sick of Linux bias

Discussion in 'Computer Security' started by Alastair Smeaton, Jan 4, 2004.

  1. Still flogging bicycle chains to goldfish? :)
    Bernd Felsche, Jan 9, 2004
    1. Advertisements

    Hash: SHA1

    irrelevent, the comparison was bogus. If you are going to compare
    vulnerabilities announcements, then compare like, with like.

    Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Jim Richardson, Jan 9, 2004
    1. Advertisements

    Hash: SHA1

    No, the RedHat list included many things, that are either not available
    at all from MS, or available seperatly from the OS. Furthermore, the
    RedHat list included numerous things that were available for MS
    operating systems, like Sendmail, yet Sendmail-Win32 was not included on
    the MS list.

    It was a bogus comparison.

    Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Jim Richardson, Jan 9, 2004
    Hash: SHA1

    No, the 5% number was from machines that reported the crash back to
    Redmond, which is available as an optional install on W2K, built in to
    XP, and not available to W9X.

    So the number was for many XP systems, and some W2K systems, but few or
    no W9X systems.

    Like I said. That's *gotta* sting.

    Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Jim Richardson, Jan 9, 2004
  5. Spoken like someone that's too goddamn stupid to READ. You know, READ,
    that basic function that you learned in grade school, then in the midst
    of going through puberty, conveniently "forgot" because you think you
    know it all?

    Did I say Exchange? No dumb ass... I specifically quoted the "Outlook"

    Evolution is almost IDENTICAL to Outlook in it's "look" and the
    functions are nearly the same. Sure, there's some differences and how it
    handles certain things, but the "feel" is the same. Truthfully, how many
    users fully-use the potential of Outlook? None that I know of. You of
    course, seeing this "opening" will probably retort with "...well, all of
    *my* users use every aspect of Outlook." But then again, since I
    mentioned it... you'll probably not say that....

    Considering your mentality, if I were you, I'd just sit there and take
    it, because when you reply, I'll bet money there's something else I'll
    flame you for.

    /me waits patiently while you think of a way to represent your "greater
    than thou attitude".

    Colonel Flagg

    Privacy at a click:

    Q: How many Bill Gates does it take to change a lightbulb?
    A: None, he just defines Darkness? as the new industry standard..."

    "...I see stupid people."
    Colonel Flagg, Jan 9, 2004
  6. Alastair Smeaton

    John Guest

    You may have missed what I meant. I was not arguing for or against the
    truthfulness of any particular statement. I was pointing out that your
    silly name calling and ridiculous mud-slinging causes people to not care
    if you are right or wrong. They automatically assume you are an idiot,
    true or not, based on your inability to conduct an adult conversation.

    Now I will await your "oh yeah, you're another" response. Please make it
    entertaining enough to bother reading.
    John, Jan 9, 2004
  7. Alastair Smeaton

    dkg_ctc Guest

    No, it wasn't. The actual quote (from the NY Times) was, "Mr. Gates
    acknowledged today that the company's error reporting service
    indicated that 5 percent of all Windows-based computers now crash more
    than twice each day."

    "All Windows-based computers".
    Yes, it really must sting, being that incapable of simple
    comprehension...go back to COLA where such a lack of comprehension is
    dkg_ctc, Jan 9, 2004
  8. Alastair Smeaton

    E. Guest

    I'd strongly recommend that Windows admins play about with linux for the
    simple reason that you have learn about what is happening, rather than
    where to click..
    I learnt more about DNS + TCP/IP from farting about with Linux than I
    did from Windows servers.
    A small example, but you can apply the knowledge learnt with linux to MS
    platforms even if you don't plan to use linux in an organisation.

    Installing and configuring exchange is piss easy (even to do it
    properly). Farting about with sendmail etc can help you to understand
    how SMTP is supposed to work, and why it does what it does.

    Think of it as a chance to learn.
    E., Jan 9, 2004
  9. Alastair Smeaton

    John Guest

    vi does beat emacs. tcsh better than bash? BLASPHEMER!! All bow before the
    mighty bash!!!!!
    John, Jan 9, 2004

  10. "that the company's *error reporting service*" (Emphasis added.)

    Windows XP computers report.

    Windows 2000 can report.

    Windows 9x computers cannot report.

    One can only extrapolate meaningful statistics from data that you have.

    Plz to remember this.
    Tim S. Knight, Jan 9, 2004
  11. Alastair Smeaton

    John Guest

    There you go again steve, trying to amicably end this rant thread so we
    can take up your "sick of FreeBSD bias" thread. Well I for one will not
    fall for it.

