Submitted by “In Vista/Longhorn server, the file system (NTFS) will start supporting a new filesystem object (examples of existing filesystem objects are files, folders etc.). This new object is a symbolic link. Think of a symbolic link as a pointer to another file system object (it can be a file, folder, shortcut or another symbolic link).” More news out of Redmond: “Microsoft will add a ‘Save As’ function in its upcoming Microsoft Office 12 for publishing the developer’s own electronic document format, XPS, another move in a competitive campaign against Adobe.”
Right, a symbolic link is new. ln -sf anyone?
It’s not about being first, you f–king Linux-using dipshit. No one is competing for “OMG I was first” here. It’s a good feature, they’re now supporting it — what’s there to bitch about?
Get a life.
what’s there to bitch about?
First of all, lower your tone. We have had some complaints about you, so please, for your own good, get some decent manners.
Anyway, the point anonymous brings up is a valid one. MS should have introduced symbolic links earlier, they’re simply very late to the party, and there’s no problem in someone making that clear.
At least he didn’t use any insults or ‘bad’ words. Learn from him.
You can tell by his tone that he’s just trying to be an arrogant Linuxtard.
The article says MS is introducing a new filesystem object. “New” in this case doesn’t mean “new to the world”. New means new to Windows — making it a completely honest and harmless statement.
Linux users have such single-track minds. As soon as anything mentions Microsoft, it’s like “RED ALERT, RED ALERT, SWITCH ON MICROSOFT-BASHING PORTION OF BRAIN” … and then all reason flies out the door.
They *should* have introduced them a long time ago, yeah, but they didn’t. So far we’ve managed to survive for over a decade — so clearly it wasn’t a critical feature, but it’s a nice feature to have. By criticizing the lag with which MS has implemented this, does he hope to convince people to use Linux or something? No one cares.
Linux users have such single-track minds. As soon as anything mentions Microsoft, it’s like “RED ALERT, RED ALERT, SWITCH ON MICROSOFT-BASHING PORTION OF BRAIN” … and then all reason flies out the door.
Thanks for the insult, sonny. I’m a Linux user. You generalize too much, and that’s dangerous.
Remember those complaints we recieved. Consider this an official, public warning.
He gets a warning for telling the truth. What a crock!
I take it you are either new to this site, or you haven’t came across “Linux Is Poo” before.
The guy insults Linux and Linux users every chance he gets. He justs comes into articles to start an argument.
He should be banned.
Hey hey, welcome to OSnews. I get modded down because of my name, not the content of my posts.
Soon you will learn that this site is just a massive gay Linuxtard wankfest — much like Slashdot. The exception here is that there are a number of cool people.
Where is the insult aimed at you?
I am a Linux user, a windows user and an OS X user, and I agree with his statement.
The new item is that Microsoft is implementing support for symbolic links. There is nothing in this article that tries to state that *symbolic links* are new, simply that MS is now supporting them. Simply witness any Windows related tech. thread on this site, and it turns into Windows bashing.
On a related off topic topic:
When are we going to get to vote on knee jerk reactionary insulting comments made by OS news staff?
When are we going to get to vote on knee jerk reactionary insulting comments made by OS news staff?
This isn’t about agreeing or not, this is about the Linux Is Poo user systematically acting like a jerk, and we’ve been getting complaints about him. I’m actually very leniant, but when I get multiple complaints from other readers, I have to take action.
On other websites, the mere ‘Linux Is Poo’ username is enough to get his account de-activated. I tolerate it, as long as he acts like a normal ordinary user. There was no need to insult the anonymous poster of the original comment. That, combined with the various complaints, led to the warning.
“Other readers” here must mean over-sensitive Linux cry-babies. You know it, as does everyone else.
Your gimmick is not terribly creative and it’s getting pretty tiresome.
Who’s forcing you to read my comments? Because I want to meet them. 🙂
“Linux users have such single-track minds.”
“Linux users” used here as an absolute (it’s a noun for all users of Linux).
“I am a Linux user, a windows user and an OS X user, and I agree with his statement. ”
“his statement” here is referring to the above statement about single track minds. You’ve put yourself in as part of the group “Linux users” by calling yourself “a Linux user.”
The only possible way you could:
1.) Speak English.
2.) Not find that insulting.
