19-Apr-2024 21:05 GMT.		 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 64 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 64]
[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.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 1 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Mark Olsen on 11-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
> (how many errors are normal in W2k's dialup status window? So far I have 143 for less than 200k transferred...).
Unless you've got a 2GHz machine, that's normal.
With a K6@233MHz, there was a total of 800 different errors after 20 minutes.
It helps if you don't move the windows etc while you download, the problem is that Windows has it's graphicsoperations in kernelspace.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 2 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Hassan Sultan on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 1 (Mark Olsen):
Wrong.
This has nothing to do with the OS, it simply means that the quality of the line between your modem and the ISP is bad.
W2k having its graphic operations in kernel space has absolutely nothing to do with that.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 3 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Mark Olsen on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 2 (Hassan Sultan):
> Wrong.
Nope.
> This has nothing to do with the OS, it simply means that the quality of the line between your modem and the ISP is bad.
99% chance it has something to do with the OS, it COULD be the line, but chances are that it's Windows.
> W2k having its graphic operations in kernel space has absolutely nothing to do with that.
It has much to do with it.
Say, move a window, Windows locks out everything else while moving and redrawing, making the serial buffer overflow. It's simple logic.
Do I sense one of those W2k-is-the-best-OS-ever-made-and-can't-do-anything-wrong persons?
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 4 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Perttu Kuukankorpi on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
If you didn't mind non-amiga-related sponsors, you could easily get 0.15 - 0.30 USD per daily visitor who bothers to click on a search engines search result.
Check out www.WayAds.com and www.searchreferral.com. The first one allows text-only ads so it wouldn't too much stuff. And no javascript either.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 5 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by X on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (Mark Olsen):
Hmm, that sounds really odd. Unless you
have a non-FIFO serialport (which I doubt),
there's no chance in the moon you'd get that
many errors in so short a time.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 6 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Mark Olsen on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 5 (X):
Why not?
Move the window around, the system stops everything else just to move the window. Same thing happens when you scroll the browser.
It's not impossible, it's MS. And it's not even a bug, it's a feature.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 7 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Perttu Kuukankorpi on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 6 (Mark Olsen):
Machine: portable Dell Inspiron, 850 MHz P III, 256MB RAM, W2k professinal.
symptom: when pressing eject on the DVD-drive, it ejects in under a second.
When doing a software eject, it takes 3-5 to eject and during that time any user interaction is impossible.
On the plus side, the thing boots up quite fast, well under a minute :)
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 8 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Dave on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 6 (Mark Olsen):
Correct - Display the modem activity lights, then start moving the windows around to watch the pretty lights flashing errors at you :)
Dave.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 9 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by nOw2 on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Personally, I use AmigaOS.
I feel in the minority here.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 10 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Dave on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 9 (nOw2):
So do I - but I have to use other inferior OS's at work :)
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 11 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Christian Kemp on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
I set up the same dialup account, same modem, on my backup machine, the old P450, on which I also installed W2k. And it works flawlessly. Seems like there is some driver issue or incompatibility on the 750, so I either live with this solution (use the P450 as server) or re-install the 750 again.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 12 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (Mark Olsen):
I wish my wife was like Windows. I could format a 3 1/2" disk and she'd not be able to nag me for about a minute....Time for an MEI 100 pack! :D
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 13 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Hassan Sultan on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (Mark Olsen):
No, an Amiga user since 13years(I hope to go at least to 20 :+) ) who knows how Win2000 works.
This has nothing to do with the OS, that's CLEAR.
Now if you really want to think that the problem is the OS you can, but that's not the case.
Hassan
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 14 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 6 (Mark Olsen):
>Why not?
>Move the window around, the system stops everything else just to move the >window. Same thing happens when you scroll the browser.
It's the same on AmigaOS, would you rather the system waited a bit before it decided to move your window? Then you'd still be saying exactly the same as this:
>It's not impossible, it's MS. And it's not even a bug, it's a feature.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 15 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Christian Kemp on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Windows might be bad, and have many shortcomings, but it certainly doesn't behave as described above. With WinAMP (with visualisation studio plugin), multiple browser windows, Eudora and TextPAD running, I can move any window without the screen becoming corrupted or audio playback stopping, as should be expected. My machine is a Duron 750 with RIVA TNT gfx card (PCI) and cheap onboard audio, 128 MB RAM and a 7200rpm Maxtor 40 GB. Right now, it is connected to the old Pentium3/450, which is busy encoding MP3's and keeping the connection to the Internet (with zero errors, by the way).
