Peter Norton is one smart dude

Peter Norton is one smart dude

Post by Chad Myer » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



Hey bastards, Peter Norton is one smart dude.  He writes some of the
best software on the planet, and it's way better than that free shit
that comes with Linux.  For example, fsck is a joke on Linux.  The
filesystem sucks compared to NTFS, which has journaling.  I use Norton
Disk Doctor, and it is much much better than fsck.  Fsck is shit.

Just imagine if Peter Norton would have written fsck - it would really
have kicked ass then.  Don't you agree?

-Chad

 
 
 

Peter Norton is one smart dude

Post by mr_organ » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00




Quote:>Hey bastards, Peter Norton is one smart dude.  He writes some of the
>best software on the planet, and it's way better than that free shit
>that comes with Linux.  For example, fsck is a joke on Linux.  The
>filesystem sucks compared to NTFS, which has journaling.  I use Norton
>Disk Doctor, and it is much much better than fsck.  Fsck is shit.

>Just imagine if Peter Norton would have written fsck - it would really
>have kicked ass then.  Don't you agree?

>-Chad

1. Fsck does not suck.  It does the job.  It *is* slow, but that's an
artifact of the filesystem, not the fsck utility itself.
2. Fsck is free, which NDD is not.  (Which is not to say that the Norton
Utilities are bad.  If you run any flavor of Windows, you need Norton.  
'Nuff said.)
3. Peter Norton did not, AFAIK, write NDD.  Hordes of Symantec programmers
wrote it.  Peter Norton gave his name to it and that's about it.
4. EXT2 is a good filesystem, but not as good as NTFS.  Still, there are
good alternatives for Linux -- EXT3, ReiserFS, XFS (by SGI), etc.  And they
are all free and open-source.  XFS is especially interesting as it is a
high-performance 64-bit FS which has been tested in production use for many
years on IRIX systems.

I shouldn't fall for blatant trolls like this, but since EXT2 *is* a Linux
weak spot, it's important for people to know that there are good
alternatives now.  That wasn't always the case.

mr_organic

 
 
 

Peter Norton is one smart dude

Post by Craig Kelle » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> Hey bastards, Peter Norton is one smart dude.  He writes some of the
> best software on the planet, and it's way better than that free shit
> that comes with Linux.  For example, fsck is a joke on Linux.  The
> filesystem sucks compared to NTFS, which has journaling.  I use Norton
> Disk Doctor, and it is much much better than fsck.  Fsck is shit.

He may be brilliant, but....

... he's SPOOKY!  I can't look at that box without feeling like I'm
under scrutiny; like the unabomber or something.  Maybe it's just me.

Quote:> Just imagine if Peter Norton would have written fsck - it would really
> have kicked ass then.  Don't you agree?

It just wouldn't have worked on Zip disks.  :)

--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.


 
 
 

Peter Norton is one smart dude

Post by Matthias Wark » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


It was the Mon, 31 Jan 2000 09:45:00 -0500...

[schnibble]

Sorry, no dice. You can do better than that.

mawa
--
Not everything in the world exists because of or for the benefit of
economics.
                                                             -- Arthur

 
 
 

Peter Norton is one smart dude

Post by Chad Myer » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


heh

How nice. I'm so cool I have an impersonator now!


Now, the linvocates can even debate me to my face, they
have to stoop to childish measures such as this.

Thanks 5X3 for proving you're an idiot (or is it Jerry?)

--
Chad Myers
--
Have you recompiled your kernel today?


Quote:> Hey bastards, Peter Norton is one smart dude.  He writes some of the
> best software on the planet, and it's way better than that free shit
> that comes with Linux.  For example, fsck is a joke on Linux.  The
> filesystem sucks compared to NTFS, which has journaling.  I use Norton
> Disk Doctor, and it is much much better than fsck.  Fsck is shit.

> Just imagine if Peter Norton would have written fsck - it would really
> have kicked ass then.  Don't you agree?

> -Chad

 
 
 

Peter Norton is one smart dude

Post by Chad Myer » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


In case you haven't noticed,
that wasn't me, it was a lame impersonator (5X3)

--
Chad Myers
--
Have you recompiled your kernel today?




> >Hey bastards, Peter Norton is one smart dude.  He writes some of the
> >best software on the planet, and it's way better than that free shit
> >that comes with Linux.  For example, fsck is a joke on Linux.  The
> >filesystem sucks compared to NTFS, which has journaling.  I use Norton
> >Disk Doctor, and it is much much better than fsck.  Fsck is shit.

