Linux-Advocacy Digest #168, Volume #28 Wed, 2 Aug 00 01:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Drestin Black")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Drestin Black")
Re: AARON KULKIS...USENET SPAMMER, LIAR, AND THUG (Donovan Rebbechi)
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Drestin Black")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Drestin Black")
Re: What are all you nix trolls doing in the WINDOWS advocacy list? ("Mike Byrns")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Drestin Black")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Drestin Black")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Drestin Black")
Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark ("Mike Byrns")
Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive! ("Drestin Black")
Re: LOSEDOS can physically destroy your hard drive! ("Drestin Black")
Re: Learn Unix on which Unix Flavour ? (Grant Edwards)
Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive! ("Drestin Black")
Re: A Case Study of Software RAID Systems ("Drestin Black")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why Lycos Selected Microsoft and Intel
Date: 1 Aug 2000 23:04:50 -0500
In article <utLh5.3099$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> I can't speak to anything YOU think, but Lycos still uses FAST. And if
>> you happen to do a search on Lycos, you will see the FAST icon at the
>> bottom. Check your facts first.
>
>I just did a search on Lycos, and I see no FAST icon. I do see an icon for
>DMOZ and Direct Hit, but nothing relating to FAST.
>
>I tried with both IE and Netscape, just to be sure it wasn't something
>related to content targeted pages.
>
>> These are facts:
>> Lycos IS a customer of FAST.
>> Lycos does use the FAST search engine for web search.
>> FAST does use FreeBSD as the search OS.
>
>The only evidence of this you've presented seems to be wrong.
Try again. The icons at the bottom change from
fast to Direct Hit to DMOZ and several combinations.
Perhaps it depends on what results are returned.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: 1 Aug 2000 23:09:07 -0500
"Jun Nolasco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "Donal K. Fellows" wrote:
> >
> > In article <uveh5.11098$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Many corporations use WinNT and now Win2000 for their largest, most
> > > heaviest tasks.
> >
> > The PC bus architecture has the I/O throughput for that sort of stuff?
> > The usual tactic is to get a proper mainframe or Sun Enterprise or
> > what-have-you[*], and I've never heard of a port of NT to that size of
> > iron...
> >
> > Donal.
>
> Then you'd be surprised to hear that the top 5 of the latest TPC-C
> Performance results use Windows 2000. Plus the top 10 TPC-C
> Price/Performance results are either WinNT or Win2000.
Actually it's ALL of the top 55 positions in Price/Performance using NT(4 or
4) and SQL Server (6.5 or 7).
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: 1 Aug 2000 23:10:36 -0500
"Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8m6f7f$hf3$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jun Nolasco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > Then you'd be surprised to hear that the top 5 of the latest TPC-C
> > Performance results use Windows 2000. Plus the top 10 TPC-C
> > Price/Performance results are either WinNT or Win2000.
>
> Partitionable or non-partitionable data?
The name of the benchmark is TPC-C. It's detailed and specific. The results
are audited. Vendors do their thing and try to "win." Your question is
better direct towards tpc.org and perhaps asking them to develop a benchmark
more suited to your fovored product to win. But, as it stands now: read'em
and weep.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi)
Crossposted-To:
misc.legal,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.libertarian,talk.politics.libertarian,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,soc.singles
Subject: Re: AARON KULKIS...USENET SPAMMER, LIAR, AND THUG
Date: 2 Aug 2000 04:11:13 GMT
On Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:23:15 -0400, Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> Consumption taxes hit the lower and middle classes harder because they
>> spend a greater portion of their income.
>
>1. Make an exemptiong for food (unprepared, not restaurant purchases)
>and medicine.
This softens their impact, but the above still applies.
>2. It encourages savings and investment
Yes, this is one of the advantages of consumption taxes.
>3. PROPORTION of doesn't matter. Are you trying to say that high wages
> earners use MORE government resources than low-wage earners?
If you make a flat amount, it is just plain unfair. Are you trying to
imply that someone on $7500 or so a year should pay the same amount of
tax as a millionaire ??? That sounds a tad unfair to me. Not only that,
but it would erode the revenue base badly enough that you'd need to
make steep cuts to services to fund the tax breaks.
