Linux-Advocacy Digest #624, Volume #31 Sat, 20 Jan 01 23:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: Windows curses fast computers ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: NT is Most Vulnerable Server Software ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows curses fast computers ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Windows curses fast computers ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: A salutary lesson about open source (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Windows curses fast computers ("Mike")
Re: A salutary lesson about open source (Jim Richardson)
Re: Comparison of Linux/Apache versus Win2000 server uptime (Jim Richardson)
Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant (Jim Richardson)
Re: What really burns the Winvocates here... (Jim Richardson)
Re: A salutary lesson about open source ("Chad Myers")
Re: A salutary lesson about open source ("Chad Myers")
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) ("Chad Myers")
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("Chad Myers")
Re: M$ *finally* admits it's OSs are failure prone ("Erik Funkenbusch")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows curses fast computers
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 21:04:35 -0600
"Pete Goodwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Dfma6.185482$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Donn Miller wrote:
>
> > > Actually, I think this *IS* a fault of the drive. The drive should
hold
> > > enough capacitance to finish writing out it's cache and then park, but
> > > aparently the drive doesn't do this.
> >
> > And yet FreeBSD and Linux don't have this problem.
>
> I'm curious - how do they do it? Do they do what was mentioned in another
> post and force a 'sleep' etc. as mentioned in the spec.
>
> Hmmm... since I have the source code on my Linux box, I could go a-hunting
> myself... 8)
I don't know about Linux, but FreeBSD waits 5 seconds after it's flushed
it's internal buffers to disk before shutting off.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: NT is Most Vulnerable Server Software
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 03:21:43 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Said [EMAIL PROTECTED] () in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 20 Jan
>>On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 04:14:17 GMT, T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Actually, there are several subnets that are reserved for
>> local use. Assuming your local router is not malconfigured,
>> the traffic you see on those subnets should be rather
>> limited.
>
> Again, your knowledge seems sound, but your understanding is flawed.
> There are no subnets 'reserved' for anything, unless you're dealing with
> a full-blown firewall (which by nature breaks all those rules about how
> IP networking works). There are such things as local subnets; those
> that are directly connected on the transmission system(s) the computer
> is connected to. But that doesn't inform anything but the routing
> decision; which MAC address to put on the frame bearing the packet. It
> doesn't have squat to do with the packet itself, nor certainly the
> datagram (potentially fragments of datagrams, in fact) in the packet.
You are completely wrong here. There are class A, B, C (to use the old
naming convention) subnets that are reserved for private use only and
must never be seen on the Internet (10.x.x.x and 192.168.x.x for
example (plus the 172.x.x.x ones)). You clearly have no understanding
of Internet routing and firewalls. How is a firewall breaking all the
rules? Do you know what a firewall is? Most firewalls allow address
translation. They use PAT to translate many internal addresses to a single
external routable address. The good
firewalls also allow 1 to 1 NAT. MAC addresses are used to send the packet
to the next hop on its route. When the packet arrives at a router connected
to the destination host the MAC address is that of the destination host. May
I suggst you purchase a copy of the late Mr. Stevens' books on TCP/IP. If
you can understand and digest those then you may talk about Internet subnets
and routing.
>
>> Likewise, if you see such traffic coming to you inbound
>> parts unknown it's and obvious danger signal.
>
> This is a mechanism for firewall software. IP (routing) software can't
> be *allowed*, in fact, to pay attention to it, or you make IP nothing
> but a virtualization, not a routing method, and that removes all
> benefits from using it.
Please give up talking about something that you are totally ignorant of.
You obviously know nothing of how IP routing works and even less about
firewalls.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 03:25:59 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> SoneoneElse wrote:
>
>> Actually I think Mandrake is starting to take over.
>> It tends to be solid, and to have an easier install.
>
> Mandrake is pretty, and has a nice looking install.
> But I've seen some flakiness on mandrake that I
> don't see on old dependable red hat.
Why don't you try storm linux (www.stormix.com)? All the
advantages to the debian package management system wihtout
having to touch dselect. :-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Windows curses fast computers
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 03:53:11 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> This is the crux of the matter. The people who write the drivers for Linux
>> know exactly how the hardware works at the lowest programmable level. It
>> is clear that Microsoft, and most of the hardware companies producing
>> drivers for Windows, don't know how the hardware works at a low level.
