Uh, you're basically shooting down his entire argument because of one letter? It's not like he called it X-hippos, which would've made it totally difficult to understand what he was saying. Windows 2003, Windows 2003 Server System, Windows 2003 Server... what's the difference?
No, I'm not shooting down his entire argument, or any part of his argument (at least, that's not my intention). But to answer you question, the difference is, that's its name. That's what it's called. It reminded me of a recurring rant echoed throughout the community from time to time. I will add however, that it's really suprising to see that sort of a misspeak from an OS guru like Mark Russinovich.
That is not correct. NT (and hence XP) was designed with the flexibility to support multiple OS Environments. One such option is the POSIX environment which is not a GUI.
It supports a POSIX environment? Great. So how do I do it?
Well, I hadn't really ever used any of them Winders before about 8 years ago. I grew up with the likes of MSDOS, AppleDOS, and later Amiga Workbench. Unix software, and the hardware it ran on, was pretty derned expensive. And, of course, that all changed when this GNU/Linux fella came along....
"With Linux, you have messages transmitted which can degrade performance," he said, but conceded that this does make it easier to do remote applications. "With X-windows you can run windows for applications on a remote client. That is much more difficult in Microsoft Windows," he said.
First off, what the hell is "X-windows"? I know of the X Window System, X11, X, X.org, XFree86 -- but I know nothing of this "X-windows."
Now, what the author of the article fails to point out, is that the more significant difference between the operating systems, is that one requires the use of GUI display, while the other finds it entirely optional.
So who would you rather employ, someone who knows how to use redhat-config-* (or system-config-* as they are now known), or someone who knows how to edit each of the corresponding config files
As a matter of fact, RHCE track GLS instructors teach vi, scripting, and configuration by editing directive files directly. Having actually taken the RHCE, I can attest to the fact that not only was there no time to install the GUI tools (it's optional), one may be hard pressed to find the time to even use them (the test requires you to deliver A LOT in very LITTLE time).
No, believe it or not, the redhat-config-* tools are geared more for beginer users and Windows transpants. True Red Hat hackers are adept with a shell as the next Deb, Slack, or BSD user.
have had entirely too many people with college degrees that simply can not function in the computer industry. Computer science majors that have no idea how any portion of a computer works, but they can use the VB IDE.
That sounds rather remarkable. You might want to require an official transcript before merely hiring someone on his or her word on that. Any computer science student who has "no idea" was probably a very poor student, or perhaps is pulling your leg. Or perhaps, I'm not sure to which aspect of the "computer industry" you are referring? Are we talking about technicians? Programmers? Analysts? Sales persons?
Yeah, I can see how many CS graduates would have little to no technical knowledge of vendor application and hardware solutions. I don't think that's the point of a college education. College isn't about learning vocational skills, it's about learning how to think on your own. It's about developing skills in analytical and logical reasoning. Rather than learning individual programming languages through pedagogic repition and application, one can learn the underlying theory behind things like data abstraction and logic design. From there, picking up new languages are a breeze. Vendor solutions will change from job to job, but the fundamental understanding isn't likely to change over a career.
Maybe not everyone is suited for that sort of path, and maybe the industry no longer has an overabundance of room abstract thinkers, but that's a shame. Given time and patience, the CS grad will pick up the practical experience that only time can really give (vocational or academic background). But the academic foundation? That's going to pay bigger dividends in the long run.
Well, the CompTIA certs (A+ Netwok+ etc.), although kinda entry level, tend to be broad theory, rather than product specific.
You mean "broad" as in Windows 9x AND Win NT?
The A+ that I took was completely based on Microsoft Window's products. I seem to recall in fact that an A+ used to count towards one of the segments on the MCSA path.
Perhaps there is some validity to what you say. I'm running FC2 and XP side by side w/o a snag. Grub lives in the MBR and the rest of the drive is partitioned as follows:
/dev/hda1 83 Linux <-- "/boot" /dev/hda2 7 HPFS/NTFS <-- "C:" /dev/hda3 83 Linux <-- "/" /dev/hda4 f W95 Ext'd (LBA) <-- extended /dev/hda5 82 Linux swap <-- "swap" /dev/hda6 b W95 FAT32 <-- "/mnt/fat32" or "D:"
From grub.conf:
title Fedora Core (2.6.5-1.358) root (hd0,0) kernel/vmlinuz-2.6.5-1.358 ro root=LABEL=/ rhgb quiet initrd/initrd-2.6.5-1.358.img title Windows XP rootnoverify (hd0,1) chainloader +1
I'm glad I read about this after I put it together. Had I know there was an issue, I might have screwed it up.
