Compaq stuff is just terrible. Take their old S910 monitors for example. They have all nice stamps and stickers showing they meet Australian standards, yet they don't meet Australian standards at all. (come to think of it, perhaps it was just the plastic that met those standards).
I'd expect such explosions / fires are the result of inadequate componentry / design / thought. It is nice to see the makers being taken to court however:)
You've described my experience with Mandriva exactly. Numerous bug reports just ignored. Being verbally belittled when trying to shed light on issues (even though I was a contributor).
It is far from a polished distro, and is leagues behind any other major distro due to the aforementioned issues IMO.
For everyone slagging off RPM, where is biarch support in other package management schemes? That is a pretty important feature to a number of people I know. APT users for example seem to be happy with ridiculous chroot'd environments.
Doing RC4_set_key for 5 seconds
2711712 RC4_set_key's in 4.39 seconds
Doing RC4 on 1024 byte blocks for 5 seconds
1451056 RC4's of 1024 byte blocks in 4.39 second
RC4 set_key per sec = 617702.05 ( 1.619uS)
RC4 bytes per sec = 338469554.44 ( 0.024uS)
That looks mighty sweet for a Athlon64 3000+. I would have expected it to be far less than the Opteron though, wierd!
I've testes all the mozilla-die ones on my mozilla and it didn't have any issues, no crashing. The other ones (Opera, Links, lynx) all crashed though:(
Mozilla 1.7.2, Copyright (c) 2003-2004 mozilla.org, build 2004080400
Linux natalie 2.6.8.1-12.2mdk #1 Sun Oct 10 14:35:41 WST 2004 x86_64 AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3000+ unknown GNU/Linux
I am worried that Microsoft may actually yet keep Linux from spreading everywhere. I think that Linux's growth relies on credibility and the fundamentals of its proven design. My biggest fear for Linux is that Microsoft will understand why Linux is a threat to them, but not the ideals behind it. This article suggests that Taylor has done this. With this understanding Microsoft, could develop tactics to combat Linux without improving its products or answering for its software's severe flaws.
I use Linux because Microsoft have done some very bad things to the IT industry and the people that are involved in it, thats not to say they havn't done anything good. Microsoft only exists for the $, not to improve the IT industry.
I would really like Microsoft to know that there are plenty of people like me that will always be here to demonstrate why Linux is the better choice for IT and almost everyone in it, and to try to ensure that Microsoft cannot harm the IT industry again.
I work in an office with maybe 80 or 90 PCs. They are all IBM Pentium 4s and all run 2K or XP, about a 50/50 split. Every single one of those machines is so much slower and less reliable than my older 1Ghz P3 machine running Linux. That is a fact that cannot be disproven.
If I were the admin of such a network and I was asked to make the machines faster and more reliable, I would say that is impossible using Microsoft software. Now while you PC may be more stable than the above 90 PCs, you should be aware that you PC is a minority and doesn't do anything to stand up for the reliability of Microsoft software.
The glass is either full or empty.
Like most I have used windows for years because it was easy, colorful and worked for the most part. About 2 years ago I went away from Windows, using Linux in its variety of flavors. I can without doubt say that these last 2 years have been the most stable my system has known (apart from when its off).
Microsoft lost their ability to have any impact on my machine & its tasks. For the most part I have worked in IT, being surrounded by computers, or rather operating systems that don't work properly for various reasons. It is true that just about anything is possible in software, but this is no excuse for the millions of windows computers that could fall over any time due to flaws in Micrsoft's operating systems or nasty people dedicated to writing viruses/worms that have the same effect.
To use the car analogy, it would seem I would get a more reliable car from Joe down on the corner than the large well known new car yard in the next city.
Microsoft has no excuse. They should be held accountable. For example, I have spoken to roughly a dozen people in the last two weeks that have gone and bought themselves a new computer preinstalled with windows XP. All of these people gave me a call because after connecting to the internet for just a few minutes, their PC was either turning off or the connection was unusable.
This is ludicrous. What are these people meant to do with their 'off-the-shelf' copy of windows? Computer retailers are apparently not supposed to patch windows for *known* problems. Has Microsoft ever thought of these people, or are they so busy trying to keep their existing clientele.
I would like for just more people to say that its not acceptable for wheels to occasionally fall off Microsoft cars regardless of blame, and to go speak to old Joe down on the corner.
