29-Mar-2024 15:21 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
[Motd] MOTD 12/Feb/2001ANN.lu
Posted on 12-Feb-2001 19:38 GMT by Christian Kemp64 comments
View flat
View list
Things have been pretty slow behind the scenes at ANN. I still worked most of January 2001 and the past two weeks of February, so my free time was limited. My PC seems to be working okay now, but my dialup has been very unreliable and painfully slow (how many errors are normal in W2k's dialup status window? So far I have 143 for less than 200k transferred...). The DSL line is supposedly being installed "in a few weeks". Sounds oddly familiar. I finally found an Amiga sponsor again, so that my phone costs are almost covered. Thanks also to the individuals who offered donations - sorry I didn't get back to you - but I'm always reluctant to accept individual donations for a number of reasons I won't go into since space is limited. :) To wrap up this MOTD, I'm trying once more to find one or more reliable contributors to do a bit of moderation and article posting. Please apply via email.
List of all comments to this article
Sorted by date, most recent at bottom
Comment 1Mark Olsen11-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 2Hassan Sultan12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 3Mark Olsen12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 4Perttu Kuukankorpi12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 5X12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 6Mark Olsen12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 7Perttu Kuukankorpi12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 8Dave12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 9nOw212-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 10Dave12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 11Christian Kemp12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 12Anonymous12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 13Hassan Sultan12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 14Anonymous12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 15Christian Kemp12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 16Mark Olsen12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 17Mark Olsen12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 18Mark Olsen12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 19Hassan Sultan13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 20Mark Olsen13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 21Hassan Sultan13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 22Mark Olsen13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 23Hassan Sultan13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 24Mark Olsen13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 25Hassan Sultan13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 26Mark Olsen13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 27Hassan Sultan13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 28Mark Olsen13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 29Karl Hamilton13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 30Karl Hamilton13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 31Dave13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 32Hassan Sultan13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 33S Katz13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 34Hassan Sultan13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 35Steffan Katz13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 36christophe13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 37christophe13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 38Hassan Sultan13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 39Hassan Sultan13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 40Pede^FUP13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 41Dave13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 42Hassan Sultan13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 43Dave14-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 44 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by christophe on 14-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 38 (Hassan Sultan):
>99.999% availability GUARANTEE is an advertisement ? No, it's a product >offering. You can buy a system with Win2k and it is guaranteed to be available >99.999% of the time each year, and if it's not then the company(IBM,Unisys,...) will pay a penalty, I don't think they would do that with an >unstable OS because they are here to make money, not to lose money.
You do not understand that it is an offer. The 99.99 is what everyone offer as a service. Just to say never fail. The 0.01 is just to say nobody is perfect. The service include having many servers and people available in case of crash recovery.
>Concerning the TPC benchmarks, if you think that Win2k beat Unix because of >the number of CPU's then look at the results per price/performance, the top 10 >is 100% Win2k.
We never argue on the price but on the reliability /performance.
Unix is beating 2000: have you ever saw SAP benchmarks on same harware running with Windows 2000 and Unix ?
If you want to abort the price argument I would say that freebsd linux have a better ratio because they are free. So the system will be cheaper :)
>Concerning the network transfer record, you make silly jokes because you don't >have anything better to say, but no, the file was finished after 81sec.
I was just kidding you ;)
>Concerning your BSD stack claims, can I please have some pointers to your
Enjoy:
http://slashdot.org/articles/980730/1336226.shtml
http://slashdot.org/bsd/00/10/02/1331233.shtml
>informations ? Note that I don't say that Win2k's stack is better than BSD's >stack, I just say it's a very good stack.
You just say W2K beat records to show it is the best: this is not true.
>Concerning the uptime, the number 50 in the list is at 652days, Win2k didn't >exist 652 days ago, so it would be hard for it to be in the top50.
I was waiting this one :)
I'am not speaking about Win2K but every MS OS. No one is in the top. NT4 is well known to be more stable than 2000 and it is not there.
And about new OS releases: Take for example apple.com vs microsoft.com.
The apple non finished OS has far better up times ...
>The fact is that you never gave any real technical problem in Win2k, you only >say "it's crap".
The last day I just got mmc crashing 3 times, regedit and explorer twice.
Sometimes the system completely lock and I have to press reset.
Isn't it enough ?
>Oh by the way, I don't say that Win2k is the best OS on earth, just that >people saying that it is a crap OS really don't know what they are talking >about.
Anyone has the right to set up his level of expectation and to think that what is above is crap.
I think that most OSes ar crap for XY reasons. What pissed me off is that the most used are the most junk. But I'am free to use other OS and answer to your Win2k propaganda.
Jump...
TopPrevious commentNext commentbottom
List of all comments to this article (continued)
Comment 45christophe14-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 46Steffan Katz14-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 47Colin Wilson14-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 48Colin Wilson14-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 49Ville Sarell14-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 50Dave14-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 51Hassan Sultan14-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 52Colin Wilson15-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 53Hassan Sultan15-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 54Mark Olsen15-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 55Hassan Sultan15-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 56Anonymous15-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 57Anonymous15-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 58Colin Wilson15-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 59Simon Webber17-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 60Colin Wilson17-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 61Hassan Sultan17-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 62Colin Wilson18-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 63Hassan Sultan18-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Comment 64Bill Crawford18-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Back to Top