Linux-Advocacy Digest #735, Volume #31 Thu, 25 Jan 01 23:13:08 EST
Contents:
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Ramen worm/virus cracks NASA and others (David Steinberg)
Re: Windows 2000 (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Getting first W2K server (Marten Kemp)
Whistler predictions... (Charlie Ebert)
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4 ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: A salutary lesson about open source ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Why can't Microsoft keep their web servers up? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Monopoly Crapware pricing. (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Comparison: Installing Monopoly Crapware vs Debian (Charlie Ebert)
Re: Whistler predictions... ("Jan Johanson")
Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows ("Ayende Rahien")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 01:38:22 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <94qe94$ntr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"ono" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The tests are sending random crap through OS communication channels in
>> order to see whether the OS will screw up or not. When an application
>> runs amok, who knows what it's going to do? It would be nice to know
>> that no matter WHAT an app did, the OS would keep ticking. That's what
>> these tests show.
> Did you actually read the article? I don't think you did because they just
> state about applications that fail. In case you lost the link, here it is;
> http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~bart/fuzz/fuzz-nt.html.
> Btw: give me one method (or 'crap' i can feed the os with) that will crash
> W2K. I've yet to find one.
Does anybody have the source code to the old crashme program? I'm sure it
would crash w2k if it could be made to compile on it. I don't think any
Unix OS at the time it was published survived. Some only lasted seconds.
It ran as a user process by the way so didn't need any special privileges.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Steinberg)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Ramen worm/virus cracks NASA and others
Date: 26 Jan 2001 01:14:48 GMT
Conrad Rutherford ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: http://betanews.efront.com/article.php3?sid=980449212
: Kaspersky Lab's is now reporting that the Linux-based virus 'Ramen'...
Worm. Not virus.
: One executive at Russia-based Kaspersky Labs told reporters "The discovery
: of the Ramen worm 'in-the-wild' is a very significant moment in computer
: history. Previously considered as an absolutely secured operating system,
: Linux now has become yet another victim to computer malware."
This quote demonstrates the total ignorance of the article's author. I
don't think Linus would have ever called Linux "an absolutely secured
operating system." If fact, I think if you used that phrase to describe
ANY operating system, anyone with a clue would laugh in your face.
: Perhaps the most unsettling piece of this puzzle is that Redhat has known
: about the problem for more than six months.
Unsettling? I'll tell you what's unsetting: in spite of the fact that Red
Hat has had fixes available for months, NASA decided not to apply them.
--
David Steinberg -o)
Computer Engineering Undergrad, UBC / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Subject: Re: Windows 2000
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 01:42:00 GMT
In article <94qbpm$127g$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Steve Mading wrote:
>Aaron R. Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: Steve Mading wrote:
>:>
>:> T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>:> : Said Steve Mading in comp.os.linux.advocacy on 23 Jan 2001 19:42:17 GMT;
>:> :>
>:> :>Actually, I think the reason for it is that the only reason Windows
>:> :>is popular at all is because of all the applications that are only
>:> :>released for Windows and nothing else, not because the OS itself is
>:> :>all that spectacular. Therefore, porting the OS to other platforms
>:> :>would be usless unless MS could get all the third-party application
>:> :>developers to make all of their software for non-intel platforms
>:> :>also. If ONLY Windows and maybe Office ran on platform Foo, but
>:> :>nothing else did, nobody would want it. MS discovered this, and stopped
>:> :>trying to support other platforms. Of course they falsely attributed
>:> :>this to people being uninterested in other platforms, when in fact
>:> :>they *would* be interested if the Windows world hadn't been
>:> :>monoplatform for so long that all the app developers forgot how to
>:> :>program cross-platform code. (Consider how Corel ported WP 2000
>:> :>to Linux - by using Wine instead of actually doing a real port.)
>:> :>
>:>
>:> : Coincidentally, immediately after Microsoft bought a big stake in the
>:> : company, IIRC.
>:>
>:> I got a copy of Corel WP 2000 for Linux *before* MS bought that
>:> large sum of stock in Corel.
>
>: Was it a native port, or something to run on Wine?
