My school gets Computer Currents www.computercurrents.com magazine for free. It's a pretty down to earth magazine with a few "How to" down to earth questions, advertisement comes from local companies selling build to order pcs. So it's pretty nice if you're looking for some custom systems. My favorite part about the mag..well it's free;) gives us something to read during lunch.
90%? I'd guess closer to 95%;) Speaking of blue screens...month two of running Win2k no blue screens yet. Woops! I must be doing something wrong since I heard NT crashes every 15 minutes. Where can I have this problem fixed?
Uhuh, what if they had a Linux version but not a Irix? BeOS? Will you still lead the call to arms against them? Windows 9x is the #1 computer gaming platform right now, they're thinking in terms of $.
I'm boggled by how this can be displaced on Microsoft. If my Linux system from VA came with a trojan because joe bob working at VA messed up, I certainly wouldn't be pointing fingers at Linus or Alan Cox. "Gee you guys really suck! Why can't you make the linux kernel automaticly erradicate trojans like fairy dust?" The mistake was the fault of the OEM. Yes it's popular to blame oh gee whiz every little thing that goes wrong in the universe on Microsoft, but face it, the product they gave to the OEM did not have a virus. It is on the production line (or whenever) that it was introduced. As for AV software/advocacy, that's not the job of Microsoft to adress. That's a whole seperate industry.
Dear god that is just...what a fantastic statement, if their Linux installs were infected by a Trojan would you scream "Hur hur hur! Linux's security model is so weak to allow such a breach! Hur hur hur!"
Agreed, this is quite idiotic. I'm also running Windows 2000 Server and I hardly see a "Install IIS or DIE" option anywhere. Now that aside, I am running IIS instead of apache, why? I've never used it before. No magical hatred of microsoft will force me never to try their products. A lot of Linux advokiddies knock products that haven't even tried. My opinion so far? IIS 5 is pretty darn nice.
You do have a point, 4 nics is a bit overkill although several posters on this board have pointed out that their company uses systems with that many network cards. However I think a standard setup is 2 nics for routing off traffic. This does point out something though, joe bob may not need a 256 cpu box, but that doesn't mean there's no demand for it.
Actually with windows 2000 games that aren't hard coded not to work with NT will work with 2000. The major problemIf you're interested in a more "sensable" opinion, head over to forum.arstechnica.com and look at the NT forum, there's at least 30+ beta testers hanging around there ready to relay their experiences
It hardly matters, any victory for NT will be automaticly drowned in linux advokiddiesm. In fact there's hardly a point in doing these anymore. Unless Linux wins a benchmark test the end result will always be the same.
1. "It was rigged! Evil microsoft strikes again!" 2. "Oh well nobody would use that hardware!" 3. "HA! I bet NT can't stay up for more then 15 minutes!"
Rotate excuses as needed, insert bold statement from Eric Raymond that NT is Evil, so is BeOS, and someday fat penguins will march over the corpses of the capitalist closed source software using neanderthalls.
Um have you _tried_ windows 2000? Because in the month+ time that I've been running it I haven't had a single crash. Code base is a mess full of kludges? I take it you're a developer for Microsoft and have seen the code, correct? *nods* Hmm I think I'll end this with your response "Go troll somewhere else, you must have stock in Redhat, right?"
It's exactly that, IE as the file manager merges web/ftp site and file browsing together seamlessly. It is _completely_ diffrent from the old explorer.
Why in the world is 95 even mentioned in this article? Dear god;) I think if you're going to compare Gnome to a Windows GUI then do it to the Win 98 or 2000. Claiming that a group of programmers made a gui that supposedly looks better then something microsoft came up with 4-5 years ago isn't that great a PR statement;)
Actually I used Netscape as the default web browser for Windows till..well last night actually. I had no problems setting it as the "default web browser" whenever a link was launched, it would be launched in Netscape, not IE. The "Jolting experience" Is the diffrence users would feel when switching from IE file browsing to Netscape as opposed to Ie file browsing to IE web browsing. One feels like you're launching another application, another feels seemless. Now if Netscape ran horribly on Windows and without a glitch of Linux/Unix then yes, this would point to something wrong with the windows operating system interfacing with Netscape, but I think it's pretty apparent that netscape exhibits the same instability and bug set on all platforms. In short..Netscape is the one to blame for it's shortcomings, not IE. Personally I haven't tried the Solaris port of IE, is it similar to the Windows version?
