>> How many passes of overwriting... blah That's a stupid question, because overwriting zillions of times may not really erase all the data. You have to go to the inode table and find out WHICH BLOCKS OF THE DISK the file was written out, and target those blocks/sectors and overwrite stuff. rm or unlink just removes the entry for the file in the parent directory's entry and marks the inodes as unused. that doesn't actually ERASE data from your disk. even in MS DOG (FAT as well as VFAT) they just replace the first letter of the filename with junk in the FAT. they don't actually go and delete the disk blocks which housed the data.
Try killing netscape on a mandrake 7 box... running KDE (the crappiest of them all - I've no clue if it happens on the other windowmanagers. netscape doesn't even show up as a process in ps x - and there's a completely dead netscape window eating up your root window and probably grabbing your mouse as well... and you'll be getting your undies all in a bunch about putting that crap on 2500 workstations.
>>The stupidity of the American People has never >>been in doubt, sadly. >> "American" is redundant here. Not really, because the American People (and their government) gets to decide what happens to microsoft, and if Microsoft gets away with this, it is the American Peeple who're proved stupid.
India was never impoverished Farming colony. The British made it out to be that... and in spite of what the rest of the world thinks, it's a fun place to be. Right mix of the old and the new.
>>>And whatever he said, I will say, linux does not >>>scale well at all. Once you have more than a >>>handfull of processors, linux loses, and NT, >>>Solaris, etc all win. Scalability is not judged merely by how many proccessors a kernel uses efficiently. Scalability is a term applied to all things big and small. Take number of users, variety of hardware (from a piddling 386, to Alpha) Network traffic capability - and if you still wanna talk about SMP, talk after the 2.4 kernel's here. >>>when it comes to doing work (other than trumped up shell windows), neither comes close to >>>win98/macos for ease of use, consistency, or >>>navigability. *inhales sharply* U must be kidding. The kinda work most people do requires your machine to NOT need a reboot after every network error, and needs better error reporting than "General Protection Fault." Mac is definitely cool - but if you're insinuating that people ACTUALLY get work done on Win98, I need to know WHAT kinda work!!!
>>>And whatever he said, I will say, linux does not >>>scale well at all. Once you have more than a >>>handfull of processors, linux loses, and NT, >>>Solaris, etc all win. Scalability is not judged merely by how many proccessors a kernel uses efficiently. Scalability is a term applied to all things big and small. Take number of users, variety of hardware (from a piddling 386, to Alpha) Network traffic capability - and if you still wanna talk about SMP, talk after the 2.4 kernel's here. >>>when it comes to doing work (other than trumped up shell windows), neither comes close to >>>win98/macos for ease of use, consistency, or >>>navigability. *inhales sharply* U must be kidding. The kinda work most people do requires your machine to NOT need a reboot after every network error, and needs better error reporting than "General Protection Fault." Mac is definitely cool - but if you're insinuating that people ACTUALLY get work done on Win98, I need to know WHAT kinda work!!!
Well... the author seems to be quite happy to look at the chipset and start cribbing even before trying to install stuff on the compaq box. At one time ( and I mean REALLY long ago) I had Slackware running on a Compaq 80486. Since then I have graduated to a P-III 450 Mhz. And as part of my work, I have installed Debian, SuSe, RedHat, Mdk, Slackware and Phat -- in a NetWare network with DHCP... all on Compaq machines - and haven't had trouble EVER. So - if you have an axe to grind against Compaq, don't stand on a moral high-ground and crib. say that you hate Compaq - don't give us vague reasons like you have. - They Got a name for the winners in the world I want a name when I lose...
This can get endless. We as responsible ciizens MUST put an end to this. Soon, for saying "reboot", we'll have to pay royalty to Microsoft... they can't just take words and copyright them - the Oxford English dictionary will go bankrupt paying money to these visigoths.
Their PEERS ? Are you NUTS ? Microsoft is Peerless. For all my pals into Linux, would rather have a root canal than look at all those BSTR's and Windows code that passes as C++. Man... these guys are from a different planet. they even speak a diffrent C++!!!
