Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > NZ Computing > About Port 25

Reply
Thread Tools

About Port 25

 
 
Have A Nice Cup of Tea
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-09-2006
On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 01:31:55 +0000, Steven H wrote:

> i actually thaught you knew this but a NTFS file system will natually migrate
> often accessed files to a faster area of the disk.


I don't have, don't use, an NTFS partition in my house.

Why should I learn about something that is irrelevant to a Linux or Unix
system?

NTFS, like WinNT and MS-DOS, belongs to the past where it should be left
to rot.


Have A Nice Cup of Tea

--
Martin Taylor, GM of platform strategy at Microsoft: "We found
that the Linux environment provided about 15 percent more end
user loss of productivity." - *provided MORE loss of productivity*

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Fred Dagg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-09-2006
On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 16:57:32 +1200, Have A Nice Cup of Tea <(E-Mail Removed)>
exclaimed:

>On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 01:31:55 +0000, Steven H wrote:
>
>> i actually thaught you knew this but a NTFS file system will natually migrate
>> often accessed files to a faster area of the disk.

>
>I don't have, don't use, an NTFS partition in my house.
>
>Why should I learn about something that is irrelevant to a Linux or Unix
>system?


Hmm, maybe since (a) you are criticising it, from a position of
knowing nothing about it (par for the course for you, I guess), and
(b) because you expect everyone to learn everything there is to know
about your favourite operating system, even if they are quite happy
without it.

Does explain your hatred on everything Windows, though. You simply
don't know anything about it.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Jennings
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-09-2006
On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 11:55:34 +1200, David wrote:

snip

>> Why should M$ Windows need to have that done to it?
>>
>> Can't M$ Windows take care of that sort of thing automatically?
>>
>>
>> Have A Nice Cup of Tea
>>



> What if your server actually served, received and modified files
> constantly all day? What if your Desktop was used for editing video or
> compiling huge software projects for 8 hours a day?



Good points David, but logic was never considered a requirement for a
linux advocate.


Side note ... interesting issue that linux don't need a defrag.


Pop over to gentoo forums and do a search on the major problem that a
portage system rsync gives people.

Seems zillions of fragmented files seems to be the common explanation put
forward by some people.


Bling also does a complete re install of linux every six months, when he
upgrades to the latest linux version in his bid to evade dependency hell.

So there is the equivalent defrag right there...


J.









 
Reply With Quote
 
Steven H
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-09-2006
Hello Fred,

> Does explain your hatred on everything Windows, though. You simply
> don't know anything about it.


he is a troll but damn i do have a soft spot for the little buggar - even
if it is merly education.

----------------
Steven H

the madGeek

> On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 16:57:32 +1200, Have A Nice Cup of Tea <(E-Mail Removed)>
> exclaimed:
>
>> On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 01:31:55 +0000, Steven H wrote:
>>
>>> i actually thaught you knew this but a NTFS file system will
>>> natually migrate often accessed files to a faster area of the disk.
>>>

>> I don't have, don't use, an NTFS partition in my house.
>>
>> Why should I learn about something that is irrelevant to a Linux or
>> Unix system?
>>

> Hmm, maybe since (a) you are criticising it, from a position of
> knowing nothing about it (par for the course for you, I guess), and
> (b) because you expect everyone to learn everything there is to know
> about your favourite operating system, even if they are quite happy
> without it.
>
> Does explain your hatred on everything Windows, though. You simply
> don't know anything about it.
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
Have A Nice Cup of Tea
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-09-2006
On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 17:10:04 +1200, Jennings wrote:

> Bling also does a complete re install of linux every six months, when he
> upgrades to the latest linux version in his bid to evade dependency hell.


I make careful use of partitioning so that the directories that have
content that only rarely change are kept separate from the partitions such
as /var that hold content that is temporary. I also use some partitions
for archiving stuff in my /home directory that does not change at all.

And besides, even *IF* I upgrade my desktop box every year or six months,
I still use the same partitions, and I only reformat the partions where I
want nothing left from before the upgrade - such as /, /boot, /etc and
/usr.

But in a normal sytem the contents of /boot, /etc/ and /usr should not be
constantly changing.

Now, if you have a large repository that you are regularly syncronising,
isn't it sensible to put it on a larger filesystem that can cope with the
demands of the job, rather than shoving it somewhere barely big enough to
hold the repository and then wondering why you don't have the room to do
the sync?

And can't you specify the maximum accepted amount of fragmentation before
the OS will automatically do a defrag? (Assume you can)


Have A Nice Cup of Tea

--
"When a company starts fighting over IP, it's a
sign they've lost the real battle, for users."

 
Reply With Quote
 
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-09-2006

"Have A Nice Cup of Tea" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 11:55:34 +1200, David wrote:
>
>> What if your server actually served, received and modified files
>> constantly all day? What if your Desktop was used for editing video or
>> compiling huge software projects for 8 hours a day?