Even better are the ones that claim "Microsoft inserted code into their Windows operating system to make Netscape suck" Of course Microsoft must've also hacked the macos, solaris, irix, linux, and whatnot kernels to include the "make Netscape suck" option. Is there no end to the evil that Microsoft brings into being?
Well quite honestly.. I'd have to say Netscape killed Netscape. Lack of vision, lack of conforming to standards, lack of interest in forming OEM relationships. Netscape literally snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, they _were_ the monopoly in the browser market..and they let Microsoft chew them up and spit them back out. Netscape was dead before AOL bought them. Now of course some people are angry at microsoft for making IE free...well let me ask you something, Gimp is free, Gimp is similar to Photoshop, a commercial product that costs quite a bundle. Gimp is packaged with most Linux distributions (if not all?) Is Gimp evil? Netscape should've created other sources of revenue. Also notice that we now have two competing browsers that are _free_ as opposed to having one browser that was not. The consumer benefitted from competition. If you believe netscape should've remained the monopoly..well don't point fingers at Microsoft then. Now the issue here is "What comes next?" AOL does have gigantic resources to use in competition with MS, not only are they a wealthy company, but they also command the largest Internet user base. After their contract expires in 2001 (?) They should be able to dump their new AOL-Netscape browser onto every one of their customers which could shift the playing field overnight.
It's called Linux Advokiddiesm. Once they hate Microsoft heck..Bill Gates can give away his entire fortune to feed starving families, MS can open source, whatever, they'll still find a fault in it. This is just typical slashdot linkiddie thinking, of course if you enjoy using Windows NT (I'm beta testing 2000 here and I must say it's been fantastic so far) you of course get bashed, smirked at, and demoted to "troll" status. Welcome to Linuxdot, news for linux users, nobody else matters;) The most amusing part in all of this is that most of these kiddies still use the horrible evil evil Windows that they claim to hate so much. Oh the irony;)
Slashdot Mirror
Out of curiousity, what is so unsecure about IIS?
My school gets Computer Currents www.computercurrents.com magazine for free. It's a pretty down to earth magazine with a few "How to" down to earth questions, advertisement comes from local companies selling build to order pcs. So it's pretty nice if you're looking for some custom systems. My favorite part about the mag..well it's free ;) gives us something to read during lunch.
90%? I'd guess closer to 95% ;) Speaking of blue screens...month two of running Win2k no blue screens yet. Woops! I must be doing something wrong since I heard NT crashes every 15 minutes. Where can I have this problem fixed?
I'm afraid you have me wrong, I'm a windozzz$$$e user, you missed a few "z" and "$"
Uhuh, what if they had a Linux version but not a Irix? BeOS? Will you still lead the call to arms against them? Windows 9x is the #1 computer gaming platform right now, they're thinking in terms of $.
Only one Microsoft joke so far? :) ouch, slashdot is slipping
I'm boggled by how this can be displaced on Microsoft. If my Linux system from VA came with a trojan because joe bob working at VA messed up, I certainly wouldn't be pointing fingers at Linus or Alan Cox. "Gee you guys really suck! Why can't you make the linux kernel automaticly erradicate trojans like fairy dust?" The mistake was the fault of the OEM. Yes it's popular to blame oh gee whiz every little thing that goes wrong in the universe on Microsoft, but face it, the product they gave to the OEM did not have a virus. It is on the production line (or whenever) that it was introduced. As for AV software/advocacy, that's not the job of Microsoft to adress. That's a whole seperate industry.
I'm sorry but what exactly do you mean but "breach the security" ? You mean login as administrator? I think a lot of unix software requries the same?
So Windows needs to bundle anti virus software with the operating system now in order to meet your security model?
Dear god that is just...what a fantastic statement, if their Linux installs were infected by a Trojan would you scream "Hur hur hur! Linux's security model is so weak to allow such a breach! Hur hur hur!"
Itanium is available to select few developing companies under NDA, SGI is one of them
Agreed, this is quite idiotic. I'm also running Windows 2000 Server and I hardly see a "Install IIS or DIE" option anywhere. Now that aside, I am running IIS instead of apache, why? I've never used it before. No magical hatred of microsoft will force me never to try their products. A lot of Linux advokiddies knock products that haven't even tried. My opinion so far? IIS 5 is pretty darn nice.
Careful :) you'll get moderated down for even hinting at support for microsoft
That is the stupidest thing I've heard as Silicon Valley is primarily Unix. SGI, Sun ring a bell?