>> They probably only know C / C++ and can't develop software at the assembler
>> level when required (or do so very badly when they have to as they aren't
>> assembler programmers).
>
> A lot of companies will advertise: "position available, 3+ years of C+
> required". Of course, since they've done the required no. of years of
> work doing C++, they get the job. Most interviews are conducted by
> human resources, who look for the typical interview crap like eye
> contact, poise, as well as meeting the requisite time doing C++ on some
> software engineering job somplace. With open source, it's pretty much a
> voluntary effort, so it requires more than just passing a job interview
> to do the job.
I thought USA companies were a bit more ruthless in this. I'm sure in the
USA you have a probation period when you start a new job. Either party
can terminate the contract within a short period during the probation.
In Europe the probation time is a joke. Once you have the job, unless you
are completely clueless, the probation period means a small pay rise once
it is completed. In other words it is a waste of time. This is one of the
few things I thought the USA was superior in. Perhaps not.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Windows curses fast computers
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 03:45:47 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <J4ma6.185472$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> > It's supposed to WAIT on the fucking interrupt you god damn idiot!
>>
>> This is a general problem these days. Most software engineers just don't
>> know how the hardware works. In the old days we learnt what the hardware
>> could do because we were coding in assembler (even toggling in machine on
>> occasions:-). Now software engineers are so isolated from the hardware
>> they resort to adding delay loops in their software instead of finding out
>> how the hardware works. It is clear that Erik is of this sad generation.
>> He might know how windows works but hasn't a clue how it interacts with
>> the hardware. It appears that most Microsoft developers don't know how it
>> interacts with hardware.
>
> I know how it works, and I'm a Microsoft developer.
>
> Ah, but then I started as a Electronics Engineer at EMI, then switched to
> software. That's one reason in my favour when I took my current job writing
> audio device drivers.
I must say that some of the best software engineers that I have worked with
were electronic engineers who made the transition to softwae. What went wrong
in your case?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: "The Linux Desktop", by T. Max Devlin
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 03:29:27 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <94cq2d$ils$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam> wrote:
>
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:8oic49.pkk.ln@gd2zzx...
>> In article <94c6mh$6h2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam> wrote:
>> >
>> > This is *very* accurate.
>> > If he will install windows, he will need a LILO boot disk, because RH
>> > wouldn't boot because Windows will overwrite the MBR.
>> > He will have to reinstall LILO in the MBR if he wish to use Linux.
>>
>> Your reply is inaccurate and confusing. A boot disk with his linux
>> kernel is all that is required although a disk with lilo will boot
>> faster. He will not have to reinstall lilo if he has a boot disk
>> although it makes sense to do so. Please try and be accurate and not
>> make a big issue out of such a trivial matter.
>
> It's not a trivial matter to most people.
> I meant that he will have to reinstall LILO in the MBR, not reinstall LILO
> as a whole.
Grief, what is the difference between installing LILO in the MBR and reinstalling
LILO as a whole? You obviously don't know LILO at all but use it as a buzz word.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A salutary lesson about open source
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 03:03:23 GMT
In article <baqa6.6123$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Chad Myers wrote:
>
>"Cliff Wagner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 20:29:45 GMT, J Sloan typed something like:
>> >Chad Myers wrote:
>> >
>> >> "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >>
>> >
>> >And you carefully snipped my references to amazon, google, deja,
>> >which, like yahoo and other large sites, use apache.
>> >
>> >Nice try kid, but you're fighting a losing battle and we all know it.
>> >
>> >jjs
>>
>> If there is one thing Chad is good at, it's snipping out every
>> thing except for the part he can keep parroting the same
>> argument in response to without ever addressing anything else.
>> If Microsoft certified that, he'd be an MCP of it.
>
>I refuse to debate on an argument that has no merit.
>
>When you post a 6 page diatribe based on a faulty argument, I don't
>bother replying to, nor posting the rest of it because it's
>irrelevant. I stop it where it needs to be stopped.
>
>Any good debater would do the same.
>
>-Chad
>
>
A GOOD debater might. But Chad here is becomming just
an asshole again. He keeps quoting things from websites
which are not said.
