Very Computer

by **Felix Koga** » Fri, 16 Jan 1998 04:00:00

I prefer to use UNIX:
1. because it allowes me to automate my day-to-day tasks easily, and
with little or no additional payment;
2. It gives me smooth and transparent remote access method;
3. It is robust enough to stay up heavily loaded for months and months
(latest experience: 112 days up for RS6000 running 3 Oracle- and
OpenIngres- based
apps simultaneiously, AND DNS for at least 3000 computers.
eventually it went down after
long-time out-of-memory condition);
4. It has lots of very robust RDBMS, including those for free;
5. It has lots of free applications which really help to get work done;

6. And I prefer Linux, because among all this it has VERY LOV COST,
big amount of supported software, and lots of cheap personal
productivity applications.

I think, guys, this is the way to advocate Linux, not bashing NT and 95.
It's getting boring!

Who can add something to the list I offered above?

--
Felix A. Kogan, User Services Consultant
Columbia University, Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center in New York
Core Resources, Technology ? Operations, (212) 305-1433, ext. 71433

by **Cary B. O'Bri** » Fri, 16 Jan 1998 04:00:00

>>I prefer to use UNIX:
>>1. because it allowes me to automate my day-to-day tasks easily, and
>> with little or no additional payment;
>>2. It gives me smooth and transparent remote access method;
>>3. It is robust enough to stay up heavily loaded for months and months
>> (latest experience: 112 days up for RS6000 running 3 Oracle- and
>>OpenIngres- based
>> apps simultaneiously, AND DNS for at least 3000 computers.
>>eventually it went down after
>> long-time out-of-memory condition);
>>4. It has lots of very robust RDBMS, including those for free;
>>5. It has lots of free applications which really help to get work done;

>>6. And I prefer Linux, because among all this it has VERY LOV COST,
>> big amount of supported software, and lots of cheap personal
>>productivity applications.

>>I think, guys, this is the way to advocate Linux, not bashing NT and 95.
>>It's getting boring!

>Agreed. M$ stuff doesn't even try to fill the same niche
>as *nix systems. *nix are multitasking AND multiuser!

>>Who can add something to the list I offered above?

>Number 7 is _Linux_ related, not necessarily UNIX.

>7. Because the source code is available, we can make changes to
>fit OUR needs much easier than MS can fill their customers. For
>Example:

> a) I came across a new ne2000 pci clone that most drivers
> wouldn't recognize AS an ne2000. In the Linux kernel I
> modified the ne2000 code so that it DID accept this card
> as ne2000. (Actually I just had to add ID numbers to a
> few arrays)

> b) When trying to install Linux on a Thinkpad which needed
> special parameters for the floppy, I was able to compile
> a special kernel with those parameters set so that it
> could be done with a single boot/root floppy without a
> need to prompt users for the parameters.

c) I decided that I _really_ didn't want to start our web
server as root, but I _really_ wanted it to listen
at port 80. Took a whole 15 minutes to find the
socket code that enforces this restriction and
comment it out. I'm sure I'm a bad person for doing
this but it makes my life easier.

Quote:>8. Remote administration is a snap. Virtually anything which
>can be done at the console can be done from thousands of miles
>away. This includes even changing the kernel, rebooting, etc.

Yuppers, 100%. We have a whole bunch of _completly_ headless (i.e. no
display, no keyboard) machines. Nothing like testing out new drivers
on a headless machine! Makes you a _very_ careful coder. Relink, cp,
/sbin/lilo, /sbin/reboot, and wait and see what happens. If you*
up you get to pop the covers and shove in the one shared video card and
debug. So I tend to try _very_ hard not to make mistakes.

-- cary

by **Grayson William** » Fri, 16 Jan 1998 04:00:00

> >I prefer to use UNIX:
> >1. because it allowes me to automate my day-to-day tasks easily, and
> > with little or no additional payment;
> >2. It gives me smooth and transparent remote access method;
> >3. It is robust enough to stay up heavily loaded for months and months
> > (latest experience: 112 days up for RS6000 running 3 Oracle- and
> >OpenIngres- based
> > apps simultaneiously, AND DNS for at least 3000 computers.
> >eventually it went down after
> > long-time out-of-memory condition);
> >4. It has lots of very robust RDBMS, including those for free;
> >5. It has lots of free applications which really help to get work done;

> >6. And I prefer Linux, because among all this it has VERY LOV COST,
> > big amount of supported software, and lots of cheap personal
> >productivity applications.

> >I think, guys, this is the way to advocate Linux, not bashing NT and 95.
> >It's getting boring!

> Agreed. M$ stuff doesn't even try to fill the same niche
> as *nix systems. *nix are multitasking AND multiuser!

> >Who can add something to the list I offered above?

> Number 7 is _Linux_ related, not necessarily UNIX.

