All this coming from an AC? What a pussy. But again, I'm really glad to have this following of AC's who get their panties in such a bunch over trivial, meaningless stuff. Really, I'm flattered. Negro.:)
The difference for users is not just one of cost, it is also one of reliability. New windows software is definitely getting there but still I have crashed XP more since its release then I have crashed Linux EVER
That's the thing... Most people aren't willing to trade usability for a bit of perceived reliability. That's why Linux hasn't really taken off as much as some people would expect.
It doesn't matter who the companies are. You can't pick and choose who you want to enforce laws for. I suppose that somebody coming out with a "Red Mat" distro would be OK, then? Or a "Webian"? Or possibly a web server called, "Mapache"?
XP is $75/year? Where's that? I've never seen that.
And of course you don't have to explain to them it's not "Free". People know and willingly buy Windows. That's the thing... you literally can't give Linux away for free to most people.
Okay, you take your proudct, that directly competes with Microsoft's. You change one letter of it, and market it. What do you think is going to happen?
Pretty much any company would do this. And, Lindows is going to lose. Try to open a restaurant named "Mc Ronald's" and see what happens. Or a store named "Bal-Mart". Or a drink named "Coca-Mola". The guys at Lindows obviously have never used a lawyer.
I do so love having a fan club of AC's. It's very flattering. And, if you're really an admin, you may want to consider a new line of work. You're going to be replaced pretty soon by software and/or Indians. Then, you'll have to go back to the fryer at the local KFC.
A. You have no way of knowing what my race or sex is, so don't make assumptions, because when you make an assumption, you only make an ass out of you and umption.
B. No, they're words. They don't matter. Words by themselves can't be offensive.
C. I really don't care who I offend. I'm not living in 19th century victorian England, so fuck off.
Well, uh, A Mac is a computer. A slow, expensive one at that. What's so amazing about 'em? Do they do things that I don't know about, like make me coffee?
In my neck of the woods, we tend to say, "Wigged out", as in "wiggers" as in "white niggers". I do hope this doesn't offend. Although I did use the word "nigger", I did refrain from using "porch monkey", "coon", "spear chucker", "jungle bunny", "spook", or other offensive terms. And, I didn't ever refer to "spics", "wops", "gooks", "chinks", "kikes", or "wetbacks"!
That's exactly what I was gonna say... just not in so much code...
But, that's nice that they're doing such a wide reaching patent. I think that we can safely say, "Bye bye case mods", since any cases sold already modded would violate the patent. So if anybody does LAN parties, you're gonna have to get an Apple if you want a cool case. Swell.
Now, Microsoft feels extremely threatened by Linux, both on the client and on the server, and they are desparately trying to clone the essence of Linux so that their servers won't become completely irrelevant.
Last I checked, Linux was desperately trying to clone Windows so as not to remain completely irrelevant. I don't see Windows adding in bizarre installers, removing hardware support, or require convoluted commands for simple procedures like Linux, so I don't know what you're talking about.
Wow. You obviously don't have a very busy webserver (or very much content)... Thumbnails on the fly is a *very* resource intensive operation, and storing images in a database is generally a bad idea unless you have a *very* good reason to do it that way. So, no, it should *not* be the webserver's job to create thumbnails. Generating dynamic pages is one thing, but running a.jpg compression algorithm and cacheing images is more than a bit silly when silly when storage is so damn cheap. Just do what we're talking about and make static ones.
You would not believe the number of people out there who honestly think that Windows is the greatest thing since sliced bread (or, in Joe & Velma's case, canned beer)... "
Oh, I do believe it. Again, that's how MS got to be so huge. They make things that most people like. It's that simple. But for geeks to say MS isn't good because... it like an audiophile saying that that $1000 Sony receiver sucks because Fisher is so much better... or the car fanatic that says that Accuras suck because Ferraris are better. Of course there might be better things out there. But again, you can't build a business around pleasing EVERYONE. It's a physical impossibility. I know of ZERO businesses that are universally loved. And honestly, I think that MS is probably more loved than most companies.
