Linux-Advocacy Digest #907, Volume #31 Fri, 2 Feb 01 06:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: THOLEN IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: The 130MByte text file (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Yum! A new laptop screen, i thinks ill fry it! (meow)
Re: The 130MByte text file (Pete Goodwin)
Re: The 130MByte text file (Pete Goodwin)
Re: The 130MByte text file (Pete Goodwin)
Re: The 130MByte text file (Pete Goodwin)
Re: The 130MByte text file (Pete Goodwin)
Re: The 130MByte text file (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Aspects of open-source that MS will co-opt: Predictions? ("Flacco")
Re: My open-source quote (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: questions (windows & Mac)....? (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe (Milton)
Re: more egg on microsoft's face! :-) ("Flacco")
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Ian Davey)
Re: How long does your box run for? (Shane Phelps)
SGI XFS Installation Update ("Adam Warner")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("David Brown")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("David Brown")
Re: NTFS Limitations (Was: RE: Red hat becoming illegal?) ("David Brown")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[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,soc.singles
Subject: Re: THOLEN IS A MISERABLE PIECE OF SHIT
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 04:32:00 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Aaron R. Kulkis writes:
>
> > See why I think Dave Tholen is a miserable piece of shit....
>
> Classic invective, as expected from someone who lacks a logical argument.
Classic distraction, from someone who knows he's a misearable piece of
shit.
--
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: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 09:31:26 GMT
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> So then just use what works and don't whine about what doesn't. That's
> what any mentally healthy person does.
I don't like EMACS. I do like the KDE style editors. They're the ones
that either bomb or hang the system.
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: meow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Yum! A new laptop screen, i thinks ill fry it!
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 09:48:19 GMT
Well despite your claims it happened.
Maybe its just Sony laptop screens that are dodgy but it was fine
running Win 2000 pro
When i installed Linux it screwed the screen up. Go figure.
Someone mentioned in one of the replies that i shouldnt of chosen lcd
monitor as the monitor choice.
If this is the case what would be the approriate selection for a sony
laptop screen
The card inside is an ati rage mobility.
Paul Teale
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 09:23:01 GMT
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Translation: you're too dumb to learn how enable it. And if it was
> enabled by default, we'd have been told how insecure linux is.
Correction: I'm too lazy to fix it.
Yes I know how insecure it is, but that wasn't the issue.
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 09:21:38 GMT
In article <95choo$24e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> These are not similar tools... Kwrite and Kedit are light weight editors
> for Linux... they are editors ala notpad + syntax highlithing + a bit
> more... and nothing else.
So, the Open Source community produces light weight tools that barf
under a big load?
> As i told you - i got a bluscreen on Wordpad and a 30 MB file.. so a
30 MB
> file did hang Windows - no big deal since the file whas binaty and
what the
> heck should i load a binary file in a text editor ? I didnt even have the
> patience to let Word read the whole file... after 15 minuttes i gave up.
WordPad did indeed crash on me with this file. It did not Blue Screen
though.
Word faffed around and eventually asked me what character set I wanted.
I gave up after that. At no time did Windows hang, freeze or crash.
> > Ah but deleting entries in the registry is deliberately damaging. Linux
> > ought to have been able to handle a huge file. I mean, if Windows can do
> > it, why not Linux? Isn't Linux supposed to be better?
>
> Thats not completely true. It depends on what you delete.
Well, what I meant was deleting registry entries is somewhat unusual,
whilst just try to load a large file is just less than usual.
> That was not Linux - that was some KDE editors and maybe X that you hang.
> These are just apps running on Linux.. One feature i like about Windows
> (at least NT and W2K) is that the three finger salute allways produces a
> screen where you can start task-manager and kill a process even if
> ressources are very low.. X definitevely lacks a way to have something
like
> the 3 finger salute or maybe a control console with higher priority and
> with top running where you could kill processes.
Linux of itself cannot edit files. Linux is an OS, nothing more. I think
you are being a little pedantic here, and possibly splitting hairs. I
could take PFE in isolation, since it is not supplied with Windows.