He doesn't live on the same planet as the rest of us
appearently.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Mike" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows curses fast computers
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 03:10:54 GMT
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> Do any high reliability drives have some kind of on board power backup
> so they can finish writing if the power execpectedly dies? A small
> lithium battery would provide enough power for a few seconds.
>
> I really wouldn't expect this in standard PC IDE drives, though.
>
See my other post later in this thread. I discuss capacitors there, since
that's what Erik had mentioned.
A small lithium battery might provide enough power for a few seconds, but
you'd have to have the battery there and a switching regulator to convert it
to the correct voltages for the drive. Since the (relatively) inexpensive
lithium batteries aren't rechargable, it wouldn't last for too many power
cycles before needing replacement. Adding a more expensive rechargeable
battery might do the job, but at extra (needless) cost. It's needless
because most high end drives are SCSI, and there is a protocol for flushing
the cache on SCSI drives, so all this extra crud isn't necessary.
-- Mike --
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A salutary lesson about open source
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 17:24:33 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 05:06:21 GMT,
T. Max Devlin, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Said Chad Myers in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 20 Jan 2001 01:19:54
>GMT;
>>
>>"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>> Said Chad Myers in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sun, 14 Jan 2001 21:54:25
>>> [...]
>>> >Who knows how many back doors are in OpenSource software. It took them
>>> >6 months just to find this one in this product. There are thousands
>>> >in Linux that they're finding all the time.
>>>
>>> Lie.
>>
>>Not really. When the (false) news came out about Win2K having 65k
>>bugs, Debian's bug list had somewhere in the 12-13k area. And that
>>was just Debian alone. Yes, I know Debian != Linux, but some of those
>>were generic Linux related.
>
>But you don't know which. Nor is it accurate to say they're 'finding
>them all the time'. It didn't take them six months to find this one,
>either; it took six months before they looked. Once they looked, they
>found it immediately, because it is open source. Nor is the report of
>W2K having '65,000 bugs' actually false, though it might be regarded as
>misleading.
>
Chad is lying again, debian's bug list included bugs for all packages in the
tree, things like apache, and emacs were included, as were gcc bugs. W2K's
number (whatever it's real value) did not include bugs in IIS &etc.
So to reiterate, Chad lied.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: Comparison of Linux/Apache versus Win2000 server uptime
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 17:42:57 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 11:42:58 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED], in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 22:52:59 +1300, Frank Kruchio
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>http://uptime.netcraft.com
>>
>>www.suse.com Suse Linux with Apache server, latest 90 day moving average is
>191.45 days
>>
>>www.microsoft.com Win2000 server, latest 90 day moving
>average is 15.93 days
>>
>>Does this count in favour of Linux to be reliable as a server ?
>>
>>What do YOU think ?
>>
>
>I think you should not just select one Linux distributor but look at
>all of them.
Sure, here's some
Site OS 90 day avg max
www.microsoft.com W2K 16.20 18.76
www.redhat.com RH_Linux 21.56 96.11
www.debian.org Debian Linux 26.73 92.23
www.suse.com SuSE Linux 192.65 192.65
www.mandrake.com Mandrake Linux 116.70 160.50
(note mandrake was reported as a 28day moving avg, instead of 90)
and a couple of bsds for flavouring
www.freebsd.org FreeBSD 9.86 13.40
www.openbsd.org OpenBSD 44.44 108.05
advocacy groups, like a courtroom, are no place to ask a question that you
don't allready know the answer.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Linux is crude and inconsistant
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 18:38:25 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 04:03:55 GMT,
Kyle Jacobs, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> > I think you mean incompetent system architect for choosing NT.
>>
>>
>> Incompetent NT LoseDOS admin and incompetetant system architects who
>> choose LoseDOS products....go hand in hand.
>
>Of course, then there are idiots like you who would choose a Linux
>workstation platform as their choice when you knew what would suffer.
>
>UNIX on the desktop isn't pretty. If it were, Microsoft wouldn't be in
>business.
>
>
I don't know about "pretty", seems quite subjective, I like the looks of
windowmaker a lot better than the M$ look. But Linux sure works well for me,
with far less problems and hangs than windows.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: What really burns the Winvocates here...
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 19:32:23 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 07:43:15 +0000,
Pete Goodwin, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Aaron Ginn wrote:
>
>> > And I cut myself off from tools to configure the system like linuxconf.
