I think you left out the argument against the "higher quality" drive. Personally, that's where Seagate takes the cake. I know it's anecdotal, but I've never had a Seagate fail in a RAID array or standalone on a server. It's always the pesky IBM drives. In the seven years I've been fixing computers for my hometown, I've never seen a failed Seagate.
SCSI drives still take the cake when it comes to performance and reliability, IMHO. I run them exclusively in the server farm I operate because I can count on them to be best-of-breed. Sure, there's a premium for them, but I belive the uptime and extra speed make up for it.
Nobody reads the articles, but they do like to look at pictures! Especially screenshots. Sometimes it confuses people when no links to screenshots are posted with Linux kernel releases, but that doesn't happen every day.:)
Glad to know it compiled. I just hope those AIC7xxx patches work.
I can't get 2.4 stable with my pure scsi system (hdd, cdrom, etc). Using a 2940U2W. It bombs when installing Drake 8.2. Slackware 8.1 will go on (with segfaults in the package install) but you can't compile a thing with it.
Indeed they do. I would rather be buying one disk that lasts a very long time than constantly replacing them. A *reliable* hard drive is like a good friend.
>it might be more flexible,
Indeed it is! Cable length, number of devices, configurabilty, and RAID are features I routinely enjoy. They've been around for a while and work quite well. In some reported instances, better than their IDE counterparts.
>but in the end, it's way too expensive
There are three things that differentiate a good SCSI drive from an IDE one. * Size: SCSI costs more per gig * Speed: Comparatively, SCSI *typically* faster * Life: SCSI drives live longer
There are some times when space is a killer need. Such as those MP3 servers.... This is where IDE murders SCSI. It is very difficult to get reasonable 100 GB SCSI drives. There isn't a solution to this. I just break down and get an IDE drive.:-/
EBay is really the best place to get your SCSI equipment. It's cheaper than retail and if you choose good supplier, they're just as reliable.
SCSI drives are also faster. This is just a fact of life.:) All the new technology that makes drives faster gets dumped in SCSI first. Mainly because people who by SCSI are spending that money to _get_faster_drives_.
Life: see top
>and overkill
I don't know about you, but given the choice, I would buy choose a BMW over a Ford. Especially if the price difference was the same as SCSI vs IDE.
>there's serial ATA on the horizon.
This really doesn't mean jack squat, IMNSHO. Serial ATA brings more devices (bandwidth) and smaller cables. That's it. Physical drive quality won't change a bit. It's like changing the body styling on a car but leaving the engine the same. SCSI drives will still be high quality drives, SATA drives will still be bottom-bucket.
SATA also has one hitch to having more devices: the cables are in a star configuration. This means, you have one cable that comes out of your controller and goes to each drive. Individually. None of this easy daisy chaining you used to enjoy in PATA, SCSI, or FireWire. If your controller only has 4 cables coming out of it, tough nuts.
Your thoughts could be answered with a simple google search.
http://main.mswinxp.net/~lpackham/smbclient/
Of course, it requires Cygwin. But, a drop in replacement for something that is proprietary to begin with and comes bundled with all windows version sounds kind of ridiculous, doesn't it.;)
"In fact, the methods described in these patents are quite inappropriate for a Unix/POSIX"
It is most likeley that they are hinting these methods would certainly apply to a Windows platform, meaning a Win32 port of Samba would probably infringe upon them.
The question is, are we, as individuals, willing to give up the ease of letting corporations and governments make marginally correct decisions (but progressively and cascadingly worse ones) and do it right, ourselves? Who's willing to sacrifice time, money, and effort into developing a viable alternative to this nonsense?
The problem is that 99% of the time, the person who's willing has their own agenda for volunteering, therefore corrupting the movement at the onset, even though for the most part the effort seems sound.
We want those people who don't want the job because they know what it what it entails. They had to push George Washington into the president's seat, no?
