Journal Journal: Anonyance
Well putting this up is probably a dumb idea, because the troll posting this will have their day made but
Ok some post (example here, with some of the centricies pulled out, *replaced words* or *comment*):
*START OF POST*
I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you *SOMETHING* fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a *SOMETHING* box (*Some powerful computer such as a PIII 800 w/512 Megs of RAM* ) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this *SOMETHING* box, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.
In addition, during this file transfer, Netscape will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even Emacs Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.
I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various *SOMETHING* machines, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a *SOMETHING* box that has run faster than its Windows counterpart, despite the *SOMETHING* machines faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this *powerful computer mentioned earlier* machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that *SOMETHING* is a "superior" machine.
*SOMETHING* addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a *SOMETHING* over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.
*END OF POST*
--------------------------------
So far in a quick search of slashdot I have found this posts:
BSD related stories: here, and here (These 2 posts are the same word for word, only their subjects differ)
Windows related story (replace any instances of windows with BeOS R5) (and I am not aware of a Pentium @ 225Mhz machine being sold ) : here
Complaining how packet (at 1200 or 9600 baud) is slower than their WiFi connection (If I understand the post correctly:
Mac story one(for note: A friend of mine copied 8GB (yes, GB) of stuff over a 100Mbs network his TiBook, took less than 45 minutes(Stuff at my house before he left for college)): here.
A post done in a similar fashion, but not the same format of it saying how their hub is so much faster than some Cisco devices when they are transfering a file (and that their hub does a better job of routing, I was not aware that a hub (a layer 2 device ) could route ( a layer 3 operation )(I mean route as TCP/IP type routing (as taken from post)) ) here.