>> > What's the equivalent in KDE or something else?
>>
>> I'm beginning to wonder if you ever have used Mandrake now. Ever hear
>> of that thingy called DrakConf? You know, that little icon that
>> Mandrake put on your desktop? There's a little button in the DrakConf
>> called Linuxconf. Care to guess what it does?
>
>Yes, and Linuxconf is a Gtk tool, not a Qt tool. What's a Gtk tool doing
>mixed with a KDE desktop? The differences between the way Qt/KDE and Gtk
>handle save/open dialogs are what I'm complaining about. Linux Mandrake
>gives you a mixed desktop, not a complete KDE or GNOME one.
>
IIRC linuxconf can run with a curses (or some other text based interface) a web
interface, and a gui.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A salutary lesson about open source
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 02:56:42 GMT
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
>
> > "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > And you carefully snipped my references to amazon, google, deja,
> > > which, like yahoo and other large sites, use apache.
> >
> > So a handful of large sites use Apache, so what? Many more use IIS.
>
> Sorry kid, you're just not believable anymore -
So, when I present facts, they're unbelieveable, but when you
present NO facts at ALL, it's somehow more credible?
Whatever.
>
> > Also, Yahoo is "unknown on FreeBSD".
>
> It's apache -
And I'm just supposed to take your word on it?
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A salutary lesson about open source
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 02:58:20 GMT
"Cliff Wagner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Sun, 21 Jan 2001 00:35:20 GMT, Chad Myers typed something like:
> >
> >"Cliff Wagner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> [SNIP]
>
> >> Probably because you make up your own analysis as opposed
> >> to actually addressing what is on the page you are
> >> so happy to quote:
> >> -------- BEGIN QUOTE FROM URL CHAD LOVES SO MUCH -----
> >> The 1999 Fortune 500 list of companies ranks the top corporations
> >> in the United States. We expected the results to be dramatically
> >> different than the Netcraft results because upper management in
> >> big business generally don't understand open source software (OSS).
> >> They often forbid the use of OSS because they confuse it with the
> >> FreeWare and ShareWare from the 1980s. They're not aware that
> >> the quality of Apache rivals the commercial products and surpasses
> >> the commercial products in terms of flexibility and functionality.
> >> ------- END QUOTE ----
> >> That basically say that the Fortune500 is skewed due to business
> >> politics (in case you have problems comprehanding it).
> >> And are you ever going to get me a number of "all these unimportant
> >> low-traffic sites" that run on apache? I know of a lot that
> >> run on IIS as well. Hell, i've designed some for both platforms
> >> (gotta love companies that believe, if you build it they will come)
> >
> >
> >So now what biznix says in opin is the bible? The facts speak for
> >themselves. You can make up all sorts of fairy-tales about business
> >politics to make up for Apache's poor showing, but it's just
> >that, fairy tales.
> >
> >Please show conclusive proof that the reason Fortune 500 companies
> >don't use Apache is because they think it's shareware. That's an
> >assinine statement. That URL shows numbers, the rest is just all
> >idle conjecture.
> >
> >-Chad
>
> In other words, your opinion is more valid then
> those who actually did the study.
> How nice.
Please show me proof that Fortune 500 execs were making these
kinds of decisions based on an OSS/shareware confusion.
I'm just going on the plain facts. The numbers speak for themselves.
It's pretty sad for you guys now. You're no longer trying to
argue for Apache, you're trying to make excuses why its failing,
and you're eager to use anyone else's conjecture (like the Biznix
article) to support your excuses.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 02:59:43 GMT
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I dunno, ask Microsoft or Winamp. They managed to make their players
> > attractive looking, while xmms looks dreadful, no matter what skin you
> > use.
>
> Well now it's pretty clear why it's called a flatfish -
> It flounders about, making bizarre arguments that fall flat..
>
> I've seen more than one windows user's jaw drop after
> stopping by my desktop and seeing something like xmms
> with kjofol plugins, or my 3D screensavers.
>
> > It's a mess even on a 21 inch monitor at 1024x768 32bpp.
>
> Who in bloody hell would run 1024x768 on a 20" monitor?
>
> 1024x768 is a good resolution for a 15" monitor, not 20",
> it's just plain wrong on a monitor that big.
