Linux-Advocacy Digest #750, Volume #31 Fri, 26 Jan 01 19:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) (Johan Kullstam)
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Why can't Microsoft keep their web servers up?
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
The Peguin Gets Serious - [www.economist.com] (Nick Condon)
Re: Whistler predictions... ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4 ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Whistler predictions... ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4 ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: New Microsoft Ad :-) (Shane Phelps)
Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4 (Glitch)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 18:03:14 -0500
ono wrote:
>
> > Perhaps you've a better graphics card than my last two (the current ones
> > a laptop).
> There you have it! Your graphics card vendor doesn't know shit about writing
> drivers.
>
> > it isn't there. I've never seen a Windows box that doesn't stutter when
> > its doing any I/O. Ever.
> Obviouly you've never seen mine :-).
Nevertheless, you're still a liar.
--
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.
------------------------------
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?)
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 23:06:05 GMT
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Johan Kullstam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > "Johan Kullstam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > "Ayende Rahien" <Please@don't.spam> writes:
> > > >
> > > > > "T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Fri, 19 Jan 2001
> 06:58:01
> > > > > > >"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > > >> > > 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.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> There are limitations on file sizes and numbers, as there must
> be...
> > > > > > >> luckily, the max filesize with NTFS is huge, but it wont be long
> before
> > > > > > >> people are hitting that limit too (if they haven't already).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >16 Exabytes ???
> > > > > > >16 billion Giga byte.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >I'm not sure exactly *what* you can put into a file to get into that
> > > > > size.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Precisely what they said about the 2 Gigabyte limit. ;-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And they were really sure *they* were right, too. ;-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Difference is in the size.
> > > > > And the 2GB limit in what exactly? FAT has it (actually, it's a
> partition
> > > > > limit, but that is beside the point) but it's justifiable, FAT was
> designed
> > > > > in the 70s.
> > > > > Linux on 32bit has(d) it, it's not justifiable, because need for such
> files
> > > > > exist for a long time,
> > > >
> > > > i agree. linux should move to 64 bit size_t for files regardless of
> > > > processor. linux-2.4 will do large files, but C is a cranky beast
> > > > sometimes and updating software can be cumbersome.
> > > >
> > > > > I can assure you that there was no need for 2GB files
> > > > > in the 70s, when FAT was designed.
> > > >
> > > > unix style filesystems with the inodes &c were also designed in the
> > > > 70s. however, it's not the age of the filesystem design. it's the
> > > > also competence of the design and the goal of the design. FAT was
> > > > made for floppies and tiny systems. unix filesystems were made for
> > > > hard drives and larger systems. it's still MS's fault for keeping
> > > > such a bad design as FAT and trying to keep it going where it doesn't
> > > > belong, but age is not the issue.
> > >
> > > It's interesting then, now that FAT has moved on, whereas ext2fs
> > > has not.
> >
> > ext2fs is only a few years old.
>
> So that's an excuse? NTFS is older than ext2 and it has way more
> functionality and stability.
it's not an excuse. someone was lambasting FAT because it was created
in the 70s. i merely point out that the time of creation is
irrelevant to what makes a filesystem good or bad. the system must
stand on its own merits.
an old system is just old, not necessarily crappy, but it could well
be.
--
J o h a n K u l l s t a m
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Don't Fear the Penguin!
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 18:04:40 -0500
chrisv wrote:
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >Under normal usage, a crashing app will crash ALL of Windows as well.
>
> Change will to can and you would be correct.
85% of the time, it is *WILL*.
--
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] ()
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why can't Microsoft keep their web servers up?
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 23:08:02 -0000
On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 15:50:31 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 00:04:54 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> >"Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> >news:94qcc1$9qg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[deletia]
>> >
>> >Also, MS provides complete source to it's IPv6 implementation at:
>>
>> Then why didn't/couldn't you point to the WinME version,
>> or better yet: the Win98 version?
>
>Win98 and WinME are dead products, with no security.
For "dead" products, they certainly constitute
quite a bit of the installed consumer computing
userbase...
