Not entirely. "What's Linux?" implies that that operator has led a more sheltered computer-related life than the typical Slashdotter (i.e. matches the majority of the Windows user base) and therefore has never heard of Linux. The other choice implies that the operator has at least heard of Linux but has decided not to tinker with it for one reason or another.
So, no, they're really not redundant at all when some logical thought is applied.
I know you are trolling, but I feel compelled to answer this. Mandrake is easier to use for him, both for the installation and everyday use. With Mandrake (and RH, SuSE, and other similar distros), X configuration is done with the GUI during install. Just about everything he needed was included with Mandrake in the default installation. Less shell work is necessary with Mandrake--in fact, he's not yet found the need to use an xterm. And even if FreeBSD is more "stable," stability isn't everything. Do you think Windows got where it is by being rock-solid?
Besides, does FreeBSD provide support for ham radio like Linux does? I'm sure the guy wants to eventually integrate everything into one simple solution.
For him, Mandrake just worked. FreeBSD needed a fair amount more configuration for his preferences in a workspace, but Mandrake could meet them with the installation options. He's more or less a normal user--e-mail, light browsing, Solitaire and Mahjong, etc. Nothing overly deep. Linux distros still have a little way to go to be viable for the masses (like him), but FreeBSD is leaps and bounds behind in being ready for the masses. Just my $0.02.
...and it ties into a personal experience. A friend of my family's is a ham radio operator. He is experimenting with Linux and FreeBSD. So far it seems that he prefers Mandrake over FreeBSD. So maybe this type of thing could broaden the acceptance of UNIX/Linux substantially, which is always a good thing.
I want to see a free program come out that uses bzip2 and gzip (choice between best and normal compression) as well as having volume spanning and the ability to read zip files. Then maybe I could get my brother-in-law off a stupidass program called ZipIt that was made by a company called Quarterdeck (came on Norton SystemWorks 2000 CD).
Yes, Ghost *does* offer this functionality, but it often wastes as much as 100 MB per CD. That and it requires a reboot *every* time you run a backup with it. Windows' built-in backup program on 2k/XP coupled with WinRAR archive splitting as I discussed here is a better option in this case, as it never requires a reboot.
Are you using Win2K or WinXP? The backup program included in those versions of the OS, while somewhat clunky, is fairly full featured. You can do incremental backups and stuff like that, which should cut down on the amount of stuff you're burning every day.
The file that is generated by Windows Backup apparently isn't compressed, so you can zip it up and save a good bit of space. If that still won't fit on a CD, I'm not entirely sure what to do. Will something like WinZip span CDs the way you used to be able to span floppies with PKZip? I've honestly never had to deal with that particular problem before...
Yes, and the Win2k/XP backup program (winkey+r, type ntbackup, hit enter--quickest access) can be scheduled to run at given times as well. Just specify when using the backup wizard that you want to run it later and specify the schedule.
For splitting the archives, WinRAR works extremely well. You can compare compression with RAR and ZIP yourself if you want, but I usually use RAR with maximum compression as I find this option usually gives me rather good compression, second only to bzip2 compression. There is a specific option for WinRAR to split directly to 700MB CD size, which you can then burn with CD Creator. The "700MB" size leaves a little under a meg free space on the CD (700MB CD-Rs are really 703MB and some change), so it works quite nicely. It can also split to 650MB CD size, or to a custom size (ideal for you DVD recorder users for the time being). But you do need the temporary disk space to do this.
Note also that Win2k/XP's Backup performs somewhat better (from my observations) if the output file is located on an NTFS partition rather than a FAT32 partition. No clue why, though. The output file MUST be on a separate partition if the entire partition will be backed up, or in a different directory if only selected directories will be backed up.
Or maybe people on dial-up ISPs are finally following the instructions most of the ISPs sent them Thursday and Friday about how to patch the issues. I know of at least 15 ISPs (without backtracking through the last four days' worth of e-mail to find more) who sent out an advisory to all their customers.
You could always take the safer route and just hope the mods see your comment for its true value, like I do. OTOH, four comments I intented to be Funny were modded Insightful, and while I'm not complaining (as Insightful keeps me eligible for the Karma Bonus while Funny doesn't), YMMV.
