But, like I said, I'm just glad I'm no longer using 150 MB of memory. Yech.
Of course, I've upgraded (yes, a huge upgrade for Linux users, at least) to the 11/16/2000 (21) build of Mozilla. Wow it's a massive improvement over standard Netscape.
I've been running this single session of NS6 all day and I'm at 43 MB total size. This is such a huge improvement over the prior Netscape which by now would be well over 150 MB due to nasty leaks in form input handling.
Turns out Ford underinflated the tires at the factory by almost 50% of the Firestone recommended PSI (20 vs. 35). Non-Firestone tires haven't fixed the issue unless they are properly inflated, and those same Firestone tires have no issues on other vehicles when inflated to the correct pressure.
ESD is also a mixer. It lets you play lots of sounds simultaneously. This is a good thing, as it means playing an MP3 isn't going to kill my ability to receive AIM notifications, or other similar things.
NT uses full ACLs while Samba is written to the lowest common denomiter (SP?), or true Unix permissions which are a 3 part ACL only (user, group, all). This causes problems between the mapping.
When I was subscribed to the Samba list, there was talk about how to go about it.
It's not a pretty sight. It's not too far off from running out of memory. And, the 4096 number is a system wide number:
file-nr and file-max
The kernel allocates file handles dynamically, but as yet doesn't free them again.
The value in file-max denotes the maximum number of file handles that the Linux kernel will allocate. When you get a lot of error messages about running out of file handles, you might want to raise this limit. The default value is 4096. To change it, just write the new number into the file:
Now, it's not that when that number runs out, that process dies, but the *NEXT* process to request a file dies. This happens on officially penguin-peed kernels as well. You need to set resource limits to keep an individual process from getting to trigger happy with files.
And by the way, take stock 2.2 and make a program which either A) fork bombs or B) chews memory. Watch the system go down in flames. In the case of (B) you (once? Is it fixed?) had the chance of watching the kernel give init the boot, which is very ugly.
Last week, it was posted it would be out Monday. Today is monday, thus there is another posting saying it actually *IS* out, not just announced to *be out*.
They use 3 revision numbers (.0,.1,.2) and then work on a distribution that may break binary compatibility due to a major program update. 5.0 was glibc, 6.0 was kernel 2.2 (I think). In this case, GCC is upgraded to 2.96 which means C++ programs may have issues.
Just because something can be used illegally does not render that item illegal, particularly when that item can also be used to distribute "speech." It doesn't matter if there is a way to combat it effectively or not, Napster is not inherently illegal. You have admitted this already. Since Napster is not inherently illegal, nor is the use of Napster sufficient or necessary for you to be partaking in an illegal action, there is no reasonable standing to demand it be shut down.
This is all about the *RIGHT* way to go about protecting copyrights rather than the way the RIAA is persuing MP3.com and Napster, or the MPAA is persuing DeCSS.
1) The best processors and hardware are designed to work best with Windows. All of these components take advantage of specific code inside Windows to bring us the best performance, particularly with processor intense work like multimedia.
Which is why 3D rendering on MIPS R10K chips (which run much slower than PIII's) is still faster than Intel boxes and why Photoshop on the Mac is still king. Oh, silly me. Wait, that's right, Windows is a faster web server, except Linux beats it hands down and Sparcs are phenomonal.
2) The when required phrase is key here. We aren't talking as much about how often completely new vesions come out, we're talking about the regular updates and bug fixes that any software requires.
Really. Explain why the F00F bug took 2 months to get fixed in Win95 and why critical security bugs are fixed faster on the free *nix systems than anything showing up on Microsoft's site.
Windows has the Windows Update web site. It has no peer, in fact, MS has a patent application pending because it is so good.
Oh, like that means anything.
There is no better way to be sure you have the latest security fixes and functionality patches.
Except most anything put out by a competitor.
Windows is extremely stable given its functionality, particularly the 2000 version. Uptimes of more than 1 year are common with properly configured systems.
Really? You have a release-copy Win2K box running for more than a year? I'd like to know how you managed that one. Course, Win9x until recently couldn't stay up *AT ALL* for more than either one or three (I forget which) month(s) because of a timer wraparound. Through NT4SP6 there are fixes for memory leaks and such that have a noticible impact on performance and stability after a couple months. No, you may have "correctly configured" boxes, but those boxes are massively overpowered compared to what you need.