I am sure you will point this out to us soon enough
when it is no longer inconvenient to one of your rants.
--
Ease of use should be associated with things like "human engineering"
and "use the right tool for the right job". And of course,
"reliability", since stopping to fix a problem or starting over due
to lost work are the very antithesis of "ease of use".
Bobby Bryant - COLA
|||
/ | \
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 18:07:02 -0500
ono wrote:
>
> > >C'mon, start thinking. These test are like when you put water into the
> tank
> > >of a car and measure how long it takes for the engine to die.
> > >Why sould I protect my application in a release build from random data
> when
> > >the data is always generated on the same machine from the same programs?
> > >You unix/linux people must be really desperate to prove fault in ms
> software
> > >to take such crap at face-value.
> > >
> > If your car was a firewall hackers would put 'water in the tank' all the
> > time.
> Cool one, but we're not talking firewalls here.
To be more precise, Ono isn't talking about anything.
[At least nothing that exists outside of his peyote-induced ravings].
--
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: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 18:07:55 -0500
ono wrote:
>
> > 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.
?
> I'm interrested too. Would be fun to have something to compile into my apps
> that is actually capable of crashing W2K.
> btw: I actually crashed a few boxes but the I'm the one writing the kernel
> drivers so everybody knew it was me ;-).
Translation: Ono admits he's on the Microsoft payroll.
--
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: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 18:08:52 -0500
Kevin Ford wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis once wrote:
> >"." wrote:
> >>
> >> > >> Our solaris box we've retired and I can say not soon enough, we were
> >> > >> tired of it crashing all the time.
> >> >
> >> > >Two possibilities here:
> >> > >
> >> > >1) You're lying
> >> > >
> >> > >2) Your admins are incompetent
> >> >
> >> > You forgot 3) the machine was 10 years old and had a bad disk drive.
> >>
> >> Always more possibilities ;)
> >>
> >> However, should the machine have been 10 years old with a dodgy drive,
> >> then point 2 is also in effect =) (up until the point someone refuses
> >> to buy a new machine on the admins advice, naturally)
> >
> >Big deal. You go out and buy a new drive.
> >
> >10-year old HP works great with new drives. (I know...I've been there :-)
> >
>
> A guy here at work runs windows 3.1 on a PIII 700, it absolutely flies,
> the Wintel alliance has been really bad for PC's they should be by rights
> the most powerful things ever at the moment but they still lag badly even
> behind mainframes let alone these old sparc 20's we have here at work.
>
> All I can say is I can't wait for us to get out hands on some servers as
> we have just been green lighted to whack lvs clustering on them.
>
> We'll show the microsoft followers in this office what a real cluster is.
Heh heh heh
--
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] (Nick Condon)
Subject: The Peguin Gets Serious - [www.economist.com]
Date: 26 Jan 2001 23:11:06 GMT
[www.economist.com - Jan 25th 2001]
>From The Economist print edition
THE PENGUIN GETS SERIOUS
[Graphic shows a penguin putting on a suit and tie]
LINUX, the free computer operating system developed by thousands of volunteers
collaborating over the Internet, is still not taken very seriously in corporate
circles. It is used for niche tasks, such as running web servers, but it is
generally deemed to be too immature for the most demanding environments, such
as heavy-duty database systems. Recent events, however, suggest that Linux -
whose mascot is a cheerful penguin - may have outgrown the commune of its
birth.
On January 4th, Linus Torvalds, the Finnish programmer who co-ordinates the
development of Linux (see article), quietly released the latest version of the
Linux kernel the software that, as its name suggests, is at the core of the
operating system. Many of the enhancements in this new kernel (version 2.4)
make Linux more suitable for corporate use. In particular, they make it more
scalable, in other words, as capable of working on very large computer systems
as on small ones. Linux 2.4 can support more processors, more memory, and
faster networking and disk access, all prerequisites for industrial-strength
corporate use.