Now, if I could only be sure that the system will keep on being as stable as it is right now, and not surprise me with yet another incompatibility, software bug, or beta driver gone bad.
And I guess some day, I'll get back to actually updating ANN again. :)
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 16 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Mark Olsen on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 14 (Anonymous):
>>Why not?
>>Move the window around, the system stops everything else just to move the
>>window. Same thing happens when you scroll the browser.
>It's the same on AmigaOS, would you rather the system waited a bit before it decided to move your window? Then you'd still be saying exactly the same as this:
Nope, in Windows it stops everything else while it moves the window, all the graphics code is in kernelspace. With AmigaOS, everything except the task scheduler is in userspace, one task can interrupt the other, so even though I'm moving 15034 windows at once, my serial port will NOT drop packets, as it gets all the CPU time it needs.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 17 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Mark Olsen on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 13 (Hassan Sultan):
> No, an Amiga user since 13years(I hope to go at least to 20 :+) )
> who knows how Win2000 works.
An Amigauser without a clue.
> This has nothing to do with the OS, that's CLEAR.
> Now if you really want to think that the problem is the OS you can, but that's not the case.
You don't understand what I'm saying, that's the problem. Go read a couple of books, find out what "kernelspace" and "userspace" is. When done, come back, then we can have the discussion again.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 18 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Mark Olsen on 12-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 9 (nOw2):
Same here, but I have to deal with Windows users every freaking day. A bit sad, life would be wonderful without :)
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 19 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Hassan Sultan on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 17 (Mark Olsen):
:+) You are very funny...
Go look at my homepage : http://www.infomaniak.ch/~hsultan to see who is my employer.
And if you want to talk to me offline, simply send me an e-mail to hassans at microsoft dot com.
I have the source code of Windows2000 on my workstation, so I don't think you will be able to explain me how it works...
You are a funny guy :+)
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 20 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Mark Olsen on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (Hassan Sultan):
> Go look at my homepage : http://www.infomaniak.ch/~hsultan
> to see who is my employer.
AHAHAHA, that explains it. Brainwashed dumbass.
Do all Microsoft employees believe that Windows is faultless?
That might explain why it is so crappy.
> And if you want to talk to me offline,
> simply send me an e-mail to hassans at microsoft dot com.
How is that offline?
> I have the source code of Windows2000 on my workstation,
Wauw, you're testing one of those 7TB disks? How are they?
> so I don't think you will be able to explain me how it works...
Use the source, Luke.
No, really, as you do have the source, I think you should get a clue, look a little at it and then go cram it up Bill Gates' ass.
> You are a funny guy :+)
Naw, actually I'm depressed, how did a spawn of hell get here?
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 21 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Hassan Sultan on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 20 (Mark Olsen):
You are right, all these developers at MS are stupid and don't know how to write code...
That's probably why they are among the most wanted employees in the field.
You must be very stupid to think that you know better than Microsoft's developers how their own code work.
Same goes for you thinking that I didn't know the difference between user space and kernel space.
But well, you are Mark Olsen, this very intelligent guy who knows everything better than everybody else, you even know my own stuff better than me, you're so smart...
But if you are so smart, how is it that we never heard about any of your wonderful inventions ? I didn't see your name at the Nobel prizes ceremony, they forgot you ? How stupid they are...
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 22 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Mark Olsen on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 21 (Hassan Sultan):
> You are right, all these developers at MS are stupid
> and don't know how to write code...
No, even that you can't do right.
The monkeys can code, but they code the wrong things. Go look a little at what you have.
Bad APIs, bad software, bad UI, bad architecture. Bad everything.
> That's probably why they are among the most wanted employees in the field.
Who wants an MS employee? Raise your hands.
> You must be very stupid to think that you know better than
> Microsoft's developers how their own code work.
