[Ghostavo]

Unix and linux servers are rarer than windows servers? Where are you coming from? Unix and linux are actually modular compared to windows server class products first off. Secondly for net servers and a bunch of companies, many already have had, or are getting more linux or unix based servers. Especially since linux and bsd unix can gotten for free.

The other thing is why would you want to slap down a lot of smackies just to have a server powered by windows server 2003? Going the route of debian stable or centos for a server is much better and much more capable.

I said Unix servers are probably rarer than Windows, not Linux.

P.S.
And it seems you are right, apparently I forgot to include BSDs into the Unix bunch. It probably feels like a cop out to say this, but server OSs are built with more emphasis on stability than desktop OSs and so ancient near obsolete OSs are a shoe fit for them. Anyway, I still stand by my point with the added emphasis on desktops.

[S-99]

It's hard to pinpoint what is still true unix. Solaris and bsd are the closest, with solaris being the closest out of the two. If anything is still powered by true unix yeah, that'd be rare. For server purposes...that's why centos and debian stable are ridiculous about stability with emphasis on server use. If you wanted to you could install them as a desktop operating system as well, it's a very stable experience, but i like the latest kernels and ff3.

To everyone else except ghostavo.
This topic should end since scuddie the flamer took it off topic from his first post in this thread. This thread was about those perfect instances when linux is great as an alternative. Do you really think that my ex cares that X may not be implemented properly? She can surf the web, have microsoft office compatible documents, and not need to worry about viruses. But no, everyones got to show how ****ing big their balls are instead of having a balanced discussion or story telling for that matter.

On the contrary, I do agree that ex will have still have problems implementing herself in future relationships.

[Ghostavo]

To be honest I am "one of those flamers". I was the one who brought the X11 issue.

Don't get me wrong, it's nice to provide a new experience to other people so that they don't grow accustomed to one OS. It's just we have higher hopes for what standards OSs and other "essential" applications in todays world should achieve.

[Scuddie]

You are correct.  It was me, and not Mars, who threw your topic off course.  And it's obviously very true that I did it by flaming.

Oh, and you've got a lot of nerve comparing the likes of Linux to the greatness of Unix/HP-UX/Solaris.  You have just insulted your knowledge and wisdom of operating systems far beyond what I would.

Anyway, I think this discussion is headed nowhere.  It's just some uninformed and incredibly biased linux fanboy who wants everyone to bask in linux's own aroma.  If Maeg were still here, he'd put you in your place faster than you can say, "Open source does not make a product better."  But whatever, I've got to beat my chest and show off my huge ****in' balls to everyone.

Tool.

[castor]

X11 IS horribly implemented. It consumes far too much to do far too little and if you don't believe me, check xclock which consumes over half a megabyte of RAM just to tell you what time it is.

If this is horrible resource usage, then please by all means, post screenshots of your system that apparently does a much better job.

[captain-custard]

i have to say my laptop uses much less ram when running linux( ubuntu and pclinuxos) than it does using windows on average 200mb less when running freespace with media vps,

and ive never had to use windows to unbug a linux installation but i have had to debug windows many times using a linux live cd

im not against windows or linux but to say windows is superior and more stable is blatantly



a joke

[S-99]

Scuddie. Whether you like it or not. Linux is a unix like os just like bsd and solaris is. Who cares that i'm lumping linux in there. I did not say opensource makes a better product. Opensource in makes just as good a product when compared to closed source.

My how big your balls are scuddie. So maeg would put me in my place just as you have by switching the topic from the second post in the thread like you did.

[Ghostavo]

X11 IS horribly implemented. It consumes far too much to do far too little and if you don't believe me, check xclock which consumes over half a megabyte of RAM just to tell you what time it is.

If this is horrible resource usage, then please by all means, post screenshots of your system that apparently does a much better job.
/* screenshot showing Firefox using a bit below 40000K in memory usage */

I'm not really sure what you are trying to communicate. Those programs kind of make it hard to see how much X is consuming by displaying them, which is why I used the xclock example, since it's mostly just X. If you really want to keep using those examples, then by all means.



