Surefire solution - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on Surefire solution - Ubuntu ; ray wrote: > On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 21:35:30 -0800, jeff wrote: > > >>Based on some of the threads that I see here recently, apparently not >>everyone knows this... A surefire way to deal with trolls is to simply ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 75

Thread: Surefire solution

  1. Re: Surefire solution

    ray wrote:
    > On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 21:35:30 -0800, jeff wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Based on some of the threads that I see here recently, apparently not
    >>everyone knows this... A surefire way to deal with trolls is to simply
    >>not respond to them. The same approach, BTW, works on the few who
    >>derive childish pleasure out of feeding the trolls. Leave them all be,
    >>killfile them, and the world will be a (little bit) saner place.
    >>
    >>Just say ''.
    >>
    >>Jeff

    >
    >
    > Actually, silence does little to disuade them. Particularly in the case
    > of 'frank' it is entertaining to push him just a little - usually does
    > not take much and he deteriorates into a whining little ball of epithets
    > - shows his true colors to the entire world.



    Payback is such a bitch isn't it...LOL!
    Frank

  2. Re: Surefire solution

    On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 22:05:27 -0500, CBFalconer wrote:

    > Don't feed the trolls.


    Fix your double signature block, dimwit. You've been asked to do this
    numerous times by numerous people, and yet you refuse.

    A bigger hypocrite would be near impossible to find.

    Bugger off.


    --
    "Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".


  3. Re: Surefire solution

    CBFalconer wrote:

    > ray wrote:
    >
    >>jeff wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Based on some of the threads that I see here recently, apparently
    >>>not everyone knows this... A surefire way to deal with trolls is
    >>>to simply not respond to them. The same approach, BTW, works on
    >>>the few who derive childish pleasure out of feeding the trolls.
    >>>Leave them all be, killfile them, and the world will be a (little
    >>>bit) saner place.
    >>>
    >>>Just say ''.

    >>
    >>Actually, silence does little to disuade them. Particularly in the
    >>case of 'frank' it is entertaining to push him just a little -
    >>usually does not take much and he deteriorates into a whining
    >>little ball of epithets - shows his true colors to the entire world.

    >
    >
    > And in the process you clutter the newsgroup with many of your
    > 'pushes' and franks deteriorations. Just leave him alone and he
    > will eventually die out, for some value of 'eventually'. That way
    > everybody gains.
    >
    > Don't feed the trolls.
    >

    You're one of the brain dead morons who populates this open sores
    ****hole and you have no idea why I'm here do you?
    You and the rest of your sisters are just a bunch of totally clueless
    loser assholes!
    Frank

  4. Re: Surefire solution

    Christopher Hunter wrote:


    > "Frank" is so utterly stupid, and self-deluded enough to think that the
    > rubbish (s)he spews into this NG is actually believed by /anyone,/ that
    > it's fun to play with.


    It may be fun for you but annoys other people and makes this group
    unreadable. Please stop it.


    Florian
    --

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    ** Hi! I'm a signature virus! Copy me into your signature, please! **
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

  5. Re: Surefire solution

    George Orwell wrote:

    >> Name one system that is essential that has to be unix, please?

    >
    > SMTP, HTTP, NNTP, IRC, SIP, FTP, NTP, NS, DNS...


    .... and /many/ more.

    > Without *nix they'd all be ancient history. Winblows would crumble
    > under the weight and Wintard admins would go postal and eat each other.


    /That/ could be fun!

    > Ok, so that last bit is a good reason for letting the information dirt
    > road to take a Winblows detour for a couple hours... *laugh*


    Exactly!

    C.

    --
    Windows - a poor proprietary client for a Unix world.