Slashdot Mirror
Compaq stuff is just terrible. Take their old S910 monitors for example. They have all nice stamps and stickers showing they meet Australian standards, yet they don't meet Australian standards at all. (come to think of it, perhaps it was just the plastic that met those standards). I'd expect such explosions / fires are the result of inadequate componentry / design / thought. It is nice to see the makers being taken to court however :)
You've described my experience with Mandriva exactly. Numerous bug reports just ignored. Being verbally belittled when trying to shed light on issues (even though I was a contributor).
It is far from a polished distro, and is leagues behind any other major distro due to the aforementioned issues IMO.
For everyone slagging off RPM, where is biarch support in other package management schemes? That is a pretty important feature to a number of people I know. APT users for example seem to be happy with ridiculous chroot'd environments.
Doing RC4_set_key for 5 seconds 2711712 RC4_set_key's in 4.39 seconds Doing RC4 on 1024 byte blocks for 5 seconds 1451056 RC4's of 1024 byte blocks in 4.39 second RC4 set_key per sec = 617702.05 ( 1.619uS) RC4 bytes per sec = 338469554.44 ( 0.024uS) That looks mighty sweet for a Athlon64 3000+. I would have expected it to be far less than the Opteron though, wierd!
I've testes all the mozilla-die ones on my mozilla and it didn't have any issues, no crashing. The other ones (Opera, Links, lynx) all crashed though :(
Mozilla 1.7.2, Copyright (c) 2003-2004 mozilla.org, build 2004080400
Linux natalie 2.6.8.1-12.2mdk #1 Sun Oct 10 14:35:41 WST 2004 x86_64 AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3000+ unknown GNU/Linux
I am worried that Microsoft may actually yet keep Linux from spreading everywhere. I think that Linux's growth relies on credibility and the fundamentals of its proven design. My biggest fear for Linux is that Microsoft will understand why Linux is a threat to them, but not the ideals behind it. This article suggests that Taylor has done this. With this understanding Microsoft, could develop tactics to combat Linux without improving its products or answering for its software's severe flaws.
I use Linux because Microsoft have done some very bad things to the IT industry and the people that are involved in it, thats not to say they havn't done anything good. Microsoft only exists for the $, not to improve the IT industry.
I would really like Microsoft to know that there are plenty of people like me that will always be here to demonstrate why Linux is the better choice for IT and almost everyone in it, and to try to ensure that Microsoft cannot harm the IT industry again.
I work in an office with maybe 80 or 90 PCs. They are all IBM Pentium 4s and all run 2K or XP, about a 50/50 split. Every single one of those machines is so much slower and less reliable than my older 1Ghz P3 machine running Linux. That is a fact that cannot be disproven. If I were the admin of such a network and I was asked to make the machines faster and more reliable, I would say that is impossible using Microsoft software. Now while you PC may be more stable than the above 90 PCs, you should be aware that you PC is a minority and doesn't do anything to stand up for the reliability of Microsoft software. The glass is either full or empty.
Like most I have used windows for years because it was easy, colorful and worked for the most part. About 2 years ago I went away from Windows, using Linux in its variety of flavors. I can without doubt say that these last 2 years have been the most stable my system has known (apart from when its off).
Microsoft lost their ability to have any impact on my machine & its tasks. For the most part I have worked in IT, being surrounded by computers, or rather operating systems that don't work properly for various reasons. It is true that just about anything is possible in software, but this is no excuse for the millions of windows computers that could fall over any time due to flaws in Micrsoft's operating systems or nasty people dedicated to writing viruses/worms that have the same effect.
To use the car analogy, it would seem I would get a more reliable car from Joe down on the corner than the large well known new car yard in the next city. Microsoft has no excuse. They should be held accountable. For example, I have spoken to roughly a dozen people in the last two weeks that have gone and bought themselves a new computer preinstalled with windows XP. All of these people gave me a call because after connecting to the internet for just a few minutes, their PC was either turning off or the connection was unusable.
This is ludicrous. What are these people meant to do with their 'off-the-shelf' copy of windows? Computer retailers are apparently not supposed to patch windows for *known* problems. Has Microsoft ever thought of these people, or are they so busy trying to keep their existing clientele.
I would like for just more people to say that its not acceptable for wheels to occasionally fall off Microsoft cars regardless of blame, and to go speak to old Joe down on the corner.