Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work? - Linux

This is a discussion on Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work? - Linux ; Micoshaft Corporation's Fradulent Asstroturfer DFS wrote on behalf of Micoshaft Corporation: > I'm glad you brought this 'toy' issue up Windopws is a toy OSen. Use it to administer any PCs or serious system anywhere in the chain and your ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7
Results 121 to 134 of 134

Thread: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

  1. Re: Who seriously uses Windopws here for administering serious networks?

    Micoshaft Corporation's Fradulent Asstroturfer DFS wrote on behalf of
    Micoshaft Corporation:


    > I'm glad you brought this 'toy' issue up


    Windopws is a toy OSen. Use it to administer any PCs or serious system
    anywhere in the chain and your whole system is toast.

    The hackers and viri writers have now caught on to the idea that
    its best to hoard cracked passwords and log data and stay silent
    for a while, and then rapdily appload the attacked web pages to websites to
    upload even more trojans and viri through those web****es into
    visitor's windopws PCs. Its such an easy target!

    What a nightmare.

    Use windopws toy OSen in any chain of administrations and your entire system
    is toast no matter how secure you believe you are.

    From governments to military - no one safe from this technique.

    Isn't time you eliminated toy OSen from your workplace
    and replace it with professional Linux solutions?

    http://www.livecdlist.com
    http://www.distrowatch.com


  2. Re: Who seriously uses Windopws here for administering serious networks?

    7 wrote:

    > Windopws is a toy OSen. Use it to administer any PCs or serious system
    > anywhere in the chain and your whole system is toast.


    Makes me wonder why the corporate world has embraced it to the tune of about
    95% on desktops, and a large unit share of servers (while desktop Linux/OSS
    languishes at 0.46%, due of course to crappy office software, crappy email
    clients, etc)


    > Use windopws toy OSen in any chain of administrations and your entire
    > system is toast no matter how secure you believe you are.


    Is there an echo in here.


    > Isn't time you eliminated toy OSen from your workplace
    > and replace it with professional Linux solutions?


    After you, Windows user and developer.




  3. Re: Who seriously uses Windopws here for administering serious networks?

    Moshe Goldfarb writes:

    > On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:31:30 -0500, DFS wrote:
    >
    >> 7 wrote:
    >>
    >>> Windopws is a toy OSen. Use it to administer any PCs or serious system
    >>> anywhere in the chain and your whole system is toast.

    >>
    >> Makes me wonder why the corporate world has embraced it to the tune of about
    >> 95% on desktops, and a large unit share of servers (while desktop Linux/OSS
    >> languishes at 0.46%, due of course to crappy office software, crappy email
    >> clients, etc)
    >>
    >>
    >>> Use windopws toy OSen in any chain of administrations and your entire
    >>> system is toast no matter how secure you believe you are.

    >>
    >> Is there an echo in here.
    >>
    >>
    >>> Isn't time you eliminated toy OSen from your workplace
    >>> and replace it with professional Linux solutions?

    >>
    >> After you, Windows user and developer.

    >
    > It's just more FUD from the Linux gang bangers.
    > Look, Windows, especially Vista has it's problems, and Microsoft has not
    > exactly been a great corporate citizen over the years, but the stuff that
    > is posted by the Linux advocates in COLA is so far off the deep end, it
    > becomes comical.


    And that is why I play the COLA RPG.

    Linux could well be the next best thing since sliced bread. But the crap
    spewed in here makes me want to play devil's advocate. Even my mate
    Peter has Roy and Mrs Roy Kent sussed.

  4. Re: Who seriously uses Windopws here for administering serious networks?

    On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 06:18:40 +0100, Hadron wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb writes:
    >
    >> On Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:31:30 -0500, DFS wrote:
    >>
    >>> 7 wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Windopws is a toy OSen. Use it to administer any PCs or serious system
    >>>> anywhere in the chain and your whole system is toast.
    >>>
    >>> Makes me wonder why the corporate world has embraced it to the tune of about
    >>> 95% on desktops, and a large unit share of servers (while desktop Linux/OSS
    >>> languishes at 0.46%, due of course to crappy office software, crappy email
    >>> clients, etc)
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> Use windopws toy OSen in any chain of administrations and your entire
    >>>> system is toast no matter how secure you believe you are.
    >>>
    >>> Is there an echo in here.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> Isn't time you eliminated toy OSen from your workplace
    >>>> and replace it with professional Linux solutions?
    >>>
    >>> After you, Windows user and developer.

