Hrm, if this is the case, I wonder if either will actually BUY Cyrix from Nat. They DID recently put the whole division up for sale..
This COULD be bad for them, 'spec ifXyrix ends up going away..
Re:A for fileserver for NT????
on
NOS Crossroads
·
· Score: 1
It's i386 based Solaris, NOT Sparc.. the intel release is hampered by lack of ANY sort of decent PCI support for the raid boards themselves..
Re:hmmm... Now where have I seen this test before?
on
NOS Crossroads
·
· Score: 1
Gimme a break. This is a pretty mcuh standard setup for a large scale server.. And if you bothered to read the article, the actually included SOURCE level tweaks on Apache AND the kernel, and several configuration options with Samba. Hell, Solaris used the same release with the same options as the Linux box..
And if you actually read (Once again, notice a trend?) they rated SMP with a B, the same grade they gave NT.
There is no FUD here.. These are legit problems with Linux.. It still doesn't scale up well.. It's a gimme, unfortionatly.. Heck, if they moved Samba into the kernel itself, that'd be a 20% increase in performance right there..
I have to agree.. I don't seehow anyone could fault these tests, 'Spec comparing Solaris and Linux,as they where BOTH running simular software. Linux didn't do all that great here.. What we need to do is figure out WHY and fix 'em..
If it happens that it wasn't tuned properly, then perhaps the tuning needs to be done by default.
I've got a hunch that a whole month after the tests, if they where to fail, would be devoted to getting Linux to outperform NT in these cases.. It would indeed be a blow to the 'movement', and a WHOLE lot of reasons for people that are on the border to go with NT..
I'm hoping that what I suspect will come about, aka, Linux outperforming NT by a wide margin, this type of test has never been done to my knowledge before, and if it turns out that they CAN get NT to work better then Linux, it could be the end of a bad first few chapters in 'The Book of Linux'
He hardly 'Wrote Unix'. No more then Linus has 'written Linux'. He was there in the beginning, and helped write it, just as Linus was for Linux.. Granted, his opinions matter, but please don't go on like the guy is a saint and everything we do is based on him.. Shesh..
Please give more information regarding not unmounting drives correctly.. I've never seen this happen. Feel free to use my email address if you'd like..
I'm sorry to say I've never encountered what your saying.. I DO use an Adaptech SCSI controller, using a no name brand 1 Meg video card. No problems here..
The only problem is it doesn't support decent rates.. To get 128, you need to PAY for an upgrade.. I hope people don't record stuff, and respond with 'This sounds like crap',and decide MP3 stinks..
And I doubt they're going to support shoutcast. They haven't supported any other streamining media's, I doubt they're about to start now..
Well that'd make NO sense.. Why would they break into 3 different 'versions' of Windows? I was thinking that they meant breaking Microsoft into 3 parts.
Oh man, I would friggen love that.. Untill you can actually BUY an itsy (Compaq, if your listening, I'd buy one..), I simply love the CE boxes, 'spec the color screen ones..
The primary thing I hate about the Pilots are that you can't just write on the screen normally..
A) I don't just 'happen' to open my mailbox, it's specifically addressed. The radio idea just isn't the case here...
B) Tell me, if they did filter the mail messages, how would that NOT use bandwidth? They don't just magically disappear upstream, you know.. And you've obviously never tried to filter 25,000+ messages at a pop. THat isn't just a few second of proccess time..
C) (THIS will get the message rated to -1 I'm guessing, but here we go anyway)
Go ahead and try, buddy. I'm not sure if you know exactly how many hits www.ups.com get's A SECOND, but I'd love to see you try to bring it down. Our WAN has 68 T1 lines being serviced, all with access to the 'net. That's IN ADDITION to what's being used for www.ups.com. Face it buddy, mine's bigger then yours..;-P
Ok, so they added damages in there, and promptly dropped it. I stand slightly corrected. The judge did not 'force' them to drop the charges, they did that themselves.
This guys guilty as sin, and we all know it.. Anyone who thinks he isn't, lemme know, so I can start blasting your email box with junkmail from hudreds of sources, and see how much you think it'd be legal then..;-P
All of your points are more then valid, but what concerns me is that something LIKE this could happen that could bury the whole idea OF the GPL. Big money can find all sorts of holes that could make then exempt. They could claim that some GPL'd source infinges on their IP,and hence making everything that came from it also suspect. Imagine if hey Microsoft looked at Linux kernel.01 and said 'Hey, this is based on Minux. We own Minux. We should have owned this. Let's sue for this AND ALL derivitive works!!'