  6. Re: Surefire solution



    "George Orwell" wrote in message
    news:076f1cc3a99f1775a78b688f6af46d98@mixmaster.it ...
    > dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> "Dirk T. Verbeek" wrote in message
    >> news:47b9f7c3$0$14352$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
    >> > dennis@home schreef:
    >> >>
    >> >>
    >> >> "Christopher Hunter" wrote in
    >> >> message news:G2muj.107191$801.87676@fe1.news.blueyonder.co .uk...
    >> >>> Vitorio Okio wrote:
    >> >>>
    >> >>>> Yes, do not feed the trolls.
    >> >>>
    >> >>> Why not? It's fun to annoy a fool like "Frank". (S)he's so sure
    >> >>> that
    >> >>> "everyone runs Windows" that (s)he doesn't realise that the web is
    >> >>> held
    >> >>> together with Linux and Unix.
    >> >>
    >> >> The web wouldn't go away if you removed unix
    >> >
    >> > Hmm I think you are short of a few minutes of study...
    >> >
    >> >> as not everything uses unix or linux.
    >> >
    >> > No but the essentials do.

    >>
    >> Name one system that is essential that has to be unix, please?

    >
    > SMTP, HTTP, NNTP, IRC, SIP, FTP, NTP, NS, DNS...


    Don't be stupid they all run on things other than unix.
    You really should stop posting as it makes you look stupid every time you
    do.

    >
    > Without *nix they'd all be ancient history. Winblows would crumble
    > under the weight and Wintard admins would go postal and eat each other.
    >
    > Ok, so that last bit is a good reason for letting the information dirt
    > road to take a Winblows detour for a couple hours... *laugh*
    >
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
    > non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
    > reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
    > di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
    > Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
    > https://www.mixmaster.it


    Why not fix your sig or stop posting from some cr@p anonymous server, alias?


  7. Re: Surefire solution



    "CBFalconer" wrote in message
    news:47BA4777.6E164A9F@yahoo.com...


    > Don't feed the trolls.


    You are a troll dimwit.




  8. Re: Surefire solution

    dennis@home wrote:

    >
    >
    > "George Orwell" wrote in message
    > news:076f1cc3a99f1775a78b688f6af46d98@mixmaster.it ...
    >> dennis@home wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Dirk T. Verbeek" wrote in message
    >>> news:47b9f7c3$0$14352$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
    >>> > dennis@home schreef:
    >>> >>
    >>> >>
    >>> >> "Christopher Hunter" wrote in
    >>> >> message news:G2muj.107191$801.87676@fe1.news.blueyonder.co .uk...
    >>> >>> Vitorio Okio wrote:
    >>> >>>
    >>> >>>> Yes, do not feed the trolls.
    >>> >>>
    >>> >>> Why not? It's fun to annoy a fool like "Frank". (S)he's so sure
    >>> >>> that
    >>> >>> "everyone runs Windows" that (s)he doesn't realise that the web is
    >>> >>> held
    >>> >>> together with Linux and Unix.
    >>> >>
    >>> >> The web wouldn't go away if you removed unix
    >>> >
    >>> > Hmm I think you are short of a few minutes of study...
    >>> >
    >>> >> as not everything uses unix or linux.
    >>> >
    >>> > No but the essentials do.
    >>>
    >>> Name one system that is essential that has to be unix, please?

    >>
    >> SMTP, HTTP, NNTP, IRC, SIP, FTP, NTP, NS, DNS...

    >
    > Don't be stupid they all run on things other than unix.
    > You really should stop posting as it makes you look stupid every time you
    > do.
    >


    In theory, yes, they all /could/ be handled by windows.

    In practice though, even MS itself stopped using windows for DNS, for
    example.
    Some years ago MS sites were unreacheable for days. It turned out that MS
    was not able to handle DNS effiently enough, and their servers crashed
    constantly.
    So they decided to use Akamai's services instead. Akamai uses linux

    And if one tries a breakdown of the sites, one can't fail to notice that MS
    servers handle a lot of the "parked" sites without any traffic. Most "high
    traffic" sites are run by *nix machines
    --
    Designed for Windows. No user serviceable parts inside. By design


