Very Computer

by **Matt Templeto** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

Well, It looks like MS is getting every one ready for a buggy Win2000.
As I have been saying all along, It has to many buggs.

http://www.computerworld.com/home/news.nsf/all/9908194win

And the business world seems to expect it to be buggy as well

http://www.newsalert.com/bin/story?StoryId=Cn7JEqbWbtKvuvtaYmW&FQ=Lin...

by **stua..** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

Quote:> Well, It looks like MS is getting every one ready for a buggy Win2000.
> As I have been saying all along, It has to many buggs.

Nice troll Matt. When you've written 27 Million lines of bug free
code, let use know. What am I to assume by reading this article and
your post - that Linux is perfect?

And why crosspost it to cola if you're not just trolling?

Quote:
> http://www.computerworld.com/home/news.nsf/all/9908194win

> And the business world seems to expect it to be buggy as well

> http://www.newsalert.com/bin/story?

StoryId=Cn7JEqbWbtKvuvtaYmW&FQ=Linux&Nav=na-search-&StoryTitle=Linux

Same thing happened with NT 4.0. I have customers who are just
migrating now. I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect that a new
product will have some bugs - it's just not possible to get them all
out - some you won't know about because a machine has never been put in
a particular situation, but someone out there will eventually and the
bug will be found.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

by **Tim Hans** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

>Well, It looks like MS is getting every one ready for a buggy Win2000.
>As I have been saying all along, It has to many buggs.

>http://www.computerworld.com/home/news.nsf/all/9908194win

>And the business world seems to expect it to be buggy as well

>http://www.newsalert.com/bin/story?StoryId=Cn7JEqbWbtKvuvtaYmW&FQ=Lin...

Same sh**, different day.

by **Matt Templeto** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

> > Well, It looks like MS is getting every one ready for a buggy Win2000.
> > As I have been saying all along, It has to many buggs.

> Nice troll Matt. When you've written 27 Million lines of bug free
> code, let use know. What am I to assume by reading this article and
> your post - that Linux is perfect?

I posted articles discussing to NT in the NT group that is what c.o.m.n
is for isn't it?

And no, linux is not perfect, just better.

by **Rube** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

That happens, when you try to deliver a new 5 million lines of code, adding
it to an alreay buggy OS with 4 service packs already.

Ruben

Quote:> Well, It looks like MS is getting every one ready for a buggy Win2000.
> As I have been saying all along, It has to many buggs.

> http://www.computerworld.com/home/news.nsf/all/9908194win

> And the business world seems to expect it to be buggy as well

http://www.newsalert.com/bin/story?StoryId=Cn7JEqbWbtKvuvtaYmW&FQ=Lin...
na-search-&StoryTitle=Linux

by **Carlo** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

>> Well, It looks like MS is getting every one ready for a buggy Win2000.
>> As I have been saying all along, It has to many buggs.

>Nice troll Matt. When you've written 27 Million lines of bug free
>code, let use know.

Anybody can write 27 million lines of bug free code. Just write NOOP NOOP
NOOP...
Anyway, it would outperform MS's.

Seriously, it's not about writing "millions" of bug-free code lines: it's
about beeing serious and intelligent enought to do an extraordinary desing
capable of handling most things and only dependent on a few thousands of
code lines at most. Again, that few can be bug-free if well designed and
proved.

MS's doesn't do that thing, and, nowadays, very few vendors seem to do.

Carlos

by **Jerr** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

> > Well, It looks like MS is getting every one ready for a buggy Win2000.
> > As I have been saying all along, It has to many buggs.

> Nice troll Matt. When you've written 27 Million lines of bug free
> code, let use know. What am I to assume by reading this article and
> your post - that Linux is perfect?

> And why crosspost it to cola if you're not just trolling?

I did'nt think that spreading factual information came under the
trolling banner. The true "trolls" in this group spread rumour and
down-right lies - this appears to be factual....but not strictly related
to Linux advocacy (but what is in this group ???? when most of the
correspondants appear to be anti-Linux FUDers)....
Is this the anti-Linux FUDers maoning about anti-MS information
appearing in "their" group ???? I can't imagine that many pro-Linux
people would object that much....

Quote:
> > http://www.computerworld.com/home/news.nsf/all/9908194win

> > And the business world seems to expect it to be buggy as well

> > http://www.newsalert.com/bin/story?
> StoryId=Cn7JEqbWbtKvuvtaYmW&FQ=Linux&Nav=na-search-&StoryTitle=Linux

> Same thing happened with NT 4.0. I have customers who are just
> migrating now. I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect that a new
> product will have some bugs - it's just not possible to get them all
> out - some you won't know about because a machine has never been put in
> a particular situation, but someone out there will eventually and the
> bug will be found.

> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

by **Matt Templeto** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

> > > Well, It looks like MS is getting every one ready for a buggy Win2000.
> > > As I have been saying all along, It has to many buggs.

> > Nice troll Matt. When you've written 27 Million lines of bug free
> > code, let use know. What am I to assume by reading this article and
> > your post - that Linux is perfect?

> > And why crosspost it to cola if you're not just trolling?

> I did'nt think that spreading factual information came under the
> trolling banner. The true "trolls" in this group spread rumour and
> down-right lies - this appears to be factual....but not strictly related
> to Linux advocacy (but what is in this group ???? when most of the
> correspondants appear to be anti-Linux FUDers)....
> Is this the anti-Linux FUDers maoning about anti-MS information
> appearing in "their" group ???? I can't imagine that many pro-Linux
> people would object that much....

