Linux-Advocacy Digest #501, Volume #30 Tue, 28 Nov 00 13:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: A Microsoft exodus! (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Whistler review. (T. Max Devlin)
Re: Whistler review. (J.C.)
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? ("Peter Foelsche")
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? (Giuliano Colla)
Re: Things I have noticed................ ("James")
Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever ("Ayende Rahien")
Re: Major shift ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Uptime -- where is NT? ("Erik Funkenbusch")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 12:39:45 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Curtis in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 11 Nov 2000 00:23:24
-0500;
>Les Mikesell wrote...
>> > > If it's unknown, they it wouldn't be executed or even viewed, it will
>> give
>> > > you the open with window.
>> >
>> >
>> > > As for executables, that is indeed a problem.
>> >
>> > I take this statement back, in the message box that Outlook gives you, the
>> > full file name appears, even with extentions off.
>> > No reason you wouldn't be able to make informed decisioned.
>>
>> Call up a few hundred people and quiz them on filename
>> associations. Let me know the percentage that know what
>> will happen with more than a couple.
>
>The best way to deal with ignorance is to get rid of it.
>
>Finding ways to work around ignorance is just an alternative and should
>be qualified as such instead of advocating it as the way things should
>be.
Is that why extensions are not displayed by default in Windows? Is that
why neither the administrator nor the user is ever asked if they'd like
Windows Scripting Host turned on by default?
DO YOU ACTUALLY EXPECT THAT IT WON'T BE NOTICED THAT YOUR STATEMENT IS
DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED TO THE BASIC PRINCIPLE OF WINDOWS?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== 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! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 12:39:39 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Ayende Rahien in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 11 Nov 2000
>"Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:8uilot$bvi$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> "Curtis" <alliem@kas*spam*net.com> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > Christopher Smith wrote...
>>
>>
>> > > > Isn't this part of the problem? I don't know if this setting
>> > > > affects how Outlook displays it's attachments because if it does and
>> is
>> > > > enabled, the user will not be able to tell what type of file it is.
>> > >
>> > > If they're used to not having extensions, then they'll look at the
>icon.
>> >
>> > But what if the icon is generic or an unknown? Also, a lot of
>executables
>> > come with their own icons.
>>
>> If it's unknown, they it wouldn't be executed or even viewed, it will give
>> you the open with window.
>
>
>> As for executables, that is indeed a problem.
>
>I take this statement back, in the message box that Outlook gives you, the
>full file name appears, even with extentions off.
>No reason you wouldn't be able to make informed decisioned.
How long was the filename? Windows is notorious for limiting the size
of the display of a path/filename in such dialog boxes.
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== 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! ======
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Microsoft exodus!
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 12:39:47 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Curtis in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Sat, 11 Nov 2000 01:27:33
-0500;
>Les Mikesell wrote...
>>
>> "Curtis" <alliem@kas*spam*net.com> wrote in message
>> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> > > Call up a few hundred people and quiz them on filename
>> > > associations. Let me know the percentage that know what
>> > > will happen with more than a couple.
>> >
>> > The best way to deal with ignorance is to get rid of it.
>> >
>> > Finding ways to work around ignorance is just an alternative and should
>> > be qualified as such instead of advocating it as the way things should
>> > be.
>>
>> Making everyone in the world memorize bizarre and arbitrary
>> name associations used by a single OS vendor is not going to
>> reduce ignorance.
>
>They however know how to use Word, their e-mail application and browse
>the web. You give them way too little credit when you find it
>unreasonable for them to memorise a few file extension in the name of
>their systems security. In fact, they don't even have to memorize them.
>Write them down and keep them close.
A better idea: don't build such a crappy system that it allows such
stupid behavior that people have to memorize a list of extensions. And
what happens when WSH starts using mime type or file type instead of
extensions to identify scripts/viruses?
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== 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! ======
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 17:36:59 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said Giuliano Colla in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sun, 26 Nov 2000
> >"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
> [...]
> >> WHY? I'm not going to be able to think until I figure out why! HOW?
> >> for that matter. HOW?
> >
> >You see? Even the fiercest fighter against MS monopoly finds sometimes
> >difficult just to consider that they could have done such a crappy thing
> >as they've done!
