Oh, I'm shoveling bullshit? Sorry if I speak from experience. I guess I bullshitted my way through all my computer experience. The day I find another PC (ie, other than my old 266MHz Dell) that doesn't work on Linux or whose sound doesn't work on Linux, I guess I'll eat my words. I have yet to see one, though - when I fixed my dad's laptop with Knoppix, the sound worked, when I fixed all the other Windows computers in the house with Knoppix, the sound worked, and when I installed Slackware, Mandrake, Redhat, Fedora, SuSE, Icepack Linux, and many other distros on my desktop the sound - and 3D acceleration - worked.
I guess it's a good thing that YOUR experience and YOUR hardware are exactly like what the rest of us have?
Bullshit, through and through.
Way to misquote me, too. I didn't say "except for some very old laptops or sound", I said that I never had any problems with sound except on some very old laptops.
It was your own quote, which you just re-stated. You must think I have "stupid" tattooed across my shiny forehead.
he fact that your laptop's clock didn't work with Linux but worked after you updated the BIOS means that the BIOS was broken, not Linux. Otherwise Linux would've not worked even with the patched BIOS.
And when did I say it was YOUR fault that Linux didn't work on your laptop? I said it was the BIOS' fault.
You have absoloutly NO IDEA as to why the clock was broken. It could very well have been something in linux that wasn't working properly OR HP's fault. Regardless, LINUX didn't work properly (That isn't to say it didn't work at all. With some kernel options, it worked better but the clock was still drifting.)
I also don't recall saying that you said (shesh!) it was my fault linux didn't work. Nice attempt at shifting the subject, though!
Actually, all allowed WoW modifications are through a scripting language, and the game loads the modifications up internally. Any third party programs that would do something like scan for memory locations would be against WoW's EULA.
Makes me wonder what they are hiding. My point still stands, though.:)
I call bullshit. I still have yet to see ANY computer, new or old, that doesn't work with Linux. My brand-new Dell laptop works with Linux, my desktop PC works great with Linux - and always has (and, yes, it has this "new" technology - it's got a GeForce FX 5500, and no, I've never had any problems with sound on it except on some *VERY* old laptops) and I even play DOOM III on Linux online with a framerate of about 30fps and fine sound. The problems people have with the nVidia or ATi drivers are always either their own stupidity or a problem with the drivers. Or a problem of software conflict. NOT a problem with Linux itself.
Speaking of bullshit, I'm going to have to put my hip-waders on. Your shoveling plenty of it. You are so contradictory in your above paragraph, it's insane. "I have yet to see ANY computer, new or old, that doesn't work with linux" out one side of your mouth while the other says "except for some very old laptops or sound".
It works great for you. Great. It doesn't for THOUSANDS of other people. The fact that the clock in my laptop was not correctly supported is a DRIVER issue with LINUX. People with sound that won't work under linux is a LINUX issue. The fact that you seem incapable of understanding this is not my fault and will, in the long run, hurt linux (if shared by enough people, and from what I've seen, it has been.)
I don't understand why you don't think a push by a big enough company would turn Linux into a viable competitor for Windows. Apple turned Mach into a good mainstream OS and it's been constantly gaining market share. It might really take off if someone releases a really good Windows emulator for the new Intel Macs. MS themselves did pretty well against the then-dominant IBM and their DOS. Lots of people, particularly security conscious businesses, are getting pretty fed up with Windows and would love to use something else. Google Linux isn't going to come out tomorrow and conquer Windows the next day but Linux is also gaining market share. A nice big company behind it to clean up the rough spots, put some pressure on hardware developers, add some stability and put it on TV might do some pretty significant wonders.
That'd be because I believe it'd take a push by THE INDUSTRY as a whole to get linux 'mainstream'.
MS "did pretty well against the then-dominant IBM and their DOS" by introducing false errors into the current version of Windows. They screwed IBM over again (just like they screwed IBM WRT OS/2. IBM's marketing didn't help either, but MS certianly didn't make things any better).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying a big push by a company as large as Google won't help linux. I'm just being a bit more realistic than others as to how FAR it will help.
