Linux-Advocacy Digest #546, Volume #32 Wed, 28 Feb 01 00:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: NT vs *nix performance ("Jan Johanson")
Re: MS websites: a tale of total and humiliating failure! (.)
Re: NT vs *nix performance ("Jan Johanson")
Re: Kulkis: please trim the sig (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: NT vs *nix performance ("Jan Johanson")
Re: NT vs *nix performance ("Jan Johanson")
Re: NT vs *nix performance ("Jan Johanson")
Re: Ok i admit it, I am an arsehole (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: NT vs *nix performance ("Jan Johanson")
Re: NT vs *nix performance ("Jan Johanson")
Re: NT vs *nix performance ("Jan Johanson")
Re: Mircosoft Tax (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: NT vs *nix performance ("Jan Johanson")
Re: MS websites: a tale of total and humiliating failure! ("Chad Myers")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.linux.sux,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: 27 Feb 2001 22:10:06 -0600
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Good points, well backed up, thoroughly beyond doubt. You've
convinced
> > > me.
> >
> > the facts speak for themselves - it's been documented at hotmail, and
> > microsoft.com.
> > People working at hotmail have confirmed it, even slashdot has confirmed
it.
>
trusted.
>
> Basically, there are probably three or four people on the entire planet
> who *REALLY* know how Hotmail runs. Effectively what I want to know is
> why should we believe you're one of those people?
That is completely untrue. There are, in fact, several hundred people who
know exactly what hotmail runs on, how and why. It has employees and those
employees can easily see these facts. And they are not under any NDA. I know
this because I've talked to people who did or do work at hotmail. I've met
hotmail employees at shows. it's no secret what they are running on and
when. And the facts have never been disproven. Solaris backend, BSD front
end. However, right now it's a W2K front end (with only the click-ad servers
remaining on BSD) and a solaris backend. I expect to see that solaris
portion replaced before the end of the year.
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS websites: a tale of total and humiliating failure!
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 17:11:14 +1300
> 7. An interesting tidbit: When MS announced the release of Win2K, MS
> issued a memo to all of its employees telling them to not even think
> about using it for production because it was too unstable!!!!!!! :)
>
If this is true, I would sell my soul for a chance to see that memo =)
Interdepartmental Memo:
Attention all employees - the software you guys are writing is about as
useful as pureed dogshit, don't use it!
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.linux.sux,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: 27 Feb 2001 22:11:09 -0600
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Jan Johanson wrote:
> >
> > I agree, anyone thinking that an OS has no effect on the performance of
a
> > database running on it is an idiot.
> >
> > "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Jon Johanson wrote:
> > > >
> > > > To ignore the performance of an OS underlying a database indicates
your
> > > > complete lack of how software works as well as your ignorance of the
> > real
> > > > world interaction between hardware/software/users.
> > >
> > > Idiotic.
>
> Depends which system calls it uses. I was commenting on your blasting
> of someone for essentially no reason. Basically, there's no evidence
> one way or the other that the effects of the OS are greater than the
> effects of the database. You are talking through your hat.
> Two data points are insufficient to categorize a system with two
> degrees of freedom, a fact which any moron even remotely cognizant of
> statistics should recognize.
>
blasting without reason?
Again, I state a fact; the OS has a noticable impact on db performance.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Kulkis: please trim the sig
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 23:11:39 -0500
Brent R wrote:
>
> Aaron Kulkis wrote:
> >
> > Clamchu wrote:
> > >
> > > Hey bastard, what the hell's up with that ugly .sig?
> >
> > Exercising my right of free speech. Specifically, voicing my
> > opinion of people who have participated in extensive, repeated
> > slander against me.
> >
> > > You are clearly a
> > > bandwidth-wasting shit-head.
> >
> > Ever see a the bandwidth consumption of 20 simultaneous flame wars?
> >
> > > Honestly, how many of the people demonized
> > > in that stupid sig are even around anymore?
> >
> > over 90%
> >
> > > So, I respectfully plead
> > > that you trim all the wankers in that .sig. And while you're at it, add
> >
> > The wankers stay right there on the list of official wankers.
> >
> > > yourself. Oh wait a second, if you add yourself, that'd cause some sort
> > > of regenerative feedback to occur, which will over-load all of our
> > > news-servers.
> >
> > bad logic.
> > try again.
> >
> > >
> > > -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
> > > http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> > > -----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
> >
> > --
> > Aaron R. Kulkis
> > Unix Systems Engineer
> > DNRC Minister of all I survey
> > ICQ # 3056642
>
> Where's meow?