Pasted from a great AC post higher up in this thread. He's already said it better than I could:
Do you really think that BillG got to be worth $40 billion by making customers UNhappy? Do you really think that 93% of all end-users are masochists? Do you really think that people in a free market choose of their own free will to buy inferior products?
Or do you suppose that Apple [Macintosh] & NeXT [NeXTSTEP] & Commodore [Amiga] & Novell [DrDOS/NetWare] & Digital [RSTS/VMS/True64] & Sun [SunOS/Solaris] & IBM [OS/2] & Linux [Gnome/KDE] couldn't [and, to date, still can't] get their heads out of their asses for long enough to give the consumer he wants: An inexpensive platform that allows him to copy from a text editor, paste to a spreadsheet, and vice-versa, without having to go back to school to get a goddamned PhD in the minutae of Bourne Shell scripting [much less artificial intelligence, LISP, and emacs]?
Bill said many years ago that he doesn't assign programmers to projects unless the project will make money for Microsoft or advance its strategic goals. Making customers happy is not a sufficient reason.
That's how business works. You can't make every customer happy. That's impossible. Gap can't have a rack of clothing designed to perfectly fit every single individual that comes in there. Not possible. I have a small store. I can't have *every* item that every customer has ever asked for. That's not possible, either. But, at the same time, you DO make money by making as many of your customers happy as possible. That makes 'em buy. Kinda' basic. Contrary to the popular Slashdot opinion, MS doesn't have legions and legions of pissed off customers. If they did, then Apple would be huge today. So I agree, making customers happy alone isn't a sufficient reason, but it is a major part of deciding what to implement when.
Microsoft doesn't plan or strategize anything for the long term. Microsoft is driven by paranoia, "not invented here", and the usual geek attitude of "if we implement it, it will be better". Nothing could be further from the truth, of course.
Well, I can't get inside of Gates' head, so I can't say for sure, but I'd find it a tremendous stroke of luck if a company could go from nothing to the largest on the planet in 20 years by doing nothing but kneejerk reactions to competitors.
Very funny. XP can be fairly stable and secure--if you dedicate machines to individual tasks and disable most multiuser features. Running Apache and ssh helps, too. But, compared to UNIX and Linux, XP's stability and security are still ridiculously poor. And that's not because lacks features, it's because it has too many features.
I wasn't even going to argue this because I thought that any competent Windows admin could make any W2K machine as stable as any other *nix. And you know what, I'm still not gonna argue this. If you can't make a Windows box stable, well, no offense, but that's your problem.
Why would it? I haven't read anything about them removing any GUI support for anything. I expect the next server OS to have pretty complete GUI AND CLI. Take your pick. Either keep doing things the way you have been with the GUI, or use their new CLI.
I think that they DID make that tradeoff. I'm sure that by building a very solid GUI first wasn't accidental. They knew that most users wanted a good GUI, so they did that first. Also, they weren't even players in the back-end until very recently. So now, they're tacking the needs of admins. Notice that they had a decent CLI for local systems for a while now, which is primarily how Windows was used for many years. Now that they're entering the server market in a big way with W2K, they're adding this feature.
You're right. NET START has been around since NT 3.1, I think. That's been about... 10 years? NET START will only work locally, though. But NETSVC is an addon that's been available for a while now. Not sure how long, but it's part of the Resource Kit.
Actually, I think that there will be even less of a reason to switch to something else in the first place. I'm betting that this is what MS is thinking, too.
Trying to stop/start Unix services remotely through ssh is a breeze. We gave up trying to use VNC (and others) remotely for Windows services since the performance was so bad.
Slashdot Mirror
All this coming from an AC? What a pussy. But again, I'm really glad to have this following of AC's who get their panties in such a bunch over trivial, meaningless stuff. Really, I'm flattered. Negro. :)
The difference for users is not just one of cost, it is also one of reliability. New windows software is definitely getting there but still I have crashed XP more since its release then I have crashed Linux EVER
That's the thing... Most people aren't willing to trade usability for a bit of perceived reliability. That's why Linux hasn't really taken off as much as some people would expect.