  9. Re: Surefire solution

    Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    > dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >
    >> "George Orwell" wrote in message
    >> news:076f1cc3a99f1775a78b688f6af46d98@mixmaster.it ...
    >>
    >>> dennis@home wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> "Dirk T. Verbeek" wrote in message
    >>>> news:47b9f7c3$0$14352$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
    >>>>
    >>>>> dennis@home schreef:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> "Christopher Hunter" wrote in
    >>>>>> message news:G2muj.107191$801.87676@fe1.news.blueyonder.co .uk...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Vitorio Okio wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Yes, do not feed the trolls.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Why not? It's fun to annoy a fool like "Frank". (S)he's so sure
    >>>>>>> that
    >>>>>>> "everyone runs Windows" that (s)he doesn't realise that the web is
    >>>>>>> held
    >>>>>>> together with Linux and Unix.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> The web wouldn't go away if you removed unix
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> Hmm I think you are short of a few minutes of study...
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> as not everything uses unix or linux.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> No but the essentials do.
    >>>>>
    >>>> Name one system that is essential that has to be unix, please?
    >>>>
    >>> SMTP, HTTP, NNTP, IRC, SIP, FTP, NTP, NS, DNS...
    >>>

    >> Don't be stupid they all run on things other than unix.
    >> You really should stop posting as it makes you look stupid every time you
    >> do.
    >>
    >>

    >
    > In theory, yes, they all /could/ be handled by windows.
    >
    > In practice though, even MS itself stopped using windows for DNS, for
    > example.
    > Some years ago MS sites were unreacheable for days. It turned out that MS
    > was not able to handle DNS effiently enough, and their servers crashed
    > constantly.
    > So they decided to use Akamai's services instead. Akamai uses linux
    >
    > And if one tries a breakdown of the sites, one can't fail to notice that MS
    > servers handle a lot of the "parked" sites without any traffic. Most "high
    > traffic" sites are run by *nix machines
    >



    Let's not be so narrow-minded. Windows and *nix are not all that there are.

    I still use AboutTime client on the old Windows 95 and 98 PCs, and the
    built-in NTP client on Windows XP. All other clients use ntpd on some
    distro of GNU/Linux, with a Stratum Two ntpd server running on a Debian box.

    I've also used HTTP and FTP under Windows in the past. Now they are
    running under GNU/Linux.

    As for the others, I've used NNTP (RumorMill), DNS (Mac DNS and QuickDNS
    Pro), and FTP on a Mac (pre-OS-X). I've moved these to INN, BIND9 and
    vsftpd on GNU/Linux.

    I am still running SMTP and POP3 on an old PowerMac 8500 under System
    9.0.4. It will be replaced by Exim4 or Postfix, when I get my roundtuit.

    They all sufficed in their day, but time marches onward.


    --
    John

    No Microsoft, Apple, Intel, Trend Micro, nor Ford products were used in the preparation or transmission of this message.

    The EULA sounds like it was written by a team of lawyers who want to tell me what I can't do. The GPL sounds like it was written by a human being, who wants me to know what I can do.

  10. Re: Surefire solution



    "PeterKöhlmann" wrote in message
    news:fpe4vj$81t$03$1@news.t-online.com...
    > dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> "George Orwell" wrote in message
    >> news:076f1cc3a99f1775a78b688f6af46d98@mixmaster.it ...
    >>> dennis@home wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "Dirk T. Verbeek" wrote in message
    >>>> news:47b9f7c3$0$14352$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
    >>>> > dennis@home schreef:
    >>>> >>
    >>>> >>
    >>>> >> "Christopher Hunter" wrote in
    >>>> >> message news:G2muj.107191$801.87676@fe1.news.blueyonder.co .uk...
    >>>> >>> Vitorio Okio wrote:
    >>>> >>>
    >>>> >>>> Yes, do not feed the trolls.
    >>>> >>>
    >>>> >>> Why not? It's fun to annoy a fool like "Frank". (S)he's so sure
    >>>> >>> that
    >>>> >>> "everyone runs Windows" that (s)he doesn't realise that the web is
    >>>> >>> held
    >>>> >>> together with Linux and Unix.
    >>>> >>
    >>>> >> The web wouldn't go away if you removed unix
    >>>> >
    >>>> > Hmm I think you are short of a few minutes of study...
    >>>> >
    >>>> >> as not everything uses unix or linux.
    >>>> >
    >>>> > No but the essentials do.
    >>>>
    >>>> Name one system that is essential that has to be unix, please?
    >>>
    >>> SMTP, HTTP, NNTP, IRC, SIP, FTP, NTP, NS, DNS...

