First of all, apt-get on Debian stable never seems to have these kinds of problems, so why can't Microsoft get it right?
Second of all, if you actually read the article, you'll find that the systems were in fact test systems, so the IT professional was doing exactly what you recommend. And, based on the results of the test (namely, the systems were unable to incorporate essential security patches from Microsoft), I'm sure you and I would agree that Windows XP is unsuitable for production use.
Which was my point.
The eweek article I linked referenced several sources, of which I only quoted one. I could understand if it was one particular configuration of hardware, but the diversity of negative experiences seems to indicate that this problem is more general than just one configuration.
I have nothing bad to say about Windows 2000 (other than that it's proprietary), but Windows XP is not anywhere near as stable as Linux by a long shot.
Another IT professional, based in California, who runs Windows XP systems for testing purposes, said that after installing the latest batch of XP security patches on four systems running XP Professional, all the systems became unstable.
"I'm seeing system failures requiring a reboot about once a week on each machine," said the user, who requested anonymity. "Before this latest batch of patches, I hadn't had to reboot any of these boxes. They were as stable as Windows 2000 Service Pack 2 or my Linux 2.4 systems."
First, read my belated follow-up, which addresses the specifics in ever so slightly more depth.
Second, my position is that government interference leads to some company acquiring a monopoly. The fact that that company happens to be Microsoft is irrelevant. For all we know, if the chips had fallen a little differently, we might all be complaining about the Apple monopoly.
More on Microsoft's government protection
on
Broadband Obstacles
·
· Score: 1
Perhaps I was too brief in my first reply.
There are market segments (like books, and music) where copyright laws exist but have not yet led to an all-enveloping monopoly. The difference is that books have been around for a lot longer and we have had enough time to tune copyright law for books to strike the near-optimal balance between publishers', authors', and readers' interests.
In the case of software, I would argue that
software is so much easier to copy than books that it needs its own specially tailored copyright law
the effort required to correctly tailor copyright law for software has not been made
because software copyright is too skewed towards the interests of publishers, a monopoly is inevitable
The creation of separate laws for software has precedent--in fact, prerecorded music is an example of a medium that enjoys a separate body of copyright law suited for its unique properties (which is why the copyright notices on CDs have a P with a circle instead of a C with a circle).
please dont say people are bad programmers just because they are not in the US.
I said no such thing, and I am appalled that you thought I said such a thing.
Read what I wrote. I agree with the conclusion that foreign programmers are very good. I objected to the method of arriving at that conclusion, not the conclusion itself.
I second the opinion of the previous reply. Your four individuals are in the top of the pack because they are in the US.
US immigration law is very complex and difficult to navigate. It is also explicitly written to favor capable people over incapable people. The fact that the four foreigners you know are in the US indicates that they are not a representative sample of the set of all foreigners. Not all foreigners make it into the US; those that do tend to be the best and the brightest.
I happen to agree with your conclusion that foreign workers are highly talented, but your anecdote is a flawed basis for this conclusion.
You have a residental cable modem, you pay $40.0 - $60.00 a month for T-1 like speeds for download
Even setting aside for the moment the fact that Comcast prohibits you from running VPNs over residential cable modem service... the one thing that a T1 line gives you big time over a cable modem is upstream speed.
A T1 line is 1.5 mbps both ways, full duplex. An AT&T cable modem is 1.5 mbps downstream and only 128 kbps upstream. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you can't get 1.5 mbps upstream service through cable at any price.
We currently have a T1 line in the Boston area for under $500 per month. I don't know about Chicago area prices, but I would assume they are similar.
Tabbed browsing is a BFD because ctrl-tabbing through the tabs is much more convenient than alt-tabbing through all the windows you have open. I like to be able to cycle through my browser windows without worrying about my Excel window popping up.
Per-site JS management is a big deal because I can enable javascript on the few sites that I trust, and disable it everywhere else. You have no idea how blissful it is to browse without worrying about popup ads.
Yesterday you bashed MS for not going public about anything, and now you bash them for patching the program.