It doesn't matter who the companies are. You can't pick and choose who you want to enforce laws for. I suppose that somebody coming out with a "Red Mat" distro would be OK, then? Or a "Webian"? Or possibly a web server called, "Mapache"?
XP is $75/year? Where's that? I've never seen that.
And of course you don't have to explain to them it's not "Free". People know and willingly buy Windows. That's the thing... you literally can't give Linux away for free to most people.
Okay, you take your proudct, that directly competes with Microsoft's. You change one letter of it, and market it. What do you think is going to happen?
Pretty much any company would do this. And, Lindows is going to lose. Try to open a restaurant named "Mc Ronald's" and see what happens. Or a store named "Bal-Mart". Or a drink named "Coca-Mola". The guys at Lindows obviously have never used a lawyer.
Please don't assume your own sensitivity level is universal.
I don't. I know there are lots of pussies out there. I just think that they should get over themselves.
You know you use racist, offensive language and admit it freely. That is indeed your choice.
Absolutely. I can say "nigger" 'til the cows come home. That's at least one good thing the US still has going for it. Nigger.
I do so love having a fan club of AC's. It's very flattering. And, if you're really an admin, you may want to consider a new line of work. You're going to be replaced pretty soon by software and/or Indians. Then, you'll have to go back to the fryer at the local KFC.
A. You have no way of knowing what my race or sex is, so don't make assumptions, because when you make an assumption, you only make an ass out of you and umption.
B. No, they're words. They don't matter. Words by themselves can't be offensive.
C. I really don't care who I offend. I'm not living in 19th century victorian England, so fuck off.
seriously amazing capabilities?
Well, uh, A Mac is a computer. A slow, expensive one at that. What's so amazing about 'em? Do they do things that I don't know about, like make me coffee?
In my neck of the woods, we tend to say, "Wigged out", as in "wiggers" as in "white niggers".
I do hope this doesn't offend. Although I did use the word "nigger", I did refrain from using "porch monkey", "coon", "spear chucker", "jungle bunny", "spook", or other offensive terms. And, I didn't ever refer to "spics", "wops", "gooks", "chinks", "kikes", or "wetbacks"!
Seriously, get over yourself, asshole.
That's exactly what I was gonna say... just not in so much code...
But, that's nice that they're doing such a wide reaching patent. I think that we can safely say, "Bye bye case mods", since any cases sold already modded would violate the patent. So if anybody does LAN parties, you're gonna have to get an Apple if you want a cool case. Swell.
OSS alternatives to Mickeysoft are here and here to stay. And they will never go broke
Why, exactly are they going broke then? Or have you been in a cocoon for the past few years?
And, you may want to work on that spelling, kid. If you're old enough to turn on a computer, you should have already learned to read.
Now, Microsoft feels extremely threatened by Linux, both on the client and on the server, and they are desparately trying to clone the essence of Linux so that their servers won't become completely irrelevant.
Last I checked, Linux was desperately trying to clone Windows so as not to remain completely irrelevant. I don't see Windows adding in bizarre installers, removing hardware support, or require convoluted commands for simple procedures like Linux, so I don't know what you're talking about.
Wow. You obviously don't have a very busy webserver (or very much content)... Thumbnails on the fly is a *very* resource intensive operation, and storing images in a database is generally a bad idea unless you have a *very* good reason to do it that way. So, no, it should *not* be the webserver's job to create thumbnails. Generating dynamic pages is one thing, but running a .jpg compression algorithm and cacheing images is more than a bit silly when silly when storage is so damn cheap. Just do what we're talking about and make static ones.
You would not believe the number of people out there who honestly think that Windows is the greatest thing since sliced bread (or, in Joe & Velma's case, canned beer) ... "
Oh, I do believe it. Again, that's how MS got to be so huge. They make things that most people like. It's that simple. But for geeks to say MS isn't good because... it like an audiophile saying that that $1000 Sony receiver sucks because Fisher is so much better... or the car fanatic that says that Accuras suck because Ferraris are better. Of course there might be better things out there. But again, you can't build a business around pleasing EVERYONE. It's a physical impossibility. I know of ZERO businesses that are universally loved. And honestly, I think that MS is probably more loved than most companies.