I found a comment "Dennis Zhidkov" made to C-Net interesting:
"Now, let me ask you a question. If you are not a pirate, why would you need a debugger simultaneously running with the protected software? It is in the interest of the developer to keep the debuggers and emulators out of business when the protected application is run."
Apparently he's never heard of decal for Asheron's Call. I'm sure a debugger (or something) was needed to find the memory locations it needed to integrate with the game properly. I'm sure some WoW "plugins" work the same way.
Am I suddenly a pirate because I want to use third party plugins for a game I legally own (and pay a monthly fee to play?!)(note, I no longer play AC and have never played WoW, I only used them as examples).
aren't google's servers all running linux? aren't they all heavily modified customized? does google ever go down? sounds like they've got some good software and hardware engineers working for them... i think they know what they're doing.
Yes I speak from experience, I can give you any number of instances where I tried to install Windows on some PC only to find out that there were no longer any available driver for such and such part of the machine (a modem, an ethernet adapter, the USB driver etc), when Linux had no qualms.
I'd also call you a liar, right to your face, without a smile on mine. I've been a tech for 13 years (this year would be my 14'th). I know for a fact that with places like driverguide (or the plethora of copy-cats) that it is *almost* impossible to *not* find a driver on the very small chance that the OEM hadn't archived it somewhere on their web page.
The few companies that don't pursue a Linux-friendly policy are simply slowly but consistenly being driven out of the market or forced to change their attitude. Look at what happened to ATI.
Yes, lets look at ATI. I'll use the Gentoo forums as an example since I frequent those, however I've found plenty of the same results via google. Just search for ATI and look at the problems (and successes). My own laptop, with the ATI x200 chipset, had problems. The driver that other people posted worked on this very laptop, let alone this chipset, failed to install (I forget the *exact* error, but it had something to do with my chipset not being supported by the driver!).
Is ATI pushing crap software to try to sour the linux market? I doubt it, personally, but it is possible. Assuming they aren't, it underlines a HUGE problem with linux. One install, even on identicle hardware, will be different enough from another to break a driver such as the one ATI releases (and I've seen similiar stories with the closed nvidia driver).
Now, I don't recall stating that the state of hardware drivers for linux was dire (as you seem to have read from my post), however, it isn't anywhere NEAR good enough a landscape for linux to even THINK about 'taking over'.
Unless they partner with someone to build, install and sell/support complete systems (where the hardware is a uniform, known quantity).
Wonder how people would react to a Google PC at WalMart/Target for like $199 (Linspire flop aside).
They'd probably react by saing "Wow. What a good deal. I'll take the copy of Windows from my crappy malware infested PC at home and stick it on this computer!" Would you like to know why? NONE OF THEIR SOFTWARE WILL RUN (easily, without need to setup Wine or some other emulation).
Listen. I like linux as much as the next guy (my laptop has Gentoo installed and I operate/maintain at least 6 Gentoo servers. Unlike you and seveal others, however, I realize what needs to be done before linux can "be a replacement/viable alternative" to Windows.
So why do you suppose third party developers don't like to develop drivers for Linux? Is it because it's harder? Nope. It's because it's not a big market. So third parties don't release drivers for Linux because few people use it, and few people use it (according to you) because there aren't drivers for everything for it.
According to me? Hardly. It is a catch-22 for linux as far as drivers go. I don't even think, personally, that hardware vendors don't develope for linux because it's "hard". How many binary only drivers (think nvidia and ati) don't work when you switch from one kernel to another, or need to have a portion re-compiled? I think this is why many of them don't develope.
The grandparent mentioned that Linux is ready, it just needs a marketing push. Suppose a big enough company, with enough commitment got behind Linux and started pushing it... hard. More people start using it, despite the lack of drivers. Google pressures third party hardware manufacturers to start providing drivers or let Google themselves do it.
I mentioned it's not, backed up the claim, and got negatively moderated by a bunch of linux fanbois. It, in spite of what you and the other idiots want to believe, will take more than "a push by a big enough company" to get linux anywhere CLOSE to where Windows is right now.