Not quite true.. You see, any email address marked @intel.com is targeted twards intel. A person does not 'own' the individual address at intel, intel allows them use of it. They also have the same rights as everyone else to say, 'Your mail is not welcome, please stop'. Once that happens, it must stop, or it's against the law. That's all they did, was enforce the fact that they didn't want it.
If I started shipping boxes of condoms to your moms house, I wouldn't be breaking the law. If she asked me to stop, and I did it AGAIN, that's against the law. Same applies.. They warned him several times before taking these steps..
Not only that, but this message wasn't sent over some sort of public list. It was individually addressed to each email recipient. It was targeted, and not something that was broadcast to everyone.. God forbid if they had an address like everyone@intel.com;-P
EXACTLY what I've been trying to say here.. They didn't sue him for billions from one sending. They requested he cut it out, and he didn't, so they enforced their right to say 'You are NOT welcome to use our professional email system'..
Guys and gals, your barking up a tree here that doesn't exist..
Sure, anyone can sue anyone to make them STOP SENDING you email.. It's an electronic version of a restraining order. That's all that was done here..
He would have the right to contact any of these employees at their home addressif he liked, but he didn't. He used a professional contact address for personal use.
They didn't throw him in jail here. They didn't collect millions in damages. NONE of this happened.. He wasn't put to death. He was merely ordered to stop. Just as if you had a restraining order against an old flame. That's it..
Let's not make this something it's not. They did the equivilant of posting a 'No Trespassing' sign the first time he did it. The next time, they took him to court to say stop.
I think they are using the same right we all have. To tell someone legally that they aren't wanted and to keep the heck away.
Slashdot Mirror
Hrm, if this is the case, I wonder if either will actually BUY Cyrix from Nat. They DID recently put the whole division up for sale..
This COULD be bad for them, 'spec ifXyrix ends up going away..
It's i386 based Solaris, NOT Sparc.. the intel release is hampered by lack of ANY sort of decent PCI support for the raid boards themselves..
Gimme a break. This is a pretty mcuh standard setup for a large scale server.. And if you bothered to read the article, the actually included SOURCE level tweaks on Apache AND the kernel, and several configuration options with Samba. Hell, Solaris used the same release with the same options as the Linux box..
And if you actually read (Once again, notice a trend?) they rated SMP with a B, the same grade they gave NT.
There is no FUD here.. These are legit problems with Linux.. It still doesn't scale up well.. It's a gimme, unfortionatly.. Heck, if they moved Samba into the kernel itself, that'd be a 20% increase in performance right there..
I have to agree.. I don't seehow anyone could fault these tests, 'Spec comparing Solaris and Linux,as they where BOTH running simular software. Linux didn't do all that great here.. What we need to do is figure out WHY and fix 'em..
If it happens that it wasn't tuned properly, then perhaps the tuning needs to be done by default.
I've got a hunch that a whole month after the tests, if they where to fail, would be devoted to getting Linux to outperform NT in these cases.. It would indeed be a blow to the 'movement', and a WHOLE lot of reasons for people that are on the border to go with NT..
I'm hoping that what I suspect will come about, aka, Linux outperforming NT by a wide margin, this type of test has never been done to my knowledge before, and if it turns out that they CAN get NT to work better then Linux, it could be the end of a bad first few chapters in 'The Book of Linux'
I'm betting that much of this thread will go unmoderated becouse of how juicy it is. They'll want to post to..
Linus himself has been invited to help tune the system, and witness the tests himself, along with other Experts of Samba and Apache...
He hardly 'Wrote Unix'. No more then Linus has 'written Linux'. He was there in the beginning, and helped write it, just as Linus was for Linux.. Granted, his opinions matter, but please don't go on like the guy is a saint and everything we do is based on him.. Shesh..
Please give more information regarding not unmounting drives correctly.. I've never seen this happen. Feel free to use my email address if you'd like..
I'm sorry to say I've never encountered what your saying.. I DO use an Adaptech SCSI controller, using a no name brand 1 Meg video card. No problems here..
This isn't a flame, but I don't think you understand the method used to manage the kernel.