You've done an outstanding job of making it difficult, if not impossible for the people who are running slashdot "light" to mark a person a friend or foe. Could we have a bit more description of these features please?:)
Which is probably why it works. Think about it from a professor who patents student's work point-of-view. Not that I think it's a good idea or anything...
Deb won't install on a 200mb hard drive. At least, not with the stuff you need (basic tools, no X, and a compiler) turned on. I've tried it (using a 20mb swap). I even left the compiler out, still didn't work. Yes, Deb has a smaller footprint, but Slack can shuffle in at 100mb. Perfect for my 486/DX 50.
I've always thought that "fair use" was doing whatever the hell you felt like with copyrighted material you bought short of stealing sales to another person from whoever sold it to you. 'Course, gets tricky with households, DJs, radio, etc...:) Fair use is like the "be nice" clause.
But in reality, copyright is an artifically created right, so therefore fair use is just conjured up too. It's tradition to attempt to balance the rights of the copyright owner to the rights of the audience.
Dude, my pissy little K6-2/500 with 64mb of PC-66 SDRAM and a ATI AIW (Rage 128GL) card ate this sucker upon Win95. Allthough, I've got a Cheetah X15 to make swapping less of a PITA......
Slashdot Mirror
I think you left out the argument against the "higher quality" drive. Personally, that's where Seagate takes the cake. I know it's anecdotal, but I've never had a Seagate fail in a RAID array or standalone on a server. It's always the pesky IBM drives. In the seven years I've been fixing computers for my hometown, I've never seen a failed Seagate.
SCSI drives still take the cake when it comes to performance and reliability, IMHO. I run them exclusively in the server farm I operate because I can count on them to be best-of-breed. Sure, there's a premium for them, but I belive the uptime and extra speed make up for it.
Nobody reads the articles, but they do like to look at pictures! Especially screenshots. Sometimes it confuses people when no links to screenshots are posted with Linux kernel releases, but that doesn't happen every day. :)
Glad to know it compiled. I just hope those AIC7xxx patches work.
I can't get 2.4 stable with my pure scsi system (hdd, cdrom, etc). Using a 2940U2W. It bombs when installing Drake 8.2. Slackware 8.1 will go on (with segfaults in the package install) but you can't compile a thing with it.
I can't belive I left out Paul van Dyk. 10 CDs and I skip over him... it's too late at night.
BT (The man, period. I'm not kidding :)
Underworld
Way Out West
Chicane
Hybrid
William Orbit
Orbital
Robert Miles
All are good enough that you can go to your local record store, pick up any regular album, and be happy with it.
If you're Privoxy/Junkbustering, you can change it there, FWIW.
> The disks might last longer,
:-/
:) All the new technology that makes drives faster gets dumped in SCSI first. Mainly because people who by SCSI are spending that money to _get_faster_drives_.
Indeed they do. I would rather be buying one disk that lasts a very long time than constantly replacing them. A *reliable* hard drive is like a good friend.
>it might be more flexible,
Indeed it is! Cable length, number of devices, configurabilty, and RAID are features I routinely enjoy. They've been around for a while and work quite well. In some reported instances, better than their IDE counterparts.
>but in the end, it's way too expensive
There are three things that differentiate a good SCSI drive from an IDE one.
* Size: SCSI costs more per gig
* Speed: Comparatively, SCSI *typically* faster
* Life: SCSI drives live longer
There are some times when space is a killer need. Such as those MP3 servers.... This is where IDE murders SCSI. It is very difficult to get reasonable 100 GB SCSI drives. There isn't a solution to this. I just break down and get an IDE drive.
EBay is really the best place to get your SCSI equipment. It's cheaper than retail and if you choose good supplier, they're just as reliable.
SCSI drives are also faster. This is just a fact of life.
Life: see top
>and overkill
I don't know about you, but given the choice, I would buy choose a BMW over a Ford. Especially if the price difference was the same as SCSI vs IDE.
>there's serial ATA on the horizon.