When the Linux supporters have a problem with articles critical of
Linux, they are usually critical of information in the document, not the
person posting it.

by **Stig B** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

> >When the Linux supporters have a problem with articles critical of
> >Linux, they are usually critical of information in the document, not the
> >person posting it.

> Amen to that.

And still we are very happy with the OS we run.
Life can be strange at times.

--
Regards

Stig Bull

Networking and Systems Administrator
Kommuneforlaget AS, Po. box 1263 Vika, N-0111 Oslo, Norway
Telefon: 22 94 77 00, Faks: 22 83 62 22
http://www.kommuneforlaget.no/e_komind.html

by **Donovan Rebbec** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

>When the Linux supporters have a problem with articles critical of
>Linux, they are usually critical of information in the document, not the
>person posting it.

Amen to that.

--
Donovan

by **Anthony O** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

>That happens, when you try to deliver a new 5 million lines of code, adding
>it to an alreay buggy OS with 4 service packs already.

Five. There is a sixth being prepared.

Quote:>Ruben

Regards

by **Gerwin Bijsterbos** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

>>That happens, when you try to deliver a new 5 million lines of code, adding
>>it to an alreay buggy OS with 4 service packs already.

>Five. There is a sixth being prepared.

Do you really think that M$ will do anything about fixing bugs in NT4, so
soon before releasing W2000? I don't.

Gerwin

--

--
Linux XENIX 2.2.11 #2 Wed Aug 11 19:16:56 CEST 1999 i686
2:02pm up 1:06, 5 users, load average: 0.08, 0.04, 0.02

by **Jason Ea** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

>>>That happens, when you try to deliver a new 5 million lines of code, adding
>>>it to an alreay buggy OS with 4 service packs already.

>>Five. There is a sixth being prepared.

>Do you really think that M$ will do anything about fixing bugs in NT4, so
>soon before releasing W2000? I don't.

I think that it is _more_ than likely. One of the best things about
Linux making big news is that Microsoft is having to act more and more
in their customer's interests.

The analysts say that no one is planning on jumping on the W2K freight
train until there are at least a couple of service packs. If
Microsoft makes the jump to W2K look like just another excuse for
their customers to give them money, then it will only make Linux look
that much better. After all, Linux is getting to the point where it
is practically a drop in replacement for NT Server.

Jason

by **stua..** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

> >>On Fri, 20 Aug 1999 05:05:15 -0400, "Ruben" <I-

> >>>That happens, when you try to deliver a new 5 million lines of
code, adding
> >>>it to an alreay buggy OS with 4 service packs already.

> >>Five. There is a sixth being prepared.

> >Do you really think that M$ will do anything about fixing bugs in
NT4, so
> >soon before releasing W2000? I don't.

> I think that it is _more_ than likely. One of the best things about
> Linux making big news is that Microsoft is having to act more and more
> in their customer's interests.

I hate to burst your bubble but MS releasing service packs has
precisely nothing to do with Linux. It has to do with delivering bug
fixes which *all* vendors do. NT 3.51 has five service packs, and
there wan't much noise about Linux when they were released. NT 4 had 3
service packs before Linux started getting all the media coverage.

Quote:
> The analysts say that no one is planning on jumping on the W2K freight
> train until there are at least a couple of service packs.

Some would consider that a reasonably sound business practice - not
many people like to implement brand new products...

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

by **stua..** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

> > > > Well, It looks like MS is getting every one ready for a buggy
Win2000.
> > > > As I have been saying all along, It has to many buggs.

> > > Nice troll Matt. When you've written 27 Million lines of bug free
> > > code, let use know. What am I to assume by reading this article
and
> > > your post - that Linux is perfect?

> > > And why crosspost it to cola if you're not just trolling?

> > I did'nt think that spreading factual information came under the
> > trolling banner. The true "trolls" in this group spread rumour and
> > down-right lies - this appears to be factual....but not strictly
related
> > to Linux advocacy (but what is in this group ???? when most of the
> > correspondants appear to be anti-Linux FUDers)....
> > Is this the anti-Linux FUDers maoning about anti-MS information
> > appearing in "their" group ???? I can't imagine that many pro-Linux
> > people would object that much....

> When the Linux supporters have a problem with articles critical of
> Linux, they are usually critical of information in the document, not
the
> person posting it.

Your post had very little "information" in it. The first article
talked about MS being more stringent in the bug testing of their own
and third party drivers - big deal. The second specifically stated
that "This is not to say Windows 2000 will not be a success; just the
opposite, IDC believes Windows 2000 will succeed -- over time." You
basically interpreted the information the way you wanted (ie Win2000 is
buggy) and crossposted it to the NT group - if that's not a troll I
don't know what is.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.

Very Computer

Win2000 buggy?? Yes, said MS

Win2000 buggy?? Yes, said MS

Win2000 buggy?? Yes, said MS

Win2000 buggy?? Yes, said MS

Win2000 buggy?? Yes, said MS

Win2000 buggy?? Yes, said MS

Win2000 buggy?? Yes, said MS

Win2000 buggy?? Yes, said MS

Win2000 buggy?? Yes, said MS

Win2000 buggy?? Yes, said MS

Win2000 buggy?? Yes, said MS

Win2000 buggy?? Yes, said MS

Win2000 buggy?? Yes, said MS

Win2000 buggy?? Yes, said MS

Win2000 buggy?? Yes, said MS

Win2000 buggy?? Yes, said MS