NetNews Offline 2/NetNews Offline Volume 2.iso/news/comp/sys/amiga/misc-part1/3902

Internet Message Format | 1996-08-05 | 9.4 KB

Path: taco.cc.ncsu.edu!rkswamy
From: [e-mail] (Ravi Krishna Swamy)
Newsgroups: alt.2600,alt.binaries.warez.ibm-pc,alt.crackers,alt.cracks,alt.cyberspace,alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.fan.bill-gates,alt.wired,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.win95.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.win95.setup,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.misc,comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.adventure,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.misc
Subject: Re: Will anyone buy NT??
Date: 2 Feb 1996 05:20:30 GMT
Organization: North Carolina State University
Message-ID: <4es6uu$[e-mail]>
References: <1d7cc$[e-mail]> <4elusl$[e-mail]> <4eolet$[e-mail]> <4eraqb$[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: cc06du.unity.ncsu.edu


In article <4eraqb$[e-mail]>, Simon <[e-mail]> wrote:
>On 31 Jan 1996 21:03:25 GMT, [e-mail] (Ravi K. Swamy)
>wrote:
>
>
>>Let me put you down as the first in my list of people who
>>like the win3.1 interface.
>
>I'm sure there will be plenty of others! I like it becuase I can work
>in it without a second thought, and it does the job. No doubt, if I

I give it three or four thoughts and still cannot understand
why it is so braindead.

>had spent half as long with "Windows 95", I might be able to say the
>same about that. (or then again ... )
>
>>>>My TI-85 has a better "OS" than a computer with win95...
>
>>>What's a T1-85 when it's at home?
>>
>>The same thing it is when it's at school.  A calculator.
>
>Hmmm...

It works rather well and even has built in "networking."

>>>>I can't wait for that 32-bit solitaire!  Best windoze app
>>>>I've ever seen!
>>>
>>>Have you seen many?
>>
>>Yes.
>
>Not a "Magic Carpet" kind of guy then?

I have the shareware version of Magic Carpet somewhere on my
hard drive.  I played it a couple of times but I didn't get
into it very much.  My current autoreboot.bat file has
"cd\games\d2demo  d2" has the last line.  If I boot into
DOS I want to play Descent 2.  I can't think of any other
reason to boot into DOS except to play a game.

>>>When there is more than one PC in a house, the oportunity of
>>>connecting them is bound to arise. Why have not concentrate hardware
>>>like disk drives in one machine, which less expensive ones can use
>
>>I'm planning on it, but I don't need for Micro$oft to sell me
>>this "New Technology" in order to be able to have a network.
>
>Your assumption that "Microsoft" sold me the idea of networks is
>wrong ! I'm merely enthusiastic that "NT" happens to be a good
>potential chioce. I could have been saying the same about "Linux"
>under different circumstances.

That's good to know.

>>>just as easily. Not necessarily dumb terminals though; after all many
>>>would like to keep CD ROM drives to hand, as well as other devices.
>
>>A dumb terminal would still let me access files on a CD.  I'm not
>>exactly sure what you mean be "would like to keep CD ROM drives
>>to hand."  What does "to hand" mean?  Personally I use my CD-ROM
>>drive about once ever 4 months if that often.  I've only used
>>it to install a couple of OS's and play some CD's, but my stereo
>>downstairs is much better at that.
>
>You only use your CD ROM "about once every 4 months" !!!

That's at a minimum.

>No wonder that you do not feel the need to keep a CD ROM drive to
>hand.

I was going to try to sell mine and get some network cards and
use my roommate's if I ever needed to use a CD.

>I am always using mine. Loading app's from computer mag CD's. Loading

Well I don't buy too many (read none) computer mags.  I read some
at work and at the library.

>and re-loading comercial app's in my collection. Veiwing multimedia,

I've got 2.1 gigs of space, I never really have to reload anything.

>and reference material. The CD ROM can easily be used 20 times a day !
>
>I sure wouldn't want to wander to another part of the house to put in
>a CD; not to mention removeable hard disks.

My apartment isn't too big.