Slashdot is a group, and a group can have diverse opinions. Unless you can produce examples of the same individual adopting both these views, there is nothing inconsistent to cry about.
Take this post as a challenge. Reply with a link that shows that there is/was a bug in Redhat Linux 7 that caused the loss of an ENTIRE FILE SYSTEM.
The point (which I'm sure you'll miss, but anyway) is that linux-2.4.15.tar.gz is not an operating system. Anyone with the knowhow to download, compile, and install 2.4.15 from source had better be able to run fsck when something like this happens.
Furthermore you way overstate the case when you assert this causes lost file systems. The vast majority of 2.4.15 corruption cases can be repaired with a fsck.
Personally, I consider the code red II worm to be a far greater threat to my data than linux-2.4.15.tar.gz.
Easy. Go to the program's install directory and type dir/S >list.txt. If it isn't in the directory, it doesn't belong to the package.
This does not work. Many packages install files outside of their directory. For example, I consider start menu shortcuts, dlls in c:\windows, and desktop shortcuts to be part of the package.
As just one example, Microsoft IE6 installs dozens of files outside of the main program directory.
I assume you are talking about executables or DLLs, in which case Microsoft has had a program available for a long time called Dependancy Walker.
I agree that it is easy to see what dlls an.exe uses. But the reverse is, as far as I know, completely impossible on Windows: namely, given a dll, output a list of all.exe's that use that dll.
On linux with package managers this is a triviality. And you have to agree that this is useful functionality--if I want to know whether a dll on my system is needed or not, then I need to have a list of what exe's use it.
If it's even close the the standard of the windows uninstaller, it'll leave a ton of files lying around
It's not even close.
The windows uninstaller, as far as I know, provides no way for you to:
list what files belong in a package
for a given file, list what package that file belongs to
list all other packages that a package depends on
list all other packages that depend on a given package
Unix package managers do allow these things, so you can see exactly what it is doing and make sure that it works right.
Also, in windows there is no centralized package management app -- Add/Remove programs pretends to give you central control, but behind the scenes it really just runs the uninstall app provided by the 3rd party vendor. In Unix, the situation is quite different -- there is a central program to manage packages (rpm on redhat, dpkg on debian, ports on BSD), and so there is no opportunity for lazy 3rd party developers to screw things up.
Which slows down the quick alt+tab everyone uses to switch between browser windows...
Try Ctrl-PgUp/PgDn to switch between tabs. Yes this is configurable.
Personally I actually prefer a separate key command to switch between tabs because then I have an easy way to switch pages without interference from other windows that aren't browsers.
I use Galeon on my k6-266 with 128 MB of ram, and I find that on this machine Galeon / RedHat 7.2 is faster than IE / Windows 2000 in every respect--including load time, user interface, rendering, and page navigation.
Now, first of all I should say that I agree a winmodem driver for linux is a good idea. But, just because it is a good idea to have such a driver does not mean you should use one yourself.
This is much like the situation with web pages and high-end monitors -- yes, of course web pages should be designed to be accessible on small monitors, but you yourself will be much happier with a large monitor.
Anyone who complains that "real" modems are too expensive doesn't know how to buy from pricewatch. On any given day, a search for "external serial modem" will return a bunch of real modems for under $30. To put this in perspective, a phone line plus an ISP account usually costs over $30 for a single month!
The benefits of a real modem are well worth the price. A year ago I bought an external serial modem from pricewatch for $30 (plus 5 shipping). This thing gets me ~50k throughput, much better latency than a winmodem, and works on either a desktop or a laptop (it's smaller than a deck of cards, and it's powered from the PS/2 port, not the wall outlet). Linux support is a nice bonus, but, honestly, a real modem like this is worth it even if you use windows only.
In summary, a linux winmodem driver is a worthy thing for the masses, but you deserve better than that.
In the US there are laws governing fraud which are separate from the laws governing copyright. A copyright license such as the GPL in no way invalidates the protections afforded by laws governing fraud.