>I'm not aware of how much Fedora lets the user >write their grub.conf, but if they have a GUI tool, >it might just not be programmed for this.
RH/FC is just as transparent a distro as all the other ones. Yes, Fedora has some different tools on the front end, but Fedora users can still pull up a term, edit the appropriate data directive files (grub.conf, device.map), and run the grub shell or grub-install just like they would under any other distro.
Having inherited a first gen iMac running OS 8, I thought I'd give OS X a shot.
OS X installled fine. It was slow on that old iMac, but remarkably stable. Needing to run a couple legacy apps, I attempted to install the "Classic" layer OS/9. Turns out the BIOS on the machine would allow me to install OS X and 8, but not 9.
So at that point, I had to reinstall OS 8 to install the flash upgrade, so I could then reinstall OS X, and then finally OS 9. Pretty straightforward, right?
Unfortunately that BIOS turned out to have another limitation. After partitioning my 40 gig drive into equal portions and installing OS X on the first, I soon learned that OS 9 refused to install beyond the 8 GB mark on the drive. A repartition, and two installs later, I had achieved a dual boot OS X/ OS 9 on a first-gen iMac.
Of course, I'm not suggesting that this is a typical scenario for a Mac install, but it was most certainly more than a couple clicks in my case.
Who exactly is Ralph Nader scamming and how is he benefitting? Are you talking about student PIRG fees? You mean the fees that the student body overwhelmingly opts to adopt by popular vote? You mean the fees which are entirely optional? Do you mean the student PIRGS whose parent company was founded by Ralph Nader 30 years ago? The Ralph Nader who has selflessly dedicated his life to consumer and environmental advocacy? You mean the Ralph Nader who lives in a studio apartment and owns neither a car nor a television? He's your evil shitbag scam artist?
I know.../. is like the death star... we focus this intense beam on of traffic on a single web host and BLAM!
BEN: I felt a great disturbance in the Web...as if millions of httpd daemons suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear
something terrible has happened.
So, anyone with $700 to blow might could think up some random tech just to prevent Microsoft from using it, if they wanted too.
I don't think it's quite that easy. The problem with patents isn't so much about acquiring them (which is still somewhat difficult), but enforcing them. Eolas and the UC probably have the resources to pursue MSFT in the courts, but as for "anyone with $700".... well, I'm not so sure.
Your anecdote is well received, but you must grant us that you receive more paid leave than the average American. Consider the findings a 2002 Center for Economic Policy Research study:
Minimum MANDATED (by law) annual paid vacation days:
Austria 30
Denmark 30
Finland 30
France 30
Spain 30
Luxembourg 25
Sweden 25
Germany 24
Belgium 4 (weeks)
Greece 4 (weeks)
Ireland 4 (weeks)
Netherlands 4 (weeks)
United Kingdom 4 (weeks)
Portugal 22
European Union 4 (weeks)
Canada 2 (weeks)
United States 0
Of course, the above are just the minimum legal requirements, in practice, the contrast is even more stark:
AVERAGE Annual Paid Vacation Days and Holidays
(vacation/total vacation+holiday)
Italy 37/45
Finland 37.5/44.5
Netherlands 31/38.1
Germany 30/38
Luxembourg 28/38
Austria 26.5/36
Portugal 22/36
Spain 22/36
Denmark 27/34
France 25/34
Sweden 25/34
United Kingdom 25/34
Switzerland 24.3/33
Belgium 20/31
Greece 22/31
Japan 18/31
Ireland 21/30
Norway 21/28
United States 12/23
Re:Looks like a good choice for a router
on
More Cheap Linux PCs
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Yeah... but the likes of Netgear, Linksys, SMC, and D-link all already provide SOHO solutions to those ends (WiFi NAT Switch), and sell for considerably less (especially when considering TCO -- ie. electricity and noise).