    >>
    >> It's just more FUD from the Linux gang bangers.
    >> Look, Windows, especially Vista has it's problems, and Microsoft has not
    >> exactly been a great corporate citizen over the years, but the stuff that
    >> is posted by the Linux advocates in COLA is so far off the deep end, it
    >> becomes comical.

    >
    > And that is why I play the COLA RPG.
    >
    > Linux could well be the next best thing since sliced bread. But the crap
    > spewed in here makes me want to play devil's advocate. Even my mate
    > Peter has Roy and Mrs Roy Kent sussed.


    My feelings exactly.

  5. Re: Who seriously uses Windopws here for administering serious networks?

    On 2008-01-25, DFS wrote:
    > 7 wrote:
    >
    >> Windopws is a toy OSen. Use it to administer any PCs or serious system
    >> anywhere in the chain and your whole system is toast.

    >
    > Makes me wonder why the corporate world has embraced it to the tune of about
    > 95% on desktops, and a large unit share of servers (while desktop Linux/OSS


    An individual desktop is really quite trivial when compared to
    any mission critical system. Desktops are relatively disposable
    and the cost to the business of any one of them being offline
    is trivial.

    [deletia]

    Compare the upper management attention given to a problem with
    any "real system" being down for mere hours as compared to a
    worker being out of action for DAYS due to Windows PC problems.


    --
    NO! There are no CODICILES of Fight Club! |||
    / | \
    That way leads to lawyers and business megacorps and credit cards!

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  6. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    > DFS wrote:
    >
    >> Peter Khlmann wrote:
    >>
    >>> To make it simpler for twats like you, "icecream" is handling off
    >>> portions of a compile job to several machines in a "compile
    >>> cluster", bringing down the total time to compile BIG projects.
    >>>
    >>> You know, not the toy one types like your VB thingies

    >>
    >> I'm glad you brought this 'toy' issue up, dumbkopf, because it will
    >> be instructive to compare the respective value to our employers of my
    >> proprietary, Windows-only VB toy systems versus your proprietary,
    >> Windows-only non-toy systems.
    >>
    >> It won't take long. Ready?
    >>
    >> You're paid in Euros; I'm paid in US dollars. Disregarding the steep
    >> slide of the USD against the EUR over the last 6 months (about 10%),
    >> if your employer isn't paying you at least EUR 69 per hour they
    >> value your software development skills less than my employer values
    >> mine.
    >>
    >> hmmmm... exactly how much less are your 'non-toy' systems valued
    >> than my 'toy' systems? Is it 20%? 40%? Probably much more, but
    >> there's one percentage I know for sure: it's 100% guaranteed you'll
    >> evade and slink away.

    >
    > You mean, I should make up figures out of full cloth as you just did?
    >
    > Face it, DumbFull****, whatever you post, it will be a lie. Do you
    > really think anybody would believe *you* of all people?


    In other words, your half-ass 'non-toy' systems are worth EUR 20/hr to 30/hr
    (significantly less than half the value of my 'toy' systems). Glad you
    could clarify that for us, "highly paid Windows developer", "distributed
    compiling connoisseur", "Apple expert", "true OSS advocate", "anti-aliasing
    master", and "authority on swap partitions".





  7. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    "DFS" writes:

    > Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >> DFS wrote:
    >>
    >>> Peter Khlmann wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> To make it simpler for twats like you, "icecream" is handling off
    >>>> portions of a compile job to several machines in a "compile
    >>>> cluster", bringing down the total time to compile BIG projects.
    >>>>
    >>>> You know, not the toy one types like your VB thingies
    >>>
    >>> I'm glad you brought this 'toy' issue up, dumbkopf, because it will
    >>> be instructive to compare the respective value to our employers of my
    >>> proprietary, Windows-only VB toy systems versus your proprietary,
    >>> Windows-only non-toy systems.
    >>>
    >>> It won't take long. Ready?
    >>>
    >>> You're paid in Euros; I'm paid in US dollars. Disregarding the steep
    >>> slide of the USD against the EUR over the last 6 months (about 10%),
    >>> if your employer isn't paying you at least EUR 69 per hour they
    >>> value your software development skills less than my employer values
    >>> mine.
    >>>
    >>> hmmmm... exactly how much less are your 'non-toy' systems valued
    >>> than my 'toy' systems? Is it 20%? 40%? Probably much more, but
    >>> there's one percentage I know for sure: it's 100% guaranteed you'll
    >>> evade and slink away.

