Linux-Advocacy Digest #190, Volume #30 Sun, 12 Nov 00 12:13:09 EST
Contents:
Re: NT/2000 true multiuser? ("Bill Crocker")
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (.)
Re: The Sixth Sense ("PLZI")
Re: Aaron R. Kulkis - Who is this guy? (A transfinite number of monkeys)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Russ Lyttle)
Re: NT/2000 true multiuser? (A transfinite number of monkeys)
Re: OS stability (sfcybear)
Re: OS stability (sfcybear)
Re: Is there any limitation to the numbers of opening files? thanks (mlw)
Re: NT/2000 true multiuser? (Russ Lyttle)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Craig Kelley)
Re: OS stability (sfcybear)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ("PLZI")
Re: NT/2000 true multiuser? (Russ Lyttle)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! ("Christopher Smith")
Side by side (sfcybear)
Re: Can you love a platform without being a bigot? (Tim Tyler)
Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum (Mike Kenzie)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... ("Bruce Schuck")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Bill Crocker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NT/2000 true multiuser?
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 15:31:23 GMT
>From what I read recently, yes, it is a true multi-user OS! Hackers in
Russia are able to use Microsoft's very own servers, at the same time
Microsoft is using them!
Sad!
Bill Crocker
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8ujtov$7en$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Is Windows NT/2000 a true multiuser environment? My impression is that
> it is not. Comments?
>
> sjfromm
>
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: 12 Nov 2000 15:42:33 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Had you been following the thread, you would've seen several claims
>> that ext2 is good for this, good for that, etc. I'm merely pointing
>> out ext2's weakness, or rather shortcomings:
>>
>> - No journaling
> Journaling is bad for databases: they already journal, so you're
> doing twice as much work (unless you're just talking about
> meta-journaling, which doesn't guarantee any data at all).
Chad is one of those people who pretends that he knows whats going on,
and will post all about whats going on until someone notices that what
hes actually doing is lying.
Chad has no DB experience.
=====.
------------------------------
From: "PLZI" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Sixth Sense
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 15:43:49 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> PLZI wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > <delurk>
> >
> > > Why does Microsoft need 3rd party software for full remote
administration?
> > > Hmmmmmmmmmmmm?
> >
> > Please define "full remote administration"? On Terminal Server Client,
you
> > get the server console. TSC is a part of W2K server. You get two
concurrent
> > licenses.
>
> Two concurrent licenses?
>
> THAT'S IT?
Now please tell me, in how many places can you be, concurrently? This means
that you can have two server-side sessions PER SERVER.
> In unix, I can have remote xterms logged into the administration account
> on 15 machines simultaneously...and 14 other admins ALSO remote logged
> into each of these 15 machines...
You're playing a very interesting game called "who's doing what". 15 persons
administering one server? All of them at the SAME TIME? You must be joking.
What do they do? In my days with the Big Blue, MVS, DOS, VM/S, JES2/3, TSO
and all that, we got along with three admins - and back in those days we
still Had To Do Something (tm). Those print jobs needed administering,
printers needed different paper and tape drives had to be loaded - and there
was a few hunderd square meters of space, littered with Iron. Not to mention
the file system, which requires you to reserve space manually.
TSC is not the ONLY way to administer W2K from far away. There is a bunch of
things that I personally would like NOT to do from console, and W2K gives you
the possibility of doing that. Anything with a MMC console can me done from
another machines MMC. Without a "real" or "remote" console of the machine in
question.
> And not one red cent in licensing fees.
> In fact, you can even do it from an Amiga...or a windows box...or even
> an IBM mainframe.
> NO extra costs needed.
But of course. If you by the way happen to have that all-free SSH client fot
OS/370, let me have a copy. Or for MVS, that will do also. I'll be more than
glad to have a tape copy. Telnet, of course, is never an option. Too
unsecure.
> > So, if I see the server console before me, what am I missing
from
> > "full remote administration"?
>
> See above.
The ability of letting ten other people use the server console exactly at the
same time? Right, that's really what I call "crippled". There is only one of
me, and all the other admins can use the two remote desks when I'm not using
them. And yes, they keep their state, so I can hand my desk over to someone
else.
I am yet to see the situation where there would be so much administration
work to be done, in ANY OS, that it woud require three peolpe on one machine,
at the same time. But hey, I've only been around computers from mid-80's, so
what do I know.
And still- if you do not CARE about the licensing, you can install the
Application Mode of the TSE - but then again, that would of course be illegal
without the actual license.
> > And of course, the answer to your question is: There is no "why". It does
not
> > need it.