    --Linux rants rule--
    John, Jan 9, 2004
  12. Alastair Smeaton

    John Guest

    On Mon, 05 Jan 2004 16:51:02 -0500, Jim wrote:

    Can we sub-divide this thread? It's getting so I can't tell who I'm
    arguing with and agreeing with anymore! Guess I'll just argue with
    myself...or was I agreeing with me?
    John, Jan 9, 2004
    Hash: SHA1

    W9X don't report the error back to Redmond.
    Like I said, that 5% doesn't include Win9x, because they don't report
    back to Redmond

    What's worse, is that the 5% number, is for machines that crash three or
    more times a day...

    Wonder what the percentage of the ones that crash only once a week are?

    And to try and drag this back on topic, anyone know what the port that the
    crash reporting tool on XP uses to send that crash report to MS is?

    Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Jim Richardson, Jan 9, 2004
  14. Dans sa prose, Mike nous ecrivait :
    True for Evolution is the client side. But, did you have a look to this :
    Cedric Blancher, Jan 9, 2004
  15. Alastair Smeaton

    Mike Guest

    Granted but the original quote was "Find something that compares to Exchange
    and using Outlook 2003 on the free market - you can't." And I still maintain
    there is nothing in the open source that even comes close to that

    Who uses the full potential of any desktop software?

    <provocative rant sniped>

    Mike, Jan 9, 2004
  16. Alastair Smeaton

    Leythos Guest

    Nice to see you acting your age.

    The first part of this was "Find something that compares to Exchange
    2003 and using Outlook 2003 on the free market - you can't."

    Which you failed to properly address.
    And just what are you going to connect it to? Exchange? I thought the
    point of this thread was just how great Linux is and how there is no
    reason to have MS products that are sooooooo inferior.
    Nope, you got me there - now will you settle down? Most of the people we
    setup don't use more than 10% of what they have. On the other hand, we
    work with a lot of development teams that actually make use of most of
    the features available in their apps and systems.

    But, again, you missed the point, I didn't say anything about finding an
    app that meets most of the users needs, which has nothing to do with a
    specific OS, finds something that replaces the Exchange 2000 or 2003
    server with Outlook 2000 or 2003 as a client (COMBINATION!).
    Yea, because you are just a troll and contribute very little to the
    Nothing I've said indicates that, but you seem to have an inferiority
    Leythos, Jan 9, 2004
  17. Alastair Smeaton

    Dazz Guest

    Well, it is a change, but only to a small degree.
    But you're still running a Nix box. ;-P
    Yes, it is a cost, however, you're no longer paying for x amount of
    desktops, so you're saving some money, as well as saving money on
    support (to an extent).

    You're also saving money on hardware, as you no longer need the latest
    and greatest desktop just to run the latest Micro$oft OS.

    Let's face it, if you tried running XP on the lowest spec machines
    that Micro$oft *say* can run XP, then you're going to have a lot of
    very annoyed users screaming for your blood.
    To the user it's not much of a switch, but to the IT Department, it
    makes life easier, and saves money.

    And that's what we've been talking about.

    Dazz, Jan 9, 2004
  18. Alastair Smeaton

    Dazz Guest

    I agree with you that adding patches and service packs unnecessarily,
    can lead to problems in itself (ie Service Pack 6 and a couple of
    other "patches").

    As for a protected servers behind a firewall, I've heard of one case
    recently where some moron decided to bring down a firewall for
    maintenance (???) leaving the servers behind this "protected"
    firewall, decidedly unprotected.

    When the network ground to a screaming halt because of a particular
    worm, I bet they wished they *had* of kept all their
    servers/workstations patched.

    I never found out what happened to this moron, but if I was his boss,
    I would have killed him.

    Mind you, it was a Government Dept, so he probably kept his job.

    Dazz, Jan 9, 2004
  19. Alastair Smeaton

    Mike Guest

    Nice try but from their own pages:-

    Does OGo do exactly the same things like Exchange?
    A: No. OGo is something between a mixture of Exchange and SharePoint portal
    server. It focuses on groupware and collaboration instead of messaging, e.g.
    OGo will not provide its own mail server but rather use existing ones like
    Cyrus (see the mission on that).

    Now please don't get me wrong. I would love to have a replacement for
    Exchange that runs on Linux. The cost savings for my clients would be
    enormous. I have looked at all the alternatives and I continue to look and
    when something turns up that is a real alternative I will probably switch.

    Mike, Jan 9, 2004
  20. On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 20:08:38 -0800, Jim Richardson spoketh
    No, it was not. I only counted those items on the RedHat list that was
    core OS and corresponded to similar items on the Microsoft list. That
    means items for Apache and IIS was included. I found the post I
    originally made, and the count at that time was 64 for MS and 44 for
    RedHat 7.3.

    Lars M. Hansen
    (replace 'badnews' with 'news' in e-mail address)
    Lars M. Hansen, Jan 9, 2004
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.