The fact is Linux hung and I had no way out of it. I suspect even if
telnetd was running, it was probably hung too.
Yes, the three-fingered-salute is a useful feature - I certainly missed
it when I was trying to kill some of the editors I tried on Linux.
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 09:27:54 GMT
In article <95cqnf$bno$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Telnet servers don't break. Yours isn't working because you
> instructed your Mandrake security tools not to let you access it.
That explains why it doesn't work. NOT!
> On the other hand, telnet servers also aren't secure, which is why all
> usable security levels disable it by default. SSH is the modern
> replacement for telnet, and your Mandrake distribution includes it.
> You should use that instead.
Now I wonder, can the Windows Millenium box sitting on the same network
make use of these features. It can do telnet, but I'm not so sure about
SSH etc.
> All the statements you made about Linux in this thread to date, to the
> best of my knowledge and recollection, are in fact false.
Fascinating!
> First, you're using apps in ways they weren't intended, and not using
> the ones that would have been appropriate for the job. Second, your
> blaming an OPERATING SYSTEM for the real or perceived weaknesses of
> APPLICATIONS, none of which are even Linux-specific.
If the Operating System hangs, who should I blame? An errant
application? Aren't people here complaining that Windows is too easy to
crash, yet here I find I can take out Linux by doing something so
obvious and easy - and yet it works on Windows.
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 09:24:15 GMT
In article <95d9a9$6lo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Nah, my copy of Mandrake 7.2 also didn't install the telnet server,
despite
> me selecting "install all".
Thank you.
> Of course, the rsh and rlogin servers *were* installed, and *are* working
> just fine....
Great. How do I access these from Windows Millenium?
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 09:36:10 GMT
In article <95cq44$bno$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Joseph T. Adams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Linux sux, 'cuz I tried to use beta software, which is not even Linux
> software much less Linux, to do stuff it wasn't designed to, and it
> didn't work.]
I very carefully do not use such language as LinSUX (except after being
called names).
As for "To do stuff it wasn't designed to" - you're kidding right? Linux
can't handle a large file without hanging? Isn't that what everyone here
is complaining about with Windows?
> You are obviously smarter than than a typical Wintroll, however, so
> how 'bout acting like it?
Translation: you want me to be more forgiving and tolerant of the little
inadequacies of Linux. Well, sorry, no!
I want Linux to _replace_ Windows. But it can't really do it if it falls
over when Windows carries on regardless. I thought Linux had a far
better paging system than Windows - is this wrong?
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The 130MByte text file
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 09:29:35 GMT
In article <95ci2v$3h1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Mig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think Emacs will refuse.. at leat it refused my 1200 MB file.. some
> maximum buffer size exceeded same with Xemacs.
XEmacs loaded it fine.
> Well.. tell me you never used jove under dos? A gnome (or GTK+??)
frontend
> is underdevelopment
Don't think so.
I do like EDT and SEDTWIN and some of the EDT emulations in JED, EMACS etc.
--
---
Pete
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: "Flacco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Aspects of open-source that MS will co-opt: Predictions?
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 04:59:12 -0500
> Only a tiny fraction of incoming freshmen in CS run anything
> but Windows on their computers.
I think this is where people miss the importance of the lack of games
support for Linux - to make it more acceptable to the younger market.
> (I base this on a couple of semesters' of
> informal show-of-hand surveys that I did.) Even among the upper-division
> students, a surprisingly large fraction isn't interested in learning
anything
> other than how to use that One True Product (tm) that will get them a
> high-paying job when they graduate.
I'd like to hear mor about this, if you have any other observations. I'm
interested in what motivates people to try Linux or shy away from it; and if
they try it, to either stick with it or abandon it.
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: My open-source quote
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 09:36:46 +0100
Ralph Miguel Hansen wrote:
> I got TWO seats on my open-source-OS (bash and KDE) and my bicycle has got
> two wheels compared to the one very little wheel M$ has.
>
Which isn't round to boot.
Roundness is a concept not yet thought of at MS.
So one is constantly on a quite bumpy ride.
