RE: OT NT2K vs Unix.

From: Kevin Kostyszyn <kevin_at_dulcian.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 14:46:50 -0800
Message-ID: <F001.002A8312.20010201140307@fatcity.com>

Another excellent point. And know, it's not "mean" to intend to wound, especially if it's mentally. However, when you really think about sarcasm, it's really not "mean". You know like when you say something really stupid and someone says "Wow, you are so smart!". It's not that it hurts, it gets a laugh.

-----Original Message-----From: root_at_fatcity.com [mailto:root_at_fatcity.com]On Behalf Of Mohan, RossSent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 4:38 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE: OT NT2K vs Unix.
Amen......there are very few new "discoveries" and many many enhancements.

 One
 of the reasons the Japanese automakers have been KICKING AMERICAN FANNY
 for,
 oh, twenty years, is their simple, dogged *improvement* of our methods. They even
revere William Deming, a guy we just shrugged off in the 50's...he revolutionized QA
 and
 TQM over there. .....

 oh,
 btw

 SARCASM: A
 cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound.
 ( is
 it "mean" to intend to wound? )



-----Original Message-----
 From: Kevin Kostyszyn [mailto:kevin_at_dulcian.com]Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 4:18 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE: OT NT2K vs Unix.
 Good points and don't worry about the sarcasm, at least you are honest about it. Sometimes I can't tell if people are being mean, or sarcastic.
 Anyway, back to the argument. What it would seem like to me is that because Microsoft is trying to improve their platform you are arguing that they are moving more towards Unix. That's not right. They are trying to improve their system. Just because the Unix OS already had some of the functions that made it more stable doesn't mean that MS is copying Unix. For the love of goodness, if I think that way everyone is copying everyone else in some form or another! When air bags came out and car manufacturers starting putting them in their vehicles standard, did anyone walk around pointing fingers and saying "Hey, that was our idea come up with your own precautionary measures to avoid disaster!!!"
 hehehhehehe Kev

-----Original Message-----From: root_at_fatcity.com
[mailto:root_at_fatcity.com]On Behalf Of Rocky WelchSent:
Thursday, February 01, 2001 3:28 PMTo: Multiple recipients of
list ORACLE-LSubject: RE: OT NT2K vs Unix.
From the URL:
<A
href="http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/guide/professional/solutions/overview/reliable/default.asp">http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/guide/professional/solutions/overview/reliable/default.asp
PCs Stay Up and Running
Memory conflicts and missing or altered system files caused many of the
system crashes prior to Windows 2000. To put an end to these problems, we
changed Windows 2000 memory management to reduce the chance that software
applications will interfere with one another.
Applications runing in a seprate memory area...HMMMMMM Unix did that 15
years ago.
Fewer Reboots
Performing routine maintenance on your system requires significantly
fewer reboots, therefore less downtime, with Windows 2000. In addition,
with its support for Plug and Play, Windows 2000 automatically recognizes
and adapts to hardware changes. This means users can easily add hardware
devices such as scanners, DVD players, and speakers without rebooting, and
with less potential for user error.
Reboots are also reduced-and reliability increased-through the
Microsoft hardware device driver certification program. This program helps
ensure that hardware drivers are compatible with Windows 2000, and do not
require a reboot after installation. Certified drivers are tested and
digitally signed by Microsoft. If Windows 2000 detects a driver that
Microsoft has not digitally signed, it warns users about the risk before
they install it on their system<A
href="http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/guide/professional/solutions/overview/reliable/default.asp">
Not having to reboot after installing an application....Unix from it's
beginings.
How Much More Reliable Is Windows 2000 Professional?
Third-party studies that assess reliability from three different
perspectives-lab-based testing, customer-site measurement, and user
perceptions-conclude that Windows 2000 Professional is the most
reliable desktop operating system.
Highest Reliability in Production Environments
<A
href="http://www.microsoft.com/windows2000/guide/professional/reviews/nstl.asp">NSTL
collected uptime data in the real-world environment of several
customer sites and concluded that the average system uptime between
failures of Windows 2000 Professional is 13 times more than that
of Windows 98 and three times more than that of
Windows NT Workstation 4.0.
Notice no comparison to Unix. It's like people that hangout with
socially unacceptable people to make themselves look better (Hey! Wait a
minute! Is that why alot of people want to hang out with me? ). I guess
you're right they aren't the same. Unix posts much higher numbers.
Sorry, it's sarcastic Thursdsay here. I love the debate about Windows
and Unix. ;o)
Kevin Kostyszyn <kevin_at_dulcian.com> wrote:

I would disagree with that, how is Windows becoming like
Unix?

-----Original Message-----From: root_at_fatcity.com
[mailto:root_at_fatcity.com]On Behalf Of Rocky
WelchSennt: Thursday, February 01, 2001 2:01
PMTo: Multiple recipients of list
ORACLE-LSubject: Re: OT NT2K vs
Unix.
The same prediction was made at least 5 years ago. At the rate
Microsoft is going, Windows will be a direct form of Unix. It becomes
more like it with every release.
-Rocky
"Mohan, Ross" <MohanR_at_STARS-SMI.com>
wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">

Yea, but......
Win2K Datacenter will just decimate Unix. I predict
that, in 5 years, there will be two or three
Unix vendors, fighting over the 45% of the
market that DataCenter hasn't eaten.
-----Original Message----- From: Steve Orr [<A
href="mailto:sorr_at_arzoo.com">mailto:sorr_at_arzoo.com]]]
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 1:01 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L
Subject: RE:
OT_RE:_Réf._:_Re:_asyn_i/o_on_sun_
Close. It's Dave Cutler. There's too much old
DOS/Windows backward compatibility for
WinNT/2000 to achieve stability like VMS despite Cutler's
leadership.
I knew VMS and you, Mr. NT, are no VMS!

With apologies to Senator Bentsen, Steve Orr
-----Original Message----- stephane Sent: Thursday, February 01,
2001 9:22 AM&< To: Multiple
recipients of list ORACLE-L
NT is based on VMS (talk about a real OS) and if
my memory is good the guy's name is
Cutter.
Do I win a toaster ? a microwave oven ? a palm-pilot
?
--- "Mohan, Ross" <MohanR_at_STARS-SMI.com> a
écrit : > "...Standing,
corrected, and sniggering....." > Odd
picture, that...... > > > Anyways, pop quiz:
> > On what OS kernel
technology is NT based? >
> Who was the original designer and what was
his/her > first OS? > >
-- Please see the official
ORACLE-L FAQ: <A target=_blank
href="http://www.orafaq.com/">http://www.oraaafaq.com
-- Author: Steve Orr
INET: sorr_at_arzoo.com
Fat City Network Services -- (858)
538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 San
Diego,
California && --
Public Internet access / Mailing Lists --------------------------------------------------------------------
To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an
E-Mail message to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com
(note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB
ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you
want to be removed from). You may also
send the HELP command for other information (like
subscribing).

Do You Yahoo!?- Get personalized email addresses from
Yahoo! Mail Personal
Address - only $35 a year!

Do You Yahoo!?- Get personalized email addresses from <A
href="http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/">Yahoo! Mail Personal Address -
only $35 a year!

Received on Thu Feb 01 2001 - 16:46:50 CST