Hey Michael,
It depends if you believe in the voodoo.
In general once a SSD drive actually fails there is not much you can do
as long as you don't know what the chip does exactly.
If you have important data on it then in most cases the suggestion is to
have a HDD as a backup device so you won't
the right move it's
another story and then you can see that the disks just takes ages to fail.
Eliezer
On 17/03/2016 22:59, Michael Fothergill wrote:
On 17 March 2016 at 20:33, Eliezer Croitoru mailto:elie...@ngtech.co.il>> wrote:
Hey Michael,
It depends if you bel
+1.
But as a part of their job they might be required to be qualified enough
to manage these systems.
Eliezer
On 30/09/2015 08:45, Heracles wrote:
Can we keep religious wars off the list. They fill up the inbox and
achieve nothing.
Sysadmins administer whatever they are asked to administe
nt.
All The Bests,
Eliezer
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 07:33:52PM +0300, Eliezer Croitoru wrote:
Hey Chris,
It doesn't matter if some would like them to just vanish.
They do commit to the client but the scale of things might not be understood
by all in the same level\manner.
MS doesn't an
just learn how to program a Cisco device using a shell, and by the way
it is the same for traffic lights systems, as an operator and engineer
you are not required to know C.
All The Bests,
Eliezer
On 29/09/2015 20:38, Reco wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 07:03:57PM +0300, Eliezer Croitoru wr
who hate google more then MS..
On 29/09/2015 07:51, Chris Bannister wrote:
On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 01:21:12PM +0300, Eliezer Croitoru wrote:
>Hey Martin,
>
>I was reading your note and it is not the reality or something that should
>be done but rather another side to consider when working
+1
* And if indeed the basic requirement from a system operator would be "a
programmer" then it would suck to be a sysadmin for many.
Eliezer
On 27/09/2015 20:22, Doug wrote:
There is Linux software that is proprietary and not free. Just because
that's the
case does not make such software a
On 27/09/2015 13:47, Reco wrote:
>The above is one of the main reasons that many sysadmins prefer to use
>RedHat and Windows despite the fact that both companies cannot always be
>aware of very critical bugs.
Oh. Now you put the Red Hat Enterprise Linux in the non-free category.
May I ask why
to be
assessed and evaluated like in any software product and like any other
chair in the planet.
All The Bests,
Eliezer
On 27/09/2015 11:47, Martin Read wrote:
On 27/09/15 08:06, Eliezer Croitoru wrote:
Like any other job the programmers need money and software authors are
not obligated to publis
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 09:54:05PM +1200, Chris Bannister wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 01:24:45PM +0300, Reco wrote:
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 07:36:32AM +0300, Eliezer Croitoru wrote:
>>>> I will not argue since truth can be s
I will not argue since truth can be seen from more then one side.
Proprietary software usage is normal in all cases.
It is as dangerous as the usage of open source software.
It might limit but it gives something that not all open source software
can give.
It doesn't limit freedom but just a mere
11 matches
Mail list logo
