Board index » cppbuilder » Re: Why Run Linux?

2003-10-10 07:19:44 AM
cppbuilder103
Oh. It was a US warship....
We had a similar problem with the Royal Navy. It was a frigate. That had to
go back to Scotland for the engineer to spend 2 hours fixing the problem.
Rhys Sage.
www.sageworld.freeserve.co.uk for
code snippets and software downloads.
"Benny Hill" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in
message

David Erbas-White < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
as moderators. You need to push things really far for getting a
warning. They always participate on discussions of this kind, with
almost the same arguments repeated again and again, BTW :-)
There is no {*word*97} here.
[snip]
--
Oscar
 

The main reason is that Linux is much safer (security-wise) than Windows.
I would like here to quote a point made by Sebastion Ledesma:
========================================================
"Did you read the pages of Symantec Security Response (or whatever) of any
virus trojan etc, that says:
Systems Affected: Windows 2000, Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows Me,
Windows NT, Windows XP
Systems Not Affected: Linux, Macintosh, OS/2, UNIX"
Sebastian
========================================================
Rodolfo
"Thomas Maeder [TeamB]" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message

{smallsort}

FYI: The item in question was a PC running NT. It wasn't hot swappable. It
was a derivative of a commercial system used on cargo ships (a relatively
old system at that). Even cruise ships use redundant PC's.
Yes, PC's mostly running Win2K or NT are used as readouts. They are more
reliable and vastly cheaper than the terminals they replaced and can be
swapped out easily because they aren't embedded - just unplug the puppy and
plug in a new one.
. Ed

I use the Mozilla project's Thunderbird client for email and newsgroup
reading. You can get it on Windows, Linux, OS/2, Sun, and other
operating systems.
www.mozilla.org for Mozilla, Firebird, Thunderbird, and other fun
stuff.
I used to use Gravity. Still fire it up occasionally.
Ed Mulroy [TeamB] wrote:

"Oscar Fuentes" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
fanatic
I just look at the facts, and Linux is becoming stronger all over the world.
Maybe there are better OS than Linux that I am not aware of, but Windows
is not one of them.
other developer can)
how insecure/unreliable it is. This can only come from a bad design to begin
with.
IBM SP2 supercomputer with a 32-node cluster of PCs running Linux. Amerada
Hess decided against using Windows NT because it would have required them to
re-write an application containing three million lines of code, an effort
that was judged to be impractical. The United States Postal Service bases
its optical character recognition system for reading mail nationwide on
6,000 computers running Linux. Linux was also found to be powerful and
reliable enough to power a supercomputer at the Los Alamos National
Laboratory. (Would you trust a nuclear lab that used Microsoft Windows to
control its equipment?) "
www.qsl.net/kd2bd/linux.html
don't understand it. How do I know? well, just because of their answers.
Rodolfo
 

And these two examples is what it has been disclosed to the public. I reckon
there must have been many more NT crashes in Navy ships that we are not
aware of.
Rodolfo
"Rhys Sage" <No.Spam@ta>wrote in message

"Rodolfo Frino" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
simulation, not real-time control of critical systems.
you despite your self-acknowledged ignorance about most of the topics
related with your "facts".
Please don't waste your time trying to convince me about anything. I'm
not the kind of person you can convince.
--
Oscar
 

Also about security issues relating nuclear power plants
www.snapgear.com/cs20020704.html
www.snapgear.org/faq.html
Rodolfo
"Oscar Fuentes" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message

"Oscar Fuentes" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
the topics
related with my "facts"" as you said and also because of your ego.
There are facts such as security issues with the Windows OS's that are well
known
by most experts in security who know much more than you and me about this
topic.
So this is one of my facts that you will probably not accept simply because
of your ego. My advice to you is get off the egocentric horse you ride and
start being
more realistic.
Having said that I have to tell you that I am not trying to convince you
since I don't really
give a damn whether you like Linux or not, or whether you agree with me or
not. I was
expressing my point as I replied to your post.
Rodolfo
 

Rodolfo Frino wrote:
David Erbas-White
 

LOL!
Rodolfo
"David Erbas-White" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message

"Rodolfo Frino" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
It is not necessary to be a nuclear engineer to see that the thing
described there doesn't play a critical role, security-wise. Noting
that they run the thing through the Internet would be enough to show
you that.
--
Oscar
 

"Rodolfo Frino" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >writes:
[snip]
Rodolfo,
You don't get it.
I'm a Linux user. I prefer Linux over Windows for my work. If Windows
is bearable to me, is thanks to Cygwin and Emacs.
It's just that I have a problem with those who goes around proclaiming
"The Absolute Truth was revealed to me! Save your soul! Join the Religion!".
That's all ;-)
--
Oscar
 

"Oscar Fuentes" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >wrote in message
I think you must be confused with some fanatic priest from some other
newsgroup.
I am not preaching any Absolute Truth, there are no absolute thruths in
technology.
The "thruth" about Linux it is been revealed to new users every day around
the clock,
around the world by their own personal experiences. Even in this thread I
learnt many aspects
of Linux from other posters. Try to be a bit more humble and learn, as I do,
from other
people in these newsgroups.
Rodolfo