Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #331566 > unrolled thread

Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine

Started by7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com>
First post2015-11-07 20:57 +0000
Last post2015-11-09 06:20 -0500
Articles 20 on this page of 119 — 24 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy


Contents

  Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2015-11-07 20:57 +0000
    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-11-07 21:03 +0000
      Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2015-11-07 21:19 +0000
        Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine "Cola Zealot" <Cola_Zealot@fuckoff.com> - 2015-12-22 22:20 +0100
    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-07 16:48 -0500
    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Bob Loblaw <BL@LinuxProfessionals.com> - 2015-11-07 18:43 -0500
    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-07 18:32 -0700
      Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine 7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com> - 2015-11-08 11:02 +0000
        Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Saint George <stgeorge@england.eng> - 2015-11-08 14:57 +0000
          Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine saneearth <sane@theearth.com> - 2015-11-08 15:55 +0000
            Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine burfordTjustice <burfordTjustice@hub.hob> - 2015-11-08 13:03 -0500
              Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine totsob <sane@theearth.com> - 2015-11-10 05:30 -0600
                Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine burfordTjustice <burfordTjustice@hub.hob> - 2015-11-10 08:22 -0500
          Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-09 07:35 -0600
            Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Saint George <stgeorge@england.eng> - 2015-11-09 14:54 +0000
              Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-11-09 10:21 -0500
                Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 13:10 -0700
              Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-09 09:28 -0600
                Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-11-09 10:34 -0500
                Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Saint George <stgeorge@england.eng> - 2015-11-09 17:14 +0000
                  Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-09 14:53 -0600
                    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-09 15:07 -0700
                      Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-09 23:21 +0100
                        Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-11-09 22:26 +0000
                          Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-09 15:32 -0700
                          Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-09 23:36 +0100
                            Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 18:10 -0700
                              Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-10 10:15 +0100
                                Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-10 14:01 -0700
                            Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-09 20:43 -0600
                              Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-10 10:14 +0100
                                Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-10 10:29 -0600
                                Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-10 14:03 -0700
                              Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-10 14:02 -0700
                            Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-11-10 09:04 -0500
                              Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-10 15:33 +0100
                                Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-10 08:49 -0600
                                  Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 15:02 +0000
                                  Quiet, Turdv. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-10 14:05 -0700
                                  Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-11-11 09:34 -0500
                                Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-10 14:04 -0700
                          Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-11-10 02:02 +0100
                          Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 18:08 -0700
                        Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-09 15:31 -0700
                        Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-11-10 09:02 -0500
                          Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 14:10 +0000
                            Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-10 10:42 -0500
                              Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-10 14:06 -0700
                    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-09 17:11 -0500
                    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 18:06 -0700
              Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 13:12 -0700
                Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-11-09 21:24 +0100
                  Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-11-09 15:33 -0500
                    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2015-11-09 16:57 -0800
                  Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-09 16:51 -0500
                    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-11-09 17:02 -0500
                      Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-09 23:12 +0100
                        Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-09 17:33 -0500
                        Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-11-09 17:45 -0500
                        Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 18:15 -0700
                  Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 18:13 -0700
                Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2015-11-09 16:54 -0800
                  Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 18:20 -0700
                    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2015-11-09 21:20 -0800
                      Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-10 14:11 -0700
              Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-09 14:51 -0600
                Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-11-09 21:24 +0000
                Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Saint George <stgeorge@england.eng> - 2015-11-09 21:37 +0000
                  Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-09 16:06 -0600
                    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-09 17:27 -0500
                    Yeah, we know you are an Idiot, Turdv.  So what else is new? GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 18:23 -0700
                  Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-09 16:05 -0600
                    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-11-09 23:41 +0000
                      Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-09 16:49 -0700
                      Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 18:23 -0700
                    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 18:22 -0700
                Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-09 15:08 -0700
                  Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Saint George <stgeorge@england.eng> - 2015-11-09 22:26 +0000
                    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-11-09 22:27 +0000
                    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-09 15:30 -0700
                    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-09 16:36 -0600
                      Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-11-10 00:12 +0000
                      You are getting really lame and senile JED. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 18:25 -0700
                Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2015-11-10 08:49 +0000
                  Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-10 07:34 -0600
                    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2015-11-10 13:59 +0000
                      Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2015-11-10 15:30 +0100
                        Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2015-11-10 15:37 +0000
                          Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 07:51 -0800
                        Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2015-11-10 10:36 -0600
                          Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Lloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com> - 2015-11-10 17:19 +0000
                          Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-10 14:14 -0700
                  Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-10 14:12 -0700
                  Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2015-11-10 22:24 +0000
                    Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-10 17:09 -0700
            Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-09 10:17 -0500
        Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-08 11:08 -0500
          Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Big Fish in a Small Crotch <bigfishinasmallcrotch@myself.com> - 2015-11-08 11:18 -0500
        Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-08 15:49 -0700
        Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2015-11-10 08:24 +0000
          Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-10 14:15 -0700
      Re: Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-08 11:04 -0500
    Trading software developed for Windoze only, no Linux support at all! Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2015-11-08 22:40 -0800
      Re: Trading software developed for Windoze only, no Linux support at all! Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-11-09 07:49 +0100
        Re: Trading software developed for Windoze only, no Linux support at all! Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2015-11-09 00:18 -0800
          Re: Trading software developed for Windoze only, no Linux support at all! Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-11-09 06:20 -0500
            Re: Trading software developed for Windoze only, no Linux support at all! Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2015-11-09 05:30 -0800
              Re: Trading software developed for Windoze only, no Linux support at all! Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-09 08:36 -0500
              Re: Trading software developed for Windoze only, no Linux support at all! Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-11-09 10:19 -0500
                Re: Trading software developed for Windoze only, no Linux support at all! William Poaster <wp@dev.null> - 2015-11-09 17:35 +0000
                  And you can't even afford to go on the stock market, luser. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 13:15 -0700
                And now, show the link. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 13:14 -0700
                Re: Trading software developed for Windoze only, no Linux support at all! Takuya Saitoh <taka0038@gmail.com> - 2015-11-09 17:15 -0800
                  Re: Trading software developed for Windoze only, no Linux support at all! Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-11-10 06:01 -0500
                    Re: Trading software developed for Windoze only, no Linux support at all! DFS <nospam@dfs.com> - 2015-11-10 09:01 -0500
                      Re: Trading software developed for Windoze only, no Linux support at all! "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2015-11-10 09:57 -0500
                    Re: Trading software developed for Windoze only, no Linux support at all! GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-10 14:17 -0700
            So name one. GreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com> - 2015-11-09 13:14 -0700
        Re: Trading software developed for Windoze only, no Linux support at all! Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2015-11-09 06:20 -0500

