*BSD News Article 92688


Return to BSD News archive

Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!news.wildstar.net!news.ececs.uc.edu!newsfeeds.sol.net!newspump.sol.net!mindspring!realtime.net!not-for-mail
From: dneeley@bga.com (David Neeley)
Newsgroups: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Linux or FreeBSD (or something else?)
Date: Thu, 03 Apr 1997 21:51:01 GMT
Organization: Real/Time Communications Internet customer posting
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <5i1216$gc4$1@news3.realtime.net>
References: <332c9a76.3278270@news.adelaide.on.net> <01bc32f2$3783f300$04000001@Colin> <E79F14.n7z@forthdv.pfm-mainz.de> <332f5ffb.519605@news.sprynet.com> <5h51ma$b1u$2@kayrad.ziplink.net> <3337e3ad.1847437@news.sprynet.com> <5hbh2g$gah$1@kayrad.ziplink.net> <333990e3.2587820@news.sprynet.com> <333EE698.41C67EA6@kzin.dorm.umd.edu> <3343cbbf.1091644@news.sprynet.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: apm5-178.realtime.net
X-RTcode: efa039a0336616d97d440bb9
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au alt.os.linux:19727 comp.os.linux.misc:167791 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:38361

lcappite@sprynet.com (Goatboy) wrote:


>It's more stable than any other OS but Linux or freebsd (pc's, not
>damn alphas or sgi onyx2's). It's more stable than OS/2, MacOS, win95,
>etc. PC World even did tests, and NT was the only one that didn't
>crash. And I doubt that many home users support more than 100 people
>on a network or run an ISP. And NT is $200. That's not that bad
>considering what u get. Face it boys, MS has made computing easier,
>and that isn't exactly bad.

More stable than "any" other OS but Linux or freebsd? You're kidding,
right? And what about the "bug fix" set of patches that introduced
more bugs than it fixed?

Of course, when talking about networking you're usually not talking
about home networks. 

Not to mention that NT Server is considerably higher than $200...like
about four to six times higher, in the real world.

As for MS making computing easier--stick with herding your goats. Many
of the incompatibilities we suffer from come from Microsoft's
insistance on ignoring any standards and attempting to create their
own standards that work only on MS operating systems...just lilke they
seem to be trying to do with Java at the moment. Since when is copying
Apple (who, of course, copied Xerox) a major step in making computing
easier?

Of all the OS's I've seen, the most elegant and easiest to use had to
be Nextstep. Others are only now starting to catch up.

Before we leave the subject of "making computing easier"--can we say
"Bob"? Or maybe "Plug and play"? 

Sheesh, give me a break from the "Goatboys" of the world who haven't
been around long enough to support their theories...and who buy into
Microsoft's BS about how great they are. 

Otherwise, have a nice day.   :-)