Very Computer

Quote:> 1. It scails down

> Noboddy cares if Linxu can run on some geaks' obsolete 386 in 2MB of
> RAM. Windows runs on todays computer's, and the fact that it doesn't
> run on some obsoleat piece-of-shit computer from 1991 doessn't mean
> shit.

This is an old discussion. I care about 'down-scaling', since I want to
be in charge of what hardware I want and need - It is not a decision
for my OS vendor to make.

Quote:> 2. It's multi-user

> Linux ganes NOTHING over Windows by being multi-user. All that meens
> to me is that I have to remember a password just to be able to get
> into my own computer. Users want to get their work done, not waist
> time "logging in" screwing around with usernames and passwords that
> can't even be disaballed, and having to remember the "root password"
> every time somethign goes wrong. Those "other users" that UNIX is
> dessined to support through VT100 terminals can get the're own
> computer, and the "administrative identities" aka daemon, nobody,
> mail, news, bin, sys, and uucp, can all go to hell. It's not the '70s
> anymore.

If you don't want a multiuser OS, then consider running DOS.
If you are running Linux, and you don't care for passwords, then disable
passwords (leave them 'blank').
Personally I like the idea that other users don't destroy my files by
accident, but if your work is worthless, Logins and passwords are a
waste of time.
If you've got a lot of money, then feel free to buy a PC for every
member of your family. Remember to save up money for the upgrades that
Windows requires.

Quote:> 3. It's "flexibbal" (in other words you can turn off the GUI)
> And noboddy cares. Linux is just as useless without its GUI as
Windows
> is. There is NO REASON to turn off the GUI, and NO REASON to turn off
> the desktop, and NO REASON to turn off the Window manager. These are
> all useless feetures, and Linux gains NOTHING over Widnos for halvign
> them. Yet Linux isn't flexibble enough to allow you to turn off the
> multi-user "feature". Now THAT would be a somewhat usefull feature.

Turning off the GUI can be a nice thing, especially if
1) You don't need it,
2) You want to put the system resources that your GUI swallows into
better use.

Turning off Linux multiuser capabilities would mean something like
1) Bringing up Linux in single user mode (runlevel 1), or
2) not using multiuser capabilities.

Quote:> 4. You can logg in remotely

> ...creating the nead for the whole username-and-pasword system. And
> since it's a feature that only geeks need, the only "beneffit" for
> normal users is that they need a password (see #2) to keep hackers
> out, where they don't need one if they run Windows.

Controlling a machine remotely has it's benefits. Feel free to bring up
Linux without networking if you like (runlevel 2)

Quote:> 5. "X" Windows works over a network.

> Another faeture that nobody ever uses. This doesn't make "X" Windows
> more usefull to most users. Windows still wins.

On whos behalf are you talking? In my daily work, I often need to
control a server remotely, and I think that products like NetOp
(http://www.crossteccorp.com/) prove that Windows users also happen to
require remote GUI access.
But then again, I've got a _real_ job...

Quote:> 6. The CLI can multitask and network.

> ...which still doesn't make it any more usefull than DOS.
> Multitasking is only usefull to normal people in a GUI, which is why
> DOS doesn't do it.

What do you usually use your CLI for?
Running a job that doesn't need your attention in the background is
useful to many people. Having your mailbox checked automatically
every 10th minute is quite useful. Well, I guess I'm not 'normal'...

Quote:> 7. It gives you "choice"

> ...betwean one crappy program and 50 others just like it. Most
> people's "choice" is MS Windows and the fine MS software that goes
> together with it. They would never give up all that just to run Linux
> and its shitty little beta-test apps except if they were tricked into
> it.

Apache runs on Linux...
And try checking out http://www.it-analysis.com/00-01-21-3.html...
But I guess that SAP is just a crappy program that no one uses...

Quote:> 8. It's "free"
> ...but it costs lots and lots of time, a little time at first durring
> the installation, and then more and more time after the installation
> as one thing after annother goes wrong.

Hmm. This description reminds me of my experience with NT...
The more time I spend with my Linux system, the more boring daily
routines are automated. I usually end up with a Linux system that allows
me to do some work, instead of running virusscanners, reinstalling
Windows, etc ...

Quote:>9. It's Open-Source

> ...but nobody want's to waste time fixing all the bugs it has when
> they can just run Windos like they've been doing and have world-class
> sofrware.

Speaking of fixing bugs...
http://securityportal.com/direct.cgi?/cover/coverstory20000117.html:
'How did our contestants fair? Red Hat had the best score, with 348
recess days on 31 advisories, for an average of 11.23 days from bug to
patch. Microsoft had 982 recess days on 61 advisories, averaging 16.10
days from bug to patch.'

Quote:> 10. It's been ported to 16,000 different hardware plattforms that
> alreaddy shipped with UNIX to beagen with.

> Yawn.

We call it 'Linux everywhere' ;-)

11. Linux comes with a free spell checker :-D

--
"It's the best $50 bucks I ever spent. I would have paid five
times that for what your 'New You' packet allowed me to do!!!"
-- K. Waterbury, CA
Martin A. Boegelund.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Being able to login to machines remotely is a good thing.  At a remote
research site I help to support, we have several Linux machines running as
general purpose servers, database servers, and data acquisition machines.  I
initially installed and configured these machines, brought them to the site,
and have not been back to the site in 2 and a half years.  I routinely
administer and maintain these machines from in town.  It's a lot easier
doing this than driving 150 miles to the site and wasting half a day
traveling.  My colleague, who manages the NT machines, goes up about
every week or 2, and will sometimes need to bring an NT machine back to
reinstall NT.  Every NT machine typically gets reinstalled every few
months.

