The submitter of the article was an idiot
on
Looking at Longhorn
·
· Score: 5, Informative
The new big feature of the filesystem is not that it's journalling.
They are integrating the filesystem with their SQL engine so that files are easily searchable with the multiple GB hard drives everyone will have by the time 2005 rolls around. The big feature is that it's a database filesystem called WinFS.
I guess the submitters of the article don't even read the articles anymore! Gotta love the quip at the end of the summary--makes him look even more moronic. NTFS has been a journalling file system since its inception. Many years before ext3 reared its ugly head.
Many Slashbots just refuse to understand it because it invalidates their worldviews.
By downloading their product, you deprive them of a potential sale. If you don't buy it, yet you obtained the product anyway, you stole the money they are owed by depriving it from them. You owe them a sale and are not paying up. You diminish the value of the work.
It's incredibly simple. But so many Slashbots refuse to see it because they are obsessively stuck on the fact that making a copy isn't the same as physically stealing. Which, as we all know, isn't even the point.
Debian flat-out sucks. Debian elitists are the worst kind of Linux users because they think Debian solves absolutely everything wrong with Linux when it doesn't.
You posted that you believed that, no matter what the circumstances (I had already pointed out the possibility of a Taliban-like regime taking over Iraq), an Iraq without Saddam Hussein was "better" than an Iraq with it.
That's right; an Iraq without Saddam is better than an Iraq with him.
We can play "what-if" games all day. What if Russia took over Iraq? What if toads fell from the sky? But in the real world away from your paranoid, trendy counterculturalist fantasies, Saddam's regime is gone and Iraq is the better country for it.
But, by all means, ignore the above as "irrelevent" if it makes you feel better about the current US regime. Trust me, one day it'll hit you, and you'll go "Oh fuck", and there will not a pill big enough to make you sane again.
Yes, I'll take your sage Slashbot wisdom to heart in order to better my life. One day, it'll hit me. Because you're just that smart that you feel the need to convince me that I'll someday accept that you were right. Which, of course, weakens your entire position to begin with.
They aren't left-wing regarding the war effort? Are you living in a bubble or something? Or have the Susan Surandons and Tim Robbins of the world really escaped you? It's well known that the majority of Hollywood is left-wing.
If you feel the need to call it "whining," then by all means.
And then a long beat-around-the-bush argument side-stepping the fact that Apple and MS ignored the underlying problem as to why the GUI was becoming unresponsive, and just put on a bandaid. See the threat between Linus and that Xfree86 guy for details on why just renicing things alone is a problematic solution.
That's Linux's problem. The fact that they're rewriting parts of the kernel just to make X worth a damn in responsiveness should tell you something.
Your propensity for bullshit is remarkable. What was windows 3.11? Basically it was a file-manager plus a primitive windowmanager.
It was an entire GUI, yes. And it was more responsive. I still remember running word processing applications and multimedia programs. They worked fine.
Ratpoison or pwm (pluse a file-manager, like DFM) would provide all of that functionality on GNU/Linux, except faster and with greater stability. Thank you for demonstrating you don't know wtf you're talking about, as usual.
It's okay to admit you were wrong. My Windows 3.11 argument has never been countered by anyone yet.
And introduced 6 additional problems, which I mentioned. I won't mention them again, since you'd obviously sooner ignore them than admit that you were wrong.
I dismissed them because they were vague claims with no examples to back them up. People have been using Windows XP for close to two years now with no problems--no more DLL hell, unlike the Linux equivalent.
The real solution -- the best way to solve the problem, the way which doesn't introduce at least 6 additional problems when you implement it -- is to create better package/dependency management. I've been using Gentoo for a while: no dependency problems. Period.
Gentoo will never succeed in the desktop market. Next.
They're also working on reverse-dependencies, so I can remove libraries that are no longer needed: not perfect yet, but on it's way. Btw, the reason for removing no-longer use dependencies (libraries) is that they're wasteful and grab disk-space. Since your "solution" wastes tons of disk-space, you can't complain at all on the grounds of "unnecessary libraries being there".
Yes. "Tons" of disk space. After all, kilobytes and even mere megatbytes are at a premium these days. Did you get one of those new things they call hard drives? I'll never be able to go back to my diskless workstation again!