>
> Sure. Computer's don't need administration?
If your computers need more than too people at once actively administering
them, then there is somenthing very wrong with your computer, or with
yourselves.
> You've been smokin' some pretty hard crack, haven't you?
No, I'm just getting old. And lazy.
> > Yes, there are remote admin software packages available for
W2K. For
> > example, TSC does not have inbuilt scripting language of it's own (like
for
> > example the NetSupport has), but this is besides the point- TSC is an
> Really?
Really.
> Not having an inbuilt scripting language is "beside the point"
>
> Evidently, you'd prefer to do the same repetitive series of
point-click-point-click-point-click.....
> 45 times over...rather than write a short script that does the same
operation
> 45 times for you.
Ah. But there you of course understood me wrong. I was talking about internal
scripting of the remote package - not the scripting per se. You can automate
anything with the WSH. Ah, by the way. Let's see you do something interesting
with your favourite *nix, again. Did this one for fun:
Let's say that there is an Older Lady (tm), who's job is to follow the
accounts of a given ISP. She knows how to use Excel and Word, but that's
about it. Now, let us assume that the billing records are stored in a Oracle
db somewhere, and the ISP's dial-up uses radius and a LDAP directory for user
accounts.
Took two hours to make an Excel sheet, which populates it's data through ADO
from the oracle, and uses ADSI for managing the records in LDAP. So what you
get? An excel sheet, from which the Older Lady can easily check the current
balance of user's accounts, make changes in the user database, and even
disable/enable accounts if the user fails to pay his/her bills.
All in one excel sheet. The older lady has to know absolutely nothing about
anything else. She opens the sheet, sees the billing data, and has nice
little buttons to make changes to user accounts.
Now, how would you do this in any other environment? Of course all above can
be built in Word, Powerpoint or Access, or it may be ported onto series of
CLI scripts, or hey, the same code may be put into web page - let's have an
intranet interface. In minutes.
All right, now go and do the same in emacs, tex, bash and apache. With the
same objects, with the same code.
> In other words...if you believe the lack of scripting language is
> NOT a deficiency...than you're a Shit-for-brains, First Class
You definetely know nothing about windows. See above.
>
> > your favourite *nix have one, shared, consistent clipboard?
>
> Who cares? Clipboards are for weenies.
Right. And user-friedliness is just another word.
> > Can you select a file, picture (say, from your web
> > browser) or text from you remote desk, and copy/paste it into the local
> > machine? Or vice versa?
>
> For anything that I do administratively...yep.
Somehow I do not believe you, having a HP-UX (awww he's a cutie, and my very
own big HP to hold and have) and a Solaris 7 with CDE here. Latter is an Axil
clone, but it get's the work done. Sorta.
> Of course....distributing pictures to a large number of machines is best
> done by scripting, not cut and paste.
I like to have versioning and authoring process with mine, so of course with
scripting, but distribution is made through webDAV. Using ftp is not secure,
and NFS clients are not always available. OTOH, DAV end are available for a
number of web servers, including apache and i-planet. And I get version
control, and a publishing process.
> This is why Windows is still playing catchup to the rest of the industry.
Oh that is so true. It's a niche OS, there are only few of them around. What
monopoly?
> http://directedfire.com/greatgungiveaway/directedfire.referrer.fcgi?2632
>
>
> H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
BTW, what the hell is wrong with your .sig? Started using usenet like month
ago? Four lines is the accepted standard, if I recall.
- PLZI
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (A transfinite number of monkeys)
Subject: Re: Aaron R. Kulkis - Who is this guy?
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 15:52:09 GMT
On Sun, 12 Nov 2000 02:58:11 -0500, Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: My mistake
:
: 15 credit hours of calculus.
: 5 credit hours of differential equations
: (best summed up as calculus by ESP)
What on earth are you blithering about? The term "differential calculus"
is used to describe the process of taking derivatives of functions in the
real and/or complex fields. Likewise, the process of integration is
referred to as "integral calculus". You spent 5 hours of time learning
how to take derivatives??? Perhaps you mean real analysis? Or maybe
vector calculus?
--
Jason Costomiris <>< | Technologist, geek, human.
jcostom {at} jasons {dot} org | http://www.jasons.org/
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
------------------------------
From: Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 15:55:35 GMT
Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> > As far as problems with Windows go, well *starts snickering*, I probably
> > shouldn't even go there. I'll just say that's it's included two full
> > re-installs of 98 SE for various reasons, replacing a CMOS battery after
> > 2000 fried it, and my NT loader miraculously corrupting after installing
> > 2000 again. Oh, and a format of the 98/2000 drive from the NT Loader
> > crash, which is why I'm glad I didn't let Mandrake near that drive. And
> > total cost of my Linux CD's: about $3 (one CD each for 6.1 and 7.0, and
> > 2 CD's for 7.2) And by the way, keep going and you might be in the
> > running for my dumbass plonk of the year award. :)
>
> Ummm....CMOS battery...fried by an OS....
