Linux-Advocacy Digest #491, Volume #34 Sun, 13 May 01 20:13:02 EDT
Contents:
Re: The Economist and Open-Source (Roy Culley)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux (Roy Culley)
Re: The Economist and Open-Source (Roy Culley)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux in Retail & Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know (mlw)
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roy Culley)
Subject: Re: The Economist and Open-Source
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 00:43:51 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <AYwL6.709$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Charles Lyttle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>> >
>> > "Roy Culley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > In article <sShL6.647$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> > > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > > >
>> > > > They have to regression test each patch thoroughly before releasing
> it.
>> > > > With Linux, someone will hack a quick fix together and release it,
> not
>> > > > caring a bit about testing it. Then, as the developers have time,
> they
>> > > > create a decent fix, which happens in about the same timeframe that
> MS
>> > > > takes.
>> > >
>> > > Then why are so many security bugs reported in bugtraq due to
> Microsoft
>> > > patches? Regression testing indeed. I would say that there are about
>> > > 25% patches to previous patches reported by Microsoft on bugtraq.
>> >
>> > Regression testing only tells you if you've recreated a previous bug,
> not if
>> > you've created a new one.
>> >
>> > Perhaps if you understood what "regression" means, you'd know that.
>> I know what regression testing means. If it doesn't catch new bugs
>> introduced by your change, you did the test wrong. I get really ticked
>> at people who think they can get away with just doing a minimal test(the
>> code compiles and the old bug didn't show up in 10minutes) and call it
>> regression test.
>
> Why would a new bug show up in a regression test? Personally, I think that
> if you catch a new bug in a regression test, you're either lucky, or not
> performing the regression test correctly. You can't detect the bug unless
> you're looking for it.
>
> Sure, you can test your inputs and outputs, but that won't tell you if you
> Lotus notes is gonna break because it assumes that a return value means
> something it's not documented to mean.
Again it was you that brought up regression testing and how good
Microsft are at it.
The point is that a large proportion of Microsoft security fixes don't
correctly fix the original bug or introduce new ones. When it comes to
security Microsoft just stink.
--
Over 100 security bugs in Microsoft SW last year. An infamous
record. The worst offending piece of SW, by far, IIS. 2001 isn't
looking any better.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roy Culley)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 00:14:28 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <GvbL6.45194$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> "Roy Culley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>>
>> Grief, you people are pathetic. Microsoft has lost the Internet server
>> market. Remember, over 100 security bugs in Microsoft SW last year.
>
> That's including Office and such as well. How many were in Red Hat Linux
> and the software that ships with it? At least that many.
Can't you read. Over 100 security bugs in Microsoft SW in 2000. A RECORD.
> Linux has beat Windows (combined NT 4.0 and Win2K) on several occasions
> on the defacement list. And that's even with Attrition's clever grouping
> of the ancient NT 4.0 and Win2K together. Numbers for Win2K are
> significantly lower.
>
> Not to mention that deployments of Win2K continue to grow and it seems
> Windows is taking over the Fortune 500 web space.
>
> Apache still has numbers on Netcraft, but we've already established
> the inaccuracy of Netcraft's numbers.
>
> Where it matters, in big business, people are using Windows more and more
> and Linux is still no where to be seen.
>
>> An infamous record. It doesn't look any better this year. IIS is the worst
>> offender of all.
>
> If you group IIS 4 and 5. Shall we include Linux 2.1 or 1.3 as well? How
> about prior versions of Apache?
>
>> Now they are sticking it in the kernel! Talk about being desparate.
>
> You mean like Tux?
Your ignorance never fails to astound me.
--
Over 100 security bugs in Microsoft SW last year. An infamous
record. The worst offending piece of SW, by far, IIS. 2001 isn't
looking any better.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roy Culley)
Subject: Re: The Economist and Open-Source
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 00:40:24 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <rnwL6.704$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Roy Culley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> In article <sShL6.647$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> > They have to regression test each patch thoroughly before releasing it.
>> > With Linux, someone will hack a quick fix together and release it, not
>> > caring a bit about testing it. Then, as the developers have time, they
>> > create a decent fix, which happens in about the same timeframe that MS
>> > takes.