This really doesn't mean jack squat, IMNSHO. Serial ATA brings more devices (bandwidth) and smaller cables. That's it. Physical drive quality won't change a bit. It's like changing the body styling on a car but leaving the engine the same. SCSI drives will still be high quality drives, SATA drives will still be bottom-bucket.
SATA also has one hitch to having more devices: the cables are in a star configuration. This means, you have one cable that comes out of your controller and goes to each drive. Individually. None of this easy daisy chaining you used to enjoy in PATA, SCSI, or FireWire. If your controller only has 4 cables coming out of it, tough nuts.
I know, I was just being sarcastic about "de facto" programs (by virtue of being installed with the OS) normal people use in windows such as IE.
The words I used were "samba win32 port".
Your thoughts could be answered with a simple google search.
;)
http://main.mswinxp.net/~lpackham/smbclient/
Of course, it requires Cygwin. But, a drop in replacement for something that is proprietary to begin with and comes bundled with all windows version sounds kind of ridiculous, doesn't it.
"In fact, the methods described in these patents are quite inappropriate for a Unix/POSIX"
It is most likeley that they are hinting these methods would certainly apply to a Windows platform, meaning a Win32 port of Samba would probably infringe upon them.
Just a drawn-out conjecture...
"List Price: $299.99"
..click... add to cart as indicated...
"Our Price: Too low to display."
Oh really?
$296.99
Hoooo, Amazon! They threatened you with legal ramifications for advertizing a THREE DOLLAR discount?
Thats it. I had an Imagine 128e. 128bit was the "touted feature".
Are you sure they just didn't use XENIX sources?
The question is, are we, as individuals, willing to give up the ease of letting corporations and governments make marginally correct decisions (but progressively and cascadingly worse ones) and do it right, ourselves? Who's willing to sacrifice time, money, and effort into developing a viable alternative to this nonsense?
The problem is that 99% of the time, the person who's willing has their own agenda for volunteering, therefore corrupting the movement at the onset, even though for the most part the effort seems sound.
We want those people who don't want the job because they know what it what it entails. They had to push George Washington into the president's seat, no?
T1 in my BFE town cost $600.
with DVDs. Consumers can already make their own recordings in digital format. Quite easily, actually.
iMovie. Thanks Steve!
I will be DAMNED! You DO listen! Absolutely amazing... :) Here I was losing all hope.
But, what *are* the consequences of setting people to "foes?"
You've done an outstanding job of making it difficult, if not impossible for the people who are running slashdot "light" to mark a person a friend or foe. Could we have a bit more description of these features please? :)
I used VB for 3.11, dude :p Version 2.0. You work with what people give you.....
NCC's keep Java source code portable. You just have to recomplile; no biggie.
Which is probably why it works. Think about it from a professor who patents student's work point-of-view. Not that I think it's a good idea or anything...
Deb won't install on a 200mb hard drive. At least, not with the stuff you need (basic tools, no X, and a compiler) turned on. I've tried it (using a 20mb swap). I even left the compiler out, still didn't work. Yes, Deb has a smaller footprint, but Slack can shuffle in at 100mb. Perfect for my 486/DX 50.
Nobody knows the origin of anything anymore. Or even cares to read the Jargon file to find it.
Damn kids, they're all alike.
I've always thought that "fair use" was doing whatever the hell you felt like with copyrighted material you bought short of stealing sales to another person from whoever sold it to you. 'Course, gets tricky with households, DJs, radio, etc ... :) Fair use is like the "be nice" clause.
But in reality, copyright is an artifically created right, so therefore fair use is just conjured up too. It's tradition to attempt to balance the rights of the copyright owner to the rights of the audience.
Dude, my pissy little K6-2/500 with 64mb of PC-66 SDRAM and a ATI AIW (Rage 128GL) card ate this sucker upon Win95. Allthough, I've got a Cheetah X15 to make swapping less of a PITA......