Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 23:25:51 -0400 From: Stuart Krivis <ipswitch@apk.net> To: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: "Windows brings us something we don't have..." Message-ID: <200105260325.f4Q3PtK22466@madcap.apk.net> In-Reply-To: <20010524212354.A40930@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--Apple-Mail-1233767835-3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii On Friday, May 25, 2001, at 12:23 AM, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 04:34:17PM -0400, Technical Information wrote: >> What building at MIT is named after Bill Gates? And since when has he >> given MIT any money at all? MIT is a die-hard UNIX institution; I >> can't >> imagine that injecting any version of Windows into the official >> infrastructure would be easy at all. > > The point is that the original quote was unsupported, and therefore > meaningless unless put in some kind of context. Frankly, I think it's > a waste of time discussing this kind of thing..I wouldn't mind if > Jonathan stopped posting every unsupported assertion about Windows > being good that he comes across :-) Oh, he's one of those? Windows is good for very small values of good. :-) It's no longer a joke. Win 2K is a vast improvement over Win 3.1 and Win 9x. However, the NT 3.1 -> 3.5x -> 4 -> Win 2K progression keeps going in the wrong direction. They keep stuffing more and more into kernel space, and the things they put in are the least stable parts of the OS. MS made a big deal out of the "improved" video performance gained by moving graphics into the kernel. Then they tell you that you need to run it in VGA mode if you want it to be stable. --Apple-Mail-1233767835-3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/enriched; charset=us-ascii On Friday, May 25, 2001, at 12:23 AM, Kris Kennaway wrote: <excerpt>On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 04:34:17PM -0400, Technical Information wrote: <excerpt>What building at MIT is named after Bill Gates? And since when has he given MIT any money at all? MIT is a die-hard UNIX institution; I can't imagine that injecting any version of Windows into the official infrastructure would be easy at all. </excerpt> The point is that the original quote was unsupported, and therefore meaningless unless put in some kind of context. Frankly, I think it's a waste of time discussing this kind of thing..I wouldn't mind if Jonathan stopped posting every unsupported assertion about Windows being good that he comes across :-) </excerpt> Oh, he's one of those? <color><param>0000,0000,DEB7</param> </color>Windows is good for very small values of good. :-) It's no longer a joke. Win 2K is a vast improvement over Win 3.1 and Win 9x. However, the NT 3.1 -> 3.5x -> 4 -> Win 2K progression keeps going in the wrong direction. They keep stuffing more and more into kernel space, and the things they put in are the least stable parts of the OS. MS made a big deal out of the "improved" video performance gained by moving graphics into the kernel. Then they tell you that you need to run it in VGA mode if you want it to be stable. --Apple-Mail-1233767835-3-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200105260325.f4Q3PtK22466>