Misrepresenting the authorship of a software program such as Linux, depending on the situation, could easily be prosecutable as fraud even if you have a copyright license.
If you mount all your filesystems as "auto", and you use slocate, then be sure to edit the small file/etc/updatedb.conf and remove "auto" from the list of PRUNEFS types.
Otherwise updatedb will ignore your "auto" filesystems (i.e., your whole system) and the slocate database will be empty.
Many die-hard Linux advocates claim that the fact that MS still holds the desktop for the foreseeable future is irrelevant. Yet the way projects like this are being touted whenever there is some progress made suggests inconsistency.
Unless you can cite an instance of the same individual espousing both these positions, your claims of inconsistency are invalid.
The slashdot crowd, and the linux community in general, are made up of diverse groups of people with diverse viewpoints. Differences of opinion between members of a large group of people is something to be expected, not derided as "inconsistent".
The settlement terms stipulate that Microsoft may not retaliate against an OEM for distributing a dual-boot system. It does not prevent Microsoft from retaliating against OEMs for distributing Linux-only systems.
From my admittedly non-expert reading of the settlement, OEMs may develop, use, distribute, sell, and promote alternative operating systems like Linux without fear, but when it comes to shipping said operating systems with a personal computer, the document has this to say:
Microsoft shall not retaliate against an OEM [for]... shipping a Personal Computer that (a) includes both a Windows Operating System Product and a non-Microsoft Operating System, or (b) will boot with more than one Operating System
These terms are terrible for Linux, because it means that the big OEMs will still have to include Windows on every system. It's no better than the bad old days where OEMs were charged a license for every machine shipped, Windows or not.
I agree that the spec sheets on the el cheapo CDs from compusa may only say 5 years, but in practice I'm finding that the 5 year figure is conservative and the actual figure is higher than that.
I have here a number of pairs of identical CDs that I burned in the early months of 1997, using el cheapo microcenter media (yeah, I made two copies of each in case one went bad). I ran them through md5sum just now and they're still identical. Although it hasn't quite been five years, there's no sign of physical deterioration on them that would make me fear for their integrity in 2002 or the near future.
I suspect that this is much like the situation with CD-RW write cycles, where the spec sheet only vouches for 1000 write cycles per disc but in practice one might be able to get 100000 or so. But you're right that you take good care of your discs!
Linux is good for server applications, but *really*, what can it do that Windows/Mac cannot do, other than not crash as often?
"Server applications" to me is no small potatoes, but if you want one that you haven't already mentioned, it's: educational value.
Linux/BSD is the only x86 system I know that even so much as ships with a C compiler. Assume for the moment that I'm a poor student who doesn't relish the idea of paying for MS Windows, Visual Studio, IIS, and MS SQL server, even at academic prices (which is the truth). Unless you are suggesting that I:
Solicit donations (and I'll gladly accept any checks you send my way), or
Warez
you have to admit that a completely free development environment with all the tools I need is a pretty killer application, albeit not a "mainstream" one.
It should be further noted that Linux doesn't need mainstream business to survive, since its continued progress is not dependent on any single company's business revenue or business prospects. But that's a story for another day.
Unless they've made some serious improvements in the past few months, the filesystem still writes at 50% the speed of ext2
They have made improvements, and in my experience ext3 is faster than ext2. See for example the Michael Johnson email:
Despite writing some data more than once, ext3 is often faster (higher throughput) than ext2 because ext3's journaling optimizes hard drive head motion.
Slashdot Mirror
Second of all, if you actually read the article, you'll find that the systems were in fact test systems, so the IT professional was doing exactly what you recommend. And, based on the results of the test (namely, the systems were unable to incorporate essential security patches from Microsoft), I'm sure you and I would agree that Windows XP is unsuitable for production use.
Which was my point.
The eweek article I linked referenced several sources, of which I only quoted one. I could understand if it was one particular configuration of hardware, but the diversity of negative experiences seems to indicate that this problem is more general than just one configuration.
