Fri, 27 Mar 1998 09:06:13 -0600 (CST)
> cosc> I don't know what Unix machines you are using, but at work I
> cosc> use SunOS and SGI machines, and they require frequent rebooting,
> cosc> more rebooting than DOS or Win95 ever required. As a matter of
> cosc> fact, I will go as far as to say that the most unreliable systems
> cosc> I have had the misfortune of using were Unix systems.
> ha ha ha ha!!!!!!!! REALLY??? More rebooting than UNIX?
Do you even know what you are talking about? You obviously
haven't read my posting at all, or seem to have a problem
with the English language.
I never said "More rebooting than UNIX" anywhere in my email.
> got to be kidding. Unless of course, no one ever uses the Windows
> boxes, and you always work as root under UNIX, and have little
> knowledge of it.
1) I am not kidding.
2) I am not working as root.
3) I have been using Unix for several years and I know it very well.
You obviously have no clue about Unix however, if you think that
working as root and not being familiar with Unix can be blamed
for a system managing to forget its own terminal emulation
mid-session and crashing on a double-right mouse click.
Come back when you learn something about Unix. You are obviously
a Unix newbie who is overwhelmed by the heady possibilities
of long file names and therefore has not had the chance to see
the fundamental flaws of this system.
> The only scenario of a Windows more reliable than
> UNIX is that one.
I see you are new to computing in general then. Reliability is a
feature that is independent of the ability of the operator.
System A is either more reliable than system B or it is not,
regardless of the operator.
Is it even worth my time to respond to your poorly coughed up
"thoughts"? What the hell, I might as well finish.
> Ro are you working at Microsoft?
So you are working at Sun?
> I gather that a
> Windows95 would have extreme difficulty to work with a UNIX box.
And a UNIX box would have extreme difficulty working with
a horse drawn carriage. Your point?
> Windows designer as root, would probably trash the UNIX OS in seconds...
There is no such thing as "root" under Windows. Why don't you
learn something about Windows and Unix first before you go making
a fool of yourself? Buy or steal a copy of "Windows for Dummies",
it was obviously written with people like you in mind.
> cosc> Ever see a system forget its own terminal emulation in the
> cosc> MIDDLE of a session? Only in Unix (SunOS in particular, a
> cosc> particularly nasty strain of the Unix virus).
> That's called a BUG, not a virus!
You don't know anything about the English language, Operating
Systems, or Sarcasm. Is there anything you do know something
about??? Other than making a fool of yourself that is.
> cosc> Ever see a double right mouse click consistently take an O/S
> cosc> down to its knees? Only in Unix (SunOS, SGI Irix 6.2 (Indigo^2)).
> That's also called a BUG, not a virus!
See the above Einstein.
> Now I understand! You are indeed a Microsoft employee! Oly a
> Microsoft employee would not know what a bug is (they call it a
> "feature" instead! Marketing dept. orders!).
Now I understand! You are indeed a Sun employee! Only a
Sun employee would demonstrate such depressing stupidity and
ignorance of common terms used within his own corporation!
> cosc> Contrary to popular belief, Unix is NOT reliable. It is flaky
> cosc> and badly designed. It may be ok for batch operations, but
> cosc> when it comes to user interface, it is completly worthless.
> -- Flames ahead! --
I got news for you, you've been flaming all along.
> Really??? Oops, you probably mispelled MICROSOFT withhh UNIX.
Actually, misspellings seem to be your specialty (hint: look at
the way you spelled "misspelled").
> Badly designed? Well, tell me that X is badly designed, and
> what GUI is well designed in your opinion!
> Windows? Oops, can't do a
> xemacs -display somewhere.else:0 on a windows machine... tough break!
I never said Windows was well designed. Please learn how to read,
I'm getting tired of watching you act like a jackass.
Furthermore, since I never had the need for remote windowing on
Windows, I never tried any of the X-Winblow compatibility
packages like eXcursion. Something like this may very well
be possible -- I don't know, nor do I care.
> Tell me that the UNIX memory system design is flaky, and what OS has a
> good VM design? Windows? Oops, windows swap to a ordinary file
> (usually fragmented) and usually gives protection failures... tough
Einstein, I said in my post, the one that you so foolishly decided
to respond to without reading that as far as I was concerned,
ALL the O/Ses I used stunk. Now, if you think about this for a
few hours, and get your Nurse to help you with the logic, you
might come to realize that this means that as far as I was
concerned, Windows stinks.
> Let's not start a Windows vs UNIX war, for your own sake, at
> least in the above points (system design).
You're the only one fighting a Windows vs. Unix war. I said that
Unix was not a good O/S, and you came to the conclusion that
I was a Windows fanatic.
What's more important is that you don't continue this flame
war for your own sake.
> Note that the people that
> usually reads this mailing list have technical expertise enough to
> know how Windows sucks...
And technical expertise enough to know how Unix sucks...
> If we want a LispOS, and are aware why that
> would be great, don't call us stupid by saying that Windows is more
> reliable than UNIX. Ok?
I'm not calling everyone on this mailing list stupid, I am only
calling you stupid, and not because you like Unix, but just because
you really do seem to be stupid. You are arguing on a topic which
you know nothing about ("root" on Windows? Come on!), you
have not mastered the basic skills of _READING_ [your entire post
would not have been written had you understood anything that I
said], and you have a SERIOUS attitude problem which I intend
> cosc> As far as I'm concerned, all O/S'es stink. LispOS is the chance
> cosc> to design a decent O/S for a change.
> I hope you are not proposing us to use the Windows kernel
> instead of a UNIX one...
You can use what you want. I have no intention of touching Unix.
> *** Rodrigo Martins de Matos Ventura, alias <Yoda>
> *** firstname.lastname@example.org, http://www.isr.ist.utl.pt/~yoda
> *** Instituto de Sistemas e Robotica, Polo de Lisboa
> *** Instituto Superior Tecnico, Lisboa, Portugal
> *** PGP Public Key available on my homepage
> *** Key fingerprint = 0C 0A 25 58 46 CF 14 99 CF 9C AF 9E 10 02 BB 2A