Is if you don’t consider having a one-track mind to be a bad thing. The general consensus amongst the people I’ve known is that it is a bad thing, especially if not immediately followed by a harmless story from childhood by one’s own mother. Given the odds of “linux is poo” being your mother, and the lack of a story; I think it’s safe to say that context doesn’t exist here.
That is how it’s insulting.
And yes, this was supposed to make you feel bad for asking something so obvious.
But you’re right. No one is saying Microsoft is calling symlinks a new thing. However, that didn’t make up for the slandar that was thrown against “Linux users” by “linux is poo” when “Linux” had not yet been mentioned.
This is the point where I remind the audience that not only does Linux already have symlinks, but, so does every other Unix variant.
I wouldn’t be surprised if BeOS and OS/2 (in their current iterations) have them as well.
“When are we going to get to vote on knee jerk reactionary insulting comments made by OS news staff?”
When OSNews Inc (or w/e the company name is) has its IPO and you put your money where your mouth is.
Thom is fully in the right on this one. Many of us have been quite patient with “linux is poo”, I’ve voted countless posts of his back up because someone voted it down just for his name (which I don’t think that’s what the voting system is for, I think the mods should cut his name).
Yes, BeOS has them.
The insult is aimed at all Linux users. Although his point IS valid, still, they way he expresses it is offensive.
“Linux users have such single-track minds.”
“Linux users” used here as an absolute (it’s a noun for all users of Linux).
Yea, like one didn’t have to suffer all kinds of insults directed at ‘windows users’ all the time here.
Any such remark, no matter how absolutive, is in fact restricted by the behaviour expressed after, i.e., if one says ‘linux users do X because they’re Y’, only those who really do X are being called Y.
Yea, like one didn’t have to suffer all kinds of insults directed at ‘windows users’ all the time here.
Last I remember, that’s not an excuse. Both represent a bad behavior and should be condemned. However, you’ll notice that pro-Linux posters usually attack Microsoft, not Windows users, so it is not something we see “all the time” as you suggest. In fact, many of them are Windows users as well. On the other hand, it seems that anti-Linux posters often direct their bile towards Linux users, who are portrayed as quasi-religious fanatics.
Any such remark, no matter how absolutive, is in fact restricted by the behaviour expressed after, i.e., if one says ‘linux users do X because they’re Y’, only those who really do X are being called Y.
Following your flawed logic, I could say “Windows users beat their wives because they’re violent” and then claim that I merely meant that only those who really beat their wives are called violent.
Words have meaning, and absolute statements have absolute meanings (and are more often than not wrong…). Trying to prove the contrary is dooming onself to failure.
Edited 2005-11-01 06:32
So if I say, “Linux users (in general) have such one-track minds. They are simply too quick to bash everything to do with Microsoft.” Would that be okay.
I don’t find it insulting, because I think when someone makes a broad statement like that then it’s generally accepted as being… a generalization. I’m a Linux user also, but I agree that in general Linux users are too caught up in hate for their own good. I believe Mac OX is the best Operating System because it’s a product of love. Apple love their products and it shows. Linux is a product of hate. Linux communities (in general) continually bitch-slapp MS every chance they get. I’m not saying that MS doesn’t deserve each and every kick it gets, but I do feel that Linux would be better, and the community would be healthier if it was based on a passion for Linux, rather than a anti-Microsoft mentality that seems to dominate the Open Source world.
Besides all that computer users that post on OS News (in general) seem to be far too sensitive. Saying Linux is Poo shouldn’t matter. Isn’t it like saying… apples are horrible, oranges taste better. People who eat apples have strange taste. Any apple eaters offended? So now I’m going to contradict myself a little. Although I said we needed more passion and less hate, now I’m going to say we need to tone down on the passion too. Get passionate about things that really matter. You’d think it really made some kind of difference if most of the world used one OS or another.
I see OSNews as a predominately alternative OS blog site (ie. the most widely used OS doesn’t get a fair hearing). And I’m no “MS fanboy”.
If Linux lost all steam and died tomorrow, and was never used by another person on the earth again… what REAL difference would it make? Probably none.
So if I say, “Linux users (in general) have such one-track minds. They are simply too quick to bash everything to do with Microsoft.” Would that be okay.
Well, it’s certainly not as offensive as some other anti-Linux posts, however you’d still be wrong – in my opinion.
