they did proprietary things like removing the
classroom-use permission in 7th-Edition Unix.

On Wed, 22 May 2024 21:49:33 +0000, Tyrone <none@none.none> wrote:

>On May 22, 2024 at 4:30:38?PM EDT, "DFS" <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/22/2024 11:07 AM, Tyrone wrote:
>>
>>
>>> This makes me think that Windows is FINALLY going to be Unix (Linux) based.
>>
>> Keep hope alive!
>
>I'm not hoping for anything. I really don't care. I have personally given up
>on Windows.
>
>But for Windows to have any future at all, it needs to become Unix. Because
>the rest of the world IS Unix. MS can't remain on (shrinking) Windows Island
>forever.
>
>That one needs to have Linux installed on Windows via WSL to do ANY "AI" dev
>work is a very large admission by MS that Windows is - indeed - a hopeless,
>outdated mess.
>
>Apple did it, in one of the smoothest OS transitions ever. Then they moved
>from Power PC to Intel and then to Arm. And they now have an astonishing
>range of products all running on Unix, which are all forks of MacOS Unix.
>None of that would have been possible with the original MacOS. Because Unix
>is portable and scalable. Old MacOS was not, and neither is Old Windows.
>
>One would think that "The World's Largest Software Company" can manage it.

There is no benefit to a corporation looking to have a monopoly to use
UNIX. Microsoft will hold onto the Windows core for as long as they
can, and if they replace it, they will likely do so with a rewritten
Windows core.

On May 23, 2024 at 7:58:35 AM EDT, "Andrzej Matuch" <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:

> There is no benefit to a corporation looking to have a monopoly to use
> UNIX. Microsoft will hold onto the Windows core for as long as they
> can, and if they replace it, they will likely do so with a rewritten
> Windows core.

Microsoft has no monopoly. On anything. It is to their benefit to retire
Windows. Windows usage is shrinking, and has been for the last 14 years.
Monopolies don't go from 95% of the market to 70%.

On Thu, 23 May 2024 13:38:15 +0000, Tyrone <none@none.none> wrote:

>On May 23, 2024 at 7:58:35?AM EDT, "Andrzej Matuch" <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>
>> There is no benefit to a corporation looking to have a monopoly to use
>> UNIX. Microsoft will hold onto the Windows core for as long as they
>> can, and if they replace it, they will likely do so with a rewritten
>> Windows core.
>
>Microsoft has no monopoly.

You disregarded my use of "looking to have a."

>On anything. It is to their benefit to retire
>Windows.

Because they're allergic to money and would benefit from offering a
system which would have to compete on an equal competitive field? I
don't believe you understand how business works.

> Windows usage is shrinking, and has been for the last 14 years.
>Monopolies don't go from 95% of the market to 70%.

It didn't shrink because Linux is getting better for the average user;
it's shrinking because Chromebooks have become acceptable for the
low-end user and Macs have become excellent for the high-end user
interested in manipulating media. Those holding onto Windows are
gamers and business users who realize that Microsoft caters to them
specifically with the operating system and the office suite. Only a
fool would think that Linux is going to overtake the desktop anytime
soon. The best you can hope for is that the average user will be
teerrified at what AI and the features Microsoft is looking to sell on
the desktop, and actively seeks out an alternative. Even then, the
alternative is likely to go the one offered by Apple, not Linux.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

>> It's ghey ...
>
>Is “ghey” supposed to be bad? Please explain.

It's, theoretically at least, a polite way of using "gay" to mean
"lame", but without spelling it the same, thus recognizing that using
"gay" that way is offensive.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Tyrone <none@none.none> wrote:
>On May 23, 2024 at 7:58:35?AM EDT, "Andrzej Matuch" <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>
>> There is no benefit to a corporation looking to have a monopoly to use
>> UNIX. Microsoft will hold onto the Windows core for as long as they
>> can, and if they replace it, they will likely do so with a rewritten
>> Windows core.
>
>Microsoft has no monopoly. On anything. It is to their benefit to retire
>Windows. Windows usage is shrinking, and has been for the last 14 years.
>Monopolies don't go from 95% of the market to 70%.

Windows is a *type of* monopoly, in that only M$ controls it, but it
is used as a general OS. But macOS isn't really less so, it just
isn't seen as a "monopoly" because of lower market share, but what's
the difference? It's a proprietary OS. I can't run native Mac
software without a Mac, unless I have some kind of emulation scheme.
But I would argue, given the choices people do indeed have, there
isn't any one "monopoly" among OSes. Each one individually could be a
type of monopoly, but no one's forcing anyone to use any of them.
Particularly thanks to the open source community (hail Stallman and
Torvalds, etc.), we have a choice that truly is free in price and
freedom.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On May 23, 2024 at 3:19:39 PM EDT, "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:

> Windows is a *type of* monopoly, in that only M$ controls it, but it
> is used as a general OS.

