a system crash at least once a week .. - Linux

This is a discussion on a system crash at least once a week .. - Linux ; "The company's Linux-based platform made it difficult and expensive to collaborate with clients effectively because a majority of its customers work in a Microsoft-based IT environment" "With Linux on the back end, Capital Engineering found there were issues with exposing ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: a system crash at least once a week ..

  1. a system crash at least once a week ..

    "The company's Linux-based platform made it difficult and expensive to
    collaborate with clients effectively because a majority of its
    customers work in a Microsoft-based IT environment"

    "With Linux on the back end, Capital Engineering found there were
    issues with exposing confidential information when sharing data with
    clients. The need for greater security was a key driver in moving to a
    Microsoft-based platform"

    "In the past with the Linux server, this was difficult without having
    someone onsite to provide an open connection to a certain folder.
    There was way more overhead involved with sharing data on the Linux
    server."

    "Capital Engineering's Linux solution could no longer keep up with the
    volume of message traffic being generated by the growing company, and
    mobile users could not access email and customer data easily when they
    were travelling or working offsite"

    "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least
    once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually
    eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."

    - Ed Castillo, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital Engineering

    http://www.microsoft.com/canada/case...gineering.mspx

    "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least
    once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually
    eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."

    - Hussein Kaddoura, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital
    Engineering

  2. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..


    "Doug Mentohl" wrote in message
    news:e60d613d-efe6-49ab-a64d-4a34cdf8ac0e@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
    > "The company's Linux-based platform made it difficult and expensive to
    > collaborate with clients effectively because a majority of its
    > customers work in a Microsoft-based IT environment"
    >
    > "With Linux on the back end, Capital Engineering found there were
    > issues with exposing confidential information when sharing data with
    > clients. The need for greater security was a key driver in moving to a
    > Microsoft-based platform"
    >
    > "In the past with the Linux server, this was difficult without having
    > someone onsite to provide an open connection to a certain folder.
    > There was way more overhead involved with sharing data on the Linux
    > server."
    >
    > "Capital Engineering's Linux solution could no longer keep up with the
    > volume of message traffic being generated by the growing company, and
    > mobile users could not access email and customer data easily when they
    > were travelling or working offsite"
    >
    > "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least
    > once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually
    > eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >
    > - Ed Castillo, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital Engineering
    >
    > http://www.microsoft.com/canada/case...gineering.mspx
    >
    > "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least
    > once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually
    > eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >
    > - Hussein Kaddoura, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital
    > Engineering



    They must have been using one of the more stable and mature versions of
    linux if it was only crashing once a week. It's a well known fact that most
    linux machines grind to a halt within days or sometimes hours because of
    memory leaks in the kernel.







    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  3. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..

    On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:32:48 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:

    > "Doug Mentohl" wrote in message
    > news:e60d613d-efe6-49ab-a64d-4a34cdf8ac0e@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
    >> "The company's Linux-based platform made it difficult and expensive to
    >> collaborate with clients effectively because a majority of its
    >> customers work in a Microsoft-based IT environment"
    >>
    >> "With Linux on the back end, Capital Engineering found there were
    >> issues with exposing confidential information when sharing data with
    >> clients. The need for greater security was a key driver in moving to a
    >> Microsoft-based platform"
    >>
    >> "In the past with the Linux server, this was difficult without having
    >> someone onsite to provide an open connection to a certain folder.
    >> There was way more overhead involved with sharing data on the Linux
    >> server."
    >>
    >> "Capital Engineering's Linux solution could no longer keep up with the
    >> volume of message traffic being generated by the growing company, and
    >> mobile users could not access email and customer data easily when they
    >> were travelling or working offsite"
    >>
    >> "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least
    >> once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually
    >> eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >>
    >> - Ed Castillo, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital Engineering
    >>
    >> http://www.microsoft.com/canada/case...gineering.mspx
    >>
    >> "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least
    >> once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually
    >> eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >>
    >> - Hussein Kaddoura, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital
    >> Engineering

    >
    >
    > They must have been using one of the more stable and mature versions of
    > linux if it was only crashing once a week. It's a well known fact that most
    > linux machines grind to a halt within days or sometimes hours because of
    > memory leaks in the kernel.


    Not to mention inept administration.
    Take Roy Schestowitz for example.
    Please............

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  4. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..