And BTW, I *do* read IANAL as "I ANAL" (largely due to a true anal-retentive boss).
That depends on the bus speed on that particular board and the CPU clock's bus multiplier. I have access to a 1GHz pentium 3 (a Dell, FWIW) machine that is actually 1005 MHz. This is because the clock generator on the board isn't perfect. The system bus is actually 134 MHz instead of being 133. You can't make such a generalization on processor speed because there is always a margin of error. Nothing is perfect.
I wouldn't be surprised to find a 10/100 NIC that can actually do 105 Mbit/sec (even if the potential can't really be used) because its clocking crystal produces a slightly faster pulse than would be expected.
Yes, you're exactly right. And the best part about the GPL is that the BSA can only scratch their asses and get glad, because it makes them irrelevant. Unless of course there are still Windows workstations in the mix, but that's another issue entirely...
Windows 2000 and XP (both Home and Professional) allow scheduling of the backup jobs. Use the Scheduled Tasks folder and leave the PC running. XP is stable enough that it can be left running constantly for a month or more without reboots, so this wouldn't hurt a thing. He'd just need a place other than a tape drive or CD/DVD recorder to store the backups till he could put them on such a medium.
The stock prices falling are probably the SCO execs selling their shares (a la "get the hell of Dodge"). At least, it wouldn't surprise me in the least.
Strange how everyone's luck is radically different. I still have a Compaq Presario 5152 that's going on an 85W (110W surge) power supply. This is an odd one--it's an AT style, but it has a third connector for 3.3v. That particular PSU has been going strong for almost 5 years now (although power line sruges gave me a couple scares with it). But I didn't include it in my earlier post because I've seen a good many LiteOn PSUs, and they've all been quite impressive.
For two years I ran this old 486 on a heavy-ass 250W LiteOn PSU (the PSU was two pounds short of the entire weight of the system) and it never experienced any downtime more than 5 minutes (caused by power service interruptions). That 486 was a third-hand unit and is now well over 9 years old, and has since been passed on to another person who is still getting plenty of reliable use from it (still going 24/7). I have no idea how much load is actually on that particular PSU, however, as I never cared to measure.
It seems to me that the AT days were when you could find a good PSU rather easily. I've had one AT PSU go on me, and all the others (I've lost count, but it's a good many) still work quite well.
Rumors were that Novell would allow both, but be less flexible with the licensing of their proprietary stuff for RH AS/SLES than with their complete Linux distro.
Dear God, NO! NT is NOT good under the loads a typical library catalog would get. I can verify this because my local public library used NT for three months. They got tired of having to force reboot the server every day because of bluescreens (STOP errors) or just plain locking up. It was simply way too much load for the NT box to handle, even with 4 CPUs. They've run HP-UX on a two-CPU machine ever since and the same server ran for over 4 years without a reboot before they upgraded to the latest and greatest HP-UX.
SuSE, however, DOES support IA-64, and they also support PowerPC. And since the Novell stuff will run on SuSE Linux Enterprise Server, I would think this means they'd have to recompile it for at least the IA-64 architecture because SLES is for IA-32, IA-64, and x86-64.
One thing I forgot to mention is that Linux has amazingly broad hardware support. Novell could take advantage of this and break into new markets all by simply recompiling their source code for the various different architectures Linux supports. And peripheral support is probably much better in Linux, which means that overall the Novell solution could be far more beneficial on a Linux base than on the old NetWare base.
This has already been predicted several months ago. This is probably a good thing for Novell, as they no longer have to focus on the ENTIRE OS, just their proprietary services, and therefore can make more advances such as further seamless integration with windows clients and the addition of seamless integration for UNIX/Linux clients. While never particularly a fan of the entire OS itself, I've always admired the capabilities of the Netware solution. This really looks like a good sign for the future.
I need to make a slight correction to this. You can encrypt files/directories with or without a CA, but if you have a CA, the encryption is considered more secure. You have to be careful, however, because the Administrator account can access any encrypted file anywhere on the disk. If it's standalone PCs the local Administrator account has those priveleges; if the PC is a member of a domain, the domain Administrator account (or whomever is assigned the Recovery Agent privelege) has those priveleges.