>>
>> Then why are so many security bugs reported in bugtraq due to Microsoft
>> patches? Regression testing indeed. I would say that there are about
>> 25% patches to previous patches reported by Microsoft on bugtraq.
>
> Regression testing only tells you if you've recreated a previous bug, not if
> you've created a new one.
>
> Perhaps if you understood what "regression" means, you'd know that.
You do go out of your way to make a pillock out of yourself don't you?
Regression testing is done to ensure that the SW still meets its
requirements after changes have been made. You were the one that
brought up regression testing and I just stated that an appreciable
number of Microsoft security fixes either didn't fix the problem
correctly or introduced new security problems. When it comes to
security Microsoft are a joke. No system administrator worth his job
would use a Microsoft based system where security is a prime
requirement. The facts speak for themselves and no amount of hand
waving from the likes of you will change it.
--
Over 100 security bugs in Microsoft SW last year. An infamous
record. The worst offending piece of SW, by far, IIS. 2001 isn't
looking any better.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 19:25:54 -0400
Paolo Ciambotti wrote:
>
> Yeah, I just looked at the latest OS graphs on Attrition.org. No doubt
> about it, W2K and IIS are setting new records.
>
> http://www.attrition.org/mirror/attrition/os-graphs.html
If Microsoft were a government Agency, they would win the Golden Fleece
award hands down.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
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: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 18:44:15 -0500
"Roy Culley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <GvbL6.45194$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > "Roy Culley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >>
> >> Grief, you people are pathetic. Microsoft has lost the Internet server
> >> market. Remember, over 100 security bugs in Microsoft SW last year.
> >
> > That's including Office and such as well. How many were in Red Hat Linux
> > and the software that ships with it? At least that many.
>
> Can't you read. Over 100 security bugs in Microsoft SW in 2000. A RECORD.
And I would bet that Linux had just as many, if not more. It's just that
they aren't as well publicized or as heavily hit. For instance, Red Hat 7.1
has had six security advisories in just the last month alone.
Red Hat 7.0 has had 45 security advisories in the last 6 months.
That's not counting the security patches which didn't make "advisory"
status, such as the stealth security updates in the kernel patches.
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.retail.category.management,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux in Retail & Hospitality - What Every Retailer Should Know
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 19:32:17 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jan Johanson wrote:
Just because Microsoft's marketing department writes something, does not
mean it is true. At best it is a matter of opinion, at worst it is an out
right lie.
>
http://www.microsoft.com/europe/industry/retail/strategicwhitepapers/2523.htm
>
> NT advocates already know all of this but it's nice to have a single
> document that clearly brings all the elements together. Allow me to quote
> the management summary: (if you don't have a newreader that can handle
> HTML, add this to another reason why your OS choice sucks cause every
> windows newsreader handles HTML).
>
> Management Summary
>
> Despite popular belief in the retail and hospitality markets, the Linux
> operating system is not free. The Linux kernel itself may be free, but
> there are many other costs associated with the total cost of ownership of
> a system. There are significant costs associated with "retail-hardening"
> Linux. Even Linux executives admit that Linux isn't free, but that you
> just pay in different ways. Linux especially has a long way to go in
> retail, and someone is going to bear these costs.
These extra costs are no different than those associated with re-training
every new release of Windows. The cost for switching from 3.1x to '95 was
huge.
A switch to Linux would be no worse, and in most cases, less.
> Limited Device Driver Support
>
> Very few device drivers are available for Linux today, especially those
> used in retail environments. The JavaPOS standard is still in the early
> stages and has not been proven like the OPOS standard. In fact, most
> JavaPOS installations today run on Windows with OPOS and a Java OPOS
> wrapper. JavaPOS has a long way to go before it can provide the same
> device driver support as OPOS provides. The cost of developing retail
> device drivers is a huge consideration in total cost of ownership.
> Someone is going to have to pay to develop them for retail. The Microsoft
> platform is years ahead of Linux in meeting the retail industry's needs
> and provides an extensive set of device drivers.