It's a very good thing you and your obviously limited exposure to computers is not representitive of how things really are.
My laptop didn't even work properly in linux (HP z2000 series) untill HP released a BIOS update to fix the clock problem. Your own post shows that linux is fairly good at supporting OLD hardware. Just google for "nvidia linux" or "ati linux" and look at all the posts that complain about NEW hardware not working properly (yes, this isn't the best example, but it is still good).
Linux needs to come a LONG way to even come close to what XP is today (As far as usability goes for the end user WRT installing hardware) which was my point all along (Before I got moderated overrated flaimbait!)
Re:Do people actually log-in when searching Google
on
Google Toolbar v.4
·
· Score: 1
Are you really this stupid, or are you just acting this way hoping for some mod points?
Unless "the government" specifically starts sniffing my traffic (or some third party they hire), I am in my home, a private setting, looking up things on the internet that no one else will see.
What part of that is so difficult for you to understand?
IBM didn't "lose" the OS market. They screwed themselv's out of it with horrible marketing (mainly) and choosing to partner with MS. That MS backstabbed IBM then left didn't help, either.
You would have to have a company behind a distro that would set it up to be as simple to install software/hardware as possible.
Yes, we have a few of those. Here is the problem. Most hardware makers absoloutly refuse to create drivers for linux (I can understand why) and, since they won't release their own drivers, they also will not release info for 3rd parties to MAKE drivers (for various reasons).
It may be "good enough" to you, myself, and others who are already familiar with linux, but the vast majority of the public who might actually try it once would run into one piece of hardware that didn't work and give up on it for good (this has already been seen on MANY occasions, even complained about here on slashdot!)
Windows XP 64-bit does not run 16-bit apps. No big deal, eh? But many, many, many titles have been shipped (and still shipping!) using older InstallShield. Guess what? These _installers_ are 16-bit apps. And installer not working equals to "this app does not run" for practically all users. Do you think XP 64-bit is an "alternative to Windows"?
No, I don't believe XP 64bit is an alternative. I don't recall where I said it was, either.
It's been said before but I feel needs to be repeated.
There is no way this is going to be an "alternative to Windows" unless it can run *every* currently available (and even "out of print") piece of software, nor will this work unless it can work with every piece of hardware that Windows supports (as it were).
No more going out and getting a new toolbar every time the standard changes.
(I may be dating myself, but I'm only 22, I swear.:)
I had an internal ISA version I got for $250 for being a SysOp "back in the day".
Don't worry, it wasn't lost on *everyone*.
Re:Do people actually log-in when searching Google
on
Google Toolbar v.4
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Why all the paranoia? What is everyone doing on the web that they don't want others to see?
We are exercising our right to privacy in our own home is what we are doing. If you, as you put it, would "gladly give that up", what other rights are you willing to give up?
In a home environment, this is likely not a real problem. In a business environment, anything beyond about 15 active users is usually too much for a Linksys-type router, since the processor and memory capabilities of these are usually pretty low. I think Netgear has a few for small/medium businesses, but if all you want is a NAT box, Linux/*BSD work quite well on some pretty low-end hardware. 100 users on a DSL/Cable circuit could be handled by an old Pentium 133 picked up on eBay for $25. At work, we have a FreeBSD box (though on a much faster Opteron 244) doing NAT, firewalling, monitoring, load balancing, and intrusion detection for 2 Gigabit segments, 3 T1s, and a Frame Relay circuit. On average, this box is at 0.4% CPU utilization when you aren't actively monitoring something.
Rubbish. I have a school operating, right now, on an SMC7004 router. Somewhere between 30-40 PC's. All day. 5 days a week. Trhough the entire school year. For the last two years. Not one complaint. They are DESIGNED for this type of application. If they weren't, do you really think the DHCP server would allow useage of 200+ IP's?
If one needs something simple for a handfull of machines, a "home" router is perfectly fine. I even had a school up (for about a week) on an old D-Link router (I forget it's model) while I wiped and re-setup a Win2k server (the previous tech had ISA server on it and some "hacker" found a way to throw a remote control software and FTP server on the thing.). This school had somewhere around 100 PC's. Other than not having their files available to them, no one noticed a thing WRT the internet connection.