When applicaitons start coming with their own libraries built in, there are going to be consistency problems. Different libraries do not function exactly the same. There will also be security problems.
I'm still waiting for the examples you're burdened to give regarding Windows XP, which has none of those DLL problems.
There's also the fact that MS' "solution" wastes gobs of hard-drive space and also wastes RAM.
Another vague claim. "Gobs" of hard drive space and RAM are not wasted. Next.
Yes, and how much of your RAM does XP waste on its own selfish needs, which are completely irrelevant to you getting work done?
Not much. Not only that, but I turn off services I don't need.
Try loading several more programs, or even one program that requires lots of RAM per the nature of what it does (e.g., MrBayes), and see how things slow down to a crawl.
I currently run Photoshop, Sonar, Wavelab, Mozilla, mIRC, Trillian, and sometimes Quicktime. When I need to, I load 3D Studio Max 5. I have 256MB of RAM and a 1.5ghz Celeron. I'm still waiting to be convinced.
Can't speak for RedHat or Slack because I don't use them. However, Gentoo works very well on all systems, and can be taylored specifically to your needs.
Ah, a Gentoo elitist. Your opinion is already suspect. As if I want to spend all day building my distribution over the network when I've got work to do.
You have yet to refute any of my points. That is, of course, because all of my 6 points were right.
There were no points to refute. You simply claimed a bunch of things and now assume they were true when facts and experience run contrary. I have already won by default.
This is also the very reason why no network is particularly liberal, at least regarding the war effort or Bush, because when over 80% of your potential viewers are in support of Bush and the war effort it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to piss them off by having a liberal sentiment.
I guess you don't watch, for instance, NBC. Most of Hollywood and the media is liberal. In many cases, what the general populace actually believes doesn't matter when there is a belief system among those in power.
Yep, you and anyone else who's arguing that the increased bloat and reduced performance, stability, and security which would occur if we got rid of shared libraries would be a good thing.
My implication with the troll comment clearly went over your head.
MS and Apple decided to take the easy -- as in, wrong -- way to deal with this problem. Just like they've taken the easy -- as in wrong -- way to deal with all their other problems (e.g., always running the UI at maximum priority).
Nobody's having problems anymore. Though I hear Linux users complaining daily about library hell.
The UI should definitely be high-priority. It is the interface with which you control the computer. If a process steals enough cycles to slow your mouse down and disallow you from continuing to use your computer, it is poorly designed rubbish. The system should always allow the user to properly control things, and that means giving priority control to the interface the user is controlling their computer with. How anyone would disagree with this amazes me but doesn't surprise me, as it is the default setup with all Linux distributions. I suppose because X, its overlying libraries, its abstracted libraries on top of those, its window managers on top of those, and its desktop environments on top of those cause so much processor waste that setting them high-priority would indeed be a bad idea. Not so with OS X and Windows.
People may argue that windowing functions are in the kernel in Windows, causing the speed. And yet Linux has yet to spawn forth a desktop environment as responsive as Windows 3.11, which was a mere shell on top of DOS and not an entire kernel. So much for that argument.
Hahahah. You can forget about real consistent behavior between apps. You can forget about security -- as if it was ever there in the first place for Windows. Forget about stability as well. Finally, you can forget about using WinXP on your current system: plan on shelling out $1,000 just to get WinXP to run acceptably. That is fucking bullshit. You want to emulate that bullcrap, fine.
What on earth are you talking about? Windows XP solved DLL hell. Does that strike a nerve or something? There are no consistency problems. You have no other arguments, so you resort to complaining about upgrading your system. I was running Windows XP acceptably on a 266mhz with 128MB of RAM for hard disk recording work using Cakewalk Sonar. Try that with Red Hat 9 or even the latest Slackware.
As it is, I'd rather be able to install a program sensibly than worry about downloading new versions of my programs--something I do anyway, so the point is moot. The advantages clearly outweight the disadvantages.
I ignored the rest of your message because it had no valid points that even remotely related to the discussion at hand. I considered the conversation over when I completely obliterated any arguments you had offered, particularly when I pointed out your bias. If you wish to obsessively continue the debate, have at it.
The way to solve dependency-hell is to write better package management systems.
Or, instead of constantly dancing around the problem, eliminate the problem--shared libraries.
