unix vs xp

[n0cmonkey]

vi and emacs are the only editors people should know. If it can't be done with one of those two, it can't be done.

vim is great, but I generally just use vi. I'm trying to learn emacs through emacs on some systems and mg on others. So far it's pretty cool.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
vi and emacs are the only editors people should know. If it can't be done with one of those two, it can't be done.

Will emacs connect to a running j2ee server and line-by-line debug it with full introspection and data modifying? I'm pretty sure vi won't, I'm just wondering if I'll be suprised.

 

[Nothinman]

Will emacs connect to a running j2ee server and line-by-line debug it with full introspection and data modifying? I'm pretty sure vi won't, I'm just wondering if I'll be suprised.

Will it? I don't know off the top of my head. But can it? I'm sure it's possible if someone wanted to put the time into writing the code to handle it. But you should look at fixing your first two problems first, the main problem being that you're using Java and the second being that you want to use emacs. =)

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: kamper

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
vi and emacs are the only editors people should know. If it can't be done with one of those two, it can't be done.

Will emacs connect to a running j2ee server and line-by-line debug it with full introspection and data modifying? I'm pretty sure vi won't, I'm just wondering if I'll be suprised.

You doubt EMACS??

Anything you want can be done with Emacs. It's it's own developement environment and language. When people say: "Emacs seems nice, but I already have a operating system" weren't joking. (well they were, but it's not much of a exageration.)

JDEE is a project to make Emacs a intellegent java programming environment.
http://jdee.sunsite.dk/rootpage.html

The website dates from 1998, but the mailing list is active. I am sure there are other things also.

 

[silverpig]

What's the difference between a Honda Civic and a Peterbilt dump truck?

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: silverpig
What's the difference between a Honda Civic and a Peterbilt dump truck?

One is used for hauling away the other?

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: kamper

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
vi and emacs are the only editors people should know. If it can't be done with one of those two, it can't be done.

Will emacs connect to a running j2ee server and line-by-line debug it with full introspection and data modifying? I'm pretty sure vi won't, I'm just wondering if I'll be suprised.

It probably could.

 

[spikespiegal]

I would have figured, *nix for the hard working, and Windumb for the lazy

I'm assuming from the arrogance of that remark that:

- Your parents paid for your college eduction

- You don't have one

- You couldn't run a small Windows network better than the company janitor

- You're simply p!ssed that Windoss has put zillions of over-paid Unix developers and admins out of a job

- Most of the above

I've been in the IT industry long enough to see small/mid/large companies I've worked with evolve in many directions from the early 90's. The most obvious demographics from a corporate standpoint are that a small/mid company can now run their entire infrastructure on Windows servers and clients with lightweight SQL clients that cost a fraction to maintain -vs- their Unix and AS400 systems of yester year. They might be held hostage by Microsoft's goofy licensing agreements, but they aren't held hostage by some fat, over-paid Unix developer who only knows the source code, and the MS licenses are cheaper.

What hasn't changed is many college IT departments are still run by old fart technology nazi's who promote Unix/Linux over evil Microsoft, which is another contributing factor to why many corporations would rather out-source to India and get better talent than recent college graduates. I mean, I run 70+ desktops and all applications off a single Windows server that hasn't gone down since it was built 4 years ago, and these punk college kids tell me how awesome Unix is because they have to reboot their XP laptop mommie and daddy got for them twice a day.

Next, most people I know who own Windows computers did not own a computer prior to that running a different OS. This fact alone makes me chuckle, and is akin to motorcycle owners complaining that cars had an illegal monopoly because first time vehicle owners choose 4 wheels over 2.

The rest is basically tripe. The amount of 'freeware' available for Linux has never impressed me much because most if the good stuff has Win32 ports anyways (Open Office, Apache, etc), and my license costs for real corporate applications cost the same regardless of what platform I'm running them on. I mean, you can't even run a basic Windows app like Photoshop on Linux without having to trick it into thinking it's running on Windows in the first place, and I'd get fired if I forced our graphics dept to use Gimp.