"Kid! I only have one more question....
Have you rehabilitated yourself?!?!?"
Meow: Yes
Very well then.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.linux.sux,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: 27 Feb 2001 22:13:04 -0600
"Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I agree, anyone thinking that an OS has no effect on the performance of
a
> > database running on it is an idiot.
>
> It actually has very little effect. DBM systems pretty much
> re-implement all OS features within themselves (vfs, caching, raw
> organization). The OS just needs to get out of the way. Some OSes
> may not be so good at that (like MacOS 9 or lower, for instance) --
> but by and large the OS has very little say.
So, the database has it's own tcp/ip stack? it's own named pipes interface?
handles multiprocessor concurrency with other applications on the OS
(amazing trick that one). it may handle the memory it's alloted by itself,
but that memory comes from the OS and how the OS manages virtual memory is
of significant impact.
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.linux.sux,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: 27 Feb 2001 22:13:07 -0600
"Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Jan Johanson wrote:
> >
> > The "ad" servers run BSD still - why? The ad servers are what put up the
> > banner ads. No one cared what they ran. Those will be migrated later -
they
> > are unimportant.
> >
> > The GFX servers provide all the images and run W2K.
> > The OE servers provide all the dymanic HTML and run W2K.
> > These are load balanced farms of W2K boxes.
>
> Can you cite a reference on these alleged facts, since you seem to
> be "in the know", ahem?
>
Go to netcraft.com and type in hotmail.com ...
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.linux.sux,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: 27 Feb 2001 22:13:14 -0600
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:CBFm6.462$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Jon Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:3a9a5bf2$0$19260$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:fG_l6.1224$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "Charlie Ebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > What I find hillarious about this is the author appearently
> > > > has never heard of HOT MAIL and how Microsoft has been trying
> > > > for the last decade to replace the FreeBSD servers which RUN
> > > > HOTMAIL with Windows counterparts.
> > >
> > > Jezuz Charlie. Stop being so stupid.
> > >
> > > 1) MS has not owned Hotmail for a decade, it's only owned it for 3
> years.
> > > 2) Hotmail has been running entirely on Win2k except for 3
> single-tasking
> > > graphic servers since July.
> >
> > I'm on your side of this Erik and don't have reason to doubt you but can
> you
> > help me find info about your item #2. I know they've switched all the
> front
> > end servers to w2k but I heard the backend application itself was
running
> on
> > solaris. Are you saying they've converted the application itself ?
>
> There are 3 single-tasking graphic servers that run a web server called
> "boa" under single-user mode FreeBSD. This gives them the ability to
simply
> server HTTP graphic files (which are completely static and don't require
any
> multitasking) very fast.
>
> Although, it appears that they're starting to phase even these out. Check
> out:
>
>
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=64.4.18.24&submit.x=72&submit.y=11
>
> Then look at the history, you'll see it wobbles between Win2k and FreeBSD.
> They may have even completely replaced it with Win2k, since the last
record
> of a change was a few weeks ago.
I believe the GFX server is purely w2k and handles all the inline graphics.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ok i admit it, I am an arsehole
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 23:13:22 -0500
Tim Hanson wrote:
>
> Aaron Kulkis wrote:
> >
> > Ok i admit it, I am an arsehole
> You'd better go out and hang yourself right now, or at least eat a worm
> or something. Make a public apology to Usenet Steering Committee.
1) What part of "I did not write that" do you not understand?
2) read the "path:" line in the headers.
> --
> Bombeck's Rule of Medicine:
> Never go to a doctor whose office plants have died.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.linux.sux,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: 27 Feb 2001 22:14:10 -0600
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Jan Johanson wrote:
>
> > And isn't Tux a "special" web add-on?
>
> Tux is a web server, and I suppose you could say it's
> special, since it's quite fast, and did I mention free too?
>
specweb classifies it as an add-on just as SWC is an add-on.
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: 27 Feb 2001 22:15:14 -0600
"Amphetamine Bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> jjs wrote:
>
> > Jon Johanson wrote:
> >
> > Gee, and IBM has the money and has done TPC before and yet they
> don't have a
> > > benchmark using linux. In fact, they use windows 2K even when running
their
> > > own database.
>
> No, actually IBM has banned Windows 2000 for all internal use! Yes,
> it is true!
No, it's not. Prove your claim.
> >
> > Yes, IBM supports the windows pc line, it is one of their
> > supported OSes, but I think you are somewhat deceived
> > if you think windows is their only concern, Yes, IBM wants
> > to see windows pcs, there's money in it.