> 7. Because the source code is available, we can make changes to
> fit OUR needs much easier than MS can fill their customers. For
> Example:

> a) I came across a new ne2000 pci clone that most drivers
> wouldn't recognize AS an ne2000. In the Linux kernel I
> modified the ne2000 code so that it DID accept this card
> as ne2000. (Actually I just had to add ID numbers to a
> few arrays)

> b) When trying to install Linux on a Thinkpad which needed
> special parameters for the floppy, I was able to compile
> a special kernel with those parameters set so that it
> could be done with a single boot/root floppy without a
> need to prompt users for the parameters.

> 8. Remote administration is a snap. Virtually anything which
> can be done at the console can be done from thousands of miles
> away. This includes even changing the kernel, rebooting, etc.

9. Linux runs far more effectively on lower-end hardware (such as
i386 or SPARCstation 2-class machines) than NT or 95. A 386 with 16 MB
RAM would make an adequate mailhost or FTP server (with a good
Ethernet board, of course)

10. Linux is a very low-cost solution, thus allowing poor
community college students like me to use it, where NT is still
$150 for us poor CC students.. :)

Grayson

- Show quoted text -

> --
> Peter F Curran
> Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

> Use address in Organization line, finger
> for PGP key. Antispaam test in progress.

by **Peter F. Curr** » Sat, 17 Jan 1998 04:00:00

Quote:>I prefer to use UNIX:
>1. because it allowes me to automate my day-to-day tasks easily, and
> with little or no additional payment;
>2. It gives me smooth and transparent remote access method;
>3. It is robust enough to stay up heavily loaded for months and months
> (latest experience: 112 days up for RS6000 running 3 Oracle- and
>OpenIngres- based
> apps simultaneiously, AND DNS for at least 3000 computers.
>eventually it went down after
> long-time out-of-memory condition);
>4. It has lots of very robust RDBMS, including those for free;
>5. It has lots of free applications which really help to get work done;

>6. And I prefer Linux, because among all this it has VERY LOV COST,
> big amount of supported software, and lots of cheap personal
>productivity applications.

>I think, guys, this is the way to advocate Linux, not bashing NT and 95.
>It's getting boring!

Agreed. M$ stuff doesn't even try to fill the same niche
as *nix systems. *nix are multitasking AND multiuser!

Quote:>Who can add something to the list I offered above?

Number 7 is _Linux_ related, not necessarily UNIX.

7. Because the source code is available, we can make changes to
fit OUR needs much easier than MS can fill their customers. For
Example:

a) I came across a new ne2000 pci clone that most drivers
wouldn't recognize AS an ne2000. In the Linux kernel I
modified the ne2000 code so that it DID accept this card
as ne2000. (Actually I just had to add ID numbers to a
few arrays)

b) When trying to install Linux on a Thinkpad which needed
special parameters for the floppy, I was able to compile
a special kernel with those parameters set so that it
could be done with a single boot/root floppy without a
need to prompt users for the parameters.

8. Remote administration is a snap. Virtually anything which
can be done at the console can be done from thousands of miles
away. This includes even changing the kernel, rebooting, etc.

--
Peter F Curran
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Use address in Organization line, finger
for PGP key. Antispaam test in progress.

by **Michiel Ettem** » Sun, 18 Jan 1998 04:00:00

> > >I prefer to use UNIX:
> > >1. because it allowes me to automate my day-to-day tasks easily, and
> > > with little or no additional payment;
> > >2. It gives me smooth and transparent remote access method;
> > >3. It is robust enough to stay up heavily loaded for months and months
> > > (latest experience: 112 days up for RS6000 running 3 Oracle- and
> > >OpenIngres- based
> > > apps simultaneiously, AND DNS for at least 3000 computers.
> > >eventually it went down after
> > > long-time out-of-memory condition);
> > >4. It has lots of very robust RDBMS, including those for free;
> > >5. It has lots of free applications which really help to get work done;

> > >6. And I prefer Linux, because among all this it has VERY LOV COST,
> > > big amount of supported software, and lots of cheap personal
> > >productivity applications.

> > >I think, guys, this is the way to advocate Linux, not bashing NT and 95.
> > >It's getting boring!

> > Agreed. M$ stuff doesn't even try to fill the same niche
> > as *nix systems. *nix are multitasking AND multiuser!

> > >Who can add something to the list I offered above?

> > Number 7 is _Linux_ related, not necessarily UNIX.

> > 7. Because the source code is available, we can make changes to
> > fit OUR needs much easier than MS can fill their customers. For
> > Example:

> > a) I came across a new ne2000 pci clone that most drivers
> > wouldn't recognize AS an ne2000. In the Linux kernel I
> > modified the ne2000 code so that it DID accept this card
> > as ne2000. (Actually I just had to add ID numbers to a
> > few arrays)

> > b) When trying to install Linux on a Thinkpad which needed
> > special parameters for the floppy, I was able to compile
> > a special kernel with those parameters set so that it
> > could be done with a single boot/root floppy without a
> > need to prompt users for the parameters.

> > 8. Remote administration is a snap. Virtually anything which
> > can be done at the console can be done from thousands of miles
> > away. This includes even changing the kernel, rebooting, etc.