If you're thinking of using the Ecrypting File System (EFS) to hide criminal activity, however, forget it. Most data forensics teams have software that defeats this encryption rather quickly (less than 6 hours, as far as I know, maybe even faster).
Yes, I am training for the MCSE exams, but no, I am not a Microshaft sellout. I give Windows more than its fair share of bashing. I have one Windows PC at home, but four Linux PCs. Linux gets possibly more than its fair share of bashing too:)
You must not be using service packs for Windows 2000. SP3 and SP4 make Win2k look almost identical to XP with the classic theme turned on--the only difference is the Windows icon on the Start button. If you like all the icons, right-click the desktop and click properties, then look through there. All the "missing" icons can be turned back on. Control Panel can be made identical to Win2k. While you're at it, go to Start->Settings->Taskbar and Start Menu and set the start menu to classic mode. There you go. 99.9% the same as Win2k.
And if you've performed an actual upgrade of the OS, then all your settings are saved anyway; you just need to change the theme to Windows Classic.
I hate all the control panels--Windows, KDE, and GNOME. For Windows I find it much more comfortable to turn on expanding the control panel into the start menu, that way I can get each specific item whenever I want it. KDE's control center has always annoyed me because to change certain behaviors you have to search and search through all the options and you may not find it then. GNOME isn't much better. But I live with it because I either I can't or I don't know how to change the crap that exists. Instead, I use WindowMaker or Enlightenment and tolerate Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
So, no, they're really not redundant at all when some logical thought is applied.
Besides, does FreeBSD provide support for ham radio like Linux does? I'm sure the guy wants to eventually integrate everything into one simple solution.
For him, Mandrake just worked. FreeBSD needed a fair amount more configuration for his preferences in a workspace, but Mandrake could meet them with the installation options. He's more or less a normal user--e-mail, light browsing, Solitaire and Mahjong, etc. Nothing overly deep. Linux distros still have a little way to go to be viable for the masses (like him), but FreeBSD is leaps and bounds behind in being ready for the masses. Just my $0.02.
I'd be more willing to bet that the CBers are Windows users, though. (Yes, I know you were joking. I chose to ignore the humorous side.)
...and it ties into a personal experience. A friend of my family's is a ham radio operator. He is experimenting with Linux and FreeBSD. So far it seems that he prefers Mandrake over FreeBSD. So maybe this type of thing could broaden the acceptance of UNIX/Linux substantially, which is always a good thing.
How dare you?! You stole my idea!!
I want to see a free program come out that uses bzip2 and gzip (choice between best and normal compression) as well as having volume spanning and the ability to read zip files. Then maybe I could get my brother-in-law off a stupidass program called ZipIt that was made by a company called Quarterdeck (came on Norton SystemWorks 2000 CD).
Yes, Ghost *does* offer this functionality, but it often wastes as much as 100 MB per CD. That and it requires a reboot *every* time you run a backup with it. Windows' built-in backup program on 2k/XP coupled with WinRAR archive splitting as I discussed here is a better option in this case, as it never requires a reboot.
For splitting the archives, WinRAR works extremely well. You can compare compression with RAR and ZIP yourself if you want, but I usually use RAR with maximum compression as I find this option usually gives me rather good compression, second only to bzip2 compression. There is a specific option for WinRAR to split directly to 700MB CD size, which you can then burn with CD Creator. The "700MB" size leaves a little under a meg free space on the CD (700MB CD-Rs are really 703MB and some change), so it works quite nicely. It can also split to 650MB CD size, or to a custom size (ideal for you DVD recorder users for the time being). But you do need the temporary disk space to do this.
Note also that Win2k/XP's Backup performs somewhat better (from my observations) if the output file is located on an NTFS partition rather than a FAT32 partition. No clue why, though. The output file MUST be on a separate partition if the entire partition will be backed up, or in a different directory if only selected directories will be backed up.
Happy archiving!
Or maybe people on dial-up ISPs are finally following the instructions most of the ISPs sent them Thursday and Friday about how to patch the issues. I know of at least 15 ISPs (without backtracking through the last four days' worth of e-mail to find more) who sent out an advisory to all their customers.