I could go on, but, well, this is slashdot and I think two examples are just fine.
The strange thing is, I have a similar ICQ number to you (low one million's), and I have yet to receive a single one of these ICQ spam messages, and I don't have my user list set to only accept IM's from users on my list.
You are a bit confused. My number is in the low 10 millions, not the 1's.:)
Strange enough, however, is that a few contacts I did have in the list are gone now (Save for my ex-roomie and his current "live-in" girlfriend).
Just checked that number, I think it's a good idea if you remove your personal details like your adress and phonenumber (if it is yours)
You might just be spammed to death at home:(
I'll have to check it. I haven't used that account since I moved away from SoCal over 5 years ago, so whoever lives there now is the one that might get spammed to death.:)
Something to be said for still using ICQ. It has a simple interface, supports what I need (text messages to co-workers mostly), and with the increasing popularity of the other services, I haven't had any spam/pR0n offers in months.
Tell that to the customer whose computer is currently on my desk. In it's time (a few hours) sitting here, TRYING to get it to scan for adware/malware, I've had to close at least 30 message request/add to buddy request windows. I clicked to view a few, our of curiosity, and they were the "Oohh, I want you to see my NAUGHTY pictures, baby!" messages.
Glad I left ICQ back in the late 90's when this crap started to happen.
12789908 (Just checked -- still active. Used the "ICQ2GO". Inside of about 10 minutes of being connected (while I typed this) I got two of said "messages" on an account I haven't logged into for YEARS.)
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, I'm shoveling bullshit? Sorry if I speak from experience. I guess I bullshitted my way through all my computer experience. The day I find another PC (ie, other than my old 266MHz Dell) that doesn't work on Linux or whose sound doesn't work on Linux, I guess I'll eat my words. I have yet to see one, though - when I fixed my dad's laptop with Knoppix, the sound worked, when I fixed all the other Windows computers in the house with Knoppix, the sound worked, and when I installed Slackware, Mandrake, Redhat, Fedora, SuSE, Icepack Linux, and many other distros on my desktop the sound - and 3D acceleration - worked.
I guess it's a good thing that YOUR experience and YOUR hardware are exactly like what the rest of us have?
Bullshit, through and through.
Way to misquote me, too. I didn't say "except for some very old laptops or sound", I said that I never had any problems with sound except on some very old laptops.
It was your own quote, which you just re-stated. You must think I have "stupid" tattooed across my shiny forehead.
he fact that your laptop's clock didn't work with Linux but worked after you updated the BIOS means that the BIOS was broken, not Linux. Otherwise Linux would've not worked even with the patched BIOS.
And when did I say it was YOUR fault that Linux didn't work on your laptop? I said it was the BIOS' fault.
You have absoloutly NO IDEA as to why the clock was broken. It could very well have been something in linux that wasn't working properly OR HP's fault. Regardless, LINUX didn't work properly (That isn't to say it didn't work at all. With some kernel options, it worked better but the clock was still drifting.)
I also don't recall saying that you said (shesh!) it was my fault linux didn't work. Nice attempt at shifting the subject, though!
Actually, all allowed WoW modifications are through a scripting language, and the game loads the modifications up internally. Any third party programs that would do something like scan for memory locations would be against WoW's EULA.
:)
Makes me wonder what they are hiding. My point still stands, though.
I call bullshit. I still have yet to see ANY computer, new or old, that doesn't work with Linux. My brand-new Dell laptop works with Linux, my desktop PC works great with Linux - and always has (and, yes, it has this "new" technology - it's got a GeForce FX 5500, and no, I've never had any problems with sound on it except on some *VERY* old laptops) and I even play DOOM III on Linux online with a framerate of about 30fps and fine sound. The problems people have with the nVidia or ATi drivers are always either their own stupidity or a problem with the drivers. Or a problem of software conflict. NOT a problem with Linux itself.