> >
> >As of how and why, two choices are available: incompetence (one point
> >for me) or sabotage for monopolistic purposes (one point for you).
>
> Well, I can't see this as being anything but incompetence, so I'll just
> hand you the point. But its the 'how' that gets me. I didn't even mean
> "why" in terms of human motivations, but why this is even possible. How
> the hell do you get a counter to wrap before it wraps?
>
IMO, but it's just a guess, they just take their internal
tick counter which has 1 ms resolution, so that it wraps
after 49.7 days, divide by 10 to comply with 10 ms
resolution, and hand this out as an uptime counter.
Software testers didn't notice, because they were not able
to keep a system running for 49 days before it crashed for
other reasons!
Did you read the posting, not long ago, of the guy who was
up late at night on win 9x, and at 3 am was told that
because of change from summer saving time to solar time his
clock was being put on hour back? And of course on hour
later he got exactly the same message?
Well, he was answered by someone knowing MS: Do you expect
software testers to stay up until 3 am to test the software?
Maybe the same considerations hold also in this case.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 12:46:54 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said kiwiunixman in comp.os.linux.advocacy on Mon, 27 Nov 2000 03:36:17
GMT;
>Spicerun, calm down, I think Ayende is a little excited because Windows
>may actually reach the realiability of UNIX/Linux (which is very
>unlikely due to its very poor design/achitecture), however, I don't
>think it will happen. From the description, it seem like Whistler will
>be mega-mega-mega-mega-mega-mega-mega-mega-mega bloatware that will
>require a 1Ghz processor and 512MB RAM just so that it can run a decent
>level of responsiveness due to all the hairy-fairy addons a gizmo's
>Microsoft has added to the OS (which most people don't really need).
Let's not forget, Ayende was the guy who said W2K runs fine on 32 Meg of
RAM. ;-D
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== 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! ======
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (J.C.)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Whistler review.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 29 Nov 2000 04:43:12 +1100
On Tue, 28 Nov 2000 19:04:50 +0200, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"J.C." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> On Tue, 28 Nov 2000 17:26:51 +0200, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>
>> >Alpha - not working.
>> >Beta - still not working
>>
>> Nope. Far too simplistic.
>
>No, it's a joke.
>I thought it was a well known one, but apperantely it isn't.
*shrug*
Never heard it. Sorry about that. Given the context of the conversation, though, it's
facetious. Did you have a point?
[snip]
>> ... and in the computer industry, market penetration is everything. So
>whether or not
>> something is "published openly", if it's used by a large chunk of the
>relevant population,
>> it can be referred to in the capacity of a standard, because the meaning
>has changed (to
>> everyone but yourself, as it appears). Whether or not the standard is
>"published
>> openly" makes no difference in the computer industry, particularly to end
>users.
>
>So does this make windows the standard OS, and IE the standard browser, and
>OE the standard Email Client, and MS the standard software-producer company?
Yes, it does. MS _has_ established themselves as the industry standard in those
areas.
>> >> >IIRC, the Java they wanted to develop would've supported windows
>spesific
>> >> >commands or libraries.
>> >>
>> >> ... so that way, it wouldn't run on OSs other than Windows... (duh...)
>> >
>> >If you used the windows spesific commands/libraries, yes.
>>
>> ... and that's exactly my point. MS did this to screw up Java. Have you
>tried wasting a brain
>> cell on it? MS encouraged developers to do this, precisely to remove
>Java's primary benefit:
>> write once, run anywhere. MS realized this as a threat and worked to kill
>off Java.
>
>I don't program in Java.
Should I care? Whether or not you program in Java is irrelevant. Re-read the point.
[snip]
>> MS's implementations of Java were fucked, to say the least. So, why did MS
>release these
>> munted versions of Java? To run apps written for this munted Java. Why did
>MS screw up Java
>> in the first place? See above.
>
>My knowledge of this is third party at best, as I don't program or interest
>very much in Java.
If you don't know the topic, then quit mouthing off about it, duh...
>> >> >They can do whatever they want with the office documents, there isn't
>a
>> >> >standard for office documents, therefor, you can't claim a propreity
>> >> >standard here.