>Even at a flat-rate income tax, how can you justify a $60,000/year
>family paying 3x as much taxes as the $20,000/year family when the
>$20,000/year family typically consumes FAR more community resources????
Did it occur to you that the 20,000 cannot afford to pay anywhere near
as much as the 60,000 a year family ?
>What would be far fairest of all would be if everyone paid the same
>DOLLAR AMOUNT in taxes, REGARDLESS of income.
What, are you saying that a millionaire should pay the same dollar amount as
a grad student on $7500 or so ? I'd hardly call that "fair".
This would require one of the following:
(1) Making taxes so high that the low income earners do not even earn enough
income to pay their taxes, or
(2) Cutting back public services to the point where health and education
are on a user-pays ( or goes without ) model.
Both alternatives would move things back to the 19th century kind of scenario
-- how much you earn would be predetermined by how much your parents earned,
because the poor kids would not receive health care or a decent education ( if
any education at all ) OTOH, the rich kids would be on a gravy train.
What you'd end up with is an anti-meritocracy, where old money takes
precedence over new genius.
--
Donovan
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: 1 Aug 2000 23:13:09 -0500
"fungus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8m411b$i2a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > The PC bus architecture has the I/O throughput for that sort of stuff?
> > > The usual tactic is to get a proper mainframe or Sun Enterprise or
> > > what-have-you[*], and I've never heard of a port of NT to that size of
> > > iron...
> > >
> >
> > Yes, actually, it does. This is proven all the time.
>
> Huh? Show me a PC bus which can transfer 80Gb/second
> sustained.
so?
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: 1 Aug 2000 23:15:11 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8m411b$i2a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In article <uveh5.11098$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > Chad Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Many corporations use WinNT and now Win2000 for their largest, most
> > > > heaviest tasks.
> > >
> > > The PC bus architecture has the I/O throughput for that sort of stuff?
> > > The usual tactic is to get a proper mainframe or Sun Enterprise or
> > > what-have-you[*], and I've never heard of a port of NT to that size of
> > > iron...
> > >
> >
> > Yes, actually, it does. This is proven all the time. Benchmarks head to
head
> > against the biggest iron Sun can muster is defeated by Compaq and Dell
boxes
> > using Wintel.
>
> Only on machines that cost as much or more than similarly equipped Sun
> boxes.
>
wrong wrong wrong wrong - again and again and again you are wrong and proven
wrong and demonsrated pathetically stupid and did I mention wrong?
Sun is beaten by 3 times the performance on hardware that costs 1/2 the
price! Over and over it's proven that sun hardware costs too much and
delivers squat. The pierced masterbaters who worship sun hardware have
failed to recognize their idol has been left behind...
------------------------------
From: "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: What are all you nix trolls doing in the WINDOWS advocacy list?
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:16:59 -0500
"Perry Pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Tue, 1 Aug 2000 15:12:24 -0500,
> Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >So there are idiots on both sides of the fence. What I don't understand
is
> >that every time I snip the crossposts to the nix groups on of my replies,
>
> Could the reason you snip the crossposts to the nix groups is becuase
> you're spreading lies and FUD about nix and nix users and you don't
> want to get their rebuttal. Some of your posts that I found via
> deja.com tend to suggest that.
I've only been here for a few days and that's been my assessment of the
situation to date from my perspective. I just don't know why advocacy
forums, which are forums of LIKE-MINDED people discussing advantages of
their OS-of-choice and helping to educate readers, need to be "invaded" by
trolls from the other advocacy groups. I know there are some Windows folks
that do the same thing. I'm justr asking people to consider their motives
in doing this crap. Are you that recognition deficiant?
> >some nixer puts them back. It's like they are looking for notoriety
amongst
> >their peers.
>
> Name some *nix users that do that.
Mr. Kulkis and petilon come to mind. I'm sure there are more.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: 1 Aug 2000 23:22:07 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Chad Myers wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > >
> > > > > If Microsoft has such a good platform, then why are the servers
> > > > > that come under the heaviest usage Unix machines?
> > > > >
> > > > > How come no Lose2000 machines?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
> > > >
> > > > Now that's a compelling argument! Also completely false.
> > > >
> > > > Many corporations use WinNT and now Win2000 for their largest, most
> > > > heaviest tasks.
> > >
> > > EVERY Fortune 500 company I have worked at keeps their most
> > > important databases on AS/400's and Unix machines.
