RE: OT NT2K vs Unix.

From: Mohan, Ross <MohanR_at_STARS-SMI.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 14:52:00 -0800
Message-ID: <F001.002A8465.20010201143301@fatcity.com>

Personally, I love sarcasm.

Sometimes, theres a little collateral damage. 
We can
put up with it in the Persian Gulf, why not here at home? 
( har
har har )

-----Original Message-----From: Kevin Kostyszyn [mailto:kevin_at_dulcian.com]Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 5:03 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE: OT NT2K vs Unix.
 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? )



      <FONT face="Times New Roman" 
      size=2>-----Original Message-----<FONT 
      face=Arial color=#0000ff> 
      <SPAN 
      class=637282921-01022001> 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.
      <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff 
      size=2>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.  
      <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff 
      size=2>Anyway, back to the argument. 
          <FONT face=Arial 
      color=#0000ff size=2>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!!!"    
      <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff 
      size=2>  hehehhehehe Kev
      
        <FONT face=Tahoma 
        size=2>-----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: 
        
        <BLOCKQUOTE 
        style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">
          
          <FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff 
          size=2>I would disagree with that, how is Windows becoming like 
          Unix?
          
            <FONT face=Tahoma 
            size=2>-----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 <FONT 
              size=2>the 45% of the market that DataCenter hasn't eaten. 
              
              -----Original Message----- <FONT 
              size=2>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----- <FONT 
              size=2>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...... > <FONT 
              size=2>> > Anyways, pop quiz: 
              > > On what OS 
              kernel technology is NT based? > 
              > Who was the original designer and what was 
              his/her > first OS? <FONT 
              size=2>> > 
              -- 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 <FONT 
              size=2>San Diego, 
              California      &&  -- 
              Public Internet access / Mailing Lists <FONT 
              size=2>-------------------------------------------------------------------- 
              To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send 
              an E-Mail message to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com 
              (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in <FONT 
              size=2>the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB 
              ORACLE-L (or the name of mailing list you 
              want to be removed from).  You may <FONT 
              size=2>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 - 16:52:00 CST