> >Just imagine if Peter Norton would have written fsck - it would really
> >have kicked ass then.  Don't you agree?

> >-Chad

> 1. Fsck does not suck.  It does the job.  It *is* slow, but that's an
> artifact of the filesystem, not the fsck utility itself.
> 2. Fsck is free, which NDD is not.  (Which is not to say that the Norton
> Utilities are bad.  If you run any flavor of Windows, you need Norton.
> 'Nuff said.)
> 3. Peter Norton did not, AFAIK, write NDD.  Hordes of Symantec programmers
> wrote it.  Peter Norton gave his name to it and that's about it.
> 4. EXT2 is a good filesystem, but not as good as NTFS.  Still, there are
> good alternatives for Linux -- EXT3, ReiserFS, XFS (by SGI), etc.  And they
> are all free and open-source.  XFS is especially interesting as it is a
> high-performance 64-bit FS which has been tested in production use for many
> years on IRIX systems.

> I shouldn't fall for blatant trolls like this, but since EXT2 *is* a Linux
> weak spot, it's important for people to know that there are good
> alternatives now.  That wasn't always the case.

> mr_organic

 
 
 

Peter Norton is one smart dude

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




>> Hey bastards, Peter Norton is one smart dude.  He writes some of the
>> best software on the planet, and it's way better than that free shit
>> that comes with Linux.  For example, fsck is a joke on Linux.  The
>> filesystem sucks compared to NTFS, which has journaling.  I use Norton
>> Disk Doctor, and it is much much better than fsck.  Fsck is shit.

>He may be brilliant, but....

>... he's SPOOKY!  I can't look at that box without feeling like I'm
>under scrutiny; like the unabomber or something.  Maybe it's just me.

I agree to some extent. Put it this way -- if I was a virus, I'd be
scared !

--
Donovan

 
 
 

Peter Norton is one smart dude

Post by JEDIDI » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



>heh

>How nice. I'm so cool I have an impersonator now!


>Now, the linvocates can even debate me to my face, they
>have to stoop to childish measures such as this.

        Well, if we did that, we would be rolling on the
        floor laughing.

        It's hard to argue like that...

>Thanks 5X3 for proving you're an idiot (or is it Jerry?)

>--
>Chad Myers
>--
>Have you recompiled your kernel today?



>> Hey bastards, Peter Norton is one smart dude.  He writes some of the
>> best software on the planet, and it's way better than that free shit
>> that comes with Linux.  For example, fsck is a joke on Linux.  The
>> filesystem sucks compared to NTFS, which has journaling.  I use Norton
>> Disk Doctor, and it is much much better than fsck.  Fsck is shit.

>> Just imagine if Peter Norton would have written fsck - it would really
>> have kicked ass then.  Don't you agree?

>> -Chad

 
 
 

Peter Norton is one smart dude

Post by mr_organ » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


No-Spam (Terry Porter) wrote in




>>>Hey bastards, Peter Norton is one smart dude.  He writes some of the
><snip of troll bait>
>>>-Chad

>Is this our old pal Steve ??

>NNTP-Posting-Host: p-837.newsdawg.com

>>1. Fsck does not suck.  It does the job.  It *is* slow, but that's an
>>artifact of the filesystem, not the fsck utility itself.
>Who the hell says it's slow, have you EVER compared it to *FAT* ???

EXT2 is slow, pal.  Accept it and move on.

Quote:

>>2. Fsck is free, which NDD is not.  (Which is not to say that the
>>Norton Utilities are bad.  If you run any flavor of Windows, you need
>>Norton.  'Nuff said.)
>>3. Peter Norton did not, AFAIK, write NDD.  Hordes of Symantec
>>programmers wrote it.  Peter Norton gave his name to it and that's
>>about it. 4. EXT2 is a good filesystem, but not as good as NTFS.
>Again who says so ?

Just about anybody who admins enterprise servers.

Quote:

><snip>

>>I shouldn't fall for blatant trolls like this, but since EXT2 *is* a
>>Linux weak spot,
>FUD.
>My experience over 2 years shows that EXT2 is stable, fast, and does not
>loose data. Wish I could say the same for Windows.

Everyone knows that EXT2 is terrible as a server filesystem.  (If you doubt
it, just try to fsck a 20GB RAID drive and watch it grind away for about an
hour....)  It's okay as a desktop system.  My point is not that EXT2 is
bad, simply that there are better filesystems out there.