> >
> > which demonstrates exactly what we've been saying all along. You are
full of
> > it! And, besides, so what if 1 or 2 F500 companies keep "most" of their
> > "important" databases on AS/400s and Unix machines according to
ex-employee
> > kookis. All the rest run on less expensive, easier to maintain/operate
and
> > more productive Windows/Intel boxes.
>
> Refresh my memory....
>
> Exactly how is re-installing the operating system, re-installing all of
> the applications, and then having to tweak all of the settings through
> a gui every couple of months "easier to maintain and operate"
>
> In EXCEEDINGLY RARE the event of catastrophic failure on a Unix machine,
> all you have to do is
>
> a) reload the absolute minimal base operating system (30 min max.)
> b) recover from last night's backup tapes.
>
> ta-daaaaaaaaaaaaah, perfect restoration.
>
> Unix engineer goes back to desk, relaxes, posts to Usenet,
>
>
> Meanwhile, drestin adress will be working overtime on his LoseNT box,
> long into the night...going home when he has achieved the mere goal
> of "getting it running"...and then will resume working on this ONE
> BOX for the next two day.
No - you miss the scenario completely. When the rare even of a Wintel box
failure occurs, my clients simply... continue onwards as if nothing happened
while the machine is pulled from the cluster and repaired. Load balancing
spreads the load to other machines and no on even knows there is a missing
machine. Restoring Backups? Huh? reloading the OS?!!! huh? what crack have
you been smoking? Rebuilding boxes? You mean, you don't have a ghost of your
system on-line? You mean you aren't using RAID? You mean you aren't using
redundant hardware? OOoooooohhhh, you aren't using W2K - you are still
living in the 70s with losnix - hahahaha The only sleep I lose when a box
goes down is if I should hear the sound outlook makes when it receives an
e-mail flagged "operator notification" - but I've learn to ignore and sleep
through them - it's never catastrophic. The day the generator doesn't start
on the first crank is the day I'll worry a tiny bit, the day more than 1 of
200 10,000 watt UPS batteries doesn't test 99.9% I might give someone a
sideways glance. The day I see more than .5% packetloss or a ping over 20 ms
on our redundant feeds from level 3, I will cause someone there to sweat.
meanwhile, we'll continue to lob DoS attacks from zombie unix boxes and
laugh as unix takes the heat...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: 1 Aug 2000 23:18:38 -0500
In article <oYMh5.8365$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Mike Byrns is quite obviously a crack addict.
>>
>> Get help, Mike.
>
>Ignoring the lack of rebuttal and ad hominem rhetoric, I'll take the
>opportunity to support my position, an opportunity that you chose to throw
>away:
>
>Windows 2000 is a stable, practical, user-friendly operating system that
>scales from the desktop to the datacenter.
It might be stable, but you are accepting that on faith from a
company that has the worst record on Bugtraq since it doesn't really
have any history. With unix type systems you can see actual examples
of machines that have been running more that a year without problems.
>The consistant user interface
>allows for rapid adoption and training of new IS staff. In this age of
>staff shortages it's relative simplicity of operation is a boon to
>organizations seeking to "upgrade" existing staff to administer new servers.
Yes, it is consistantly difficult to manage remotely.
>In addition, the consistancy as a platform allows near drop-in replacement
>of new-hire staff whereas the balkanization of the nix world often requires
>retraining of admin staff accustomed to another "flavor" of nix. It's ease
>of implementation and related time-to-market advantages are well known and
>have been shown as an advantage of Windows vs. nix for some time (references
>available on request).
I think the best thing you can say about win2k is that it isn't
quite as bad as the previous versions. Still - try changing
the name of a running server - why won't it do it without a
reboot?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: 1 Aug 2000 23:24:01 -0500
so, what you are saying below is - you simply can't. You are ignorant and do
not posses even remotely enough intelligence to even cut & paste an answer
eh?
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "fungus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > >
> > > Mike Byrns wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Everything is redundant.
> > > >
> > >
> > > No it *isn't*, that's the entire point. How many times must
> > > it be pointed out to you?
> >
> > but, you are wrong and we're trying to educate yo.
>
> Um... you're lacking in two crucial areas, Drestin Adress
> Specifically: knowledge and wisdom.