Just as the software itself has become more solid, so support for Linux within
the computer industry has also been growing. IBM, which has embraced Linux
across its product range, from PCs to mainframes, announced in December that it
would spend $1 billion on Linux-related activities in 2001. And this week the
Open Source Development Laboratory, an independent, not-for-profit research
centre financed by such industry giants as IBM, Intel and Dell, opened its
doors. It is intended to accelerate the adoption of Linux in business
computing, and to allow developers to test their software on the largest
systems. In other words, with the notable exceptions of Microsoft and Sun
Microsystems, the industry is pushing Linux for use in corporate computing.
Linux is also proving a popular choice for powering Internet appliances, such
as handheld computers and smart telephones. And, at the other end of the scale,
it is emerging as a powerful force in the specialist field of supercomputing.
By connecting hundreds of PCs running Linux in a "cluster", it is possible to
construct an enormously powerful machine for a fraction of the cost of a
conventional supercomputer. IBM recently started installing a 1,024-processor
Linux supercomputer at Shell�s research centre in the Netherlands, where the
oil company plans to use it to analyse geophysical data and to help it find
oil. And on January 16th, America�s National Centre for Supercomputing
Applications said that it had agreed to buy two Linux supercomputers from IBM,
one of which will be the fourth-fastest supercomputer in the world when it is
switched on this summer.
There are some fears that the embrace of Linux by big computing companies could
prove a mixed blessing. George Weiss of Gartner, a research firm, suggests that
IBM, in particular, "looms like a shadow" over the future of Linux; its obvious
enthusiasm, he says, might deter new firms from entering the market for Linux
support and services. Any attempt by big computing companies to hijack Linux,
declares Eric Raymond, an open-source guru, would be counter-productive, since
it would alienate the very people from whom Linux draws its strength. Yet it is
inevitable, as Linux becomes increasingly popular, that it will shed the
revolutionary cachet which, for some of its supporters, is its greatest appeal.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Whistler predictions...
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 18:11:01 -0500
Mart van deWege wrote:
>
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> <snip some stuff>
> >> In Microsoft's new EULA they will simply state that
> >
> >> *** YOU *** agree to this on a permanent basis.
> >
> >
> >
> > No license agreement can take away your rights.
> Erik,
>
> READ the bloody EULA for a change! It specifically states that
> ONLY a single backup is permitted. So if I like to be safe and
> want to have multiple redundant backups, I am in violation,
> although copyright law and precedent specifically grant me the
> right to make multiple backups.
> I am not even talking about the fact that my Win98 OEM EULA was
> tied to my HARDWARE. Technically I am now in violation of it,
> because I have upgraded my HD, and Win98 is no longer installed
> on the HARDWARE it was licensed on.
> Now Microsoft should know they can't make these conditions stick
> in a court of law, so why do they keep putting them in?
For the same reason Loan Sharks and other criminals do...
>
> Mart
--
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: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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 15:27:35 +0200
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> ono wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe I am being a little harsh. Early Win2000 betas were slow too,
but
> > from
> > > what I saw there is no reason on Earth why any intelligent person
would
> > > "upgrade" from Win2K to Whistler. I'd bet it might go over with those
> > > running WinME, but I doubt many people who run Win2K will waste their
time
> > > and money on it.
> > I heard that they want to put the cd-burner into the os. It's about time
> > they do something about that. I had it with shoving out money for stupid
> > burner-software upgrades.
> > 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).
>
> With all due respect, putting a CD-burner INTO the kernal is about the
> dumbest idea I've ever heard of...
He meant that the OS come with a builtin cd-burner, I very much doubt that
it's in the kernel.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler predictions...
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 15:42:30 +0200
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:R98c6.559$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> You're a real idiot Charlie.
>
> "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> It will be a year after the release before any serious sales
> > >> are made on the OS.
> >
> > GEE! NT was this way. W2k IS this way...
> > Why would Microsoft's attempt at a 64 bit operating system
> > be any different then their 32 bit entrants?