Really, you should know better than believing Microsoft's marketing BS. 99% of what they say is bullshit and lies. So either MS (and you) have no clue what you are doing, or you lie for fun.
> Same goes for you thinking that I didn't know the difference
> between user space and kernel space.
Well, obviously you don't. Else you wouldn't had said that it wasn't the fault of the OS.
Or, maybe nothing can be the fault of Windows? Windows is perfect?
> But well, you are Mark Olsen, this very intelligent guy who
That you got right. Unbelievable.
> knows everything better than everybody else, you even know
Incorrect discription, but close.
> my own stuff better than me, you're so smart...
Most people know that Windows is crap. You don't.
> But if you are so smart, how is it that we never heard about
> any of your wonderful inventions ? I didn't see your name at
We can also do the opposite, what have you done of good things?
How come we've never heard of you until you had to defend the honour of the company?
> the Nobel prizes ceremony, they forgot you ? How stupid they are...
No, I can still make it. Just wait. I'll get the Nobel prize for bashing lamers.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 23 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Hassan Sultan on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 22 (Mark Olsen):
>> You are right, all these developers at MS are stupid
>> and don't know how to write code...
>No, even that you can't do right.
>The monkeys can code, but they code the wrong things. Go look a little at what you have.
>Bad APIs, bad software, bad UI, bad architecture. Bad everything.
You are right, I don't know who I should believe David Cutler, the guy who wrote the NT kernel, and the VMS operating system, or Mark Olsen, the guy who wrote... nothing.
>> That's probably why they are among the most wanted employees in the field.
>Who wants an MS employee? Raise your hands.
Most companies in the world, that's sad if you don't want to see the truth
>> You must be very stupid to think that you know better than
>> Microsoft's developers how their own code work.
>Really, you should know better than believing Microsoft's marketing BS. 99% of >what they say is bullshit and lies. So either MS (and you) have no clue what >you are doing, or you lie for fun.
Yes, I believe the code I see and write, while you believe what you WANT to believe. Here's the difference between you and me.
>> Same goes for you thinking that I didn't know the difference
>> between user space and kernel space.
>Well, obviously you don't. Else you wouldn't had said that it wasn't the fault of the OS.
>Or, maybe nothing can be the fault of Windows? Windows is perfect?
I never said that Windows was perfect, I simply said that this problem was not due to the OS, either you don't know to read or you are unable to understand simple english.
>> But well, you are Mark Olsen, this very intelligent guy who
>That you got right. Unbelievable.
>> knows everything better than everybody else, you even know
>Incorrect discription, but close.
>> my own stuff better than me, you're so smart...
>Most people know that Windows is crap. You don't.
Most people use Windows so they probably feel it's not that bad.
>> But if you are so smart, how is it that we never heard about
>> any of your wonderful inventions ? I didn't see your name at
>We can also do the opposite, what have you done of good things?
>How come we've never heard of you until you had to defend the honour of the company?
The difference being that I don't say that I know your stuff better than you, because I don't, I'm not a magician, since you are able to do this kind of miracles, I thought you would be a celebrity.
>> the Nobel prizes ceremony, they forgot you ? How stupid they are...
>No, I can still make it. Just wait. I'll get the Nobel prize for bashing lamers.
This simple phrase shows how smart you are.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 24 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Mark Olsen on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 23 (Hassan Sultan):
> You are right, I don't know who I should believe David Cutler,
> the guy who wrote the NT kernel, and the VMS operating system,
> or Mark Olsen, the guy who wrote... nothing.
Sure, believe David Cutler. He wrote a crapkernel, that makes him a hero.
>> Who wants an MS employee? Raise your hands.
> Most companies in the world,
> that's sad if you don't want to see the truth
Hey, we've got an exemployee from a crapcompany, lets hire him!
> Yes, I believe the code I see and write, while you believe what you
You write real crap code if you can't see that Windows is crap.
> WANT to believe. Here's the difference between you and me.
Naw, I believe what I see, while you believe in marketing BS from MS. There's the difference.
> I never said that Windows was perfect, I simply said that this
> problem was not due to the OS, either you don't know to read or
> you are unable to understand simple english.
Noo, it isn't Windows' fault, and even if it is, it's a feature.
And if you can't see that Windows is crap, then your perception of reality is twisted.