>> >>
>> >> Um, you need a good English-language dictionary. It might help your
>> >spelling as well.
>> >> MS "can do whatever they want with the office documents" precisely
>> >_because_ the various
>> >> Office file formats are _proprietary_.
>> >
>> >But not _standards_ . Which is what you said they were.
>>
>> Did I say that the Office file formats are standards? Where?
>
>Sorry, you said formats, I didn't notice it.
Really? Oh, gee. You don't say. Your whole point is moot, then.
>> (Well, given MS's market penetration in the office-app market, it makes no
>difference; you're
>> playing semantic games with the meaning of `standard' and `de facto
>standard'...)
>
>No, there is a big difference between those things.
><blink> used to be a de facto standard, frex.
><table> is standard.
... there _used_ to be a big difference between the two. Today, though, the terms
are used interchangeably. Second, even given your first definition of `standard',
saying that "<table> is standard" introduces yet _another_ definition of standard.
(IIRC you said above that a standard was published openly. Is `<table>' published
openly? You're referring to something that comes with HTML `as standard', as
opposed to something being a `standard', or a `de facto standard'...)
So, you now have three definitions to untangle. Enjoy yourself.
[snip]
>> There are two? I refer you to the 3.1x incident, with the dialog box that
>appeared, erm...
>
>Oh, you mean the dialog that said:
>
>"Error number: <can't recall>
>Please contact Microsoft Beta Support"
>
>Which only appeared on the beta release of win3.1X?
>
>Nothing to suggest what the problem was.
Mmmm-hmmm. Perhaps there was no problem in the first place?
>Nothing to suggest that DR-DOS and its like are invovled.
... and they weren't. It was actually so people wouldn't use DR-DOS, and use MS-DOS
instead. That was one example of how MS unfairly booted their competitors out of the
arena.
--
J.C.
"The free flow of information along data highways being piped into our
homes and offices will permit unimaginable control by a small elite..."
-- 'The Thunder of Justice', pg. 264
------------------------------
From: "Peter Foelsche" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 09:47:10 -0800
"Bob Lyday" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
C:\>uptime corpserver
Uptime - system uptime utility for Windows NT
by Mark Russinovich
Systems Internals - http://www.sysinternals.com
Querying corpserver...done.
corpserver has been up for 111 days, 0 hours, 29 minutes, 40 seconds.
C:\>uptime
Uptime - system uptime utility for Windows NT
by Mark Russinovich
Systems Internals - http://www.sysinternals.com
This computer has been up for 6 days, 12 hours, 30 minutes, 15 seconds.
C:\>
How stupid of me to post into this flame newsgroup.
A software engineer with a minimum of experience ought to understand
(and if he is using some UNIX flavor he made this experience already),
that patching a running system/executable may result in a crash,
and thus appreciates that he cannot do it.
------------------------------
From: Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 17:47:05 GMT
"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>
> Said Giuliano Colla in alt.destroy.microsoft on Mon, 27 Nov 2000
> >Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >>
> >> > Said Giuliano Colla in alt.destroy.microsoft on Sat, 25 Nov 2000
> >> > >Now look what NT does. It exposes a 32 bit value, which is incremented
> >> > >in units of one hundredth of a second, as per specs, but when it reaches
> >> > >a value 10 times smaller than the all 1's value (i.e. after 49.7 days,
> >> > >instead 497) it goes back to zero. To be exact, when it reaches the
> >> > >binary value 11001100110011001100110011001 it goes back to zero. It's
> >> > >not a binary counter rolling over to zero!
> >>
> >> That's not the case. NT's tick counter is not in 10ms units, it's in 1ms
> >> units, though it increments it 55ms at a time (the system tick minimum
> >> resolution)
> >>
> >> It does roll over to 0 after filling up with all 1's.
> >>
> >> Here's a little exercise. Calculate the largest number of days a 32 bit
> >> value can hold if it holds 1ms units. The answer, 49.7 or so days.
> >
> >Here's a little exercise for you.
