Linux follows a nice modular design? Coming from someone who uses an OS based on a monolithic kernel.
Windows has a much much more modular design that Linux (COM+ etc). The point wasn't you _couldn't_ seperate IE, the point is seperate IE would ruin windows.
Just like vi isn't part of the Unix OS, but without vi it would make many things useless (like the man pages)...same with Windows, removing IE (a highly componentized product) would render the help pages useless.
It's not a matter of technically not being able to remove it, it's a matter of removing it would make windows 2000 not windows 2000 anymore. It would be windows 2000 without .
PC technology is growing at an accelerated rate - that's why it's catching up with Sun etc.
Besides, ATM you can always upgrade to a 32way 64GB Windows 2000 Datacentre server. And if you really want to, wolfpack several servers together into a nice cluster.
Yeah, netscape roolz dude. Lets not forget how cool and super fast Java is on the client side...and Netscape 4.7 will become an OS real soon! Navigator is going to kick windows 2000 ass.
Re:2 Netscape processes here plenty of stability
on
Mozilla Status Update
·
· Score: 1
You work for Microsoft, don't you? Well, in my book, the browser isn't part of the OS!
A browser may not be part of an operating system in some sense, but it's part of the Windows OS. It's as much a part of Windows 2000, as Windows Explorer was part of Windows 95. In Microsoft's mind, it's as essential as bash/tsh etc would be to redhat. So while it's not part of the kernel (what you would probably consider part of the OS) it's a major part of Windows, and is hugely important - windows would be useless without a shell for most people. Who cares if the shell just happens to be able to render HTML (just like most shells of yesteryear can render ASCII).
IE technology & IIS etc are important to windows 2000 cause they provide objects and libraries that are used as other parts of the OS. IE for HTML Help, It's XML DOM etc. IIS comes with MTS, which is becoming essential for load balancing and stabalizing COM+.
This guy goes around claiming Win2K is the best OS available, but its own backup program cannot understand its own filesystem?
Who said Win2K's backup couldn't understand it's own filesystem. Am I missing something here? Since when was windows 2000's backup program restricted to 8.3?
Really? You don't use many OSes, do you? According to your own website, you've had Windows 2000 go bonkers. SVCHOST.EXE starting eating up all your RAM and CPU. Very interesting, that. I find it very interesting that you assert Win2K is the best OS on the market, when you yourself have encountered problems Linux has never had, and never will.
Uh, you've never used netscape have you?
Another thing about Linux: Linux backup software can handle file names longer then eight characters. I guess in Micros~1 land, that is too advanced to do.
Uh, you could always get 3rd party backup software (or did Linux write all of GNU himself).
NT IS _EASIER_ to use. And why do you assume that means everything is supposed to be easier (like security). But anyway, your assumption is correct anyway, NT is _EASY_ to secure. But you have to do it!
By default NT is left open so that things work. It's easier to start with a working system, and close of things.
Anyway, it's easy to secure, you've just got to make sure you (*&(%# do it.
How easy is it to setup a share, setup permissions and allow user X to have access in Linux? In NT it's a breeze.
I mean, even on a celeron the interface is kindda sluggish don't you think? And although the page rendering is MUCH improved from nutscrape 4.x, it is also sluggish compared to the silky smooth IE5 rendering.
Now, I don't think anyone here is willing to state that the reason IE5 does silky smooth rendering is "cause microsoft integrated IE5 into the NT kernel, infact KERNEL32.DLL is going to be replaced with MSHTML.DLL" or that it's silky smooth cause "bill gates is casting voodoo magic or making deals with the devil".
Come on netscape, make it faster:P
If it's faster when it's released I'll eat my celery processor (mm crunchy), I'm betting it's not going to get much faster - perhaps less BLOATED memory wise tho.
BTW, I thought xpCOM was supposed to be a light version of COM:P
If Netscape was allowed to preload most of it's code with the GUI/OS you'd see a huge speed increase
Firstly, what's stopping them from this special 'preloading' you're talking about? Why do so many people think that just cause windows uses internet explorer rather than explorer as a shell, that automatically means microsoft have somehow integrated IE5 into the windows kernel (not that Netscape couldn't do that either with VXDs).