And BTW, I *do* read IANAL as "I ANAL" (largely due to a true anal-retentive boss).
I wouldn't be surprised to find a 10/100 NIC that can actually do 105 Mbit/sec (even if the potential can't really be used) because its clocking crystal produces a slightly faster pulse than would be expected.
Yes, you're exactly right. And the best part about the GPL is that the BSA can only scratch their asses and get glad, because it makes them irrelevant. Unless of course there are still Windows workstations in the mix, but that's another issue entirely...
Windows 2000 and XP (both Home and Professional) allow scheduling of the backup jobs. Use the Scheduled Tasks folder and leave the PC running. XP is stable enough that it can be left running constantly for a month or more without reboots, so this wouldn't hurt a thing. He'd just need a place other than a tape drive or CD/DVD recorder to store the backups till he could put them on such a medium.
The stock prices falling are probably the SCO execs selling their shares (a la "get the hell of Dodge"). At least, it wouldn't surprise me in the least.
Beginner. Make that $699 per license as an introductory price and up it to $1399 later. You'll make a killing!
For two years I ran this old 486 on a heavy-ass 250W LiteOn PSU (the PSU was two pounds short of the entire weight of the system) and it never experienced any downtime more than 5 minutes (caused by power service interruptions). That 486 was a third-hand unit and is now well over 9 years old, and has since been passed on to another person who is still getting plenty of reliable use from it (still going 24/7). I have no idea how much load is actually on that particular PSU, however, as I never cared to measure.
It seems to me that the AT days were when you could find a good PSU rather easily. I've had one AT PSU go on me, and all the others (I've lost count, but it's a good many) still work quite well.
Rumors were that Novell would allow both, but be less flexible with the licensing of their proprietary stuff for RH AS/SLES than with their complete Linux distro.
Dear God, NO! NT is NOT good under the loads a typical library catalog would get. I can verify this because my local public library used NT for three months. They got tired of having to force reboot the server every day because of bluescreens (STOP errors) or just plain locking up. It was simply way too much load for the NT box to handle, even with 4 CPUs. They've run HP-UX on a two-CPU machine ever since and the same server ran for over 4 years without a reboot before they upgraded to the latest and greatest HP-UX.
SuSE, however, DOES support IA-64, and they also support PowerPC. And since the Novell stuff will run on SuSE Linux Enterprise Server, I would think this means they'd have to recompile it for at least the IA-64 architecture because SLES is for IA-32, IA-64, and x86-64.
One thing I forgot to mention is that Linux has amazingly broad hardware support. Novell could take advantage of this and break into new markets all by simply recompiling their source code for the various different architectures Linux supports. And peripheral support is probably much better in Linux, which means that overall the Novell solution could be far more beneficial on a Linux base than on the old NetWare base.
This has already been predicted several months ago. This is probably a good thing for Novell, as they no longer have to focus on the ENTIRE OS, just their proprietary services, and therefore can make more advances such as further seamless integration with windows clients and the addition of seamless integration for UNIX/Linux clients. While never particularly a fan of the entire OS itself, I've always admired the capabilities of the Netware solution. This really looks like a good sign for the future.
If you're thinking of using the Ecrypting File System (EFS) to hide criminal activity, however, forget it. Most data forensics teams have software that defeats this encryption rather quickly (less than 6 hours, as far as I know, maybe even faster).
Yes, I am training for the MCSE exams, but no, I am not a Microshaft sellout. I give Windows more than its fair share of bashing. I have one Windows PC at home, but four Linux PCs. Linux gets possibly more than its fair share of bashing too :)
So do XP and 2000. Use NTFS. For 2000 you need a CA on the network, for XP you don't.
And if you've performed an actual upgrade of the OS, then all your settings are saved anyway; you just need to change the theme to Windows Classic.
I hate all the control panels--Windows, KDE, and GNOME. For Windows I find it much more comfortable to turn on expanding the control panel into the start menu, that way I can get each specific item whenever I want it. KDE's control center has always annoyed me because to change certain behaviors you have to search and search through all the options and you may not find it then. GNOME isn't much better. But I live with it because I either I can't or I don't know how to change the crap that exists. Instead, I use WindowMaker or Enlightenment and tolerate Windows.