Well, I don't know if anyone ever did this poll before but I'm curious... what is everyone's favorite version of windows and why? Later,
-zer0 flaw
Printable View
Well, I don't know if anyone ever did this poll before but I'm curious... what is everyone's favorite version of windows and why? Later,
-zer0 flaw
Windows 3.0, DUH. :D :D
Rofl, I thought about putting that on the poll... then I though everyone would just vote for that to be a smartass so I didn't. :D
I have only used 9x, so I guess that would have to be my favorite :)
I admit it, I still like 3.11 :)
Some retard voted for Windows Me. :D
:rolleyes: :D :DQuote:
What is your favorite version of Windows
Option 4: A non-Windows OS
where are any server builds!?!?1
Win 2000 advanced server is best!!
Mike, win3.11 is better ;) no sorry, winNT3.52 is :p
where are any server builds!?!?1
Win 2000 advanced server is best!!
Mike, win3.11 is better ;) no sorry, winNT3.52 server is :p
Honestly, I hate Windows (surprise). But I do run windows for playing games. Given such, here are my recommendations for which MS OS.
W2K Pro
It will play your games and doesn't crash too often. Do not install IIS unless you know what you are doing. Stupid people with IIS are the reason behind Code Red.
Win98 SE
It will play your games and is the most stable of the 9x series.
WinNT 4 (SP 3, 5+)
It will play some of your games. It is as stable (or unstable for us glass-half-full people) as Win98 SE. WinNT offers NTFS, which is the only FS from MS to offer security. That isn't saying much, but it's better than nothing.
Other than that, stay away from MS. There are more and more games being ported to Linux.
No, stupid people who don't apply security fixes are the cause of Code Red. How moronic can you be NOT to apply patches to a SERVER?!
sometimes people CANT restart there server, you ever tried to restart a server with a load of about 500 people constant? (and answer that please)Quote:
Originally posted by filburt1
No, stupid people who don't apply security fixes are the cause of Code Red. How moronic can you be NOT to apply patches to a SERVER?!
A) If applying a patch requires a reboot, you are using the wrong OS.Quote:
Originally posted by chenko
sometimes people CANT restart there server, you ever tried to restart a server with a load of about 500 people constant? (and answer that please)
B) If your web server is so important that it is handling that much traffic, you need a failover/recovery solution. Thus, you should be able to stop server 1 and let server 2 handle the load for a moment.
Of course not. But I'd rather dump 500 people than have 500 people scanning my ports.
Well, they were stupid enough to choose IIS in the first place.Quote:
Originally posted by filburt1
No, stupid people who don't apply security fixes are the cause of Code Red. How moronic can you be NOT to apply patches to a SERVER?!
Mmmm... let me see... how much does an MCSE cost? How much does an RHCE cost? How much does Win2K Server cost? How much does Linux cost? How much does IIS cost? How much does Apache cost?
Wow, these same stupid people are spending too much money.
sometimes patches are not important anywaysQuote:
Originally posted by CiberTHuG
A) If applying a patch requires a reboot, you are using the wrong OS.
B) If your web server is so important that it is handling that much traffic, you need a failover/recovery solution. Thus, you should be able to stop server 1 and let server 2 handle the load for a moment.
one of the server that we run is not just a webserver anyways...and its not liable to switch and turn off for 1 second.
IIS comes with win2k, does Linux run ASP, does IIS run CGI and all that crappy linux stuff.
I don't understand what you are saying here, but my point is, you only have to reboot then entire machine if you rebuild the kernel. If you patch Apache, you just have to restart Apache. No biggie.Quote:
Originally posted by chenko
sometimes patches are not important anyways
one of the server that we run is not just a webserver anyways...and its not liable to switch and turn off for 1 second.
The IIS that comes with Win2K Pro has a ten connection limit. How much do you pay for Win2K Server and the full IIS license?Quote:
IIS comes with win2k, does Linux run ASP, does IIS run CGI and
You can run CGI under IIS, but I wouldn't recommend it. You can run Apache on Windows, but again, I wouldn't recommend it.
I don't think Apache (or Tux et al) can run ASP. But, what is so special about ASP? What makes it better than CGI, JSP, PHP, or server-side JavaScript?
Yeah, whatever.Quote:
all that crappy linux stuff.
"If applying a patch requires a reboot, you are using the wrong OS."
