5
Votes
I don’t think an article containing a section “What to use in Windows world?” needs any further examination.
Note that the whole article is unrelated to what a NTFS reparse point actually is. ( Junctions are implemented per NTFS reparse points, but that’s it )
Then notice the blatant lack of quotation as well. ( or well of facts in general )
- “[...] a new symbolic link capability that replaces junction points [...]” – Lie, these are unrelated.
- “They are designed to aid in migration and application compatibility with UNIX operating systems.” – Funny how this is copied from this MSDN article without any reference to it.
- “Used in default Windows Server 2008 configuration for Users folder redirs.” – Wait, I thought junctions were obsolete and now Microsoft uses them?
Comments
“Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that every freetard can edit”
I think it’s actually written by an illiterate Windows fan, oddly enough. (I have no way of proving this, either way.) It’s certainly uninformative and ignorant enough for Linux FUD, and the weirdo use of BLOCK CAPITALS is disconcerting, but there’s nowhere near enough hate in it.
I’m actually trying to come up with a reason why somebody should be tasked with writing an article on something as esoteric as NTFS Reparse Points, and decide to write irrelevant junk instead. Nope, still can’t think of a reason.
If there’s one thing I noticed about Wikipedia, there is nary a bad word on the Linux articles; meanwhile Microsoft’s article talks about antitrust suits when you’re just two paragraphs in.
If that isn’t biased, I don’t know what is.
@Wolfie
Of course. Take a look at the articles on Ballmer, Gates and Stallman. Naturally, the Ballmer article mentions the chair-throwing and the “cancer” comments, while the Gates article shows a police mugshot and court footage. The Stallman article, by contrast, is full of flowery love and optimism, painting him as a wonderful hero and advocate, and devotes an entire SECTION to his views, while completely ignoring his more questionable remarks and practices.
Somebody apparently bothered to “improve” the article ( http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=NTFS_reparse_point&action=historysubmit&diff=392182469&oldid=386515869 ).
That makes it so much better! And now the real surprise comes in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/178.49.18.203 , that very editor’s history. Notice something? Criticism of Microsoft Windows, ALT Linux… So much surprise in there.
Over a year later, the article is still an embarrassment to Wikipedia and should be deleted. That said, I’m sure about 2/3rds of Wikipedia is an embarrassment to Wikipedia and should be deleted.
You must be signed in to leave comments.