    >>
    >> Don't be stupid they all run on things other than unix.
    >> You really should stop posting as it makes you look stupid every time you
    >> do.
    >>

    >
    > In theory, yes, they all /could/ be handled by windows.
    >
    > In practice though, even MS itself stopped using windows for DNS, for
    > example.
    > Some years ago MS sites were unreacheable for days. It turned out that MS
    > was not able to handle DNS effiently enough, and their servers crashed
    > constantly.
    > So they decided to use Akamai's services instead. Akamai uses linux
    >
    > And if one tries a breakdown of the sites, one can't fail to notice that
    > MS
    > servers handle a lot of the "parked" sites without any traffic. Most "high
    > traffic" sites are run by *nix machines


    Probably something to do with the size of machines Windows is designed to
    run on.

    Maybe if M$ developed hardware they would have machines to compete with Sun
    , etc.
    As it is why bother when there is more cash in desktops and enterprise
    servers?



  11. Re: Surefire solution

    John F. Morse wrote:

    > Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >> dennis@home wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> "George Orwell" wrote in message
    >>> news:076f1cc3a99f1775a78b688f6af46d98@mixmaster.it ...
    >>>
    >>>> dennis@home wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> "Dirk T. Verbeek" wrote in message
    >>>>> news:47b9f7c3$0$14352$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> dennis@home schreef:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> "Christopher Hunter" wrote in
    >>>>>>> message news:G2muj.107191$801.87676@fe1.news.blueyonder.co .uk...
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Vitorio Okio wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Yes, do not feed the trolls.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Why not? It's fun to annoy a fool like "Frank". (S)he's so sure
    >>>>>>>> that
    >>>>>>>> "everyone runs Windows" that (s)he doesn't realise that the web is
    >>>>>>>> held
    >>>>>>>> together with Linux and Unix.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> The web wouldn't go away if you removed unix
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> Hmm I think you are short of a few minutes of study...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> as not everything uses unix or linux.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> No but the essentials do.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> Name one system that is essential that has to be unix, please?
    >>>>>
    >>>> SMTP, HTTP, NNTP, IRC, SIP, FTP, NTP, NS, DNS...
    >>>>
    >>> Don't be stupid they all run on things other than unix.
    >>> You really should stop posting as it makes you look stupid every time
    >>> you do.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> In theory, yes, they all /could/ be handled by windows.
    >>
    >> In practice though, even MS itself stopped using windows for DNS, for
    >> example.
    >> Some years ago MS sites were unreacheable for days. It turned out that MS
    >> was not able to handle DNS effiently enough, and their servers crashed
    >> constantly.
    >> So they decided to use Akamai's services instead. Akamai uses linux
    >>
    >> And if one tries a breakdown of the sites, one can't fail to notice that
    >> MS servers handle a lot of the "parked" sites without any traffic. Most
    >> "high traffic" sites are run by *nix machines
    >>

    >
    >
    > Let's not be so narrow-minded. Windows and *nix are not all that there
    > are.


    No. But the rest is near to non-existant
    Windows (still) rules the desktop niche, the different *nixes basically rule
    the server area (except, partially, in the corporate area, where windows
    has still a large segment).
    The internet is run to about 51% on linux, and around 35% windows servers.
    The rest is basically different Unixes, but not other OS

    Apple (with OSX) is a non-player in that area. Much too expensive (without
    any better quality) and a Unix which is way too different from all other
    unixes under the hood don't make it a likely candidate to use it for
    servers

    > I still use AboutTime client on the old Windows 95 and 98 PCs, and the
    > built-in NTP client on Windows XP.


    Fine, but irrelevant
    Nobody with half a working brain would use Win9X as a server.