Mostly right, but NLB and other failover stuff somewhat diminish this. With w2k, you simply take a server offline and apply the patch one by one and the downtime is transparent to the user. I applied all my patches at 2:30 in the morning anyway.
One thing I noticed with w2k is that you don't have to restart it as much as with nt4, though it still has a little ways to go.
"Mmmm... let me see... how much does an MCSE cost?"
To get certified about $1000 for the books and tests. The courses are a joke, don't even bother.
"How much does an RHCE cost?"
Dunno.
"How much does Win2K Server cost?How much does Linux cost?"
$1300 or so for the software, plus $2000 - 5000 for hardware. You're gonna need a guy (guys) to admin it, an MCSE's from outside firms are about C$80 per hour. CNE (Novell) cost about C$100 - 120 per hour. I've heard Linux specialists charging $150 per hour or more. What it all boils down to is how much you're going to pay some twerp to run it, not how much you pay for the box.
Besides, getting the job done (properly) is somewhat more of a priority than cost. But that depends on the job.
"How much does IIS cost? How much does Apache cost?"
Both free. You can run PHP and CGI on both, but ASP only works (well) on IIS.
Well, the only cost in a Linux solution is training. Your cost in a Windows solution is OS and training. I don't mention BSD because I don't think there is a certifcation system by anybody and I don't mention a Sun solution because that can get expensive, too.
If you are willing to pay $150 for a Linux consultant, well, you are again stupid. The reason they can demand so much is because there aren't very many of them. What I suggest is you find a willing MS/ASP consultant and instead of sending him to an MS certification program, send him to a Linux one. There is no need to pay him more.
Sure he may leave, but if everyone does this enough times, there will be enough Linux consultants and they won't be able to demand $150.
Besides, you are saving $1300 (that sounds cheap) for each server you have.
You will also save several hundred for each workstation you have.
As to ASP only running on IIS. I still don't get that. You guys sound like you like ASP. What is so special about ASP?
"As to ASP only running on IIS. I still don't get that. You guys sound like you like ASP. What is so special about ASP?"
I likes it mainly because it's easier for me to write, and because it works with compiled vb apps, which run much faster than asp.
its the fact that it can run them all....Quote:
Originally posted by CiberTHuG
I don't understand what you are saying here, but my point is, you only have to reboot then entire machine if you rebuild the kernel. If you patch Apache, you just have to restart Apache. No biggie.
The IIS that comes with Win2K Pro has a ten connection limit. How much do you pay for Win2K Server and the full IIS license?
You can run CGI under IIS, but I wouldn't recommend it. You can run Apache on Windows, but again, I wouldn't recommend it.
I don't think Apache (or Tux et al) can run ASP. But, what is so special about ASP? What makes it better than CGI, JSP, PHP, or server-side JavaScript?
Yeah, whatever.
and who runs a internet server with win2k pro who wants more than 5 users??
if you get 1 licence for win2k serrver, that covers connections, whether or less it is thru ISS or whateva.
for one i wouldnt go on a linux course... id prefer ms/asp as it involves more.
I had to do this ASP POC last week. I hate VBScript so much I downloaded PerlScript.
Let me check something on PHP, I'll be right back.
I do know that you can use compiled code with CGI scripts. I'm not sure about how much the open COM movement has improved that.
If Microsoft could play with others and work toward standards, Java and that whole realm would work wonderfully well on server and client. But MS has more of the mindset of a dope dealer and less the mindset of a technology innovator.
You can run Apache on a XBox, but why would you want to?Quote:
Originally posted by chenko
its the fact that it can run them all....
for one i wouldnt go on a linux course... id prefer ms/asp as it involves more.
And what is so special about ASP? What makes it better?
"But MS has more of the mindset of a dope dealer and less the mindset of a technology innovator."
Because the more MS openly shares its technology and research with others, the less it can sell. The less it sells, the less research they do in the first place. The less research, the worse off we all are.
"And what is so special about ASP? What makes it better?"
It's merely a language, one with which I feel quite comfortable writing, that's why I use it. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
You say this like MS innovates. Name an MS innovation?Quote:
Originally posted by aknisely
"But MS has more of the mindset of a dope dealer and less the mindset of a technology innovator."
Because the more MS openly shares its technology and research with others, the less it can sell. The less it sells, the less research they do in the first place. The less research, the worse off we all are.