> Most people use Windows so they probably feel it's not that bad.
And most of them never made a choice. Most of those who do make a choice, choose something else.
> The difference being that I don't say that I know your stuff
> better than you, because I don't, I'm not a magician, since
Here's the sad part: I do know your stuff better than you. You've just proved that.
> you are able to do this kind of miracles, I thought you
> would be a celebrity.
No, no miracles, just a simple fact.
>>> the Nobel prizes ceremony, they forgot you ? How stupid they are...
>> No, I can still make it. Just wait. I'll get the Nobel prize for bashing lamers.
> This simple phrase shows how smart you are.
Silly questions get silly answers...
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 25 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Hassan Sultan on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 24 (Mark Olsen):
Well, one thing is sure, you would make miracles as a clown :+)
You are really pathetic, calling the VMS kernel crap really shows how knowledgeful you are, you really make me laugh :+)
And if you believe that MS employees need marketing to believe in the products THEY write then you are probably smoking crack :+)
Stay in your small world, continue to believe that you are a genius who knows everything, I just hope you never see the real world, because this day will be a painful one for you.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 26 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Mark Olsen on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 25 (Hassan Sultan):
I treat your unwillingnes to answer accusations as a silent "I agree".
You only seem to be able to say that I smoke pot. Good argumentation.
So on one side, you say the Windows and Microsoft are good, but on the other side, you're unable to argument your oppinion.
Sad, but that's how some people are.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 27 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Hassan Sultan on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 26 (Mark Olsen):
Well, you say : "Windows is crap", fine, what exactly is crap in Windows(say Win2000 since it's the one that Christian use) ? give me the technical problem, not "this is crap".
What I see : IBM, Compaq, Dell, Unisys, Bull,Motorola... have programs that guarantee 99.999% availability for Windows2000, same level as the other Unix bigboxes, this is a proof of its stability.
Go look at http://www.tpc.org the benchmarks results for databases, this is a industry wide standard for benchmarking databases, the top spots are trusted by Windows2000, proof of its performance.
At http://www.internet2.edu/html/i2lsr.html, you can see that Win2000 hold the speed record for transfer over Internet2: 830Mbit per second during 81 seconds on a distance of 5,626Km. Proof of its network stack performance. Now, I don't think Win2000 would be able to transfer 830Mbit/s during 81sec and would not be able to reliably transfer a 200Kb over a modem.
If such an OS is completely crap, then I wonder what you call other OSes.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 28 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Mark Olsen on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 27 (Hassan Sultan):
> Well, you say : "Windows is crap", fine, what exactly is crap in
> Windows(say Win2000 since it's the one that Christian use) ?
> give me the technical problem, not "this is crap".
Look at my other posts. Such stupid ideas as putting graphics operations in kernel space. Have you fired that crazy bimbo that came up with this?
Crap APIs, Win32 is evil, and DirectX is really, really fscked up.
> What I see : IBM, Compaq, Dell, Unisys, Bull,Motorola... have programs
> that guarantee 99.999% availability for Windows2000, same level as the
> other Unix bigboxes, this is a proof of its stability.
Ohh, nice, what's even nicer is that Microsofts bad programmers enjoy stuffing things into kernelspace, as simple a thing as playing an MPEG can lay down Win2k Advanced Server easily. Please note this: Keep stuff out of kernel space.
> Go look at http://www.tpc.org the benchmarks results for databases,
> this is a industry wide standard for benchmarking databases, the top
> spots are trusted by Windows2000, proof of its performance.
They finally got this one. But what good is it when Win2k is a bastard to administer?
> At http://www.internet2.edu/html/i2lsr.html, you can see that Win2000 hold
> the speed record for transfer over Internet2: 830Mbit per second during
> 81 seconds on a distance of 5,626Km. Proof of its network stack performance.
> Now, I don't think Win2000 would be able to transfer 830Mbit/s during
> 81sec and would not be able to reliably transfer a 200Kb over a modem.
cat /dev/random | nc www.microsoft.com 80
> If such an OS is completely crap, then I wonder what you call other OSes.
Now, if you would just answer my accusations instead of digging up shit, you might realise that Windows IS crap.