The fact is that it is impossible to make a generalization like this and still be accurate. There are millions of Linux users out there, and only a small fration of them post here or on other OS “opinion” sites. That’s a first source of bias (sample size). Another source of bias is that people who post here and on other OS opinion sites usually have stronger opinions than those who don’t post.
I’m a Linux user also, but I agree that in general Linux users are too caught up in hate for their own good.
Again, let me respectfully disagree. Polls have shown that dislike of Microsoft is NOT the main reason cited by Linux users for their OS choice. In fact, it’s safe to say that there are a lot more Windows users who hate Microsoft – I know the most vile words against MS I’ve heard came from people having problems with their Windows PCs…
Also, you have to realize that poking fun as something is not the same as hating that thing. Linux users may poke fun at MS and Windows, that doesn’t mean they’re consumed by negative emotions! I think you’re clearly exaggerating here.
I believe Mac OX is the best Operating System because it’s a product of love. Apple love their products and it shows. Linux is a product of hate.
Again, I disagree. Linux is a product of love, from all the hundreds of contributors to the kernel, its userspace apps, and distros. It is in fact more a labour of love than Mac OS X is, since Mac OS X is after all a commercial product primarily designed to sell Macs – and if you don’t think that Mac OS enthusiasts can’t flame Windows and Microsoft, then you’ve obviously never seen a Mac OS/Windows flamewar!
Besides all that computer users that post on OS News (in general) seem to be far too sensitive. Saying Linux is Poo shouldn’t matter. Isn’t it like saying… apples are horrible, oranges taste better. People who eat apples have strange taste. Any apple eaters offended? So now I’m going to contradict myself a little. Although I said we needed more passion and less hate, now I’m going to say we need to tone down on the passion too.
Indeed you are contradicting yourself, but not in the way you think. The fact is that “passion” and “hate” are not opposed, but one is actually contained in the other (i.e. “hate” is a passion).
The fact is that people like Linux is Poo are trolls, i.e. they deliberately post provoking and offensive messages in hope of eliciting a response. You’re correct in the sense that people shouldn’t respond to such attacks, however human nature is such that people will usually respond. So trolling should in fact be shunned as disruptive behavior.
Get passionate about things that really matter. You’d think it really made some kind of difference if most of the world used one OS or another.
Actually, it does, when the main consumer OS is owned by a single vendor. Things like vendor lock-in are not frivolous: they have a real economic, social and even political impact. Why do you think MS lobbies US senators and foreign politicians? Why do you think MS refuses to support ODF in the next version of Office?
I see OSNews as a predominately alternative OS blog site (ie. the most widely used OS doesn’t get a fair hearing). And I’m no “MS fanboy”.
The reason people criticize MS is that MS has a problem with allowing any kind of competition, and that it’s seemingly incapable of playing fair. Most Linux users critical of MS wouldn’t have a problem if a) it wasn’t a monopoly; b) it didn’t abuse its monopoly status; c) it didn’t actively conduct a campaign to marginalize and slander Linux.
If Linux lost all steam and died tomorrow, and was never used by another person on the earth again… what REAL difference would it make? Probably none.
The same could be said of Windows or Mac OS X. What’s your point?
If Linux lost all steam and died tomorrow, and was never used by another person on the earth again… what REAL difference would it make? Probably none.
The same could be said of Windows or Mac OS X. What’s your point?
Well.. that was my point actually. Perhaps you agree with me in that case, that it’s not something worth getting worked up over, as seems to be an all-too-regular occurrence here.
Indeed you are contradicting yourself, but not in the way you think. The fact is that “passion” and “hate” are not opposed, but one is actually contained in the other (i.e. “hate” is a passion).
Exactly. Obviously then it would be a good thing to get less passionate about this subject, love and hate. Since we are in apparent agreement that any system could be done without. It’s not like the air, water or food.
The rest of your comments are taken and noted. I agree with you for the most part. Poking fun at MS should be fine, so should poking fun at anything… until the other side doesn’t like it anymore, and then it might be time to stop.
In this case however, I think everyone involved in this sort of argument needs to get a grip. I will accept your point that a company in an abusive monopolistic position is not a healthy thing. I grew up using computers. ZX81 (Typing programs into it when I was 6), Dragon 32, Dragon 64, Amiga 500, Amiga 1200, PC running Windows 3.1, then Windows 95, Windows NT4, ….. BeOS, Linux, and finally bought a Mac. There was a time when I thought that Amiga was the greatest computer on the planet. And if anyone said anything about Windows being better than AmigaOS, I was ready to jump to its defense. Amiga is dead. BeOS is dead. The Earth is still here.
