Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-11 Thread Philip Newton
Greg McCarroll wrote: > * Philip Newton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > AFAIK Samba implements the SMB protocol, which is the > > native resource (file, printer, ...) sharing protocol of > > Windows. So if you have Windows, you've already got an SMB > > client and server running. > > for the same

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-09 Thread Greg McCarroll
* Philip Newton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Greg McCarroll wrote on Freitag, 8. Juni 2001 11:11 > > And some pieces of software just wont be able to be plugged > > in - why can't i run Samba on Windows? > > Why would you want to? * in a heterogeneous network i may want to standardise on a s

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Chris Benson
On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 10:11:13AM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > * GUI > > I really don't want to have a server running a GUI, it adds at least some > overhead, encourages people to `work on the server' and as its an additional > process may add additional security concerns. A

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Philip Newton
Greg McCarroll wrote on Freitag, 8. Juni 2001 11:11 > And some pieces of software just wont be able to be plugged > in - why can't i run Samba on Windows? Why would you want to? AFAIK Samba implements the SMB protocol, which is the native resource (file, printer, ...) sharing protocol of Wind

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Greg McCarroll
* Struan Donald ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > * at 08/06 11:35 +0100 Robin Szemeti said: > > On Fri, 08 Jun 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > > > > calling wordpad an editor is as laughable as calling vi an editor ;-) > > > > arrghh .. burn the heretic! ... speak brother, for the truth will out ..

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Struan Donald
* at 08/06 11:54 +0100 Robin Szemeti said: > > pah! .. tis written in the scripture ... 'let he who hath one eye be > blessed' .. clearly the 'one eye' is a reference to the one 'i' in vi .. > its *obvious* innit ... I shall found my entire religion on this shadowy > fact wriiten by our lord him

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Robin Szemeti
On Fri, 08 Jun 2001, Struan Donald wrote: > * at 08/06 11:35 +0100 Robin Szemeti said: > > On Fri, 08 Jun 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > > > > calling wordpad an editor is as laughable as calling vi an editor ;-) > > > > arrghh .. burn the heretic! ... speak brother, for the truth will out .. >

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Struan Donald
* at 08/06 11:35 +0100 Robin Szemeti said: > On Fri, 08 Jun 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote: > > > calling wordpad an editor is as laughable as calling vi an editor ;-) > > arrghh .. burn the heretic! ... speak brother, for the truth will out .. > have you been using [x{0,1]]emacs again ... ? and th

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Robin Szemeti
On Fri, 08 Jun 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote: > calling wordpad an editor is as laughable as calling vi an editor ;-) arrghh .. burn the heretic! ... speak brother, for the truth will out .. have you been using [x{0,1]]emacs again ... ? -- Robin Szemeti

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Greg McCarroll
* Dean ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > There is entirely to much DLL upgrading for my liking at every possible > > chance with Windows software/service pack. I don't believe that this can > > really lead to a stable system. > > Win2k address a lot of these issues with its dll and system

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Dean
On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 10:11:13AM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote: > Well here are some reasons why i prefer UNIX to Windows * for servers, I'm going to play devils advocate. I've been using Win2k for the last four months and have a basic grasp of it. Its difficult because i agree with a lot of you

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Struan Donald
* at 08/06 10:11 +0100 Greg McCarroll said: > > Well here are some reasons why i prefer UNIX to Windows * for servers, > they are pretty much personal reasons and i'm sure not everyone agrees with > them. I'd also add that is something hardwary does go wrong and the box stops running, windows

Re: Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Greg McCarroll
* Jonathan Peterson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > > >At the end of the day, the simple fact is that Windows 2000 crashes more > >frequently than *n[ui]x does -- this surely is unquestioned fact. > > I just questioned it. Win2k appears to be a very nice OS, although I've > never used it at th

Religion (was Re: M$ SQueaLServer)

2001-06-08 Thread Jonathan Peterson
> >At the end of the day, the simple fact is that Windows 2000 crashes more >frequently than *n[ui]x does -- this surely is unquestioned fact. I just questioned it. Win2k appears to be a very nice OS, although I've never used it at the server end. It may have all sorts of scalability issues an