But maybe this is why you are avoiding it. You know that Windows is shit, but you don't want to admit it.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 29 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Karl Hamilton on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 27 (Hassan Sultan):
Hassan, one word for you: MULTITASKING. I bet that scared the shit out of you. No matter how much bloatware you code, you`ll never be able to make a Windows PeeCee do this. After all, the PeeCee is just a glorified typewriter. The Amiga has been multitasking from 1985!!! Unbelievable that you "programmers" cant do this yet. Before I go, let me just say this, PeeCees cant AutoConfig either. ROFL
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 30 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Karl Hamilton on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Windows95 Source Code
Warning: do not compile; unpredictable results
Subject: *** TOP SECRET MICROSOFT CODE ***
Project: Version - Windows 95
Microsoft marketing strategy (MARKET.EXE):
#include
#include
#include /* Microsoft Network Connectivity library */
#include /* For the court of law */
#define say(x) lie(x)
#define computeruser ALL_WANT_TO_BUY_OUR_BUGWARE
#define next_year soon
#define the_product_is_ready_to_ship another_beta_version
void main()
{
if (latest_window_version>one_month_old)
{
if (there_are_still_bugs)
market(bugfix);
if (sales_drop_below_certain_point)
raise(RUMOURS_ABOUT_A_blank_BUGLESS_VERSION);
}
while(everyone_chats_about_blank_version)
{
make_false_promise(it_will_be_multitasking); /* Standard Call, in
lie.h */
if (rumours_grow_wilder)
make_false_promise(it_will_be_plug_n_play);
if (rumours_grow_even_wilder)
{
market_time=ripe;
say("It will be ready in one month);
order(programmers, stop_fixing_bugs_in_old_version);
order(programmers, start_brainstorm_about_blank_version);
order(marketingstaff, permission_to_spread_nonsense);
vapourware=TRUE;
break;
}
}
switch (nasty_questions_of_the_worldpress)
{
case WHEN_WILL_IT_BE_READY:
say("It will be ready in", today+30_days," we're just testing");
break;
case WILL_THIS_PLUG_AND_PLAY_THING_WORK:
say("Yes it will work");
ask(programmers, why_does_it_not_work);
pretend(there_is_no_problem);
break;
case WHAT_ARE_MINIMAL_HARDWARE_REQUIREMENTS:
say("It will run on a 8086 with lightning speed due to"
" the 32 bits architecture");
inform(INTEL, "Pentium sales will rise skyhigh");
inform(SAMSUNG, "Start a new memorychip plant"
"'cos all those customers will need at least 32 megs");
inform(QUANTUM, "Thanks to our fatware your sales will triple");
get_big_bonus(INTEL, SAMSUNG, QUANTUM);
break;
case DOES_MICROSOFT_GET_TOO_MUCH_INFLUENCE:
say("Oh no, we are just here to make a better world for
everyone");
register(journalist, Big_Bill_Book);
when(time_is_ripe)
{
arrest(journalist);
brainwash(journalist);
when(journalist_says_windows95_is_bugfree)
{
order(journalist, "write a nice objective article");
release (journalist);
}
}
break;
}
while (vapourware)
{
introduction_date++; /* Delay */
if (no_one_believes_anymore_there_will_be_a_release)
break;
say("It will be ready in",today+ONE_MONTH);
}
release(beta_version)
while (everyone_is_dumb_enough_to_buy_our_bugware)
{
bills_bank_account += 150*megabucks;
release(new_and_even_better_beta_version);
introduce(more_memory_requirements);
if (customers_report_installation_problems)
{
say("that is a hardware problem, not a software problem");
if (smart_customer_says_but_you_promised_plug_and_play)
{
ignore(customer);
order(microsoft_intelligence_agency, "Keep an eye on this
bastard");
}
}
if ( bills_bank_account>skyhigh && marriage>two_years )
{
divorce(woman_that_was_beatifull_when_I_married_her);
wave(dollars, at_lusty_chicks);
marry(young_blond_virgin_with_big_boobies);
devirginize(young_blond_virgin_with_big_boobies);
if (boobies_start_to_hang)
dump(young_blond_virgin_with_big_boobies);
}
if (there_is_another_company)
{
steal(their_ideas);
accuse(compagny, stealing_our_ideas);
hire(a_lot_of_lawyers); /* in process.h */
wait(until_other_company_cannot_afford_another_lawsuit);
buy_out(other_company);
}
}
/* Now everyone realizes that we sell bugware and they are all angry at
us */
order(plastic_surgeon, make_bill_look_like_poor_bastard);
buy(nice_little_island); hire(harem);
laugh_at(everyone,
for_having_the_patience_year_after_year_for_another_unfinished_version);
}
void bugfix(void)
{
charge (a_lot_of_money)
if (customer_says_he_does_not_want_to_pay_for_bugfix)
say("It is not a bugfix but a new version");
if (still_complaints)
{
ignore(customer);
register(customer, big_Bill_book);
/* We'll get him when everyone uses Billware!!*/
}
}
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 31 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Dave on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 30 (Karl Hamilton):
That's absolut~1 hilari~1! :o)
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 32 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Hassan Sultan on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 28 (Mark Olsen):
The day when you understand how operating systems and kernels work will be a great day.