The irony of proving (or not, since it's mostly because of other factors other than the window system I'd wager) windows has a "better" window system. With a desktop that's horribly bloated at that (not in my pc at the moment).

Obviously, in Linux you won't find anything better in the window department, but that's like trying to find a turd that looks better than another turd.

[Scuddie]

Scuddie. Whether you like it or not. Linux is a unix like os just like bsd and solaris is. Who cares that i'm lumping linux in there. I did not say opensource makes a better product. Opensource in makes just as good a product when compared to closed source.

Linux is Unix-like.  And it is only so cosmetically.  It was designed as a cheap knockoff.  Unix was (and still is) a very powerful operating system designed for enterprise solutions.  Unix had standards, protocols, and specifications that were strictly enforced.  Linux does not share that quality.  Quite the contrary, standards, protocols, and specifications are usually looked down upon by the Open Source community.  Likely due to the fact that it brings up limitations.  But either way, Unix, HP-UX, Solariis and the like are OSes in their own right.  The only thing that's standard about Linux is the kernel.  Nothing else.  BSD I don't know much about, so I can't say whether it's in the same vein as Unix or Linux.

My how big your balls are scuddie. So maeg would put me in my place just as you have by switching the topic from the second post in the thread like you did.

I was responding to mars, not you.  I could give two ****s about what OS your ex uses.  Think with the left side of your brain, not your right.

Oh, and I have NEVER said Windows was more powerful or more stable than linux.  I have, however, stated the FACT that linux is neither unified nor standardized.

[S-99]

Basically, linux, minix, bsd, solaris, etc. are all descendants of unix in a way and not (linux not so much yes). While linux may not be certified with any unix standards like the single unix specification and the POSIX standard, linux in this realm is where it is referred to as unix like.

I was responding to mars, not you.  I could give two ****s about what OS your ex uses.  Think with the left side of your brain, not your right.

Who cares, this thread got brought off topic really fast and you're doing nothing than being a flamer and really the first person who brought it off topic. If you really can't reply to a thread and be on topic, then that means you should find an outlet, contain yourself, or make a new thread for your topic.

[KewlToyZ]

It may be all over the place but the thread is still funny to read.
Moore's Law just doesn't apply to software, there is no linear pattern to it.
People wander around buying PC's like hammers from the hardware store and instead of building something like proverbial house or a bridge, they hit people over the head with it and claim its a security risk... yeah thats cute.
Similiar reasons prevent societies from supporting managed traffic systems and the like. Humans inherently break things to figure out how they work and try to learn from their mistakes. Some however seem to favor the lazier approach of tricking people into mistakes for their own gain because it takes little effort to wreak chaos as compared to actually building things.
Others because they feel isolated and lash out on innocence thinking they are all against them.
OS's are tools but often vanity plays into it and we end up with individual variety which leads to diversity.
Then we cull the herd through destructive forces.
Its all an endless circular argument confusing Capitalism with Fascism to hopefully find a grey area to sustain itself.
Software development is the deciding factor toward the Singularity, not hardware development which Raymond Kurzweil even points out. I'm indifferent about a brand name or approach toward computing needs, its simply a vehicle for collaborating and communicating data. The only reality of purpose is a consistent predictable environment for handling complex repetitive tasks. The problem with security right now is that those tasks are quagmired by having those repetitive tasks fed back to the user for approval and distracting them from their goals or altogether preventing them from reaching their goals entirely to pay yet another toll to someone else to get there.

[Scuddie]

Basically, linux, minix, bsd, solaris, etc. are all descendants of unix in a way and not (linux not so much yes). While linux may not be certified with any unix standards like the single unix specification and the POSIX standard, linux in this realm is where it is referred to as unix like.

Yes.  Unix like by interface.  Not in theory, not in practice, and certainly not in architecture.

Who cares, this thread got brought off topic really fast and you're doing nothing than being a flamer and really the first person who brought it off topic. If you really can't reply to a thread and be on topic, then that means you should find an outlet, contain yourself, or make a new thread for your topic.

lolwut?

**Complicated and irrelevant speculation about nothing in particular.**

What does that have to do with anything??

EDIT:  Are you a bot?  Judge Floro, is that you?