--
Linux is simply a fad that has been generated by the media
We are Borg. Resistance is futile (Borg Gates)
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: questions (windows & Mac)....?
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 10:27:49 +0100
cool cool wrote:
> excuse me that I don't understand what "Liononu (Falthead(tm))" and
> "Wintendo(tm)" are..
> mind to tell me?
>
Sure.
Flatfish is a character hanging around here bashing linux.
Because more often than not his remarks are basically dumb,
I call him flathead, which is much more appropriate.
This guy likes to call linux-users "linonuts".
And Wintendo, well, that's an easy one. It simply shows what
I think of windows in general. It's Ok for games and not much more.
So, instead of Nintendo it's Wintendo.
I have used Windows for a long time and still have to use it now
and then. It simply crashes too often to be a real OS.
Well, so it all falls into place.
Your posting did not look real. Either you are very inexperienced
(then I did treat you wrong), or you are not for real and just playing
the completely dumb and clueless.
Well, if your question is real, my advice: Stick with Win98SE,
it's for most users of windows the best compromise. And it is the only
Windows-version which runs more devices than linux. ME is basically
a optically beefed up version of 98 with several features DISABLED, it
won't run lots of programs which just run fine on 98.
Win2K is the most stable of all, the most expensive, and it won't run all
of your programs either. Lots of devices won't work with it, even lots
which work just fine with linux, so if you're not completely shure that your
hardware will work with it, just stay off it. It does not pay off to use it.
If you're in need of a server, put a linux-box there and forget it, just
hang your other computers on the net. Don't use Win2k, it's too expensive
for that and not stable enough.
Work with Win98 if you must work with windows, and don't believe all that
hype, neither from Microsoft nor from linux-users. I myself have several
computers running, 1 with Win95 (won't run 98), 1 with win98, 1 with
OS/2 Warp4, 2 with linux (my main work machine is one of those).
The windows- and OS/2-machines are basically for testing the programs
I write, I do not work on them normally.
My kids have Windows-machines, all are connected via network.
You see, I use what's needed and what works, I couldn't care less
who says what.
--
Linux is simply a fad that has been generated by the media
We are Borg. Resistance is futile (Borg Gates)
------------------------------
From: Milton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: 3100 W2K Adv Servers deployed accross Europe
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 05:13:47 -0500
On Fri, 2 Feb 2001 15:26:15 +0800, "nuxx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>"Les Mikesell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:A5pe6.65941$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> "nuxx" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:pord6.1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > The mind boggles at this bit of sophistry.
>> > >
>> > > Hello? have we heard of Oracle? DB2? Sybase? Informix?
>> > >
>> > > In fact, EVERY database that matters has a Linux version.
>> >
>> > How many of these enterprise class databases have you deployed in
>> production
>> > environments on Linux servers? What sort of systems & how are they
>> > performing? Seriously, I'm interested in reading some good Linux
>advocacy
>> > for once. Or is there anywhere I can find some case studies?
>> >
>> > cheers,
>> > nuxx
>>
>> Here's one:
>>
>> http://www.fcw.com/fcw/articles/2000/1204/pol-nasa-12-04-00.asp
>>
>
>Thanks. Are there any similar stories for Oracle or DB2 on Linux?
Glad you asked
http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/reports/1665/1/
http://www2.software.ibm.com/casestudies/swcs.nsf/customername/E8FDF9FEC5ADFFC3872569860026B025
http://www2.software.ibm.com/casestudies/swcsdm.nsf/customername/640ED89B457B6C24002568D5001BD6BF
Any questions?
--
«««««««««««««««««««««««»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»
Milton B. Hewitt
CAUCE Member - http://www.cauce.org
Proud supporter of the Microsoft Boycott Campaign
http://www.vcnet.com/bms/
«««««««««««««««««««««««»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»
------------------------------
From: "Flacco" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: more egg on microsoft's face! :-)
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 05:11:02 -0500
> http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-4682851.html?tag=tp_pr
I would have considered reading the article, but that damn advertisement is
about as subtle as being hit in the face with a frying pan.
