Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Windows, Linux and the Cattle Effect

  • Subject: Re: Windows, Linux and the Cattle Effect
  • From: Ray Ingles <sorceror@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: 16 Sep 2005 14:16:48 -0400
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • References: <4086975.PkKuA2fQTm@linux.ziggynet> <pNzVe.69924$xl6.7781@tornado.tampabay.rr.com> <b3joiv8cd7yd.dlg@winxp02.ziggynet> <PoDVe.69991$xl6.43547@tornado.tampabay.rr.com> <1762397.W4os74A7ku@linux.ziggynet> <BbXVe.48256$4i6.216@tornado.tampabay.rr.com> <1ju42usghavf5$.dlg@winxp02.ziggynet> <q__Ve.69133$p_1.55306@tornado.tampabay.rr.com> <Ch%Ve.194092$NW2.10520637@phobos.telenet-ops.be> <kH1We.75613$xl6.17225@tornado.tampabay.rr.com> <n83We.194289$6O4.10576962@phobos.telenet-ops.be> <os4We.77402$xl6.9068@tornado.tampabay.rr.com> <Je7We.194352$WA.10656811@phobos.telenet-ops.be> <hCfWe.84978$xl6.31543@tornado.tampabay.rr.com> <u9mWe.195146$2K3.10357859@phobos.telenet-ops.be> <RonWe.52188$4i6.28706@tornado.tampabay.rr.com> <YgpWe.195275$CY5.10362926@phobos.telenet-ops.be> <dgek56$2sat$1@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk> <zSDWe.85828$xl6.72011@tornado.tampabay.rr.com>
  • Reply-to: sorceror171@xxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: slrn/ (Debian)
  • Xref: news.mcc.ac.uk comp.os.linux.advocacy:1030940
On 2005-09-16, billwg <billw@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> (2) several of the UNIX filesystems can be mounted read-only in a
>>> runtime environment, which Windows does not allow;
> Well pat yourself on the back, roy, but look foolish in the process! 
> Windows provides for remote management of machines, too, and also 
> provides for installable file systems that allow anyone that actually 
> needs such a capability to do that too.

 "Read-only" and "runtime" are kinda the key phrases there, which you
cheerfully ignore. Ah, well.

>>> (3) Gnu/Linux comes with all the tools for configuring and tweaking 
>>> your system, and allows you the freedom to do that.

> No one seems to be able to name any specific instance of this claim by 
> way of example.  It is true that many Windows tools, which Microsoft has 
> determined to not be of practical use to most Windows product consumers, 
> are not shipped with the installation media, but they are available at 
> no additional charge to anyone who wants to access them.

 But they don't work. There's a multiple-desktop feature for Windows,
for example, but it doesn't work with multiple monitors.

>>> (4) UNIX systems do not require reboots _during_ the installation of
>>> either the operating system or any application software - unless you
>>> plan on changing the kernel.

> Windows has the same physical constraints as unix and linux in this 
> regard.  You are behind the times.

 Lie by omission. So much is tied into the operating system in Windows
that is not in Linux that in practice a reboot is required vastly more
often. E.g. the HTML parser or the video driver, off the top of my head.

> Windows allows for multiple remote logins, too.  Where have you been 
> sleeping?

 Not terribly well. I know I've had some real trouble working with the
test clusters our product monitors. It really only works reliably if
one person at a time uses it.

> Well I didn't vote for him myself, but you are a jive turkey to think 
> that GB got re-elected due to marketing.  GB got re-elected because the 
> full story on Iraq had not yet surfaced and the churchy crowd liked the 
> way GB called on the Lord for help.  Women didn't like Kerry's wife much 
> either and that hurt him.

 This paragraph is so inane, and self-contradictory, that I left it in
for sheer amusement value.

> But that very group is the one that is reponsible for the huge success 
> of Windows server editions.  They have come from nowhere to over 50% of 
> the shipping server rate in barely 10 years.

 And Linux is doing pretty darn well after only about 7 (1998 is when
businesses really got serious about Linux). We'll see where things are
after three more years.

> It's not how you play the game, roy, it is whether you win or lose.  I 
> think Vince Lombardi said that.  Windows has won.  There has not even 
> been a game on for quite a while. 

 Boy, I hope Microsoft shares that sentiment.


 Ray Ingles                                   (313) 227-2317

 "SCSI is not magic. There are fundamental technical reasons
  why you have to sacrifice a young goat to your SCSI chain
            every now and then." - John Woods

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index