[bf1942] RE : RE: [bf1942] RE : Re: AW: [bf1942] Where can i DL

[cuban]

I can't help but to respond to this nonsense. Sorry everyone.

I'm an avid linux AND windows user. If you are getting "random" blue
screens in windows you don't know what the hell you are doing. Windows
gives plenty of data as to why.

This very machine I'm typing on (happened to be working on my server)
has an uptime of 3 months (since SP3 came out). Basically, if you say
Windows is for amateurs then you haven't used the more advanced
features. Active Directory is amazing; it makes life on the end user
VERY simple, which in the end... is all that counts.

I wouldn’t recognize and easy to use distro? Man, I think RedHat dumbs
some things down worse than Microsoft.

All I'm saying is don't shorthand Windows, in a business environment:
Active Directory kills any other form of centralized logon, Exchange
kills Sendmail (if you say otherwise, or complain about resource usage
you aren't sure of all the features it provides), and NTFS ties into AD
perfectly.

Though on the internet, I would never even consider using a Windows box.
I still have my dual homed sendmail box forward all my email to my
exchange server. I would never put an IIS server up, nor msSQL either
(at least not for public access)


Just my two cents, but we shouldn't clutter this mailing list with
anything but BF1942 linux questions. Not that there could really be any
;).

cuban


-----Original Message-----
From: Eric J. Schultz [mailto:paradxum at thecookieshop.net] 
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 4:36 PM
To: bf1942 at icculus.org
Subject: [bf1942] RE : RE: [bf1942] RE : Re: AW: [bf1942] Where can i DL


I apologize for starting the dreaded Windoze Vs. Anything else debate...
And I'd agree that Windows has it's place but I don't think it's the
server... yet (from what I hear they are making the next server os much
like Unix/dos of the olden days.... which might help.<shrug> don't
know... I really would like that.) I would LOVE to run windows as a
server but right now windows is not ready IN MY OPINION. I have run
windows servers (but they take more babysitting and work to get somewhat
stable.) I have put the work into win2k servers and I still had many
more problems with the windows servers compared to the Linux ones. The
windows servers would run for months..... But the Linux ones doing the
same job ran longer.  But that's just mine. I get my opinion from my
experiences and the other people I've talked to. (but they are generally
more technical people and are able to put the substantial work in it
takes to learn Linux.) I dual boot my workstations and that's that
(since the!
re are many things that run native under windows and I don't want to put
the work into cramming them into wine.) But I would realize if windows
released a stable OS... Trust me... I am a GOOD friend of the BSOD. Yes,
they have gotten less and less, but there still there. (And yes, I've
seen kernel panics before, but only when I messed with it.... and it
wasn't easy or RANDOM.) I prefer Linux but it is not ready for the
masses. (BTW, you windows zealots wouldn't recognize a easy to use Linux
distro if it was released... or maybe you would.... but you'd still like
your windows anyway... oh well ... and I'm not trying to bait anyone
here either. We all like what we like.) 

Eric Schultz

p.s. Does anyone know how to get Open Office to open up in less than a
year?