No thanks.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 10:28:12 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ian Davey wrote:
>>
>> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> As far as Atheists are concerned, god doesn't exist any more than Santa
> Claus
>> >> or the Easter Bunny.
>> >
>> >Which *IS* a belief in itself.
>>
>> Not true. I read lots of novels and enjoy them, but don't believe any of the
>> content as it's just fiction. There's no belief system wrapped up in it.
>> There's no need to pay any attention to people who elevate stories into a
>> belief system.
>
>You have just expressed a belief.
>
>It might be true, or not...either way, it IS a belief.
You've still not managed to convince me. But perhaps it's just a matter of
semantics, Atheism is a lack of *religious* beliefs (theism), but not a lack
of belief. Does that work better for you? So an Atheist believes something
other than religion.
There is a valid proof that God doesn't exist, but I can't remember who coined
it now: "the existance of God disproves the existance of God, therefore God
does not exist". Seeing as you're mathematically/scientifically minded, you
might be able to figure out the logic of that statement.
Not Christian are you?
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: Shane Phelps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How long does your box run for?
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 21:37:02 +1100
"R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard )" wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Michael Vester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[ snip lots of thoughtful stuff ]
> > Customers notice really fast
> > when their sites are dead in the water. IIS has proven to be a
> > very flimsy base to build dynamic web applications on. =
>
> Just out of curiousity, have you considered offering Linux or
> FreeBSD as an alternative? Some people want a more "private"
> host without the extra costs of purchasing an entire server.
>
Have you seen the product announcement for Sun's Netra X1?
It's essentially a stripped-down Ultra 5 without the video circuitry,
floppy drive or CD-ROM, all crammed into a 1RU rack-mount case.
and for an official price tag of $US 1K
I can see Sun selling *lots* of them into precisely this market segment.
Now we know why Sun bought Cobalt ;-)
[ snip again ]
------------------------------
From: "Adam Warner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: SGI XFS Installation Update
Date: Fri, 02 Feb 2001 10:43:54 GMT
Hi all,
I am pleased to let you know that I have now successfully installed Linux on
a boot partition using the SGI XFS pre-release iso.
Given my particular hardware configuration I had a few problems. But I doubt
you would run into the same ones. There is the mailing list if you get
stuck.
As Eric Sandeen of SGI posted a few days ago:
---Begin Quote---
If you want to really give XFS a workout, try the installer we've
released along w/ the filesystem.
It's a modified version of the Red Hat 7.0 system installer which will
let you install & run your whole system on XFS.
ISO image at ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/download/PreRelease-0.9/iso/
You'll need the original RH 7.0 discs along with it.
The installer still has a few bugs (we prefer to spend our time
improving the filesystem, not the installer...) but in general it works
quite well, and it can make you a shiny new Linux box running completely
on XFS.
-Eric Sandeen
SGI, Inc.
XFS for Linux
---End Quote---
I'll just add that you really should read the installer caveats first ;-)
http://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/installcavs.html
I used the original Redhat 7.0 CD 1 in the installation process. Quite a bit
of CD swapping goes on.
Eric was very helpful. It still blows my mind that a developer from such a
prominent organisation would post in this forum and later follow up with
troubleshooting advice. It just goes to show that you might be surprised who
actually reads these forums.
I learned some new recovery techniques as well :-)
And let's also appreciate the OpenGL improvements that SGI is bringing to
Linux.
Regards,
Adam
------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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?)
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 11:44:08 +0100
Chad Myers wrote in message ...
>
>"David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:95bv3o$3ga$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> Chad Myers wrote in message
<0Wde6.602$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> >
>>
>> >No, quotas have been around for NT for years.
>> >Save the lies.
>>
>> I am curious about the disk quotas on NT - we have NT 4.0 Server at the
>> office, and I can find no mention of disk quotas anywhere in the help
files,
>> or in any of the administrative tools. In fact, the only mention I find
of
>> the word "quota" is that in order to use the SU program (a utility to let
>> you change to another user in a command box - it is very limited, but
>> nonetheless essential for administrating NT - why you have to buy it as
part
>> of the NT Resource kit is beyond me), a user has to have the "Increase
>> Quotas" account priviledge.