What is the problem with putting graphical operations in kernel space ? Can you tell this to me ?
The kernel can't do anything else during this time and the system is blocked while the call is processed ? FALSE
The NT/2000 kernel is fully reentrant, and threads executing in the executive(in the kernel code) are preempted by the scheduler, they do NOT own the CPU from the start of the syscall to the end of the syscall.
YOU should go read a few books about operating systems, because you are making a fool of yourself in front of everybody.
Concerning your other "problems", can you give more precise informations than "Crap APIs, Win32 is evil, and DirectX is really, really fscked up" ?
Or is it because you don't have any clue about it ?
And I would be very happy to know how an MPEG movie can lay down Win2k(unless your graphic card driver has a bug), can you explain that precisely to me ? And please not by saying "this is crap", I'd like to know the real problem.
Oh and for Win2k being a bastard to administer, you will have to explain that to almost all the small businesses who don't have a Unix sysadmin, because most of them use Windows servers.
Please, use your brain next time,
Hassan(still laughing...)
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 33 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by S Katz on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 29 (Karl Hamilton):
>Hassan, one word for you: MULTITASKING. I bet that scared the shit out of you. >No matter how much bloatware you code, you`ll never be able to make a Windows >PeeCee do this. After all, the PeeCee is just a glorified typewriter. The >Amiga has been multitasking from 1985!!! Unbelievable that you "programmers" >cant do this yet. Before I go, let me just say this, PeeCees cant AutoConfig >either. ROFL
Actually, you'll find that Windows 95+ and NT+ multitask in the same way as the Amiga (a priority based timeslicing model).
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 34 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Hassan Sultan on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 29 (Karl Hamilton):
I totally agree with you that AmigaOS was multitasking before everyone else and I still really like this system(I wouldn't have taken my A4000 with me from Switzerland if it wasn't true, so I can even say that MS has payed for my Amiga :+) ), and I even agree than Win95/98/ME is a piece of shit(and a big one).
However, you have to understand that NT/2000 is a completely different OS than Win95, they don't have much in common except the API and the GUI, the internals are completely different, the kernel in NT/2000 was rewritten from scratch and it is a fully preemptive multitasking OS, like AmigaOS. The DOS console you see in NT/2000 is an emulation, like Shapeshifter on the Amiga.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 35 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Steffan Katz on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 30 (Karl Hamilton):
Karl Hamilton:
Your post was just childish. You are no doubt one of these Amiga users who thinks it's fashionable to join the obsessed group of Linux users who centre their entire lives around their hatred of Bill Gates. What did he do wrong? He worked hard to make something of himself.
Well the fact is, that Linux+X requires just as much CPU power, more RAM and just as large disks as Windows NT/2000. So maybe you should clue yourself and stop giving other normal Amiga users a bad reputation.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 36 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by christophe on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 27 (Hassan Sultan):
> Well, you say : "Windows is crap", fine, what exactly is crap in Windows(say Win2000 since it's the one that Christian use) ? give me the technical problem,
> not "this is crap".
I got many locks of the system that let me know nothing. Even the old NT4 blue screen was not there to know what the problem was.