Netscape runs in it's own process, by preloading i'm assuming you mean caching DLLs so they get injected into netscape.exe faster - but that would only improve load time.
Once netscape is loaded, what's the excuse for it be slower? It renders pages slowly, and everytime you resize the window, it has to repaginate the entire page all over again! And most of the time it does this off the server again!
Why you think anything IE does is part of secret APIs? Is this just some FUD you've learnt at college or something? Cause I can tell you, there's NOTHING IE does that I can see that requires the use of APIs that doesn't exist. Windows is very modular, so you can do just about anything, including kernel (ring 0) stuff, so all your crap about 'hidden apis' is exactly that, crap. Windows gives you all the GDI, DirectX and winsock functions - everything you need to make a web browser. If you would care to prove that IE5 uses some secret API like MakeEverythingFasterThanNetscapeEx() then I'd love to see it. Netscape is slower cause it's simply not well written, the fact that Mozilla is considerably faster than netscape (but not quite as fast as IE5) proves that.
HyperComputeGlobalSuperMegaNet or something like that:). Same episode the comic book guy is trying to download naked pictures of captain janeway. hehe.
My long time favourite is the one where homer gets hair and becomes successful.
Gates in all his photos looked kind (and sortta geeky in a nice way). But if you need any more proof, here's another article with a picture at the same press conference, Ballmer loooks like he's giving someone the look of death.
He kind of reminds me of Scott Mcneally when he's talking about Microsoft.
Uh, voice recognition would never be used for the kind of coding we do now days. Hell, I don't forsee myself giving up the keyboard very soon. I can type faster than I can speak.
I will use voice recognition the same way I use the mouse. If my hand happens to be on the mouse already, and I think it's faster to use the mouse I'll go and use the mouse...otherwise I'll go and use the keyboard (and vice versa). When programming for example, I usually use the k/b to press F7 for compiling, cause I usually compile straight after I stop coding, but I can image sitting there coding and saying "compile now" before my hand even reaches the F7 key. No one input medium (human interface) will replace everything else, you have to learn to use them all effectively.
And remember that most people in the world aren't geeks. Too many people around here think that everyone MUST know everything they know, or else they're stupid.
I'd rather say "computer lights" than turn the switch, or say "car, drive me to work, and drop by the nearest store on the way" than actually have to drive there. Not that recreational isn't fun:).
First off, who in their right mind would let a program randomly modify/overwrite crucial system libraries?
Well Linux does just as good a job as windows (eg both do nothing). Microsoft provided APIs to get DLL versions (GetModuleVersion) but some people don't use it properly. However, Windows 2000 and the next version of 9x will have SFP (System File Protection) in which system DLLs can't be overwritten. SFP also includes "Personal DLLs" in which applications have a special sub dir they stick their own DLLs in, if they want to make sure that they only use a specific version of a DLLs.
Also, there's a new article on MSDN right now (msdn.microsoft.com) about DLL Hell, even has a nice picture of a DLL burning in hell;).
In the meantime, if you want APIs to program with, you can find tons of them for Linux.
True there are some, but I like the way windows APIs are standard in each distribution of windows.
of them crossplatform like SDL, and many widget sets (I wish Windows knew what a widget set was!) and window managers (ditto for that, Windows needs more cool shells) and many free ready-made applications and stuff.
Windows doesn't have many shells cause noone really bothers (you can try stuff like WindowBlinds tho). It's just a big hassle, it looks cool for about 2 minutes:). And Explorer as a shell is rather nice (which is why i use KFM in Linux).
However, I've never seen Linux get Unstable in the sense that Windows does--everything happens for a reason in Linux, and you can find out what it is if you know what you're doing
To tell the truth, on good hardware I've never seen Linux totally stuff it more than twice...which isnt' bad, i've had to panic on me for untaring a file:).
