Slashdot Mirror
Linuxwatch Budget System of 2001
A reader writes "Linuxwatch.org has posted their Budget System of 2001 in response to LinuxHardware's 2001 System of the year. Boasting their system is 13% of the price and plenty of power for "normal users". Running at 1.4Ghz with 256MB RAM, it doesn't seem to bad for "normal users"(whatever that means)IMHO."
suckaz...
Slashdot requires you to wait 20 seconds between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment.
It's been 18 seconds since you hit 'reply'!
If you this error seems to be incorrect, please provide the following in your report to SourceForge.net:
* Browser type
* User ID/Nickname or AC
* What steps caused this error
* Whether or not you know your ISP to be using a proxy or some sort of service that gives you an IP that others are using simultaneously.
* How many posts to this form you successfully submitted during the day
* Please choose 'formkeys' for the category!
Thank you.
First post for the guys at InfoRad
fp well maybe . . .
this sounds an awful lot like socialism to me
For those shopping in the not-so-budget Linux systems category, there's this site.
They've got a huge comparison of several systems that have been mass-manufactured and custom built. The results are very surprising...
I like Linux.
You will become troll food! so do NOT moderate!
Are you death?
DO NOT MODERATE THIS POST
you will be sorry if you do!
DO NOT, I REPEAT DO NOT (AND I MEAN IT) MODERATE THIS POST
Thank you! Please help get rid of unnecceary features such as moderation as they hinder slashdots open discussion!
LET ME REMIND YOU! DO NOT MODERATE THIS POST
Let's have a close look at the costs involved when running a Linux system.
An important factor in Linux' cost is its maintenance. Linux requires a *lot* of maintenance, work doable only by the relatively few high-paid Linux administrators that put themselves - of course willingly - at a great place in the market. Linux seems to be needing maintenance continuously, to keep it from breaking down.
Add to this the cost of loss of data. Linux' native file system, EXT2FS, is known to lose data like a firehose spouts water when the file system isn't unmounted properly. Other unix file systems are much more tolerant towards unexpected crashes. An example is the FreeBSD file system, which with soft updates enabled, performance-wise blows EXT2FS out of the water, and doesn't have the negative drawback of extreme data loss in case of a system breakdown.
According to Linux advocates, an alternative to EXT2FS would be ReiserFS. Unfortunately, ReiserFS is still in beta stage. This means it is not intended for production use (although according to many Linux advocates this shouldn't be a problem, which makes me wonder how (little) valuable they find your data).
The other proposed 'solution', EXT3FS, is nothing more than an ugly hack to put journaling into the file system. All the drawbacks of the ancient EXT2FS file system remain in EXT3FS, for the sake of 'forward- and backward compatibility'. This is interesting, considering that the DOS heritage in the Windows 9x/ME series was considered a very bad thing by the Linux community, even though it provided what could be called one of the best examples of compatibility, ever. When it's about Linux, compatibility constraints don't seem to be that much of a problem for Linux advocates.
Back to Linux' cost. Factor in also the fact that crashes happen much more often on Linux than on other unices. On other unices, crashes usually are caused by external sources like power outages. Crashes in Linux are a regular thing, and nobody seems to know what causes them, internally. Linux advocates try to hide this fact by denying crashes ever happen. Instead, they have frequent "hardware problems".
The steep learning curve compared to about any other operating system out there is a major factor in Linux' cost. The system is a mix of features from all kinds of unices, but not one of them is implemented right. A Linux user has to live with badly coded tools which have low performance, mangle data seemingly at random and are not in line with their specification. On top of that a lot of them spit out the most childish and unprofessional messages, indicating that they were created by 14-year olds with too much time, no talent and a bad attitude.
I could go on and on and on, but the conclusion is clear. Linux is not an option for any one who seeks a professional OS with high performance, scalability, stability, adherence to standards, etc.
Enlightenment just posted the date for .17 as 2005/12/12 in neverland :)
Well, I never got to read the first aritlce because it was slashdotted, and it looks like I won't be able to read this one. Maybe both of these sites should follow their own advice and build some beefier servers.
Kind thoughts do not change the world
Iraqis.org is not a computer review site. Avoid iraqis.org like it's goatse.cx or buttse.cx. When you go to a certain page on iraqis.org, it plays a wav "Hey everybody I'm looking at gay porno!" through IE bgsound and then pops up dozens of windows containing a Mr. Goatse jpg, challenging your ability to press Ctrl+W faster than your machine can open windows. I admit it isn't as bad as comp-u-geek (20 popup windows that all run an endless loop of JS alerts), but it's still very annoying and misleading.
--Pinocchio
YES, you stupid fuck! Why don't you bother to read the previously posted comments before adding to the redundancy?