I Hate Computers

[Alan L.]

Having had some very shallow experience with Xenix in the past, I fooled around with Linux on 2 occasions and ended up in a straight jacket both times. I never could get the windows desktop thingy running, and trying to set up an email server using sendmail was near impossible. I got on a Linux newsgroup for help on setting it up and was told that if I didn't know I didn't belong on that newsgroup.

Anyway, my mailserver is a Windows 2000 machine running Mailsite. Very easy to set up.

Alan L., TX

 

[Knight9]

Redhat is pretty good from everything I've seen of it.

http://www.redhat.com

Kevin

<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by Knight9 on 08/17/01 03:51 PM (server time).</FONT></P>

 

[looch]

That's what I use - version 6.2. It frequently locks up when I browse the Internet (Netscape). I shouldn't jump to conlcusions about it being the window manger's fault though. It may be any number of things. Kind of like saying I only have computer problems when the machine is turned on - must be the power supply. I have heard others complain about Linux's reliabillity as a desktop operating system, so I assumed this is what I was experiencing. Also, I have always installed Linux on my second rate/older machines. I bet things would be different if I went and bought one of those nice new Hewlett Packard 64 bit Itanium systems./w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

 

[Bird]

I have another question for you computer/electronics experts. Is it better to turn off the computer when it's not being used, or just leave it on all the time? All my computers in the past were shut down and the power turned off when not in use, but this one I'm now using has been left on 24 hours a day. Does it make a difference?

Bird

 

[Anonymous Poster]

The new one you have coming... will go into "energy saving mode"... draws about 5 - 20 watts... like a kids nightlight, after a period of "non-use"...

One advantage, windows is not constantly updating/rewriting/reading it's registry and other hidden user files {as it does everytime you normally boot and shutdown the system}

One disadvantage is if you and the Mrs. are away... and a storm moves in the area... unless you have a "real" $100. surge suppressor not the $7. unit that only prevents the house from burning down {after the computer is wiped out}

Of course it still may not matter, when the lightning strike hits a "telephone line" around the corner and spikes your unit through the modem... even in the off position... /w3tcompact/icons/blush.gif

 

[GlueGuy]

SHF

I don't think 3.1 was more stable. I was early on in pushing the limits of 3.1, and I jumped all over NT when it came out. A major improvement. XP is just NT finally trickling down. Over the next few years people will wonder why they put up with the weirdnesses of 95/98/ME.

As for interrupt sharing, it works fine if the devices are all PCI. My machine is all PCI, and I share a lot of interrupts. Here's my list:

0 System timer
1 Standard 101/102-Key or Microsoft Natural Keyboard
3 (free)
2 Programmable interrupt controller
4 Communications Port (COM1)
5 ACPI IRQ Holder for PCI IRQ Steering
5 VIA Tech 3038 PCI to USB Universal Host Controller
5 VIA Tech 3038 PCI to USB Universal Host Controller
5 ESS SOLO-1 PCI AudioDrive
6 Standard Floppy Disk Controller
7 Printer Port (LPT1)
8 System CMOS/real time clock
9 SCI IRQ used by ACPI bus
10 ACPI IRQ Holder for PCI IRQ Steering
10 3Com Fast EtherLink XL 10/100Mb TX Ethernet NIC (3C905-TX)
10 Texas Instruments OHCI IEEE 1394 Host Controller
11 ACPI IRQ Holder for PCI IRQ Steering
11 Hayes Accura V.90 PCI modem
11 S3 Inc. Savage4 GT
12 WheelMouse1 (PS/2)
13 Numeric data processor
14 Primary IDE controller (dual fifo)
14 VIA Bus Master PCI IDE Controller
15 Secondary IDE controller (dual fifo)
15 VIA Bus Master PCI IDE Controller

Scruffy

You'll get no arguments from me on any of those scores. I think VMS is a fine OS too. Only thing I know that is more reliable is Guardian/NSK.

My wife's computer is the longest-running upgrade project that I've ever done. It started out _____w_a_y____ back as an original IBM PC/AT. I have slowly upgraded everything in it; rarely spending more than $200 for any single upgrade. It's now a 350MHz Athlon w/128MB of memory and SCSI disk/DVD/CDRW. She'll get another upgrade one of these days, but I think it will just be more memory.

Bird

That is potentially one of those "religious" arguments. The new computers are designed to shut down components reliably, and I think that's fine. Saves energy.

I've also found that if you regularly start/stop the hard drives, they will "give you a clue" when they are getting close to one of those disastrous failures. If you leave the HD on all the time, you'll never know that it's about to fail at startup time until the rare occasion when you do try to start it up.

I leave my computer to do it's own "stand-by" operation when I have it on during the day. However, I usually shut it down completely when I'm done at the end of the day.

The computer I use at work stays on all week, but gets shutdown for the weekends.

The GlueGuy

 

[Bird]

Thanks, John & GlueGuy. I was just wondering which would make a computer last longest. I do have a TrippLite Internet Office UPS power protection/battery backup with both power cord and phone line routed through it. With my last IBM, I shut it down at night, like you do GlueGuy, but with the current one, I've just been leaving it on all the time.

And GlueGuy, I read a story in the local paper this morning about Microsoft's ongoing court battle that indicated XP might not be shipped in October as planned without some modifications. Of course, I don't understand all of it, and also don't know whether I would want XP or not (even if it's not a rental deal).

Bird

 

[Harv]

Bird -

What with the energy saving features on today's computers, I would just turn it on when you first need it in the morning, and then shut it off when you go to bed. There is some value to rebooting once in a while (the system gets a "fresh start" and tidies up a few things), so why not make it part of your routine?

Having said that, I leave two of my computers on 24 hours a day, because:

1. they double as fax machines, and I want them accessible any time day or night
2. I have them programmed to run incremental backups in the middle of the night
3. I have my web sites programmed to download strategic data in the middle of the night
4. I'm too impatient to wait for them to boot up in the morning. /w3tcompact/icons/smile.gif

As a software developer, I manage to crash them just often enough to get the benefits of rebooting that I mentioned above. /w3tcompact/icons/wink.gif

In other words, eveyone has their own criteria on this matter. The technology is solid enough that you should just do what makes you happy.

 

[Bird]

Thanks to all of you. Harv, one reason I've left this one on was for the fax (will not be important in the foreseeable future) and I had some of the maintenance stuff programmed to run at night (also will probably not be important in the future). So, I think I will be shutting everything down at night.

Bird

 

[scruffy]

Glueguy, the old 166mhz started life as an NEC 286 with a whopping 2 megs of RAM and an 8bit bus! Through the years it was upgraded to a 386,486DX40,P-90 and finally the 166, at that point, my wife and son were getting too active, and I started building extra 'puters'.
The only reason I went to AMD cpu's was the cost factor, but the Intel's Instruction sets are a lot longer than the AMD's and used to be (in the 486 days) twice as many of them.
I've found the AMD chips to be good cpu's, but they sure require more cooling....which can be a problem at times. The 700 was pain in the backsides to get it running cool enough to keep from causing write errors to the h/d. Of course, I also was fighting an unknown problem with a brand new video card that was flakey right out of the box. M/B on this puter still runs hotter than it should, but I made up my mind a year and a half ago to let it 'fry'....turkey's still hanging in there!

Bird, like Glueguy, I shut mine down nightly...wife leaves it on.
I like the 'cleansing' effect on the system, and feel that the unit runs better overall. Even the networks I run, I have a regular bounce schedule for the VAX's. I bounce them once a month, but have seen many of them running for a year or more without being bounced. Of course hospital's get a little antsy when you want to bring the system down for maintenance....even though it is in their best interest to do so.