> What I see : IBM, Compaq, Dell, Unisys, Bull,Motorola... have programs that guarantee 99.999% availability for Windows2000, same level as the other Unix
> bigboxes, this is a proof of its stability.
This is a commercial advertisement that let you think W2k can be as Unix.
> Go look at http://www.tpc.org the benchmarks results for databases, this is a industry wide standard for benchmarking databases, the top spots are trusted by
> Windows2000, proof of its performance.
And you will see that Windows 2000 beat unix when it has X times more CPU.
Go to:
http://www.netcraft.com/survey/developers/oracle.html
And look what the database company is using for servers.
> At http://www.internet2.edu/html/i2lsr.html, you can see that Win2000 hold the speed record for transfer over Internet2: 830Mbit per second during 81 seconds
> on a distance of 5,626Km. Proof of its network stack performance. Now, I don't think Win2000 would be able to transfer 830Mbit/s during 81sec and would not
> be able to reliably transfer a 200Kb over a modem.
What happened after 81 seconds , it crashed ? ;)
It is well known that do download records are on BSD servers. There is no way to compare the MS IP stack.
> If such an OS is completely crap, then I wonder what you call other OSes.
I call other OS OS, I call MS stuff crap.
Go to www.netcraft.com and look at the top 50 server uptime:
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html
Where is Microsoft ?
Mark is right even if categorical.
Bathed in a sea full of crap (m$) you can ever try to do something good but the conclusion will be that it will be crap whatever you try to do.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 37 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by christophe on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 34 (Hassan Sultan):
>However, you have to understand that NT/2000 is a completely different OS than Win95, they don't have much in common except the API and the GUI, the
> internals are completely different, the kernel in NT/2000 was rewritten from scratch and it is a fully preemptive multitasking OS, like AmigaOS. The DOS
> console you see in NT/2000 is an emulation, like Shapeshifter on the Amiga.
Do you know that MS outsourced this emulation.
They did not know how to emulate their own OS ;)
Anyway they were not even capable to keep compatibibility with DOS 6.
A lot of commands are still missing and you have to use an additional script tools when you want to write a decent script.
Windows 2000 even does not have a decent shell.
Windows 2000 pissed me off so much.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 38 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Hassan Sultan on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 36 (christophe):
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.
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.
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.
Concerning your BSD stack claims, can I please have some pointers to your 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.
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.
The fact is that you never gave any real technical problem in Win2k, you only say "it's crap".
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.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 39 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Hassan Sultan on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 37 (christophe):
The emulation was not outsourced, the people in charge of this part of the code are 20 meters from my office...
Concerning scripting, you have VBScript and JScript with which you can do a lot of things, call COM objects, play with the registry, send e-mail,...
If you don't know to use them is another problem, everything's here
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 40 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Pede^FUP on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Well...
Urhm... I just wonder why it is that Win2k about can do nothing else than do a ftp transfer on a local network, and hardly keeping up on a surfing trip on a P3-500,
WHILE my Amiga 4000 happily enjoys the walk of surfing, emailing, mp3 playing, icq'ing, irc'ing and actually doing the ftp serving???
Yikes, it IIIIS wierd, isn't it?
Cheers... Pede.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 41 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Dave on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Guys...
The only thing which Microsoft would make which *wouldn't* suck would be a vacumn cleaner...
Windows 2000 is just like the rest of the crap that comes out of Redmond. I have to deal with numerous 'issues' as they call them, every day.
As for multitasking - Windows 2000 is *still* a joke. You shouldn't even have it in the same category. It's better than NTfloor but not much.
Wasn't Windows 2000 released with 63,000 *known* bugs? (I may be totally wrong there, please correct if necessary Hassan).
Anyway. I hate W2K as it's 'fashionably' called. I can't throw away that ERD Pro yet...
Dave
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 42 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Hassan Sultan on 13-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 41 (Dave):
Fact is that I still didn't read any REAL technical issue with Win2k, I only read "it's crap", fine , but what ? why ? what is the TECHNICAL problem ?
As for the 63'000 bugs rumor, it's nothing but a rumor.
Here we call 'bug' : real bugs, any feature request(having a function to do xyz,...), things that work but could work better,... anything that require a change in the product, be it source code, documentation,... is called a "bug".