Page 1 of 6  [1] 2 3 4 5 6  Next page →


#331566 — Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine

From7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com>
Date2015-11-07 20:57 +0000
SubjectLinux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 CPU desktop machine
Message-ID<7Bt%x.64926$XO1.18360@fx38.am4>
Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 Core desktop machines
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Its no brainer, Linux has beaten Appil and Microshaft to run on
64 core desktop machines for a long time now.

Linux runs on the best parallel machines and the best desktops with dozens 
of CPU cores all running Linux.

Have been doing so for years.

Fake browser stats used by Appil and Windopws trolls never cut any mustard
with power desktop Linux users. True desktop power is 64 core desktops 
running Linux. Used by real engineers to stock traders.


[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#331569

FromLloyd Parsons <lloydp211@gmail.com>
Date2015-11-07 21:03 +0000
Message-ID<da7794Fj5k8U2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#331566
On Sat, 07 Nov 2015 20:57:38 +0000, 7 wrote:

> Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 Core desktop machines
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Its no brainer, Linux has beaten Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 core
> desktop machines for a long time now.
> 
> Linux runs on the best parallel machines and the best desktops with
> dozens of CPU cores all running Linux.
> 
> Have been doing so for years.
> 
> Fake browser stats used by Appil and Windopws trolls never cut any
> mustard with power desktop Linux users. True desktop power is 64 core
> desktops running Linux. Used by real engineers to stock traders.

