Why firefox sucks

Page 19 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Terumo

Banned
Jan 23, 2005
575
0
0
Originally posted by: Sunner
Terumo, you might not be aware, but mainframes have actually quite the upswing lately.
There are places where clusters of cheap PC's can never replace one big mainfram or UNIX big iron.

Yeah, if one was working at NASA.

Also, what do you mean "Most programs" don't run under Linux?
I run Debian on my workstation, exactly because it has the programs I need, I guess I could run Cygwin on my Windows box, but now I mostly use it for mail reading and as an mp3 player.
Where I work, we run our entire environment on Linux boxes(well actually we have a few Solaris boxes as well), we're not missing any software.

You're looking at all of this from your perspective, without thinking about others, and their needs/preferences, that just won't work.

Meanwhile, others would use a Windows box and do it all without a need for a Debian workstation and a Windows box. You'll still need Windows in some capacity. Even the most diehard Linux fan has Windows 2000 or XP somewhere in reach.

Think about others, their wallet, and their wish for a unified system without the need for 2 OSes to do their work.
 

Armitage

Banned
Feb 23, 2001
8,086
0
0
Originally posted by: Terumo
Originally posted by: Sunner
Terumo, you might not be aware, but mainframes have actually quite the upswing lately.
There are places where clusters of cheap PC's can never replace one big mainfram or UNIX big iron.

Yeah, if one was working at NASA.

Actually, NASA does quite well with clusters - mainframes are good where you need massive IO and unquestionable uptime among other things.

Also, what do you mean "Most programs" don't run under Linux?
I run Debian on my workstation, exactly because it has the programs I need, I guess I could run Cygwin on my Windows box, but now I mostly use it for mail reading and as an mp3 player.
Where I work, we run our entire environment on Linux boxes(well actually we have a few Solaris boxes as well), we're not missing any software.

You're looking at all of this from your perspective, without thinking about others, and their needs/preferences, that just won't work.

Meanwhile, others would use a Windows box and do it all without a need for a Debian workstation and a Windows box. You'll still need Windows in some capacity. Even the most diehard Linux fan has Windows 2000 or XP somewhere in reach.

No you don't. The only reason I have access to a windows image @ work is because my company made some bad choices in email (Lotus Notes) & timekeeping software. So I have a citrix image available, that I only use for those apps. Equiv. apps are available for Linux, but our management was short sigted in that respect. I haven't run windows at home for years. Maybe you don't think you could survive without it, but frankly, I don't miss it. In fact it's painfully kludgy when I have to use i have to use it.


 

Terumo

Banned
Jan 23, 2005
575
0
0
Originally posted by: Armitage
Actually, NASA does quite well with clusters - mainframes are good where you need massive IO and unquestionable uptime among other things.

And would you know why? What they need is massive processor time for heavy number crunching. They deal with very raw data that needs to be computed into something that humans can read. If you've seen the datasets that are piped down from a satellite you'd know by how much!!

No you don't. The only reason I have access to a windows image @ work is because my company made some bad choices in email (Lotus Notes) & timekeeping software. So I have a citrix image available, that I only use for those apps. Equiv. apps are available for Linux, but our management was short sigted in that respect. I haven't run windows at home for years. Maybe you don't think you could survive without it, but frankly, I don't miss it. In fact it's painfully kludgy when I have to use i have to use it.

<Mercy do they go to extreme lengths to say they dislike MS! lololol>

Fanaticism at it's finest!!

Meanwhile, I have a RHE server and I'd careless of the OS, it's no big deal.
 

Sunner

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
11,641
0
76
NASA is a fine example, the applications they use are perfect for HPC clusters, might be why they just bought a bunch of Altixes, running Linux by the way.
Various financial institutions would be a good example of organizations that don't use clusters, but rather mainframes(of course they usually also have several datacenters as well).

<Mercy do they go to extreme lengths to say they dislike MS! lololol>
Honestly, how old are you?
 

Terumo

Banned
Jan 23, 2005
575
0
0
Originally posted by: Sunner
Honestly, how old are you?

Do you know it's rude to ask a woman that question?

Let's put it this way, I'm old enough to remember Vietnam firsthand.

Now how old are you?
 

ProviaFan

Lifer
Mar 17, 2001
14,993
1
0
I'm not going to try to read Sunner's mind, but I do find it odd that someone who uses only Linux because it's better than Windows for what they do is somehow labeled a fanaticist, while someone who advocates Windows as what should be used for (almost?) everything expects quite the opposite treatement.

FWIW, I use Linux and Windows on my home network, and before you jump to conclusions (not that I could stop you anyway), the only reason I stick to Windows is because I can't afford a Mac to run Photoshop (MacOS is better at running Photoshop than Windows, and that's not necessarily because of speed).

While I wouldn't put Linux on my grandparents' computer, I'd like to know if you think it would be better for me to pirate Windows 2003 Server (which I can not afford), or to legally download and install a Linux distribution on my server (which is too old to handle Win2k3 well anyway).
 

Sunner

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
11,641
0
76
Originally posted by: Terumo
Originally posted by: Sunner
Honestly, how old are you?

Do you know it's rude to ask a woman that question?

Let's put it this way, I'm old enough to remember Vietnam firsthand.

Now how old are you?

I just have a hard time taking people using "expressions"(and I use the term very loosely) like "lololol" seriously, and in the last few posts, you haven't exactly displayed a whole lot of maturity.

Me, I'm 24.

A far more relevant question then, since you aren't working with any special right now(or all kinds of stuff, whichever way you wanna put it), I assume you've spent many years as an administrator, since you presume to tell those of us who actually are working with it how to do our jobs?
 

Terumo

Banned
Jan 23, 2005
575
0
0
Originally posted by: Sunner
I just have a hard time taking people using "expressions"(and I use the term very loosely) like "lololol" seriously, and in the last few posts, you haven't exactly displayed a whole lot of maturity.

Even us old folks can laugh, ya know (I lifted that "expression" from a mom even older than I)? This is a forum, not a boardroom.

So now what, Sunner, is it attack the messenger time when your clip is empty??

Me, I'm 24.

That explains a lot.

A far more relevant question then, since you aren't working with any special right now(or all kinds of stuff, whichever way you wanna put it), I assume you've spent many years as an administrator, since you presume to tell those of us who actually are working with it how to do our jobs?

Let's put it this way, when you were born I was already working on a computer (and beginning my short tour in the USMC).

As much as you resent being posted to in whatever manner, you may want to look at how you respond to those who aren't 15 year-olds. It's a two-way street. I figured you were younger (at least in manner), but can you reflect on how?

Advice: knowledge doesn't = wisdom. You can have an IQ of 220, but be as unwise as a newborn. That's only something you'll acquire with time in and experience (paying your dues). When you're in your 30's you'll know what I mean, especially when the pressures of life, death, work and family wise you up. I have no need to act like I'm 65, when I'm comfortable being middle aged, with no need to show off to peers. I'm here to exercise the brain, read, and help, not to get any more gray hairs or wrinkles!! lololol
 

Terumo

Banned
Jan 23, 2005
575
0
0
Originally posted by: ProviaFan
While I wouldn't put Linux on my grandparents' computer, I'd like to know if you think it would be better for me to pirate Windows 2003 Server (which I can not afford), or to legally download and install a Linux distribution on my server (which is too old to handle Win2k3 well anyway).

If you haven't yet or acquired it from another friend (or know how to get one), you're really out of the loop (not just the l33t one too) -- which isn't wise being a network guru.

You knew that's a poor defense too.
 

ProviaFan

Lifer
Mar 17, 2001
14,993
1
0
Originally posted by: Terumo
Originally posted by: ProviaFan
While I wouldn't put Linux on my grandparents' computer, I'd like to know if you think it would be better for me to pirate Windows 2003 Server (which I can not afford), or to legally download and install a Linux distribution on my server (which is too old to handle Win2k3 well anyway).
If you haven't yet or acquired it from another friend (or know how to get one), you're really out of the loop (not just the l33t one too) -- which isn't wise being a network guru.
When you assume, you make an ass out of "u" and me. I am somewhat familiar with p2p technology to obtain legal software (e.g. bittorrent and emule), and am sure that I could have any illegal software I wanted in a few hours over my broadband connection. Howver, even if I were able to use Win2k3 illegally without feeling guilty about it, why should I, when Linux does what I need it to do better than Windows does.
You knew that's a poor defense too.
What now? Are you just running out of valid reasons to attack me for preferring Linux?
 

n0cmonkey

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2001
42,936
1
0
I have legal access to just about any Microsoft product out there. I continue to use OpenBSD. :cool:

Shooting the users in the foot is bad. Giving them a gun isn't. - Gordon Schumacher, Mozilla bug #84128
:laugh:
 

Sunner

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
11,641
0
76
Originally posted by: Terumo
That explains a lot.

And yet I'm the one not acting like a kid here.

You obviously don't know a whole lot about anything more than your own desktop, your comments about NASA and so forth definitely suggest you don't.
 

Terumo

Banned
Jan 23, 2005
575
0
0
Originally posted by: Sunner
Originally posted by: Terumo
That explains a lot.

And yet I'm the one not acting like a kid here.

Ironically you have. Now answer the question, why? If a person is mature enough s/he'd know why.

You obviously don't know a whole lot about anything more than your own desktop, your comments about NASA and so forth definitely suggest you don't.

How so, Sunner? You don't work for NASA so how can you assume I don't know XYZ about NASA? Only by opinion. And that worth is what online?

You got stumped (your talkorgins style reply is spent), and your last resort is to come attack the messenger -- no different than the rest of the jump-on-the-bandwagon MS bashers (or any other lemmings ready to jump because it's popular). When out of ammo, try ad hominen attacks to look knowledgeable. In other words, you lost the argument -- especially since you can't add anything to the browser war, but must address the personal points instead.
 

Terumo

Banned
Jan 23, 2005
575
0
0
Originally posted by: ProviaFan
When you assume, you make an ass out of "u" and me. I am somewhat familiar with p2p technology to obtain legal software (e.g. bittorrent and emule), and am sure that I could have any illegal software I wanted in a few hours over my broadband connection. Howver, even if I were able to use Win2k3 illegally without feeling guilty about it, why should I, when Linux does what I need it to do better than Windows does.

Who said anything about p2p? Only a very stupid person would d/l a proggie from an unknown source (especially for cracked applications) -- security 101.

You'd have it like you'd have a p2p client in the first place.

What now? Are you just running out of valid reasons to attack me for preferring Linux?

I didn't even "attack" you.

I gave you the doubt you'd at least have better resources than a p2p client (which says a lot in itself). With the mass of illegal software floating around, it's amazing that anyone would waste the time d/l it from a cracker (but it could explain why there's a lot of "problems" with Windows, all right).
 

ProviaFan

Lifer
Mar 17, 2001
14,993
1
0
Originally posted by: Terumo
Who said anything about p2p? Only a very stupid person would d/l a proggie from an unknown source (especially for cracked applications) -- security 101.
Ok, so I could ask someone else for a copy... sure. And if they're willing to supply me with a copy, then who can say for sure where they got it from?
You'd have it like you'd have a p2p client in the first place.
You aren't making a whole lot of sense here. Are you insinuating that merely the posession of a p2p client indicates that one must use it for illegal activities? How naive... :roll:
I gave you the doubt you'd at least have better resources than a p2p client (which says a lot in itself). With the mass of illegal software floating around, it's amazing that anyone would waste the time d/l it from a cracker (but it could explain why there's a lot of "problems" with Windows, all right).
Hopefully, I indicated clearly enough that the legality of obtaining Windows 2003 Server was not the only reason that I don't use it, though it is certainly one of the major factors.

Let's see... I need an OS that:
Is free, or at least affordable.
Can function as a web server, database server, file server, NAT, firewall, and print server.
Can do all of the above on a 500MHz system with 256MB of RAM, and quickly.
Offers quick and reliable remote access (good CLI is a plus - I grew up on old computers and DOS, so I'm not afraid)
Being legal and free / affordable at the same time is a nice additional benefit.

What would you suggest? (I know n0c would say OpenBSD ;))
 

programmer

Senior member
Mar 12, 2003
412
0
0

Terumo

Banned
Jan 23, 2005
575
0
0
Originally posted by: ProviaFan
Ok, so I could ask someone else for a copy... sure. And if they're willing to supply me with a copy, then who can say for sure where they got it from?

That's one way. But there are other ways too. MS, and other vendors know how it's done. And the network types don't get second hand images.

You aren't making a whole lot of sense here. Are you insinuating that merely the posession of a p2p client indicates that one must use it for illegal activities? How naive... :roll:

You'd love that would you?

BTW, Provia, what's this thread about?

Hopefully, I indicated clearly enough that the legality of obtaining Windows 2003 Server was not the only reason that I don't use it, though it is certainly one of the major factors.

But also by showing to the boys that you too are "hip" for not using Windows, you make a critical error of showing that you're an average end user.

Let's see... I need an OS that:
Is free, or at least affordable.

Read above. It's funny too, the ones who have a lifted copy of Windows on their rig and also using Linux complain about the price. Imagine that!

Can function as a web server, database server, file server, NAT, firewall, and print server.
Can do all of the above on a 500MHz system with 256MB of RAM, and quickly.

That 256MB of RAM wouldn't last on a web server at all, especially one with any traffic than hitting simple web pages. It's why servers of any worth have at least 2gigs of memory -- to run that database, file server, NAT, firewall, and security ware. Let's see, I had a straight install of Fedora on a VPS with 128MB (nothing else) and CPanel. It had like 64MB left over for anything else. With a 2mb seat for every forum connection, you can imagine that setup wouldn't work. On my dual Xeon system, out of 2gigs, there's alittle over 1.5gigs left after the essentials are loaded.

And a 500mhz processor would c-r-a-w-l on anything but serving web pages. With a database like mysql, it'll be crying for help. It's why it's recommended that a server running a board like here with more than a 100 active members online to have a dual Xeon processors, 2+gigs of memory, and SCSI drives.

It's fine bragging about *nix on a desktop, but in practice in the real world even *nix needs hardware and resources like Windows. This is the problem now with current TECHNOLOGY.

Offers quick and reliable remote access (good CLI is a plus - I grew up on old computers and DOS, so I'm not afraid)
Being legal and free / affordable at the same time is a nice additional benefit.

What would you suggest? (I know n0c would say OpenBSD ;))

For what I do? Anything that works. I'm not OS loyal. :D If I can bribe my relative for that Windows 2003 Server license pack he has laying around doing nothing, I'd use it (think the package also has MSSQL and other goodies too) :D

For a *nix? FreeBSD as it's the most secure in lock down mode (and why I'd prefer it over all other *nix flavors). It takes a lot of work for it to work on common web serving clients alone (why CPanel and it really conflict), but once done, it's a good platform for ecommerce (either with Zend or Curl modules).

BTW, don't judge folks by their clothing. :p
 

n0cmonkey

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2001
42,936
1
0
Originally posted by: Terumo
That 256MB of RAM wouldn't last on a web server at all, especially one with any traffic than hitting simple web pages. It's why servers of any worth have at least 2gigs of memory --

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
heh.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

to run that database, file server, NAT, firewall, and security ware.

How many enterprise level firewalls have you setup? How many enterprise IDS systems? The database server? Sure. The rest? Generally not.

For a *nix? FreeBSD as it's the most secure in lock down mode (and why I'd prefer it over all other *nix flavors).

Not even close. It's good, but doesn't have the added security of OpenBSD, especially on good hardware (AMD64, sparc64, sparc).