>
> (clearing throat)
>
> PLONK!
>
> --
> Registered Linux User #194021
It is possible. New computers are all still drawing power as long as
they are plugged in. There are hardware functions still running even if
the system appears to be turned off. It is possible that the OS set up
hardware to keep doing some task (Network card trying to tell the
network the computer is connected but off?). If the OS starts some
hardware, then the hardware reverts to battery when main power is off,
the battery will fry. Rechargables will discharg, reverse polarity, and
get things all screwed up. CMOS batteries weren't designed for the kinds
of loads they pull now.
--
Russ Lyttle, PE
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (A transfinite number of monkeys)
Subject: Re: NT/2000 true multiuser?
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 15:58:11 GMT
On Sat, 11 Nov 2000 19:36:16 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Yes, of course they do. The one problem with telnet on NT4 though is that
: only the user logged into the console's user.dat registry hive is loaded (or
: whoever is logged in first). I think there are some versions of commercial
: telnetd for NT that solve this problem though. Also, Win2k doesn't have the
: problem either.
Of course, this now begs the question.. What is there for these people to
DO once they've managed to telnet to a Win2k server? Start/Stop services?
--
Jason Costomiris <>< | Technologist, geek, human.
jcostom {at} jasons {dot} org | http://www.jasons.org/
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS stability
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 15:53:19 GMT
In article <8um7ea$r2m$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Stuart Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <8um3k5$onk$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In article <ColP5.7666$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > >
> > > I suppose you don't change the oil in your car either. The whole
> Oil
> > > Changing thing is a ruse designed to sell more oil and is
completely
> > > unneccesary. Right?
> >
> > I don't have oil in my computer! I don't have ANYTHING that REQUIRES
> > regular changing. Please povide documented evidance were a computer
> > manufacture recomends changing ANYTHING the way car manufactures
> > recomend changing OIL!
> >
> > Your loosing it franky!
> >
>
> Whoosh!
>
> What was that?
>
> Just another analogy shooting over Matt's head...
What's this, Showing the flaw in someones thinking, wait thinking,
Hmmmm. I quess this will all be lost on you.
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS stability
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 15:57:13 GMT
In article <qklP5.7665$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:yw1P5.18333$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:h0XO5.7562$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > Sorry, but I would *MUCH* rather take a server down for regular
> *HARDWARE*
> > > maintenance every so often, than risk a spontaneous failure, which
will
> > > leave my site unavailable and losses of data since the last
backup.
> >
> > Do you have to polish up those disk platters once in a while or
what? I
> > just copy things over to a new machine every 4 or 5 years.
>
> Hardware failure in PC components is in excess of 10% a year. If you
have
> 100 machines, 10 of them *WILL* fail within a year. You can either
scramble
> to fix a dead machine after a failure, or you can be proactive and
monitor
> the machine for potential failures before they do. Most components
will
> show signs of impending failure. Power supplies begin to have erratic
> voltage levels. Hard disks begin to get CRC errors. CPU's begin to
make
> calcuation errors. Memory will occasionally return incorrect bits.
> Diagnostic programs and hardware tools can identify many of these
failures
> before they happen.
>
> The cost of maintenance is miniscule compared to the cost of
unexpected
> downtime.
That is, IF you find the hardware that is going to fail!!!! Still, I you
have not shown anything that supports your claim of a 10% hardware
failure rate OR that you would be able to FIND that failure in advance
with maintenace. Besides, a well planned reduntant system would be able
to handle a hardware failure in stride.
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.groupware.lotus-notes.admin,comp.groupware.lotus-notes.misc,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Is there any limitation to the numbers of opening files? thanks
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 11:12:49 -0500
"David .." wrote:
>
> mlw wrote:
> >
>
> > The per process limitation requires a complete system rebuild, so don't
> > even bother. The current limit is AFAIK 1000. (probably 1024) This is
> > because of routines like "fdset" which must have prior knowledge of a
> > limit.
>
> I may be wrong but I thought it was just a kernel compile with a couple
> of tweaks to the source?
Oh, sure that works for the kernel, but the C library must be recompiled
as well, and of course all the applications which use routines like
"fdset" which allocate a some memory based on the number of files
available to a process.