However, I should note that I'm been running Windows 2000 AdvServer for over 5 months and have had *no* BSOD (i'm as suprise as you) and never have been forced to reboot (not even to change networking settings;)).
It will be interesting to see what Windows 2000 brings, but none of this implies that people at Microsoft are good at big projects. Maybe they can all code great small assembler programs, and maybe they should have started with that and stuck to it for a while. After all, that's what got UNIX started. Maybe Microsoft will eventually manage to reinvent it
Completely disagree, Microsoft are the only company that can handle large projects. Look at Windows 95 - 2000, Office, Visual Studio, all of these are more featured than anything Unix has come up with.
And give up that "reinvent unix" thing, look at linux, it looks like Unix but it certainly only tries to behave like unix, it's not unix, and it's implemented poorly compared to commericial unixes. I really hate it when people run around indirectly implying Unix is the best OS in the world. I would argue VMS is better at what unix does best (scalability, stability) and windows is better at APIs, Applications and I suppose almost everything else. Win32 is rich compared to POSIX, has APIs for just about EVERYTHING. COM, SAPI, TAPI, ODBC, ADO, RDO, MTS, MSMQ, GDI, DirectX etc etc etc etc
Slashdot Mirror
I have never seen IE4 ask for large disk support.
And what you're saying is like a linux distro asking, hey do you want to fdisk your disk.
Anyway, show me any proof IE4 comes with FAT32 convertors...I'd like to see that.
And IE5? You can _uninstall_ that, it doesn't even come with shell extensions.
ROFLMAO. You had me rolling around on the floor.
Linux follows a nice modular design? Coming from someone who uses an OS based on a monolithic kernel.
Windows has a much much more modular design that Linux (COM+ etc).
The point wasn't you _couldn't_ seperate IE, the point is seperate IE would ruin windows.
Just like vi isn't part of the Unix OS, but without vi it would make many things useless (like the man pages)...same with Windows, removing IE (a highly componentized product) would render the help pages useless.
It's not a matter of technically not being able to remove it, it's a matter of removing it would make windows 2000 not windows 2000 anymore. It would be windows 2000 without .
You're so ignorant.
Pick the 3 things that lacks the msot in Linux and pretend they're the best.
Moderate this guy up, he's making me roll around on the floor with laughter.
Hrm, what about Windows 2000 Datacentre?
64way, 64GB in one server, capable of being clusterable.
And microsoft pays lots of attention to threading (just look at COM+), which makes 64way REALLY mean a lot.
NT gives you no such migration path
PC technology is growing at an accelerated rate - that's why it's catching up with Sun etc.
Besides, ATM you can always upgrade to a 32way 64GB Windows 2000 Datacentre server. And if you really want to, wolfpack several servers together into a nice cluster.
Have you noticed how you have to restart KPanel when you change the date/time?
Or how samba services are temrinated everytime you change a setting, add or remove a share?
What ever happened to dynamic updates? Shutting down a service to add a share is unacceptable.
What's the difference between having an exe and not having an exe.
If I weere microsoft I'd go to hell with it and include the EXE and appropriate apps so my customers can use IIS technology to it's fullest.
Removing functionality purposly like that for no reason is RUDE.
So you're saying every new feature microsoft comes up with is them trying to shove things down other people's throats. How is that fair huh?
AD uses LDAP and kerberos. AD also interoperates with NDS (i suppose Novell where tyring to dominate the world too).
Yeah, netscape roolz dude. Lets not forget how cool and super fast Java is on the client side...and Netscape 4.7 will become an OS real soon! Navigator is going to kick windows 2000 ass.
hehe famous last words....
You work for Microsoft, don't you? Well, in my book, the browser isn't part of the OS!
A browser may not be part of an operating system in some sense, but it's part of the Windows OS. It's as much a part of Windows 2000, as Windows Explorer was part of Windows 95. In Microsoft's mind, it's as essential as bash/tsh etc would be to redhat.
So while it's not part of the kernel (what you would probably consider part of the OS) it's a major part of Windows, and is hugely important - windows would be useless without a shell for most people.
Who cares if the shell just happens to be able to render HTML (just like most shells of yesteryear can render ASCII).