So, what we have here is if a company or user "chooses" to use Microsoft, then according to you they are stupid and lazy. So basically "choice" is choosing the platform that gives you a job supporting it.

 

[scottws]

I recently set up a VMWare server with Debian Sarge. Then I proceeded to create a virtualized Samba fileserver and a virtualized LAMP server, both also based on Debian Sarge.

My prior Linux experience with Fedora Core 2 involved dependency hell and trying for a month to get 3D acceleration working for my 9800XT (I finally did, and then subsequently broke it again when I updated the kernel) and with Ubuntu involved me trying unsuccessfully for two weeks to get my Broadcom-based wireless card working.

But I was willing to try again from the standpoint of a server rather than a desktop. Honestly, it couldn't be much easier. I had both the VMWare server OS and application install and the virtualized filesharing guest OS and Samba application install both configured and completed in under five hours. The LAMP server was a bit more problematic because there were a lot more applications to install and configure there, but I have that running as well.

I probably wouldn't have been able to do any of it without help found via Google and on this board as well, but armed with the information it was actually quite easy.

So, I'm all for Linux as a server. As a desktop though, I've had a much less friendly experience.

 

[Brazen]

Originally posted by: scottws
I recently set up a VMWare server with Debian Sarge. Then I proceeded to create a virtualized Samba fileserver and a virtualized LAMP server, both also based on Debian Sarge.

My prior Linux experience with Fedora Core 2 involved dependency hell and trying for a month to get 3D acceleration working for my 9800XT (I finally did, and then subsequently broke it again when I updated the kernel) and with Ubuntu involved me trying unsuccessfully for two weeks to get my Broadcom-based wireless card working.

But I was willing to try again from the standpoint of a server rather than a desktop. Honestly, it couldn't be much easier. I had both the VMWare server OS and application install and the virtualized filesharing guest OS and Samba application install both configured and completed in under five hours. The LAMP server was a bit more problematic because there were a lot more applications to install and configure there, but I have that running as well.

I probably wouldn't have been able to do any of it without help found via Google and on this board as well, but armed with the information it was actually quite easy.

So, I'm all for Linux as a server. As a desktop though, I've had a much less friendly experience.

Haha, I remember you. I'm glad you're VMWare and linux experience is going good. That is actually exactly the setup I'm planning on doing at home. I've already go the LAMP virtual machine set up, now I'm just trying to figure out how to fit and additional two (two, for RAID) 120GB harddrives inside a mini Dell case made to only hold one drive :frown:

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: spikespiegal

I would have figured, *nix for the hard working, and Windumb for the lazy

I'm assuming from the arrogance of that remark that:

- Your parents paid for your college eduction

- You don't have one

- You couldn't run a small Windows network better than the company janitor

- You're simply p!ssed that Windoss has put zillions of over-paid Unix developers and admins out of a job

- Most of the above

I've been in the IT industry long enough to see small/mid/large companies I've worked with evolve in many directions from the early 90's. The most obvious demographics from a corporate standpoint are that a small/mid company can now run their entire infrastructure on Windows servers and clients with lightweight SQL clients that cost a fraction to maintain -vs- their Unix and AS400 systems of yester year. They might be held hostage by Microsoft's goofy licensing agreements, but they aren't held hostage by some fat, over-paid Unix developer who only knows the source code, and the MS licenses are cheaper.

What hasn't changed is many college IT departments are still run by old fart technology nazi's who promote Unix/Linux over evil Microsoft, which is another contributing factor to why many corporations would rather out-source to India and get better talent than recent college graduates. I mean, I run 70+ desktops and all applications off a single Windows server that hasn't gone down since it was built 4 years ago, and these punk college kids tell me how awesome Unix is because they have to reboot their XP laptop mommie and daddy got for them twice a day.