Perhaps he has vision impairments. There are several older
developers at work who use that resolution on 21" monitors.
They are quite productive. I guess not everyone is as
supreme in make as you.
-Chad
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 03:15:22 GMT
Said Chad Myers in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 21 Jan 2001 01:03:05
GMT;
>
>"The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Chris Ahlstrom
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote
>> on Thu, 18 Jan 2001 22:51:12 GMT
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Chad Myers once wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>- MS has one of the best security response time to discovered exploits.
>> >> >> Even better than Red Hat in most cases. And MS even tests their patches
>> >> >> and then does a full regression test each Service Pack, something
>> >> >> Red Hat doesn't do.
>> >>
>> >> I've posted this before but I think Mr. Myers needs to see it again.
>> >
>> >Myers will say anything.
>>
>> Would that "anything" include
>
>It's interesting that Chris "Mr Personal Attack" would say such a thing
>when posts by Penguinistas themselves (errantly) show MS in 2nd place
>to MS. Therefore the "one of the best security response time" comment
>is true by any stretch of the truth (whether it be real truth or
>Penguinista truth).
>
>Just goes to show you the blatant and unwavering hypocrasy in the
>Linux camp.
>
>A "fact" they use to prove you wrong one day is the same fact they
>refute the next.
>
>-Chad
Does anybody have any idea what the fuck he's trying to say?
More importantly, does anybody care? (Other than EF or Claire?)
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2001 03:00:47 GMT
"Giuliano Colla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Chad Myers wrote:
> >
> > "The Ghost In The Machine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Kevin Ford
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote
> > > on Fri, 19 Jan 2001 10:58:32 +0000
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > >Ayende Rahien once wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >>> > 2.) We weren't distributing "consumer digital" products, we
> > > >>> > were making videos. Breaking up the already whole videos is
> > > >>> > just ANOTHER step we'd have to go through to reach the final
product.
> > > >>> > All because of Linux's poor design. That's not a valid excuse
> > > >>> > when there are plenty of better choices out there.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Linux is not at all at fault in this scenario. You have issues with
the
> > > >>> limitations of one filesystem. Exactly like the limitations of FAT or
> > > >>> NTFS (I know NTFS can handle larger files than ext2, but that doesn't
> > > >>> mean it doesn't have its limits).
> > > >>
> > > >>The only real limitation of NTFS I'm aware of is slow new-file creation
when
> > > >>dealing with orders of tens of millions of files.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >Apart from the 18 month self destruct cycle.
> > >
> > > Probably caused by that absolutely horrid Master File Table, that
> > > never goes down in size, but always goes up, fragments like
> > > crazy, and generally is a pain in the you know very well where.
> >
> > I've never had a problem with it. Nor have I heard of anyone having
> > a problem with it except in pre SP4 days when 4+million files would
> > cause it problems.
> >
> > I'd take this non-problem over a retarded and elementary design
> > flaw that prevents ext2fs from handling larger than 2GB files.
> >
>
> It took much less time to overcome this problem in the 32 bit version of
> Linux, than it took MS to handle properly a >2GB DRIVE SIZE. Just for
> the record. When we speak of design flaws, MS is proudly second to none!
MS had NTFS in 1994 or so. NTFS supported >2GB drives from the get-go,
where was Linux at this time. Did it support >2GB drives at that time?
-Chad
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: M$ *finally* admits it's OSs are failure prone
Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2001 21:24:06 -0600
"Bobby D. Bryant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> > Which message is that? According to Deja, you've only posted 5 messages
> > since July with the word "average" in it, and none of them are it.
>
> Here's the original post with the averages, at LT. I mentioned it here on
> 09-Jan.
>
> http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-01-07-004-20-OP-MS-0022
Ahh.. that's why I couldn't find it, your message didn't actually use the
word average.
In any event, it's still simply you pulling sties out of thin air. That
doesn't make them random, since you might subconsciously picked sites you
knew would have longer or shorter uptimes. For instance, you know for a
fact that Hotmail will have much lower uptimes because they only recently
converted to Win2k, and you know for a fact that microsoft.com and msn.com
use clustered machines which will give a lower average than a single
machine.
In short, your survey is flawed because you are an impartial person to be
selecting sites (nobody could possibly be objective here).
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