It IS divided up already. Every section has a primary maintainer, all of which is seperate from each other.
I don't see any articles bearing this as of yet, unfortionatly..
I can see where he's coming from in ONE respect. Embedded systems. It really hasn't been proven to be as rock solid as some ES systems..
I would personally like to get more information regarding his findings..
Exactly HOW did they find it unreliable?
The only problem is it doesn't support decent rates.. To get 128, you need to PAY for an upgrade.. I hope people don't record stuff, and respond with 'This sounds like crap',and decide MP3 stinks..
And I doubt they're going to support shoutcast. They haven't supported any other streamining media's, I doubt they're about to start now..
Well that'd make NO sense.. Why would they break into 3 different 'versions' of Windows? I was thinking that they meant breaking Microsoft into 3 parts.
1) Operating Systems
2) Applications
3) Services
Am I wrong here?
There are many other things that affect speed..
Do you live near any transition towers? Power lines? These all slow it down to a crawl..
Oh man, I would friggen love that.. Untill you can actually BUY an itsy (Compaq, if your listening, I'd buy one..), I simply love the CE boxes, 'spec the color screen ones..
The primary thing I hate about the Pilots are that you can't just write on the screen normally..
Few points here.
;-P
A) I don't just 'happen' to open my mailbox, it's specifically addressed. The radio idea just isn't the case here...
B) Tell me, if they did filter the mail messages, how would that NOT use bandwidth? They don't just magically disappear upstream, you know.. And you've obviously never tried to filter 25,000+ messages at a pop. THat isn't just a few second of proccess time..
C) (THIS will get the message rated to -1 I'm guessing, but here we go anyway)
Go ahead and try, buddy. I'm not sure if you know exactly how many hits www.ups.com get's A SECOND, but I'd love to see you try to bring it down. Our WAN has 68 T1 lines being serviced, all with access to the 'net. That's IN ADDITION to what's being used for www.ups.com. Face it buddy, mine's bigger then yours..
Ok, so they added damages in there, and promptly dropped it. I stand slightly corrected. The judge did not 'force' them to drop the charges, they did that themselves.
;-P
This guys guilty as sin, and we all know it.. Anyone who thinks he isn't, lemme know, so I can start blasting your email box with junkmail from hudreds of sources, and see how much you think it'd be legal then..
All of your points are more then valid, but what concerns me is that something LIKE this could happen that could bury the whole idea OF the GPL. Big money can find all sorts of holes that could make then exempt. They could claim that some GPL'd source infinges on their IP,and hence making everything that came from it also suspect. Imagine if hey Microsoft looked at Linux kernel .01 and said 'Hey, this is based on Minux. We own Minux. We should have owned this. Let's sue for this AND ALL derivitive works!!'
Not quite true.. You see, any email address marked @intel.com is targeted twards intel. A person does not 'own' the individual address at intel, intel allows them use of it. They also have the same rights as everyone else to say, 'Your mail is not welcome, please stop'. Once that happens, it must stop, or it's against the law. That's all they did, was enforce the fact that they didn't want it.
If I started shipping boxes of condoms to your moms house, I wouldn't be breaking the law. If she asked me to stop, and I did it AGAIN, that's against the law. Same applies.. They warned him several times before taking these steps..
Not only that, but this message wasn't sent over some sort of public list. It was individually addressed to each email recipient. It was targeted, and not something that was broadcast to everyone.. God forbid if they had an address like everyone@intel.com ;-P
EXACTLY what I've been trying to say here.. They didn't sue him for billions from one sending. They requested he cut it out, and he didn't, so they enforced their right to say 'You are NOT welcome to use our professional email system'..
Guys and gals, your barking up a tree here that doesn't exist..
Sure, anyone can sue anyone to make them STOP SENDING you email.. It's an electronic version of a restraining order. That's all that was done here..
He would have the right to contact any of these employees at their home addressif he liked, but he didn't. He used a professional contact address for personal use.
They didn't throw him in jail here. They didn't collect millions in damages. NONE of this happened.. He wasn't put to death. He was merely ordered to stop. Just as if you had a restraining order against an old flame. That's it..
Let's not make this something it's not. They did the equivilant of posting a 'No Trespassing' sign the first time he did it. The next time, they took him to court to say stop.
I think they are using the same right we all have. To tell someone legally that they aren't wanted and to keep the heck away.