RE: why linux? -- MIDRANGE-L

>>> See below. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Richter 

That said, before people jump on the Linux wagon, I think they should be
aware that the WIN32 kernel of windows started as POSIX and then was
improved greatly by the smart people at Microsoft.  Unicode, a whole suite
of thread syncronization objects and functions, good stack walking debug
features.  And documentation that is suprisingly easy to read and
comprehend. Its pretty impressive.

>>> But how can you say it is improved when they use just parts of it not
everything? They may be using the BSD TCP/IP stack, but it is only have
half-breed. They have tossed together things like a salad. It doesn't always
work together nicely. If it is better how come there is major flaws every
couple weeks? I am NOT saying Linux doesn't, but theirs seem to be few an
far in between.

Based on the little I know, it looks like microsoft took posix and improved
on it.  IBM has taken it and just dropped it on the as400 as is.  And Linux,
guided by one fellow named Linus, has been preoccupied with rewriting it and
has also not improved on it.

>>> How can you say this? Do you know the history of linux? Linux was
created to replace UNIX so Linus didn't have to spend the big bucks on UNIX.
I think they have improved it quite a bit. My linux server at home is up to
34 days runtime without rebooting.. And yes I am up to date on patches. If
you think they improved it, explain to me this. There are people that swear
that on a laptop, they can't run Windows anymore on battery because they get
about 10 mins of battery time. Under Linux they get about 30-40 mins. This
isn't exaggerating. Under Windows 2k the idle process uses 16k of memory,
under Linux it uses (if I am reading it right) 488 bytes.

Which platform do you want to move forward on?

>>> Linux, it has standards, it doesn't bring down an entire network due to
a worm, and it requires a smaller computer than what Windows requires to do
the same amount of work. It has a lower TCO and it can be more secure than
Windows.

-Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Wills, Mike N. (TC)
Sent: Friday, October 03, 2003 9:34 AM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: why linux?


Haven't you seen recent articles about M$ and patching in relation to the
"Trusted Computing" initiative. They are now going to be pro-active in
patching! Meaning (basically) instead of getting a bug report and fixing it,
they are going to look for bugs themselves and fix them. <sarcasm> This is a
entirely new concept. Fixing bugs that customers didn't see. Wow, I should
try that if M$ does it, it must be good! </sarcasm>. This is what you are
spending millions of dollars on every year while being locked into a
contract? And you don't expect better? If OS/400 crashed every day, wouldn't
you call IBM and complain?

My problem isn't Windows, it is a good product. My problem is that they pull
this sort of stuff every day. They make it sound like they have spaghetti
code. They can do better and should.


_______________________________________________
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe, unsubscribe,
or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a
moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.