Speaking of bullshit, I'm going to have to put my hip-waders on. Your shoveling plenty of it. You are so contradictory in your above paragraph, it's insane. "I have yet to see ANY computer, new or old, that doesn't work with linux" out one side of your mouth while the other says "except for some very old laptops or sound".
It works great for you. Great. It doesn't for THOUSANDS of other people. The fact that the clock in my laptop was not correctly supported is a DRIVER issue with LINUX. People with sound that won't work under linux is a LINUX issue. The fact that you seem incapable of understanding this is not my fault and will, in the long run, hurt linux (if shared by enough people, and from what I've seen, it has been.)
I don't understand why you don't think a push by a big enough company would turn Linux into a viable competitor for Windows. Apple turned Mach into a good mainstream OS and it's been constantly gaining market share. It might really take off if someone releases a really good Windows emulator for the new Intel Macs. MS themselves did pretty well against the then-dominant IBM and their DOS. Lots of people, particularly security conscious businesses, are getting pretty fed up with Windows and would love to use something else. Google Linux isn't going to come out tomorrow and conquer Windows the next day but Linux is also gaining market share. A nice big company behind it to clean up the rough spots, put some pressure on hardware developers, add some stability and put it on TV might do some pretty significant wonders.
That'd be because I believe it'd take a push by THE INDUSTRY as a whole to get linux 'mainstream'.
MS "did pretty well against the then-dominant IBM and their DOS" by introducing false errors into the current version of Windows. They screwed IBM over again (just like they screwed IBM WRT OS/2. IBM's marketing didn't help either, but MS certianly didn't make things any better).
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying a big push by a company as large as Google won't help linux. I'm just being a bit more realistic than others as to how FAR it will help.
I found a comment "Dennis Zhidkov" made to C-Net interesting:
"Now, let me ask you a question. If you are not a pirate, why would you need a debugger simultaneously running with the protected software? It is in the interest of the developer to keep the debuggers and emulators out of business when the protected application is run."
Apparently he's never heard of decal for Asheron's Call. I'm sure a debugger (or something) was needed to find the memory locations it needed to integrate with the game properly. I'm sure some WoW "plugins" work the same way.
Am I suddenly a pirate because I want to use third party plugins for a game I legally own (and pay a monthly fee to play?!)(note, I no longer play AC and have never played WoW, I only used them as examples).
aren't google's servers all running linux? aren't they all heavily modified customized? does google ever go down? sounds like they've got some good software and hardware engineers working for them... i think they know what they're doing.
OOOORR.. they have lots of redundancy.
Not saying that they haven't done everything they could to make the OS they are using as robust as possible, but it's not ALL software...
Yes I speak from experience, I can give you any number of instances where I tried to install Windows on some PC only to find out that there were no longer any available driver for such and such part of the machine (a modem, an ethernet adapter, the USB driver etc), when Linux had no qualms.
I'd also call you a liar, right to your face, without a smile on mine. I've been a tech for 13 years (this year would be my 14'th). I know for a fact that with places like driverguide (or the plethora of copy-cats) that it is *almost* impossible to *not* find a driver on the very small chance that the OEM hadn't archived it somewhere on their web page.
The few companies that don't pursue a Linux-friendly policy are simply slowly but consistenly being driven out of the market or forced to change their attitude. Look at what happened to ATI.
Yes, lets look at ATI. I'll use the Gentoo forums as an example since I frequent those, however I've found plenty of the same results via google. Just search for ATI and look at the problems (and successes). My own laptop, with the ATI x200 chipset, had problems. The driver that other people posted worked on this very laptop, let alone this chipset, failed to install (I forget the *exact* error, but it had something to do with my chipset not being supported by the driver!).
Is ATI pushing crap software to try to sour the linux market? I doubt it, personally, but it is possible. Assuming they aren't, it underlines a HUGE problem with linux. One install, even on identicle hardware, will be different enough from another to break a driver such as the one ATI releases (and I've seen similiar stories with the closed nvidia driver).
Now, I don't recall stating that the state of hardware drivers for linux was dire (as you seem to have read from my post), however, it isn't anywhere NEAR good enough a landscape for linux to even THINK about 'taking over'.
