[ILUG] Naive ADSL/WiFi questions (long (sorry!))?

[paul at clubi.ie]

On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Ian O'Connell wrote:

> A use for windows is irrelevent. if the machine came with windows 
> there is no sensible reason to just delete it unless you've several 
> machines to hand.

If one has no use for Windows, what's the point in keeping it??

> what world do you live in? last time i talked with an engineer in 
> one of the larger isp's here after getting elevated from a support 
> desk to a network engineer i was informed that ping times and 
> latency are entirely unrelated....

Guess what, they were right.

> Which what now? 10 gigs is a trivial ammount of space these days.

Like I said, 1G would be >1% of the disk-space of my sub-1-year-old 
laptop.. 10GiB would be 1/6th.

Sorry, but I'd like to use that space. I can't comprehend that you 
think I shouldn't be able to.

> If an installer comes onsite and wants to configure a windows 
> machine to use service or do x y z, and wants windows, i'll let him 
> off configure and get the windows working. Thats fine,

That's great, and I'm glad you have that choice.

My choice is to just get the network settings and configure it 
myself.

Choice is good.

> which what? most end user systems use a web based mechanism for 
> updating the firmware not TFTP. Can't say i've come across a 
> consumer solution requiring TFTP updates of firmware....

The windows graphical tools which come with some embedded 
routers and switches often use TFTP, as do the Java clients which 
some more expensive systems often load via web interfaces.

But thanks for pointing out there are even /more/, Os-independent, 
non-windows-requiring ways of updating firmware..

> And thats relevent how? the installer should know linux cause its
> embedded somewhere?

I find it sadly ironic when system vendors go out and grab free code 
to build products with and then refuse to allow the communities that 
built and maintain those free OSes to fully use those products.

It's parasitic.

>> The desire that it continue to remain possible to have a choice in
>> what OS to run is not zealotry.

> No but you seem to be suggesting one should limit ones choices not 
> increase them. Having windows and linux does not limit your 
> choices... Tim can refresh me here its a year since i finished but 
> 1 + 1 = 2 right which is > 1?

Again, both you and Tim are arguing for /limits/ in choice. You are 
arguing that:

- it is acceptable to require windows to:
   - maintain/update external network devices
   - initialise ISP accounts (Tim's example)

Ergo you're arguing that non-Windows systems be excluded from being 
able to fully interoperate with ISPs.

I don't see by what logic you could claim you are arguing for choice, 
other than that you wish to be able to "choose" to find the above 
acceptable.

> Huh what now? a monoculture? not deleting something you paid for 
> incase you need it some day is a form of being a zealot?

You're presuming I've paid for Windows..

That was never true up until last October, when I bought a new 
laptop. All my other machines have either been:

- whiteboxes, no software
- supplied by my employer, so not pre-installed with Windows..
- server from Dell, no OS
- incapable of even running Windows, not everything is a PC..

Again, you're presuming your world is the same as everyone elses 
here.

regards,
-- 
Paul Jakma	paul at clubi.ie	paul at jakma.org	Key ID: 64A2FF6A
Fortune:
Have you seen the latest Japanese camera?  Apparently it is so fast it can
photograph an American with his mouth shut!