> infiniband or whatever? Plus ease of use, ACPI, WMI, PnP, Power, all the
Sorry, but at least WMI is overbloated crap and has nothing to do with ease
of use.
UNIX’s /proc is much eaiser and does the same.
Linux has power management.
They also have a PnP-like thing which is very easy and smart - drivers like
sound ones are loaded not by bus enumeration like MS uses, but by… open()
request from user mode.
Is it not logical? Why do you need a loaded driver which is not opened by
any kernel or user mode agent?
open() triggers a user-mode service by request_module() function, the user
mode service check the config files (note - the text config files, easier to
back up then the registry) to determine the installed sound driver’s binary
name and then invoke a syscall to load the driver. The driver initialization
code checks the PCI config space in a manner similar to NT4 (+ the init
string provided by the loader process) and attaches itself to hardware.
Then open() proceeds.
They have a user-mode tool which checks the PCI config space on each boot
and suggests you to run the driver installation script (which updates the
config files and copies the driver binaries) if any changes were detected.
They have user-mode command line utilities to start and stop drivers.
The resource map for the driver is in /proc.
You have the same PnP functionality (at least for PCI).
Note that this approach do not require a driver to have all these
complexities with PnP IRP paths. KISS principle at work.
Also - RedHat RPM seems to be more powerful than MSI installer.
People love to compare Linux, or FreeBsd or VMS or whatever to Win2000,
but
there simply is no comparison. This operating system runs many more types
of hardware on many more types of platforms than all of the other OSes
combined.
Sorry, but Win2000 can run on x86 and IA64 only.
Do you know the list of CPUs Linux can run? Everything from x86 to Acorn.
Linux may have a shot at the embedded space, but if I was MS, I wouldn’t
be
too worried about the desktop market if that is still a market.
Linux has a shot not only in embedded, but in Internet server space.
Apache is about 3 times more popular than IIS. I will not be surprised if
the number of Linux webservers is larger than NT/Win2000 ones.
Note: this is regardless of the fact that IIS is faster, that ASP scripting
is surely better and faster than any free software under UNIX, that IIS has
MMC-based administration tool.
Then why this? The answer is simple - stability. IIS has a huge number of
stability/security holes, yes, still there.
CodeRed worm is a recent thing.
So, there is a very common attitude among web administrators - “MS? Sorry, I
do not want my webserver to be one huge security hole.”. People do use
Perl/CGI instead of ASP (which is using a sail instead of steam engine) -
for stability sake.
Many people just do not treat MS seriously on Internet servers, mainly for
stability sake. Yes, NT itself is stable - but not so with IIS.
Let’s look there more detaily. The IIS core is more or less stable. But -
for marketing reasons - MS added lots of poorly-debugged add-ons to it (like
the index server which is #1 source of holes, FrontPage extensions with is
#2 source and .printer extension which is another source) - and all of them
are on by default.
A good sample of how the marketing issues worsen the product technical
quality and stability.
On the other hand, Linux pays more respect to stability. For instance, they
for long had IDE DMA off by default as a potentially unstable feature. This
is because they are free from marketing pressure, stockholders reports etc.
driven project will do. GNU, or the Free Software Foundation or whoever
don’t have the billions it takes to get the top minds working on the
underlying fundamental problems.
Just wrong. Huge number of innovations are done by university professors
which are not paid billions. And they are really “top minds”.
In fact, they are ones which provide real innovations, not MS. MS (and
other commercial companies) just use their ideas and implement them.
GUI was invented by PARC scientists, not by MS or Apple.
Since these “top minds” are busy in GNU projects, GNU is not so bad as it
seems.
well sure its more stable, but it isn’t facing the same issues. You just
simply cannot compare Linux and Win2000.
For webserver - yon can.
My mom can use Win2000, Linux,
even with the newer friendlier versions isn’t even close.
So what? This only means - “w2k is better than Linux on the desktop”. Who
argues?
But this says nothing on servers.
For usual sysadmin, editing text files via Telnet/ssh is much more
convinient than running a slow DCOM-based MMC applet over the slow link to
administer the webserver.
Also text files are much more convinient in terms of backup that IIS
metabase (another piece of overbloated and thus unreliable design).
were me, but then again, I don’t have a mega-house on Mercer Island and a
net worth written with 9 zeroes. Its hard to argue with success.
As Jan said, commercial success is not equal to technical quality.
Max
You are currently subscribed to ntdev as: $subst(‘Recip.EmailAddr’)
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-ntdev-$subst(‘Recip.MemberIDChar’)@lists.osr.com