> >You have an internal tick counter made the stupid way MS has
> >done. (Don't tell me that a 1 ms resolution with 55 ms
> >uncertainty is smart because I won't buy it, but that's
> >another matter)
>
> Again, Giuliano, this ties in to the whole idea of using a counter. It
> is a *continuity indicate*, not a clock. As long as it is 55 ms ahead
> every 55 ms, it is not an issue.
>
No, Max, in this case we're speaking of the *internal* tick
counter (the one you get with a GetTickCount() function),
which is usually intended to perform timing measurements.
Being internal, continuity is not an issue. You want to know
how long it takes for an operation to complete, and you read
it before and after the operation. And you get two values
with 1 ms resolution, but both affected by a 55 ms
uncertainty. Maybe it's very "innovative" but from my young
inexperienced programmers I require something better.
Perhaps, as Eric pointed out, something better is available,
I didn't check, but this one is really stupid.
------------------------------
From: "James" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Things I have noticed................
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 19:45:43 +0200
Quite a fair comparison :-) (cannot comment on Mac - very rare around
here).
So Unix pips WinNT in stability, versatility and scalability.
And Win2k pips all existing Unixes in desktop functionality and usability.
Both are moving ahead to address their respective shortcomings. Unix with
new desktops like KDE2, and Windows with more stable servers, such as Win2k.
But for the foreseeable future Unix will continue to be the choice for
servers, and Windows for the desktop. Amen.
James
"kiwiunixman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I know the post I did was very "wintroll like", however, I am only
> trying to stir a bit of shyte in this newsgroups :) with the absence of
> Claire Lynn and co, things have been getting pretty boring, needed to
> post something to liven up the atmosphere.
>
> Here are the proper things I have noticed:
>
> Windows, although getting better, still remains very bloated. Compare
> the number of lines of code to UNIX, 20 Million vs 5 Million for Linux.
> Microsoft advocate's, however, use the typical, superficial rebuttle of,
> Microsoft has 2,000 developers, whether Microsoft has two thousand or
> two million, at the end of the day, it is whether the original plain
> that was set out, carried out, communication between the various
> developers is constructive and targets are promptly kept. Generally
> speaking, the most successful OS's have not always had thousands of
> developers, and example of this would be BSD (and its variants).
>
> Here are the main three main OS's I have tried:
>
> Windows 2000: (from my experience), fairly stable, pretty good hardware
> support. However, the hardware requirements of Windows 2000 are pretty
> steep when compared to it's competition. Also, whether Windows 2000 is
> more secure than previous NT releases, this has yet to be proven. For a
> dedicated Wintel user, yes it is a defininate upgrade, however, for
> Linux/UNIX users, Microsoft is still playing catch-up in terms of
> realibility, stability and scalability.
>
> UNIX/Linux: (from my experience), very stable, average hardware support.
> The minimum hardware requirements are not as steep as Windows 2000, yet,
> able to provide the realibility, stability and scalability required in
> an enterprise situation, from the Workstation to Server, Linux/UNIX has
> all the bases covered.
>
> MacOS X Public Beta: From my limited experience, this OS will definately
> bring the stability and reliability Mac users have been asking for.
> Built on a Unix core for rock solid reliability, yet made easy with the
> re-design of the MacOS GUI (Aqua). The main outstanding feature I found
> were, Internet access was alot faster as the TCP/IP stack had been
> replaced with the more robust BSD TCP/IP Stack, Both carbonized and
> Cocoa apps thrive in the pre-emptive multi-tasking environment and the
> speed of the booting is considerably better than that of MacOS9.
>
> In terms of ease of use, MacOS X would be the winner, however, in terms
> of rock solid, "built like a brick shit house", reliability, UNIX is the
> clear Winner. Although the reliability of Windows NT has improved, it
> still has a way to go to reach the same level of respect UNIX has in
> large corperations.
>
>
> kiwiunixman
>
> <ZIP>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windoze 2000 - just as shitty as ever
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 19:24:59 +0200
"T. Max Devlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Said Ayende Rahien in alt.destroy.microsoft on Tue, 28 Nov 2000 05:09:12
> [...]
> >Garbage In, Garbage Out
> [...]
> >You claim to know computers.