Anyway, I agree with you archiesteel. I’ve read back across some of the posts, that I hadn’t seen because some of them were below my threshold.
I would have thought Thom was one of the last people who should be giving others a lecture in “tone”.
Thom…
“XPS, another move in a competitive campaign against Adobe.”
This is extremely misleading. Microsoft has also added PDF Save AS support in Office 12 as well, please change the tone of your article as it is very misleading and gives out misinformation.
shit on you GRAVE! *growls*
it is new in windows. please point me to the phrase in which they say they invented symbolic links.
So what it only means more good things for Windows. I just don’t know how long people want to use it since WinFS will introduce “SmartFolders”, or whatever it’s called, that is more lot more better than having symbolic links.
Microsoft is so innovative… UNIX has had symlinks for 40 years, and PDF is an existing established and accepted standard for many years.
Er, did I say innovative?
Well, not quite 40 years; symbolic links first appeared in 4.2bsd, which came out in 1983. So Microsoft is only 22 years behind.
“Well, not quite 40 years; symbolic links first appeared in 4.2bsd, which came out in 1983. So Microsoft is only 22 years behind.”
Incorrect, NT (including XP,2k,2k3) has had symlinks since day1 and they are used for NTFS mount points, registry hive links and appcompat registry fixes. However, Microsoft has not provided a supported end-user (e.g. non-programatic method) of using symlinks until Vista (excluding Internix with standard shells). With that said, there have been both MS supplied (resource kit – linkd.exe) and third party tools for creating symlinks.
The best current tool for creating symlinks on NT systems is Junction from Sysinternals (http://www.sysinternals.com/Utilities/Junction.html).
So, no, symlinks are nothing new to the Windows world.
I believe NTFS, until now, has only supported hard links. Hard links are different than soft or symbolic links. Importantly, hard links cannot cross volumes (they are “hard” because they are handled by the filesystem).
Nothing new. Able to be used by mortals. And certainly newer than in Unix.
>> Microsoft is so innovative… UNIX has had
>> symlinks for 40 years, and PDF is an existing
>> established and accepted standard for many years.
symbolic links came to unix in the late 80s – before that unix had only hardlinks
It’s about time they’ve made use of this feature — NTFS has only supported it since the beginning.
There have been so many occasions on which I wish I could have had a symbolic link to something on one of my Windows boxes.
Edit: And again … why a -2 rating? WTF is wrong with you people and this system? Even on Slashdot this would have been modded +1 Interesting. A total wankfest, I tell you!
Edited 2005-10-31 18:49
ln -sf anyone?
Well, it’s new to Windows users anyway
It’s a nice introduction for those who haven’t seen them yet. It’s like a shortcut that does become invalid if the original file is moved.
So, with symbolic links, virtual folders, automatic hard drive optimization, security improvements, and (I heard) the ability to adjust the volume level on the application level, Vista isn’t looking half bad.
Of course, Linux has had a lot of this for a long itme, but Linux doesn’t have a lot of the apps I love, so now I get the best of both world. And if they get the new command shell, that’s gonna rock
“So, with symbolic links, virtual folders, automatic hard drive optimization, security improvements”
Rather like OSX! But I don’t want to knock MS, who cares if Longhorn isn’t 100% innovative. Take the bits you like incorporate and move on. Like pretty much every business, musician, film director etc.
Very well said. Consider this another +1.
It’s about Microsoft implementing things and suggesting it’s a new whiz bang feature they suddenly thought up. But I guess Windows fan boys won’t see the irony in Microsoft adopting things Unix has had for a looong time.
It’s about Microsoft implementing things and suggesting it’s a new whiz bang feature they suddenly thought up. But I guess Windows fan boys won’t see the irony in Microsoft adopting things Unix has had for a looong time.
Windows fan boys don’t really care one way or the other. I mean, how long did it take for Linux distros to have decent looking fonts out of the box? Hell, some distros still don’t have that. These two operating systems are becoming more like each other, as one’s strengths seems to be the other’s weaknesses. If MS comes up with something that *nix already has, it’s going to be a bullet-point on the side of the box, no matter who came up with it first.
“Windows fan boys don’t really care one way or the other. I mean, how long did it take for Linux distros to have decent looking fonts out of the box?”