Since we're talking "non-standard" systems, Alan Cox had a Linux box up for 4 years without a reboot, and this was the system that was known to have problems with a timer wraparound after a little over a year.
If you don't know how to set it up, don't bother to knock its stability.
Microsoft has constantly and continually billed NT/W2K as something easy to set-up and administer. Are you now admitting administering W2K/WinNT is not a simple matter?
The UI in Windows is customizable in a limitless number of ways.
This I want to see.
Want your file manager to look like a web browser? Done. How about putting web objects on your desktop? Done. Details in your file view of just big icons? You can have either with Windows.
Ooooo! As if that means anything useful. You give me a very small subset of things I can change. Can I change the window manager easily without worry about its stability and interaction with other programs? No. Does Windows offer me a way to significantly alter the feel of the desktop, not just the look? No. Does Windows offer me a selection of full-featured scriptable command-line shells? No.
You people will label me as a troll, but all of these points are valid.
Really? All those invalidated points don't mean squat to someone looking at facts.
Linux and BSD and the like can't hold Windows' jock strap in these areas.
That would be because Windows doesn't have a jock strap. It's not even playing with the little boys, much less the big boys in these areas.
It also goes a hell of a long way better than this, it can do SMP better,
Only for databases. For everything else it sucks raw eggs at SMP.
is easier to manage,
Didn't you just say that you had to be highly skilled to properly configure an NT server?
faster for most tasks,
You mean slower at common tasks, right? The Mindcraft test was an obvious joke, considering hardly anyone runs 4 NICs in a web server. Instead, they buy lots of little web servers which gives nice redundancy. On a single NIC system, NT gets its ass handed to it on a platter by Linux. Badly. Very badly.
more intuitive,
People like you keep saying this. I do not think that word means what you think it means. Windows is "intuitive" because it's familiar. If I deliver someone who has never *SEEN* a computer a Windows box and a Linux box, I'd wager money that neither will be intuitive to that person. Of course, NextStep makes Windows look like a Rube Goldberg contraption in terms of intuitiveness. Oh, wait, Windows *IS* a Rube Goldberg contraption in terms of intuitiveness.
has the backing of a major corporation,
Which has been proven to be illegally operating a monopoly and is doing its best to keep consumers locked into its platform, an act which is blatantly bad for the consumer.
virtually all software is released in a Windows version.
Finally a point, albeit a very minimal one. If the software you need to run, runs on another system, why constrain yourself? That and I can use Win4Lin or similar to use the software that is unavoidable.
Can any of these things be said of Linux?
Yes, and I wouldn't be lieing when I say them, unlike you and Windows.
Internet access is not a right. It's a privelege. Like driving.
Compared to a dial-up user, the effects of a cracked broadband pipe is like comparing the damage a moped will do compared to a small car. And 100BT just exacerbates the difference. If a box with double the bandwidth of a T3 is cracked, there's a *LOT* that can be done with it in a very short amount of time.
That said, the notion of "earning the right" is kinda scary in and of itself. But comparing the a doctor to someone who knows how to keep his bandwitdh from being used to do other nasty deeds is plainly stupid. And to think you're the one telling people to climb back under holes.
Over on IWETHEY (my usual hangout), someone floated the notion of charging extra for raw bandwidth as opposed to filtered/firewalled bandwidth, and after giving it some thought, most people agreed with him. It makes a lot of sense. It keeps Joe User from getting in over his head and should make those who think they want raw bandwidth really give it some honest thought. I'd say nearly 100 percent of the people who want a big fat raw pipe to their house don't need anything other than a big fat firewalled pipe. Yeah, they might *WANT* a raw pipe, but they don't *NEED* a raw pipe. A firewall preventing internal connections wouldn't hurt them one bit, because they initiate an outbound connection to get into work. Those that do, really, truely need a bidirectional pipe pay for the privelege.
