From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Redeeman Subject: Re: when will it end? Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 18:23:32 +0200 Message-ID: <1099153412.14113.1.camel@localhost> References: <417EF280.10003@slaphack.com> <20041027033443.GE25932@backtop.namesys.com> <417F3C7C.2020408@slaphack.com> <1406818064.20041027103126@tnonline.net> <417FD40B.2050807@namesys.com> <418054C8.5020104@slaphack.com> Reply-To: redeeman@metanurb.dk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Errors-To: flx@namesys.com In-Reply-To: <418054C8.5020104@slaphack.com> List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Reiserfs Mailinglist On Wed, 2004-10-27 at 21:09 -0500, David Masover wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Hans Reiser wrote: > | Spam wrote: > | > |> > |> Windows 2000 and later comes with a lite version of Diskeeper from > |> Executive Software. > |> > | MS charges for the OS, so that business model works for them. Nobody > | will buy a heavy resizer from us if there is a lite one. That would be > | as likely to happen as their buying a support contract. The lite > | software is reiser4 without a resizer. > | > | Such is my feel of the market. > > Perhaps. I'd just feel a little cheated. Currently, without a > repacker/resizer, I would have to borrow/buy another hard drive to get > my data off reiser4, and it seems that it would slowly become more > fragmented. hmm.. well you would certainly need that with another filesystem too > > What about plugins? Application patches? The repacker seems sort of > essential, and definitely a lot of work, but your expertise would also > be very useful for things like, say, a reiser4 backend to a traditional > SQL database. I sincerely doubt people would be willing to pay much for > something that they see as "free" with Windows, while there's some real you do pay in windows, but also, its more needed with ntfs and fat32 i believe > potential here to create something entirely unique. Not unique in its > benchmarks, but in its usability. > > I know I'm somewhat biased, but I do prefer something entirely > proprietary to something which is sort of "half-open", like > WineX/Cedega, Lustre, etc. It leaves a really bad taste in my mouth > when I start to get hooked on a product, only to find later on that I > have to buy some really critical feature. Like all those "GI-Joe > Grenade Launcher" with "GI-Joe sold separately" fine-print labels. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iQIVAwUBQYBUyHgHNmZLgCUhAQJDOg/+NIjPua8z9iAOszVpAhMxV672uSrEjTZq > uGjPySFxjbc0UtDBHrGexIchiUnTF8L6tSzgJKoYF4lpoZ+/cMMosZ9Qxk0Agn8n > smhvRKz+pWr5my0PVMUxcUrsYtfhqiHEO+zRSLX/LJ22b6Qiy3yOxKgV74AylpSi > ZtINahQicT0sbok0n0UAt5Zk4yzJPj3+R7J3TUEAgatisZhWGwr5w9WIVIGHVsYa > YwXsX8AparnfLhh700DSg5k0OWCBf1gZs+iXN1Oy1G6x1z7cVtqB+nHjZPPYEoFx > B3zRYYm1M2LGuNe6tqpLwM0jufBZ2ZOMbsGA0Kbg2c/zSBviOjZfq+oTrtUdiFKU > Log4sVRH/rk8H1B4DqG0iEwLwjZ4Q+q3DAs9c2GKPS7VQ+fb/UjATd1HlBFYCVtG > hN12UHI2Tg6wTsn2fhp9Q48BKd/D4g5LEKbZ4fYhtrPOqDSVV3d3lMPTp1Lxtv0j > AXyEyouClEOvAr0eLTLTX31M5Negg+MX+z82NwW3kTigw/DFVsTY3jo3qJqZ9iHT > NKAbF3hHYarhC1w+Z607of2CO1dQqkC3Gs0XgN3qKQ0yN4kRJcWyXeVzAtkOOinY > Ymou+1v70t3ZVNgraV+znIVQelT2xHWNuK58D6WLALZPHN3kXrzIZvQNpt72ZwqM > RnPLTLuSX4o= > =BGb5 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > -- Redeeman