If only for security, convenience, and inconsistent behavior alone, your idea -- and that of anyone else who wants to do away with shared libraries -- is crap.
Despite your misinformed claims, it's clear shared libraries are pointless and an obsolete concept. My idea is not "crap" because you disagree with it. Again, you fear change and wish we were still using 80s era technology in which hard drive space and memory are at a premium.
Incidentally, Windows XP removed DLL hell by copying different versions of conflicting system libraries. And yet the computing world has not fallen apart. Yet another feature for Linux to play catch-up on.
Instead of inventing YET ANOTHER WEB SERVER DISTRO (yes, I've been tempted too), can we please focus our efforts on the things that are wrong, broken and unusuable in EVERY DISTRO ON THE PLANET?
Priorities would be better served by targetting them at idiots who don't bother reading the links of Slashdot articles, and instead decide to launch into a misinformed diatribe accusing LFS of being a misprioritized "distro." And also, fixing their caps lock key.
It is called the capacity for rational thought, considering you have obviously never implemented an LFS system. It was a nice troll attempt, but far too obvious to be terribly effective.
What I do remember with shocking clairity was having the epiphany that if everything has to be routed through a.NET server (which our REP said would make it a lot more secure than it is now.. har-har) then WHO is going to be making those servers ?
Your sysadmins running Windows.NET servers, perhaps?
Not everything is a Microsoft-centric world conspiracy. He was probably referring to how future versions of Exchange and so forth would handle transmitting information. By then, Longhorn and the Blackcomb.NET server will be out.
Slashdot Mirror
The new big feature of the filesystem is not that it's journalling.
They are integrating the filesystem with their SQL engine so that files are easily searchable with the multiple GB hard drives everyone will have by the time 2005 rolls around. The big feature is that it's a database filesystem called WinFS.
I guess the submitters of the article don't even read the articles anymore! Gotta love the quip at the end of the summary--makes him look even more moronic. NTFS has been a journalling file system since its inception. Many years before ext3 reared its ugly head.
Many Slashbots just refuse to understand it because it invalidates their worldviews.
By downloading their product, you deprive them of a potential sale. If you don't buy it, yet you obtained the product anyway, you stole the money they are owed by depriving it from them. You owe them a sale and are not paying up. You diminish the value of the work.
It's incredibly simple. But so many Slashbots refuse to see it because they are obsessively stuck on the fact that making a copy isn't the same as physically stealing. Which, as we all know, isn't even the point.
Windows XP copies system DLLs that are of differing versions. "DLL Hell" has been solved since 2001.
Do you know what a troll is?
Debian flat-out sucks. Debian elitists are the worst kind of Linux users because they think Debian solves absolutely everything wrong with Linux when it doesn't.
Do you know what a troll is?
You posted that you believed that, no matter what the circumstances (I had already pointed out the possibility of a Taliban-like regime taking over Iraq), an Iraq without Saddam Hussein was "better" than an Iraq with it.
That's right; an Iraq without Saddam is better than an Iraq with him.
We can play "what-if" games all day. What if Russia took over Iraq? What if toads fell from the sky? But in the real world away from your paranoid, trendy counterculturalist fantasies, Saddam's regime is gone and Iraq is the better country for it.
But, by all means, ignore the above as "irrelevent" if it makes you feel better about the current US regime. Trust me, one day it'll hit you, and you'll go "Oh fuck", and there will not a pill big enough to make you sane again.
Yes, I'll take your sage Slashbot wisdom to heart in order to better my life. One day, it'll hit me. Because you're just that smart that you feel the need to convince me that I'll someday accept that you were right. Which, of course, weakens your entire position to begin with.
Next.
No, it's an outright laugh. UNIX is way more absurdly complex than Windows, on all levels.
They aren't left-wing regarding the war effort? Are you living in a bubble or something? Or have the Susan Surandons and Tim Robbins of the world really escaped you? It's well known that the majority of Hollywood is left-wing.
If you feel the need to call it "whining," then by all means.
Wow! You should post another reply to this!
Do you know what a troll is?
And then a long beat-around-the-bush argument side-stepping the fact that Apple and MS ignored the underlying problem as to why the GUI was becoming unresponsive, and just put on a bandaid. See the threat between Linus and that Xfree86 guy for details on why just renicing things alone is a problematic solution.