Good fonts are an issue of quality. It wasn’t like the Linux community pretended that good fonts wasn’t of importance, but rather an issue of implementation. Symbolic links are a feature of convenience, which is clearly a concept borrowed by Microsoft an attempt to catch up to some technical benefits of *nix/*nux.
I mean, how long did it take for Linux distros to have decent looking fonts out of the box?
This was fixed a few years ago. Any larger linux distro today has better font technology than anything in Windows. Only Mac OS X can beat Linux on font quality.
But of course, you can’t see it if you’re not using a reasonable font.
Bitstreams fonts are really good, and you can use Windows Corefonts as well (legally) and then you have something which beats Windows in regard to font quality.
Bitstream fonts are usually a part of Gnome, and if not a part of Gnome it’s shipped with OOo and therefore present on the system from the beginning.
This is true for all larger distro’s and several minor ones.
Let’s turn on the brain, shall we? New in this case doesn’t mean new to the world. Is this feature new to Windows? Yes — therefore the statement is valid.
Lay off the Linux crack for a while. It’ll do you good.
Where in any of that does it say anything about a Microsoft innovation?
No where… for the first time ever in MS history MS doesn’t claim to be innovative
NTFS has had a lower implementation called junctions, similar to symbolic links. However, this only worked on directories, and not files. A feature not very well known I guess.
Since an average windows user is familiar to the windows ‘shortcut’ paradigm, I’m not too sure how useful symbolic links would be to them. Would probably be more confusing to them. For the power user, all I can say is it’s about time.
NTFS also has hardlinks for files. Junctions and hardlinks are fall under reparse points. These are very little known features of NTFS because they’re a disaster waiting to happen for the average user. Most people don’t even know you can mount a NTFS drive onto a folder instead of drive letter.
Of course, if anyone actually RTFA, it was actually geared more towards SMB understanding symbolic links.
“Most people don’t even know you can mount a NTFS drive onto a folder instead of drive letter. ”
how do you do this? that would be cool
how do you do this? that would be cool
You can do it in the command line with fsutil, or through the logical disk manager (in the computer management MMC plugin). NTFS ‘reparse points’ are nothing more than mount points – and they have existed for a long time. In fact NT doesn’t even require drive letters, but doing away with them would break too much software. You can mount any volume that doesn’t have an assigned drive letter into any directory within an existing NTFS partition. I have two logical volumes on this machine grafted on to ‘c:/mount’. These are hard drives with working NTFS partitions; they just don’t have a drive letter associated with them. Again, you can do all this through the command line or the MMC GUI, and you’ve been able to do it since 1999 (’98 if you count the W2K betas).
Commenting on this article, nowhere did Microsoft say this feature was ‘innovative’, but I guess that doesn’t stop the retard teenagers from excitedly blabbing about how ‘MS is teh suxx’ because they’re ‘copying’ a ‘Linux’ feature, as if symlinks were somehow invented by Torvalds. OSnews consistently gets stories posted much more quickly than Splashdork, but the comments are going in the same direction – worthless flamebait.
You can do it with the Disk Manager. You right-click on your partition, you choose “Change drive letter and access path” then you can add or modify a path.
Some time ago, NT had a lot of compliance with the POSIX standard…
Will they patent Symbolic Links too?
If there is no previous patent applied for, then there is nothing to stop Microsoft trying to patent it.
I actually hope they do try to patent the idea of symbolic links, for the reason that if they do, it will show the US patent laws up for the shambles they already are.
Symbolic links for folders where introduced with w2k with the larger concept of “reparse points”.
Hardlinks existed since NT3.1.
SMB already unterstands a sort of transparent redirection since NT40. That is used with the Distributed File System (DFS). The configuration is stored in the Registry and the Active Directory
So I am not terribly sure, that there is a really big change.
Maybe they only merge the features (moving things out of the registry)
Definitely a nice feature that I’m glad to see them implementing. It’s a good technology so to me it doesn’t matter who had it first, but that both Unix and Windows have it.
through the shell or do they only work from the console?
both 2k and xp support sym links thrue the console, just with a very clunky interface to do it. I assume sence they are bringing it up as a new feature that explorer will support making them, and sence MS has been working on a more robust command line that command line tools will have a better management of them then how you currently make them
I’d give an example of how you make them now.. but I completely forgot.. its something I stumbled on a long time ago
I seem to recall .lnk shortcuts functioning (in Windows, not DOS) as symbolic links. You double-click them and they load what they refer to. It’s not quite as transparent as symbolic links in UNIX in that it seems like way more functions act on the link and not the target, but still…
The difference is that .lnk files are implemented in the Windows shell (explorer). So only programs which understand them will treat them as pointing to some other thing.