This is a FUD point as well.
There are many device drivers for Linux, not nearly as limited as MS would
have you believe. This is FUD. Just as not everything runs on Windows 2000,
not everything will run on Linux.
>
> Support / Maintenance Costs
>
> Support and maintenance for Linux is not free. Most Linux
> distributors make their money by selling their services. Support
> options vary by vendor and can get quite expensive for the
> enterprise. You will have to pay for support when you need it.
> However, before you can even receive support, you have to meet
> certain requirements. Most Linux distributors will only support
> un-modified versions of their software. Some of them also require
> you to meet certain hardware requirements before they will support
> you. Microsoft has a much more advanced support system in place to
> aid you when you need help.
I have yet to have one helpful suggestion from Microsoft's tech support.
and guess what? It isn't free either. Do a search for "Microsoft tech
support psychic friends" on any web search engine and you will find a
humorous, if not scary, bit about how un helpful MS is.
>
> Numerous Installation Versions
>
> There are over 188 different distributions of Linux available today,
> with the number growing all the time. You have to first decide which
> distribution and graphical user interface to use. Next, you have to
> deal with the limitations you will be faced with. For example, there
> is no guarantee that any software you develop on one distribution
> will run under another distribution. Nor is it guaranteed, or even
> likely, that an application you develop for one GUI will run under a
> different GUI, even on the same distribution. You do not have this
> problem with Microsoft's platform, since there are only a few
> different versions, all with a common user interface.
This is even more FUD.
As any Windows developer knows, every Windows system is different.
Depending on what applications were installed and in what order creates
minor, sometimes major, differences on the OS which leads to add behavior.
I have been developing Windows programs since there has been a Windows, and
there are far more difficulties supporting the millions of subtally
different behaviors of windows. Windows 95 vs 95b, 98 vs 98SE, ME, NT, W2K,
various service packs, not to mention WinG, DirectDraw, and various OLE and
MFC issues. Linux is a piece of cake in comparison.
>
> Lack Of Available Software
>
> Software for the Linux operating system has a long way to go. There
> are not very many well-known or enterprise-wide software packages
> available for Linux today, especially for POS. There is also a huge
> void on the Linux platform in server side software, like database,
> message queuing services, and transaction servers. The present
> limitations of software for the front end, middle tier, and server on
> Linux represent additional costs you need to factor into your TCO
> model. You do not face this limitation with the Microsoft platform,
> which has thousands of products available to create a complete
> end-to-end solution.
Again FUD.
There are thousands of programs you can run on Linux. You would be hard
pressed to find a single application genre that isn't on Linux.
>
> Untested Waters In Retail
>
> Linux has a long way to go in retail and hospitality. Very few
> retailers run Linux today. POS and other application vendors are
> going to pass the cost along to you for "retail-hardening" Linux.
Oh please, all OS upgrades are troubled waters. Apple, Windows, and yes,
Linux.
>
> Lack Of Formal Development Schedule, Research, and Standards
>
> With Linux, no formal development schedule or set of standards
> exists. There are thousands of developers contributing to it from
> all over the world, with no accountability to the retail industry.
> Linus Torvalds makes the final decision about what gets included in
> the latest Linux release, and he has no accountability to the retail
> industry. There is no formal research and development process with
> Linux. Microsoft plans to spend over $4 billion in R&D in 2001 and
> listens to the retail industry.
Look how good Microsoft's stuff is. MS-BOB? lol. Linux has more eyes and
minds working on it than Microsoft could dream of.,
>
> Less Secure
>
> "Open source" means that anyone can get a copy of the source code.
> Developers can find security weaknesses very easily with Linux. The
> same is not true with Microsoft Windows.
This is pure FUD.
Open source has been proven to be more secure than closed source.
>
> Increased Labor Costs
>
> You will have to spend extra money training your staff on a new
> environment. Store clerks will have to be trained on a new user
> interface that they are not likely to be familiar with already, and
> developers will have to be trained in a new development environment.
> It will be less costly to train staff on the Microsoft Windows user
> interface and the development environment because so many people are
> already familiar with them.