See for example this eweek article:
Second, my position is that government interference leads to some company acquiring a monopoly. The fact that that company happens to be Microsoft is irrelevant. For all we know, if the chips had fallen a little differently, we might all be complaining about the Apple monopoly.
There are market segments (like books, and music) where copyright laws exist but have not yet led to an all-enveloping monopoly. The difference is that books have been around for a lot longer and we have had enough time to tune copyright law for books to strike the near-optimal balance between publishers', authors', and readers' interests.
In the case of software, I would argue that
- software is so much easier to copy than books that it needs its own specially tailored copyright law
- the effort required to correctly tailor copyright law for software has not been made
- because software copyright is too skewed towards the interests of publishers, a monopoly is inevitable
The creation of separate laws for software has precedent--in fact, prerecorded music is an example of a medium that enjoys a separate body of copyright law suited for its unique properties (which is why the copyright notices on CDs have a P with a circle instead of a C with a circle).Federal copyright law.
I said no such thing, and I am appalled that you thought I said such a thing.
Read what I wrote. I agree with the conclusion that foreign programmers are very good. I objected to the method of arriving at that conclusion, not the conclusion itself.
US immigration law is very complex and difficult to navigate. It is also explicitly written to favor capable people over incapable people. The fact that the four foreigners you know are in the US indicates that they are not a representative sample of the set of all foreigners. Not all foreigners make it into the US; those that do tend to be the best and the brightest.
I happen to agree with your conclusion that foreign workers are highly talented, but your anecdote is a flawed basis for this conclusion.
Even setting aside for the moment the fact that Comcast prohibits you from running VPNs over residential cable modem service ... the one thing that a T1 line gives you big time over a cable modem is upstream speed.
A T1 line is 1.5 mbps both ways, full duplex. An AT&T cable modem is 1.5 mbps downstream and only 128 kbps upstream. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you can't get 1.5 mbps upstream service through cable at any price.
We currently have a T1 line in the Boston area for under $500 per month. I don't know about Chicago area prices, but I would assume they are similar.
Per-site JS management is a big deal because I can enable javascript on the few sites that I trust, and disable it everywhere else. You have no idea how blissful it is to browse without worrying about popup ads.
Slashdot is a group, and a group can have diverse opinions. Unless you can produce examples of the same individual adopting both these views, there is nothing inconsistent to cry about.
Take this post as a challenge. Reply with a link that shows that there is/was a bug in Redhat Linux 7 that caused the loss of an ENTIRE FILE SYSTEM.
The point (which I'm sure you'll miss, but anyway) is that linux-2.4.15.tar.gz is not an operating system. Anyone with the knowhow to download, compile, and install 2.4.15 from source had better be able to run fsck when something like this happens.
Furthermore you way overstate the case when you assert this causes lost file systems. The vast majority of 2.4.15 corruption cases can be repaired with a fsck.
Personally, I consider the code red II worm to be a far greater threat to my data than linux-2.4.15.tar.gz.
This does not work. Many packages install files outside of their directory. For example, I consider start menu shortcuts, dlls in c:\windows, and desktop shortcuts to be part of the package.
As just one example, Microsoft IE6 installs dozens of files outside of the main program directory.
I assume you are talking about executables or DLLs, in which case Microsoft has had a program available for a long time called Dependancy Walker.
I agree that it is easy to see what dlls an .exe uses. But the reverse is, as far as I know, completely impossible on Windows: namely, given a dll, output a list of all .exe's that use that dll.
On linux with package managers this is a triviality. And you have to agree that this is useful functionality--if I want to know whether a dll on my system is needed or not, then I need to have a list of what exe's use it.
It's not even close.
The windows uninstaller, as far as I know, provides no way for you to:
- list what files belong in a package
- for a given file, list what package that file belongs to
- list all other packages that a package depends on
- list all other packages that depend on a given package
Unix package managers do allow these things, so you can see exactly what it is doing and make sure that it works right.Also, in windows there is no centralized package management app -- Add/Remove programs pretends to give you central control, but behind the scenes it really just runs the uninstall app provided by the 3rd party vendor. In Unix, the situation is quite different -- there is a central program to manage packages (rpm on redhat, dpkg on debian, ports on BSD), and so there is no opportunity for lazy 3rd party developers to screw things up.