It's actually pretty simple, really. The reason the site in question would have plummeted is that as Google is updating its stats, it probably makes some allowances for screwups and inability to reach a given site. However, after a time, the fact that Google was not allowed to search the page must have some sort of impact, and probably an exponential one. "OK, not here, probably a screw up, but we can't verify the search terms will be there" happened at the beginning and eventually as it aged out of relevence, it became "Well, lots of people think this page is good, but it's just not there!" from Google's perspective.
That makes sense.
Now, we know Google weights other sites by the weight of the site that links them. As the original directory started sliding, anything it linked to starts sliding as well. Which means Yahoo! fills the void. Particularly in such a specialized example where your liklihood of getting a good match is based on a few key sites.
Perl wins hands down there, but once you get out of that niche, Perl slows down considerably compared to, oh, say, Java. Remember, I'm talking about general purpose. If you're doing stuff Perl is "Real Good At" (TM) (like massive string manipulation), Perl will be fast. Different problem domains.
I did read some of the documentation on their site, which says "64-bit processor" of which AMD is *NOT*. However, I did not read the RaQ 3 or 4 information which are "Intel-compatible processor" based.
The NASRaQ and the Qube are also still listed on their site as being 64-bit processors, which means the MIPS chips.
I think it's a little unfair to say "they used to be MIPS but moved to AMD some time ago" when they still sell MIPS based systems.
The fact that an ADK requires you actively add it when you generate a key. In a corporation, it's possible (if I remember right) to force all keys to have an ADK, and you're not likely to be using that feature at home. That, and this is a sincere case of it being a bug which was rectified within 19 hours of being reported.
Slashdot Mirror
But, like I said, I'm just glad I'm no longer using 150 MB of memory. Yech.
Of course, I've upgraded (yes, a huge upgrade for Linux users, at least) to the 11/16/2000 (21) build of Mozilla. Wow it's a massive improvement over standard Netscape.
--
Ben Kosse
I've been running this single session of NS6 all day and I'm at 43 MB total size. This is such a huge improvement over the prior Netscape which by now would be well over 150 MB due to nasty leaks in form input handling.
--
Ben Kosse
I forgot we were talking about everything under the sun. My bad.
--
Ben Kosse
I don't know if it'll make it or not, but I think it actually has a decent chance of making it.
--
Ben Kosse
Turns out Ford underinflated the tires at the factory by almost 50% of the Firestone recommended PSI (20 vs. 35). Non-Firestone tires haven't fixed the issue unless they are properly inflated, and those same Firestone tires have no issues on other vehicles when inflated to the correct pressure.
Just a bit of a correction.
--
Ben Kosse
ESD is also a mixer. It lets you play lots of sounds simultaneously. This is a good thing, as it means playing an MP3 isn't going to kill my ability to receive AIM notifications, or other similar things.
--
Ben Kosse
NT uses full ACLs while Samba is written to the lowest common denomiter (SP?), or true Unix permissions which are a 3 part ACL only (user, group, all). This causes problems between the mapping.
When I was subscribed to the Samba list, there was talk about how to go about it.
--
Ben Kosse
It's not a pretty sight. It's not too far off from running out of memory. And, the 4096 number is a system wide number:
Now, it's not that when that number runs out, that process dies, but the *NEXT* process to request a file dies. This happens on officially penguin-peed kernels as well. You need to set resource limits to keep an individual process from getting to trigger happy with files.
And by the way, take stock 2.2 and make a program which either A) fork bombs or B) chews memory. Watch the system go down in flames. In the case of (B) you (once? Is it fixed?) had the chance of watching the kernel give init the boot, which is very ugly.
--
Ben Kosse
Hurry up and get your lab stuff done. :)
--
Ben Kosse
Why? Because every problem in P has a polynomial time for determining if the 'guess' is correct.
--
Ben Kosse
Last week, it was posted it would be out Monday. Today is monday, thus there is another posting saying it actually *IS* out, not just announced to *be out*.
--
Ben Kosse
Turns out Sawmill was the name of another application, so the Sawfish guys were nice enough to change it.
--
Ben Kosse
I believe he has a part, but it's kinda hard to change the main hero of a movie. It's hard enough to change a member of the supporting cast.
--
Ben Kosse
They use 3 revision numbers (.0, .1, .2) and then work on a distribution that may break binary compatibility due to a major program update. 5.0 was glibc, 6.0 was kernel 2.2 (I think). In this case, GCC is upgraded to 2.96 which means C++ programs may have issues.
