I'm happy again!

Nick Kralevich

unread,

to

In article <41ivm6$d...@agate.berkeley.edu>,
nick...@caa32.alumni.berkeley.edu (Nick Kralevich) wrote:

>Check this out:

>login:
>
>----- End -----

Sho 'nuff, that's what it says.

Really makes one wonder about these Microsoft people. I have been
told that Microsoft is still using OS/2 on many of their internal
network servers. I guess it ain't quite "dead" yet, even at
Microsoft.

> nick...@cory.eecs.berkeley.edu

Bill Oconnor

to

|> Or download.windows.microsoft.com.

|> I guess Microsoft really does suck! Long live Linux and Unix!
|>
|> Thanks to wp...@ctr.columbia.edu (Bill Paul) for pointing this out on
|> comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc.
|>
|> Take care,
|> -- Nick Kralevich
|> nick...@cory.eecs.berkeley.edu
|>

Microsoft used to market or license Xenix, a BSD flavored Unix.
It was funny that all software I used on Xenix, Fortran, Pascal,
commercial or public domain programs, all did multitask and multiuser
correctly - all, with the exception of Microsoft software
which crashed whenever one tried to multitask. Should come as no
surprise that the WWW server is not MS software.

to

Interestingly enough, it's also wl7, wl8, and wl9. They are all running
Netscape Communication Server 1.1.

I guess they're doing a real competetive analysis with their beta web
server. You will notice that www.microsoft.com is only one computer
running a beta web server.

Hey, that's pretty funny. The only machines at MS running OS/2 are for
competetive analysis or compatibility testing. All their internal network
servers (including telnet and ftp gateway) are running NT.
--
/~~~~ / /~~~ / /~~/~~ gn...@po.cwru.edu
/ ___ __ /_ __ (__ __ /_ __ _/__/__ _http://www.gabe.com/
/ / ___/ / ) /__) ) / / ) ___/ / / /__) /__)
/____/ /__/ (__/ (___ ___/ (__ / / /__/ / / (___ / \__

to

> >login:
> >
> >----- End -----
>
> Sho 'nuff, that's what it says.

Oh this is really too sweet! There is a God after all!
Of course, I agree fully with whoever in M$ that set this up...
You won't catch this fool trying to set up a www page on a M$ os.

to

In article <41vd0g$o...@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>,

>I guess they're doing a real competetive analysis with their beta web
>server. You will notice that www.microsoft.com is only one computer
>running a beta web server.

Gabe, it wasn't meant to be funny. This was posted a while back
by a Microsoft consultant. At first several Microsoft employees
vehemently denied this but when this fellow supplied all of the
facts they recanted their denials. This was about a year ago.
Things might have changed since then, but I don't know.

_http://www.gabe.com/

Bill Oconnor

to

Bill Oconnor (ocon...@source.asset.com) wrote:
: In article <41vd0g$o...@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>,

: >I guess they're doing a real competetive analysis with their beta web
: >server. You will notice that www.microsoft.com is only one computer
: >running a beta web server.

Then how come, when you do a "whois microsoft.com" and it comes back with
the name of the server "atbd.microsoft.com" and THEN you telnet to
atbd.microsoft.com it comes back with a Unix login prompt??

Up until last week you could telnet to www.microsoft.com and it would come
back with the same Unix login prompt. I tried it again yesterday, but they
have turned off the telnet function and now you get a refusal. Guess that
Unix prompt was just too embarasing.

: Gabe, it wasn't meant to be funny. This was posted a while back

: _http://www.gabe.com/

: Bill Oconnor

--
INTERNET: r...@Celestial.COM Ray A. Jones; Celestial Systems, Inc.
URL: http://www.celestial.com One Mercer Plaza, Suite S100
Mercer Island, WA 98040; (206) 236-1676
Manufacturer of InterRack (Internet-in-a-Rack), a full turn-key
system, including all the hardware, software, installation, setup, training
and support for businesses and Internet Service Providers

Ray A. Jones

unread,

Ray A. Jones

unread,

to

>Then how come, when you do a "whois microsoft.com" and it comes back with
>the name of the server "atbd.microsoft.com" and THEN you telnet to
>atbd.microsoft.com it comes back with a Unix login prompt??

Well, I don't know what atbd is running, but I get:
</home/jurban> telnet atbd.microsfot.com
atbd.microsfot.com: unknown host

No, you are thinking of www.windows.microsoft.com. www.microsoft.com is
and has been NT.

-Jay
MCSE
Certified Solaris Admin
Mobile Systems International

to

You are the "Solaris admin", you figure it out!
Maybe after an hour of fiddling with your named setup files,
you will learn that "microsfot" is not how you spell it.