>
> It is interesting to note that the PC Division has been losing $1
> billion a year for several years now while OS/2 brings in about a $1
> billion a year. Guess which line IBM tries to kill?
IBM PC's not making money. I can believe that. OS/2 making money, sure, why
not. It's paid for, any sales now are just profit. So..?
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.linux.sux,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: 27 Feb 2001 22:17:14 -0600
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Jon Johanson wrote:
>
> > Special cache? You mean some software anyone can buy and run outta the
box?
> > You didn't notice the AIX box has 12 processors versus 8 for the w2k box
> > (and it only beat it by 14% with 50% more processors).
>
> You have to ask yourself why microsoft doesn't just
> submit benchmarks for the 32-way system on which
> win 2k can ostensibly run. Think about it.
Perhaps they are working on it now? And MS doesn't do the submissions,
hardware vendors do.
>
> > I did see the custom benchmark buster Tux system beating it by a
sizzling 3
> > whole percentage points! Woo hoo!!
>
> You've got the chronology all wrong.
>
> Linux blasted into first place in specweb last summer.
> In the process is beat all existing windows results by
> a wide margin, something like 2:1.
>
> We haven't yet seen the Linux response to the latest
> microsoft results, but they will come.
I've seen the two dell tests, one under the other, tux doing 7500 and iis5
doing 7300. Nothing newer than that.
>
> > > I have a very low end server (Compaq Pentium Pro 200)
> > > here at the office - I did some quick benchmark tests with
> > > apache, mind you - not something really fast like zeus or
> > > tux, just plain old apache on Red Hat 7.0,and I get 4200
> > > requests per second from that tired old Linux box, over
> > > a single100 mbit ethernet interface.
> >
> > Amazing... but I think you are lying. Why? Well, how do you figure that
you,
> > joe blow average user,
>
> Well, first of all, I'm hardly "joe blow average user", but...
>
> > using a piece of crap pentium pro scraper can get
> > 4200 but it takes IBM a quad Xeon 700 to get 4200? You really expect me
to
> > believe that you generated 4200 rps on a PP200? ahahahaha
>
> You completely misunderstand the whole concept here.
<snip>
no, what I understand is that you made up some test that doesn't equate to
what we're talking about so therefore is completely invalid in this thread.
You hoped others might mistake the 4200 claim as specweb claim.
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 23:18:43 -0500
Giuliano Colla wrote:
>
> "." wrote:
> >
> > > > (BTW, Office 95 was significantly better than Office 2000)
> > > >
> > > Care to elaborate Giuliano? Interesting point. Or anyone else have
> > > any opinions on this?
> > >
> >
> > Office 95 - a couple of Y2K patches, occasionally crashes for no apparent
> > reason, no office assistant, unobtrusive and optional office sidebar (I
> > hated it, but I loved that fact that it would fucking STAY GONE, not like
> > the bloody paperclip)
> >
> > Office 97 - two NON-cumulative service packs, still unreliable, office
> > assiSATANt, slower, often can't even INSTALL without introducing a couple
> > of screwups into the registry (regclean sometimes picks these up)
> >
> > Office 2000 - I don't even want to start on this, IMO it is pure evil,
> > but let's just say 'compulsory registration' and leave it at that.
>
> That's more or less my experience, with minor differences, because
> localized versions suffer from MS inability to tell apart code from text
> messages. After Office 95 (not good but bearable) we got Office 97 for
> free, bundled in a few PC we bought, and found it slow, dramatically
> more unstable than Office 95 we had. After some time all the Office 97
> versions have been uninstalled, and reverted (with some pain and
> StarOffice help) to Office 95 for which we had a site license.
> Compulsory registration of Office 2000 rules it out for our use: we
> frequently wipe clean computers and reinstall everything, and usually
> those registration gimmicks fail painfully. However I haven't seen any
> useful feature added since Office 95, I've seen the product becoming
> bloated, unsecure and more and more unstable. When a text editor decides
> to correct the name of your customer because it thinks you misspelled
Oh man...what was the name?
> it, and replaces it with a word you'd better not use in a polite letter,
> you understand that the added "features" are really idiotic. If you're
> writing in a hurry, you may not notice it. If the customer gets the
> letter, this significantly increases the Total Cost of Ownership, if you
> understand what I mean. For that reason the only place where you may
> find Office 97 at our company is in a number CD's neatly piled up in a
> corner. Sometimes they are used to get clip art cartoons.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: "Jan Johanson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.linux.sux,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: 27 Feb 2001 22:19:05 -0600
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Boris Dynin wrote:
>
> > We discussed it on this group already. Linux results are for some
strange
> > kernel mode web server called Tux which nobody seems to use.