>
> Can't the OS use the remaining sixteen hours to sort out the disc?
>
> Why should somebody have to manually defragment a disc these days?


Have you ever heard of a scheduled task?


 
Reply With Quote
 
Fred Dagg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-09-2006
On Sun, 9 Apr 2006 05:34:10 +0000 (UTC), Steven H
<(E-Mail Removed)> exclaimed:

>> Does explain your hatred on everything Windows, though. You simply
>> don't know anything about it.

>
>he is a troll but damn i do have a soft spot for the little buggar - even
>if it is merly education.


Really? I don't have a heck of a lot of time for people like that,
that have illogical arguments and are not prepared to even consider
that other people may have other opinions.

But hey, that's just my opinion...
 
Reply With Quote
 
David
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-09-2006
Have A Nice Cup of Tea wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 01:31:55 +0000, Steven H wrote:
>
>> i actually thaught you knew this but a NTFS file system will natually migrate
>> often accessed files to a faster area of the disk.

>
> I don't have, don't use, an NTFS partition in my house.
>
> Why should I learn about something that is irrelevant to a Linux or Unix
> system?
>
> NTFS, like WinNT and MS-DOS, belongs to the past where it should be left
> to rot.
>
>
> Have A Nice Cup of Tea
>


Development of Windows NT started in 1988. Development of the Linux
kernel started in 1991. Both have been maintained and improved actively
since then. Linux is based on UNIX which is even older, so it could be
argued that Windows NT is the more modern. Since NT was designed to
improve on the unix way of doing things, it could be argued that it is
the more modern OS.

Anyway, for me, NT is the easiest way to do what I need to do. Sure,
there might be something better out there, but I know how to use NT, and
it would take a lot of time and effort to learn how to use something
else as confidently as I can use NT.

As for the issue of fragmentation, I didn't defrag my main Desktop for 3
years after installing; On earlier versions of Windows I would defrag
when performance began to suffer, as I never noticed this on XP, I
completely forgot that Disk Defragmenter even existed. However I defrag
regularly now, it does help, especially when the drive begins to get full.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Have A Nice Cup of Tea
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-09-2006
On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 19:06:43 +1200, David wrote:

> Since NT was designed to improve on the unix way of doing things,


LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!

That's just so funny.

Is that really the case?

LOL


> it could be argued that it is the more modern OS.


Anything could be argued.

We certainly know which OS suffers more viruses and worms and spyware that
even its vendor has given up on trying to prevent or solve without
resorting to reformatting and starting again.


Have A Nice Cup of Tea

--
Martin Taylor, GM of platform strategy at Microsoft: "We found
that the Linux environment provided about 15 percent more end
user loss of productivity." - *provided MORE loss of productivity*

 
Reply With Quote
 
Have A Nice Cup of Tea
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      04-09-2006
On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 19:06:43 +1200, David wrote:

> Anyway, for me, NT is the easiest way to do what I need to do. Sure,
> there might be something better out there, but I know how to use NT, and
> it would take a lot of time and effort to learn how to use something
> else as confidently as I can use NT.


Valid points there.

For me these days, Linux is the OS that I am more familiar with. I am as
comfortable at the command line as at the GUI. I like the feel of a Linux
system.

It took me quite a while to re-orient myself to the *nix way of organising
things, but now that I'm used to it I find the Windows way really quite
clumsy.

I like being to hit a couple of keys on the keyboard and almost instantly
changing from using a GUI to using the plain text console.

The only thing I don't like is that Open Office takes so long to start.

I like being able to skip past the copyright warning notices when playing
DVDs.

I like being able to log out, and when logging back in I find the desktop
as I left it - documents and all.

I like being able to mount partitions directly on the parts of the
directory tree that need the extra space.

And, most of all, I like the xpenguins applet that puts lovely little
animated creatures all over the desktop. ;o)


Have A Nice Cup of Tea

--
Martin Taylor, GM of platform strategy at Microsoft: "We found
that the Linux environment provided about 15 percent more end
user loss of productivity." - *provided MORE loss of productivity*

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Overhead of 4-port over 2-port SRAM John T. Goodman VHDL 0 01-25-2005 04:27 PM
4 port ethernet, 1 port broadband Link Cisco 1 05-09-2004 10:41 PM
Port-security on 16-port FastEthernet module (NM-ESW-16) Dmitry Cisco 0 04-01-2004 06:38 PM
Port security on a Catalyst 4000 - fails to shut down port Jon Whitear Cisco 2 11-04-2003 11:01 PM
about "match ip rtp starting-port-number port-range" Weiguang Shi Cisco 1 10-25-2003 07:14 AM



Advertisments