[rescue] New acquisition... (AIX)
mike at blackhairy.demon.co.uk
Thu Apr 1 16:08:47 CST 2004
On Thu, 1 Apr 2004 15:10:28 -0600, Jonathan C. Patschke wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Apr 2004, Phil Stracchino wrote:
> > For all its faults, Linux is way better than Windows.
> I put them about equal.
Then you don't know much about Linux do you ? Linux at the core is
pretty much just Unix (not "UNIX(tm)" but neither is *BSD), so at the
shell prompt, you can do pretty much what you can do with *BSD or a
proper UNIX (the kernel is a different matter ... proper UNIX tends to
scale on SMP/(cc)NUMA machines better).
One of the things I can't stand is the idea that a proper administrator
can't operate a Linux box, a FreeBSD box, and a Solaris box pretty much
equally competantly. There's knowledge that isn't transferrable, but
with the manual pages online, there's little reason for complaint.
Don't blame Linux for idiot Linux administrators who can't operate
without a point and drool interface.
> I have no deep quarrel with MS. They make a fine officeware suite and
Word is fine ?!? Strange that I hear so many complaints about it then.
My quarrel with MS is simply that they lock users into their
applications with proprietry file formats and interfaces, which makes
document transfer to sensible systems (i.e. what I have on the desktop)
> This is not a techincal problem. I've gone around that by easing in
> the BSDs.
There's always the "FreeBSD distribution of Linux" :)
When suits have queried my use of Linux in the past, I've shrugged and
said 'it's pretty much Unix'. And if a suit wondered what Unix was, I'd
explain in simple terms would get across the message 'if you don't know
what Unix is, you shouldn't be making IT decisions'.
More information about the rescue