Re: IBM to build massive 20 Petaflop supercomputer for NNSA

On Feb 7, 1:02 pm, Benj <bjac...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 5, 7:38 am, Eric Gisse <jowr...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

You are high - and stupid - if you think you have to "make
modifications to the motherboard to run Linux".

Um, Eric, that would be "to run Linux "properly"" And by that I mean
as an OS totally compatible with the MB. Yes, one can load Linux onto
a Windoze MB.

There is no such thing as a 'windows motherboard'. Or a "linux
motherboard". There are some that are more or less compatible with
others, and some that can have open-source BIOSes loaded upon them but
that's not what is being argued.

But regardless, let's see an example of a "windows motherboard".

And yes, it CAN be made to as they say "run". However,
if you know anything about this subject (which I doubt) you'll know
that there is a thing called a "LiLo" or Linux Loader which has the
function of overlaying all the Windoze folderol built into the Mother
Board.  

Three points:

a) LILO has been depreciated for quite some time now. GRUB has been
the preferred bootloader for several years now by every linux
distribution I have seen. syslinux is the other bootloader, less
frequently used but is dominant in things like boot cds and such due
to it being more compact.

b) You don't know what the *** you are talking about. Windows - and
linux - store the bootloader in the master boot record [first handful
of sectors] of the HARD DRIVE rather than the motherboard.

c) Windows doesn't use LILO. Dumbass.

And talk about BOOT TIME! Jeeze Linux holds the record!  My
all-time fav is the Red Hat version I had that would scan my disk
drives and tell me that I had no IDE drives and then wait 3 minutes
looking for them just in case I installed a couple in the last 10
seconds!  When I confronted the Red Hat representative face to face,
he said, "Yeah it's a real bug", "But we aren't going to do anything
about it!". Doesn't anyone who develops software possess a brain?

Why are you blaming Redhat for a fuckup in the BIOS of the motherboard
or RAID controller? Drive seeking ENDS after control is handed off to
the OS.


And while I'm on a rant, how about this one? Why does a system need to
scan all the hardware EVERY time it starts?

....because plug and play is nice?

....because the OS needs to know what hardware is on the system to
work?

....because that way the OS does not have to load every driver it has
in order to function?

It's an insult to my
intelligence!

I get the feeling that lots of things insult your intelligence.

They are saying that I'm too Stooopid to know if I just
installed some new gear or not! While there may be some persons out
there where this is true, I assure you in my case I DO know if I just
installed new hardware!  So why do I have to waste man-hours while my
hardware is scanned over and over? Why can't it just remember the last
configuration until I TELL it I want to reconfigure?

It does. None of the major OS' consume much time hunting for hardware.


I do know the answer. It's because it all starts with Bill Gates (the
smartest man in the universe) assuming that YOU are stooopid. He
thinks that HIS time is valuable, but YOUR time is worth nothing. He
assumes that your machine is always still HIS machine which is why he
constantly demands access to yours and freely invades and changes
whatever he wants at will.  He is King and you are ***. Simple enough
for ya?

Windows is not the entire computing universe. Move elsewhere.


And America (and the world) pays the price).

(end rant)

.

Quantcast