>
>There are very good 3rd party implementations of Quotas. He never said that
>they had to be built into the OS, he just said NT 4.0 doesn't have quotas,
>which is a lie. Win2K has them built in, that's the only difference.
>
So quota management is one of these few extra utilities that Linux has but
you have to buy third-party for NT? Or go for W2K, which is gradually
catching up with the unix world in regards to these minor, extra utilites.
I am disappointed - I may have used quotas if they were available on NT 4
(hidden functionality is not available - saying NT doesn't have quotas is
factually wrong but effectively true).
------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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?)
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 11:38:48 +0100
Chad Myers wrote in message ...
>
>"David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:95bv3o$3ga$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> 1. Why is windows nt the most vulnerable web server platform?
>> >
>> >Because, like any other OS, the administrators are not properly
>> >trained to use the security implementation. When set up and configured
>> >properly NT is rock solid. Of course, like any other OS, there are
>> >the occasional buffer overflows and such (Linux is no stranger to this),
>> >but in general, when you lock down the permissions, it's nearly
impossible
>> >for someone to crack it over the internet.
>>
>> I thought windows was supposed to be the ultimate in ease-of-use. But
>> apparently configuring NT properly (and especially keeping up with all
those
>> pesky service packs) is so difficult that a range of MS subsiduaries (or
the
>> 3rd parties they hire to do their web hosting) around the world cannot
cope
>> with it. Defacing Microsoft websites seems to be a popular hobby.
>
>Ah yes, the typical round-a-bout argument. Attack NT admins because they're
>stupid, then when we say NT gets hacked alot because there lots of stupid
>NT admins out there, attack NT, then attack .... and it goes on an on.
>
>NT is _EASIER_, not easy. If you know what you're doing, you can be more
>productive faster and get more accomplished faster with NT. That doesn't
>mean that a bum could walk in off the street and be a sysadmin with NT
>overnight. Unfortunately, this seems to happen. Someone gets a
>"MCSE in 20 minutes" book, manages to muddle his way through the tests
>and gets hired to administer a .com web site which gets defaced after
>the first week.
>
>MS is helping to stave off the growing number of paper MCSE's by
>going with adaptive and simulation tests, but they haven't moved
>all the tests to that style yet.
>
I was referring specifically (but obviously too subtely) to Microsoft's own
websites around the world, not NT-hosted sites in general (other people can
through links and statistics around regarding other sites). There have been
a series of defacements of various countries' Microsoft sites hitting the
news recently - all are hosted on NT. Some are run directly by MS employees
in those countries, others are run by a third party. There are only three
possible explanations - either NT is inherintly insecure, or MSCEs are not
competent to make it secure, or MS is not able to make sure their employees
(or their partners' employees) are properly educated and certified. Feel
free to choose the explanation you like best, but the result is the same -
no one in their right mind would trust MS for internet services.
------------------------------
From: "David Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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?)
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 11:51:42 +0100
nuxx wrote in message ...
>
>> As far as I understand it, if I set up an NT server (be it NT4.0 or w2k)
>> with IIS and some active server pages collecing data from a MS SQL Server
>> database, I have to buy client access licences for anyone connecting to
>the
>> database over the internet. Does anyone know the situation if the same
NT
>> server is running Apache, PHP and MySQL? This is a genuine question, by
>the
>> way. The system is likely to move over to Linux some time, but we may be
>> running on NT for a while first.
>>
>Not true, you only need CALs if you are authenticating the user on the
>domain.
>
That at least is a relief. Correct me if I am wrong (my understanding of MS
licencing is far from perfect), but as long as the people using the server
are not domain users (i.e., they do not turn up the in User Manager's
lists), they do not need any client licences regardless of how they use the
server. Would this change if we were to use MS SQL Server instead of MySQL
(I doubt that we will, but I'd like to know for comparison)?
I was under the impression that there were limits to the number of clients
that can access the server simultaneously, unless additional licences are
bought. Was this wrong? Is the limitation purely a limit on the number of
users registered in the User Manger for Domain's list?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