    * Doug Mentohl peremptorily fired off this memo:



    > http://www.microsoft.com/canada/case...gineering.mspx


    The idiots should have gone to RedHat .

    --
    We don't have the user centricity. Until we understand context, which is way
    beyond presence -- presence is the most trivial notion, just am I on this
    device or not; it doesn't say am I meeting with something, am I focused on
    writing something.
    -- Bill Gates, .NET Briefing Day Speech (24 July 2002)

  5. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..

    Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    > On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:32:48 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >
    >> "Doug Mentohl" wrote in message
    >> news:e60d613d-efe6-49ab-a64d-4a34cdf8ac0e@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
    >>> "The company's Linux-based platform made it difficult and expensive
    >>> to collaborate with clients effectively because a majority of its
    >>> customers work in a Microsoft-based IT environment"
    >>>
    >>> "With Linux on the back end, Capital Engineering found there were
    >>> issues with exposing confidential information when sharing data with
    >>> clients. The need for greater security was a key driver in moving
    >>> to a Microsoft-based platform"
    >>>
    >>> "In the past with the Linux server, this was difficult without
    >>> having someone onsite to provide an open connection to a certain
    >>> folder. There was way more overhead involved with sharing data on
    >>> the Linux server."
    >>>
    >>> "Capital Engineering's Linux solution could no longer keep up with
    >>> the volume of message traffic being generated by the growing
    >>> company, and mobile users could not access email and customer data
    >>> easily when they were travelling or working offsite"
    >>>
    >>> "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least
    >>> once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually
    >>> eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >>>
    >>> - Ed Castillo, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital Engineering
    >>>
    >>> http://www.microsoft.com/canada/case...gineering.mspx
    >>>
    >>> "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least
    >>> once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually
    >>> eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >>>
    >>> - Hussein Kaddoura, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital
    >>> Engineering

    >>
    >>
    >> They must have been using one of the more stable and mature versions
    >> of linux if it was only crashing once a week. It's a well known fact
    >> that most linux machines grind to a halt within days or sometimes
    >> hours because of memory leaks in the kernel.

    >
    > Not to mention inept administration.
    > Take Roy Schestowitz for example.
    > Please............


    I hope he doesn't take me; he might give me a virus!
    --
    http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
    - Personalised Desktop Computers



  6. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..

    On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 19:51:23 -0000, Dr.Hal0nf1r$ wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >> On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:32:48 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Doug Mentohl" wrote in message
    >>> news:e60d613d-efe6-49ab-a64d-4a34cdf8ac0e@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
    >>>> "The company's Linux-based platform made it difficult and expensive
    >>>> to collaborate with clients effectively because a majority of its
    >>>> customers work in a Microsoft-based IT environment"
    >>>>
    >>>> "With Linux on the back end, Capital Engineering found there were
    >>>> issues with exposing confidential information when sharing data with
    >>>> clients. The need for greater security was a key driver in moving
    >>>> to a Microsoft-based platform"
    >>>>
    >>>> "In the past with the Linux server, this was difficult without
    >>>> having someone onsite to provide an open connection to a certain
    >>>> folder. There was way more overhead involved with sharing data on
    >>>> the Linux server."
    >>>>
    >>>> "Capital Engineering's Linux solution could no longer keep up with
    >>>> the volume of message traffic being generated by the growing
    >>>> company, and mobile users could not access email and customer data
    >>>> easily when they were travelling or working offsite"
    >>>>
    >>>> "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least
    >>>> once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually
    >>>> eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >>>>
    >>>> - Ed Castillo, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital Engineering
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.microsoft.com/canada/case...gineering.mspx
    >>>>
    >>>> "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least
    >>>> once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually
    >>>> eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >>>>
    >>>> - Hussein Kaddoura, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital
    >>>> Engineering
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> They must have been using one of the more stable and mature versions
    >>> of linux if it was only crashing once a week. It's a well known fact
    >>> that most linux machines grind to a halt within days or sometimes
    >>> hours because of memory leaks in the kernel.

    >>
    >> Not to mention inept administration.
    >> Take Roy Schestowitz for example.
    >> Please............

    >
    > I hope he doesn't take me; he might give me a virus!


    Yea....
    The guy is a walking petri dish...

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  7. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..

    Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    > On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 19:51:23 -0000, Dr.Hal0nf1r$ wrote:
    >
    >> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >>> On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:32:48 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> "Doug Mentohl" wrote in message
    >>>> news:e60d613d-efe6-49ab-a64d-4a34cdf8ac0e@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
    >>>>> "The company's Linux-based platform made it difficult and
    >>>>> expensive to collaborate with clients effectively because a
    >>>>> majority of its customers work in a Microsoft-based IT
    >>>>> environment"
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "With Linux on the back end, Capital Engineering found there were
    >>>>> issues with exposing confidential information when sharing data
    >>>>> with clients. The need for greater security was a key driver in
    >>>>> moving to a Microsoft-based platform"
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "In the past with the Linux server, this was difficult without
    >>>>> having someone onsite to provide an open connection to a certain
    >>>>> folder. There was way more overhead involved with sharing data on
    >>>>> the Linux server."
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Capital Engineering's Linux solution could no longer keep up with
    >>>>> the volume of message traffic being generated by the growing
    >>>>> company, and mobile users could not access email and customer data
    >>>>> easily when they were travelling or working offsite"
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at
    >>>>> least once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has
    >>>>> virtually eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >>>>>
    >>>>> - Ed Castillo, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital
    >>>>> Engineering
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/canada/case...gineering.mspx
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at
    >>>>> least once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has
    >>>>> virtually eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >>>>>
    >>>>> - Hussein Kaddoura, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital
    >>>>> Engineering
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> They must have been using one of the more stable and mature
    >>>> versions of linux if it was only crashing once a week. It's a well
    >>>> known fact that most linux machines grind to a halt within days or
    >>>> sometimes hours because of memory leaks in the kernel.
    >>>
    >>> Not to mention inept administration.
    >>> Take Roy Schestowitz for example.
    >>> Please............

    >>
    >> I hope he doesn't take me; he might give me a virus!

    >
    > Yea....
    > The guy is a walking petri dish...


    Little do the Usenet community know that behind that guise of a simple
    asshole on a mission to harm Microsoft; in truth the real identity of Roy
    Schestowitz is none other than the techno-supervillain Jairus the Virus.

    --
    http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
    - Personalised Desktop Computers



  8. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..


  9. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..


  10. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..

    On 2008-03-28 10:28:07 -0400, Doug Mentohl said:

    > "The company's Linux-based platform made it difficult and expensive to
    > collaborate with clients effectively because a majority of its
    > customers work in a Microsoft-based IT environment"
    >
    > "With Linux on the back end, Capital Engineering found there were
    > issues with exposing confidential information when sharing data with
    > clients. The need for greater security was a key driver in moving to a
    > Microsoft-based platform"
    >
    > "In the past with the Linux server, this was difficult without having
    > someone onsite to provide an open connection to a certain folder.
    > There was way more overhead involved with sharing data on the Linux
    > server."
    >
    > "Capital Engineering's Linux solution could no longer keep up with the
    > volume of message traffic being generated by the growing company, and
    > mobile users could not access email and customer data easily when they
    > were travelling or working offsite"
    >
    > "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least
    > once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually
    > eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >
    > - Ed Castillo, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital Engineering
    >
    > http://www.microsoft.com/canada/case...gineering.mspx
    >
    > "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least
    > once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually
    > eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >
    > - Hussein Kaddoura, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital
    > Engineering



    What a complete rock of ****!

    Nice try ****tard!



  11. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Larry's prostate

    wrote
    on Fri, 28 Mar 2008 18:53:16 -0400
    <47ed76e9$0$12562$4c368faf@roadrunner.com>:
    > On 2008-03-28 10:28:07 -0400, Doug Mentohl said:
    >
    >> "The company's Linux-based platform made it difficult and expensive to
    >> collaborate with clients effectively because a majority of its
    >> customers work in a Microsoft-based IT environment"
    >>
    >> "With Linux on the back end, Capital Engineering found there were
    >> issues with exposing confidential information when sharing data with
    >> clients. The need for greater security was a key driver in moving to a
    >> Microsoft-based platform"
    >>
    >> "In the past with the Linux server, this was difficult without having
    >> someone onsite to provide an open connection to a certain folder.
    >> There was way more overhead involved with sharing data on the Linux
    >> server."
    >>
    >> "Capital Engineering's Linux solution could no longer keep up with the
    >> volume of message traffic being generated by the growing company, and
    >> mobile users could not access email and customer data easily when they
    >> were travelling or working offsite"
    >>
    >> "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least
    >> once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually
    >> eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >>
    >> - Ed Castillo, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital Engineering
    >>
    >> http://www.microsoft.com/canada/case...gineering.mspx
    >>
    >> "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least
    >> once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually
    >> eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >>
    >> - Hussein Kaddoura, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital
    >> Engineering

    >
    >
    > What a complete rock of ****!
    >
    > Nice try ****tard!
    >


    Something suggests to me that this sort of major Linux
    foulup is not because of Linux but because someone was
    using substandard hardware...