--
Ben Kosse
Just because something can be used illegally does not render that item illegal, particularly when that item can also be used to distribute "speech." It doesn't matter if there is a way to combat it effectively or not, Napster is not inherently illegal. You have admitted this already. Since Napster is not inherently illegal, nor is the use of Napster sufficient or necessary for you to be partaking in an illegal action, there is no reasonable standing to demand it be shut down.
--
Ben Kosse
This is all about the *RIGHT* way to go about protecting copyrights rather than the way the RIAA is persuing MP3.com and Napster, or the MPAA is persuing DeCSS.
--
Ben Kosse
1) The best processors and hardware are designed to work best with Windows. All of these components take advantage of specific code inside Windows to bring us the best performance, particularly with processor intense work like multimedia.
Which is why 3D rendering on MIPS R10K chips (which run much slower than PIII's) is still faster than Intel boxes and why Photoshop on the Mac is still king. Oh, silly me. Wait, that's right, Windows is a faster web server, except Linux beats it hands down and Sparcs are phenomonal.
2) The when required phrase is key here. We aren't talking as much about how often completely new vesions come out, we're talking about the regular updates and bug fixes that any software requires.
Really. Explain why the F00F bug took 2 months to get fixed in Win95 and why critical security bugs are fixed faster on the free *nix systems than anything showing up on Microsoft's site.
Windows has the Windows Update web site. It has no peer, in fact, MS has a patent application pending because it is so good.
Oh, like that means anything.
There is no better way to be sure you have the latest security fixes and functionality patches.
Except most anything put out by a competitor.
Windows is extremely stable given its functionality, particularly the 2000 version. Uptimes of more than 1 year are common with properly configured systems.
Really? You have a release-copy Win2K box running for more than a year? I'd like to know how you managed that one. Course, Win9x until recently couldn't stay up *AT ALL* for more than either one or three (I forget which) month(s) because of a timer wraparound. Through NT4SP6 there are fixes for memory leaks and such that have a noticible impact on performance and stability after a couple months. No, you may have "correctly configured" boxes, but those boxes are massively overpowered compared to what you need.
Since we're talking "non-standard" systems, Alan Cox had a Linux box up for 4 years without a reboot, and this was the system that was known to have problems with a timer wraparound after a little over a year.
If you don't know how to set it up, don't bother to knock its stability.
Microsoft has constantly and continually billed NT/W2K as something easy to set-up and administer. Are you now admitting administering W2K/WinNT is not a simple matter?
The UI in Windows is customizable in a limitless number of ways.
This I want to see.
Want your file manager to look like a web browser? Done. How about putting web objects on your desktop? Done. Details in your file view of just big icons? You can have either with Windows.
Ooooo! As if that means anything useful. You give me a very small subset of things I can change. Can I change the window manager easily without worry about its stability and interaction with other programs? No. Does Windows offer me a way to significantly alter the feel of the desktop, not just the look? No. Does Windows offer me a selection of full-featured scriptable command-line shells? No.
You people will label me as a troll, but all of these points are valid.
Really? All those invalidated points don't mean squat to someone looking at facts.
Linux and BSD and the like can't hold Windows' jock strap in these areas.
That would be because Windows doesn't have a jock strap. It's not even playing with the little boys, much less the big boys in these areas.
It also goes a hell of a long way better than this, it can do SMP better,
Only for databases. For everything else it sucks raw eggs at SMP.
is easier to manage,
Didn't you just say that you had to be highly skilled to properly configure an NT server?
faster for most tasks,
You mean slower at common tasks, right? The Mindcraft test was an obvious joke, considering hardly anyone runs 4 NICs in a web server. Instead, they buy lots of little web servers which gives nice redundancy. On a single NIC system, NT gets its ass handed to it on a platter by Linux. Badly. Very badly.
more intuitive,
People like you keep saying this. I do not think that word means what you think it means. Windows is "intuitive" because it's familiar. If I deliver someone who has never *SEEN* a computer a Windows box and a Linux box, I'd wager money that neither will be intuitive to that person. Of course, NextStep makes Windows look like a Rube Goldberg contraption in terms of intuitiveness. Oh, wait, Windows *IS* a Rube Goldberg contraption in terms of intuitiveness.
has the backing of a major corporation,
Which has been proven to be illegally operating a monopoly and is doing its best to keep consumers locked into its platform, an act which is blatantly bad for the consumer.
virtually all software is released in a Windows version.
