Slashdot Mirror

You seem knowledgeable, did you ask before you left the store, if it had Bluetooth device installed? What models did they have, did they advertise it as Bluetooth enabled? According to this from Jan 2006, the Aspire 9500 comes equipped with integrated Bluetooth and Firewire port.

Actually, automatically developing an exploit is probably the next big thing for malware writers (if it doesn't already happen, who knows). And considering that better than 50% of all XP systems have known unpatched flaws (search Google -- some of the research puts the percentage at over 90%) and that a huge number of users don't know how to (or choose not to) update their system with the patches Microsoft puts out, it seems a foregone conclusion that matters will only get worse.

It is inevitable -- assuming these conditions do not improve (and there's surely no evidence that things are improving) -- that XP will eventually be buried under the task load imposed by the malware running on the average user's machine.

Vista sells on almost 100 per cent of all the new consumer PCs around the world .. 45 percent of all of new business PCs

Like IBM p575 or heating pools with data centers?

Is "Republicans" or perhaps "Libertarians", the term you were looking for?

I'm sorry, that was a low blow on my part, justified, but still low.

Just so I don't get into oblivion as a troll, I will add something informative and on-topic. It appears that MSFT is getting heat from its channel "partners" about MSFT itself bashing Vista too much.

http://www.crn.com/software/207402573

Hah. I remember when DSL first came out and I waited to get that instead of cable I got some comments from friends but Verizon seemed to make sense to me vs the more shared bandwidth of cable. I knew it wouldn't take long for customers to start complaining about not getting all the bandwidth promised and other measures enacted to restrict user's bandwidth. Based on comments here and from friends and relatives. Instead of blocking p2p they do stuff like this http://www.crn.com/software/206903773

Verizon wireless internet services are a different story it seems.

This appears to be the result of a currently unawarded 2006 contract with the EPA for 80 million dollars to overhaul their financial systems. Information is scarce, but it seems that EPA employees may have given IBM information which should have been withheld.

http://www.crn.com/government/207000896

The media the games come on is irrelevant, Nintendo proved success is possible with an unusual format.

Microsoft also has stated they are trying to move toward a content-download type system, so the physical media would, again, be irrelevant.

As others have said, there may be a standalone Blu-ray player in the future, but I think MS thinks they simply don't need it. And Ballmer himself has said no Blu-ray for Xbox, of course that's not really worth much and could change with the market.

http://www.crn.com/digital-home/206903456

Spamming with your FUD eh Khaed? Perhaps you should go to jail?

Wow, are you that stupid? This is a discussion, and I'm not advertising "v1agr4." What crawled up your ass that me complaining about spam invoked such an angry response?

Forged headers: free speech doesn't protect lying.

That's not what I was saying, and you know it. Spammers fake being from other domains using the forged headers, which is quite a different thing from lying.

A huge percentage huh? Gotta real number?

Sure do, Skipper: 90%, up from 80% in 2005. I'd say either number qualifies as "huge."

As for what the ISP or user wants, are you a mind reader? Speak for yourself. I'm perfectly capable of deciding what I do and do not want myself.

ISPs have went after spammers on many occasions, pursuing every legal option, and in some cases pushing for more. Do I need to cite all that? Also, the post I responded to is titled "nobody likes spam." Are you asking for a cite from parent, too? Seriously, do you need a scientific poll on what users feel about spam? Because we both know that it would be pretty lopsided against spam. Are you honestly arguing that ISPs and users like spam?

I didn't want to read your bullshit drivel, and it certainly took me far longer to respond to it than simply ignore it.

Well, when I send it to your personal or work e-mail, instead of posting it on a public discussion site, then you can complain.

just because you're acting like an annoying fucking prick.

Well hello there Pot...

And they use the (r) here plain as day. Mea culpa - it would have been so easy to look first. *blush*

The rest of my statements were accurate, however, despite my lapse of memory. Microsoft's initial request for a trademark on Windows was rejected as generic, but they succeeded in overturning that ruling on appeal. Lindows sought to have the trademark invalidated as generic as part of their countersuit. Microsoft launched a blitz of lawsuits worldwide to (I believe) drive Lindows into financial distress and force a settlement rather than litigate on the merits of their case. And Microsoft did pay Lindows $20 million to end the lawsuit and change their name (to Linspire) - which looks less like a victory to me than a payoff. You can read the details here and here.