    Granted, the same could be said for a lot of Windows
    problems as well.

    One wonders.

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Windows. Multi-platform(1), multi-tasking(1), multi-user(1).
    (1) if one defines "multi" as "exactly one".

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  12. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..

    Doug Mentohl wrote:

    > Ed Castillo, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital Engineering


    And obviously a totally incompetent dip****.

    --
    RonB
    "There's a story there...somewhere"

  13. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..

    Ezekiel wrote:

    > They must have been using one of the more stable and mature versions of
    > linux if it was only crashing once a week. It's a well known fact that
    > most linux machines grind to a halt within days or sometimes hours because
    > of memory leaks in the kernel.


    Well known "fact" in the realm of WinTrolls. Those very same WinTrolls who
    drool in the Linux Advocacy newsgroup 24/7 -- while simultaneously claiming
    that Linux offers absolutely nothing for Micro$hafters to worry about.

    --
    RonB
    "There's a story there...somewhere"

  14. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..

    On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:17:20 -0000, Dr.Hal0nf1r$ wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >> On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 19:51:23 -0000, Dr.Hal0nf1r$ wrote:
    >>
    >>> Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
    >>>> On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:32:48 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> "Doug Mentohl" wrote in message
    >>>>> news:e60d613d-efe6-49ab-a64d-4a34cdf8ac0e@h11g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
    >>>>>> "The company's Linux-based platform made it difficult and
    >>>>>> expensive to collaborate with clients effectively because a
    >>>>>> majority of its customers work in a Microsoft-based IT
    >>>>>> environment"
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "With Linux on the back end, Capital Engineering found there were
    >>>>>> issues with exposing confidential information when sharing data
    >>>>>> with clients. The need for greater security was a key driver in
    >>>>>> moving to a Microsoft-based platform"
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "In the past with the Linux server, this was difficult without
    >>>>>> having someone onsite to provide an open connection to a certain
    >>>>>> folder. There was way more overhead involved with sharing data on
    >>>>>> the Linux server."
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "Capital Engineering's Linux solution could no longer keep up with
    >>>>>> the volume of message traffic being generated by the growing
    >>>>>> company, and mobile users could not access email and customer data
    >>>>>> easily when they were travelling or working offsite"
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at
    >>>>>> least once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has
    >>>>>> virtually eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> - Ed Castillo, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital
    >>>>>> Engineering
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> http://www.microsoft.com/canada/case...gineering.mspx
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at
    >>>>>> least once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has
    >>>>>> virtually eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> - Hussein Kaddoura, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital
    >>>>>> Engineering
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> They must have been using one of the more stable and mature
    >>>>> versions of linux if it was only crashing once a week. It's a well
    >>>>> known fact that most linux machines grind to a halt within days or
    >>>>> sometimes hours because of memory leaks in the kernel.
    >>>>
    >>>> Not to mention inept administration.
    >>>> Take Roy Schestowitz for example.
    >>>> Please............
    >>>
    >>> I hope he doesn't take me; he might give me a virus!

    >>
    >> Yea....
    >> The guy is a walking petri dish...

    >
    > Little do the Usenet community know that behind that guise of a simple
    > asshole on a mission to harm Microsoft; in truth the real identity of Roy
    > Schestowitz is none other than the techno-supervillain Jairus the Virus.


    Yea!
    He's traveling in FOG-nito....

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  15. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..

    [snips]

    On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 10:32:48 -0400, Ezekiel wrote:

    > They must have been using one of the more stable and mature versions of
    > linux if it was only crashing once a week. It's a well known fact that
    > most linux machines grind to a halt within days or sometimes hours
    > because of memory leaks in the kernel.


