From: "Rich"
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_004C_01C2E439.809E6C10
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I didn't argue against your invalid assumptions. You already admited =
you made stuff up. I referred you to a reliable source of factual =
information. You don't appear to have any interest in this. Maybe you =
would prefer to make false statements, which you now claim as an opinion =
only based on a fiction of your own imagination. Of course you still =
haven't acknowledged that when you make up facts on which you base your =
opinions you should be honest and acknowledge that.
Rich
"Robert Comer" wrote in message =
news:3e6835d9{at}w3.nls.net...
> It's not whether or not you are giving an opinion or not that was =
your major deception.
LOL! An opinion is not a deception.
> It was that your opinion was based on assumptions you made and not =
fact.
And again, assumptions you have not argued against.
>You just admitted that you made up what it was that you were =
comparing.
I admitted no such thing.
>Not that it wouldn't do you some good to prefix your opinions, as =
opposed to statements of fact, with "I believe" or "I feel".<
I say it again, *ALL* I say here is opinion. (It may be fact also, =
but it may not be, just not intentionally wrong.)
> In regard you your mention of propaganda, don't you think that =
this is a bit ironic given that your post to which I replied was =
propaganda and as you admitted based on a fiction of your own creation?<
No, I don't as what I said wasn't propaganda -- to be using propaganda =
I'd have to have something to gain, I have nothing to gain by what I =
said. You yourself know I use more Microsoft products than Linux, and I =
like a third platform (the AS/400) the best. As for the last part, I =
created no fiction, I STATED AN OPINION.
- Bob Comer
"Rich" wrote in message news:3e682dfc{at}w3.nls.net...
It's not whether or not you are giving an opinion or not that was your =
major deception. It was that your opinion was based on assumptions you =
made and not fact. You just admitted that you made up what it was that =
you were comparing. Not that it wouldn't do you some good to prefix = your
opinions, as opposed to statements of fact, with "I believe" or
"I = feel".
In regard you your mention of propaganda, don't you think that this =
is a bit ironic given that your post to which I replied was propaganda =
and as you admitted based on a fiction of your own creation?
Rich
"Robert Comer" wrote in message =
news:3e6821ab$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> If you are just making assumptions you should state that you are =
giving an
opinion based on assumptions and not making a statement based on =
facts.<
As I have stated before, when I say something I am stating an =
opinion, no
more, no less, if you want to take everything I say as fact (or =
false
fact,) that is your choice, but I have no energy to argue such. =
This is,
after all, a discussion group, not a scientific journal of some =
kind.
>It will avoid having your false statements pointed out.
You haven't pointed out any...
>If you care about facts, and I'm not sure you do, see
=
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overview/default.ms=
px.
<
You're wrong, I'm tired of reading Microsoft propaganda like that.
> As for your comments regarding the web edition's suitability for
something other than web server, maybe you should take a moment and =
ask what
the likely purpose is for something called the web edition.<
Well duh -- I was comparing it to Linux and I can do cheaper and =
more with
Linux, that's all I said.
> In regard to free support, do you mean posting to a newsgroup or =
some
infamous IRC channel? Is this what you use to support your critical
systems?<
More than just newsgroups, but, that's how I support all our =
systems, even
the AS/400. To phrase it another way, we have no software support =
contracts
on anything in my department. (Not saying I wouldn't want them =
necessarily,
but they didn't have sw support contracts under the old manager...)
No IRC or IM though, I loath that kind of thing...
- Bob Comer
"Rich" wrote in message news:3e681879{at}w3.nls.net...
If you are just making assumptions you should state that you are =
giving
an opinion based on assumptions and not making a statement based on =
facts.
It will avoid having your false statements pointed out. If you care =
about
facts, and I'm not sure you do, see
=
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overview/default.ms=
px.
As for your comments regarding the web edition's suitability for
something other than web server, maybe you should take a moment and =
ask what
the likely purpose is for something called the web edition.
In regard to free support, do you mean posting to a newsgroup or =
some
infamous IRC channel? Is this what you use to support your critical
systems?
Rich
"Robert Comer" wrote in message
news:3e681017$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> Can you be specific instead of hot air and hand waving?
I just stated my opinion, that's all. I'm not here to list out =
everything
possible.
> It's well known that Linux has less functionality.
I'm not so sure that can be said any more, but no matter I wasn't =
just
talking overall OS functionality, but what you can do with that =
specific
version of Windows Server -- with no Cal's, that means no NT
authentication,
files serving, or print serving, and I assume no domain =
capabilities --
that's 4 areas that Windows is strong on and Linux needs to catch =
up, yet
I
can put together a Linux box that does all 5 of these things for a =
LOT
less
money.
>If you want to roll your own it can cost less for Linux, assuming =
your
time
is worth >nothing.
There's actually a decent amount of free support out there, and =
you don't
have to roll your own version, you can use someone's distribution.
>If you want to use a supported version, like from RedHat, expect =
to spend
much more for your annual subscription. They will sell you a =
subscription
to red hat linux advanced server for $1499 per year.<
I would *never* pay Red Hat that much, they don't have enough to =
offer
support wise. I have spent that much on Microsoft products =
several times
over up to now, but things are a changin. I might add that =
Microsoft is
quite costly for aftermarket support and I don't buy that either.
>If you want their supported enterprise level web server you are =
going to
pay another $395 to $895 annually. That's more than four to six =
times
more
expensive than the Windows Server 2003 solution.<
I got it beat -- I have a server here at home (always learning) =
that cost
$0
for the Linux and about $200 for the hardware. (I also have a =
Linux
client
PC here that I paid $99 for and I'm not going to do that again, at =
least
not
this distribution.)
- Bob Comer
"Rich" wrote in message news:3e67d5e4$1{at}w3.nls.net...
Can you be specific instead of hot air and hand waving?
It's well known that Linux has less functionality. If you want =
to roll
your own it can cost less for Linux, assuming your time is worth =
nothing.
If you want to use a supported version, like from RedHat, expect =
to spend
much more for your annual subscription. They will sell you a =
subscription
to red hat linux advanced server for $1499 per year. If you want =
their
supported enterprise level web server you are going to pay another =
$395 to
$895 annually. That's more than four to six times more expensive =
than the
Windows Server 2003 solution.
Rich
"Robert Comer" wrote in message
news:3e67b7d1{at}w3.nls.net...
Less functionality, higher cost. Ease of use is a draw, but it =
would
have
to be even cheaper just for a web server.
- Bob Comer
"Rich" wrote in message news:3e67b63f{at}w3.nls.net...
By what criteria and how so?
Rich
"Robert Comer" wrote in message
news:3e67ae88$1{at}w3.nls.net...
That's not good enough to compete with Linux.
- Bob Comer
"Geo." wrote in message
news:3e67a4e1$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/29567.html
>
> There will be no price increases (as such) when Microsoft =
ships
its
next
> server OS, Windows Server 2003, on April 24th, but there =
will be a
new
> budget-priced version of the product aimed squarely at the =
web
server
> market. Server 2003 Web Edition comes without client =
access
licences, with
a
> 2gig limit on memory, 2-way SMP, and is $399.
>
>
------=_NextPart_000_004C_01C2E439.809E6C10
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I didn't
argue against =
your invalid=20
assumptions. You already admited you made stuff up. I =
referred you=20
to a reliable source of factual information. You don't appear to
= have any=20
interest in this. Maybe you would prefer to make false
statements, = which=20
you now claim as an opinion only based on a fiction of your own=20
imagination. Of course you still haven't acknowledged that when =
you make=20
up facts on which you base your opinions you should be honest and = acknowledge=20
that.
Rich
"Robert Comer" <bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>">mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">bobcomer{at}mindspring.com>
= wrote in=20
message news:3e6835d9{at}w3.nls.net...
>
It's not whether or =
not you are=20
giving an opinion or not that was your major deception.
LOL! An opinion is not a=20
deception.
> It was
that your opinion =
was based on=20
assumptions you made and not fact.
And again, assumptions you have not =
argued=20
against.
>You just admitted
that you made =
up what it=20
was that you were comparing.
I admitted no such =
thing.
