21 Apr
2002
21 Apr
'02
10:14 p.m.
On April 22, Richard Erlacher wrote:
Most of the people I've met who use UNIX/LINUX in
their home-computing
pursuits do it because they've nothing better to do. You may not fit that
model, but these guys figure out ways to make their computers more secure,
more complicated to use, and often have to type for several minutes to find
out whether a copy of a file on their local hard drive is available on that
other box down the wire. When my machines are all turned on, I can do that in
less than 15 seconds, and that long only because I can't remember the file
name.
This is the one of your trolls that I think I'll ignore.
I just want (1) for my computers to act in concert to
present me with a
convenient interface and (2) for them to work as expected. They seem to do
that most of the time. In recent years my cars have been more reliable than
my computers, but that wasn't the case some years back when I used Detroit
iron. When my computers become as reliable as my telephone, which may happen
not because the computers get better but ... then I'll be happy enough, I
I suppose I'm more demanding than to accept my computers working as
expected "most of the time". My computers are much MORE reliable than
my telephone. But then, I don't use PeeCees, and I don't run Windows.
I suppose it's just an issue of personal/professional standards and
expectations. If I had a hammer that randomly jumped off of my
workbench and flew through a window, I'd throw it in the trash and get
a better hammer. I did exactly that with my computer a very long time
ago.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire "Mmmm. Big."
St. Petersburg, FL -Den
22 Apr
22 Apr
12:04 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave McGuire" <mcguire(a)neurotica.com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 1:14 AM
Subject: Re: Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers (was: OT email response format)
do
I'd throw that hammer away, too. I've not had that sort of experience with
my
computers, however. I've had the heads break off hammers when I was using
them, and I've whacked my thumb from time to time. I can't blame the hammer
all the time, though.
I have had many years of positive experience with telephone systems. I've had
fewer than five days of no-service or unuseable service in the 30+ years
during which I've had my own phone(s). In the past two years, since we've had
our service taken over by Qwest, the service has become noticeably worse, but
overall, it's still not bad with <5 days in 10,000 of system failure overall.
Can you show me a computer that's had only 5 days' downtime in 30 years?
PC's
don't do that well either.
I'm also willing to accept part of the blame for the occasional failure. I
once tripped over a power cord, causing a shutdown. There have been times
when I did something stupid, requiring a file be restored from a backup or the
like.
Remember, I'm coming from a background with Sun hardware/software that was
unavailable 8-10 days per month due to software patch side-effects and other
causes having to do with the OS. That's the basis of my *nix aversion.
On April 22, Richard Erlacher wrote:
> Most of the people I've met who use UNIX/LINUX in their home-computing
> pursuits do it because they've nothing better to do. You may not fit that
> model, but these guys figure out ways to make their computers more secure,
> more complicated to use, and often have to type for several minutes to
find
> out whether a copy of a file on their local hard
drive is available on
that
> other box down the wire. When my machines are
all turned on, I can do
that in
less than 15
seconds, and that long only because I can't remember the file
name.
This is the one of your trolls that I think I'll ignore.
> I just want (1) for my computers to act in concert to present me with a
> convenient interface and (2) for them to work as expected. They seem to > that most of the time. In recent years my cars
have been more reliable
than
> my computers, but that wasn't the case some
years back when I used Detroit
> iron. When my computers become as reliable as my telephone, which may
happen
not because
the computers get better but ... then I'll be happy enough, I
I suppose I'm more demanding than to accept my computers working as
expected "most of the time". My computers are much MORE reliable than
my telephone. But then, I don't use PeeCees, and I don't run Windows.
I suppose it's just an issue of personal/professional standards and
expectations. If I had a hammer that randomly jumped off of my
workbench and flew through a window, I'd throw it in the trash and get
a better hammer. I did exactly that with my computer a very long time
ago.
5:23 p.m.
It was thus said that the Great Richard Erlacher once stated:
Remember, I'm coming from a background with Sun hardware/software that was
unavailable 8-10 days per month due to software patch side-effects and other
causes having to do with the OS. That's the basis of my *nix aversion.
And because of that, all of Unix sucks?
Seriously, if the patches were causing such downtime, then why apply the
patches in the first place. It seems like the systems were up the other 20
days after the side effects were worked around, and after two, maybe three
times of that, I would not have bothered applying patches, or investigated
*why* the patches were causing so much problems in the first place. Was it
Sun supplying horrendous patches? Or your own developers who coded so
deeply to the system that any little change would break their software?
Or heck, switch vendors if possible. There's plenty to choose from (and
IBM's AIX is quite nice).
-spc (``I couldn't get Windows to work on my system, so therefore Windows
sucks and should never be used.'')
6:16 p.m.
Or heck, switch vendors if possible. There's
plenty to choose from (and
IBM's AIX is quite nice).
Lovely, even! (See .sig.)
--
----------------------------- personal page: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ --
Cameron Kaiser, Point Loma Nazarene University * ckaiser(a)stockholm.ptloma.edu
-- Proudly running on the Apple Network Server 500/200 ------------------------
25 Apr
25 Apr
1:31 p.m.
New subject: SW bugs/interactions With Solaris
Remember, I'm coming from a background with Sun
hardware/software that was
unavailable 8-10 days per month due to software patch side-effects and other
causes having to do with the OS. That's the basis of my *nix aversion.
Sounds like some questionable admin/development procedures to me.
Software patches put in production without being tested with
the os version they're running on... OS patches without checking
application issues.
Anyway both sets of patches should be backed out within 24 hours of
getting the SW bug, IMHO.
What version of Solaris are you talking about -- or is this an old
SunOS 4.x situation?
Bill
--
d|i|g|i|t|a|l had it THEN. Don't you wish you could still buy it now!
bpechter@shell.monmouth.com|pechter@ureach.com
8119
days inactive
8122
days old
4 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
edick＠idcomm.com -
mcguire＠neurotica.com -
pechter＠pechter.dyndns.org -
spc＠conman.org -
spectre＠stockholm.ptloma.edu