    Machine 1: uptime 98 days, 15:21
    Machine 2: uptime 375 days, 16:39
    Machine 3: uptime 375 days, 15:52

    Machines 2 & 3, combined:

    Total inbound messages: 125,164,286 (12 months)
    Monthly average: 10,430,357
    Daily average: 347,675
    Hourly average: 14,486
    Per-minute average: 241
    Peak loading: 15,412 messages/minute

    241 messages per minute doesn't seem like a lot, until you stop and
    realize a couple of points:

    1) That includes RBL checks, spam-scanning and the rest
    2) The system has to be designed to handle the peak load, not the average
    3) When several local ISPs, including the "big boys", got hit with a spam
    bomb lasting some 72 hours, our machines cleared the jam and were back to
    normal operations in an additional 72 hours, where the "big boys" were
    still cleaning up the mess weeks later, despite having approximately five
    times the hardware to handle a similar number of users.

    Point being, it works, very efficiently, very effectively and very, very
    reliably and does so for a year and more at a go.

    Not sure where this supposed grinding to a halt in days or hours comes
    into play; we handle terabytes of traffic for thousands of users and
    millions of messages without ever encountering it.




  16. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..

    Doug Mentohl espoused:
    > "The company's Linux-based platform made it difficult and expensive to
    > collaborate with clients effectively because a majority of its
    > customers work in a Microsoft-based IT environment"
    >
    > "With Linux on the back end, Capital Engineering found there were
    > issues with exposing confidential information when sharing data with
    > clients. The need for greater security was a key driver in moving to a
    > Microsoft-based platform"
    >
    > "In the past with the Linux server, this was difficult without having
    > someone onsite to provide an open connection to a certain folder.
    > There was way more overhead involved with sharing data on the Linux
    > server."
    >
    > "Capital Engineering's Linux solution could no longer keep up with the
    > volume of message traffic being generated by the growing company, and
    > mobile users could not access email and customer data easily when they
    > were travelling or working offsite"
    >
    > "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least
    > once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually
    > eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >
    > - Ed Castillo, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital Engineering
    >
    > http://www.microsoft.com/canada/case...gineering.mspx
    >
    > "With the Linux-based platform we would have a system crash at least
    > once a week. Migrating to a Microsoft-based system has virtually
    > eliminated server crashes and we have vendor support."
    >
    > - Hussein Kaddoura, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital
    > Engineering


    "A certain folder"? Since when did Linux systems have folders? This
    has the odour of dishonesty about it.

    --
    | mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |


  17. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..

    RonB wrote:

    > Doug Mentohl wrote:
    >
    >> Ed Castillo, Information Technology Team Lead, Capital Engineering

    >
    > And obviously a totally incompetent dip****.


    Must be.

    I read an article that the BBC R&D team at Kingswood Warren has gone the *other*
    way, from Windows to Linux. They said they needed a system that can cope with
    four or five 1.5gbps streams of data *simultaneously*, & that Windows could not
    keep up with the increasing demand. They wanted a system that didn't buckle &
    crash under the strain, & they can take advantage of the Linux system's modular
    design. The BEEB's senior software engineer, Suart Cunningham, said "The
    Windows NTFS file system is not very good. It cannot cope with the data we are
    simultaneously trying to save." He went on to say that the Linux XFS filesystem
    was ideal for their use.

    --
    Mandriva - 2008.1 - RC2 - 64bit OS.
    COLA trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/

  18. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..

    In article <13h1c5-96v.ln1@ellandroad.demon.co.uk>,
    Mark Kent wrote:
    > "A certain folder"? Since when did Linux systems have folders? This
    > has the odour of dishonesty about it.


    Linux has had folders pretty much from the start. It didn't take long
    at all for people to start getting various GUI environments up on Linux,
    and many (most?) of those provided folders. There is often a direct
    correspondence between folders and directories (e.g., a folder is
    usually the GUI object that represents a directory--which is a file
    system object, not a GUI object), but there sometimes are folders that
    aren't representations of a directory, and directories that aren't
    represented as folders.

    However, in casual speech it is common to use "folder" and "directory"
    interchangeably.

    --
    --Tim Smith

  19. Re: a system crash at least once a week ..

    Moshe Goldfarb is flatfish (aka: Gary Stewart)

    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2008/...arb-troll.html
    http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/2007/...ish-troll.html

    Traits:

    Frequently cross posts replies to other non-Linux related newsgroups

+ Reply to Thread