>
> --
> Confucius say: He who play in root, eventually kill tree.
> Registered with the Linux Counter. http://counter.li.org
> ID # 123538
> Completed more work units than: 98.797% of seti users +/- 0.01%.
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NT/2000 true multiuser?
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 16:14:59 GMT
The Great Suprendo wrote:
>
> A certain Aaron R. Kulkis, of comp.os.linux.advocacy "fame", writes :
>
> >Translation . Lose2k "Professional" is deliberately crippled.
> >
> >What else would you expect from Microshaft?
>
> "Crippled" is the wrong word. It is "crippled" in the sense that only
> ten users can connect to shares on it at once. But would a user
> workstation want to share files out to more than ten users ? It's no
> more "crippled" than linux is if you recompile the kernel so that you
> can use a small PC as a router booted off a floppy.
>
It is crippled if the limit is artificial for "trial" or "licensing"
version vs. a "full" version. Is the limit artificial? If someone sold a
system based on a Linux build that did not support full Linux
capabilities and then tried to charge you for a version that did, you
could rightly claim that the specific build was crippled.
I have a combat simulation game. It does combined arms simulation. There
are a minimum of 50 players per army plus referees. All red army need
constant access to all red army shares, all blue army need constant
access to all blue army shares, all referees need constant access to all
shares. What would I need in W2K to port that system. The target will be
older laptops for users, older desktops for servers. Stripped down
RedHat 6.0 works fine in all positions now.
> The different versions of W2K server are like different distributions of
> Linux. There are two different distributions for SuSE for example. They
> are just aimed at different classes of user and machine. You wouldn't
> try to argue that SuSE Linux 7.0 Personal was a "crippled" version of
> the Professional edition, would you ?
>
> --
>
> ROAR UP MY TWAT!!!
--
Russ Lyttle, PE
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 12 Nov 2000 09:15:55 -0700
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[snip]
> > > And you're blaiming your incompetent computer dept. operators on Exchange?
> > > They didn't do good backups, and now it's Exchange's fault?
> >
> > Perhaps if Windows had a concept of a home drive, and the server
> > stored all their information in their own home space, then one bug
> > wouldn't take down everyone's mail/calendar/task lists.
>
> What does a home drive have to do with mail? Home drive is where you store
> your documents and settings (yes, Windows has had this for quite some time)
> but storing everyone's email, etc in different places would severly impact
> performance.
Yep, that's the faulty reasoing I was talking about.
> > It is a bug in Exchange, if you ask me
>
> Exchange does more than just email. Besides, where does sendmail keep it's
> mail before the client downloads it? In each person's home drive? No, of
> course not it keeps it in a central mail store until the user downloads
> it via POP3 or IMAP
Sendmail keeps all user's inbox information in a separate file, owned
by each individual user. Qmail (another popular SMTP server for UNIX)
stores these files in a user's home drive as well. Any user can copy
their inbox with simple filesystem utilities
(/var/spool/mail/username).
The point is, putting all your eggs in one basket is stupid -- One
little glitch takes out mail/calendar/etc./etc. for everyone instead
of just one person.
> > -- and it speaks volumes for how people in Redmond think.
>
> Not really, it speaks volumes to your ignorance.
Uh-huh.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OS stability
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 16:09:50 GMT
You claim that REGULAR maintenance is the reason for the poor uptime
performanc of W2K, Then you do you explain this?
http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=www.bn.com
A daily hardware maintenance schedule???
Shure haven't seen anything as bad as this from Linux or Unix.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "PLZI" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 16:22:10 GMT
"Russ Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Registered Linux User #194021
> It is possible. New computers are all still drawing power as long as
> they are plugged in. There are hardware functions still running even if
> the system appears to be turned off. It is possible that the OS set up
> hardware to keep doing some task (Network card trying to tell the
> network the computer is connected but off?). If the OS starts some
> hardware, then the hardware reverts to battery when main power is off,
> the battery will fry. Rechargables will discharg, reverse polarity, and
> get things all screwed up. CMOS batteries weren't designed for the kinds
> of loads they pull now.
This of course would be the case, IF the the current from tha battery could
be drawn anywhere in the machine, instead of the CMOS ram chip. Which is not
the case. Any battery-backup cmos reference circuit diagram will tell you
why.
- PLZI
------------------------------
From: Russ Lyttle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: NT/2000 true multiuser?
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 16:24:34 GMT
The Great Suprendo wrote:
>
> A certain Pete Goodwin, of comp.os.linux.advocacy "fame", writes :
> >Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> >> Not true. Multiple users can be logged in simultaneously. For instance,
> >> Win2000 ships with a telnet server that allows multiple people to log in
> >> at the same time, each using their own user profile and priviledges.