Pasted from a great AC post higher up in this thread. He's already said it better than I could:
Do you really think that BillG got to be worth $40 billion by making customers UNhappy? Do you really think that 93% of all end-users are masochists? Do you really think that people in a free market choose of their own free will to buy inferior products?
Or do you suppose that Apple [Macintosh] & NeXT [NeXTSTEP] & Commodore [Amiga] & Novell [DrDOS/NetWare] & Digital [RSTS/VMS/True64] & Sun [SunOS/Solaris] & IBM [OS/2] & Linux [Gnome/KDE] couldn't [and, to date, still can't] get their heads out of their asses for long enough to give the consumer he wants: An inexpensive platform that allows him to copy from a text editor, paste to a spreadsheet, and vice-versa, without having to go back to school to get a goddamned PhD in the minutae of Bourne Shell scripting [much less artificial intelligence, LISP, and emacs]?
Bill said many years ago that he doesn't assign programmers to projects unless the project will make money for Microsoft or advance its strategic goals. Making customers happy is not a sufficient reason.
That's how business works. You can't make every customer happy. That's impossible. Gap can't have a rack of clothing designed to perfectly fit every single individual that comes in there. Not possible. I have a small store. I can't have *every* item that every customer has ever asked for. That's not possible, either. But, at the same time, you DO make money by making as many of your customers happy as possible. That makes 'em buy. Kinda' basic. Contrary to the popular Slashdot opinion, MS doesn't have legions and legions of pissed off customers. If they did, then Apple would be huge today. So I agree, making customers happy alone isn't a sufficient reason, but it is a major part of deciding what to implement when.
Microsoft doesn't plan or strategize anything for the long term. Microsoft is driven by paranoia, "not invented here", and the usual geek attitude of "if we implement it, it will be better". Nothing could be further from the truth, of course.
Well, I can't get inside of Gates' head, so I can't say for sure, but I'd find it a tremendous stroke of luck if a company could go from nothing to the largest on the planet in 20 years by doing nothing but kneejerk reactions to competitors.
mkdir thumbnail
;) I've been doing this for years, but my tool doesn't even rquire any batch scripting.
for i in *.jpg; do convert -resize 128x128 $i thumbnail/$i; done;
Looks like somebody is inthe same business I'm in (see below)
Very funny. XP can be fairly stable and secure--if you dedicate machines to individual tasks and disable most multiuser features. Running Apache and ssh helps, too. But, compared to UNIX and Linux, XP's stability and security are still ridiculously poor. And that's not because lacks features, it's because it has too many features.
I wasn't even going to argue this because I thought that any competent Windows admin could make any W2K machine as stable as any other *nix. And you know what, I'm still not gonna argue this. If you can't make a Windows box stable, well, no offense, but that's your problem.
Why would it? I haven't read anything about them removing any GUI support for anything. I expect the next server OS to have pretty complete GUI AND CLI. Take your pick. Either keep doing things the way you have been with the GUI, or use their new CLI.
I think that they DID make that tradeoff. I'm sure that by building a very solid GUI first wasn't accidental. They knew that most users wanted a good GUI, so they did that first. Also, they weren't even players in the back-end until very recently. So now, they're tacking the needs of admins. Notice that they had a decent CLI for local systems for a while now, which is primarily how Windows was used for many years. Now that they're entering the server market in a big way with W2K, they're adding this feature.
You're right. NET START has been around since NT 3.1, I think. That's been about... 10 years? NET START will only work locally, though. But NETSVC is an addon that's been available for a while now. Not sure how long, but it's part of the Resource Kit.
Actually, I think that there will be even less of a reason to switch to something else in the first place. I'm betting that this is what MS is thinking, too.
Trying to stop/start Unix services remotely through ssh is a breeze. We gave up trying to use VNC (and others) remotely for Windows services since the performance was so bad.
You guys didn't research this too hard, huh?