>
>Wine. My point is that you can't blame the MS buyout for
>the decision to use the Wine solution. The work was already
>done to make the Wine solution before that happened.
>
Who would ever *THINK* that Microsoft would find their next
Windows solution using WINE?
Charlie
------------------------------
From: Marten Kemp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Getting first W2K server
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 01:44:52 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Where is good sight to post CV? I have IBM certifications, published
> author, and the like.
>
www.monster.com, got my current position from it (2.3x salary). If
you're a Linuxite, you're in demand.
-- Marten Kemp
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Whistler predictions...
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 01:49:52 GMT
When whistler finally hit's market I predict the following.
It will be a year after the release before any serious sales
are made on the OS.
Corporations will repel from the idea of having their installed
base of software show up on Microsoft corporate registers
for the viewing of *OTHERS* interested in prosecuting violators!
Home users will FEAR Whistler and it's ability to report
to Microsoft about the applications found on your machine
and they will resist upgrade.
The home user based community will begin the FEEL the pain of
having to pay the extremely HIGH price for this OS.
They will not have fixed their instability problems and will
have mounted additional issues to be resolved as discovered
by the dwindling user base.
But this isn't anything new for Microsoft. They have
doubled the problems and the price of EVERY release
of their Windows OS.
And you can avoid all of this right now by going to this
website and installing an OS on your computer tonight!
http://www.debian.org
Why not leave this mess while you can and join us in
the sunshine by using a truely FREE OS for a change.
No copyrights! No lawsuit threats! No software police!
No bluescreens! No unexplainable lockups! No throwing
away that GOOD PC of your just so you can upgrade to the
next Microsoft product/s.
Windows really is wasteful.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?)
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 03:44:29 +0200
Reply-To: "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam>
"Mathias Grimmberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam> writes:
> > "Mathias Grimmberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > > > > Sometimes ago someone mentioned ADS as an NTFS exploit, but I've
> > found
> > > > > > absolutely no information about this.
> > >
> > > There has been a virus using them to hide itself but I don't think it
> > > ever appeared in the wild. And the webserver exploits. See (NT)
Bugtraq.
> >
> > Streams, yes, I've heard about it.
> > Frankly, I'm sure that most anti virus makers would be delighted because
of
> > it, the virus actually packs itself in a nice little package that you
can
> > nuke without harming the actual file data.
>
> But you can't do that.
>
> The virus must also modify the data in the default stream or it won't be
> activated - ever.
Actually, Streams, the only virus to have ever use streams copy the file's
content to a stream and set itself as a the unnamed string.
When it is run, it will first launch itself & then it will launch the code
from the stream it put the original file's contents.
cleaning it is a simple matter of:
copy file.xyz:real_data file.xyz
> > I'm no interested in NT bugs at the moment, but in NTFS bugs & exploits.
>
> I see. There have been reports of bugs in the quota stuff and right now
> about EFS in W2K. You probably can find these by looking at the
> (NT)Bugtraq archives.
I'll take a look.
> > > [snip examples about image.jpg:Thumbnail and foo.doc:Formatting]
> > >
> > > > I'm sure you can see why this is a good feature.
> > >
> > > It also depends on some central registry allocating the names. Not
quite
> > > a scaleable setup. But it may work if MS would choose to do that work.
> >
> > Central registry? You mean MFT? That is how NTFS *works*, it's pretty
> > scalable by what I've seen.
>
> No, not MFT. For e.g. the thumbnail thing to be useful everyone has to
> agree that the stream containing it is called "Thumbnail" and that the
> image data is stored in format foo. So there needs to be a central
> registry for these stream names and what they should contain.
No, you don't need a central registry for that. Not anymore than you need a
registry for file formats.
Tradition & convention dictate where & how it would be, not some registry.
> Maybe the market could work that out, but then again maybe not.
I don't think that this is an issue.
> > > > A> Awareness for this feature.
> > >
> > > Which lead to security holes in webservers some time ago, AFAIK bot
MS's
> > > and others.
> >
> > You mean the ::$DATA bug in IIS?
>
> Yes.
I know of this one, and it's entirely MS' fault for overlooking this one,
but do you know of any other applications that are vulerable because of
this? (I think that the only thing that can be vulerable is scripts, where
you want to guard your code.)