Unless they partner with someone to build, install and sell/support complete systems (where the hardware is a uniform, known quantity).
Wonder how people would react to a Google PC at WalMart/Target for like $199 (Linspire flop aside).
They'd probably react by saing "Wow. What a good deal. I'll take the copy of Windows from my crappy malware infested PC at home and stick it on this computer!" Would you like to know why? NONE OF THEIR SOFTWARE WILL RUN (easily, without need to setup Wine or some other emulation).
Listen. I like linux as much as the next guy (my laptop has Gentoo installed and I operate/maintain at least 6 Gentoo servers. Unlike you and seveal others, however, I realize what needs to be done before linux can "be a replacement/viable alternative" to Windows.
So why do you suppose third party developers don't like to develop drivers for Linux? Is it because it's harder? Nope. It's because it's not a big market. So third parties don't release drivers for Linux because few people use it, and few people use it (according to you) because there aren't drivers for everything for it.
According to me? Hardly. It is a catch-22 for linux as far as drivers go. I don't even think, personally, that hardware vendors don't develope for linux because it's "hard". How many binary only drivers (think nvidia and ati) don't work when you switch from one kernel to another, or need to have a portion re-compiled? I think this is why many of them don't develope.
The grandparent mentioned that Linux is ready, it just needs a marketing push. Suppose a big enough company, with enough commitment got behind Linux and started pushing it... hard. More people start using it, despite the lack of drivers. Google pressures third party hardware manufacturers to start providing drivers or let Google themselves do it.
I mentioned it's not, backed up the claim, and got negatively moderated by a bunch of linux fanbois. It, in spite of what you and the other idiots want to believe, will take more than "a push by a big enough company" to get linux anywhere CLOSE to where Windows is right now.
It's a very good thing you and your obviously limited exposure to computers is not representitive of how things really are.
My laptop didn't even work properly in linux (HP z2000 series) untill HP released a BIOS update to fix the clock problem. Your own post shows that linux is fairly good at supporting OLD hardware. Just google for "nvidia linux" or "ati linux" and look at all the posts that complain about NEW hardware not working properly (yes, this isn't the best example, but it is still good).
Linux needs to come a LONG way to even come close to what XP is today (As far as usability goes for the end user WRT installing hardware) which was my point all along (Before I got moderated overrated flaimbait!)
Are you really this stupid, or are you just acting this way hoping for some mod points?
Unless "the government" specifically starts sniffing my traffic (or some third party they hire), I am in my home, a private setting, looking up things on the internet that no one else will see.
What part of that is so difficult for you to understand?
IBM didn't "lose" the OS market. They screwed themselv's out of it with horrible marketing (mainly) and choosing to partner with MS. That MS backstabbed IBM then left didn't help, either.
How the HELL was my comment underrated flaimbait? Also, how the hell is the guy below me talking about XP 64bit insightful?!
Bad moderators! Shame on you!
I dispute this claim.
You would have to have a company behind a distro that would set it up to be as simple to install software/hardware as possible.
Yes, we have a few of those. Here is the problem. Most hardware makers absoloutly refuse to create drivers for linux (I can understand why) and, since they won't release their own drivers, they also will not release info for 3rd parties to MAKE drivers (for various reasons).
It may be "good enough" to you, myself, and others who are already familiar with linux, but the vast majority of the public who might actually try it once would run into one piece of hardware that didn't work and give up on it for good (this has already been seen on MANY occasions, even complained about here on slashdot!)
Windows XP 64-bit does not run 16-bit apps. No big deal, eh? But many, many, many titles have been shipped (and still shipping!) using older InstallShield. Guess what? These _installers_ are 16-bit apps. And installer not working equals to "this app does not run" for practically all users. Do you think XP 64-bit is an "alternative to Windows"?
No, I don't believe XP 64bit is an alternative. I don't recall where I said it was, either.
It's been said before but I feel needs to be repeated.
There is no way this is going to be an "alternative to Windows" unless it can run *every* currently available (and even "out of print") piece of software, nor will this work unless it can work with every piece of hardware that Windows supports (as it were).