> >
> >Oh yes I forgot about that. However, you can't actually do a great deal can
> >you? If you run notepad, it pops up as a window on the main screen!
>
> This is a capability that Citrix Metaframe has - "seamless window"
> applications. That's where the window looks as though it is running on
> your own desktop, ie you don't get a second desktop. This can be very
> useful indeed - you can migrate a set of applications to terminal server
> without your users being aware of it, retrained or whatever.
>
Believe me, users are very much aware of the migration. All the friggin
shortcuts broke is the usual symption. Also the friggin terminal server
version is never quiet the same as the old version, it runs much slower,
and dies everytime the network gets heavy usage. We stupid users never
have any idea whether our problems are something we did, something in
the OS, or someone is migrating applications without our being aware.
OK, end rant. I just had to spend 1 hour doing my on-line time card
because the system administrators silently migrated the application.
> The default option is the normal desktop mode however.
>
> --
>
> ROAR UP MY TWAT!!!
--
Russ Lyttle, PE
<http://www.flash.net/~lyttlec>
Not Powered by ActiveX
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 02:35:46 +1000
"Donovan Rebbechi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sat, 11 Nov 2000 21:25:05 -0500, Colin R. Day wrote:
> >Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> >Do you know of any UIX/Linux file managers that by default send *.sh
> >files to sh?
>
> It wouldn't matter if they did, because files aren't saved as executables
> by default...
If it's a shell script it wouldn't have to be.
sh <scriptfile> runs a script without +x.
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Side by side
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 16:34:04 GMT
let's do some industry by industry comparisons:
And if you want to say it's because of scheduled maintenance, please
explain how barns and noble is scheduled maintenance!
book sellers:
Barns & Noble vs Amazon
http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=www.bn.com
http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=www.amazon.com
ISP:
Microsoft network vs. AOL
http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=www.msn.com
http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=www.aol.com
Hardware with preinstalled OS
dell vs Valinux:
http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph/?host=www.dell.com
http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=www.valinux.com
Software
http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=www.microsoft.com
http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=www.redhat.com
http://uptime.netcraft.com/graph?display=uptime&site=www.caldera.com
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy
From: Tim Tyler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Can you love a platform without being a bigot?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 16:30:33 GMT
In comp.lang.java.advocacy Shane Phelps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Jon Davis wrote:
:> Just FYI I found some free time to write another lame article, this time
:> about platform bigotry ... This one's not so good--not that either of the
:> previous articles were--but .. well, I'm interested in your feedback anyway.
:>
:> http://www.planetspooge.com/Social/articles/-platformbigot.htm
: Nice satire. I'll give it an A. [...] True spin-doctor stuff!!
Yes. I /actually/ thought you were serious, right until the end, when you
gave the game away by writing:
``A million people would disagree with me, and I put them back into a box
the same size as the one they�ve put Microsoft in. I label theirs,
�People who don�t know how to just get shit done and be happy with it.�
Is this bigotry? Perhaps.''
--
__________ Lotus Artificial Life http://alife.co.uk/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|im |yler The Mandala Centre http://mandala.co.uk/ ILOVEYOU.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Kenzie)
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 mired in delays as Compaq warns of lack of momentum
Date: 12 Nov 2000 16:42:18 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Kenzie)
"Chad Myers" ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:
>
> One of the new features in the 2.4 kernel is "improved ext2
> stability and recovery"
Are you implying here that NT is perfect and that there is no need for
SP1, SP2, SP3, SP4, SP5, SP6, or W2K?
------------------------------
From: "Bruce Schuck" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 08:46:14 -0800
"Glitch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> > > >
> > > > at least Linux provides the capability for protection. No such
> > > > protection exists under Windows. Any user can delete files, any
files.
> > >
> > > I'm so sorry. You are wrong. When you compare nix to win you gotta
> > compare lin
> > > to nt4 or w2k. Both have secure journaling file systems. lin does
not
> > unless you
> > > are a programmer level user and build reiserfs and edit numerous
crypyic
> > config
> > > code to enable it.
> >
> > PLUS: Windows Me has System File Protection. You can't delete or
overwrite a
> > system file accidently.
>
> Finally
Win2K has had it all year of course.
By the end of the year Whistler will merge all the stability of Win2K with
the Consumer parts of Windows Me.
And Microsoft will have unforked the codebase.
And will be able to use the freed up resources on .NET and Blackcomb.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