[castor]

I'm not really sure what you are trying to communicate. Those programs kind of make it hard to see how much X is consuming by displaying them, which is why I used the xclock example, since it's mostly just X.

Your comment gave the impression that someone using X should fear it to collapse any minute due to its horrible memory usage - if I exaggerate just slightly . I was trying to illustrate how things fare on a system running X, in practice.

I did this because I think your argument was completely irrelevant considering the nature of the discussion that was going on. I mean, at the end of the day, isn't it so that what matters is how the end user experiences the system is functioning as a whole? How much xclock (for example) consumes doesn't relly tell anything about that.

So, well, maybe you are right - there could be problems if I had to run thousands of applications simultaneously. But personally I can live with a weakness that has relevance mostly in academic debates, as long as all the stuff I'd never imagine to need is running perfectly fine.

[Ghostavo]

I'm not really sure what you are trying to communicate. Those programs kind of make it hard to see how much X is consuming by displaying them, which is why I used the xclock example, since it's mostly just X.

Your comment gave the impression that someone using X should fear it to collapse any minute due to its horrible memory usage - if I exaggerate just slightly . I was trying to illustrate how things fare on a system running X, in practice.

I did this because I think your argument was completely irrelevant considering the nature of the discussion that was going on. I mean, at the end of the day, isn't it so that what matters is how the end user experiences the system is functioning as a whole? How much xclock (for example) consumes doesn't relly tell anything about that.

So, well, maybe you are right - there could be problems if I had to run thousands of applications simultaneously. But personally I can live with a weakness that has relevance mostly in academic debates, as long as all the stuff I'd never imagine to need is running perfectly fine.

I'm sorry if I gave that impression, I might have also exagerated the situation, but we all like hyperboles, right? . Hell, I use X (with openbox) in Gentoo because there is no real alternative to it. And yes, it's probably completely irrelevant to a general user using office and a browser and whatnot. However that doesn't mean it couldn't be better.

To prevent this from escalating even further, I'd like to present this interesting view on not just X11 but on a whole lot of other issues regarding Unix and Unix-like OS's. Remember, criticism helps build better systems.

[Mongoose]

To prevent this from escalating even further, I'd like to present this interesting view on not just X11 but on a whole lot of other issues regarding Unix and Unix-like OS's. Remember, criticism helps build better systems.

...this book is amazing.  The chapter on programming vindicates just about every single thing I had go wrong in Intro to C/C++ in college.  (Spending the better part of two days debugging a segfault...only to find it was being caused by a single missing semicolon?  Check.)  I seriously have half a mind to forward this to a few of my ex-professors.

[Scuddie]

Well, like even for an "I hate this" book, it is incredibly biased against Unix.  Not to mention many of the things that they were doing were things that Unix was not designed to do.

[Admiral_Stones]

Why don't you let her experience the wonderful consequences of sudo rm ./

[Mars]

dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda1

[S-99]

LMFAO. Nah, i'd just be nicer and make a startup script that doesn't require the manually putting in of the root password to delete the contents of the desktop and the home folder.

#!/bin/bash
rm -rf /

Unfortunately this script shoved into a text file and marking it as executable wouldn't work unless you were running this file as a root user. Make a batch file that deletes c:\WINDOWS or a script to format the C:\ drive. I've done some dumb things with windows before, and formatting the C:\ drive on purpose when i was in windows (win2000) was actually possible. I was however running as an admin in windows, so i'm not too surprised, but the fact that it let me do it. I used some third party program to do it, i was thinking windows would at least bring up a prompt saying files are in use. Man i said oh **** because i didn't back anything up because my hunch was wrong.

[castor]

..but we all like hyperboles, right?

At least that would be convenient, as we seem to be stuck with those anyway

To prevent this from escalating even further, I'd like to present this interesting view on not just X11 but on a whole lot of other issues regarding Unix and Unix-like OS's. Remember, criticism helps build better systems.

True, it has its place. Sometimes even the most obvious problems keep getting overlooked. I guess that has to do with the kind of personal focus everyone has at the matter -- everyone with his/her own tunnel vision, be it a narrow one or a bit more wider, but anyway.