    < snip >
    --
    "The Microsoft Game" rules are very simple:
    1. If you play Microsoft's game, Microsoft wins.
    2. If you refuse to play Microsoft's game, Microsoft wins.
    3. Anytime you win, Microsoft gets to change the rules.


  12. Re: Surefire solution

    dennis@home wrote:

    >
    >
    > "PeterKöhlmann" wrote in message
    > news:fpe4vj$81t$03$1@news.t-online.com...
    >> dennis@home wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "George Orwell" wrote in message
    >>> news:076f1cc3a99f1775a78b688f6af46d98@mixmaster.it ...
    >>>> dennis@home wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Dirk T. Verbeek" wrote in message
    >>>>> news:47b9f7c3$0$14352$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
    >>>>> > dennis@home schreef:
    >>>>> >>
    >>>>> >>
    >>>>> >> "Christopher Hunter" wrote in
    >>>>> >> message news:G2muj.107191$801.87676@fe1.news.blueyonder.co .uk...
    >>>>> >>> Vitorio Okio wrote:
    >>>>> >>>
    >>>>> >>>> Yes, do not feed the trolls.
    >>>>> >>>
    >>>>> >>> Why not? It's fun to annoy a fool like "Frank". (S)he's so sure
    >>>>> >>> that
    >>>>> >>> "everyone runs Windows" that (s)he doesn't realise that the web is
    >>>>> >>> held
    >>>>> >>> together with Linux and Unix.
    >>>>> >>
    >>>>> >> The web wouldn't go away if you removed unix
    >>>>> >
    >>>>> > Hmm I think you are short of a few minutes of study...
    >>>>> >
    >>>>> >> as not everything uses unix or linux.
    >>>>> >
    >>>>> > No but the essentials do.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Name one system that is essential that has to be unix, please?
    >>>>
    >>>> SMTP, HTTP, NNTP, IRC, SIP, FTP, NTP, NS, DNS...
    >>>
    >>> Don't be stupid they all run on things other than unix.
    >>> You really should stop posting as it makes you look stupid every time
    >>> you do.
    >>>

    >>
    >> In theory, yes, they all /could/ be handled by windows.
    >>
    >> In practice though, even MS itself stopped using windows for DNS, for
    >> example.
    >> Some years ago MS sites were unreacheable for days. It turned out that MS
    >> was not able to handle DNS effiently enough, and their servers crashed
    >> constantly.
    >> So they decided to use Akamai's services instead. Akamai uses linux
    >>
    >> And if one tries a breakdown of the sites, one can't fail to notice that
    >> MS
    >> servers handle a lot of the "parked" sites without any traffic. Most
    >> "high traffic" sites are run by *nix machines

    >
    > Probably something to do with the size of machines Windows is designed to
    > run on.


    Decidedly balderdash
    If you would ever look what is inside a typical server, it is usually about
    as powerful as typical desktop machines

    Granted, windows absolutely sucks at handling small machines with little
    computing power.
    And it sucks even more with multi-processor machines. It is barely able to
    handle typical desktop-types of machines.

    So yes, linux is much better in handling a wide area of machines from tiny
    embedded to supercomputers.

    But the bulk of the internet servers is quite simply the typical "blade"
    type. Machines which are not more powerful than run-off-the-mill desktops

    > Maybe if M$ developed hardware they would have machines to compete with
    > Sun , etc.


    If MS would do hardware, they would have to compete with companies which
    know what they are doing. Their current hardware (keyboards, mice etc)
    sucks donkey dicks. Miserable quality, all design and no function.
    Their "old" hardware was OK quality wise, the current one is not to be
    touched with a ten-foot pole

    > As it is why bother when there is more cash in desktops and enterprise
    > servers?


    Well, they are losing traction with the enterprise servers, too.
    A few years ago it was a rare find to see a linux server in a company. Today
    it is almost the rule. Windows CALs and a much better TCO for linux have
    done their fair share
    --
    Windows: Because everyone needs a good laugh!