And it's not true that NTFS is unstable or unreliable.  Every test and
review I've ever seen, as well as three years of personal experience, shows
that NTFS is an excellent filesystem.  I'm not overfond of NT 4.0, but NTFS
is a dandy filesystem -- I wish I could run it on Linux!  (Well, I can use
NTFS in *read only* mode in Linux -- I just wish I could use it as a r/w
filesystem.  Sigh.)  For the time being, ReiserFS seems to be a good
solution for a server filesystem.

mr_organic

- Show quoted text -

><snip>

>>mr_organic

>Kind Regards
>Terry
>--

>   My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been  
> up 1 day 10 hours 51 minutes
>** homepage http://www.odyssey.apana.org.au/~tjporter **

 
 
 

Peter Norton is one smart dude

Post by Gary Halloc » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



> In case you haven't noticed,
> that wasn't me, it was a lame impersonator (5X3)

I knew it wasn't  you from the start.  But why do you think it's 5x3?     5x3
uses tin 1.4.1 on Linux 2.2.12-20  while the fake Chad is using  Netscape 4.7
on FreeBSD 4.0.    Just curious if you have some other info.

Gary

 
 
 

Peter Norton is one smart dude

Post by Stev » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00


Here they come, the Linux police. I'm amazed they don't think it is me.

This is the only group I have seen where this happens. As soon as a
negative post against Linux happens, the storm troopers spring into action
analyzing the headers.

I can analyze headers too and in fact know exactly who it is..
Hint....It's not me....

Steve



>> In case you haven't noticed,
>> that wasn't me, it was a lame impersonator (5X3)

>I knew it wasn't  you from the start.  But why do you think it's 5x3?     5x3
>uses tin 1.4.1 on Linux 2.2.12-20  while the fake Chad is using  Netscape 4.7
>on FreeBSD 4.0.    Just curious if you have some other info.

>Gary

 
 
 

Peter Norton is one smart dude

Post by JEDIDI » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



>No-Spam (Terry Porter) wrote in




>>>>Hey bastards, Peter Norton is one smart dude.  He writes some of the
>><snip of troll bait>
>>>>-Chad

>>Is this our old pal Steve ??

>>NNTP-Posting-Host: p-837.newsdawg.com

>>>1. Fsck does not suck.  It does the job.  It *is* slow, but that's an
>>>artifact of the filesystem, not the fsck utility itself.
>>Who the hell says it's slow, have you EVER compared it to *FAT* ???

>EXT2 is slow, pal.  Accept it and move on.

        Unix in general handles concurrency better, pal.
        Accept it and move on. An associate of mine, with
        no particular need to dis' NT, saw a percieved
        2x increase in disk performance over NT when runing
        SCSI disks.

        Also, personally it takes me about 10x more disk activity
        for me to bog down my personal Linux box when compared
        to a more powerful NT box with faster disk hardware.

Quote:

>>>2. Fsck is free, which NDD is not.  (Which is not to say that the
>>>Norton Utilities are bad.  If you run any flavor of Windows, you need
>>>Norton.  'Nuff said.)
>>>3. Peter Norton did not, AFAIK, write NDD.  Hordes of Symantec
>>>programmers wrote it.  Peter Norton gave his name to it and that's
>>>about it. 4. EXT2 is a good filesystem, but not as good as NTFS.
>>Again who says so ?

>Just about anybody who admins enterprise servers.

        Someone in that position is not likely to think much of
        either and will more than likely not think so much of
        their pet filesystem not to have a seriously paranoid
        backup solution and some form of fault tolerance and/or
        thruput enhancement in the hardware.

Quote:

>><snip>

>>>I shouldn't fall for blatant trolls like this, but since EXT2 *is* a
>>>Linux weak spot,
>>FUD.
>>My experience over 2 years shows that EXT2 is stable, fast, and does not
>>loose data. Wish I could say the same for Windows.

>Everyone knows that EXT2 is terrible as a server filesystem.  (If you doubt
>it, just try to fsck a 20GB RAID drive and watch it grind away for about an

        If you are in that sort of situation, a slow fsck is the
        least of your worries.

Quote:>hour....)  It's okay as a desktop system.  My point is not that EXT2 is
>bad, simply that there are better filesystems out there.

>And it's not true that NTFS is unstable or unreliable.  Every test and

        No, it's just slow.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:>review I've ever seen, as well as three years of personal experience, shows
>that NTFS is an excellent filesystem.  I'm not overfond of NT 4.0, but NTFS
>is a dandy filesystem -- I wish I could run it on Linux!  (Well, I can use
>NTFS in *read only* mode in Linux -- I just wish I could use it as a r/w
>filesystem.  Sigh.)  For the time being, ReiserFS seems to be a good
>solution for a server filesystem.

