Re:Only where remote access != multiuser support
on
CrackThisBox Updates
·
· Score: 1
HAHAHA!!! Go administer a network of 1000 machines with your graphical tools! Then go do it with scripts! Then come back and tell us what you really think!
Re:Unfortunately its a "thanks for nothing"...
on
Red Hat IPO Surprise
·
· Score: 1
For what it's worth, I was accepted. I have used E*Trade since the company started and have a couple-hundred thousand cash in my account there. I put in my order for 5000 shares of Redhat this evening (But I doubt I'll get all 5000).
Shrug...
I actually think it kinda sucks too. Redhat should be GIVING out some stock-options to open-source contributors. It's not like most of us have money. I'm just a bit lucky (and live in the Silicon Valley where money rains from the sky a couple times a week).
Easy enough - the link needs to point to a frame page on/. The frame page loads one frame from linux, one page from NT. Each page should dynamically generate current statistics using whatever is the most dynamic mechanism (e.g. ASP for NT,...) for each O/S.
Many of you are missing the point entirely here. It is, however, quite subtle (the point). Before I share what I think it is, let me address posit my opinions on a couple of issues:
(A) Linux is just barely learning to do SMP. It was experimental less than 6 months ago. The fact that NT on a Quad XENON showed a higher degree of scalability is essentially meaningless. There are quite a lot of brilliant guys that will make sure that a year from now Linux SMP will show maturity and scalability. Don't sweat the fact that our baby can't beat the olympic runner yet. Let's at least wait 'till he is an adolescent to expect it.
(B) As another poster pointed out, Microsoft has teams of people that tweak the O/S purely for attaining high benchmark results. The configuration used in the test would NEVER be used in the real-world. The company has BILLIONS of dollars to throw away doing such nonsense. Don't sweat it. All our hackers were busy writing the next version of the kernel, not playing with benchmark hacks. It would have been much more interesting to see what the benchmarks are like for an Out-of-the-box NT 4.0 installation on a vanilla (average) PC against an Out-of-the-box Linux distribution on the same machine. My bet would be squarely on Linux.
Okay... Here is the point:
The fact that Microsoft made such a fuss in the first place means that our baby is in the big league. Microsoft is advertising for us! It's amazing.
As any good marketer will tell you, NEVER compare your product to your competitors (even if the comparison is beneficial) if your competitor is less well-known than you. Doing so gives your competitor a larger market presence.
In fact, if I were to express my paranoia (as so many of you have), I would say that Microsoft is using this ploy to attempt to assert that they have competition (having competition benefits them in the Justice Department Trial). My guess is that Microsoft laughs at us and thinks we represent absolutely ZERO threat, which is why Billy boy doesn't mind breaking the cardinal rule of advertising for your competitor. He doesn't think we really represent competition.
Slashdot Mirror
HAHAHA!!! Go administer a network of 1000 machines with your graphical tools! Then go do it with scripts! Then come back and tell us what you really think!
For what it's worth, I was accepted. I have used E*Trade since the company started and have a couple-hundred thousand cash in my account there. I put in my order for 5000 shares of Redhat this evening (But I doubt I'll get all 5000).
Shrug...
I actually think it kinda sucks too. Redhat should be GIVING out some stock-options to open-source contributors. It's not like most of us have money. I'm just a bit lucky (and live in the Silicon Valley where money rains from the sky a couple times a week).
Easy enough - the link needs to point to a frame page on /. The frame page loads one frame from linux, one page from NT. Each page should dynamically generate current statistics using whatever is the most dynamic mechanism (e.g. ASP for NT, ...) for each O/S.
-Dan
Many of you are missing the point entirely here. It is, however, quite subtle (the point). Before I share what I think it is, let me address posit my opinions on a couple of issues:
(A) Linux is just barely learning to do SMP. It was experimental less than 6 months ago. The fact that NT on a Quad XENON showed a higher degree of scalability is essentially meaningless. There are quite a lot of brilliant guys that will make sure that a year from now Linux SMP will show maturity and scalability. Don't sweat the fact that our baby can't beat the olympic runner yet. Let's at least wait 'till he is an adolescent to expect it.
(B) As another poster pointed out, Microsoft has teams of people that tweak the O/S purely for attaining high benchmark results. The configuration used in the test would NEVER be used in the real-world. The company has BILLIONS of dollars to throw away doing such nonsense. Don't sweat it. All our hackers were busy writing the next version of the kernel, not playing with benchmark hacks. It would have been much more interesting to see what the benchmarks are like for an Out-of-the-box NT 4.0 installation on a vanilla (average) PC against an Out-of-the-box Linux distribution on the same machine. My bet would be squarely on Linux.
Okay... Here is the point:
The fact that Microsoft made such a fuss in the first place means that our baby is in the big league. Microsoft is advertising for us! It's amazing.
As any good marketer will tell you, NEVER compare your product to your competitors (even if the comparison is beneficial) if your competitor is less well-known than you. Doing so gives your competitor a larger market presence.
In fact, if I were to express my paranoia (as so many of you have), I would say that Microsoft is using this ploy to attempt to assert that they have competition (having competition benefits them in the Justice Department Trial). My guess is that Microsoft laughs at us and thinks we represent absolutely ZERO threat, which is why Billy boy doesn't mind breaking the cardinal rule of advertising for your competitor. He doesn't think we really represent competition.
All in my humble opinion, of course.
-Dan