> > > > B> ADS-aware NT/2K 's standards tools. Neither CLI nor Explorer will
let
> > you
> > > > know whatever a file has ADS, how many of those, and how much the
file's
> > > > size is (they only count unnamed stream, not ADS).
> > >
> > > Which basically means the feature is useless. I'm shure that most of
the
> > > third party "quota tools" for NT 4 didn't know about ADS either. Lots
of
> > > potential for abuse...
> >
> > Yes, there was a lot of potential for abuse there, but the thing is
that
> > the quota tools makers were aware of the streams, they just didn't have
> > requests to make this into the qouta (see A).
>
> Then they knowingly screwed their customers. An attacker couldn't care
> less about whether the customer wanted the quota tool to account
> correctly for streams. If he knows (or thinks) that it doesn't he will
> abuse that hole without mercy.
I agree, but it's not *their* fault, it's MS' fault.
I'm only aware of two APIs that can enumerate streams.
BackUpRead() is the usuall method.
NtQueryInformationFile() is much less known, but does much better task.
Lack of steams handling in userland is also a big problem.
> > > Hmm. AFAIK the only way to get information about the ADS of a file up
to
> > > NT 4 was some obscure backup API. Unless that changed with NT 5 (and a
> > > cursory scan of MSDN seems to suggest it didn't) B is not really
> > > possible. See the documentation of the API for why not (in short:
> > > reading the whole damn file just to find out what ADS it may have is
not
> > > an option in any (even semi-) reasonable scenario).
> >
> > You are talking about the BackUpRead(), don't you?
>
> Yes.
>
> > There is another way, which is, of course, by far less known.
> > NtQueryInformationFile()
>
> Ahh, I didn't know about that one, although obviously the native NT API
> has to have the feature somehow.
As you noted, you won't find it anywhere in official MS documentation.
There are couple of hundreds of native NT APIs, about 10% of them are
documented, and that is pushing it.
> Unfortunately the function is Officially Not There. There is AFAIK no
> documentation about it from MS, it may completely change in the next
> version or simply disappear. Nobody should use this function in any
> serious software and it won't get used in any serious software project I
> have a say in.
Yes, that is my main complaint about streams, it's there, it's good, it can
be of great value, but it's *hindered* by lack of both userland & API tools
to do it.
BTW, NtQueryInformationFile() was discovered by looking into NT's DDK,
obviously not a good option for finding out about APIs.
> Some tool for my own use is something else...
>
> > I can post some source code on how to enumerate streams in NTFS if you
like,
> > not mine, alas.
>
> Thank you, but I do not really have a need to deal with ADS. It's just a
> pet peeve of mine.
Dito, at least until I would be able to enumerate file's streams as easily
as directory's files.
> > > There is also a funny comment about support for ADS in future FSs,
> > > future NT versions and future support for OLE 2 structured storage
> > > somewhere in the MSDN stuff.
> >
> > What funny comment?
>
> It's in Q105763:
>
> "Alternate data streams are strictly a feature of the NTFS file system
> and may not be supported in future file systems. However, NTFS will be
> supported in future versions of Windows NT.
It's has always been there, and I don't think that you can take it off
without seriously crippling the system. (It will work, after all, it can run
on FAT, therefor, it can run on any FS that you can think of, but a lot of
2K's new features are tightly intervined with NTFS)
BTW, another FS that support unlimited file streams is HPS+ (I *think*)
there is also some talk to enter streams support to linux 2.5 || 2.6
> Future file systems will support a model based on OLE 2.0 structured
> storage (IStream and IStorage). By using OLE 2.0, an application can
> support multiple streams on any file system and all supported operating
> systems (Windows, Macintosh, Windows NT, and Win32s), not just Windows
> NT."
>
> Doesn't instill much confidence about the future of ADS in me.
No, I suppose it doesn't.
> BTW, another fun NTFS feature are case sensitive file names. With them
> one can probably break a great many apps. And there may even be security
> implications.
Well, NTFS *is* case sensitive FS.
Readme.txt != readme.txt
The problem (actually, I don't consider it a problem, case sensitive file
names can be a PITA) is that userland tools don't differ between those too.