That's Linux's problem. The fact that they're rewriting parts of the kernel just to make X worth a damn in responsiveness should tell you something.
Your propensity for bullshit is remarkable. What was windows 3.11? Basically it was a file-manager plus a primitive windowmanager.
It was an entire GUI, yes. And it was more responsive. I still remember running word processing applications and multimedia programs. They worked fine.
Ratpoison or pwm (pluse a file-manager, like DFM) would provide all of that functionality on GNU/Linux, except faster and with greater stability. Thank you for demonstrating you don't know wtf you're talking about, as usual.
It's okay to admit you were wrong. My Windows 3.11 argument has never been countered by anyone yet.
And introduced 6 additional problems, which I mentioned. I won't mention them again, since you'd obviously sooner ignore them than admit that you were wrong.
I dismissed them because they were vague claims with no examples to back them up. People have been using Windows XP for close to two years now with no problems--no more DLL hell, unlike the Linux equivalent.
The real solution -- the best way to solve the problem, the way which doesn't introduce at least 6 additional problems when you implement it -- is to create better package/dependency management. I've been using Gentoo for a while: no dependency problems. Period.
Gentoo will never succeed in the desktop market. Next.
They're also working on reverse-dependencies, so I can remove libraries that are no longer needed: not perfect yet, but on it's way. Btw, the reason for removing no-longer use dependencies (libraries) is that they're wasteful and grab disk-space. Since your "solution" wastes tons of disk-space, you can't complain at all on the grounds of "unnecessary libraries being there".
Yes. "Tons" of disk space. After all, kilobytes and even mere megatbytes are at a premium these days. Did you get one of those new things they call hard drives? I'll never be able to go back to my diskless workstation again!
When applicaitons start coming with their own libraries built in, there are going to be consistency problems. Different libraries do not function exactly the same. There will also be security problems.
I'm still waiting for the examples you're burdened to give regarding Windows XP, which has none of those DLL problems.
There's also the fact that MS' "solution" wastes gobs of hard-drive space and also wastes RAM.
Another vague claim. "Gobs" of hard drive space and RAM are not wasted. Next.
Yes, and how much of your RAM does XP waste on its own selfish needs, which are completely irrelevant to you getting work done?
Not much. Not only that, but I turn off services I don't need.
Try loading several more programs, or even one program that requires lots of RAM per the nature of what it does (e.g., MrBayes), and see how things slow down to a crawl.
I currently run Photoshop, Sonar, Wavelab, Mozilla, mIRC, Trillian, and sometimes Quicktime. When I need to, I load 3D Studio Max 5. I have 256MB of RAM and a 1.5ghz Celeron. I'm still waiting to be convinced.
Can't speak for RedHat or Slack because I don't use them. However, Gentoo works very well on all systems, and can be taylored specifically to your needs.
Ah, a Gentoo elitist. Your opinion is already suspect. As if I want to spend all day building my distribution over the network when I've got work to do.
You have yet to refute any of my points. That is, of course, because all of my 6 points were right.
There were no points to refute. You simply claimed a bunch of things and now assume they were true when facts and experience run contrary. I have already won by default.
Next.
It is just a simple fact that UNIX is less complex than Windows.
Microsoft's R&D department is laughing at you.
Good thing you used your karma bonus modifier to post that.
Next.
Do you know what a troll is?
This is also the very reason why no network is particularly liberal, at least regarding the war effort or Bush, because when over 80% of your potential viewers are in support of Bush and the war effort it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to piss them off by having a liberal sentiment.
I guess you don't watch, for instance, NBC. Most of Hollywood and the media is liberal. In many cases, what the general populace actually believes doesn't matter when there is a belief system among those in power.
Next.
Yep, you and anyone else who's arguing that the increased bloat and reduced performance, stability, and security which would occur if we got rid of shared libraries would be a good thing.
My implication with the troll comment clearly went over your head.
MS and Apple decided to take the easy -- as in, wrong -- way to deal with this problem. Just like they've taken the easy -- as in wrong -- way to deal with all their other problems (e.g., always running the UI at maximum priority).
Nobody's having problems anymore. Though I hear Linux users complaining daily about library hell.