A quick google search shows that while Linux can be the OS, so can 
Windows.



-- 
Lloyd

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#331571

From7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com>
Date2015-11-07 21:19 +0000
Message-ID<CVt%x.45757$Nk3.30746@fx34.am4>
In reply to#331569
Lloyd Parsons wrote:


>> Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 Core desktop machines
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> Its no brainer, Linux has beaten Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 core
>> desktop machines for a long time now.
>> 
>> Linux runs on the best parallel machines and the best desktops with
>> dozens of CPU cores all running Linux.
>> 
>> Have been doing so for years.
>> 
>> Fake browser stats used by Appil and Windopws trolls never cut any
>> mustard with power desktop Linux users. True desktop power is 64 core
>> desktops running Linux. Used by real engineers to stock traders.
> 
> A quick google search shows that

It shows what the original post reported, namely Linux beats Appil and 
Microshaft on 64 Core desktop machines.


Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 Core desktop machines
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Its no brainer, Linux has beaten Appil and Microshaft to run on
64 core desktop machines for a long time now.

Linux runs on the best parallel machines and the best desktops with dozens 
of CPU cores all running Linux.

Have been doing so for years.

Fake browser stats used by Appil and Windopws trolls never cut any mustard
with power desktop Linux users. True desktop power is 64 core desktops 
running Linux. Used by real engineers to stock traders.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#338397

From"Cola Zealot" <Cola_Zealot@fuckoff.com>
Date2015-12-22 22:20 +0100
Message-ID<n5cer7$ptu$1@news.albasani.net>
In reply to#331571
Distro flipping clown of Cola, Joseph - "cuckoo "7" - Michael wrote:
>
>>> Linux 
>
Does it have Grub 2, tard?
http://hmarco.org/bugs/CVE-2015-8370-Grub2-authentication-bypass.html
b.t.w. 
You should better post to:
alt.os.linux.is-for-turds
alt.os.linux.is-for-buffoons
alt.os.linux.is-for-geeks
alt.os.linux.is-for-morons
alt.os.linux.is-for-nerds
alt.os.linux.is-for-poofters
alt.os.linux.is-a-four-letter-word
alt.os.linux.is-a-joke
alt.os.linux.is-for-affected-queers
alt.os.linux.is-for-idiots
alt.os.linux.is-for-old-pcs
alt.os.linux.is-for-pedophiles
alt.os.linux.is-for-pinheads
alt.os.linux.is-for-ponces
alt.os.linux.is-for-poofters
alt.os.linux.is-for-pussies
alt.os.linux.is-for-retards
alt.os.linux.is-one-huge-kludge
alt.os.linux.is-rooted

BWAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#331577

FromSlimer <.m@nsn.s>
Date2015-11-07 16:48 -0500
Message-ID<n1lrfe$1s8$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#331566
On 2015-11-07 3:57 PM, 7 wrote:
> Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 Core desktop machines
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Its no brainer, Linux has beaten Appil and Microshaft to run on
> 64 core desktop machines for a long time now.
> 
> Linux runs on the best parallel machines and the best desktops with dozens 
> of CPU cores all running Linux.

The addition of Linux has made the computer worthless.

> Have been doing so for years.
> 
> Fake browser stats used by Appil and Windopws trolls never cut any mustard
> with power desktop Linux users. True desktop power is 64 core desktops 
> running Linux. Used by real engineers to stock traders.

Let me know once you find a person who actually has a 64-core machine at
home. I'm sure he'd be all too happy to waste its potential by putting
Linux on it.