This is also FUD
Many developers find Linux easier to develop on. I know I do.
>
> Limited Developer Tools
>
> There are limited developer tools available for Linux. Those that
> are available are much more difficult to use than Microsoft Visual
> Studio. Thus, the same application can take much longer to develop
> for Linux.
This is pure FUD
MS Developers studio is a piece of crap. I hate it. It gets in the way of
coding.
>
> Business Agility in the Future
>
> Businesses must have the agility to quickly adapt to changing market
> conditions. There is a lot of uncertainty concerning the future of
> Linux. Microsoft is a stable company offering a reliable long-term
> solution.
MS may be stable, but it has not proven to be dedicated to a solution.
MS-OS/2 people got screwed when MS dropped support for OS/2. Device writers
on NT got screwed when MS changed the design of the video displays in the
jump from 3.51 to 4.0. Alpha and Mips users got screwed when Microsoft
dropped that. PenWindows was pushed but never delivered.
So, whether or not the company is stable is irrelevant, it is whether the
decisions you make today can be viable tomorrow. Microsoft has proven time
and again they have no loyalty to customers committed to a solution. Some
may claim that they are a business and they have to drop products that are
not profitable. That speaks volumes for open source as being more stable.
I would be more uncertain about a Microsoft solution than I would a Linux
solution anyday.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 19:28:46 -0400
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9dirc0$b0l$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >You are trying to
> > > propogate the FUD/lie that W2K is not capable of steller uptimes.
> >
> > 120 Days, according to Microsoft. Yeah, really stellar.
>
> 120 days was the MEAN, not the maximum.
It's still pathetic.
USAB's(*) mail server was running Linux 0.98 kernal...and was up
for OVER a year.
Note the release number: 0.98.
Pretty good uptime for something that's not even considere "release quality" yet.
Which just goes to show how the Linux community has MUCH higher standards
than Mafia$oft ever will.
(*) U.S. Army, Bosnia
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 19:29:35 -0400
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9dliov$kjd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In article <i5iL6.653$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:9dirc0$b0l$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >> >You are trying to
> > >> > propogate the FUD/lie that W2K is not capable of steller uptimes.
> > >>
> > >> 120 Days, according to Microsoft. Yeah, really stellar.
> > >
> > > 120 days was the MEAN, not the maximum.
> >
> > If you know anything about statistics, then you'll know that quoting only
> > the maximum is meaningless.
> >
> > 128 days MEAN _with_ a nightly reboot. Yeah stellar!
> >
> > (Mean: thererfore some actually crashed _before_ 120 days. Geez).
>
> Are you trying to suggest that there are no linux servers that ever crash
> within the first 100 or 200 days? I hate to tell you this, but there are.
Not with nightly reboots.
>
> Mean also means some crashed AFTER 120 days.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
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: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: W2K/IIS proves itself over Linux/Tux
Date: Sun, 13 May 2001 19:29:55 -0400
Ayende Rahien wrote:
>
> "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:AxwL6.705$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:9dliov$kjd$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > In article <i5iL6.653$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Erik Funkenbusch"
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:9dirc0$b0l$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >> >You are trying to
> > > >> > propogate the FUD/lie that W2K is not capable of steller uptimes.
> > > >>
> > > >> 120 Days, according to Microsoft. Yeah, really stellar.
> > > >
> > > > 120 days was the MEAN, not the maximum.
> > >
> > > If you know anything about statistics, then you'll know that quoting
> only
> > > the maximum is meaningless.
> > >
> > > 128 days MEAN _with_ a nightly reboot. Yeah stellar!
> > >
> > > (Mean: thererfore some actually crashed _before_ 120 days. Geez).
> >
> > Are you trying to suggest that there are no linux servers that ever crash
> > within the first 100 or 200 days? I hate to tell you this, but there are.
> >
> > Mean also means some crashed AFTER 120 days.
>
> And some didn't crash at all.
Pretty pathetic for machines on a nightly-reboot schedule.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
L: This seems to have reduced my spam. Maybe if everyone does it we
can defeat the email search bots. [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shalala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan,
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.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