If a program just asks the OS to open a .lnk file, it will get the data stored inside the .lnk file rather than the data it’s meant to point to.
NTFS has also had stream for some time as well. I wonder if there will be a way to create links to specific file streams.
It becomes again clear in this thread that there’s a lot of hidden and advanced features and such in Windows. Maybe it’s time for someone to start up a website that documents these advanced and rarely-heard-of features?
I’d be interested in them, for sure. Many with me would agree, I think.
It becomes again clear in this thread that there’s a lot of hidden and advanced features and such in Windows. Maybe it’s time for someone to start up a website that documents these advanced and rarely-heard-of features?
there is already a site for this: http://msdn.microsoft.com
I think he meant one that isn’t run by marketing types…
a symbolic link? Are they going to patent that too?
So can someone show me how to make a symlink from C:Documents and SettingsTemcat to D:Temcat in XP? I know I can change My Documents location from the desktop, but I want to have it on filesystem level, transparent to all programs.
Still I think Windows should have a separate /home partition like in Linux by default 🙂
I think Junction Link Magic is what you need:
http://www.rekenwonder.com/linkmagic.htm
Log in as some other user, move c:documents and settings emcat to d: emcat, make a blank directory c:documents and settings emcat, and set up a junction.
P.S. Although it should be safe, the Temcat dir will contain lots of important things (HKEY_CURRENT_USER registry hive, for example). So there’s a chance it might not work…perhaps it would be better just to move My Documents rather than Temcat.
P.P.S. don’t trust what I said – I’m far too tired 🙂
I expect MONAD will support a new useful user comprehensible and task focused command syntax along the lines of CREATE /LINK $$sourcefile /INTO= $$destfile /WITH_LINK=SYMBOLIC /TYPE=SOFT or some other equally innovative and well designed new command line conceptthat is miles ahead of the primative unix shell.
Microsoft trying to wash away Adobe won’t be as easy as they think [I hope]. MS’s Ezpression stuff doesn’t seem enough for people to abandon Adobe’s product line, especially if we’re talking about professionals. And XPS only has a future if Expression gets a wide audience, which I personally doubt. As with many things, it takes more to replace PDF than saying XPS is better, since this is far from being a proof of superiority. Of course, time will tell, but then again, time has already told. And another thing: XPS is beign adbevrtised as being an open and application-agnostic format — I hope you all learned your lessons well regarding the words “Microsoft” and “open” being in the same sentence.
As regarding the addition of native support for real unix symlinks… I don’t think this is worth any comment at all.
XPS’s success is totally independent of Expression. XPS technology permeates Vista, and will be available (in its fixed document form) to the end-user as a built-in virtual printer. Office 12’s support of XPS exposes document rendering functionality beyond that of the printer driver in the same way that it does with PDF (passing on things like live hyperlinks). XPS technology is a subset of WPF and is also used as a PDL, and Vista’s print spooler format. It’s also exposed via WinFX class libraries so XPS documents can be created and viewed on Vista and downlevel platforms. Not sure what the exact support plans for other platforms is in terms of direct support from MS, but Office 12 for Mac will also support the format, and I believe there’ll be browser plugins as well. It could also be part of the WPF/E work.
Back to Expression — There’s really only one product out of the suite that could be said to be a new competitor to Adobe and that’s the Graphics Designer. Of the other two products, Interactive Designer is a product for designers to use in software development — something Adobe AFAIK had nothing similar to until possibly their acquisition of Macromedia (still not really the same space), and Web Designer appears to be an evolution of FrontPage.
More on the XPS cross-platform plans:
“We are planning on having viewers that support Mac and Unix—cross platform support is a critical part of the XPS story. I also know that there are several third-parties looking at building solutions for other platforms – so potentially the market will deliver something on its own, which would be great.”
http://blogs.msdn.com/andy_simonds/comments/487487.aspx
Wake me up when Vista offers something that hasn’t been offered before.