  13. Re: Surefire solution



    "PeterKöhlmann" wrote in message
    news:fpe9t5$grj$02$1@news.t-online.com...
    > dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> "PeterKöhlmann" wrote in message
    >> news:fpe4vj$81t$03$1@news.t-online.com...
    >>> dennis@home wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "George Orwell" wrote in message
    >>>> news:076f1cc3a99f1775a78b688f6af46d98@mixmaster.it ...
    >>>>> dennis@home wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "Dirk T. Verbeek" wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:47b9f7c3$0$14352$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
    >>>>>> > dennis@home schreef:
    >>>>>> >>
    >>>>>> >>
    >>>>>> >> "Christopher Hunter" wrote
    >>>>>> >> in
    >>>>>> >> message news:G2muj.107191$801.87676@fe1.news.blueyonder.co .uk...
    >>>>>> >>> Vitorio Okio wrote:
    >>>>>> >>>
    >>>>>> >>>> Yes, do not feed the trolls.
    >>>>>> >>>
    >>>>>> >>> Why not? It's fun to annoy a fool like "Frank". (S)he's so sure
    >>>>>> >>> that
    >>>>>> >>> "everyone runs Windows" that (s)he doesn't realise that the web
    >>>>>> >>> is
    >>>>>> >>> held
    >>>>>> >>> together with Linux and Unix.
    >>>>>> >>
    >>>>>> >> The web wouldn't go away if you removed unix
    >>>>>> >
    >>>>>> > Hmm I think you are short of a few minutes of study...
    >>>>>> >
    >>>>>> >> as not everything uses unix or linux.
    >>>>>> >
    >>>>>> > No but the essentials do.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Name one system that is essential that has to be unix, please?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> SMTP, HTTP, NNTP, IRC, SIP, FTP, NTP, NS, DNS...
    >>>>
    >>>> Don't be stupid they all run on things other than unix.
    >>>> You really should stop posting as it makes you look stupid every time
    >>>> you do.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> In theory, yes, they all /could/ be handled by windows.
    >>>
    >>> In practice though, even MS itself stopped using windows for DNS, for
    >>> example.
    >>> Some years ago MS sites were unreacheable for days. It turned out that
    >>> MS
    >>> was not able to handle DNS effiently enough, and their servers crashed
    >>> constantly.
    >>> So they decided to use Akamai's services instead. Akamai uses linux
    >>>
    >>> And if one tries a breakdown of the sites, one can't fail to notice that
    >>> MS
    >>> servers handle a lot of the "parked" sites without any traffic. Most
    >>> "high traffic" sites are run by *nix machines

    >>
    >> Probably something to do with the size of machines Windows is designed to
    >> run on.

    >
    > Decidedly balderdash
    > If you would ever look what is inside a typical server, it is usually
    > about
    > as powerful as typical desktop machines


    We aren't on about typical servers though.
    If we were windows would be a viable option.
    You really should try and think before posting.

    >
    > Granted, windows absolutely sucks at handling small machines with little
    > computing power.
    > And it sucks even more with multi-processor machines. It is barely able to
    > handle typical desktop-types of machines.


    That is why 90+% use it.. because it can't work as you like to claim.
    I bet you still claim windows is running a really old stolen ip stack, you
    know the really old one that does ipv6.
    Your opinions are worthless when it comes to computers as your judgment is
    impaired by petty hate.

    >
    > So yes, linux is much better in handling a wide area of machines from tiny
    > embedded to supercomputers.


    Yes if you want to call all those different variants "linux" which is
    stretching the truth rather a bit. Open source maybe but linux is being
    silly as many of them are nothing like the linux you are running.

    >
    > But the bulk of the internet servers is quite simply the typical "blade"
    > type. Machines which are not more powerful than run-off-the-mill desktops


    So? Many blades run windows I don't see your point. Are you trying to start
    another windows vs. linux battle so you can troll some more?

    >
    >> Maybe if M$ developed hardware they would have machines to compete with
    >> Sun , etc.