The UI should definitely be high-priority. It is the interface with which you control the computer. If a process steals enough cycles to slow your mouse down and disallow you from continuing to use your computer, it is poorly designed rubbish. The system should always allow the user to properly control things, and that means giving priority control to the interface the user is controlling their computer with. How anyone would disagree with this amazes me but doesn't surprise me, as it is the default setup with all Linux distributions. I suppose because X, its overlying libraries, its abstracted libraries on top of those, its window managers on top of those, and its desktop environments on top of those cause so much processor waste that setting them high-priority would indeed be a bad idea. Not so with OS X and Windows.
People may argue that windowing functions are in the kernel in Windows, causing the speed. And yet Linux has yet to spawn forth a desktop environment as responsive as Windows 3.11, which was a mere shell on top of DOS and not an entire kernel. So much for that argument.
Hahahah. You can forget about real consistent behavior between apps. You can forget about security -- as if it was ever there in the first place for Windows. Forget about stability as well. Finally, you can forget about using WinXP on your current system: plan on shelling out $1,000 just to get WinXP to run acceptably. That is fucking bullshit. You want to emulate that bullcrap, fine.
What on earth are you talking about? Windows XP solved DLL hell. Does that strike a nerve or something? There are no consistency problems. You have no other arguments, so you resort to complaining about upgrading your system. I was running Windows XP acceptably on a 266mhz with 128MB of RAM for hard disk recording work using Cakewalk Sonar. Try that with Red Hat 9 or even the latest Slackware.
Next.
Good thing you used your karma bonus modifier to post that.
Typically anything ending with "...oh wait" is junk.
You misread something as having "FBI" in it.
"DirectFeds." You're right. That is hilarious and warranted posting about it.
Then you'll get to have fun updating libraries whenever you want to install something, as well as patching BIND, sendmail, the kernel, etc.
Next.
You're just upset FoxNews is crushing CNN and all other news outlets ratings-wise.
Next.
I was waiting for someone to post that.
As it is, I'd rather be able to install a program sensibly than worry about downloading new versions of my programs--something I do anyway, so the point is moot. The advantages clearly outweight the disadvantages.
I ignored the rest of your message because it had no valid points that even remotely related to the discussion at hand. I considered the conversation over when I completely obliterated any arguments you had offered, particularly when I pointed out your bias. If you wish to obsessively continue the debate, have at it.
Next.
The stupidity at /. never ceases to amaze me.
Agreed.
Do you know what a troll is?
The way to solve dependency-hell is to write better package management systems.
Or, instead of constantly dancing around the problem, eliminate the problem--shared libraries.
If only for security, convenience, and inconsistent behavior alone, your idea -- and that of anyone else who wants to do away with shared libraries -- is crap.
Despite your misinformed claims, it's clear shared libraries are pointless and an obsolete concept. My idea is not "crap" because you disagree with it. Again, you fear change and wish we were still using 80s era technology in which hard drive space and memory are at a premium.
Incidentally, Windows XP removed DLL hell by copying different versions of conflicting system libraries. And yet the computing world has not fallen apart. Yet another feature for Linux to play catch-up on.
Next.
Instead of inventing YET ANOTHER WEB SERVER DISTRO (yes, I've been tempted too), can we please focus our efforts on the things that are wrong, broken and unusuable in EVERY DISTRO ON THE PLANET?
Priorities would be better served by targetting them at idiots who don't bother reading the links of Slashdot articles, and instead decide to launch into a misinformed diatribe accusing LFS of being a misprioritized "distro." And also, fixing their caps lock key.
It is called the capacity for rational thought, considering you have obviously never implemented an LFS system. It was a nice troll attempt, but far too obvious to be terribly effective.
What I do remember with shocking clairity was having the epiphany that if everything has to be routed through a .NET server (which our REP said would make it a lot more secure than it is now .. har-har) then WHO is going to be making those servers ?
.NET servers, perhaps?
.NET server will be out.
Your sysadmins running Windows
Not everything is a Microsoft-centric world conspiracy. He was probably referring to how future versions of Exchange and so forth would handle transmitting information. By then, Longhorn and the Blackcomb
If there's a shared system library with a hole, all programs using it are affected.
Next.