Thom is fully in the right on this one. Many of us have been quite patient with “linux is poo”, I’ve voted countless posts of his back up because someone voted it down just for his name (which I don’t think that’s what the voting system is for, I think the mods should cut his name).
While Linux is poo’s comments we a bit brash they weren’t offensive to me at least and frankly they were quite accurate. What I have seen on this website is the intentional voting down of valid comments critical of Linux. Not because the comments lacked technical merit or accuracy but because the comments were perhaps not in line with the current Linux religion or political ideology. I don’t complain normally because it is a free resource.
I modded your post down because, to me, the automatic use of mental shortcuts such as “Linux religion” is in fact flame-bait in my book. If you can’t express yourself without demonizing those you disagree with (i.e. by depicting them as religious fanatics when in fact technology and computers have nothing to do with religion), at least don’t act offended when other people mod down your posts, or those of trolls whom you happen to agree with.
And yes, Linux is Poo is a troll. His post are almost always insulting, offensive and immature. Just because some Linux enthusiasts act in an immature way (Moulinneuf comes to mind) doesn’t excuse Linux is Poo’s behavior. As I’ve said before, when almost every single post you make is modded down, I believe that it indicates an attitude problem, not an alleged bias in the site’s readership.
The moderation system is not perfect, but it’s been working pretty well so far, IMO.
As for the specific comment not being offensive, did you actually read it?
Edited 2005-10-31 23:20
You modded him down because he called Linux a religion? Have you *seen* most Linux forums out there? It’s not just a religion, but the freaking Crusades!
If you mod people down for speaking the truth, you’re only going to fulfill the prophecy of the typical self-absorbed, reactionary Linux zealot.
In all his wisdom, Linux is Poo wrote (before being modded down to oblivion): “You modded him down because he called Linux a religion? Have you *seen* most Linux forums out there? It’s not just a religion, but the freaking Crusades!
If you mod people down for speaking the truth, you’re only going to fulfill the prophecy of the typical self-absorbed, reactionary Linux zealot.”
The truth, my dear LIP, is that such statements are highly subjective. By the same standard, most Windows and Mac forums could be called religious as well – not to mention game console forums! If you think OS discussions are heated, you should check out flamewars between Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo console owners, they’re about ten times worse. (I myself own both a PS2 and Xbox, and I have had games published on all three, so I don’t play favorites.)
After that, I suggest that you visit some political forums, i.e. conservative and liberal blogs, or sites such as Fark.com, to see what political flamewars are like, and you’ll see that even the most heated OS discussion is tame in comparison.
This is the internet. People argue for what they believe in. Some try to do it in a civilized manner, many do not. Calling those who disagree with you “zealots” certainly isn’t acting civilized – especially since, as I’ve noted before, pro-Linux posters tend to attack Microsoft, while anti-Linux posters attack individual Linux users. To the casual observers, if anyone deserves to be called a zealot (in other words, an extremist), it’s people like you, LIP.
No wonder nearly all of your posts end up at -5…
Linux is Poo posting record is proof that the only thing lamer than a fanboy is an anti-fanboy.
All they do is steal. I wonder when will they reinvent the wheel…
Top 10 Windows Freeware tools for 2005: http://windows.czweb.org/show_article.php?id_article=222
Making a scapegoat of ‘Linux Is Poo’ is a distraction for their own impolite and headline grabbing behaviour. I’m sitting back with a smile on my face as OS News collapses under the weight of its own bullshit.
Euh,correct me if i’m wrong but isn’t it more likely dir -sf instead of ls -sf?
err
Microsoft has plenty innovation and Symbolic linking has been with NTFS for so long and Microsoft didn’t innovate it.
I don’t care about Symbolic links, when is Linux going to give me a real compound TCP/IP library that I can use?
When is linux going to offer a real multimedia API like Direct X. I don’t care about OpenGL that doesn’t work worth crap with multiple 3D cards, when is Linux going to offer decent multimedia, networking abilities and offer a decent desktop innovation.
whoops, I think I just killed all the fanboys wet dreams. Linux is the most overrated Operating system out there on computers today.
Millions of people making meaningless code that is either on windows already such as firefox, apache, open office or simple stuff that windows already does.
Never or soon. I don’t know and I don’t care when there will be such a “real” multimedia API. I play all my games on Windows, soon I will buy a PS3. I don’t use Linux to play, I use it for what is doing best for me, development in my area of expertise(Java/CPP), file server, web server, db server , ftp server all of them home. Time to time I use it as a desktop but that’s because I am testing/checking some features of my favorite DE (Gnome-Dropline). Otherwise, I use Windows which is already booted up. I spend my time a lot using putty and ftp to transfer/deploy my files on the Linux server, the only distraction for me from my work is games, and only there I use Windows. I don’t think it’s the time and place to debate why aren’t so many games on Linux,but rest assured is not the lack of these “real” multimedia libraries (or anyway they play a very small role in this case).
As for this :
Millions of people making meaningless code that is either on windows already such as firefox, apache, open office or simple stuff that windows already does.
Well, I could agree, but so far Microsoft didn’t came anywhere close to what Apache is and it will be. I really don’t care for the rest of the apps you enumerated, although I use FF on Windows as well.
You don’t care about symbolic links, other people don’t care about multimedia “real” API (honestly I have no clue what you are sayin’, I watch movies and listen to some music in Linux as well)
Fact is, and it will always be obvious that innovation is not the MS strong point. And no, copying things and claiming patents on what they copied doesn’t count.
Those are *your* needs and your needs only. You can’t dismiss the entire world of computer users just because YOU don’t want those things. With the current attitude (you being an example of it), Linux is destined to remain a hyped-up OS that only geeks with lots of time and some software developers waste their time on.
By the way … IIS6 is both faster and more secure than Apache. That’s not just my word on — go Google for some comparisons.
In no part of his post does he say that his needs shall satisfy us all. So, why are you putting words into his mouth?
By the way, everyone’s still using Apache and its security record is better than IIS’s… People still use the old version…
http://secunia.com/product/73/
http://secunia.com/product/1438/
I’m quite impressed, IIS6 does seem to have a nice record. So does IIS5, so why does it have such a reputation for getting cracked?
Linux fanboys and FUD-spreading. IIS6 is more secure than either Apache 1.3/2.0 so far — but you won’t find the fanboys admitting that.
I like both Apache and IIS equally, but I’m not going to spout bullshit when it comes to hard facts.
“http://www.tomchu.com was running Apache on Linux when last queried at 1-Nov-2005 15:13:58 GMT.”
in: http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=www.tomchu.com
“By the way … IIS6 is both faster and more secure than Apache” by Linux is poo.
By the way … IIS6 is both faster and more secure than Apache. That’s not just my word on — go Google for some comparisons.
Hehehe, I’ll sleep better knowing that you are not the CIO here. If we’d have morons like you in that position God knows how many would have jobs today.
There’s no wonder people mod you down, you fully deserve it, you don’t speak the truth, you are just a troll, all you do is to start the flames everytime you appear. And coincidence, you appear only in Windows threads. So, my advice to you is to stay behind your Windows box (exactly what I do) and if you have something to say do it in a polite manner. But I guess now is too late, people are already fed up with your name, let alone your attitude.
Linux is the new jihad, mod it down if you want, but it is the truth. No matter how the truth hurts, it’s still the truth.
Freedom of speech is what linux is supposed to be about so I find moding this post down kind of proves my point. It’s overrated and so is linux.
Well, I had an opinion opposite from yours and my post got modded down as well, so should I consider that it proved my point?
You guys should study rhetorics a little more before making such easily-disproved statements.
Allow me to re-use your own words:
Microsoft is the new jihad, it cannot tolerate differing viewpoints without trying to destroy them or absorb them, mod it down if you want, but it is the truth. No matter how the truth hurts, it’s still the truth.
No, wait, that’s just an opinion, like your own statement. Let me correct you, then:
No matter how much you want your opinion (i.e. Linux is the new jihad) to be the truth, it’s still just your opinion.
There, I fixed it for you.
Hey, someone modded down my post. Therefore, according to proforma’s logic, this actually proves my point.
Isn’t false logic fun?
How many people outside of Microsoft are for Microsoft and act like Zealots? Answer Not many.
How many Linux users act like pot smoking religious zealots for their OS. HINT: More than there are people that are Microsoft Zealots by far.
Thats a fact and there are many reasons for this, not in relation to anything Microsoft is doing.
It amazes me how intelligent some linux zealots are, but lack even the most basic common sense.
Freedom of speech is what linux is supposed to be about so I find moding this post down kind of proves my point. It’s overrated and so is linux.
Freedom of speech is overrated? Or your point is? (Which would explain why it’s being modded down, actually…)