> My 2 cents,
> 
> I work for an ISP that has to deal with costs of getting and making
sure all installations are legal and such, so we can't just slap a
Windows Box on our network and not worry about MS being upset they
didn't get their exuberant paycheck for making the OS.  So we love the
*nix boxes (a much cheaper and more customizable option).  Hence I had
to 'make mine linux' and save myself some money and force myself to
learn something new (which is better for anyone).
> 
> I would have to agree, MS Servers generally are a lot simpler to
setup, but with ANY application or server you run, you have to know as
much as you can about it.  Forgetting to setup a certain feature,
security measure, or logging system can bring down any system, MS or
*nix.
> 
> To bring this completely back on topic, I wish too that EA would have
a much stronger and dedicated Linux Development Dept.  You would think
that with the recent Linux Gaming Conventions and such, they would have
noticed the importance in Developing for more than just one OS (lets not
bring up the Mac OS which Developers don't consider enough anyways - I
am not actually a Mac Guru myself, I just have a lot of friends that
are).
> 
> j0nny5
> "be the ball danny"
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Richards [mailto:noxis at clara.net]
> Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 11:15 AM
> To: bf1942 at icculus.org
> Subject: Re: [bf1942] RE : Re: AW: [bf1942] Where can i DL
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ola Fransson" <ola>
> To: <bf1942>
> Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 4:58 PM
> Subject: Re: [bf1942] RE : Re: AW: [bf1942] Where can i DL
> 
> 
> > as i see it,
> > MS Server is a server for Dumies, you can put it up if you know how
to
> press
> > next...if you set it up with out turning on and off services that
you do
> not
> > need and so on you will have a server that does not work great at
all not
> in
> > my prespective anyway. (but how sets up a server without configure
it???)
> > Linux, well, you are most of the time forced to configure it , and
you
> > almost need some knowlage or at least to read the manual but its not
hard
> to
> > get a linux server not to function correctly if you dont know what
your
> are
> > doing.
> > Some thing that amuses me very much is to see people talking about
how the
> > could only get there Windows 2000 Server to run stable for X days
and
> there
> > linux boxes were running for the 5th year now, how can that be? is
it just
> > because the linux freaks have decide not to like Windows and there
fore
> not
> > put as much effort in trying to get the server to preform correctly
or
> maby
> > that they is wery poor in knowlage about windows?
> >
> > Now dont go get upset by this, i think linux and windows is great,
its
> > almost allways the due or gal behind the keyboard who makes the
mess.
> >
> > Yes and one more note, what are EA thinking, ofcorse the Linux
server
> should
> > be priorotized, now think, how is hosting the game servers? is it
big
> > companys how has afford to by a Windows 2000 Server or a 2003 even,
or is
> it
> > the private user who has no founding at all? ok some ISPs migth be
> intrested
> > in running servers but in the big picture?
> > I had to installl Windows 2000 Server just to be able to run the BF
server
> > and will switch back as soon as the Linux BF exits the beta state
(to poor
> > windows knowlage to do anything fun with it)
> >
> > Nuf´Said....
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Paul Richards" <noxis>
> > To: <bf1942>
> > Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 3:12 PM
> > Subject: Re: [bf1942] RE : Re: AW: [bf1942] Where can i DL
> >
> >
> > > Windows .NET is very good and very stable, uptime of 2 months on
my last
> > box
> > > running 2 BF1942 server. Mind you I did just nuke it and put
freebsd on
> > > there...
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Tyler "Overkill" Schwend" <tasf>
> > > To: <bf1942>
> > > Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 1:26 PM
> > > Subject: RE: [bf1942] RE : Re: AW: [bf1942] Where can i DL
> > >
> > >
> > > > Unless Windows releases a stable O.S.? You Linux zealots
wouldn't
> > > > notice if Microsoft released a stable O.S. unless they had
> > > > someone else release it.
> > > >
> > > > ---------
> > > > Tyler "[TASF]Overkill" Schwend
> > > > "Semper facere bonum, an a amare odium, vita mors."
> > > > ---
> > > > Server operator of [LCGA]Telefragged:
> > > > Counter-Strike: telefragged.lynchburg.edu:27015
> > > > http://schwend-t.web.lynchburg.edu
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> 
> As a GSP we have to charge quite a bit more for our BF servers simply
> because we have to have a Windows license not to mention the obvious
facts
> that the game requires more cpu and bandwidth. The uptimes of the
Windows
> servers move into several weeks stability is not really a problem as
long as
> you choose good well matched hardware and have them in a proper air
> conditioned enviroment, but even then its hardware stability thats the
issue
> there not the OS, I dont know anyone who would host a server on
Win95/98/ME
> which are the only real unstable MS operating systems. NT/2000/XP are
all
> fine and uptimes can run into months.
> 
> Also because of the Windows OS needed for BF it means we are very
limited in
> the public servers we can host as the cost is alot more and we would
have to
> actually spend money to host the pubs when there is no guranteed
return on
> the investment, obviously because of this we dont sponsor any clans at
all a
> BF server where as sometimes we may tack on a small quake based engine
> server onto a *nix box because you hardly notice them. Where as *nix
servers
> are a cheap to run quicker to setup a game server on , more stable and
9
> times out of 10 faster. Personal preference being FreeBSD for game
server as
> it tends to perform better.
> 
> Just my 2mhz for the topic anyway.
> 
> -Nox
> 
> 
> 
> 




The Cookie Shop
950 Main St.
Antioch, IL 60002
Phone: 847 - 838 - 2456