Slashdot Mirror
>> How many passes of overwriting ... blah That's a stupid question, because overwriting zillions of times may not really erase all the data. You have to go to the inode table and find out WHICH BLOCKS OF THE DISK the file was written out, and target those blocks/sectors and overwrite stuff. rm or unlink just removes the entry for the file in the parent directory's entry and marks the inodes as unused. that doesn't actually ERASE data from your disk. even in MS DOG (FAT as well as VFAT) they just replace the first letter of the filename with junk in the FAT. they don't actually go and delete the disk blocks which housed the data.
Try killing netscape on a mandrake 7 box... running KDE (the crappiest of them all - I've no clue if it happens on the other windowmanagers. netscape doesn't even show up as a process in ps x - and there's a completely dead netscape window eating up your root window and probably grabbing your mouse as well... and you'll be getting your undies all in a bunch about putting that crap on 2500 workstations.
>>The stupidity of the American People has never >>been in doubt, sadly. >> "American" is redundant here. Not really, because the American People (and their government) gets to decide what happens to microsoft, and if Microsoft gets away with this, it is the American Peeple who're proved stupid.
India was never impoverished Farming colony. The British made it out to be that... and in spite of what the rest of the world thinks, it's a fun place to be. Right mix of the old and the new.
>>>And whatever he said, I will say, linux does not >>>scale well at all. Once you have more than a >>>handfull of processors, linux loses, and NT, >>>Solaris, etc all win. Scalability is not judged merely by how many proccessors a kernel uses efficiently. Scalability is a term applied to all things big and small. Take number of users, variety of hardware (from a piddling 386, to Alpha) Network traffic capability - and if you still wanna talk about SMP, talk after the 2.4 kernel's here. >>>when it comes to doing work (other than trumped up shell windows), neither comes close to >>>win98/macos for ease of use, consistency, or >>>navigability. *inhales sharply* U must be kidding. The kinda work most people do requires your machine to NOT need a reboot after every network error, and needs better error reporting than "General Protection Fault." Mac is definitely cool - but if you're insinuating that people ACTUALLY get work done on Win98, I need to know WHAT kinda work!!!
>>>And whatever he said, I will say, linux does not >>>scale well at all. Once you have more than a >>>handfull of processors, linux loses, and NT, >>>Solaris, etc all win. Scalability is not judged merely by how many proccessors a kernel uses efficiently. Scalability is a term applied to all things big and small. Take number of users, variety of hardware (from a piddling 386, to Alpha) Network traffic capability - and if you still wanna talk about SMP, talk after the 2.4 kernel's here. >>>when it comes to doing work (other than trumped up shell windows), neither comes close to >>>win98/macos for ease of use, consistency, or >>>navigability. *inhales sharply* U must be kidding. The kinda work most people do requires your machine to NOT need a reboot after every network error, and needs better error reporting than "General Protection Fault." Mac is definitely cool - but if you're insinuating that people ACTUALLY get work done on Win98, I need to know WHAT kinda work!!!
Well... the author seems to be quite happy to look at the chipset and start cribbing even before trying to install stuff on the compaq box. At one time ( and I mean REALLY long ago) I had Slackware running on a Compaq 80486. Since then I have graduated to a P-III 450 Mhz. And as part of my work, I have installed Debian, SuSe, RedHat, Mdk, Slackware and Phat -- in a NetWare network with DHCP... all on Compaq machines - and haven't had trouble EVER. So - if you have an axe to grind against Compaq, don't stand on a moral high-ground and crib. say that you hate Compaq - don't give us vague reasons like you have. - They Got a name for the winners in the world I want a name when I lose...
This can get endless. We as responsible ciizens MUST put an end to this. Soon, for saying "reboot", we'll have to pay royalty to Microsoft... they can't just take words and copyright them - the Oxford English dictionary will go bankrupt paying money to these visigoths.
Their PEERS ? Are you NUTS ? Microsoft is Peerless. For all my pals into Linux, would rather have a root canal than look at all those BSTR's and Windows code that passes as C++. Man... these guys are from a different planet. they even speak a diffrent C++!!!