Of all your idiotic posts, this is the most hilarious, Mr. Urbanski!
--
Finger c2a...@keats.ugrad.cs.ubc.ca for PGP public key. Or contact
one of the public key servers -- the key id is 0xD3C7995D.
Microsoft users: crash test dummies?

to

>: >I guess they're doing a real competetive analysis with their beta web
>: >server. You will notice that www.microsoft.com is only one computer
>: >running a beta web server.
>
>: >>told that Microsoft is still using OS/2 on many of their internal
>: >>network servers.
>
>: >Hey, that's pretty funny. The only machines at MS running OS/2 are
>: >for competetive analysis or compatibility testing. All their internal
>: >network servers (including telnet and ftp gateway) are running NT.
>

>Then how come, when you do a "whois microsoft.com" and it comes back with
>the name of the server "atbd.microsoft.com" and THEN you telnet to
>atbd.microsoft.com it comes back with a Unix login prompt??

Because it's one of the few remaining Xenix machines. Like I said, all of
their internal servers are running NT (so far as I can tell). There are
hundreds of servers on many networks. Instanteously starting to run NT on
all of them isn't realistic, but as we speak they're in the process of
switching everything to NT.

You mean www.windows.microsoft.com. www.microsoft.com is running NT.

to

str...@fastlane.net (Jay Urbanski) wrote:

c2a...@ugrad.cs.ubc.ca (Kazimir Kylheku) wrote:

Well, oops. I spent a whole 2 seconds pondering it.

And you are a jerk. If you find them idiotic, why don't you take issue
with the substance of what I say rather than mocking a typo.

to

Gabriel N. Schaffer (gn...@po.CWRU.Edu) wrote:

That's strange. When did Xenix change its name to BSDI?

--
- Mark Komarinski - koma...@craft.camp.clarkson.edu

"Sure we should sell California to the Japanese. It's going to fall into
the ocean anyway." - Car Talk (on NPR)

to

In <42j7ve$5...@dfw.nkn.net>, str...@fastlane.net (Jay Urbanski) writes:
>c2a...@ugrad.cs.ubc.ca (Kazimir Kylheku) wrote:
>
>>You are the "Solaris admin", you figure it out!
>>Maybe after an hour of fiddling with your named setup files,
>>you will learn that "microsfot" is not how you spell it.

[flame deleted]

So what was the result when you tried to telnet "atbd.microsoft.com"?
Did you get a UNIX prompt like the original poster said, or did you get an NT
prompt, or was the result the same as what you posted (unknown host)?

Jerry
jgu...@epix.net
jgu...@genesis.nred.ma.us

to

>>Then how come, when you do a "whois microsoft.com" and it comes back with
>>the name of the server "atbd.microsoft.com" and THEN you telnet to
>>atbd.microsoft.com it comes back with a Unix login prompt??
>

Maybe Bill Gates has big feet.
<duck thrown paraphrenalia>
Sorry, couldn't resist.

--
Joel Garry joe...@rossinc.com Compuserve 70661,1534
These are my opinions, not necessarily those of Ross Systems, Inc. <> <>
%DCL-W-SOFTONEDGEDONTPUSH, Software On Edge - Don't Push. \ V /
panic: ifree: freeing free inodes... O

to

: >Then how come, when you do a "whois microsoft.com" and it comes back with

: Because it's one of the few remaining Xenix machines. Like I said, all of

If they were running Xenix, the prompt would say "Xenix" but it says
System V Unix.

: >Up until last week you could telnet to www.microsoft.com and it would come

They tried to use NT, didn't work, when back to Unix on those also.
Got a lot of flack on the network (lots of people tried the telnet trick)
and turned off the telnet to stop the pain.

to

>: >: >>told that Microsoft is still using OS/2 on many of their internal
>: >: >>network servers.
>: >
>: >: >Hey, that's pretty funny. The only machines at MS running OS/2 are
>: >: >for competetive analysis or compatibility testing. All their internal
>: >: >network servers (including telnet and ftp gateway) are running NT.
>: >
>: >Then how come, when you do a "whois microsoft.com" and it comes back with
>: >the name of the server "atbd.microsoft.com" and THEN you telnet to
>: >atbd.microsoft.com it comes back with a Unix login prompt??
>
>: Because it's one of the few remaining Xenix machines. Like I said, all of

>: their internal servers are running NT (so far as I can tell). There are
>: hundreds of servers on many networks. Instanteously starting to run NT on
>: all of them isn't realistic, but as we speak they're in the process of
>: switching everything to NT.
>

>That's strange. When did Xenix change its name to BSDI?

Whoa, you people aren't very observant. Somebody says that MS is using
OS/2 for their internal servers, and I say they are using NT. So somebody
asks why atbd.microsoft.com (*not* an internal server) is running Unix. I
say that's one of the few remaining Xenix boxes (which it is). Where did
BSDI come into the picture? The only BSDI machines on campus are for
competitive analysis, so far as I can tell. The windows.microsoft.com
machines are running BSDI, but they are apparently run by DEC as a contract
job. One of the machines (wl6) is actually in Bellevue, but I think it's
at DEC West a few minutes away.

to

Why would MS allow it? If their servers are so powerful and ready for
the Internet, why not make DEC use NT boxes? Sounds only reasonable
enough.

Or isn't NT up to the demanding load?

"You're one of those condescending UNIX Computer users!"
"Here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better computer." (6/24/95 Dilbert)

Newton Love

unread,