Next, most people I know who own Windows computers did not own a computer prior to that running a different OS. This fact alone makes me chuckle, and is akin to motorcycle owners complaining that cars had an illegal monopoly because first time vehicle owners choose 4 wheels over 2.

The rest is basically tripe. The amount of 'freeware' available for Linux has never impressed me much because most if the good stuff has Win32 ports anyways (Open Office, Apache, etc), and my license costs for real corporate applications cost the same regardless of what platform I'm running them on. I mean, you can't even run a basic Windows app like Photoshop on Linux without having to trick it into thinking it's running on Windows in the first place, and I'd get fired if I forced our graphics dept to use Gimp.

So, what we have here is if a company or user "chooses" to use Microsoft, then according to you they are stupid and lazy. So basically "choice" is choosing the platform that gives you a job supporting it.

So, instead of the linux bigots popping in, we get a windows bigot?

Most of the folks here (at least imho) don't care one way or another. The OS is just a tool, and Linux and windows are different tools for differnt tasks. They overlap some, and some prefer to use one over the other based on comfort level, but what it comes down to is that both are easy and hard, depending on task and experience. I would dare say it's easier to get Debian/Apache running then 2k3 with IIS. Easier and faster, but then, that's based on my experience (I am pretty decent with both). I happen to prefer Linux for almost every task, so now I'm an "old fart technology nazi" huh?

The laxy comment comes down to the fact that all my linux boxes are easier to setup/maintain then my windows boxes. I can patch all my linux machines by kicking of a single shell script, that took ~20 minutes to write and double check. I have 10ish linux boxes. Our 3 windows server, on the other hand, require 10-15 minutes, plus scheduled downtime (I have to reboot after patching ~70-80% more often then my linux machine). I'm lazy, so I choose linux. Guess if linux=nazi, then I'm a nazi

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: spikespiegal

I would have figured, *nix for the hard working, and Windumb for the lazy

I'm assuming from the arrogance of that remark that:

- Your parents paid for your college eduction

- You don't have one

- You couldn't run a small Windows network better than the company janitor

- You're simply p!ssed that Windoss has put zillions of over-paid Unix developers and admins out of a job

- Most of the above

I've been in the IT industry long enough to see small/mid/large companies I've worked with evolve in many directions from the early 90's. The most obvious demographics from a corporate standpoint are that a small/mid company can now run their entire infrastructure on Windows servers and clients with lightweight SQL clients that cost a fraction to maintain -vs- their Unix and AS400 systems of yester year. They might be held hostage by Microsoft's goofy licensing agreements, but they aren't held hostage by some fat, over-paid Unix developer who only knows the source code, and the MS licenses are cheaper.

What hasn't changed is many college IT departments are still run by old fart technology nazi's who promote Unix/Linux over evil Microsoft, which is another contributing factor to why many corporations would rather out-source to India and get better talent than recent college graduates. I mean, I run 70+ desktops and all applications off a single Windows server that hasn't gone down since it was built 4 years ago, and these punk college kids tell me how awesome Unix is because they have to reboot their XP laptop mommie and daddy got for them twice a day.

Next, most people I know who own Windows computers did not own a computer prior to that running a different OS. This fact alone makes me chuckle, and is akin to motorcycle owners complaining that cars had an illegal monopoly because first time vehicle owners choose 4 wheels over 2.

The rest is basically tripe. The amount of 'freeware' available for Linux has never impressed me much because most if the good stuff has Win32 ports anyways (Open Office, Apache, etc), and my license costs for real corporate applications cost the same regardless of what platform I'm running them on. I mean, you can't even run a basic Windows app like Photoshop on Linux without having to trick it into thinking it's running on Windows in the first place, and I'd get fired if I forced our graphics dept to use Gimp.

So, what we have here is if a company or user "chooses" to use Microsoft, then according to you they are stupid and lazy. So basically "choice" is choosing the platform that gives you a job supporting it.

Somebody needs a hug.