    >>
    >> You mean, I should make up figures out of full cloth as you just did?
    >>
    >> Face it, DumbFull****, whatever you post, it will be a lie. Do you
    >> really think anybody would believe *you* of all people?

    >
    > In other words, your half-ass 'non-toy' systems are worth EUR 20/hr to 30/hr
    > (significantly less than half the value of my 'toy' systems). Glad you
    > could clarify that for us, "highly paid Windows developer", "distributed
    > compiling connoisseur", "Apple expert", "true OSS advocate", "anti-aliasing
    > master", and "authority on swap partitions".


    You forgot "WPA security consultant".

    Peter thinks its "ok" to publish your own WPA key because "linux will keep
    you safe".

    ROTFLM

    If in doubt google up Tim's comments on the matter where Peter slunk
    away in shame and made his plans against us .... (Jeff Wayne... Duh Duh
    Derr .....)


  8. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    Hadron wrote:

    > "DFS" writes:
    >
    >> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>> DFS wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Peter Khlmann wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> To make it simpler for twats like you, "icecream" is handling off
    >>>>> portions of a compile job to several machines in a "compile
    >>>>> cluster", bringing down the total time to compile BIG projects.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> You know, not the toy one types like your VB thingies
    >>>>
    >>>> I'm glad you brought this 'toy' issue up, dumbkopf, because it will
    >>>> be instructive to compare the respective value to our employers of my
    >>>> proprietary, Windows-only VB toy systems versus your proprietary,
    >>>> Windows-only non-toy systems.
    >>>>
    >>>> It won't take long. Ready?
    >>>>
    >>>> You're paid in Euros; I'm paid in US dollars. Disregarding the steep
    >>>> slide of the USD against the EUR over the last 6 months (about 10%),
    >>>> if your employer isn't paying you at least EUR 69 per hour they
    >>>> value your software development skills less than my employer values
    >>>> mine.
    >>>>
    >>>> hmmmm... exactly how much less are your 'non-toy' systems valued
    >>>> than my 'toy' systems? Is it 20%? 40%? Probably much more, but
    >>>> there's one percentage I know for sure: it's 100% guaranteed you'll
    >>>> evade and slink away.
    >>>
    >>> You mean, I should make up figures out of full cloth as you just did?
    >>>
    >>> Face it, DumbFull****, whatever you post, it will be a lie. Do you
    >>> really think anybody would believe *you* of all people?

    >>
    >> In other words, your half-ass 'non-toy' systems are worth EUR 20/hr to
    >> 30/hr
    >> (significantly less than half the value of my 'toy' systems). Glad you
    >> could clarify that for us, "highly paid Windows developer", "distributed
    >> compiling connoisseur", "Apple expert", "true OSS advocate",
    >> "anti-aliasing master", and "authority on swap partitions".

    >
    > You forgot "WPA security consultant".
    >
    > Peter thinks its "ok" to publish your own WPA key because "linux will keep
    > you safe".
    >


    You better provide a Msg-ID for that lie, Hadron Quark

    --
    To mess up a Linux box, you need to work at it.
    To mess up your Windows box, you just need to work on it.


  9. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 08:50:10 +0100, Peter Köhlmann wrote:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> "DFS" writes:
    >>
    >>> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Peter Khlmann wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> To make it simpler for twats like you, "icecream" is handling off
    >>>>>> portions of a compile job to several machines in a "compile
    >>>>>> cluster", bringing down the total time to compile BIG projects.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> You know, not the toy one types like your VB thingies
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I'm glad you brought this 'toy' issue up, dumbkopf, because it will
    >>>>> be instructive to compare the respective value to our employers of my
    >>>>> proprietary, Windows-only VB toy systems versus your proprietary,
    >>>>> Windows-only non-toy systems.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> It won't take long. Ready?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> You're paid in Euros; I'm paid in US dollars. Disregarding the steep
    >>>>> slide of the USD against the EUR over the last 6 months (about 10%),
    >>>>> if your employer isn't paying you at least EUR 69 per hour they
    >>>>> value your software development skills less than my employer values
    >>>>> mine.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> hmmmm... exactly how much less are your 'non-toy' systems valued
    >>>>> than my 'toy' systems? Is it 20%? 40%? Probably much more, but
    >>>>> there's one percentage I know for sure: it's 100% guaranteed you'll
    >>>>> evade and slink away.
    >>>>
    >>>> You mean, I should make up figures out of full cloth as you just did?
    >>>>
    >>>> Face it, DumbFull****, whatever you post, it will be a lie. Do you
    >>>> really think anybody would believe *you* of all people?
    >>>
    >>> In other words, your half-ass 'non-toy' systems are worth EUR 20/hr to
    >>> 30/hr
    >>> (significantly less than half the value of my 'toy' systems). Glad you
    >>> could clarify that for us, "highly paid Windows developer", "distributed
    >>> compiling connoisseur", "Apple expert", "true OSS advocate",
    >>> "anti-aliasing master", and "authority on swap partitions".

