| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 22.10.99 07:04l 204 Lines 6938 Bytes #-9710 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_265D
Read: DL6KCF GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/265D
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0RGB<OK0PPL<OK0PHL<OK0PBB<OK0PAB<HA5OB<HA3PG<SV1AAW<
EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 991022/0231Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:9592 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_265
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA21799 ; Fri, 22 Oct 99 02:11:14 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00016520 ; Thu, 21 Oct 99 18:20:01 MET
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 99 18:16:56 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_265D>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/265D
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
>
> Steve, what "us" are you referring to? Redneck drunks? LandLine Lids?
>
> >
> > I've been employed as a Unix administrator for years, and Linux
> > represents what most modern Unix systems use as state of the art.
>
> No wonder it's so screwed up!
>
> > I only run the stable versions, not the development versions.
>
> Uh oh! Steve admitted to the existence of "unstable" versions of LINUX...
> Better watch out, Steve, or the LINUX thought police will be after you!
The "unstable" versions he refers to are beta-tests for new features, etc.
This would be the same as Windows is to the MSDN pre-releases.
However, note that this means that there are also STABLE versions of Linux.
That is something Windows cannot claim to have. Microsoft indicates that
there
are always unforseen "issues" - else there would be no need for the BSOD. The
only "BSOD" Linux has is the intentional parody of M$ - there is no other need
for it.
> >There
> > is no truth to the fact that Linux is unstable.
>
> You just got through admitting it. Sharp as a tack today, aren't you Steve?
>
> >Even IBM ships Linux
> > now with their Netfinity servers (high-end NT server base machine).
> >
> > The only bad thing about Linux, is that it is harder than IBM AIX to
> > administer. But with AIX I have to wait 3 years to afford the next
> > update.
> >
> > My opinion, is that RedHat Linux (I run 5.2) is more stable than
> > Sun Solaris 2.7 on a dual Pentium motherboard I run.
>
> I'm real happy for you. RedHat 5.2 proved to be extremely unstable here, and
> not worthwhile on those occasions where it did work for a few minutes.
>
> As I mentioned earlier, it all looked like stuff you might expect from
> "junior programmer wannabee's". I don't have the patience for "amateur
> software", thank you. Unreasonable as I am, I prefer to work with software
> developed by professionals.
>
> >My other
> > opinion is that Charles doesn't understand Packet radio, and he
> > doesn't understand Operating Systems. Just my opinion...
>
> That's cool. We all have our opinions.
>
> >
> > That leaves us with a question: why the hell do you even subscribe
> > to this newsgroup? DOS and GUI-DOS pro-arguments belong
> > in the fringe alt.* groups...
>
> Is that why you are here now, arguing about LINUX?
>
> >
> > If you are going to do TCP/IP, and everyone will; then you need to
> > use a good platform to develop on.
>
> Is that the same "everyone" you referred to earlier? Redneck drunks and
> LandLine Lids?
>
> If so, then your "everyone" doesn't amount to much, does it?
>
> >Linux is good, DOS would be
> > the third choice after some of the single-board microcontrollers
> > that are available now to TCP/IP anything.
>
> Well, when I see something LINUX is "good" for that I have some interest in,
> I'll be sure and let you know. Until then, I'll stick with software that
> works.
I agree that Windows-based systems make good clients but NOT servers. Linux
systems make great servers and have no real performance penalty acting as
clients either (other than the additional resource overhead for having more
programs running).
The original thread of this was: How to make a "gateway." Well, gateways ARE
SERVERS (more correctly, run server programs), and therefore, any OS which is
more server than client oriented will be better. Windows, being client only,
by design is simply going to suck. That's like sticking a beachball into a
soda can - it can be done, but only if it's deflated (but then what's useful
about a deflated beachball when one can have an inflated one with the other
approach?).
>.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Oct 1999 06:05:53 GMT
From: Hamish Moffatt <hamish@rising.com.au>
Subject: The BBS network and tcp/ip.
Charles Brabham <n5pvl@texoma.net> wrote:
> Hamish Moffatt <hamish@rising.com.au> wrote in message
> news:7ubpb2$171d$2@arachne.labyrinth.net.au...
>> Really, I thought you had a more open mind than this, Charles.
> I do. I gave LINUX a fair trial, and it turned out to be garbage. I'll give
> it another try later on, but not until the problem I mentioned has been
> resolved.
Run it past me again before I give up completely.
Hamish
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 09:43:38 -0500
From: "Steve Sampson" <ssampson@usa-site.net>
Subject: The BBS network and tcp/ip.
Charles Brabham wrote
>I gave LINUX a fair trial, and it turned out to be garbage. I'll give
>it another try later on, but not until the problem I mentioned has been
>resolved.
You want us to believe you are an authority on packet radio, with all
the right opinions.... Then you want us to believe that you are an
expert on Operating Systems, with all the right opinions.
I've been employed as a Unix administrator for years, and Linux
represents what most modern Unix systems use as state of the art.
I only run the stable versions, not the development versions. There
is no truth to the fact that Linux is unstable. Even IBM ships Linux
now with their Netfinity servers (high-end NT server base machine).
The only bad thing about Linux, is that it is harder than IBM AIX to
administer. But with AIX I have to wait 3 years to afford the next
update.
My opinion, is that RedHat Linux (I run 5.2) is more stable than
Sun Solaris 2.7 on a dual Pentium motherboard I run. My other
opinion is that Charles doesn't understand Packet radio, and he
doesn't understand Operating Systems. Just my opinion...
That leaves us with a question: why the hell do you even subscribe
to this newsgroup? DOS and GUI-DOS pro-arguments belong
in the fringe alt.* groups...
If you are going to do TCP/IP, and everyone will; then you need to
use a good platform to develop on. Linux is good, DOS would be
the third choice after some of the single-board microcontrollers
that are available now to TCP/IP anything.
Steve Sampson, K5OKC
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 14:25:53 +0100
From: tersigni@usa.net (D. Tersigni)
Subject: Wanted ICOM 207H Cloaning Cable pinout (ocp-646)
I am looking for cloning cable for the the Icom IC-207H I think ICOM's
designator for it is the OCP-646.
Is it just a cable or does it have electronics in it as well?
Does anyone have the pinout?
de Dave Tersigni
K66DUN
>.
------------------------------
End of Ham-Digital Digest V99 #265
******************************
You can send in your contribution to this digest by
sending an e-mail to: hd-group@pa2aga.ampr.org
or (via BBS-net) to: hdaga@pi8vnw.#zh2.nld.eu
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