 

[drag]

- You're simply p!ssed that Windoss has put zillions of over-paid Unix developers and admins out of a job

You probably didn't notice this, but Windows never made a dent in Unix-land. It never impacted Solaris much, if at all. Neither did it to AIX, HP-UX, or any other of the many Unix variants.

It just seems that way because there are so many new smaller businesses that became medium sized businesses since the PC came out. They used NT and Win9x because it was cheapest and compatable with the DOS software that they were using. Not because of any technical excellence or anything like that.

There are still a crapload of small businesses that installed a SCO server when NT came out and they are still happily using it.

It wasn't until Linux came along before those Unix companies started loosing market share.

And guess what.. Unix and Linux administrators are still getting paid more then Windows admins. This is generally because:
A. people that know windows are a dime a dozen.
B. adminstrators using unix-like systems tend to be much much more productive then administators on Windows. So that way a company can replace many low-priced windows admins with a few high priced unix admins.

Generally speaking of course.

 

[halfadder]

You know there is still one point that is really, REALLY hard to argue:

You can't beat the price of a downloadable linux distro. The absolute cheapest I have ever seen an OEM copy of WinXP Home was $50, and it's usually $80 or more. With the OEM vesions you get almost zero tech support. Compare this to a downloadable Linux distro such as Ubuntu, Fedora, openSuSE, etc. You get your OS, desktop environment, a bunch of applications, etc, for the price of your bandwidth and a blank CD-R or DVD-R. Driver support isn't the best, file compatibility with OpenOffice and AbiWord isn't the best, but it's really hard to beat the price.

 

[nweaver]

I would argue that the latest version of Ubuntu has BETTER out of box H/W support then WinXP

 

[halfadder]

WinXP is old and crusty.

 

[gizbug]

What type of linux do you prefer? redhat?

 

[Brazen]

redhat... more specifically, Fedora on the desktop, CentOS on the servers.

 

[halfadder]

I like the clean and simple Debian for my servers. Ubuntu, SuSE, Gentoo, and Fedora are all great for the desktop.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Will emacs connect to a running j2ee server and line-by-line debug it with full introspection and data modifying? I'm pretty sure vi won't, I'm just wondering if I'll be suprised.

Will it? I don't know off the top of my head. But can it? I'm sure it's possible if someone wanted to put the time into writing the code to handle it. But you should look at fixing your first two problems first,

Actually, don't have any problems

the main problem being that you're using Java

Thanks for bringing that up. I will seriously consider your advice.

and the second being that you want to use emacs. =)

I don't really want to use emacs, I'm just trolling.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: drag

- You're simply p!ssed that Windoss has put zillions of over-paid Unix developers and admins out of a job

You probably didn't notice this, but Windows never made a dent in Unix-land. It never impacted Solaris much, if at all. Neither did it to AIX, HP-UX, or any other of the many Unix variants.

I can offer at least one concrete example to the contrary. Last summer I worked at a very large financial institution which was in a full scale movement from *IBM to *Microsoft, mostly because it's way cheaper. Oddly, "linux" is still a bit of dirty word there.

 

[drag]

Originally posted by: kamper

Originally posted by: drag

- You're simply p!ssed that Windoss has put zillions of over-paid Unix developers and admins out of a job

You probably didn't notice this, but Windows never made a dent in Unix-land. It never impacted Solaris much, if at all. Neither did it to AIX, HP-UX, or any other of the many Unix variants.

I can offer at least one concrete example to the contrary. Last summer I worked at a very large financial institution which was in a full scale movement from *IBM to *Microsoft, mostly because it's way cheaper. Oddly, "linux" is still a bit of dirty word there.

I bet it won't be cheaper in the long run though. And I bet it was a desicion made by generally non-technical people also. Were I work they'd laugh at you if you wanted the business to depend on something very important that would have to run on Windows. Actually I have a higher opinion of Windows then the administrators were I work.

Ancedotal evidence isn't realy usefull. For every thing you hear one way, you'll hear another the other way.