    >>
    >> You forgot "WPA security consultant".
    >>
    >> Peter thinks its "ok" to publish your own WPA key because "linux will keep
    >> you safe".
    >>

    >
    > You better provide a Msg-ID for that lie, Hadron Quark


    You will get no proof from us, hypocrite.

  10. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    Moshe Goldfarb writes:

    > On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 08:50:10 +0100, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> "DFS" writes:
    >>>
    >>>> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Peter Khlmann wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> To make it simpler for twats like you, "icecream" is handling off
    >>>>>>> portions of a compile job to several machines in a "compile
    >>>>>>> cluster", bringing down the total time to compile BIG projects.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> You know, not the toy one types like your VB thingies
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> I'm glad you brought this 'toy' issue up, dumbkopf, because it will
    >>>>>> be instructive to compare the respective value to our employers of my
    >>>>>> proprietary, Windows-only VB toy systems versus your proprietary,
    >>>>>> Windows-only non-toy systems.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> It won't take long. Ready?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> You're paid in Euros; I'm paid in US dollars. Disregarding the steep
    >>>>>> slide of the USD against the EUR over the last 6 months (about 10%),
    >>>>>> if your employer isn't paying you at least EUR 69 per hour they
    >>>>>> value your software development skills less than my employer values
    >>>>>> mine.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> hmmmm... exactly how much less are your 'non-toy' systems valued
    >>>>>> than my 'toy' systems? Is it 20%? 40%? Probably much more, but
    >>>>>> there's one percentage I know for sure: it's 100% guaranteed you'll
    >>>>>> evade and slink away.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> You mean, I should make up figures out of full cloth as you just did?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Face it, DumbFull****, whatever you post, it will be a lie. Do you
    >>>>> really think anybody would believe *you* of all people?
    >>>>
    >>>> In other words, your half-ass 'non-toy' systems are worth EUR 20/hr to
    >>>> 30/hr
    >>>> (significantly less than half the value of my 'toy' systems). Glad you
    >>>> could clarify that for us, "highly paid Windows developer", "distributed
    >>>> compiling connoisseur", "Apple expert", "true OSS advocate",
    >>>> "anti-aliasing master", and "authority on swap partitions".
    >>>
    >>> You forgot "WPA security consultant".
    >>>
    >>> Peter thinks its "ok" to publish your own WPA key because "linux will keep
    >>> you safe".
    >>>

    >>
    >> You better provide a Msg-ID for that lie, Hadron Quark

    >
    > You will get no proof from us, hypocrite.


    Peter also knows it was in the Ubuntu group which is not
    archived. Possibly Tim has a copy.

    Plus I do not provide "proof" for "pondlife retarded filth and scum"
    (not bad eh?).