ASP is not a language, it is a technology. VBScript is the language. And it does suck, quite much I might add. You can use it if you want, but I suggest you eventually learning something more mature. You can use PerlScript with ASP if you want.Quote:
Originally posted by aknisely
"And what is so special about ASP? What makes it better?"
It's merely a language, one with which I feel quite comfortable writing, that's why I use it. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
I still say PHP rocks :)
Anyway, since Apache runs most of the websites in the world I'd go for something that works well with it ;) Plus it's free :p
"ASP is not a language, it is a technology. VBScript is the language"
Yeah, I just noticed that as I hit the post button.
"You say this like MS innovates. Name an MS innovation?"
Oh god, you're one of those linux POV's who think that all microsoft does is buy out companies, steal your source code, and clone programs, right? I doubt you'd care for a list of microsoft's developments, you'd probably claim that apple thought of it first, or that was a unix idea, or they only have that because they bought out this or that company. And you might be right, sometimes. But you're a fool if you believe half of microsoft's myths.
MS has innovated a huge amount and nobody can deny that. On a technology level they're incredibly advanced and they've made some good stuff. Unfortunately as a company they're a bit rough sometimes :rolleyes:
PS: Further to my post about Apache:Code:Developer June 2001 Percent July 2001 Percent Change
Apache 7346025 62.42 7314577 60.53 -1.89
Microsoft 3076623 26.14 3372341 27.91 1.77
iPlanet 273293 2.32 282517 2.34 0.02
Zeus 182735 1.55 184895 1.53 -0.02
Yes, well, the burden of proof is on you. And since you can't come up with one, I'm guessing there aren't any. And if there aren't any, then I'm right.Quote:
Originally posted by aknisely
"You say this like MS innovates. Name an MS innovation?"
Oh god, you're one of those linux POV's who think that all microsoft does is buy out companies, steal your source code, and clone programs, right? I doubt you'd care for a list of microsoft's developments, you'd probably claim that apple thought of it first, or that was a unix idea, or they only have that because they bought out this or that company. And you might be right, sometimes. But you're a fool if you believe half of microsoft's myths.
Funny how that works out.
I honestly don't know where the COM idea came from. So that may be an MS innovation. But everything else I see from MS is not.
My point is, they aren't spending money on research. MS is spending money on ways to make their product more addictive. Ways to make people more dependent. And ways to brain wash you.
Look, you can spend money on a MS solution, or you can get a Linux solution for free. You will get better results with a Linux solution, but that is a side effect.
But hey, I'm talking to someone who likes VBScript. I feel like I'm wasting my time.
Netcraft said that IIS was up 5% or so in july because of a major government shift to W2K.
Sorry, I have to deny that. What have they innovated?Quote:
Originally posted by parksie
MS has innovated a huge amount and nobody can deny that.
"Yes, well, the burden of proof is on you. And since you can't come up with one, I'm guessing there aren't any. And if there aren't any, then I'm right."
As Mike said (and I alluded to), Microsoft has made vast volumes of technological advancement, you just don't care to look beyond your open source bull**** to notice.
I'm looking (asking), but you aren't offering an answer. ***? I'm not hung up on anything, you just can't think of anything.Quote:
Originally posted by aknisely
"Yes, well, the burden of proof is on you. And since you can't come up with one, I'm guessing there aren't any. And if there aren't any, then I'm right."
As Mike said (and I alluded to), Microsoft has made vast volumes of technological advancement, you just don't care to look beyond your open source bull**** to notice.
If I was out to bash something, I would say ASP sucks. But you know something. It doesn't. It just doesn't do anything special. PHP/CGI/JSP, they work just as well as ASP. No reason to cling to ASP, and I can find reasons not to use IIS.
Stop bickering about OS choices....not too many businesses use Windows ME to run a server..but that doesn't mean my Grandma has to use Debian Linux either..:rolleyes: enough.
"I'm looking (asking), but you aren't offering an answer. ***? I'm not hung up on anything, you just can't think of anything."
I'll do it later, k? But just to give you something to chew on, how about the little button toolbars that started with MS Office?
"If I was out to bash something, I would say ASP sucks."
You did say ASP sucks. And as you pointed out before, you should say VBscript.
"PHP/CGI/JSP, they work just as well as ASP. No reason to cling to ASP, and I can find reasons not to use IIS."