IE technology & IIS etc are important to windows 2000 cause they provide objects and libraries that are used as other parts of the OS. IE for HTML Help, It's XML DOM etc. IIS comes with MTS, which is becoming essential for load balancing and stabalizing COM+.
This guy goes around claiming Win2K is the best OS available, but its own backup program cannot understand its own filesystem?
Who said Win2K's backup couldn't understand it's own filesystem. Am I missing something here? Since when was windows 2000's backup program restricted to 8.3?
Really? You don't use many OSes, do you? According to your own website, you've had Windows 2000 go bonkers. SVCHOST.EXE starting eating up all your RAM and CPU. Very interesting, that.
I find it very interesting that you assert Win2K is the best OS on the market, when you yourself have encountered problems Linux has never had, and never will.
Uh, you've never used netscape have you?
Another thing about Linux: Linux backup software can handle file names longer then eight characters. I guess in Micros~1 land, that is too advanced to do.
Uh, you could always get 3rd party backup software (or did Linux write all of GNU himself).
NT IS _EASIER_ to use. And why do you assume that means everything is supposed to be easier (like security). But anyway, your assumption is correct anyway, NT is _EASY_ to secure. But you have to do it!
By default NT is left open so that things work. It's easier to start with a working system, and close of things.
Anyway, it's easy to secure, you've just got to make sure you (*&(%# do it.
How easy is it to setup a share, setup permissions and allow user X to have access in Linux?
In NT it's a breeze.
I mean, even on a celeron the interface is kindda sluggish don't you think? And although the page rendering is MUCH improved from nutscrape 4.x, it is also sluggish compared to the silky smooth IE5 rendering.
:P
:P
Now, I don't think anyone here is willing to state that the reason IE5 does silky smooth rendering is "cause microsoft integrated IE5 into the NT kernel, infact KERNEL32.DLL is going to be replaced with MSHTML.DLL" or that it's silky smooth cause "bill gates is casting voodoo magic or making deals with the devil".
Come on netscape, make it faster
If it's faster when it's released I'll eat my celery processor (mm crunchy), I'm betting it's not going to get much faster - perhaps less BLOATED memory wise tho.
BTW, I thought xpCOM was supposed to be a light version of COM
If Netscape was allowed to preload most of it's code with the GUI/OS you'd see a huge speed increase
Firstly, what's stopping them from this special 'preloading' you're talking about?
Why do so many people think that just cause windows uses internet explorer rather than explorer as a shell, that automatically means microsoft have somehow integrated IE5 into the windows kernel (not that Netscape couldn't do that either with VXDs).
Netscape runs in it's own process, by preloading i'm assuming you mean caching DLLs so they get injected into netscape.exe faster - but that would only improve load time.
Once netscape is loaded, what's the excuse for it be slower?
It renders pages slowly, and everytime you resize the window, it has to repaginate the entire page all over again! And most of the time it does this off the server again!
LOL
IE is not repartioning harddisks?
I suppose you're going to tell me that IE5 also set your house on fire and told your girl friend that you wanted to break up with her?
IE5 uses a lot more memory? Eh?
:).
I've noticed IE5 usually uses around 6MB even when viewing large pages, that's compared to Netscape's 12MB and Hotjava's 40MB
Why you think anything IE does is part of secret APIs? Is this just some FUD you've learnt at college or something? Cause I can tell you, there's NOTHING IE does that I can see that requires the use of APIs that doesn't exist. Windows is very modular, so you can do just about anything, including kernel (ring 0) stuff, so all your crap about 'hidden apis' is exactly that, crap. Windows gives you all the GDI, DirectX and winsock functions - everything you need to make a web browser. If you would care to prove that IE5 uses some secret API like MakeEverythingFasterThanNetscapeEx() then I'd love to see it. Netscape is slower cause it's simply not well written, the fact that Mozilla is considerably faster than netscape (but not quite as fast as IE5) proves that.
HyperComputeGlobalSuperMegaNet or something like that :).
