I run Windows 98 for my workstation (the server and office are Linux). I reboot my Windows box about once a day, or day and a half. I don't have a magical stable copy of windows.
And I DO use it heavily - newsgroups, web, games, email, etc.
There are plenty of people in my complex (and they seem to seek us literate types out - maybe it was when I moved in and carried four computers up the stairs) and they can barely handle the simple windows GUI, or remember basic concepts. They're not stupid, it's just not their thing, but they're interested enough to try.
How many slashdotters take up heavy interest in a technical trade not their own and become proficient in it? How many IFR pilots, gourmet chef's, history professors, etc. do we have here? I can tell you from the grammar that we have NO english teachers:)
Have a little respect for the diversity of people who haven't chosen IT as their career/hobby choice...
Point #1 actually brings up something I've had on my mind for a while.
What about a code/distribution/architecture fork to attack the desktop market? Would it be desirable to fork the system to be optimized and designed for workstation use, and continue the current design/architecture/code tree for server use?
It seems to me that trying to attack the desktop market with a system that is server centric is a non-technically-optimal idea. Kind of like putting a GUI on NetWare. One size may fit all, but it doesn't end up fitting anyone very well.
The goals of a workstation and server as I see them are radically different. On the server side, how practical/important/useful are things like 3D Video and audio cards? On the desktop, these sorts of things are much more important.
Similiarly on a server I would think task scheduling and prioritization would be handled more evenly than on a workstation. How about a system that can easily "get out of the way" of a game or other app that needs dedicated resources?
The Linux crowd needs to grow up and realize that this is just an operating system, not a religion. Total domination is not necessary, but being taken seriously is of paramount importance.
I couldn't have said this better myself. But I'll keep trying:)
The only way we'll get our community to reform is if we apply peer pressure.
My point? Someone can't really hurt you or your group's reputation unless they have a plausible premise. Anonymous flame mails aren't plausible; they could have come from anywhere including Microsoft. We should, however, as Linux advocates, do our UTMOST to distance ourselves from prominent pro-Linux flamers. Otherwise the critics who say we're a bunch of teenage punks will have a plausible premise.
I agree. And we need to be united and public about it. Use email. Write people civil emails and apply pressure for them to be constructive, and not destructive.
Demonization and zealotry belong in churches, not in operating system discussions.
Please, let me believe that the flame composers are working for the other side. I don't want to face the prospect that the standard bearers of my OS of choice are a rabid horde of social retards.
Verify it for yourself. Check out Tom King and Joe Barr's emails on the Mindcraft Net Rage page. Their URL's are listed. I've contacted both of them to protest their advocacy techniques as being harmful and irresponsible to the community. Both of them called me a Microsoft shill and said they have a right to say whatever they want (which I never disputed).
Tom King is at www.computalk.com He's a radio talk show host. Joe Barr is at www.pjprimer.com He's a Linuxworld columnist.
This is precisely my point; not as far as you've seen. If infiltrative FUD is taking place, it is most certainly a covert operation.
The fact that the flames work to Mindcraft's advantage (to the extent that they are worthy of posting on their front page) makes them immediately suspect.
Jeremiah - these weren't forged. Two of the emails were from noted columnists. One was Tom King, an ex-lawyer turned computer talk show host, and the other was from Joe Barr, a columnist at Linuxworld.
Neither had denied sending the emails, and in fact have defended their position. Not only are they well known, public figures, their emails were some of the worst ones posted.
The linux community needs to stop looking at every problem person as a Microsoft shill. We need to apply peer pressure on our colleagues to tone down their vitriol a notch or too. Demonizing Microsoft and Bill Gates just makes you look like a zealot to those you wish to convert. Nobody trusts zealots because they're incapable of having a balanced viewpoint by defintion. Frankly the conduct of those two almost makes me want to switch to BSD (and the 9 boxes I run at the office). The only thing giving me hope is that the real doer's (Linus and Alan Cox types) are looking at the Mindcraft tests with a positive eye, learning what they can so that they can address what problems they do find.
And who am I? The IS department head who you want to convert (sigh).
I know that several Cable Modem and ADSL services here in Sweden have taken it one step further in combating the server problem and put every user behind an ip masquerading firewall instead (goodbye ICQ, goodbye DCC, goodbye Telnetting/SSHing to the home machine, goodbye any kind of server what so ever). If that is the option, I know what I would choose (if I wasn't stuck on a stupid minute metered ISDN that is)...