-- 
Slimer

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#331602

FromBob Loblaw <BL@LinuxProfessionals.com>
Date2015-11-07 18:43 -0500
Message-ID<201511071843357987-BL@LinuxProfessionalscom>
In reply to#331566
On 2015-11-07 20:57:38 +0000, 7 said:

> Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 Core desktop machines
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Its no brainer, Linux has beaten Appil and Microshaft to run on
> 64 core desktop machines for a long time now.
> 
> Linux runs on the best parallel machines and the best desktops with dozens
> of CPU cores all running Linux.
> 
> Have been doing so for years.
> 
> Fake browser stats used by Appil and Windopws trolls never cut any mustard
> with power desktop Linux users. True desktop power is 64 core desktops
> running Linux. Used by real engineers to stock traders.


There is no practical limit to the number of cores OS X can run other 
than the thread pointer size.  If that is a word, then it would be 
65536 threads (or cores).  It's more than a byte as I have well over 
256 threads running at present (4 cores/HT = 8 threads at a time) and 
the user thread limit (as running) is over 700 threads.

The license limit is whatever number Apple ship.  In a high end Mac Pro 
that would be 8 hard cores.  Some people have slapped in 15 core (30 
thread) CPU's into Mac Pros and gotten that many cores running.

So while someone might be playing out there, that does not limit OS X.

I don't know about Windows but I doubt there are serious constraints 
there either.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#331610

FromGreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com>
Date2015-11-07 18:32 -0700
Message-ID<iYKdnf4uz_-yO6PLnZ2dnUU7-a2dnZ2d@bresnan.com>
In reply to#331566
On 11/07/15 13:57, 7 wrote:
> Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 Core desktop machines
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Its no brainer, Linux has beaten Appil and Microshaft to run on
> 64 core desktop machines for a long time now.
>
> Linux runs on the best parallel machines and the best desktops with dozens
> of CPU cores all running Linux.
>
> Have been doing so for years.
>
> Fake browser stats used by Appil and Windopws trolls never cut any mustard
> with power desktop Linux users. True desktop power is 64 core desktops
> running Linux. Used by real engineers to stock traders.
>
>
>
Who... gives... a... shit?

-- 
My problem is that I don't have enough middle fingers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#331627

From7 <email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_com@enemygadgets.com>
Date2015-11-08 11:02 +0000
Message-ID<lZF%x.83155$wR.33997@fx43.am4>
In reply to#331610
GreyCloud wrote:


> Who... gives

Linux gives.

And learning to support 64 core desktop Linux PCs
earns you more employment opportunities.



Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 Core desktop machines
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Its no brainer, Linux has beaten Appil and Microshaft to run on
64 core desktop machines for a long time now.

Linux runs on the best parallel machines and the best desktops with dozens 
of CPU cores all running Linux.

Have been doing so for years.

Fake browser stats used by Appil and Windopws trolls never cut any mustard
with power desktop Linux users. True desktop power is 64 core desktops 
running Linux. Used by real engineers to stock traders.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#331643

FromSaint George <stgeorge@england.eng>
Date2015-11-08 14:57 +0000
Message-ID<n1nnnj$ojm$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#331627
On 08/11/2015 11:02 am, 7 wrote:
> GreyCloud wrote:
>
>
>> Who... gives
>
> Linux gives.
>
> And learning to support 64 core desktop Linux PCs
> earns you more employment opportunities.
>
>
>
> Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 Core desktop machines
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Its no brainer, Linux has beaten Appil and Microshaft to run on
> 64 core desktop machines for a long time now.
>
> Linux runs on the best parallel machines and the best desktops with dozens
> of CPU cores all running Linux.
>
> Have been doing so for years.
>
> Fake browser stats used by Appil and Windopws trolls never cut any mustard
> with power desktop Linux users. True desktop power is 64 core desktops
> running Linux. Used by real engineers to stock traders.
>

No it didn't, Windows and OS X went 64 bit at the same time x86_64 CPUs 
became available...

Nothing special about Linux, it just a rip-off of UNIX®...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#331660

Fromsaneearth <sane@theearth.com>
Date2015-11-08 15:55 +0000
Message-ID<563f707d$0$31061$c3e8da3$b1356c67@news.astraweb.com>
In reply to#331643
On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 14:57:01 +0000, Saint George wrote:

> On 08/11/2015 11:02 am, 7 wrote:
>> GreyCloud wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Who... gives
>>
>> Linux gives.
>>
>> And learning to support 64 core desktop Linux PCs earns you more
>> employment opportunities.
>>
>>
>>
>> Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 Core desktop machines
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Its no brainer, Linux has beaten Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 core
>> desktop machines for a long time now.
>>
>> Linux runs on the best parallel machines and the best desktops with
>> dozens of CPU cores all running Linux.
>>
>> Have been doing so for years.
>>
>> Fake browser stats used by Appil and Windopws trolls never cut any
>> mustard with power desktop Linux users. True desktop power is 64 core
>> desktops running Linux. Used by real engineers to stock traders.
>>
>>
> No it didn't, Windows and OS X went 64 bit at the same time x86_64 CPUs
> became available...
> 
> Nothing special about Linux, it just a rip-off of UNIX®...

The keyword is "core" not "bit". Windows also runs now on 64 core 
processors, but the first servers with 64 "core" processors had Linux. It 
is not a big deal either way. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#331693

FromburfordTjustice <burfordTjustice@hub.hob>
Date2015-11-08 13:03 -0500
Message-ID<20151108130358.00001459@hub.hob>
In reply to#331660
On 08 Nov 2015 15:55:42 GMT
saneearth <sane@theearth.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 14:57:01 +0000, Saint George wrote:
> 
> > On 08/11/2015 11:02 am, 7 wrote:
> >> GreyCloud wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Who... gives
> >>
> >> Linux gives.
> >>
> >> And learning to support 64 core desktop Linux PCs earns you more
> >> employment opportunities.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 Core desktop machines
> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> Its no brainer, Linux has beaten Appil and Microshaft to run on 64
> >> core desktop machines for a long time now.
> >>
> >> Linux runs on the best parallel machines and the best desktops with
> >> dozens of CPU cores all running Linux.
> >>
> >> Have been doing so for years.
> >>
> >> Fake browser stats used by Appil and Windopws trolls never cut any
> >> mustard with power desktop Linux users. True desktop power is 64
> >> core desktops running Linux. Used by real engineers to stock
> >> traders.
> >>
> >>
> > No it didn't, Windows and OS X went 64 bit at the same time x86_64
> > CPUs became available...
> > 
> > Nothing special about Linux, it just a rip-off of UNIX®...
> 
> The keyword is "core" not "bit". Windows also runs now on 64 core 
> processors, but the first servers with 64 "core" processors had
> Linux. It is not a big deal either way. 

Then STFU!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#332219

Fromtotsob <sane@theearth.com>
Date2015-11-10 05:30 -0600
Message-ID<9al34b52mtfj1npsc775u25upln9ni1jhi@4ax.com>
In reply to#331693
On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 13:03:58 -0500, burfordTjustice
<burfordTjustice@hub.hob> wrote:

>On 08 Nov 2015 15:55:42 GMT
>saneearth <sane@theearth.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 14:57:01 +0000, Saint George wrote:
>> 
>> > On 08/11/2015 11:02 am, 7 wrote:
>> >> GreyCloud wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> Who... gives
>> >>
>> >> Linux gives.
>> >>
>> >> And learning to support 64 core desktop Linux PCs earns you more
>> >> employment opportunities.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 Core desktop machines
>> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>
>> >> Its no brainer, Linux has beaten Appil and Microshaft to run on 64
>> >> core desktop machines for a long time now.
>> >>
>> >> Linux runs on the best parallel machines and the best desktops with
>> >> dozens of CPU cores all running Linux.
>> >>
>> >> Have been doing so for years.
>> >>
>> >> Fake browser stats used by Appil and Windopws trolls never cut any
>> >> mustard with power desktop Linux users. True desktop power is 64
>> >> core desktops running Linux. Used by real engineers to stock
>> >> traders.
>> >>
>> >>
>> > No it didn't, Windows and OS X went 64 bit at the same time x86_64
>> > CPUs became available...
>> > 
>> > Nothing special about Linux, it just a rip-off of UNIX®...
>> 
>> The keyword is "core" not "bit". Windows also runs now on 64 core 
>> processors, but the first servers with 64 "core" processors had
>> Linux. It is not a big deal either way. 
>
>Then STFU!

Oh, go play in your right wing fantasy land you little pussy. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#332233

FromburfordTjustice <burfordTjustice@hub.hob>
Date2015-11-10 08:22 -0500
Message-ID<20151110082205.00003221@hub.hob>
In reply to#332219
On Tue, 10 Nov 2015 05:30:58 -0600
totsob <sane@theearth.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 8 Nov 2015 13:03:58 -0500, burfordTjustice
> <burfordTjustice@hub.hob> wrote:
> 
> >On 08 Nov 2015 15:55:42 GMT
> >saneearth <sane@theearth.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, 08 Nov 2015 14:57:01 +0000, Saint George wrote:
> >> 
> >> > On 08/11/2015 11:02 am, 7 wrote:
> >> >> GreyCloud wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>> Who... gives
> >> >>
> >> >> Linux gives.
> >> >>
> >> >> And learning to support 64 core desktop Linux PCs earns you more
> >> >> employment opportunities.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Linux beats Appil and Microshaft to run on 64 Core desktop
> >> >> machines
> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >>
> >> >> Its no brainer, Linux has beaten Appil and Microshaft to run on
> >> >> 64 core desktop machines for a long time now.
> >> >>
> >> >> Linux runs on the best parallel machines and the best desktops
> >> >> with dozens of CPU cores all running Linux.
> >> >>
> >> >> Have been doing so for years.
> >> >>
> >> >> Fake browser stats used by Appil and Windopws trolls never cut
> >> >> any mustard with power desktop Linux users. True desktop power
> >> >> is 64 core desktops running Linux. Used by real engineers to
> >> >> stock traders.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> > No it didn't, Windows and OS X went 64 bit at the same time
> >> > x86_64 CPUs became available...
> >> > 
> >> > Nothing special about Linux, it just a rip-off of UNIX®...
> >> 
> >> The keyword is "core" not "bit". Windows also runs now on 64 core 
> >> processors, but the first servers with 64 "core" processors had
> >> Linux. It is not a big deal either way. 
> >
> >Then STFU!
> 
> Oh, go play in your right wing fantasy land you little pussy. 

You are very weak, practice then try getting
off the porch again.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#331846

Fromchrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
Date2015-11-09 07:35 -0600
Message-ID<a5814bp8dricrc2bcvl4bu864c7a8knmjg@4ax.com>
In reply to#331643
Saint George wrote:

>No it didn't, Windows and OS X went 64 bit at the same time x86_64 CPUs 
>became available...
>
>Nothing special about Linux, it just a rip-off of UNIX®...

Idiot.

-- 
'It's easy to hide behind some pedantic argument that "Linux is just a
kernel" or Linux is only an OS and doesn't manufacture anything.'  -
trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel", attacking Free software over the labor
practices of a company that happens to use it

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#331867

FromSaint George <stgeorge@england.eng>
Date2015-11-09 14:54 +0000
Message-ID<n1qbv6$qs4$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#331846
On 09/11/2015 01:35 pm, chrisv wrote:
> Saint George wrote:
>
>> No it didn't, Windows and OS X went 64 bit at the same time x86_64 CPUs
>> became available...
>>
>> Nothing special about Linux, it just a rip-off of UNIX®...
>
> Idiot.
>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix#/media/File:Unix_history-simple.svg

Linux, MacOS X, x.BSD, Solaris - all UNIX like clones...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#331881

FromChris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us>
Date2015-11-09 10:21 -0500
Message-ID<n1qdiu$1ad$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#331867
Saint George wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 09/11/2015 01:35 pm, chrisv wrote:
>> Saint George wrote:
>>
>>> No it didn't, Windows and OS X went 64 bit at the same time x86_64 CPUs
>>> became available...
>>>
>>> Nothing special about Linux, it just a rip-off of UNIX®...
>>
>> Idiot.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix#/media/File:Unix_history-simple.svg
>
> Linux, MacOS X, x.BSD, Solaris - all UNIX like clones...