Same episode the comic book guy is trying to download naked pictures of captain janeway. hehe.
My long time favourite is the one where homer gets hair and becomes successful.
Maybe Alan Cox could lend his beard to Linus :P
Gates in all his photos looked kind (and sortta geeky in a nice way). But if you need any more proof, here's another article with a picture at the same press conference, Ballmer loooks like he's giving someone the look of death.
He kind of reminds me of Scott Mcneally when he's talking about Microsoft.
What exactly do you mean?
Windows is in capitals cause they're refering to the product name, and Internet has been in capitals for as long as I can remember. It's also a noun.
Uh, voice recognition would never be used for the kind of coding we do now days. Hell, I don't forsee myself giving up the keyboard very soon. I can type faster than I can speak.
:).
I will use voice recognition the same way I use the mouse. If my hand happens to be on the mouse already, and I think it's faster to use the mouse I'll go and use the mouse...otherwise I'll go and use the keyboard (and vice versa).
When programming for example, I usually use the k/b to press F7 for compiling, cause I usually compile straight after I stop coding, but I can image sitting there coding and saying "compile now" before my hand even reaches the F7 key.
No one input medium (human interface) will replace everything else, you have to learn to use them all effectively.
And remember that most people in the world aren't geeks. Too many people around here think that everyone MUST know everything they know, or else they're stupid.
I'd rather say "computer lights" than turn the switch, or say "car, drive me to work, and drop by the nearest store on the way" than actually have to drive there. Not that recreational isn't fun
First off, who in their right mind would let a program randomly modify/overwrite crucial system libraries?
Well Linux does just as good a job as windows (eg both do nothing). Microsoft provided APIs to get DLL versions (GetModuleVersion) but some people don't use it properly. However, Windows 2000 and the next version of 9x will have SFP (System File Protection) in which system DLLs can't be overwritten. SFP also includes "Personal DLLs" in which applications have a special sub dir they stick their own DLLs in, if they want to make sure that they only use a specific version of a DLLs.
Also, there's a new article on MSDN right now (msdn.microsoft.com) about DLL Hell, even has a nice picture of a DLL burning in hell
In the meantime, if you want APIs to program with, you can find tons of them for Linux.
True there are some, but I like the way windows APIs are standard in each distribution of windows.
of them crossplatform like SDL, and many widget sets (I wish Windows knew what a widget set was!) and window managers (ditto for that, Windows needs more cool shells) and many free ready-made applications and stuff.
Windows doesn't have many shells cause noone really bothers (you can try stuff like WindowBlinds tho). It's just a big hassle, it looks cool for about 2 minutes
However, I've never seen Linux get Unstable in the sense that Windows does--everything happens for a reason in Linux, and you can find out what it is if you know what you're doing
To tell the truth, on good hardware I've never seen Linux totally stuff it more than twice...which isnt' bad, i've had to panic on me for untaring a file
However, I should note that I'm been running Windows 2000 AdvServer for over 5 months and have had *no* BSOD (i'm as suprise as you) and never have been forced to reboot (not even to change networking settings
It will be interesting to see what Windows 2000 brings, but none of this implies that people at Microsoft are good at big projects. Maybe they can all code great small assembler programs, and maybe they should have started with that and stuck to it for a while. After all, that's what got UNIX started. Maybe Microsoft will eventually manage to reinvent it
Completely disagree, Microsoft are the only company that can handle large projects. Look at Windows 95 - 2000, Office, Visual Studio, all of these are more featured than anything Unix has come up with.
And give up that "reinvent unix" thing, look at linux, it looks like Unix but it certainly only tries to behave like unix, it's not unix, and it's implemented poorly compared to commericial unixes.
I really hate it when people run around indirectly implying Unix is the best OS in the world. I would argue VMS is better at what unix does best (scalability, stability) and windows is better at APIs, Applications and I suppose almost everything else.
Win32 is rich compared to POSIX, has APIs for just about EVERYTHING.
COM, SAPI, TAPI, ODBC, ADO, RDO, MTS, MSMQ, GDI, DirectX etc etc etc etc