Anyone knows how I can create Readme.txt & ReadMe.txt in the same directory
under NTFS?
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 03:51:27 +0200
Reply-To: "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam>
"ono" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:94qfd0$oi4$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> What I heard too ist that they want to charge money for IE6 (don't have a
> link). It makes almost sense to charge money for it as there is no more
> competition (ns beeing almost as dead as a dodo and opera having 0% of the
> market).
Actually, I've heard the contrary, that they are going to integrate IE6 into
the OS so deeply that it would became part of the OS (IE, no more IE)
There will be also a user & bussiness class browers from MS.
The user browser would be like MSN Exploere, this mean that you *stay away*
from it.
The bussiness class browser would be something like office & a browser in
one pack, but the article had very little info about it.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A salutary lesson about open source
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 21:07:01 -0500
Chad Myers wrote:
>
> "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:94nlej$8o8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > : "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > : news:94koo1$13e0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > :> Compare this with something that actually is 100%
> > :> web based like Amazon or Google).
> >
> > : And who make USD$0 every year (or USD$-20m or so for Amazon)
> >
> > Some people believe that being a big business making big money
> > makes one more accountable to keep things working right. Your
> > argument might work to convince such a person. That person
> > would not be me. The bigger the business, the more momentum
> > it has. A downed website would not matter as much to a company
> > for which the website was an AFETRTHOUGHT, and not their core
> > reason to exist.
>
> Ah, so these companies who are making billions of dollars have
> a few things to learn from Amazon who's 20 or so million in the
> hole, or Red Hat who's a couple million in the hole, right?
> *Riiiggggghhhhttt*
>
> Regardless of how you wish to BS about it, the web has become
> an integral part in most, if not all the Fortune 500 businesses.
>
> -Chad
I've spent 90% of my career working for Fortune 500 companies.
VERY LITTLE of their business depends on the web.
(Or are you going to say that GM, Ford, Kmart, etc. have seen
95% of their sales go through the web now?)
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why can't Microsoft keep their web servers up?
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 21:08:04 -0500
Des Herriott wrote:
>
> On 25 Jan 2001 13:12:43 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > MS's 4 DNS servers were at:
> >
> > > DNS4.cp.msft.net internet address 207.46.138.11
> > > DNS5.cp.msft.net internet address 207.46.138.12
> > > DNS6.cp.msft.net internet address 207.46.138.20
> > > DNS7.cp.msft.net internet address 207.46.138.21
> >
> > > Now, think of what a netmask of 255.255.255.240 (or /28) does to those IP's.
> >
> > Tell me, do you even understand why its bad to put all your domain
> > servers on the same subnet?
>
> Not that I'm normally a Microsoft advocate, but you really need to go
> and read a book about CIDR. Then go back & read Erik's post and try to
> understand the point he's making, rather than conveniently ignore it.
>
> Hint: those addresses are not necessarily on the same subnet.
True...they could be 3-bit subnets
But...I doubt it...and so do you.
>
> --
> Des Herriott, Oracle Corporation UK Ltd.
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> - speaking for myself, not my employer.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Monopoly Crapware pricing.
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 02:22:56 GMT
In article <I53c6.26042$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, John Travis wrote:
>And Aaron R. Kulkis spoke unto the masses...
>:Considering that in Russia, there are no copyright laws, you can actually
>:get Microsoft products for about $5 or less (which is, ironically, exactly
>:what they are worth).....Wouldn't THAT be an interesting purchase :-)
>
>Not really. Considering that paying 5 US dollars for say, W2K in Russia, is
>probably more expensive for them than what we pay for it here.
>
>jt
>--
>Debian Gnu/Linux [Sid]
>2.4.1-pre9|XFree4.0.2|Nvidia .96 drivers
>You mean there's a stable tree?
>
Yet if you gave a russian $10 to mail you a CD from THEIR market,
you would be guilty of a felony crime.
Charlie
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charlie Ebert)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Comparison: Installing Monopoly Crapware vs Debian
Reply-To: Charlie Ebert:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 02:17:45 GMT
In article <94qdua$iv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Everybody wrote:
<SNIP>
Debian is probably the hardest install of them all right now
and it's not that bad.