As far as I know, in windows there is no way to:
- output a complete list of what files belong to a package
- query a specific file to find out what package it belongs to
- list what other packages a package depends on
- list all other packages that depend on a given package
I am not nitpicking here. These are legitimate gripes.Try Ctrl-PgUp/PgDn to switch between tabs. Yes this is configurable.
Personally I actually prefer a separate key command to switch between tabs because then I have an easy way to switch pages without interference from other windows that aren't browsers.
For links, see this post.
In general, probably true ... but if you read what I wrote, this modem is smaller than my wallet, and travel doesn't pose any problems at all.
This is much like the situation with web pages and high-end monitors -- yes, of course web pages should be designed to be accessible on small monitors, but you yourself will be much happier with a large monitor.
Anyone who complains that "real" modems are too expensive doesn't know how to buy from pricewatch. On any given day, a search for "external serial modem" will return a bunch of real modems for under $30. To put this in perspective, a phone line plus an ISP account usually costs over $30 for a single month!
The benefits of a real modem are well worth the price. A year ago I bought an external serial modem from pricewatch for $30 (plus 5 shipping). This thing gets me ~50k throughput, much better latency than a winmodem, and works on either a desktop or a laptop (it's smaller than a deck of cards, and it's powered from the PS/2 port, not the wall outlet). Linux support is a nice bonus, but, honestly, a real modem like this is worth it even if you use windows only.
In summary, a linux winmodem driver is a worthy thing for the masses, but you deserve better than that.
Misrepresenting the authorship of a software program such as Linux, depending on the situation, could easily be prosecutable as fraud even if you have a copyright license.
Otherwise updatedb will ignore your "auto" filesystems (i.e., your whole system) and the slocate database will be empty.
Unless you can cite an instance of the same individual espousing both these positions, your claims of inconsistency are invalid.
The slashdot crowd, and the linux community in general, are made up of diverse groups of people with diverse viewpoints. Differences of opinion between members of a large group of people is something to be expected, not derided as "inconsistent".
From my admittedly non-expert reading of the settlement, OEMs may develop, use, distribute, sell, and promote alternative operating systems like Linux without fear, but when it comes to shipping said operating systems with a personal computer, the document has this to say:
These terms are terrible for Linux, because it means that the big OEMs will still have to include Windows on every system. It's no better than the bad old days where OEMs were charged a license for every machine shipped, Windows or not.I have here a number of pairs of identical CDs that I burned in the early months of 1997, using el cheapo microcenter media (yeah, I made two copies of each in case one went bad). I ran them through md5sum just now and they're still identical. Although it hasn't quite been five years, there's no sign of physical deterioration on them that would make me fear for their integrity in 2002 or the near future.
I suspect that this is much like the situation with CD-RW write cycles, where the spec sheet only vouches for 1000 write cycles per disc but in practice one might be able to get 100000 or so. But you're right that you take good care of your discs!
"Server applications" to me is no small potatoes, but if you want one that you haven't already mentioned, it's: educational value.
Linux/BSD is the only x86 system I know that even so much as ships with a C compiler. Assume for the moment that I'm a poor student who doesn't relish the idea of paying for MS Windows, Visual Studio, IIS, and MS SQL server, even at academic prices (which is the truth). Unless you are suggesting that I:
- Solicit donations (and I'll gladly accept any checks you send my way), or
- Warez
you have to admit that a completely free development environment with all the tools I need is a pretty killer application, albeit not a "mainstream" one.It should be further noted that Linux doesn't need mainstream business to survive, since its continued progress is not dependent on any single company's business revenue or business prospects. But that's a story for another day.
They have made improvements, and in my experience ext3 is faster than ext2. See for example the Michael Johnson email: