SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
posted by
martyb
on Sunday March 27 2016, @12:27PM
from the could-this-site-run-without-both-of-them? dept.
from the could-this-site-run-without-both-of-them? dept.
Discussion on the advantages of TCP vs UDP (and vice versa) has a history which is almost as long as the eternal Linux-vs-Windows debate. As I have long been a supporter of the point of view that both UDP and TCP have their own niches (see, for example, [NoBugs15]), here are my two cents on this subject.
Note for those who already know the basics of IP and TCP: please skip to the 'Closing the Gap: Improving TCP Interactivity' section, as you still may be able to find a thing or two of interest.
It's a primer, or a refresher, or a skip. We have all kinds here. Enjoy, or don't.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Anyone who considers protocol unimportant has never dealt with a cat.
-- R. Heinlein
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by patrick on Sunday March 27 2016, @02:17PM
And that's another similarity to the Linux-vs-Windows debate.
(Score: 2, Touché) by Francis on Sunday March 27 2016, @02:45PM
Not really, the only thing that Windows does better than Linux with any consistency is attract developer support.
But, whether that's worth being spied on and the generally crappy experience that's come to characterize Windows, I don't really know. That's up to the individual to decide.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 28 2016, @10:43AM
Windows also does a better job of trampling on the user's freedoms.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 27 2016, @08:29PM
Less so these days, but back in the 90s a lot of the Windows vs. Linux debate centered around up-time.
Linux people were server oriented. If you were on "that other site", and you defended Windows in any way,
they automatically assumed you were defending NT Servers. Nope. I was defending the *desktop* where
4 hour up-time was "good enough" because you were probably going to go to lunch anyway. Networking and
security was an afterthought on Windows just as a responsive user-friendly GUI was an afterthought on Linux.
People just couldn't get it. It's become better over the years; but I'm sure those people are still around.
Of course these days, the debate is now totally different, with Windows now having more up-time than
I can use; but becoming a surveillance/ad platform...
(Score: 2) by bitstream on Monday March 28 2016, @08:25AM
Having a reboot etc when you have 10s of terminals and stuff up right in debugging is royal pain. So operating systems that can't stay stable will not be acceptable. It's also a stress to keep saving all the time because.. maybe.. ¤%¤%.