    >
    > If MS would do hardware, they would have to compete with companies which
    > know what they are doing. Their current hardware (keyboards, mice etc)
    > sucks donkey dicks. Miserable quality, all design and no function.
    > Their "old" hardware was OK quality wise, the current one is not to be
    > touched with a ten-foot pole


    Odd really as they tend to badge the stuff the companies you talk about as
    being competitors.
    Must be a problem when you don't understand where the hardware comes from.
    Next you will be thinking HP design and build servers.

    >
    >> As it is why bother when there is more cash in desktops and enterprise
    >> servers?

    >
    > Well, they are losing traction with the enterprise servers, too.
    > A few years ago it was a rare find to see a linux server in a company.
    > Today
    > it is almost the rule. Windows CALs and a much better TCO for linux have
    > done their fair share


    Maybe, maybe not, its not my problem as long as I can get the applications I
    need.
    If I can't then it becomes my problem.
    I have been there before when if you wanted and office application you wrote
    one but that was many years ago when there were dozens of different unices
    with different hardware requirements and even different page sizes. It
    wastes effort that could be used for other things just like learning to use
    another windows manager. Its not worth doing unless you have to for most
    people. If you ever actually meet some real grown ups one day, you may learn
    from observing them, but I doubt it in your case.

    > --
    > Windows: Because everyone needs a good laugh!


    --
    Linux advocates: because everyone needs to know there is always someone
    below them.

    --

    Oh look "two" many sigs.

    --

    Sigs: an easy way to waste bandwidth.


  14. Re: Surefire solution



    "PeterKöhlmann" wrote in message
    news:fpe94a$2l1$00$1@news.t-online.com...
    > John F. Morse wrote:


    8<

    >> Let's not be so narrow-minded. Windows and *nix are not all that there
    >> are.

    >
    > No. But the rest is near to non-existant
    > Windows (still) rules the desktop niche, the different *nixes basically
    > rule
    > the server area (except, partially, in the corporate area, where windows
    > has still a large segment).
    > The internet is run to about 51% on linux, and around 35% windows servers.
    > The rest is basically different Unixes, but not other OS


    Good stats..
    99% of the internet is cr@p, so most of that runs on linux servers,
    therefore most linux servers run cr@p.
    Good what stats will tell you if you are creative enough. ;-)
    Hint.. don't make up stats without thinking about what they actually mean.

    >
    > Apple (with OSX) is a non-player in that area. Much too expensive (without
    > any better quality) and a Unix which is way too different from all other
    > unixes under the hood don't make it a likely candidate to use it for
    > servers



    Well at last something that you got correct ( infinite monkeys, etc.)

    Apple do really well by lying, pretty much like you but they are better at
    it.
    They even claim to have the thinnest laptop when the ASUS u1 is thinner and
    get away with it.
    They say its impossible to fit a removable battery in a unit so thin but
    ASUS do.
    Basically they lie and their customers believe them, mugs, I think that is
    their official name.





  15. Re: Surefire solution

    dennis@home schreef:
    >
    >
    > "Dirk T. Verbeek" wrote in message
    > news:47b9f7c3$0$14352$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
    >> dennis@home schreef:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Christopher Hunter" wrote in
    >>> message news:G2muj.107191$801.87676@fe1.news.blueyonder.co .uk...
    >>>> Vitorio Okio wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Yes, do not feed the trolls.
    >>>>
    >>>> Why not? It's fun to annoy a fool like "Frank". (S)he's so sure that
    >>>> "everyone runs Windows" that (s)he doesn't realise that the web is held
    >>>> together with Linux and Unix.
    >>>
    >>> The web wouldn't go away if you removed unix

    >>
    >> Hmm I think you are short of a few minutes of study...
    >>
    >>> as not everything uses unix or linux.

    >>
    >> No but the essentials do.

    >
    > Name one system that is essential that has to be unix, please?
    >

    Who said -has to be- Unix?

    I'm talking about things that -are- Unix.

    Something non-trivial like the root servers.

  16. Re: Surefire solution



    "Dirk T. Verbeek" wrote in message
    news:47bafb99$0$14353$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
    > dennis@home schreef:
    >>


    8<

    >> Name one system that is essential that has to be unix, please?
    >>

    > Who said -has to be- Unix?
    >
    > I'm talking about things that -are- Unix.
    >
    > Something non-trivial like the root servers.