It would relieve so MANY headaches for the broadband providers to do this. They wouldn't have to worry so much about allocating IP's, and it would eliminate any sort of inbound traffic possibility. Don't take that 128Kbps or even 1Kbps for granted.
1. Uploading huge amounts of data is not adding content to the web. The user may be acting as a warez or mp3 server (we had a lot of those in San Diego - so users here started portscanning our subnets to find the offenders). Remember that the web is a subset of the internet.
2. This has nothing to do with Microsoft sedating the users.
3. Bandwidth is a finite commodity. The high speed providers are putting 250 people on a token ring subnet. Having people run high bandwidth servers DOES make everyone else in that subnet suffer. It doesn't take more than 1 or 2 FTP servers to do it. It's also aggravated by the fact that the motorola systems use a weighted token ring scheme that favors the busier modems and neglects the quieter modems.
Cable modems clearly weren't designed for hosting services. They're designed to perform well in a more "read-only" model.
None of this stops anyone from being a content provider, it just takes you longer to deliver your content.
It does cap abuse of the network for purposes it was not designed for. Get an account on simplenet.com or something for your bandwidth hosting.
My Roadrunner service ran at 40KBps upload, but to get a static IP I had pay $150.00 a month. It was also subject to the other traffic on my subnet.
My Pacbell DSL line runs at 12Kbps upload, and won't budge above that, but it's only $49.00 a month. I'm considering upgrading the the $79.00 service with a 384kbps upload rate and additional IP's.
DLT7000 tapes though are - at $99.00 per 35GB (uncompressed). My last employer (www.LAND-5.com) had a RAID-3 DLT4000 array that could easily do 40GB/hr, and they were working on a RAID-3 DLT7000 that would do 60GB/hr - but I don't know if they ever got it working - it wasn't when I left, termination issues...
The performance difference between my first 10MB hard drive, and the 9GB 10,000RPM and 20GB 5400 drives I"m using now is huge. But as you stated, it just hasn't increased anywhere near as quickly as everything else. That 10MB drive on my 1.79MHz Atari was relatively smoking, but I'm using a 415MHz CPU now...
I would be suprised if the problem was the interface. My educated guess is that it's the solid-state storage. That stuff is INCREDIBLY SLOW compared to the RAM you find in your PC.
Up to 127 drives per chain. But that would be pretty ridiculous. The fewer drives per chain the better, otherwise performance will be severely impacted.
My fibre-channel RAID array is fibre channel to the host, and UW SCSI internally. I used to work for a RAID manufacturer and there was no interest in moving to a purely native Fibre Channel architecture. The drives are still available in VERY small quantities, there are no real performance benefits to be gained for the cost, and UW SCSI does the job for less.
Program a is already running with version 1.3 of the dll, you install program b, it renames version 1.3 of the dll and copies version 1.4 to the same place as the old one. Now, when you run program b, it will try and load dll version 1.4, but since version 1.3 is already in memory it will try to use that copy first, probably causing a crash.
What's so frustrating about this, is that if Windows adopted a DLL versioning/numbering scheme it would solve a LOT of stability issues, and create a very minimal amount of problems. This is something that's fixable with almost no effort, and just a little discipline...
I run all my Linuxen (6 personal firewalls, 1 corporate web proxy, 1 corporate email server, 1 web-based-email server, 1 Intranet serer, 1 corporate webserver, 1 syslog server, 1 DHCP / NNTP server) keyboardless and monitorless. They all still have video cards of course. They all boot and run fine.
I use AMI (what a horrible BIOS - I refuse to buy a board with the AMI WinBIOS on it), Award (my personal favorite) and Phoenix.
Are you referring to Intel's own BIOS not working? Or just BIOS's on Intel platforms?
Sendmail is the single most apalling thing about Unix systems. The sooner someone comes up with a modern, easily configurable alternative the better.
Give Exim a shot - www.exim.org. It's got a LOT of flexibility and a human readable config file. I've replaced every MTA I administer (about 8) with it. Sendmail is now the first thing I yank off my new boxes (right before the stock pop3d). Including ones outside my Pix.
Slashdot Mirror
Be fair now.
:)
I run Windows 98 for my workstation (the server and office are Linux). I reboot my Windows box about once a day, or day and a half. I don't have a magical stable copy of windows.
And I DO use it heavily - newsgroups, web, games, email, etc.
There are plenty of people in my complex (and they seem to seek us literate types out - maybe it was when I moved in and carried four computers up the stairs) and they can barely handle the simple windows GUI, or remember basic concepts. They're not stupid, it's just not their thing, but they're interested enough to try.
How many slashdotters take up heavy interest in a technical trade not their own and become proficient in it? How many IFR pilots, gourmet chef's, history professors, etc. do we have here? I can tell you from the grammar that we have NO english teachers
Have a little respect for the diversity of people who haven't chosen IT as their career/hobby choice...
Point #1 actually brings up something I've had on my mind for a while.
What about a code/distribution/architecture fork to attack the desktop market? Would it be desirable to fork the system to be optimized and designed for workstation use, and continue the current design/architecture/code tree for server use?
It seems to me that trying to attack the desktop market with a system that is server centric is a non-technically-optimal idea. Kind of like putting a GUI on NetWare. One size may fit all, but it doesn't end up fitting anyone very well.
The goals of a workstation and server as I see them are radically different. On the server side, how practical/important/useful are things like 3D Video and audio cards? On the desktop, these sorts of things are much more important.
Similiarly on a server I would think task scheduling and prioritization would be handled more evenly than on a workstation. How about a system that can easily "get out of the way" of a game or other app that needs dedicated resources?
Any thoughts?
The Linux crowd needs to grow up and realize that this is just an operating system, not a religion. Total domination is not necessary, but being taken seriously is of paramount importance.
:)
I couldn't have said this better myself. But I'll keep trying
The only way we'll get our community to reform is if we apply peer pressure.
My point? Someone can't really hurt you or your group's reputation unless they have a plausible premise. Anonymous flame mails aren't plausible; they could have come from anywhere including Microsoft. We should, however, as Linux advocates, do our UTMOST to distance ourselves from prominent pro-Linux flamers. Otherwise the critics who say we're a bunch of teenage punks will have a plausible premise.
I agree. And we need to be united and public about it. Use email. Write people civil emails and apply pressure for them to be constructive, and not destructive.
Demonization and zealotry belong in churches, not in operating system discussions.
Please, let me believe that the flame composers are working for the other side. I don't want to face the prospect that the standard bearers of my OS of choice are a rabid horde of social retards.
Verify it for yourself. Check out Tom King and Joe Barr's emails on the Mindcraft Net Rage page. Their URL's are listed. I've contacted both of them to protest their advocacy techniques as being harmful and irresponsible to the community. Both of them called me a Microsoft shill and said they have a right to say whatever they want (which I never disputed).
Tom King is at www.computalk.com
He's a radio talk show host.
Joe Barr is at www.pjprimer.com
He's a Linuxworld columnist.
We have met the advocacy enemy. They are us.
This is precisely my point; not as far as you've seen. If infiltrative FUD is taking place, it is most certainly a covert operation.
The fact that the flames work to Mindcraft's advantage (to the extent that they are worthy of posting on their front page) makes them immediately suspect.
Jeremiah - these weren't forged. Two of the emails were from noted columnists. One was Tom King, an ex-lawyer turned computer talk show host, and the other was from Joe Barr, a columnist at Linuxworld.
Neither had denied sending the emails, and in fact have defended their position. Not only are they well known, public figures, their emails were some of the worst ones posted.
The linux community needs to stop looking at every problem person as a Microsoft shill. We need to apply peer pressure on our colleagues to tone down their vitriol a notch or too. Demonizing Microsoft and Bill Gates just makes you look like a zealot to those you wish to convert. Nobody trusts zealots because they're incapable of having a balanced viewpoint by defintion. Frankly the conduct of those two almost makes me want to switch to BSD (and the 9 boxes I run at the office). The only thing giving me hope is that the real doer's (Linus and Alan Cox types) are looking at the Mindcraft tests with a positive eye, learning what they can so that they can address what problems they do find.
And who am I? The IS department head who you want to convert (sigh).
Yah but with a publicity stunt like this, there's no way I'd trust these people with my credit card number.
Dave
This is a really valid point.
I know that several Cable Modem and ADSL services here in Sweden have taken it one step further in combating the server problem and put every user behind an ip masquerading firewall instead (goodbye ICQ, goodbye DCC, goodbye Telnetting/SSHing to the home machine, goodbye any kind of server what so ever). If that is the option, I know what I would choose (if I wasn't stuck on a stupid minute metered ISDN that is)...
It would relieve so MANY headaches for the broadband providers to do this. They wouldn't have to worry so much about allocating IP's, and it would eliminate any sort of inbound traffic possibility. Don't take that 128Kbps or even 1Kbps for granted.
Actually, the quote is:
:)
Eat your cake and have it too.
it makes a bit more sense when you get it in the right order
UG I can't believe I typo'd "too".
Actually, the quote is:
:)
Eat your cake and have it to.
it makes a bit more sense when you get it in the right order
That's not necessarily true.