There is no such thing as "a type of monopoly". Either you are or you are
not. The legal definition is very clear.

You can't have a monopoly on your own product. If that were the case then
Harley Davidson has a "monopoly" on Sportsters and McDonalds has a "monopoly"
on Big Macs.

But that's not how it works. Monopolies exist is markets. Not products. There
is plenty of competition in motorcycles and hamburgers. Apple can not have a
"monopoly" on iPhones for the same reason.

> But macOS isn't really less so, it just
> isn't seen as a "monopoly" because of lower market share, but what's
> the difference? It's a proprietary OS. I can't run native Mac
> software without a Mac, unless I have some kind of emulation scheme.

You can't run native Linux software without Linux either, unless you have some
kind of emulation scheme. Is Linux a "monopoly"?

Proprietary has nothing to do with being a monopoly. Monopoly means you have
97% of the market and are actively buying up/shutting down competitors.

Having a successful product does not make you a monopoly. Hell, people are
trying to claim that Apple is a monopoly with 25% of the phone market! That
is impossible. There is TONS of competition in the phone market.

Hint: U.S. anti-trust laws are in place to protect consumers. Not competitors.
Epic Games and Spotify whining about Apple means nothing. No one is forcing
either to support Apple. If you don't like the terms of the contracts you sign
with Apple, then you are free to tell Apple to Fuck Off and not sign the
contracts.

If enough companies did this, Apple might change their ways. But whining to
lawyers is going to go nowhere. As the judge in the Apple/Epic case famously
said, "Being successful is not against the law".

On 2024-05-23 5:51 p.m., Tyrone wrote:
> On May 23, 2024 at 3:19:39 PM EDT, "Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Windows is a *type of* monopoly, in that only M$ controls it, but it
>> is used as a general OS.
>
> There is no such thing as "a type of monopoly". Either you are or you are
> not. The legal definition is very clear.
>
> You can't have a monopoly on your own product. If that were the case then
> Harley Davidson has a "monopoly" on Sportsters and McDonalds has a "monopoly"
> on Big Macs.
>
> But that's not how it works. Monopolies exist is markets. Not products. There
> is plenty of competition in motorcycles and hamburgers. Apple can not have a
> "monopoly" on iPhones for the same reason.

For what it's worth, I'm probably part of the minority which actually
liked Windows Phones. It lacked decent music playing software, but using
it was rather nice before my in-call mic died.

>> But macOS isn't really less so, it just
>> isn't seen as a "monopoly" because of lower market share, but what's
>> the difference? It's a proprietary OS. I can't run native Mac
>> software without a Mac, unless I have some kind of emulation scheme.
>
> You can't run native Linux software without Linux either, unless you have some
> kind of emulation scheme. Is Linux a "monopoly"?
>
> Proprietary has nothing to do with being a monopoly. Monopoly means you have
> 97% of the market and are actively buying up/shutting down competitors.

This is something Microsoft was actively doing in the late 90s. It is
still buying up game studios and smaller software companies, so it
hasn't changed all that much.

> Having a successful product does not make you a monopoly. Hell, people are
> trying to claim that Apple is a monopoly with 25% of the phone market! That
> is impossible. There is TONS of competition in the phone market.
>
> Hint: U.S. anti-trust laws are in place to protect consumers. Not competitors.
> Epic Games and Spotify whining about Apple means nothing. No one is forcing
> either to support Apple. If you don't like the terms of the contracts you sign
> with Apple, then you are free to tell Apple to Fuck Off and not sign the
> contracts.
>
> If enough companies did this, Apple might change their ways. But whining to
> lawyers is going to go nowhere. As the judge in the Apple/Epic case famously
> said, "Being successful is not against the law".

Spotify can whine all that it wants but both Apple Music and YouTube
Music has better offerings. Apple gives you the best interface and sound
quality whereas YouTube Music offers the added benefit of blocking ads
on YouTube.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
TG: @AndrzejMatuch
Catholic, paleoconservative, Christ is king.

On Thu, 23 May 2024 07:58:35 -0400, Andrzej Matuch wrote:

> Microsoft will hold onto the Windows core for as long as they can,
> and if they replace it, they will likely do so with a rewritten Windows
> core.

The replacement wouldn’t work, because they couldn’t guarantee full bug-
for-bug compatibility with the current code.

The only way out is the path of least resistance: delegate more and more
functionality to the Linux kernel in WSL2. Let the original Windows kernel
simply wither away. This will happen incrementally, not all at once.

Does this sound like a wise plan to you? Doesn’t matter whether the answer
is “yes” or “no”: it is simply a continuation of the trend of short-
sighted decisions, taken for immediate profit, that have led Windows
development to the point where it is today, and will continue to lead it
forward into the future.