Quote the Jobs "We're going with ATA because they're
just as fast as SCSI and they offer real benefits in term of largest
capacities.". How dumb does Jobs think we are? IDE just as fast as
SCSI my ass. Any real world comparison of a top of the line IDE drive
VS SCSI shows SCSI winning.
I agree
On desktop machines, theres no reason for SCSI. However, this is a server, made for many users which is where SCSI shines. Try to get 100 users accessing an IDE drive and watch what happens. Someone really needs to talk to Jobs about his drug habit.
Wee see what MS would do with car's, do we need to adapt this old joke to space too?
1. A particular model year of car wouldn't be available until after that year, instead of before it. 2. Every time they repainted the lines on the road, you'd have to by a new car. 3. Occasionally your car would just die for no reason, and you'd have to restart it. For some strange reason, you'd just accept this. 4. You could only have one person in the car at one time, unless you bought a Car 95 or a Car NT. But then you'd have to buy more seats. 5. Sun Motorsystems would make a car that was power by the sun, twice as reliable, and five times as fast - but it would only run on 5 % of the roads. 6. The oil, engine, gas, and alternator warning lights would be replaced by a single"General Car Fault" warning light. 7. People would get excited about the "new" features in Microsoft cars, forgetting completely that they had been available in other cars for years. 8. We'd all have to switch to Microsoft gas. 9. The U.S. government would be getting subsides from an automaker, instead of giving them. 10. New seats would force everyone to have the same sized butt.
It's not just that they want to use Linux as they use Windows, but that Windows lets them do what they want to do, and they want to keep doing it, but without the hassles of Windows.
I offer the suggestion to these user, use XP or 2k. They are both reasonably stable OS's for end users.
My opinion is that 'windows users' have no business with linux. Linux was built by hackers, for hackers. It's worked so far, why not keep with what works.
I've also found that while many people wanna 'learn' linux, they don't wanna put in the time. It's true, linux has a semi-steep learning curve, however, if someone really wants to use it for what it is, and not just for a 'windows that doesn't crash' then they'll find a way to do it. We all did it didn't we. How many of you had someone there that held your hand while you learned linux? I'm sure you google'd and USENET'd and RTFM until you were blue in the face. Most windows users are not willing to do this, therefore, let them stay in their happy 'point and click world'
Alan,
As a linux geek, I am a little concerned about those wanting to make linux a mainstream, 'user-friendly' OS. I assist a friend of mine in teaching a intro to linux class at my local community college, and these are the answers I get to important questions:
Me: "Why do you want to use linux"
A: "Because Windows sucks"
Me: "What do you want to do with linux?"
A: "I wanna use it like I use windows"
I find that all most people just want to do windows stuff with linux. In my opinion, this is not in the true spirit of linux, and if anything, this would be the thing that would make linux sucks. I am very opposed to linux for users. The class calls me elitest, maybe I am. What are your feelings on the subject? Would going mainstream kill linux once all these investors and company's start turning linux into windows?
Slashdot Mirror
Quote the Jobs "We're going with ATA because they're just as fast as SCSI and they offer real benefits in term of largest capacities.". How dumb does Jobs think we are? IDE just as fast as SCSI my ass. Any real world comparison of a top of the line IDE drive VS SCSI shows SCSI winning.
I agree
On desktop machines, theres no reason for SCSI. However, this is a server, made for many users which is where SCSI shines. Try to get 100 users accessing an IDE drive and watch what happens. Someone really needs to talk to Jobs about his drug habit.
Wee see what MS would do with car's, do we need to adapt this old joke to space too?
1. A particular model year of car wouldn't be available until after
that year, instead of before it.
2. Every time they repainted the lines on the road, you'd have to by a
new car.
3. Occasionally your car would just die for no reason, and you'd have
to restart it. For some strange reason, you'd just accept this.
4. You could only have one person in the car at one time, unless you
bought a Car 95 or a Car NT. But then you'd have to buy more seats.
5. Sun Motorsystems would make a car that was power by the sun, twice as
reliable, and five times as fast - but it would only run on 5 % of the
roads.
6. The oil, engine, gas, and alternator warning lights would be
replaced by a single"General Car Fault" warning light.
7. People would get excited about the "new" features in Microsoft cars,
forgetting completely that they had been available in other cars for years.
8. We'd all have to switch to Microsoft gas.
9. The U.S. government would be getting subsides from an automaker,
instead of giving them.
10. New seats would force everyone to have the same sized butt.
It's not just that they want to use Linux as they use Windows, but that Windows lets them do what they want to do, and they want to keep doing it, but without the hassles of Windows.
I offer the suggestion to these user, use XP or 2k. They are both reasonably stable OS's for end users.
My opinion is that 'windows users' have no business with linux. Linux was built by hackers, for hackers. It's worked so far, why not keep with what works.
I've also found that while many people wanna 'learn' linux, they don't wanna put in the time. It's true, linux has a semi-steep learning curve, however, if someone really wants to use it for what it is, and not just for a 'windows that doesn't crash' then they'll find a way to do it. We all did it didn't we. How many of you had someone there that held your hand while you learned linux? I'm sure you google'd and USENET'd and RTFM until you were blue in the face. Most windows users are not willing to do this, therefore, let them stay in their happy 'point and click world'
Alan, As a linux geek, I am a little concerned about those wanting to make linux a mainstream, 'user-friendly' OS. I assist a friend of mine in teaching a intro to linux class at my local community college, and these are the answers I get to important questions: Me: "Why do you want to use linux" A: "Because Windows sucks" Me: "What do you want to do with linux?" A: "I wanna use it like I use windows" I find that all most people just want to do windows stuff with linux. In my opinion, this is not in the true spirit of linux, and if anything, this would be the thing that would make linux sucks. I am very opposed to linux for users. The class calls me elitest, maybe I am. What are your feelings on the subject? Would going mainstream kill linux once all these investors and company's start turning linux into windows?
Enough said, I hope.