But I have another VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION!
W2k has been out now for how many months? 6-7 or more???
Why on earth is there no Monopoly Crapware version of
Napster working for W2k yet?
I have 2 napster GPL'ed versions installed on my Debian workstation
and they both work just fine.
What is the problem with Monopoly Crapware?
Charlie
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler predictions...
Date: 25 Jan 2001 20:25:07 -0600
I SERIOULSY doubt it's possible for anyone to spue more lies and FUD in a
single post than this asshole.
"Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> When whistler finally hit's market I predict the following.
>
> It will be a year after the release before any serious sales
> are made on the OS.
>
> Corporations will repel from the idea of having their installed
> base of software show up on Microsoft corporate registers
> for the viewing of *OTHERS* interested in prosecuting violators!
>
> Home users will FEAR Whistler and it's ability to report
> to Microsoft about the applications found on your machine
> and they will resist upgrade.
>
> The home user based community will begin the FEEL the pain of
> having to pay the extremely HIGH price for this OS.
>
> They will not have fixed their instability problems and will
> have mounted additional issues to be resolved as discovered
> by the dwindling user base.
>
> But this isn't anything new for Microsoft. They have
> doubled the problems and the price of EVERY release
> of their Windows OS.
>
> And you can avoid all of this right now by going to this
> website and installing an OS on your computer tonight!
>
> http://www.debian.org
>
> Why not leave this mess while you can and join us in
> the sunshine by using a truely FREE OS for a change.
>
> No copyrights! No lawsuit threats! No software police!
> No bluescreens! No unexplainable lockups! No throwing
> away that GOOD PC of your just so you can upgrade to the
> next Microsoft product/s.
>
> Windows really is wasteful.
>
> Charlie
>
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 04:13:03 +0200
Reply-To: "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam>
"Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Ayende Rahien wrote:
> >
> > "Shane Phelps" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > Where's the URL mentioning that MS deliberately introduces instability
> > > into the
> > > non-server versions?
> >
> > Check MS' 99.999% page, search for "stability tax".
>
> I just tried. I can get to www.microsoft.com, but I get a DNS failure
> when I try to search :-(
>
> Can you summarise it for me or provide the URL for the 99.999% page
please?
http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/guide/server/solutions/overview/reliabl
e/default.asp
"And the three offerings in the family-Windows 2000 Server, Advanced Server,
and Datacenter Server-allow you to tailor your investment to provide the
level of system availability that's appropriate for your various business
operations, without overbuying for situations that don't require maximum
uptime."
Tell me what this tells you?
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: So much for Linux being more Difficult than Windows
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 04:13:52 +0200
Reply-To: "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam>
"Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam> wrote in message
news:94odrj$3ec$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Russ Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ayende Rahien wrote:
> > >
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > On Wed, 24 Jan 2001 05:03:10 +0200, Ayende Rahien
<Please@don't.spam>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >"Russ Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 19:14:00 +0500, "Gary Hallock"
> > > > >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > [deletia]
> > > > >More difficult? Hah!
> > > > >Exactly *how*?
> > > > >
> > > > >What do you mean by ftp? client? server?
> > > > >PWS is a free http & ftp server for windows 9x, it is somewhere in
> the
> > > CD.
> > > > >IIS is for NT.
> > > > >Both OS has a builtin text-based ftp client, as well as IE capable
of
> > > > >functioning as FTP client.
> > > >
> > > > Then please outline the procedure for initiating an
> > > > upload with IE5...
> > >
> > > Sure, open one window of explorer and navigate to the files that you
> want to
> > > copy, choose then and press CTRL+C
> > > Then either type F6 & the ftp adress or open a new windows and enter
the
> ftp
> > > adress in it.
> > > Wait for it to login, press CTRL+V
> >
> > Linux :
> > ftp [site name]
> > [login as prompted]
> > cd [destination directory]
> > put [filename]
> > bye
>
> Windows:
> ftp [site name]
> [login as prompted]
> cd [destination directory]
> send [filename]
> bye
Correction, you can use the same commands for windows as in windows.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