If you are wanting to host it yourself, there is always HORDE and Trean.
Seems it'd suit several people I've seen post in this thread.
Horde (and it's "modules") can be found here.
That will be a toolbar worth getting.
:)
No more going out and getting a new toolbar every time the standard changes.
(I may be dating myself, but I'm only 22, I swear.
I had an internal ISA version I got for $250 for being a SysOp "back in the day".
Don't worry, it wasn't lost on *everyone*.
Why all the paranoia? What is everyone doing on the web that they don't want others to see?
We are exercising our right to privacy in our own home is what we are doing. If you, as you put it, would "gladly give that up", what other rights are you willing to give up?
In a home environment, this is likely not a real problem. In a business environment, anything beyond about 15 active users is usually too much for a Linksys-type router, since the processor and memory capabilities of these are usually pretty low. I think Netgear has a few for small/medium businesses, but if all you want is a NAT box, Linux/*BSD work quite well on some pretty low-end hardware. 100 users on a DSL/Cable circuit could be handled by an old Pentium 133 picked up on eBay for $25. At work, we have a FreeBSD box (though on a much faster Opteron 244) doing NAT, firewalling, monitoring, load balancing, and intrusion detection for 2 Gigabit segments, 3 T1s, and a Frame Relay circuit. On average, this box is at 0.4% CPU utilization when you aren't actively monitoring something.
Rubbish. I have a school operating, right now, on an SMC7004 router. Somewhere between 30-40 PC's. All day. 5 days a week. Trhough the entire school year. For the last two years. Not one complaint. They are DESIGNED for this type of application. If they weren't, do you really think the DHCP server would allow useage of 200+ IP's?
If one needs something simple for a handfull of machines, a "home" router is perfectly fine. I even had a school up (for about a week) on an old D-Link router (I forget it's model) while I wiped and re-setup a Win2k server (the previous tech had ISA server on it and some "hacker" found a way to throw a remote control software and FTP server on the thing.). This school had somewhere around 100 PC's. Other than not having their files available to them, no one noticed a thing WRT the internet connection.
I could go on, but, well, this is slashdot and I think two examples are just fine.
The strange thing is, I have a similar ICQ number to you (low one million's), and I have yet to receive a single one of these ICQ spam messages, and I don't have my user list set to only accept IM's from users on my list.
:)
You are a bit confused. My number is in the low 10 millions, not the 1's.
Strange enough, however, is that a few contacts I did have in the list are gone now (Save for my ex-roomie and his current "live-in" girlfriend).
Just checked that number, I think it's a good idea if you remove your personal details like your adress and phonenumber (if it is yours)
:(
:)
You might just be spammed to death at home
I'll have to check it. I haven't used that account since I moved away from SoCal over 5 years ago, so whoever lives there now is the one that might get spammed to death.
Something to be said for still using ICQ. It has a simple interface, supports what I need (text messages to co-workers mostly), and with the increasing popularity of the other services, I haven't had any spam/pR0n offers in months.
Tell that to the customer whose computer is currently on my desk. In it's time (a few hours) sitting here, TRYING to get it to scan for adware/malware, I've had to close at least 30 message request/add to buddy request windows. I clicked to view a few, our of curiosity, and they were the "Oohh, I want you to see my NAUGHTY pictures, baby!" messages.
Glad I left ICQ back in the late 90's when this crap started to happen.
12789908 (Just checked -- still active. Used the "ICQ2GO". Inside of about 10 minutes of being connected (while I typed this) I got two of said "messages" on an account I haven't logged into for YEARS.)
Hmm
Try doing searches for people on there. The only "kids" I've run into are of the college variety (me being 29, I suppose I can call them kids now...)
Of course, I've limited my searching by "age", which helps. It's not ONLY "gothic" wanna-be's on there. There are PLENTY of normal people.
Oh sure, you get the +3 Funny while I get ignored.
You can make chain armor (chain shirt, full chainmail, etc!) and, with enough brading, have a fine frisbee!
Have you people no imagination?!