    They actually aren't essential, just very useful.
    Don't you have your own dns server? ;-)


  17. Re: Surefire solution

    On 2008-02-19, dennis@home wrote:
    > Apple do really well by lying, pretty much like you but they are better at
    > it.
    > They even claim to have the thinnest laptop when the ASUS u1 is thinner and
    > get away with it.
    > They say its impossible to fit a removable battery in a unit so thin but
    > ASUS do.
    > Basically they lie and their customers believe them, mugs, I think that is
    > their official name.


    Not so sure about that. I am not an Apple user, but the thickness of
    the Air is listed at .16-.76 inches. The Asus U1E is listed at .7-1.1
    inches. The apple, at it's thickest point, is the same thickness as
    the Asus at it's thinnest.


    --
    Joe - Linux User #449481/Ubuntu User #19733
    joe at hits - buffalo dot com
    "Hate is baggage, life is too short to go around pissed off all the
    time..." - Danny, American History X

  18. Re: Surefire solution

    dennis@home wrote:

    >
    >
    > "Dirk T. Verbeek" wrote in message
    > news:47bafb99$0$14353$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
    >> dennis@home schreef:
    >>>

    >
    > 8<
    >
    >>> Name one system that is essential that has to be unix, please?
    >>>

    >> Who said -has to be- Unix?
    >>
    >> I'm talking about things that -are- Unix.
    >>
    >> Something non-trivial like the root servers.

    >
    > They actually aren't essential, just very useful.


    Do you have *any* idea what the root servers are?
    Any at all?
    "not essential, just very useful". Good one, that

    But then, you are a Vista user. It shows

    > Don't you have your own dns server? ;-)


    I do. Helps a lot to speed up accesses
    --
    Microsoft? Is that some kind of a toilet paper?


  19. Re: Surefire solution

    Peter Köhlmann schreef:
    > dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> "Dirk T. Verbeek" wrote in message
    >> news:47bafb99$0$14353$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
    >>> dennis@home schreef:

    >> 8<
    >>
    >>>> Name one system that is essential that has to be unix, please?
    >>>>
    >>> Who said -has to be- Unix?
    >>>
    >>> I'm talking about things that -are- Unix.
    >>>
    >>> Something non-trivial like the root servers.

    >> They actually aren't essential, just very useful.

    >
    > Do you have *any* idea what the root servers are?
    > Any at all?
    > "not essential, just very useful". Good one, that


    Hehe, the kid runs Windows so how would he know what 'root' stands for
    >
    > But then, you are a Vista user. It shows


    Lack of education yet he mouths off in this group.

    >
    >> Don't you have your own dns server? ;-)

    >
    > I do. Helps a lot to speed up accesses


  20. Re: Surefire solution



    "Dirk T. Verbeek" wrote in message
    news:47bb50b5$0$14356$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
    > Peter Köhlmann schreef:
    >> dennis@home wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> "Dirk T. Verbeek" wrote in message
    >>> news:47bafb99$0$14353$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl...
    >>>> dennis@home schreef:
    >>> 8<
    >>>
    >>>>> Name one system that is essential that has to be unix, please?
    >>>>>
    >>>> Who said -has to be- Unix?
    >>>>
    >>>> I'm talking about things that -are- Unix.
    >>>>
    >>>> Something non-trivial like the root servers.
    >>> They actually aren't essential, just very useful.

    >>
    >> Do you have *any* idea what the root servers are?
    >> Any at all?
    >> "not essential, just very useful". Good one, that

    >
    > Hehe, the kid runs Windows so how would he know what 'root' stands for


    Do you know how many root servers there are and where they are located for
    each domain?
    Maybe you want to tell us how long it takes to clear all the secondary and
    tertiary dns caches after a primary fails?
    Maybe you are the dumb one for using linux?
    You sure aren't smart enough to choose it for its strengths.




+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast