Microsoft compares Win2k to Linux
JDrabb at darden.com
Mon Jul 22 07:52:29 PDT 2002
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Karakashian [mailto:tonyk at rochestermidland.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 10:11 AM
> To: lfs-chat at linuxfromscratch.org
> Subject: RE: Microsoft compares Win2k to Linux
> If you open the lid of any of my toolboxes, be it at home,
> the office, or in my
> truck, you'll find a sign. The sign reads, "If you borrow a
> tool, return it. If
> you don't return it, I will hunt you down and beat you to
> death with it." I agree
> that if there's a bug, it should be fixed. However,
> sometimes the fix is to
> tell people the right way to do things. Poor baby that you
> have to manually
> release memory yourself. As you pointed out in your first
> e-mail, it's just
> another call. It's good practice to do that regardless of
> whether the OS will
> cuddle you tight and say, "It's okay, hunny, I'll close it
> for you" or not.
Oh give me a break. You obviously have NO CLUE what you are talking about when
it comes to programming. There WAS NO SIGN that said to free the memory. This
was found out after many hours of bug hunting and searching. M$ is very cautious
on how they release bugs. They worry about their image over being technically
correct. They hide api features so that they can write an M$ application and
have a leg up on the competition. So this make it almost impossible to write
an Outlook killer or M$ office killer. Since M$ programmers have access to
internal api's that the compaction doesn't.
> Apparently, it's not dummed down enough as evidenced by the
> number of people who
> have trouble keeping their machines alive for as long as I do.
Let's all bow down to the greatest M$ administrator in the world. You are the
only person whose is capable. Where do you come up with this garbage? You seem
to enjoy making things up with NO PROOF to back it up. Please enlighten me to
"the number of people who have trouble keeping their machines alive for as long
as you do". Yes, I do believe that their is an official website that tracks
statistics for "the number of people who have trouble keeping their machines
alive for as long as Tony does".
> That's right, that is the point. Believe it or not,
> computers are no longer
> the perview of the hacker-programmer anymore. They belong to
> the masses. Some
> people just want to read their e-mail, they do not want to
> have to have a
> degree in computer science to do it. You don't like it?
> Better program
> yourself a dimensional portal that will take you to that
> mythical land where
> people give a crap as to how easy it is to program for a
> given OS or not.
> Windows is for users, Linux is for programmers. There are a
> lot more of them
> than there are of you, that's why Windows is so prevalent.
This is why windows is dominant on the desktop. However, in the server area,
the dummed down approach just doesn't cut it. With *nix I can run a server
that doesn't suck up my memory for some dumb gui. With M$ windows the gui
cannot be removed. I am sorry, but I am a technical person and I *NEED* to
be challenged. I don't want someone coming along and giving me some dumb
point-and-click crap. With M$, everything is dummed down to the first grade
level. With *nix you can have it dummed down or as *raw* as you like : )
It is all about choice and the freedom that everyone deserves. Whether they
are technical or not. With M$ there is no choice. It is the M$ way or the
> Your arguments about the greed of MS would be a lot less
> hypocritical without
> this statement. If you really stuck to your high moral
> ground, that percentage
> would be reversed, or 100% in favor of *nix.
> Of course, this leads to the evident self-loathing
> and displaced
> anger you've demonstrated so well here.
Again, you are making assumptions on what you don't know. I do 80% of my
programming on M$ because I am converting large enterprise systems form M$ to
Solaris and Linux for better scalability/performance/etc. When the M$ phase is
done then it will be 80% *nix. Large corporations have diverse server/client PC
usage. So as a programmer I need to be able to program on multi-platforms
> However, you are greedy, you want
> to make the most amount of money for your skills,
> so you program for something you hate.
When did I say I *hate* M$ windows the OS? I *hate* M$ and their corporate
crap. I *hate* the fact that M$ tries to bury details in end user license
agreements. I *hate* that M$ tries to bury hidden garbage in media player to
steal my usage information. I *hate* that M$ buries IE into the OS so users
won't want to use other browsers, etc, etc.
I never said I *hate* M$ windows. I enjoy some parts of programming on M$
windows. I enjoy lower lever win32 API programming etc.
As far as being greedy, would you work for less then you feel your worth? I
doubt it. Does that make *you* greedy? No. The difference between me and M$ is
every thing I program for a company I document and give them full source to. I
would never put back doors in, or secretly gather information from them and send
it back to me without them knowing. I would never write a program that tried to
stop a company from using another program then mine.
I am about bored with this whole stupid thread. You have your opinions on M$
and I respect that. And I have mine. If you want your whole IT future
controlled by M$ and use what they say and when then say then fine. However, I
will make decisions on my programming future based on technical merit and
Never ask a geek why, just nod your head and slowly back away
James Drabb JR
JDrabb at Darden.com
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-chat' in the subject header of the message
More information about the lfs-chat