Don't get me wrong... I realize a full fledged *nix NAT box would be considerably more flexible, not to mention more fun.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Uh, you're basically shooting down his entire argument because of one letter? It's not like he called it X-hippos, which would've made it totally difficult to understand what he was saying. Windows 2003, Windows 2003 Server System, Windows 2003 Server... what's the difference?
No, I'm not shooting down his entire argument, or any part of his argument (at least, that's not my intention). But to answer you question, the difference is, that's its name. That's what it's called. It reminded me of a recurring rant echoed throughout the community from time to time. I will add however, that it's really suprising to see that sort of a misspeak from an OS guru like Mark Russinovich.
That is not correct. NT (and hence XP) was designed with the flexibility to support multiple OS Environments. One such option is the POSIX environment which is not a GUI.
It supports a POSIX environment? Great. So how do I do it?
Well, I hadn't really ever used any of them Winders before about 8 years ago. I grew up with the likes of MSDOS, AppleDOS, and later Amiga Workbench. Unix software, and the hardware it ran on, was pretty derned expensive. And, of course, that all changed when this GNU/Linux fella came along....
Well, I think putting "Windows" and "Linux" in the same headline on /. is a little like sounding the Horn of Gondor...
First off, what the hell is "X-windows"? I know of the X Window System, X11, X, X.org, XFree86 -- but I know nothing of this "X-windows."
Now, what the author of the article fails to point out, is that the more significant difference between the operating systems, is that one requires the use of GUI display, while the other finds it entirely optional.
And I don't think anyone can argue that there's [just] cause here
You want to bet? This is America, where people dry their cat in the microwave and then sue manufacturer for not telling them it would kill it!!
Sure, one can file any number of frivolous suits; that alone doesn't establish just cause (i.e. it will get thrown out on demurrer).
So who would you rather employ, someone who knows how to use redhat-config-* (or system-config-* as they are now known), or someone who knows how to edit each of the corresponding config files
As a matter of fact, RHCE track GLS instructors teach vi, scripting, and configuration by editing directive files directly. Having actually taken the RHCE, I can attest to the fact that not only was there no time to install the GUI tools (it's optional), one may be hard pressed to find the time to even use them (the test requires you to deliver A LOT in very LITTLE time).
No, believe it or not, the redhat-config-* tools are geared more for beginer users and Windows transpants. True Red Hat hackers are adept with a shell as the next Deb, Slack, or BSD user.
have had entirely too many people with college degrees that simply can not function in the computer industry. Computer science majors that have no idea how any portion of a computer works, but they can use the VB IDE.
That sounds rather remarkable. You might want to require an official transcript before merely hiring someone on his or her word on that. Any computer science student who has "no idea" was probably a very poor student, or perhaps is pulling your leg. Or perhaps, I'm not sure to which aspect of the "computer industry" you are referring? Are we talking about technicians? Programmers? Analysts? Sales persons?
Yeah, I can see how many CS graduates would have little to no technical knowledge of vendor application and hardware solutions. I don't think that's the point of a college education. College isn't about learning vocational skills, it's about learning how to think on your own. It's about developing skills in analytical and logical reasoning. Rather than learning individual programming languages through pedagogic repition and application, one can learn the underlying theory behind things like data abstraction and logic design. From there, picking up new languages are a breeze. Vendor solutions will change from job to job, but the fundamental understanding isn't likely to change over a career.
Maybe not everyone is suited for that sort of path, and maybe the industry no longer has an overabundance of room abstract thinkers, but that's a shame. Given time and patience, the CS grad will pick up the practical experience that only time can really give (vocational or academic background). But the academic foundation? That's going to pay bigger dividends in the long run.
Well, the CompTIA certs (A+ Netwok+ etc.), although kinda entry level, tend to be broad theory, rather than product specific.
You mean "broad" as in Windows 9x AND Win NT?
The A+ that I took was completely based on Microsoft Window's products. I seem to recall in fact that an A+ used to count towards one of the segments on the MCSA path.
Yeah, 135 Mbps would prove great for full motion streaming video, but how good will all that porn look on a 1" LCD?
Patent-infringement lawsuit? If we're lucky.
I wouldn't be suprised to see it spark a national security investigation over the gathering threat these FS/OSS terrorists pose to our way of life!
