What's Your Favorite Windows IRCd?

katsklaw · Guru Joined: 28 Jun 2004 Posts: 1122

you said "windows as a platform is less stable, and less configurable than linux, or any other unix derivative. although it's still better than macs"

I understood that as an attept to state that "windows is more stable that Mac" and hence "better". It's also a direct confliction to your just stated "you might also notice, that i didn't state that o/s a is better than o/s b, or o/s c, or o/s d."

you said "windows users, moreso than linux users haver a greater tendency to 'mistreat' their machine"

I understood that as "windows users are more abusive than Linux users" in reference to their knowledge and use of their OS of choice.

So, "read posts a little more carefully before responding" has little to do with it .. I did read your posts carefully.

Robert-E-Lee · Posted: Nov 24, 2004 1:57pm Post subject:

mm, yes, i did say all of those things. but, read them in the context of the explanations of what was said, and you'll see more what i meant.
my saying that perhaps you should read things more carefully, i simply meant to consider all the possible meanings, you seem to have taken the first meaning which springs into your mind, as is your general tendency, from what i've seen of your posts, you react before fully considering a statement. admittedly, in a lot of cases, the reaction is correct, but still, you do seem to react rather quickly, and without full consideration of all the possible meanings of what's been said.
anyway..
as a second point, my stating '' but it's still better than macs'' was intended as a slight joke.. in general i'd probably consider macs to be somewhat better than windows machines in fact, they simply suffer from the software developers bias towards windows, as unix and linux also do.
they ARE more stable in general than windows. it was the 'comedy' comment, although i admit, perhaps, considering the text only method of conveying it, not the easiest joke to pick up.
<sarcasm>
must remember to use the fake html tagging in future...
</sarcasm>

katsklaw · Guru Joined: 28 Jun 2004 Posts: 1122

hehehe, to consider all possible meaning is an infinate task. If one were to do so they would never reply. Simply because if a stranger makes a statement there could be an infinate number of meanings based on the fact that the intented meaning of the statement is unknown. Take translating the Bible for example, one could ponder for thousands of years on it's true meaning and "all possible meanings" all the while it could be a practical joke that was misunderstood to be a religious document enshrined by the reader. This is one of many reasons there are so many different versions of the Bible and why there is an infinate number of ways to "view" the meaning. Then take into account it was translated from one language to another which will automaticly change the context simply because not all words exist in all languages. Then we could factor in the many different dialogs and dialects used within such an advanced language such as English where "fag" to one region has a totally different meaning in another, which adds more to the infinity of "all possible meanings".

As far as the "first thing that comes to mind" that is the result of a combination of things such as the readers ability to "catch" the meaning of what was said as well as the writers ability to say them. That outcome is "first thing that comes to mind". In theory you would be just as much to blame as the writer as would your readers for any misunderstanding. If a simple statement is made and you try to read too far into the statement the writers intended message is just as likely to get lost as if the reader never read the statement at all.

It's far easier for the speaker to speak clearly and state all sarcasm/jokes and so forth in a manner that everyone could understand. Even if it means explaining themselves a few times and re-wording their meaning in a hope that the reader would understand. Please remember that communication is 2-way. It's not solely the responsibibity of the reader to grasp the intended meaning.

Robert-E-Lee · Posted: Nov 26, 2004 3:39am Post subject:

*psychiatrists. ( sorry, but mis-spelling that word is a pet hate of mine.)

<comedy>
/r00t katsklaw
> deltree c:\docume~1\katsklaw\semantics.exe
>hit y to confirm : y
>
</comedy>

Toboe · none Joined: 28 May 2004 Posts: 31

contrary to what everyone believes.

i run my server from a windows box services to.

i use unreal. and have had my server up since 2003 and have yet to have one crash from the server itsself.

so no *nix isnt better at runing servers then windows. its abou thow much you know and how you run them.

Dr-Voodo · Eleet Joined: 07 Nov 2003 Posts: 535 Location: IRC

Well Windows is of course easier to setup a server in, but the issue is of course the stability, yeah on some places it might prove stable and at some places it don't, anyways to answer the question here, then I liked to DreamForge & LakeServ.

mentor · Posted: Feb 16, 2005 2:08am Post subject:

Windows??? *screams* ...

mentor · Posted: Feb 16, 2005 2:13am Post subject:

Robert-E-Lee · Posted: Feb 16, 2005 2:32am Post subject:

v3|0c17y · Eleet Joined: 28 Jan 2005 Posts: 650

well i have not seen a winblows box go for more than 2 weeks
and contrary to what mentor mentioned about *nix, i have seen freeBSD and debian linux boxes with an uptime of over 787 days

/me shows off one of my freeBSD box
Kernel Version FreeBSD 4.10-RELEASE
Distro Name FreeBSD
Uptime 98 days 21 hours 22 minutes
Current Users 4
Load Averages 0.12 0.17 0.14

Robert-E-Lee · Posted: Feb 16, 2005 4:02am Post subject:

um, i've seen windowsboxes comfortably equalling your bsd box larry...it just depends on what the box is doing...

zeke · Idler Joined: 04 Oct 2003 Posts: 325

My PC's name is Kermit.
Kermit was once known as Ferret.
Kermit is a Pentium II 350mHz machine, running on a stock motherboard from HP.
Kermit now runs linux, but this particular episode is from when it ran Windows 2000 pro.
Kermit, once, quite happily ran, 24/7, as a desktop, for 10 weeks straight. During this time it was also running UnrealIRCd in the background, (granted, no users), apache, and most of the time it was running winamp, mirc, outlook express, and i think IE (might have been mozilla..)

Windows 2000, desktop box, being used as such, 10 weeks straight. It was rebooted because it finally ran into the ground and taskbar.exe crashed....now i probably could have end-process'd it, and run taskbar.exe...but after 10 weeks i didn't really have the heart...i put it out of its misery and went start->shutdown->restart and pressed enter...

Just proving that in the wrong circumstances, windows will run like crap. In the right circumstances, it'll run fine, under pretty good circumstances, its almost comparable (stability-wise) with some *nix boxes...

v3|0c17y · Eleet Joined: 28 Jan 2005 Posts: 650

yeah win2k and win NT 4.0 were good and pretty much *dares to say* the most stable winblows versions imo, but from my expirience i never used a win box for more than 2 weeks uptime without it crashing and microsuck will always suck and blow Razz

WhaLberg · Posted: Feb 16, 2005 7:09am Post subject:

ConferenceRoom. Cool

Robert-E-Lee · Posted: Feb 16, 2005 1:00pm Post subject:

AHHHHHHHHHH
cr ish evil!