>Not that it wouldn't
do you some =
good to=20
prefix your opinions, as opposed to statements of fact, with "I =
believe" or "I=20
feel".<
I say it again, *ALL* I say here is=20
opinion. (It may be fact also, but it may not be, just not =
intentionally=20
wrong.)
>
In regard you your =
mention of=20
propaganda, don't you think that this is a bit ironic given that your =
post to=20
which I replied was propaganda and as you admitted based on a fiction =
of your=20
own creation?<
No, I don't as what I said wasn't =
propaganda --=20
to be using propaganda I'd have to have something to gain, I have =
nothing to=20
gain by what I said. You yourself know I use more Microsoft =
products=20
than Linux, and I like a third platform (the AS/400) the best. As for =
the last=20
part, I created no fiction, I STATED AN OPINION.
- Bob Comer
"Rich"
<{at}> wrote in message =
news:3e682dfc{at}w3.nls.net...
It's not whether or not you are =
giving an opinion=20
or not that was your major deception. It was that your opinion =
was based=20
on assumptions you made and not fact. You just admitted that you made =
up what=20
it was that you were comparing. Not that it wouldn't do you some =
good to=20
prefix your opinions, as opposed to statements of fact, with "I =
believe" or "I=20
feel". In regard you your
mention of propaganda, =
don't you=20
think that this is a bit ironic given that your post to which I =
replied was=20
propaganda and as you admitted based on a fiction of your own=20
creation?Rich
"Robert Comer" <mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com"> face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>bobcomer{at}mindspring.com> wrote in=20
message news:3e6821ab$1{at}w3.nls.net... > If you are just making
assumptions you =
should state=20
that you are giving an opinion based on assumptions and not =
making a=20
statement based on facts.< As I have
stated before, =
when I=20
say something I am stating an opinion, no more, no less, if =
you want=20
to take everything I say as fact (or false
fact,) that =
is your=20
choice, but I have no energy to argue such. This
is, =
after=20
all, a discussion group, not a scientific journal of some =
kind. =20
>It will avoid having your false statements pointed =
out. You=20
haven't pointed out any... >If you
care about facts, =
and I'm=20
not sure you do, see http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overview/de=
fault.mspx">http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overview/d=
efault.mspx.
< You're wrong, I'm =
tired of=20
reading Microsoft propaganda like that.
> =
As for=20
your comments regarding the web edition's suitability for =
something=20
other than web server, maybe you should take a moment and ask =
what =20
the likely purpose is for something called the web =
edition.< =20
Well duh -- I was comparing it to Linux and I can do cheaper and more=20
with Linux, that's all I said. =
> In=20
regard to free support, do you mean posting to a newsgroup or =
some =20
infamous IRC channel? Is this what you use to support your=20
critical
systems?< More than just =
newsgroups, but,=20
that's how I support all our systems, even the
AS/400. =
To=20
phrase it another way, we have no software support contracts =
on=20
anything in my department. (Not saying I wouldn't want them=20
necessarily, but they didn't have sw support contracts under =
the old=20
manager...) No IRC or IM though, I loath
that kind of=20
thing... - Bob
Comer "Rich"
<{at}> =
wrote in=20
message news:3e681879{at}w3.nls.net... If you
are just making =
assumptions you=20
should state that you are giving an opinion based on =
assumptions and=20
not making a statement based on facts. It will avoid having =
your=20
false statements pointed out. If you care
about facts, =
and I'm=20
not sure you do, see http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overview/de=
fault.mspx">http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/overview/d=
efault.mspx.
As for your =
comments=20
regarding the web edition's suitability for something other =
than web=20
server, maybe you should take a moment and ask what the =
likely=20
purpose is for something called the web=20
edition. In
regard to free support, do =
you=20
mean posting to a newsgroup or some infamous IRC =
channel? Is=20
this what you use to support your critical =
systems? =20
Rich "Robert
Comer" <mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com"> face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>bobcomer{at}mindspring.com> wrote in=20
message news:3e681017$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> Can you be specific =
instead of hot=20
air and hand waving? I
just stated my =
opinion,=20
that's all. I'm not here to list out
everything =20
possible.
> It's well known =
that=20
Linux has less
functionality. I'm not so
=
sure that=20
can be said any more, but no matter I wasn't =
just =20
talking overall OS functionality, but what you can do with that=20
specific version of Windows
Server -- with no =
Cal's,=20
that means no NT
authentication, files =
serving, or print serving, and I assume no domain capabilities=20
-- that's 4 areas that Windows is
strong on and =
Linux=20
needs to catch up, yet
I can put =
together a=20
Linux box that does all 5 of these things for a LOT =20
less
money. >If you =
want to=20
roll your own it can cost less for Linux, assuming your =20
time is worth =
>nothing. =20
There's actually a decent amount of free support out there, and you=20
don't have to roll your own
version, you can use =
someone's distribution.
>If you want to =
use a=20
supported version, like from RedHat, expect to =
spend =20
much more for your annual subscription. They will sell you a=20
subscription to red hat linux
advanced server =
for $1499=20
per year.< I
would *never* pay Red Hat =
that much,=20
they don't have enough to offer support =
wise. I=20
have spent that much on Microsoft products several =
times =20
over up to now, but things are a changin. I might add that =
Microsoft=20
is quite costly for aftermarket
support and I =
don't buy=20
that either. >If
you want their supported =
enterprise level web server you are going
to pay =
another=20
$395 to $895 annually. That's more than four to six =
times =20
more expensive than the Windows
Server 2003=20
solution.< I got
it beat -- I have a =
server here=20
at home (always learning) that cost
$0 =
for the=20
Linux and about $200 for the hardware. (I also have a =
Linux =20
client PC here that I paid $99
for and I'm not =
going to=20
do that again, at least
not this=20
distribution.) - Bob=20
Comer
"Rich" <{at}> wrote in =
message=20
news:3e67d5e4$1{at}w3.nls.net...
Can you be =
specific instead=20
of hot air and hand =
waving?
It's=20
well known that Linux has less functionality. If you want to=20
roll your own it can cost less for Linux, =
assuming your=20
time is worth nothing. If you
want to use a =
supported=20
version, like from RedHat, expect to
spend much =
more for=20
your annual subscription. They will sell you a=20
subscription to red hat linux
advanced server =
for $1499=20
per year. If you want
their supported =
enterprise=20
level web server you are going to pay another $395 =
to =20
$895 annually. That's more than four to six times more expensive =
than=20
the Windows Server 2003=20
solution. =
Rich =20
"Robert Comer" <mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com">
face=3DArial size=3D2>bobcomer{at}mindspring.com> wrote in
message news:3e67b7d1{at}w3.nls.net...
Less functionality, =
higher cost.=20
Ease of use is a draw, but it would =
have to be=20
even cheaper just for a web =
server. -=20
Bob
Comer
"Rich" =
<{at}> wrote in message news:3e67b63f{at}w3.nls.net... &nb=
sp; By=20
what criteria and how =
so? =20
Rich
=
"Robert=20
Comer" <mailto:bobcomer{at}mindspring.com"> =
face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>bobcomer{at}mindspring.com> wrote in=20
message news:3e67ae88$1{at}w3.nls.net...
=
That's=20
not good enough to compete with=20
Linux.
- =
Bob=20
=
Comer
= "Geo."=20
<mailto:georger{at}nls.net"> face=3DArial=20
size=3D2>georger{at}nls.net> =
wrote in=20
message news:3e67a4e1$1{at}w3.nls.net...
=
>=20
">http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/29567.html">
face=3DArial=20
=
size=3D2>http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/61/29567.html=
> =20
>
> =
There will=20
be no price increases (as such) when Microsoft ships =20
its =20
next
> =
server OS,=20
Windows Server 2003, on April 24th, but there will be =
a =20
new
>=20
budget-priced version of the product aimed squarely at the=20
web =20
server
> =
market.=20
Server 2003 Web Edition comes without client =
access =20
licences, =
with =20
a
> 2gig =
limit on=20
memory, 2-way SMP, and is=20
$399. =20
> =20
>
------=_NextPart_000_004C_01C2E439.809E6C10--
--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4
* Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/1.45)
SEEN-BY: 633/267 270
@PATH: 379/1 633/267
|