I know for financial institutions you have a big push for removing things like cutting down on the mail and moving to more pure electronic transfers and such. For example you can take pictures of checks in a high speed sorting machine and make that information directly aviable to customers online or at a ATM/Koisk or whatever. A lot of this IBM stuff that is getting replaced is just legacy hardware and people are selling slicker-looking stuff that uses Windows OS for console and automation control.

I have a freind that works at a place like that. In his case it's mostly IBM mail sorting machines and related items getting replaced by more modern stuff that uses Windows for the terminal or whatever. In that case it's not AIX being replaced by Windows, it's OS/2 Warp being replaced by Windows.

But I don't know what they run for big databases backends or whatnot. I don't know what exactly is being replaced in your case either.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: drag

Originally posted by: kamper

Originally posted by: drag

- You're simply p!ssed that Windoss has put zillions of over-paid Unix developers and admins out of a job

You probably didn't notice this, but Windows never made a dent in Unix-land. It never impacted Solaris much, if at all. Neither did it to AIX, HP-UX, or any other of the many Unix variants.

I can offer at least one concrete example to the contrary. Last summer I worked at a very large financial institution which was in a full scale movement from *IBM to *Microsoft, mostly because it's way cheaper. Oddly, "linux" is still a bit of dirty word there.

I bet it won't be cheaper in the long run though. And I bet it was a desicion made by generally non-technical people also. Were I work they'd laugh at you if you wanted the business to depend on something very important that would have to run on Windows. Actually I have a higher opinion of Windows then the administrators were I work.

Ancedotal evidence isn't realy usefull. For every thing you hear one way, you'll hear another the other way.

I know for financial institutions you have a big push for removing things like cutting down on the mail and moving to more pure electronic transfers and such. For example you can take pictures of checks in a high speed sorting machine and make that information directly aviable to customers online or at a ATM/Koisk or whatever. A lot of this IBM stuff that is getting replaced is just legacy hardware and people are selling slicker-looking stuff that uses Windows OS for console and automation control.

I have a freind that works at a place like that. In his case it's mostly IBM mail sorting machines and related items getting replaced by more modern stuff that uses Windows for the terminal or whatever. In that case it's not AIX being replaced by Windows, it's OS/2 Warp being replaced by Windows.

But I don't know what they run for big databases backends or whatnot. I don't know what exactly is being replaced in your case either.

The bits of it that I saw were AIX/MQ/DB2 out in favour of IIS/.NET/SQL Server. The .net backend with webservices has been way more reliable than the old mq/powerbuilder stuff (granted, pb is not IBM's fault). The front end of what I worked on still runs on websphere, but I got the sense that it was only still there because the migration cost would be too big.

What's going to kill them is the complexity of the new dev environment. My dad works on the .net side and he complained once (probably somewhat jokingly) that he would be just as productive working with cobol on the mainframes (as some departments still are). There are just too many huge opaque toolsets so he spends a lot of time getting them to play nice together instead of coding.

 

[TGS]

For a server type environment windows is barely catching up to the ease of use with *nix. The native scripting tools are ridiculously easy to work with, and with everything available at the tip of your fingers, you don't waste time tracking down useful tools (cough subinacl cough) or some oddball admin pack. Extensive documentation is built into the system via man pages. The help pages for windows is lacking when it comes to finding syntax examples, which is key to making sure what you are trying to script comes out right.

Now unless you were really adament about using Office or Exchange, for the desktop it could go either way. OOo and any decent mail server wil get you to the same place. The only value in going with windows over *nix is the retraining aspect for established windows environments, and windows admins or people fairly knowledgable are ubiqitous. Someone always knows that one guy or girl who can help them with a windows problem. Where I work it's solaris for the admins, and the programmers are working on windows.

Honestly if I was starting a business I would go with *nix, only because you are paying for support anyways. Trying to make things work the microsoft way opposed to how open standards work seems to be a big hassle most times.