Just like Windows NT is a VMS like clone.

   http://windowsitpro.com/windows-client/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story

-- 
Every cloud engenders not a storm.
		-- William Shakespeare, "Henry VI"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#331955

FromGreyCloud <cumulus@mist.com>
Date2015-11-09 13:10 -0700
Message-ID<4o2dnZFD0KVXYN3LnZ2dnUU7-RudnZ2d@bresnan.com>
In reply to#331881
On 11/09/15 08:21, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Saint George wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> On 09/11/2015 01:35 pm, chrisv wrote:
>>> Saint George wrote:
>>>
>>>> No it didn't, Windows and OS X went 64 bit at the same time x86_64 CPUs
>>>> became available...
>>>>
>>>> Nothing special about Linux, it just a rip-off of UNIX®...
>>>
>>> Idiot.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix#/media/File:Unix_history-simple.svg
>>
>> Linux, MacOS X, x.BSD, Solaris - all UNIX like clones...
>
> Just like Windows NT is a VMS like clone.
>
>     http://windowsitpro.com/windows-client/windows-nt-and-vms-rest-story
>
Far from it.
Where is the name$table in NT at, Chris?
Or the process$table or command$table at in NT?

-- 
My problem is that I don't have enough middle fingers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#331883

Fromchrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid>
Date2015-11-09 09:28 -0600
Message-ID<tmd14bpvtlfcsf1npjot5n205mn22u9m47@4ax.com>
In reply to#331867
Saint George wrote:

> chrisv wrote:
>>
>> Saint George wrote:
>>>
>>> No it didn't, Windows and OS X went 64 bit at the same time x86_64 CPUs
>>> became available...
>>>
>>> Nothing special about Linux, it just a rip-off of UNIX®...
>>
>> Idiot.
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix#/media/File:Unix_history-simple.svg
>
>Linux, MacOS X, x.BSD, Solaris - all UNIX like clones...

I would not object to someone merely stating that Linux is a "UNIX
like clone", idiot.

-- 
'This notion that average people can "negotiate complexities" is
demonstrably false  even with simple things like restaurant menus, car
options (leather seats, etc) and flavors of jams/ice-cream.'  -
trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel", lying shamelessly

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#331887

FromChris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us>
Date2015-11-09 10:34 -0500
Message-ID<n1qebt$4qs$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#331883
chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> -- 
> 'This notion that average people can "negotiate complexities" is
> demonstrably false  even with simple things like restaurant menus, car
> options (leather seats, etc) and flavors of jams/ice-cream.'  -
> trolling fsckwit "Ezekiel", lying shamelessly

  LOL

-- 
Your love life will be happy and harmonious.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#331902

FromSaint George <stgeorge@england.eng>
Date2015-11-09 17:14 +0000
Message-ID<n1qk50$q82$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#331883
On 09/11/2015 03:28 pm, chrisv wrote:
> Saint George wrote:
>
>> chrisv wrote:
>>>
>>> Saint George wrote:
>>>>
>>>> No it didn't, Windows and OS X went 64 bit at the same time x86_64 CPUs
>>>> became available...
>>>>
>>>> Nothing special about Linux, it just a rip-off of UNIX®...
>>>
>>> Idiot.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix#/media/File:Unix_history-simple.svg
>>
>> Linux, MacOS X, x.BSD, Solaris - all UNIX like clones...
>
> I would not object to someone merely stating that Linux is a "UNIX
> like clone", idiot.
>
What's the matter, truth hurts?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 1 of 6  [1] 2 3 4 5 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy


csiph-web