No reason, perhaps, other than that I'm used to writing asp. I'm learning PHP, just for something new, and if it looks useful, I might wedge it in somewhere.
Hehe nope. Sorry, I meant they have innovated a lot, but not recently. They're just rehashing lots of things now. Ok so a lot of Win2000 is new - big deal. Is it really that well designed? Code Red anyone?
Also the fact that there are so few viruses for Linux...access privileges and a STABLE kernel see them neatly off.
"Also the fact that there are so few viruses for Linux...access privileges and a STABLE kernel see them neatly off."
The only reason linux has few viruses is because there are few people using them, compared to linux. It's like a terrorist setting off a bomb on an indian tribe in the middle of the amazon rainforest. No one's going to care. It'd be much more effective if you were to setup a bomb in the middle of New York City. There already have been a few (small) linux viruses, and I suspect as its popularity grows, you're going to see that increase.
That's as maybe, but a virus on Linux is limited in what it can do by the privileges of the user who's just run the virus. Obviously if you run it as root then it'll take full control, but you shouldn't do that anyway.
"That's as maybe, but a virus on Linux is limited in what it can do by the privileges of the user who's just run the virus. Obviously if you run it as root then it'll take full control, but you shouldn't do that anyway."
That's somewhat true with Windows; if not, it should be.
*sigh* virus for Linux.
isn't it the same reason why NOBODY makes Viruses for macs?
Yes. Read my post above.
Windows 95a.
Pretty much win 3.11 with 32 bit support, no extra **** like 95b/c, 98/se, etc.
Probably the second most stable after 3.11, but really now, 3.11 has no use, who wants 16 bit?!
I use 2000, because it's the only windows OS which can use more than 128 MB of RAM, and I say 'use' because the OS will actually use it. sure win95/98/etc. can have their programs use the RAM, but the OS itself will not optimize itself to use that much RAM.
That and the install files for 95a are less than 35 MB.
DOS 6.22. All went pear shaped after Windows came along really. Plus it will run all my old games *sigh*
Getting into *nix at the moment, and I like it. I like it a lot. The commands (I'm just doing command line stuff @tm) and just the general style of the OS seem more.... sensible I guess than Windows and DOS. I approve.
Virii: the scarcity of virii for *nix is a mixture of both the scarcity of the OS and the fact that it's harder to write them. It's not 100% either factor.
ASP isn't that great. PHP looks better from what I've seen. Anyone heard of Zope? Another open source webserver (with lots of extras). It's actually very good. The Python dev team is now situated in the offices of Zope Corporation, since Zope is programmed in Python. Python's pretty useful on its own too.
MS started out by targeting the home pc market. Over time they developed the most user-friendly, functionality rich software. They also marketed it very well. To run this software you need windows, so MS made your OS choice academic.
Look back to when MS moved into this market in the late 80's early 90s. If you look at what happened to Lotus 123 v Excel at the start of 90s, everyone ridiculed Excel. Now people barely remember 123. Same thing with Word v WordPerfect, and FoxPro/Paradox v Access.
As MS decides to introduce a new product it starts out with a product that is typically average, and then by version 5 or 6 of a product it generally offers a product on par with the market leaders, and marketed better than the rest ;).
In terms of scalable enterprise level products focused on the Internet, MS only started introducing new products in the late 90s. This is when they introduced Win NT, SQL server and web based technologies such as IIS/ASP.
With NT version 1 was 3.51, version 2 was NT 4, version 3 in 2000..... Extrapolating 5 years into the future where does this leave Unix?
Same for Sql Server when first introduced it was the laughing stock of the enterprise level RDBM market. Now in its 3 major release, MS now has sizeable market share, which shows no signs of slowing at all.
Apply the same comparison to MS Web based technologies a la VS Net.
There is no doubt in my mind that Unix/Java/Sybase/JSP are the current market leaders for enterprise level Web solutions. Give MS another five years, and 2 more major releases for its enterprise level OS/RDBMS/Web Technologies, it is then conceivable that UNIX might go the way of Lotus 1-2-3.
What is MS's major threat? It was *cough* Netscape *cough*, nice tactics Bill! Now it is probably Linux.
For Linux to take market share from windows, it needs to be able to offer software on par with that currently offered by MS. Then it needs to match MS's marketing expertise. I just don't see this as a major threat for MS at the moment, although perhaps in the future if the people behind Linux get a little more organised...