>
>
> > >
> > >
> > > The Microsoft TPC database is split into equal chunks, if
> > > any chunk/machine is lost then all processing stops for that
> > > part of the database.
> >
> > prove that statement and maybe we'll listen.
>
> What's the point. Every other time something is we show you proof
> of this, that or the other, you ignore it.
>
>
> --
> Aaron R. Kulkis
> Unix Systems Engineer
> ICQ # 3056642
>
> I: "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"
>
> J: Loren's 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
>
> A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
>
> B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.
>
> C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
> sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
> that she doesn't like.
>
> D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.
>
> E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
> ...despite (D) above.
>
> F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
> response until their behavior improves.
>
> G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
> adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
>
> H: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: 1 Aug 2000 23:25:11 -0500
"petilon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> "John Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> You are not load balancing SQL.
> >>
> >> i.e., you are lying again.
> >>
> >
> > Can you prove this? Im currently working on a system like
> > this so if its all in my imagination I would love to know.
>
> Yes, I can prove it. But first you are going to have to explain
> what you understand by the term "load balancing", with respect
> to a DBMS. If we don't start with a definition then I cannot
> prove anything because you are simply going to redefine "load
> balancing" to mean something else.
ohhh no no no - you set it up and wrote it and we know you are lying so ...
you can back pedel all you'd like. I know what load balancing is - obviously
you do not. Now it's up to YOU to pull YOURSELF outta the lie you've
propogated.
------------------------------
From: "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft retests TPC benchmark
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:25:40 -0500
"Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:39879d71$0$33843$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > You dare to claim "unix boxes are essential to running microsoft.com?"
> > >
> >
> > Yes. And based on the existance of Unix boxes at microsoft.com,
> > Microsoft believes this, too.
>
> Prove it or continue to be considered the poorest liar on usenet
Let me take this opportunity to greet you, Mr. Black. If you've read my
posts I think you know that I am a Windows advocate. I hope that you take
this the way that I intended it as USENET can mask the intentions of the
most well mannered poster but I fail to see what you hope to gain for we
Windows advocates by posting things like this? If you have a personal beef
with these folks, and I think that you do if Mr. Kulkis is to be believed,
then I suggest that you counter him in a more appropriate forum. Like the
parking lot. nix folks are, in my experience, less concerned with physical
fitness than Windows folks are with the former preferring donuts to barbells
:-)
> > You're the one that argues that Microsoft doesn't need Unix to run
> > their websight, when each machine costs them a good $100,000 more
> > than if they were using their home grown LoseNT and Lose2000 shitholes.
>
> That is correct. MS does not need now nor has EVER at any time whatsoever
> used Unix to run www.microsoft.com. I challenge you to disprove that
> statement. Go ahead, or are you just a big bag of bullshit? are you a huge
> liar? full of unix dreams and wishes never fulfilled. There are some unix
> boxes at CD production plants that produce MS CDs, sure, but a unix box
> producing www.microsoft.com output? hahahahahahha keep dreaming liar.
The only part of this that I agree with is the request for proof of
assertation. Please play nice Mr. Black. This is really only just a game.
Our effect is negligable on the state of computing.
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive!
Date: 1 Aug 2000 23:28:17 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Drestin Black wrote:
> > > >
> > > > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > > Bob Hauck wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 29 Jul 2000 11:57:44 -0500, Drestin Black
> > > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >Remember how we always laughed at people when they'd stay
stupid
> > things
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm laughing now, at the advocate who does not think before
posting.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >well, it turns out that Linux onces again "innovates" - it's
now
> > > > possible to
> > > > > > >actually, physically destroy your hard drive using some simple
code
> > > > (link
> > > > > > >provided)...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But not by accident, and not unless you are root, and not just
on
> > > > > > Linux. This being a problem with the IDE _hardware_, it would
> > affect
> > > > > > all other systems that support IDE. Some of _them_ do not have
any
> > > > > > security at all so any user can do this.
> > > > >
> > > > > And...of course...who keeps promoting IDE instead of the far
> > > > > superior SCSI....Microsoft, of course.
> > > >
> > > > No fuckhead - I promote SCSI, always have always will, don't even
have
> > an
> > > > IDE drive. MS promotes SCSI, only a confused trolling fudster like
> > yourself
> > > > would think otherwise. How pathetic.