Add all this and you have a big number(however magnitudes less than this 63'000 bugs thing), but a very small percentage of this number is actually real bugs.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 43 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Dave on 14-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 42 (Hassan Sultan):
*My* only real problem with 2000 is that it's still slow to use. I hate having to wait for a context based menu to appear. I like to do things fast.
To me, the only thing which it currently has going for it is the fact that it's easier to set up, although I don't like the 'integrated'-ness of it and the way they have shuffled things around and renamed other parts.
Also, I would much rather have one program for one thing. I don't want an uber-alles computer 'manager' stroke setup program. (I can just see the next version - the icons in the control panel have been replaced by one HUGE icon ;)
(I hate having mail/word processing/organiser functions in one (like outlook 2000)). At work we use Outlook 2000, the main complaint I hear is that it's too complicated for the user. Before you know it they're back to outlook express...
Anyway, I'm straying way off track. I'll probably not bother posting to this thread again, but thanks for the interesting reading guys.
Cheers,
Dave.
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.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 45 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by christophe on 14-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 39 (Hassan Sultan):
>The emulation was not outsourced, the people in charge of this part of the >code are 20 meters from my office...
I though it was done by insigna and I even saw the name while looking in Windows (I don't remember what file).
So if it was not really outsourced tell them the Dos emulation is the most crapy ever. The Dos 6 is much better. They could have done all the dos commands instead of doing a little part of them.
>Concerning scripting, you have VBScript and JScript with which you can do a >lot of things, call COM objects, play with the registry, send e-mail,...
Every OS that merit this name has a decent shell. Win2K not.
In a big PC park with 2/3 of them unable to run Win2K properly you need to support NT4 that does not come in standard with such additional script interpreters.
We had to remove vbscript interpreter because of the security flaws that make you get all viruses without even opening attachments.
>If you don't know to use them is another problem, everything's here
I know how to use it and I actualy use a third party tools that I had to install on every PC.
Scripting is not standard on every Windows !
So everytime you have to write a little script you have to prepare a scripting tool deployment. This is ridiculous.
Once again a server OS SHOULD HAVE A DECENT SHELL !
I think M$ brainwashed you. Open your eyes.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 46 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Steffan Katz on 14-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
I think it's funny that despite all the ridiculous hate-messages about Windows 2000 not one person here has given ONE(!!!) reason to justify their extreme obsessive hatred.
This is just a case of Amiga users blindly following the loud obsessive Linux users that spend their lives posting to Slashdot and hating MS for no other reason than they're jealous that Windows is a higher quality product, and that Linux will always be doomed to a less than 1% share.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 47 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Colin Wilson on 14-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 39 (Hassan Sultan):
"Concerning scripting, you have VBScript and JScript with which you can do a lot of things, call COM objects, play with the registry, send e-mail,..."
No kidding - I wonder how the majority of viruses spread now (it wouldn`t happen to be a Windows platform would it, that allows .VBS files to run unhindered without the user knowing they`re being "infected").
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 48 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Colin Wilson on 14-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
One other comment:
Hassan - can you please explain why you are interested in an Amiga forum ?
Is M$ actively keeping us under observation ?
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 49 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Ville Sarell on 14-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
Hmm, just don't get it. Why do people keep on arguing about which OS is the best. I would prefer saying that use whatever OS YOU like and that's the best OS for YOU. It's still quite subjective opinion. Even if there are weak/strong points in different OS's, I don't think we should argue about those in an Amiga news/rumour channel.
Btw. I think AmigaOS is the best OS for ME, don't care if it has not have certain feature other OS's have. Just love using it, and I think that's the whole point.
Let's keep this an Amiga channel. Of course it's good to mention other systems also and what's going on in there, IF it has something to do with Amiga, now, in the future etc. But I think there are enough news-sites that cover all the nonamiga related news (argues) etc. Well, it's just an opinion anyway.
MOTD 12/Feb/2001 : Comment 50 of 64ANN.lu
Posted by Dave on 14-Feb-2001 23:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 48 (Colin Wilson):
See comment 34 - he already said he has an Amiga.
Anonymous, there are 64 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 64]
Back to Top