>
> Indeed, I do. I know a great deal about computers, including 'Garbage
> in, Garbage out.' I didn't recognize the acronym, as it is entirely
> unrelated to this discussion, AFAIK, and it never occurred to me that it
> would come up.
Oh, then I'm not the only one with acronym problem? Good. :)
It has all the relevence to this discussion.
Since you moved the discussion from curropted registry to curropted registry
entries.
Bad input result bad output.
Can you see the relevence?
> >Yet you seem to be unable to make the connection with bad data to bad
> >results.
> >If I enter wrong data in the /etc, what would happen?
>
> Well, it wouldn't bring the whole OS to a crashing halt, that's for damn
> sure.
Enter wrong variables in .conf files, and your kernel panic, frex.
I'm not talking about /etc here, as the registry is more than that.
If you give the OS wrong input, it would BSOD/panic/crush.
It doesn't matter in what form it is.
> >It's not being "pedantic", it's being correct.
>
> That would depend on whether it was accurate, consistent, and practical.
> Is it accurate, being precisely what you meant, to say "GIGO" when
> discussing the registry?
If the registry has erroneos info in it, what would happen?
If I put wrong info in linux configuration files, what would happen?
Assume vital information for both case.
Trivial information would've little to no affect on both system.
> Hardly, if you know what GIGO refers to. Is
> it consistent? I don't know what your argument about /etc has to do
> with the registry and GIGO, so I'm not at all sure it is a consistent
> argument. As I mentioned, I didn't even recognize the acronym, so out
> of context is it. Is it practical? Well, since, as I mentioned, no
> failure, flaw, or misconfiguration of /etc will generally cause the kind
> of nightmarishly unpredictable and obscenely difficult to diagnose
> problems that a corrupted, flawed, or misconfigured registry can bring.
I'm saying that putting wrong data in vital places in the /etc will cause
the similar results to putting the wrong data in vital places in the
registry.
> So, no, it isn't practical, either. Its not being pedantic, I don't
> think, but it certainly isn't being "correct", either.
>
> >If you give the OS bad data, in any way, shape, or form, it would fail.
>
> You give an application data. You configure OSes. No, an OS does not
> fail, is not, in fact, allowed to fail (provided it is a competitive
> OS), just because you gave it "bad data" in some way, shape, or form.
Really?
Put
mem = <some value greater than your RAM>kb
in lilo.conf
reboot.
kernel panic
There has been a discussion about this about a month ago.
Isn't is a case where the OS fail?
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Major shift
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 11:56:52 -0600
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:900ne5$lvl$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "sfcybear" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8vv7oi$rri$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> "...a major shift continued toward non-Microsoft servers. "
> >>
> >> While the winvocates try to tell us what's so great about a 49 day
> >> uptime clock, the European server market is moving to Unix/Linux...
> >>
> >> http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/reuters/REU20001123S0008
>
> > If you read the article, it's not that they're moving away from Windows,
> > it's that they're moving to higher end RISC systems, which currently
only
> > run Unix or Linux. With (until very recnetly) Intel based servers
maxing
> > out at 8 CPU's, the 64 CPU systems that Sun and others offer are much
more
> > attractive. That's changing though. Win2k Datacenter can support CPU
> > configurations up to 32 processors.
>
> Neat. Half as much as the worst of its competition. And on compaqs yet.
> Yes, im sure all the high-end engineers out there who are currently
building
> gigantic unix systems are going to be very happy to switch to compaq/w2k.
Worst of it's competition? 64 CPU's seems to be the max most commercial
systems can do.
> No, really.
>
> And this datacenter beast has been on the burner for how long now?
What are you talking about? DataCenter has been a released product for
about 4 months.
> Its never going to happen.
Already has.
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Uptime -- where is NT?
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 11:58:51 -0600
"Nick Ruisi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Whats the old saying?
>
> "Your mouse has moved. You must reboot your system for the changes to
> take effect. Pressk "OK" to reboot. [OK]"
>
> You can't even change the IP address of a ethernet adapter or change the
> hostname without restarting the system.
Not true. You can change them without restarting. Just ignore the message.
It's a bug that the reboot message comes up, except when changing the
default gateway.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