You do have a point, 4 nics is a bit overkill although several posters on this board have pointed out that their company uses systems with that many network cards. However I think a standard setup is 2 nics for routing off traffic. This does point out something though, joe bob may not need a 256 cpu box, but that doesn't mean there's no demand for it.
Actually with windows 2000 games that aren't hard coded not to work with NT will work with 2000. The major problemIf you're interested in a more "sensable" opinion, head over to forum.arstechnica.com and look at the NT forum, there's at least 30+ beta testers hanging around there ready to relay their experiences
What does this mean for Cygwin? Will Redhat contribute to porting applications for windows? Or will that particular product be canned or put on hold?
It hardly matters, any victory for NT will be automaticly drowned in linux advokiddiesm. In fact there's hardly a point in doing these anymore. Unless Linux wins a benchmark test the end result will always be the same.
1. "It was rigged! Evil microsoft strikes again!"
2. "Oh well nobody would use that hardware!"
3. "HA! I bet NT can't stay up for more then 15 minutes!"
Rotate excuses as needed, insert bold statement from Eric Raymond that NT is Evil, so is BeOS, and someday fat penguins will march over the corpses of the capitalist closed source software using neanderthalls.
Um have you _tried_ windows 2000? Because in the month+ time that I've been running it I haven't had a single crash. Code base is a mess full of kludges? I take it you're a developer for Microsoft and have seen the code, correct? *nods* Hmm I think I'll end this with your response "Go troll somewhere else, you must have stock in Redhat, right?"
It's exactly that, IE as the file manager merges web/ftp site and file browsing together seamlessly. It is _completely_ diffrent from the old explorer.
Why in the world is 95 even mentioned in this article? Dear god ;) I think if you're going to compare Gnome to a Windows GUI then do it to the Win 98 or 2000. Claiming that a group of programmers made a gui that supposedly looks better then something microsoft came up with 4-5 years ago isn't that great a PR statement ;)
Actually I used Netscape as the default web browser for Windows till..well last night actually. I had no problems setting it as the "default web browser" whenever a link was launched, it would be launched in Netscape, not IE. The "Jolting experience" Is the diffrence users would feel when switching from IE file browsing to Netscape as opposed to Ie file browsing to IE web browsing. One feels like you're launching another application, another feels seemless. Now if Netscape ran horribly on Windows and without a glitch of Linux/Unix then yes, this would point to something wrong with the windows operating system interfacing with Netscape, but I think it's pretty apparent that netscape exhibits the same instability and bug set on all platforms. In short..Netscape is the one to blame for it's shortcomings, not IE. Personally I haven't tried the Solaris port of IE, is it similar to the Windows version?
Even better are the ones that claim "Microsoft inserted code into their Windows operating system to make Netscape suck" Of course Microsoft must've also hacked the macos, solaris, irix, linux, and whatnot kernels to include the "make Netscape suck" option. Is there no end to the evil that Microsoft brings into being?
Well quite honestly.. I'd have to say Netscape killed Netscape. Lack of vision, lack of conforming to standards, lack of interest in forming OEM relationships. Netscape literally snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, they _were_ the monopoly in the browser market..and they let Microsoft chew them up and spit them back out. Netscape was dead before AOL bought them. Now of course some people are angry at microsoft for making IE free...well let me ask you something, Gimp is free, Gimp is similar to Photoshop, a commercial product that costs quite a bundle. Gimp is packaged with most Linux distributions (if not all?) Is Gimp evil? Netscape should've created other sources of revenue. Also notice that we now have two competing browsers that are _free_ as opposed to having one browser that was not. The consumer benefitted from competition. If you believe netscape should've remained the monopoly..well don't point fingers at Microsoft then. Now the issue here is "What comes next?" AOL does have gigantic resources to use in competition with MS, not only are they a wealthy company, but they also command the largest Internet user base. After their contract expires in 2001 (?) They should be able to dump their new AOL-Netscape browser onto every one of their customers which could shift the playing field overnight.
It's called Linux Advokiddiesm. Once they hate Microsoft heck..Bill Gates can give away his entire fortune to feed starving families, MS can open source, whatever, they'll still find a fault in it. This is just typical slashdot linkiddie thinking, of course if you enjoy using Windows NT (I'm beta testing 2000 here and I must say it's been fantastic so far) you of course get bashed, smirked at, and demoted to "troll" status. Welcome to Linuxdot, news for linux users, nobody else matters ;) The most amusing part in all of this is that most of these kiddies still use the horrible evil evil Windows that they claim to hate so much. Oh the irony ;)