Although, if someone was able to yank the hash of your root password, you alreadyave more to worry about than where they'll be when they try to use it.
>Valid points, but wouldn't it be nicer if all GUI >apps played fair and co-operated. I mean *all* >apps, not just KDE >with KDE and Gnome with Gnome. Just simple things >like using the same keybindings for open, save, >etc would make life less troublesome.
Depends on your definition of troublesome: We have an alt key on the PCs and some people have a meta and compose key, what would be done about that difference even though Gnome/KDE runs on both types of systems. Besides, not even windows programs all have the same buttons to save/wuit/etc. The only one that I have ever seen stay the same is alt-f4 and that's because it's built into windows, not the programs.
Writing a concise argument against him, I wrote the following back to the author of the article: How long have you tried to use Linux? Are you judging without testemonial. In terms of ease of setup, there are many different distributions of Linux which offer several different ways to install and maintain a linux system. Which means that if you don't like one -- maybe it's not simple enough for you -- then try a different one. If you want simplicity of setup combined with an intuitive introduction into the idea of Linux I suggest SuSE Linux. As for stability against Microsoft Windows, you forgot to mention that a 486/100 can handle as much networking traffic as a Pentium II 350 running NT. You also forgot to mention that Linux has been shown to run longer than NT without requiring a reboot. Note also that Linux provides all the services of a fully loaded NT BackOffice Suite at no charge! What's more, they work right out of the box. Keep in mind that the only reason that it has taken so long for Linux to support SMP properly is that it only _very_ recently came into the open as a possibility for mainstream servers. Hardware features in an open source environment do not get programed in unless someone has the hardware to test it on. Against opposing UNIXs, Linux supports more interoperability features for integration into _any_ network. Not to mention that it is faster than Solaris on an equally equipped machine. (be that 386 derrivative or Sun derrivative)
On other points, if you are truly suggesting a commercial competitor (I emphasize "commercial") then why did your article not mention OS/2 -- even remotely. You have shown yourself to be a supporter of only Windows with this article. As I have, try using Linux for one or two years before you try to put a dent in it's progress. It has come from nothing to something and has been around longer than Windows 98, Windows 95, _and_ NT 4.0 and with or without help it will continue to grow because it is as good as it is. If Linux was not worth the time, it would never have gotten out of its "College Student's Project" stage.
As for your closing "give me more... -not less" I have a closing for you: I'm all for anti-Linux articles, if you can write one that can hold a drop of water. I challenge you to write an accurate, _complete_ article with all the pros and cons of both Linux and Windows NT. If you desire to make such an article truly complete you'll not forget to look briefly into Novell, OS/2 and the new MacOS X.
Sincerely, Grey-Ghost
*** And this is the reply I got -- take from it what you will *** Some point regading the printing:
1. The editors removed the key point regarding available applications. The line "With Linux, these services will soon be available as a multivendor product" should have read, "Commercial versions of currently used IT products will soon..." Announcements from Oracle, IBM, Progress Software, BEA, are what should have been referenced here, but due to size they decided to take a dangerous shortcut.
2. The SMP point has been argued both ways. Yes, there are versions of Linux that work on SMP, but not all Linux distributions until recently.
Thank you for your points. Hey, all writers are entitled to one "off" article.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Although, if someone was able to yank the hash of your root password, you alreadyave more to worry about than where they'll be when they try to use it.
Actually, if you go looking for it, you'll find that the symbol is most likly going to be TMTA
>Valid points, but wouldn't it be nicer if all GUI
>apps played fair and co-operated. I mean *all*
>apps, not just KDE
>with KDE and Gnome with Gnome. Just simple things
>like using the same keybindings for open, save,
>etc would make life less troublesome.
Depends on your definition of troublesome:
We have an alt key on the PCs and some people have a meta and compose key, what would be done about that difference even though Gnome/KDE runs on both types of systems.
Besides, not even windows programs all have the same buttons to save/wuit/etc. The only one that I have ever seen stay the same is alt-f4 and that's because it's built into windows, not the programs.
But the spine has signal preserving fluids and structures to allow the signal to move that far without losing strength
So would that mean that our imagination serves as a memory decompression?
I think that the storage may be vector based (or something lik it) because the harder you think about someones face, the more clear it becomes
Maybe our brains are just so fragmented that we have to dedicate that amount of time to grabbiung all the file fragments.
Writing a concise argument against him, I wrote the following back to the author of the article:
:-)
How long have you tried to use Linux? Are you judging without testemonial.
In
terms of ease of setup, there are many different distributions of Linux
which
offer several different ways to install and maintain a linux system. Which
means that if you don't like one -- maybe it's not simple enough for you --
then try a different one. If you want simplicity of setup combined with an
intuitive introduction into the idea of Linux I suggest SuSE Linux.
As for stability against Microsoft Windows, you forgot to mention that
a 486/100 can handle as much networking traffic as a Pentium II 350 running
NT.
You also forgot to mention that Linux has been shown to run longer than NT
without requiring a reboot. Note also that Linux provides all the services
of
a fully loaded NT BackOffice Suite at no charge! What's more, they work
right
out of the box.
Keep in mind that the only reason that it has taken so long for Linux
to support SMP properly is that it only _very_ recently came into the open
as a
possibility for mainstream servers. Hardware features in an open source
environment do not get programed in unless someone has the hardware to test
it
on.
Against opposing UNIXs, Linux supports more interoperability features
for integration into _any_ network. Not to mention that it is faster than
Solaris on an equally equipped machine. (be that 386 derrivative or Sun
derrivative)
On other points, if you are truly suggesting a commercial competitor (I
emphasize "commercial") then why did your article not mention OS/2 -- even
remotely. You have shown yourself to be a supporter of only Windows with
this
article.
As I have, try using Linux for one or two years before you try to put a
dent in it's progress. It has come from nothing to something and has been
around longer than Windows 98, Windows 95, _and_ NT 4.0 and with or without
help it will continue to grow because it is as good as it is. If Linux was
not
worth the time, it would never have gotten out of its "College Student's
Project" stage.
As for your closing "give me more... -not less" I have a closing for
you: I'm all for anti-Linux articles, if you can write one that can hold a
drop of water.
I challenge you to write an accurate, _complete_ article with all the
pros and cons of both Linux and Windows NT. If you desire to make such an
article truly complete you'll not forget to look briefly into Novell, OS/2
and
the new MacOS X.
Sincerely,
Grey-Ghost
*** And this is the reply I got -- take from it what you will ***
Some point regading the printing:
1. The editors removed the key point regarding available applications. The
line "With Linux, these services will soon be available as a multivendor
product" should have read, "Commercial versions of currently used IT
products will soon..." Announcements from Oracle, IBM, Progress Software,
BEA, are what should have been referenced here, but due to size they decided
to take a dangerous shortcut.
2. The SMP point has been argued both ways. Yes, there are versions of
Linux that work on SMP, but not all Linux distributions until recently.
Thank you for your points. Hey, all writers are entitled to one "off"
article.
JP