> 9. Linux runs far more effectively on lower-end hardware (such as
> i386 or SPARCstation 2-class machines) than NT or 95. A 386 with 16 MB
> RAM would make an adequate mailhost or FTP server (with a good
> Ethernet board, of course)

> 10. Linux is a very low-cost solution, thus allowing poor
> community college students like me to use it, where NT is still
> $150 for us poor CC students.. :)

11. Because I can't mess up the system, someone else administers the
hard parts. I just ad my applications and have never managed to
hang it. (Belief me I tried, if not deliberatly )

by **JED** » Sun, 18 Jan 1998 04:00:00

e:

>> > >I prefer to use UNIX:
>> > >1. because it allowes me to automate my day-to-day tasks easily, and
>> > > with little or no additional payment;
>> > >2. It gives me smooth and transparent remote access method;

See point 11.

An expert from the other side of the world can log in and
give a newbie from dalnet a helping hand.

Quote:>> > >3. It is robust enough to stay up heavily loaded for months and months
>> > > (latest experience: 112 days up for RS6000 running 3 Oracle- and
>> > >OpenIngres- based
>> > > apps simultaneiously, AND DNS for at least 3000 computers.
>> > >eventually it went down after
>> > > long-time out-of-memory condition);
>> > >4. It has lots of very robust RDBMS, including those for free;
>> > >5. It has lots of free applications which really help to get work done;

>> > >6. And I prefer Linux, because among all this it has VERY LOV COST,
>> > > big amount of supported software, and lots of cheap personal
>> > >productivity applications.

>> > >I think, guys, this is the way to advocate Linux, not bashing NT and 95.
>> > >It's getting boring!

>> > Agreed. M$ stuff doesn't even try to fill the same niche
>> > as *nix systems. *nix are multitasking AND multiuser!

>> > >Who can add something to the list I offered above?

>> > Number 7 is _Linux_ related, not necessarily UNIX.

>> > 7. Because the source code is available, we can make changes to
>> > fit OUR needs much easier than MS can fill their customers. For
>> > Example:

>> > a) I came across a new ne2000 pci clone that most drivers
>> > wouldn't recognize AS an ne2000. In the Linux kernel I
>> > modified the ne2000 code so that it DID accept this card
>> > as ne2000. (Actually I just had to add ID numbers to a
>> > few arrays)

>> > b) When trying to install Linux on a Thinkpad which needed
>> > special parameters for the floppy, I was able to compile
>> > a special kernel with those parameters set so that it
>> > could be done with a single boot/root floppy without a
>> > need to prompt users for the parameters.

>> > 8. Remote administration is a snap. Virtually anything which
>> > can be done at the console can be done from thousands of miles
>> > away. This includes even changing the kernel, rebooting, etc.

>> 9. Linux runs far more effectively on lower-end hardware (such as
>> i386 or SPARCstation 2-class machines) than NT or 95. A 386 with 16 MB
>> RAM would make an adequate mailhost or FTP server (with a good
>> Ethernet board, of course)

>> 10. Linux is a very low-cost solution, thus allowing poor
>> community college students like me to use it, where NT is still
>> $150 for us poor CC students.. :)

> 11. Because I can't mess up the system, someone else administers the
> hard parts. I just ad my applications and have never managed to
> hang it. (Belief me I tried, if not deliberatly )

by **Kenneth R. Kinde** » Tue, 20 Jan 1998 04:00:00

> I prefer to use UNIX:
> 1. because it allowes me to automate my day-to-day tasks easily, and
> with little or no additional payment;
> 2. It gives me smooth and transparent remote access method;
> 3. It is robust enough to stay up heavily loaded for months and months
> (latest experience: 112 days up for RS6000 running 3 Oracle- and
> OpenIngres- based
> apps simultaneiously, AND DNS for at least 3000 computers.
> eventually it went down after
> long-time out-of-memory condition);
> 4. It has lots of very robust RDBMS, including those for free;
> 5. It has lots of free applications which really help to get work done;
> 6. And I prefer Linux, because among all this it has VERY LOV COST,
> big amount of supported software, and lots of cheap personal
> productivity applications.
> I think, guys, this is the way to advocate Linux, not bashing NT and 95.
> It's getting boring!
> Who can add something to the list I offered above?

7. I'm supporting an open standard, POSIX. If Unix and Unix clones
proliferate, I'm still not supporting a monopoly. With Windows, on the
other hand, I am forced to support a market bully.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Kenneth R. Kinder

"Software development is caffeine, pizza, and gcc."
PGP FingerPrints: AC 63 8E FC 56 OC 6E F2 55 68 16 E4 07 62 12 32
------------------------------------------------------------------

Very Computer

Why UNIX? (And, after all, why Linux?)

Why UNIX? (And, after all, why Linux?)

Why UNIX? (And, after all, why Linux?)

Why UNIX? (And, after all, why Linux?)

Why UNIX? (And, after all, why Linux?)

Why UNIX? (And, after all, why Linux?)

Why UNIX? (And, after all, why Linux?)

Why UNIX? (And, after all, why Linux?)