>
> Actually there's no thing strange about it except the
> price/performance ratio - and it's a brand spanking
> new product, so there's naturally not been an instant
> wholesale conversion. Give it a few years.
>
> > This means (to
> > me) that Linux results are quite useless.
> > As for AIX results, they were achieved on more powerful end expensive
> > hardware than IIS test above: 12 CPUs for AIX vs. 8 for W2k, 64GB RAM
for
> > AIX vs. 32 GB for W2k.
>
> So why doesn't microsoft post some benchmarks with
> a 32-way box? think about it.
Perhaps cause they simply have not... yet
>
>
> > I wouldn't be surprised if AIX test configuration did cost several times
> > more than W2k.
>
> However the Linux configuration was much cheaper,
> and the software cost was zero.
But the cost of the OS and software is insignificant compared to the
hardware so... so what.
------------------------------
From: "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: MS websites: a tale of total and humiliating failure!
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 04:04:01 GMT
"Amphetamine Bob" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "." wrote:
> >
> > > Every source that claims that MS tried multiple conversions of Hotmail to
NT
> > > all reference the same *SINGLE* story published on less than credible news
> > > site with "unnamed" sources.
> >
> > Cnet - Sun->NT
> > http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-344896.html
> >
> > ZDNet - BSD->NT
> > http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/2000/30/ns-17071.html
> >
> > True to form with the Microsoft web site, searching for something doesn't
> > turn it up. Do you have a link to microsoft.com with their most recent
> > official statement?
> >
> > > Meanwhile, MS themselves stated specifically that no conversion was ever
> > > attempted. Further, the claim was that MS tried to convert to NT within
> > > weeks of purchasing Hotmail. It would have taken them months just to
> > > familiarize themselves with the system enough to even begin such a task,
let
> > > alone complete and fail within weeks.
> >
> > That's based on a false premise... MS would be quite capable of fucking
> > up the conversion in just a couple of weeks. A sane programmer wouldn't
> > attempt it without reading and understanding the source code, but sanity
> > is a bit short in some areas.
>
> I believe that the most recent story was based on multiple (many)
> sources, all current MS employees. They repeated the same statement
> about MS not being able to run Hotmail on NT after multiple tries and
> also stated that almost all of MS big websites are running on Unix,
> even after numerous attempts to get them running on MS software. All
> of the employees wished to remain anonymous.
>
> Here are the facts from that article (from my notes).
>
> 1. Link Exchange. MS bought Link Exchange and tried to move it from
> Oracle over to SQL. They threw a ton of their best employees into the
> problem. After 2 months they gave up and put it on Oracle/Solaris
> where it remains. :)
URL? This sounds like bullshit.
> 2. BCentral. This site runs on Free BSD, BSD/OS and Solaris. MS
> tried very hard to migrate it to NT and Win2K. They had to quadruple
> the servers to pull it off and they decided it was not worth it! :)
More bullshit.
>
> 3. Hotmail. Sure there are a few Win2K servers there but 99% of the
> site runs on Free BSD. :)
What? It's all Win2K with Solaris database servers on the backend (to
be converted at a later date)
>
> 4. MSN!!!!!!! Yes, MS' own flagship site runs on Apache/Solaris! :)
The site www.msn.com is running Microsoft-IIS/5.0 on Windows 2000.
Am I not reading that correctly? Where do you get "Apache/Solaris" from
that? Perhaps certain parts (which are hosted by other companies)
might be, but by and large, MSN is Win2K/IIS5.
> 5. BCentral's ad server is 100% Free BSD. :)
Which was purchased from another company, just like Hotmail.
>
> 6. WebTV is almost completely run on Solaris. :)
Again, another purchase.
These things don't happen over night. You may be used to small web
sites in which migration overnight is easy, but when you have thousands
or millions of a hits a day, it's not so easy.
Besides, MS doesn't have a huge incentive to migrate these sites since
they're working right now. They don't have time or money to spend just
to make morons like you shut up.
They had to migrate Hotmail, however, since the existing setup was
failing left and right with the load.
> 7. An interesting tidbit: When MS announced the release of Win2K, MS
> issued a memo to all of its employees telling them to not even think
> about using it for production because it was too unstable!!!!!!! :)
More bullshit...
That's interesting, because MS migrated their SAP R/4 database servers
to Win2K when it was in Beta (3).
MS was using Win2K RC1 and 2 on their live web site (www.microsoft.com).
In fact, by RC2 or so, more than 50% of their live web servers were
Win2K.
-Chad
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
