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

[Steve]

Hi all!  I'm new to the list and while i always enjoy a spirited *nix vs 
Windows debate, I just wanted to add my .02 on the patch.  While I have 
been running servers for 7+ years now, there is almost always a delay in 
the "anything other than windows" PR's.  Sometimes it's a few days, 
sometimes a few weeks, up to a month or more.   Now the sad part is, while 
we wait for the release of 1.31, I have this feeling that they are already 
working on 1.32 and either the Linux PR is going to be delayed so that its 
just jumps to 1.32 or..  worst case.  we get 1.31 for Linux then a week or 
two later there is a new PR for windows and we go through this all over 
again.

I for one don't like it that companies put a greater focus on the win 
patches, but i am also a realist and know that is where the money is, and 
these companies are in it to make money.

/me crosses fingers for a patch.

3rr0r

At 05:35 PM 3/17/2003 -0600, you wrote:
>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