 
 
 

Peter Norton is one smart dude

Post by JEDIDI » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



>Here they come, the Linux police. I'm amazed they don't think it is me.

>This is the only group I have seen where this happens. As soon as a
>negative post against Linux happens, the storm troopers spring into action
>analyzing the headers.

        Well calling Norton smart for his ability to exploit the
        flaws in WinDOS while just glossing over those flaws that
        he covers up, is rather absurd.

[deletia]

 
 
 

Peter Norton is one smart dude

Post by Terry Port » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00



>Hey bastards,
Hi troll.
> Peter Norton is one smart dude.

Then subscribe to alt.worship.peter.norton ?

Quote:>  He writes some of the
>best software on the planet,

In Chads opinion, but then Chad loves Windows, so Chads opinion is suspect.

Quote:> and it's way better than that free shit
>that comes with Linux.

What a compelling argument, oh my, this has shaken my confidence in Linux badly
why didnt you share this before Chad ???

Quote:>  For example, fsck is a joke on Linux.

No look in a mirror if you want to see a *joke* .

Quote:>  The
>filesystem sucks compared to NTFS, which has journaling.  I use Norton
>Disk Doctor, and it is much much better than fsck.  Fsck is shit.

Why do you need Norton Disk Doctor Chad ?
I've been running the same EXT2FS since 1997, I've had a minium of 24 power
failures in that time, and NO lost, or corrupted data. No UPS either.

Quote:

>Just imagine if Peter Norton would have written fsck - it would really
>have kicked ass then.  Don't you agree?

Well I'm not preocupied with arse's, but hey, different strokes for different
folks.

Quote:

>-Chad

Kind Regards
Terry
--

   My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been  
 up 1 day 9 hours 51 minutes
** homepage http://www.odyssey.apana.org.au/~tjporter **
 
 
 

Peter Norton is one smart dude

Post by Terry Port » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00





>>Hey bastards, Peter Norton is one smart dude.  He writes some of the

<snip of troll bait>

Quote:>>-Chad

Is this our old pal Steve ??

NNTP-Posting-Host: p-837.newsdawg.com

Quote:>1. Fsck does not suck.  It does the job.  It *is* slow, but that's an
>artifact of the filesystem, not the fsck utility itself.

Who the hell says it's slow, have you EVER compared it to *FAT* ???

Quote:>2. Fsck is free, which NDD is not.  (Which is not to say that the Norton
>Utilities are bad.  If you run any flavor of Windows, you need Norton.  
>'Nuff said.)
>3. Peter Norton did not, AFAIK, write NDD.  Hordes of Symantec programmers
>wrote it.  Peter Norton gave his name to it and that's about it.
>4. EXT2 is a good filesystem, but not as good as NTFS.

Again who says so ?

<snip>

Quote:>I shouldn't fall for blatant trolls like this, but since EXT2 *is* a Linux
>weak spot,

FUD.
My experience over 2 years shows that EXT2 is stable, fast, and does not
loose data. Wish I could say the same for Windows.
<snip>

Quote:

>mr_organic

Kind Regards
Terry
--

   My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been  
 up 1 day 10 hours 51 minutes
** homepage http://www.odyssey.apana.org.au/~tjporter **
 
 
 

1. Peter Kholmann is NOT Peter Koehlmann (sorry, no umlauts)

Do NOT mistake the two. The real Peter is from t-online.de which the
imposter is more than likely "Osama Bin Laden" who posts from alt.net
and theplanet.net.

Ignore "Peter Kholmann"

Read "Peter Koehlmann"

--
Donovan Hill
Linux: Because you can!
All rise for the Microsoft Anthem: "BAAAA!"
"Micheal, I did nothing. I did absolutely nothing and it was
everything that I thought it could be." - Peter, Office Space

2. IPCHAINS

3. Am I the first one to try the assembler example from the Sun docs ?

4. ATAPI CDROM Help needed: "atapi0.1: unknown phase"

5. Am Power Smart UPS daemon around?

6. Monitor Network load

7. I am trying to configure X-windows on my SMART-TEC laptop, but get some problems.

8. questions(two)

9. Smart One Faxmodem anyone?

10. DPT Smart Cache IV/Smart Raid IV driver?

11. Seyon and Smart One Modem?

12. S.M.A.R.T. (SMART) attributes of IBM disc

13. Best Data-smart one 56F modem help needed!!!