I would love for either project to succeed, I just want to know their merits
You don't see the merit in an open source version of Windows?
From grub.conf:
I'm glad I read about this after I put it together. Had I know there was an issue, I might have screwed it up.
>I'm not aware of how much Fedora lets the user >write their grub.conf, but if they have a GUI tool, >it might just not be programmed for this.
RH/FC is just as transparent a distro as all the other ones. Yes, Fedora has some different tools on the front end, but Fedora users can still pull up a term, edit the appropriate data directive files (grub.conf, device.map), and run the grub shell or grub-install just like they would under any other distro.
>>3 clicks. Really !
Really? Not IIRC.
Having inherited a first gen iMac running OS 8, I thought I'd give OS X a shot.
OS X installled fine. It was slow on that old iMac, but remarkably stable. Needing to run a couple legacy apps, I attempted to install the "Classic" layer OS/9. Turns out the BIOS on the machine would allow me to install OS X and 8, but not 9.
So at that point, I had to reinstall OS 8 to install the flash upgrade, so I could then reinstall OS X, and then finally OS 9. Pretty straightforward, right?
Unfortunately that BIOS turned out to have another limitation. After partitioning my 40 gig drive into equal portions and installing OS X on the first, I soon learned that OS 9 refused to install beyond the 8 GB mark on the drive. A repartition, and two installs later, I had achieved a dual boot OS X/ OS 9 on a first-gen iMac.
Of course, I'm not suggesting that this is a typical scenario for a Mac install, but it was most certainly more than a couple clicks in my case.
Who exactly is Ralph Nader scamming and how is he benefitting? Are you talking about student PIRG fees? You mean the fees that the student body overwhelmingly opts to adopt by popular vote? You mean the fees which are entirely optional? Do you mean the student PIRGS whose parent company was founded by Ralph Nader 30 years ago? The Ralph Nader who has selflessly dedicated his life to consumer and environmental advocacy? You mean the Ralph Nader who lives in a studio apartment and owns neither a car nor a television? He's your evil shitbag scam artist?
I know... /. is like the death star... we focus this intense beam on of traffic on a single web host and BLAM!
BEN: I felt a great disturbance in the Web...as if millions of httpd daemons suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.
So, anyone with $700 to blow might could think up some random tech just to prevent Microsoft from using it, if they wanted too.
I don't think it's quite that easy. The problem with patents isn't so much about acquiring them (which is still somewhat difficult), but enforcing them. Eolas and the UC probably have the resources to pursue MSFT in the courts, but as for "anyone with $700".... well, I'm not so sure.
Your anecdote is well received, but you must grant us that you receive more paid leave than the average American. Consider the findings a 2002 Center for Economic Policy Research study:
CEPR Study
Minimum MANDATED (by law) annual paid vacation days:
Austria 30
Denmark 30
Finland 30
France 30
Spain 30
Luxembourg 25
Sweden 25
Germany 24
Belgium 4 (weeks)
Greece 4 (weeks)
Ireland 4 (weeks)
Netherlands 4 (weeks)
United Kingdom 4 (weeks)
Portugal 22
European Union 4 (weeks)
Canada 2 (weeks)
United States 0
Of course, the above are just the minimum legal requirements, in practice, the contrast is even more stark:
AVERAGE Annual Paid Vacation Days and Holidays
(vacation/total vacation+holiday)
Italy 37/45
Finland 37.5/44.5
Netherlands 31/38.1
Germany 30/38
Luxembourg 28/38
Austria 26.5/36
Portugal 22/36
Spain 22/36
Denmark 27/34
France 25/34
Sweden 25/34
United Kingdom 25/34
Switzerland 24.3/33
Belgium 20/31
Greece 22/31
Japan 18/31
Ireland 21/30
Norway 21/28
United States 12/23
Yeah... but the likes of Netgear, Linksys, SMC, and D-link all already provide SOHO solutions to those ends (WiFi NAT Switch), and sell for considerably less (especially when considering TCO -- ie. electricity and noise).
:)
Don't get me wrong... I realize a full fledged *nix NAT box would be considerably more flexible, not to mention more fun.
I would be very interested in following up on this statistic you provide, however, raw searches are not turning up much for the "garnet group".