Since you pretty much quoted the entire article, I think you failed to mention that the original article is under Creative Commons License.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/1.0/
I bought one...
on
AOL's $299 PC
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I am heavy Linux user and I bought one.
You ask why? Well, my in-laws need a computer, and they need internet access for that computer.
I could have built them a computer, but it would be hard for me to build something reasonable for a decent price and still pay for Windows XP. Yes, I personally use Linux, but I can't expect the in-laws to use Linux. They have never owned a computer in their life. They are in their 60s and this would be their first computer.
So, they get a decent computer with internet access (which I am paying for) for 1 year with AOL service.
After 1 year, they could switch to the econo-AOL service, or another cheap ISP.
Tell your boss this. I buy alot of computer hardware that needs to work under Linux as well as Windows. If I have the option of buying a device with drivers for both OSes, I will buy it rather than a device with just Windows drivers. You will be loosing out to vendors that have linux drivers as well as windows drivers.
I just wrote a script that emails me if it doesn't see all U in/proc/mdstat
md0 : active raid5 hdk[4] hdi[3] hdm[2] hdg[1] hde[0]
300272640 blocks level 5, 256k chunk, algorithm 2 [5/5] [UUUUU]
Well...we built a 5 75GB IDE raid 5 server over a year ago. It is almost like the system on kcgreak but since we built it last year, it has smaller drives.
It uses extra ATA100 IDE controllers. Each IDE drive works as a Master. It has about 280GB of storage out of 37GB.
This system has been flawless over the past year.
The system also has a 35GB tape that backs up the entire system over 10 days. We have two complete sets of backup tapes for it. But, we have yet to use the tapes.
So far, we have lost 3 SCSI drives over the past few years, and we have yet to lose a IDE drive. SCSI might be faster but you can't say it is more reliable. Both have moving parts, and most SCSI/IDE are built from the same moving parts, just different onboard controllers.
Also, on the RAID-5 system we get about 10MB/sec writing, and 60MB/sec reading. Remember, most networks can't handle more than 10MB/sec anyway. So, if you have network storage, it really doesn't matter if you can do more than what the network can handle. Our raid-5 system has multiple ethernet cards for mutiple networks.
I would like to see people with Hardware raid-5 (SCSI) post their performance numbers and they will be surprised at how low they are. In my opinion, it is not worth spendings thousands on a hardware Raid 5 solution.
Mind you, I do have a Raid-0 SCSI system built for speed. It writes/reads around 120MB+/sec.
I just built a new AMD Athlon system with 512MB ram, NVidia GeForce2 MX 400 GFX card and the system will freeze alot (RH 7.2). Redhat 7.2 on an Intel system we have is rock solid. When the AMD system freezes, the only way to get out of it is to hit the reset button. This is with or without the mem=nopentium option added to the kernel during booting.
So, I hope there is another solution besides mem=nopentium because it ain't working for me.
Slashdot Mirror
When people say "Domestic Surveilance", I know they have a political agenda..
When was the last time someone took a domestic flight from Boston to London? Never because it is called an international flight!!!!
It really should be called "International Surveilance" but that wouldn't cause such a reaction by the media and by the uninformed.
Isn't ASCII itself data transferred in a neutral form?
Feds said that was part of Phase 2.
"Lomia said the law firms that allegedly sought Lembo's services are part of "phase two" of the investigation."
Since you pretty much quoted the entire article, I think you failed to mention that the original article is under Creative Commons License.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/1.0/
I am heavy Linux user and I bought one.
You ask why? Well, my in-laws need a computer, and they need internet access for that computer.
I could have built them a computer, but it would be hard for me to build something reasonable for a decent price and still pay for Windows XP. Yes, I personally use Linux, but I can't expect the in-laws to use Linux. They have never owned a computer in their life. They are in their 60s and this would be their first computer.
So, they get a decent computer with internet access (which I am paying for) for 1 year with AOL service.
After 1 year, they could switch to the econo-AOL service, or another cheap ISP.
Tell your boss this. I buy alot of computer hardware that needs to work under Linux as well as Windows. If I have the option of buying a device with drivers for both OSes, I will buy it rather than a device with just Windows drivers. You will be loosing out to vendors that have linux drivers as well as windows drivers.
I just wrote a script that emails me if it doesn't see all U in /proc/mdstat
md0 : active raid5 hdk[4] hdi[3] hdm[2] hdg[1] hde[0]
300272640 blocks level 5, 256k chunk, algorithm 2 [5/5] [UUUUU]
Well...we built a 5 75GB IDE raid 5 server over a year ago. It is almost like the system on kcgreak but since we built it last year, it has smaller drives. It uses extra ATA100 IDE controllers. Each IDE drive works as a Master. It has about 280GB of storage out of 37GB. This system has been flawless over the past year. The system also has a 35GB tape that backs up the entire system over 10 days. We have two complete sets of backup tapes for it. But, we have yet to use the tapes. So far, we have lost 3 SCSI drives over the past few years, and we have yet to lose a IDE drive. SCSI might be faster but you can't say it is more reliable. Both have moving parts, and most SCSI/IDE are built from the same moving parts, just different onboard controllers. Also, on the RAID-5 system we get about 10MB/sec writing, and 60MB/sec reading. Remember, most networks can't handle more than 10MB/sec anyway. So, if you have network storage, it really doesn't matter if you can do more than what the network can handle. Our raid-5 system has multiple ethernet cards for mutiple networks. I would like to see people with Hardware raid-5 (SCSI) post their performance numbers and they will be surprised at how low they are. In my opinion, it is not worth spendings thousands on a hardware Raid 5 solution. Mind you, I do have a Raid-0 SCSI system built for speed. It writes/reads around 120MB+/sec.
I just built a new AMD Athlon system with 512MB ram, NVidia GeForce2 MX 400 GFX card and the system will freeze alot (RH 7.2). Redhat 7.2 on an Intel system we have is rock solid. When the AMD system freezes, the only way to get out of it is to hit the reset button. This is with or without the mem=nopentium option added to the kernel during booting. So, I hope there is another solution besides mem=nopentium because it ain't working for me.