> > >
> > > Oh really, then why does MS always spearhead the drive to "update"
> > > IDE protocols every time they become obsolete.
> > >
> >
> > and why shouldn't they? That has nothing to do with their prefered HD
> > interface....
>
> You really are fucking dense.
"The wise man is mocked by fools!"
thank you for proving this true kookus... you fool!
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: LOSEDOS can physically destroy your hard drive!
Date: 1 Aug 2000 23:29:29 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Drestin Black wrote:
> > > >
> > > > you missed the point - this doesn't just trash partion tables or
make
> > data
> > > > inaccessible - it actually physically destroys the firmware - as in,
IDE
> > > > drive => brick.
> > >
> > > And you are alleging that IDE controls codes are available only in
> > > Linux and Unix?
> >
> > Nope.
>
> Then you admit that LOSEDOS CAN DESTROY YOUR HARD DRIVE!!!!!!!!!
>
absolutely - and faster and better than losenix too !! :{)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,alt.solaris.x86,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Learn Unix on which Unix Flavour ?
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 04:31:16 GMT
In article <8m7uju$a43$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tim Prince wrote:
>
>At the risk of getting blown off the planet, I'll mention that
>cygwin/W2K is improving faster, much more attractively priced, and gives
>more opportunities for GPL software and portability to invade the
>Windows world.
>
>> > After they changed their name to Interix, I got a demo CD of
>> > their Open NT (or whatever the name was of their Posix/Gnu/NT)
>> > thing. I never got a chance to install it before it expired,
>> > so I don't know how well it worked. It looked like an
>> > impressive piece of work based on the literature.
>>
>> Most products do look impressive, in the literature.
I just noticed that in the Linux Journal 2000 buyers guide, Microsoft has an
ad for Interix: $99 for the whole thing -- it used to be more like $400.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! WHOA!! Ken and
at Barbie are having TOO
visi.com MUCH FUN!! It must be the
NEGATIVE IONS!!
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux can physically destroy your hard drive!
Date: 1 Aug 2000 23:31:26 -0500
"Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
>
> > you are making a poor asumption. I read the entire post (and the posts
to
> > the list as well as other articles about this) and am fully aware that
it's
> > possible to write a program like this that runs under Windows. Duh...
>
> You really are dense, aren't you? Here is a summary of the what was
said:
>
> Drestin:
>
> Andre posted a thing he called disk-destroyer.c (see below) which
> will use an IDE command to trash the partition table on a disk, thus
> rendering all data inaccessible.
>
> Arthur responded to THIS part of your post with:
>
> Windows has had this feature for years. I've
> had Win95 destroy it's partition table several
> times, all by itself, with no input from me.
> I've even had scandisk do it.
>
> Drestin:
>
> Apparently, however, there are other
> variants possible which will cause the drive to wipe out its firmware,
thus
> turning it into a true brick.
I didn't write the above.
>
> Arthur responded to THIS part of your post with:
>
> Seems to be a problem in the ATA/IDE spec that
> allows this. There's no reason Windows couldn't
> do it either. Note that Linux doesn't actually
> do this - you have to write and run code to make
> it happen.
>
> Drestin in response to Arthurs post:
>
> you missed the point - this doesn't just trash partion tables or make
data
> inaccessible - it actually physically destroys the firmware - as in, IDE
> drive => brick.
No, I understod it perfectly.
>
>
> This last statement by you clearly indicates that you did not read Arthurs
post
> in full, or you simply chose to ignore it. Arthur clearly did understand
that
> the firmware could be destroyed.
No, i understood. You are not making any points..
------------------------------
From: "Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Case Study of Software RAID Systems
Date: 1 Aug 2000 23:31:28 -0500
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Drestin Black wrote:
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > Drestin, this is hardly a glowing report forf Lose2000.
> >
> > not when you just change names and results until you get what you want
outta
> > it... nope...
>
> ALL I did was rename the "behavior" codes in order of desirability
>
> A Most desirable behavior
>
> B+ very good behavior
> B-
>
> C - Undesirable behavior
>
> D - One-foot-in-the-grave-the-other-on-a-banana-peel behavior.
>
>
> Do you dispute this?
yep.
------------------------------
** 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 (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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
******************************