Finally a point, albeit a very minimal one. If the software you need to run, runs on another system, why constrain yourself? That and I can use Win4Lin or similar to use the software that is unavoidable.
Can any of these things be said of Linux?
Yes, and I wouldn't be lieing when I say them, unlike you and Windows.
--
Ben Kosse
Internet access is not a right. It's a privelege. Like driving.
Compared to a dial-up user, the effects of a cracked broadband pipe is like comparing the damage a moped will do compared to a small car. And 100BT just exacerbates the difference. If a box with double the bandwidth of a T3 is cracked, there's a *LOT* that can be done with it in a very short amount of time.
That said, the notion of "earning the right" is kinda scary in and of itself. But comparing the a doctor to someone who knows how to keep his bandwitdh from being used to do other nasty deeds is plainly stupid. And to think you're the one telling people to climb back under holes.
Over on IWETHEY (my usual hangout), someone floated the notion of charging extra for raw bandwidth as opposed to filtered/firewalled bandwidth, and after giving it some thought, most people agreed with him. It makes a lot of sense. It keeps Joe User from getting in over his head and should make those who think they want raw bandwidth really give it some honest thought. I'd say nearly 100 percent of the people who want a big fat raw pipe to their house don't need anything other than a big fat firewalled pipe. Yeah, they might *WANT* a raw pipe, but they don't *NEED* a raw pipe. A firewall preventing internal connections wouldn't hurt them one bit, because they initiate an outbound connection to get into work. Those that do, really, truely need a bidirectional pipe pay for the privelege.
I'm willing to do that.
--
Ben Kosse
It's actually pretty simple, really. The reason the site in question would have plummeted is that as Google is updating its stats, it probably makes some allowances for screwups and inability to reach a given site. However, after a time, the fact that Google was not allowed to search the page must have some sort of impact, and probably an exponential one. "OK, not here, probably a screw up, but we can't verify the search terms will be there" happened at the beginning and eventually as it aged out of relevence, it became "Well, lots of people think this page is good, but it's just not there!" from Google's perspective.
That makes sense.
Now, we know Google weights other sites by the weight of the site that links them. As the original directory started sliding, anything it linked to starts sliding as well. Which means Yahoo! fills the void. Particularly in such a specialized example where your liklihood of getting a good match is based on a few key sites.
--
Ben Kosse
Perl wins hands down there, but once you get out of that niche, Perl slows down considerably compared to, oh, say, Java. Remember, I'm talking about general purpose. If you're doing stuff Perl is "Real Good At" (TM) (like massive string manipulation), Perl will be fast. Different problem domains.
--
Ben Kosse
I did read some of the documentation on their site, which says "64-bit processor" of which AMD is *NOT*. However, I did not read the RaQ 3 or 4 information which are "Intel-compatible processor" based.
The NASRaQ and the Qube are also still listed on their site as being 64-bit processors, which means the MIPS chips.
I think it's a little unfair to say "they used to be MIPS but moved to AMD some time ago" when they still sell MIPS based systems.
--
Ben Kosse
Colbalt ships MIPS-based systems, not AMD. Of course, Penguin Computing has an AMD based system ("Niveus Athlon Mid-tower").
--
Ben Kosse
Specifically, CNRI wants to resolve all disputes in Virginia which has passed UTICA.
Think about it.
--
Ben Kosse
The fact that an ADK requires you actively add it when you generate a key. In a corporation, it's possible (if I remember right) to force all keys to have an ADK, and you're not likely to be using that feature at home. That, and this is a sincere case of it being a bug which was rectified within 19 hours of being reported.
--
Ben Kosse
MS Networking runs (on Win95/98) over NetBIOS which can be encapsulated in NetBEUI, IPX/SPX, and..... TCP/IP!
Now, it may not support MS Networking, but it *SHOULD* if it truely supports TCP/IP as the protocol.
--
Ben Kosse