Because there Whistler isn't just 64bit OS, it has a port on IA-64 (using
native code, refer to slashdot's article about for proof about it), it also
run on x86 (that is what I currently use), and probably on x86-64 (AMD) as
well.
I can predict major headaches in the future, there will be three platforms
for the home market, x86 (AMD & Intel), IA-64(Intel), x86-64(AMD) and the 64
bit proccessor will not be able to swap binaries.
I wonder how long AMD are going to push their x86-64 before they will move
to copy IA-64 (would really like to lay my hands on <$4k Itanuim, only
possibility at the moment is AMD).
ISVs will probably use x86 as a base line, the problem is that while x86
code will work on all three platforms, on Itanuim is takes a *big, big BIG*
performance hit.
BTW, by all accounts, any one that wants to move to IA-64 will have to leave
9x behind. (Yeah!!!) It's either Win2k-64/Whistler-64/Linux IA-64/?NetBSD
IA-64?
> Win2k was an 80% rewrite, while Whistler is about 10-15% new code. Big
> difference.
>
> As for 64 bit, if there was a differnet 64 bit version of windows out,
they
> might run that. But there's not.
AFAIU, the difference between 32 bit & 64 bit is mainly in the HAL, NT
itself is platform independent.
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 00:22:06 +0200
"John Travis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I haven't heard this. And how the shit is this a good thing? Opera is
> still a better browser (5.02 now) in almost every regard. And it will
> probably still be in comparison to IE6 which will undoubtedly be utterly
> non standards-compliant. As soon as they started charging for it everyone
> would use something else anyway.
Up until Netscape 6, IE 5.5 was the most standard compliant browser in
history, IE6 is likely to keep this trend.
BTW, Mozilla & Netscape made a *big* mistake by supporting *only* W3C
standards, *no one* use the W3C standards because they were not supported
for a very long time.
What about getting real and implementing de-facto standards?
Netscape layers, frex, are a hack, but document.all is being widely used.
Why not support one of those? As well as supporting the W3C standards to do
it?
It makes the life of web designers much harder.
------------------------------
From: Shane Phelps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: New Microsoft Ad :-)
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 10:13:53 +1100
ono wrote:
>
> > A guy here at work runs windows 3.1 on a PIII 700, it absolutely flies,
> > the Wintel alliance has been really bad for PC's they should be by rights
> > the most powerful things ever at the moment but they still lag badly even
> > behind mainframes let alone these old sparc 20's we have here at work.
> The boys at our place have a big HP box (~400mhz, 1Gig Ram >30'000 euro) for
> doing VHDL synthesis. But since they got the NT version of the software they
> all run it on no-name ( 500mhz, 256 Meg Ram < 1500 euro) intel pc's. Guess
> why they do that? Yes you guessed right: more stable, a lot faster and even
> the gui looks better.
> Btw: The HP has an incredible uptime :-).
That may not be a fair comparison.
How many running concurrently on the HP box? If you can run 10
concurrent users
the HP box may be a better bet.
Lower system cost used to be the big benefit of NT over Unix for workstations,
especially a few years back when there was an order of magnitude
difference
in hardware costs.
I think you'll find the cost of Unix workstations has come *way*
down over the last couple of years. I paid $A4500 for a Sun Ultra5
(400 MHz, 512MB) recently - probably 50% more than an equivalent Dell
or twice a no-name brand. HP pricing may have come down as well, along
with RS/6000 and SGI.
If there's a Linux or *BSD version, you'll be able to run on the same
hardware as NT (was that NT4 or W2K?) but slightly cheaper.
Not that it really matters that much. If the NT solution is working well
then it's a good solution.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2001 18:22:58 -0500
From: Glitch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Comparison: Installing W2K and Linux 2.4
>
>
> Pardon me but your inability to read the subject or contents is showing...
>
> I didn't discuss the distro's I was talking about just the kernel
Then you can't include all of W2k in that comparison can you? You can
only include the W2k kernel. But since MS won't let you touch the source
code I guess Linux wins in that respect, doesn't it?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