>>>>>This is the reality; it's happening ! The next machine that I buy will
>>>>>be a powerful server within my home, that will be permanently
>>>>>connected to the Internet for business handling. All individual PC's
>>>>>within the house, will be able to access it. It will almost certainly
>>>>>be running "NT Server", with "NT Workstation" on the individual PC's.
>>>>
>>>>Yippy, I'm so happy for you.
>>>
>>>Me too ! It's been a long time coming. As soon as it becomes a
>>>finacially good move to keep a constant connection to the Net, a
>>>desktop PC is not an ideal solution. Something a little more powerful
>>>securely mounted in a cupboard somewhere, with a UPS sufficient to
>>>allow a controlled shutdown upon power failure, is what's needed. As a
>>
>>So why not just put the UPS on the desktop PC?  My "desktop PC"
>>at work was running an ftpd, httpd, and serving up apps to two
>>other "desktop PC's" while I was using it to do my work.  What's
>>this stuff about "secure mounting?"
>
>A desktop PC as an Internet server for my business, as well as day to
>day use, it out of the question. Between the Net and CD's, I installed
>around 700 applications over the last year. A small percentage of
>those have caused a variety of problems. Exceeding path lengths;
>overwriting important files; and most frequently of all; just crashing

One of the good things about installing programs with gunzip and tar...

>my system. Under all those situations, it's of little account if the
>PC is not running for a while. If a virus ever gets past me, it's
>still contained on a system that I can quite easily rebuild.

Never had a virus, and never will.  I doubt a sendmail like worm
could do much on a standalone computer.

>For a business server that should run for months supplying
>registration numbers, information, and other important stuff around
>the clock, without any problems; something separate is called for.
>My desktop doesn't really need a UPS capable of maintaining power long
>enough for a controlled shutdown, but the server will.

Well I just use my desktop PC as a server as well.  I have total
confidence in my operating system to stay up and keep running
no matter how stupid my actions on the computer are.

>>What's this stuff about "secure mounting?"
>
>Held securely in brackets. Shut away in a safe space, and left to it.
>Call me insecure, but brackets it's going to have !
>
>>>realistic under these circumstances. The explosion in Internet
>>>popularity is very likely to extend low cost continuous access to many
>>>over the next few years. While a server quietly does it's job, it's
>>>good to have an independent PC for everyday use, that can be rebooted
>>>frequently, played around with, or just plain switched off. My
>>
>>I guess we just differ in philosophy.  I just leave my computer
>>up 24-7 at work but my email is sent there and who knows when
>>someone wants to access some info on it.  I don't see any point
>>rebooting it except to change its IP address when some twit
>>decides he likes mine better than the one assigned to him.
>
>I reboot my desktop several times a day; sometimes much more if
>there's been a problem.

Well I have about one problem every 6 months.  I have not touched
the power switch on my "desktop PC server" in over 5 months.

>>>enthusiasm for a little home network is unrelated to anything said by
>>>"Microsoft". Domestic products manufactures are likely to be pushing
>>>home networks very soon, to integrate telephones/tv's/alarms... etc
>>>
>>>>>"Windows NT" can now be considered a stable, powerful operating
>>>>>system, which is why it has been chosen for a number of banking
>>>>>systems in the US. It can provide various levels of security, and is
>>>>>easily understood by "Windows" users.
>>>
>>>>I guess this implies Windows users are stupid?
>>>
>>>Not at all ! But compared to "Novel's Netware", it is much easier to
>>
>>Lorentz transformations are easy to understand compared to Netware.
>>
>>>understand; the interface is so familiar. If "Netware" wasn't so
>>>complicated for managers to set-up and run securely, and provided as
>>>easy a way to connect to external networks, then they wouldn't have
>>>suffered such an enourmous loss of the market. Bearing in mind it is
>>>largely these "managers" who have voted with their money as to what
>>>they want.
>>
>>I've never claimed that these "managers" are intelligent.  Quite
>>the opposite in fact.
>
>The motives that guide them though, are ultimately not to dissimilar
>to our own. In the event that something goes wrong that requires
>assistance; "NT" tech support is available 24 hours a day. "Novel"
>does not have the reputation among many, for supporting their
>customers at all. I've never needed to call a support line before, but
>If your business interests were at risk, it might be an important last
>resource.

From what I have seen tech support is usually the first resource...
Don't get me started on whether or not this is a good thing.

>>>>>I am not in any way associated with "Microsoft"; I merely wished to
>>>
>>>>For someone not associated with M$ you sure sound like their
>>>>marketing department.
>>>
>>>Your right! Perhaps I should check them out for a job !
>>>: )
>>
>>Go for it.
>>
>>>>>Already it has aquired such a large
>>>>>share of the network operating system market, that Novel's in real
>>>>>trouble. Check it out !
>>>
>>>>No thanks, I'm not interested in any "New Technology" from M$.
>
>Me, I'll have whatever I can get.

Ravi
--
Ravi K. Swamy                http://www4.ncsu.edu/~rkswamy/www/
[e-mail]         [e-mail]