Printable View
oh, but what an enlightening thread we would miss out on....Quote:
Originally posted here by phishphreek80
Lets not turn this into a linux vs windows thread... we have enough of them.
We know your stance on linux... no need to come preaching to the choir.
NOT!
:o
No one said, "you don't know anything"!Quote:
Originally posted here by gore
**** it. I'll delete my other post. Nothing I say matters anyway right? I'm always wrong I've never proven nothing to anyone and have no clue what I'm talking about, I'll go lay in bed now.
What some of us are saying is, a) Linux is not the hottest thing since sliced bread and b) some of us have been around long enough to become very bored by the "Linux vs Windows" debates. It's about as hip as a Kenny Rogers hair do.
Gore,
No reason to get fussy. I was just posting to let you know that your assumptions were incorrect.
You were misinformed. We are here to learn and share our knowledge. You can learn from here too!
I only said lets not turn this into a linux vs windows thread because it happens frequently.
Don't take it as a personal attack. :p
Well, I don’t think there is too much to comment on the original thread, ... exceptAs far as that goes, typical, and yet reasonable.Quote:
... are subject to change until released.
As far as GORE goes ... I missed his deleted thread. My loss.
But I have finally found something to attack and criticize SUSE
WTF! Why can I not download CD images?
I either have to boot and connect a machine to the Internet then install, or download and make a DVD image and install from that! ( talking about SUSE LINUX Professional 9.2 )
You are telling me I have to either expose a box to very real and imagined threats while installing from FTP, or beg my son to burn a DVD image :booty: in order to install SUSE ??
( BTW, I bought him that DVD burner )
This is open source ???
Mees thinks SUSE is trying in a round-about-way to go the way of RH!
think that will get the fur flying? ;)
You just opened up a whole can of worms!!!Quote:
Originally posted here by IKnowNot
This is open source ???
Mees thinks SUSE is trying in a round-about-way to go the way of RH!
think that will get the fur flying? ;)
/me ducks!
SuSE CD image.
SUSE LINUX - SUSE 9.1 Personal 700MB MD5SUM
http://www.linuxiso.org/download.php...rsonal-x86.iso
http://www.linuxiso.org/
I think you can just download & install and then update to 9.2 w/o problems.
I always buy my copies of SuSE --> support the distro and Linux. Besides I just love those green manuals on my desk. :-)
I'm fresh off a security conference and the sr Microsoft guy told me that MS is planning on spending 2 billion on security this year. Yes, 2 billion. He went on to say that MS realizes the importance (finally) of security and they have revamped the management chain and several other processes within the orginization. With that kind of bling, I can only imagine the wave of patches that my be right around the corner.
I don't think I would call IIS SMTP a mail server. It is very limited in what it can do as it is really just the SMTP transport. There is a definite difference between an SMTP daemon which can process SMTP mail, and what a mail server is. It is missing many things that would make it a full blow mail server.Quote:
Windows (2k/xp) does come with a mail server... IIS SMTP.
With just IIS on the machine you can really only use it to do things like send mail out from forms, etc... If you want IIS SMTP to function as a full mail server you will need to install exchange, which uses the SMTP service as its mail transport.
I guess Missed all the fun. To what could be gore's delight: I have been playing with SuSE for 2 days now. I typed a goofy blurb on it, maybe I'll post it. But on this box SuSE does boot faster. It just depends, and if someone says their windows box boots faster with more stuff than the linux boots, I believe them. WhTF cares anyway? There are wayyy too variables. On an older system I would tend to think Linux boots faster, on newer systems it tends to take longer to initialize new hardware. My Windows Advanced Servers take so freaking long to boot I always panic. Their issue though is initializing LARGE librarys of redundant RAIDS. So what? :D As long as the ****ing thing boots and gets the job done. NT took forever but XP boots fast on one machine and slow on the other. Almost the same hardware but the other initializes a wireless connection and it take a while. to load that card for whatever reason. It just depends.
When I said "they don't have to do it" I meant the whole process is automated. An admin can push it and set the time of reboot (if required). Or force it on them or set the clock to 6pm and go home. Windows requires reboot most of the time for users sake. But just like linux most of the time you just have to stop and restart the service. Tell that to grandma, so the user is prompted to reboot. Easy, clean. Most of the time each systems would require reboot for the same scenarios. Changes in drivers only effective at initialization, kernal patches, services only invoked on startup etc.