The stuff I edited out I didn't have any reason to comment on. :)
 

ProviaFan

Lifer
Mar 17, 2001
14,993
1
0
Originally posted by: Terumo
But also by showing to the boys that you too are "hip" for not using Windows, you make a critical error of showing that you're an average end user.
I am not a network admin at some large corporation. We're talking about my home server here. But it doesn't help, nonetheless, that you can't stop yourself from making snide remarks about my choice of Linux being only on the basis of impressing "the boys." :roll: * 2^1024
Read above. It's funny too, the ones who have a lifted copy of Windows on their rig and also using Linux complain about the price. Imagine that!
Way to go, you're doing great with the assumptions in this thread... I bought my Windows XP Pro legally with the rest of the parts for my "workstation." The "server" is a dedicated box thrown together from spare (but reliable) parts, that I couldn't afford a "proper" (in some people's opinions) server OS for, and for which a desktop OS would not suffice.
That 256MB of RAM wouldn't last on a web server at all, especially one with any traffic than hitting simple web pages. It's why servers of any worth have at least 2gigs of memory -- to run that database, file server, NAT, firewall, and security ware. Let's see, I had a straight install of Fedora on a VPS with 128MB (nothing else) and CPanel. It had like 64MB left over for anything else. With a 2mb seat for every forum connection, you can imagine that setup wouldn't work. On my dual Xeon system, out of 2gigs, there's alittle over 1.5gigs left after the essentials are loaded.

And a 500mhz processor would c-r-a-w-l on anything but serving web pages. With a database like mysql, it'll be crying for help. It's why it's recommended that a server running a board like here with more than a 100 active members online to have a dual Xeon processors, 2+gigs of memory, and SCSI drives.
No $#!&! Obviously, because I don't understand how "good" Windows is, and because I'm only trying to impress my pimple-faced, geek wannabe, teenage friends by running Linux, I therefore do not understand the requirements of server hardware in the real world. Uh huh, whatever...
It's fine bragging about *nix on a desktop, but in practice in the real world even *nix needs hardware and resources like Windows. This is the problem now with current TECHNOLOGY.
Naturally. I may be so far inferior to yourself in knowledge that it's not even funny, but I'm not that freaking dumb. :roll:
BTW, don't judge folks by their clothing. :p
That's good advice for everyone here.
 

Siddy

Member
Jan 29, 2005
75
0
0
Lol, Eclipse556 is a doofus, everything in his article is so stupid. Firefox does everything IE does, and more, like multi tabs.
It does load pages faster, but if u think u can get good speed by going back to dial up, then go back to ur noob school and try graduating.
Thanks for wasting 30secs of my life by reading this thread.

note to ppl reading, press BACK now, u are wasting ur life here.

(anyone who supports ms window$ programs should be flamed)
 

Siddy

Member
Jan 29, 2005
75
0
0
Lol, Eclipse556 is a doofus, everything in his article is so stupid. Firefox does everything IE does, and more, like multi tabs.
It does load pages faster, but if u think u can get good speed by going back to dial up, then go back to ur noob school and try graduating.
Thanks for wasting 30secs of my life by reading this thread.

note to ppl reading, press BACK now, u are wasting ur life here.

(anyone who supports ms window$ programs should be flamed)
 

n0cmonkey

Elite Member
Jun 10, 2001
42,936
1
0
Originally posted by: ProviaFan
Let's see... I need an OS that:
Is free, or at least affordable.
Can function as a web server, database server, file server, NAT, firewall, and print server.
Can do all of the above on a 500MHz system with 256MB of RAM, and quickly.
Offers quick and reliable remote access (good CLI is a plus - I grew up on old computers and DOS, so I'm not afraid)
Being legal and free / affordable at the same time is a nice additional benefit.

What would you suggest? (I know n0c would say OpenBSD ;))

Nah, use whatever you like. I would use OpenBSD, because that's what I like. :)
 

ProviaFan

Lifer
Mar 17, 2001
14,993
1
0
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Nah, use whatever you like. I would use OpenBSD, because that's what I like. :)
Edit: Actually, I seem to recall running OpenBSD on my "server" at one point, but that was before it was doing NAT, and for some reason I switched back to Linux. Oh well, I'll try it again when I have a few days to fiddle without the family bugging me about the 'net connection being down... ;)

The install sure is easy (compared to Gentoo!). :)