  11. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 17:19:50 +0100, Hadron wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb writes:
    >
    >> On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 08:50:10 +0100, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>
    >>> Hadron wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> "DFS" writes:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>>>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Peter Khlmann wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> To make it simpler for twats like you, "icecream" is handling off
    >>>>>>>> portions of a compile job to several machines in a "compile
    >>>>>>>> cluster", bringing down the total time to compile BIG projects.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> You know, not the toy one types like your VB thingies
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I'm glad you brought this 'toy' issue up, dumbkopf, because it will
    >>>>>>> be instructive to compare the respective value to our employers of my
    >>>>>>> proprietary, Windows-only VB toy systems versus your proprietary,
    >>>>>>> Windows-only non-toy systems.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> It won't take long. Ready?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> You're paid in Euros; I'm paid in US dollars. Disregarding the steep
    >>>>>>> slide of the USD against the EUR over the last 6 months (about 10%),
    >>>>>>> if your employer isn't paying you at least EUR 69 per hour they
    >>>>>>> value your software development skills less than my employer values
    >>>>>>> mine.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> hmmmm... exactly how much less are your 'non-toy' systems valued
    >>>>>>> than my 'toy' systems? Is it 20%? 40%? Probably much more, but
    >>>>>>> there's one percentage I know for sure: it's 100% guaranteed you'll
    >>>>>>> evade and slink away.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> You mean, I should make up figures out of full cloth as you just did?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Face it, DumbFull****, whatever you post, it will be a lie. Do you
    >>>>>> really think anybody would believe *you* of all people?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> In other words, your half-ass 'non-toy' systems are worth EUR 20/hr to
    >>>>> 30/hr
    >>>>> (significantly less than half the value of my 'toy' systems). Glad you
    >>>>> could clarify that for us, "highly paid Windows developer", "distributed
    >>>>> compiling connoisseur", "Apple expert", "true OSS advocate",
    >>>>> "anti-aliasing master", and "authority on swap partitions".
    >>>>
    >>>> You forgot "WPA security consultant".
    >>>>
    >>>> Peter thinks its "ok" to publish your own WPA key because "linux will keep
    >>>> you safe".
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> You better provide a Msg-ID for that lie, Hadron Quark

    >>
    >> You will get no proof from us, hypocrite.

    >
    > Peter also knows it was in the Ubuntu group which is not
    > archived. Possibly Tim has a copy.
    >
    > Plus I do not provide "proof" for "pondlife retarded filth and scum"
    > (not bad eh?).


    Excellent sir!
    Excellent!

  12. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    Hadron lied again:

    < snip >

    >>>> You forgot "WPA security consultant".
    >>>>
    >>>> Peter thinks its "ok" to publish your own WPA key because "linux will
    >>>> keep you safe".
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> You better provide a Msg-ID for that lie, Hadron Quark

    >>
    >> You will get no proof from us, hypocrite.

    >
    > Peter also knows it was in the Ubuntu group which is not
    > archived. Possibly Tim has a copy.


    It is nonetheless a lie, and you know it, Hadron Quark

    > Plus I do not provide "proof" for "pondlife retarded filth and scum"
    > (not bad eh?).


    Naturally not. You simply continue lying
    --
    Tact, n.:
    The unsaid part of what you're thinking.


  13. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    Moshe Goldfarb (flatfish) nymshifted:

    < snip >

    >>>>> You forgot "WPA security consultant".
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Peter thinks its "ok" to publish your own WPA key because "linux will
    >>>>> keep you safe".
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> You better provide a Msg-ID for that lie, Hadron Quark
    >>>
    >>> You will get no proof from us, hypocrite.

    >>
    >> Peter also knows it was in the Ubuntu group which is not
    >> archived. Possibly Tim has a copy.
    >>
    >> Plus I do not provide "proof" for "pondlife retarded filth and scum"
    >> (not bad eh?).

    >
    > Excellent sir!
    > Excellent!


    Yes, flatfish, you and Hadron Quark as the only existing "true linux
    advocates" certainly support each other

    In fact, you are making Hadron Quark another sewer dweller
    --
    Like being presumed a thief and a liar before using a product?
    If so, use M$ XP


  14. Re: Who seriously uses Linux here for serious work?

    Peter Köhlmann wrote:

    > Hadron lied again:
    >
    > < snip >
    >
    >>>>> You forgot "WPA security consultant".
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Peter thinks its "ok" to publish your own WPA key because "linux will
    >>>>> keep you safe".
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> You better provide a Msg-ID for that lie, Hadron Quark
    >>>
    >>> You will get no proof from us, hypocrite.

    >>
    >> Peter also knows it was in the Ubuntu group which is not
    >> archived. Possibly Tim has a copy.

    >
    > It is nonetheless a lie, and you know it, Hadron Quark


    No doubt it is. Quack doesn't seem to think (& I use the term loosly in his
    case) that there are other archives apart from google, where the ubuntu
    group *is* archived. They also show how he trolls in that group too.

    >> Plus I do not provide "proof" for "pondlife retarded filth and scum"
    >> (not bad eh?).

    >
    > Naturally not. You simply continue lying


    And trolling, of course.

    --
    This message was sent from a
    computer which is guaranteed
    100% free of the M$ Windoze virus.
    -- 64bit GNU/Linux systems --

+ Reply to Thread
Page 7 of 7 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7