1. Uploading huge amounts of data is not adding content to the web. The user may be acting as a warez or mp3 server (we had a lot of those in San Diego - so users here started portscanning our subnets to find the offenders). Remember that the web is a subset of the internet.
2. This has nothing to do with Microsoft sedating the users.
3. Bandwidth is a finite commodity. The high speed providers are putting 250 people on a token ring subnet. Having people run high bandwidth servers DOES make everyone else in that subnet suffer. It doesn't take more than 1 or 2 FTP servers to do it. It's also aggravated by the fact that the motorola systems use a weighted token ring scheme that favors the busier modems and neglects the quieter modems.
Cable modems clearly weren't designed for hosting services. They're designed to perform well in a more "read-only" model.
None of this stops anyone from being a content provider, it just takes you longer to deliver your content.
It does cap abuse of the network for purposes it was not designed for. Get an account on simplenet.com or something for your bandwidth hosting.
Dave
My Roadrunner service ran at 40KBps upload, but to get a static IP I had pay $150.00 a month. It was also subject to the other traffic on my subnet.
My Pacbell DSL line runs at 12Kbps upload, and won't budge above that, but it's only $49.00 a month. I'm considering upgrading the the $79.00 service with a 384kbps upload rate and additional IP's.
DLT7000 tapes though are - at $99.00 per 35GB (uncompressed). My last employer (www.LAND-5.com) had a RAID-3 DLT4000 array that could easily do 40GB/hr, and they were working on a RAID-3 DLT7000 that would do 60GB/hr - but I don't know if they ever got it working - it wasn't when I left, termination issues...
I agree.
The performance difference between my first 10MB hard drive, and the 9GB 10,000RPM and 20GB 5400 drives I"m using now is huge. But as you stated, it just hasn't increased anywhere near as quickly as everything else. That 10MB drive on my 1.79MHz Atari was relatively smoking, but I'm using a 415MHz CPU now...
I would be suprised if the problem was the interface. My educated guess is that it's the solid-state storage. That stuff is INCREDIBLY SLOW compared to the RAM you find in your PC.
Up to 127 drives per chain. But that would be pretty ridiculous. The fewer drives per chain the better, otherwise performance will be severely impacted.
My fibre-channel RAID array is fibre channel to the host, and UW SCSI internally. I used to work for a RAID manufacturer and there was no interest in moving to a purely native Fibre Channel architecture. The drives are still available in VERY small quantities, there are no real performance benefits to be gained for the cost, and UW SCSI does the job for less.
AMEN
IIRC they aren't making any changes to the kernel itself, just linking in object modules.
Program a is already running with version 1.3 of the dll, you install program b, it renames version 1.3 of the dll and copies version 1.4 to the same place as the old one. Now, when you run program b, it will try and load dll version 1.4, but since version 1.3 is already in memory it will try to use that copy first, probably causing a crash.
What's so frustrating about this, is that if Windows adopted a DLL versioning/numbering scheme it would solve a LOT of stability issues, and create a very minimal amount of problems. This is something that's fixable with almost no effort, and just a little discipline...
I run all my Linuxen (6 personal firewalls, 1 corporate web proxy, 1 corporate email server, 1 web-based-email server, 1 Intranet serer, 1 corporate webserver, 1 syslog server, 1 DHCP / NNTP server) keyboardless and monitorless. They all still have video cards of course. They all boot and run fine.
I use AMI (what a horrible BIOS - I refuse to buy a board with the AMI WinBIOS on it), Award (my personal favorite) and Phoenix.
Are you referring to Intel's own BIOS not working? Or just BIOS's on Intel platforms?
Aw crap
Call -936 just popped into my head - gotta clear that out and go home.
( I handle SIGBADHUMOR much more cleanly )
:)
Sendmail is the single most apalling thing about Unix systems. The sooner someone comes up with a modern, easily configurable alternative the better.
Give Exim a shot - www.exim.org. It's got a LOT of flexibility and a human readable config file. I've replaced every MTA I administer (about 8) with it. Sendmail is now the first thing I yank off my new boxes (right before the stock pop3d). Including ones outside my Pix.
Dave
Grand Moff Tarkin ordered the destruction of Alderaan--Lucas may have intentionally crafted this plot element to allow for the redemption of Vader...
Tarkin was Vader's lap dog.
Been there done that with the Alpha.
If I never touch an Alpha again it'll be too soon.
ACK what are you doing at my house? :)
desk
2 computers
sofa
chairs
window
2 cats