Quote:

>> 5. "X" Windows works over a network.

>> Another faeture that nobody ever uses. This doesn't make "X" Windows
>> more usefull to most users. Windows still wins.

>On whos behalf are you talking? In my daily work, I often need to
>control a server remotely, and I think that products like NetOp
>(http://www.crossteccorp.com/) prove that Windows users also happen to
>require remote GUI access.
>But then again, I've got a _real_ job...

This again has been crucial for me.  On our data acquisition machines, I
can su to that users account and run the GUI application as them with their
configuration settings, and see exactly what is causing problems.  I too
have a real job, and remote access has been invaluable.

On a side note, if anybody is interested in Linux drivers for Computer
Boards DAS 1600 data acquisition board, DIO48 digital I/O board, AMD 9513
timer board, or Truetime IRIG board, we have written Linux drivers for these.
They were written for 2.0 kernels, and not as slick as production drivers,
but they work well and are stable.  I should put them up on my web page in
case anybody wants to try them out, but I suspect there aren't many out
there running data acquisition under Linux.

oh yeah!?..well my dog can kick your dog's but!!!

dont take this seriously, i'm just havin a little fun is all!
sometimes humor can lighten the load of fact-opinion in your face
rhetoric..i must admit i enjoy reading the shots os users take at each
other. its funny to see someone get so worked up with their
opinions.

btw...i use windows...but i love linux!

cabal
--
--you are no longer boone---you are cabal---save me from my enemies--

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

I was going to post a humorous reply to this, but then I realized it
would be attacked by a bunch of losers defending a dying operating
system from a has-been company run by a geek and changed my mind.

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

I'm sure this will probably start a whole set of Linus is geekier than Bill
Gates discussions...

And a computationally clueless one at that.

When he wrote his first book, the self-annointed "seer of the future"
complete missed the Internet.

Then Mosaic and Netscape started making it a household word, and
old jerk-boy had to recall all of his books and write a new chapter
to cover the offending gaffe.

I wonder if the lying slime-bucket made the publishers print the
printing history as if the first printing never happened?

I wouldn't put it past him.

Megalomaniacs NEVER publicly own up to making a mistake.

Some day, they'll find him in a bunker with a pistol in his cold, blue
hand.

Quote:

> I've heard keynotes by both of them and Linus is pretty interesting.
> Gates tone of voice irritates my ears. He looks like a bloated geek
> these days :)

> Scott Mcnealy is pretty cool also as is Bob Young of RedHat.

What do you expect?

INNOVATORS are cool.
Imitators aren't.

--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642

I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
    premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
    you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
    you are lazy, stupid people"

A:  The wise man is mocked by fools.

B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.

C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
   sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
   that she doesn't like.

D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.

E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
   ...despite (D) above.

F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
   response until their behavior improves.

G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
   *ery while concurrently committing *ery with Tammy Hahn.

H:  Knackos...you're a retard.

I new it a long time ago during my first experience with DOS after
working with Unix for 4 years.

Despite all of Microsoft's money, they couldn't get some hot-shot
programmers to fix all the problems??

Or is it that....Gates is a crank who really doesn't understand
the techonology very well (remember when his first book, the one
released in 1994....the one about the "future" of computing,
and Gates COMPLETELY missed the Internet....)

Quote:

> --
> Microsoft Windows. Never had it, never will.

--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
ICQ # 3056642

I: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
    premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
    you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
    you are lazy, stupid people"

A:  The wise man is mocked by fools.

B: "Jeem" Dutton is a fool of the pathological liar sort.

C: Jet plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a method of
   sidetracking discussions which are headed in a direction
   that she doesn't like.

D: Jet claims to have killfiled me.

E: Jet now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
   ...despite (D) above.

F: Neither Jeem nor Jet are worthy of the time to compose a
   response until their behavior improves.

G: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
   *ery while concurrently committing *ery with Tammy Hahn.

H:  Knackos...you're a retard.

Quote:> > I was going to post a humorous reply to this, but then I realized it
> > would be attacked by a bunch of losers defending a dying operating
> > system from a has-been company run by a geek and changed my mind.

> I'm sure this will probably start a whole set of Linus is geekier than
Bill
> Gates discussions...

hmmm...bill calls himself the ultimate hacker..and linus calls himself
the ultimate programmer. i've heard bill doesn't know *about coding
or anything, certainly not about real hacking and real hackers. linus
has the kernel to back him up. what did bill code? hell, if i did
code M$, i'd be saying i didn't code anything, would you want to
be responsible for that?...how bloated is it?....hmmmm...i'll have to
get back to you when i can make it past the nonsense. free system
resources my ass!!!!

ben (yeah yeah excuse my windoze..im at work)
--

refuse to crawl

Sent via Deja.com http://www.veryComputer.com/
Before you buy.

:> I'm sure this will probably start a whole set of Linus is geekier than
: Bill
:> Gates discussions...

: hmmm...bill calls himself the ultimate hacker..and linus calls himself
: the ultimate programmer. i've heard bill doesn't know *about coding
: or anything, certainly not about real hacking and real hackers. linus
: has the kernel to back him up. what did bill code?

I believe Bill did a nice port of BASIC to the Altair and
singlehandedly started the pay-software movement by
accusing the users of being thieves.  Since then, I've seen
no evidence that he has any programming aptitude whatsoever.
I guess he's a geeky-looking businessman more than anything.

By comparison, Linus is a normal-looking coder with skills in
both cat herding and patch juggling.  Pretty much the
complete opposite.

[OT] Gee is this thread still going?