Perhaps I was wishfully thinking. I believe the original rejection of the trademark was proper. That and $5 will get you a coffee at Starbucks, of course.

Already been tried and killed nearly 5 years ago.

Does that mean that if I like some government interference I have to go to North Korea? Seriously, that's silly.

There are alternatives to using Microsoft, despite what you say.

Of course, in their bankruptcy filings, SCO doesn't acknowledge that they owe Novell anything ... presumably under the premise that nothing is owing until the judge declares so

The judge has already ruled SCO owes Novell, all that needs to be determined is how much. "SCO's potential death blow came in a ruling last month, as Judge Dale Kimball of Utah's U.S. District Court ruled that Novell still owned the Unix and UnixWare copyrights that formed the basis of SCO's grievance. Kimball's order is likely to cripple SCO's flagship Linux case, the extensive complaint against IBM it filed in 2003."

I believe the judge already has ruled the money is Novell's, what needs to be determined is how much money Novell is going to get.

How could that have happened? The trial hasn't occurred yet. We are still in pre-trial. The only thing the judge has ruled on is what evidence will be admitted at trial to determine the facts.

Here goes:

"SCO claims it owns all copyrights over Unix and that Linux infringes on those copyrights. In what were widely seen as bet-the-company moves, SCO, beginning in 2003, launched a series of lawsuits against rivals and customers claiming their use of Linux was violating the copyrights. The campaign was dealt a crushing blow on Aug. 10 when federal court Judge Dale Kimball ruled that Novell, and not SCO, owns the copyrights to Unix."

"As a result, Kimball said that SCO must remit to Novell a portion of the fees it has collected from selling Unix licenses -- mostly to Sun and Microsoft. That could amount to as much as $25 million. The total is to be decided at a trial that's set to start today. The case is scheduled to proceed as a bench trial, meaning that Kimball -- not a jury -- will decide the outcome."

There's what judge Kimball said. Then this:

"Novell and SCO were slated to begin trial yesterday to determine the amount SCO would need to fork over, but SCO's last-minute bankruptcy filing prompted a postponement of the Novell trial."

No point retraining the support people on Vista when I'm sure all the officials and athletes are still using XP.

No one cares about wasting user time, this is all about marketing and boosting Vista. Lenovo says Vista is too buggy to use and the athletes will have to put up with it anyway:

According to Lenovo chairman Yang Yuanqing, they're not going to load up their ThinkPads with Vista because the new and "like unstable" operating system "could have some problems." Microsoft's new crowning jewel will be allowed on shared terminals for athletes. On a side note, they're not going to support WiFi networks either (for security reasons).

That's typical of a M$ partner, going along with a marketing push of a system they know is crap. M$ will claim the Olympics are "Vista Powered" and that's all you will see on the idiot box and cnn.com. Their CEO still hopes the upgrade treadmill will spur sales, though the overwhelming evidence is that vista is a failure. From the CEO Amelio interview:

ChannelWeb: Do you view Vista to date as sort of a disappointment? How might you describe it?

Amelio: Anything that helps the PC industry I'm for. Vista for sure has driven upgraded hardware. There's no question about the systems we're shipping today, with more memory and bigger hard drives that would normally get people prepared for Vista. So from that standpoint I'm very happy. [but he's looking forward to service packs to fix problems]

When M$ dies and this kind of intentional waste ends. Computers will always ship bigger and better but forcing people to toss their old ones because of softare "upgrades" is evil. Free software will soon provide a smaller, but stable and steady market for good hardware that will be much better for the industry.

"Can anyone offer some financial perspective.."

I don't know about airplane costs, but here is some perspective on other government upgrade projects... each upgrade involved both hardware and software systems.

The IRS attempted to update their systems (originally designed in 1962). The project began in 1999 and was spread over several 'projects.' The 1999 plan was eventually scrapped after the main database was already around 40 million over budget and way over deadline. Further attempts to modernize the system in a more compartmentalized fashion lead to the $318 million lost due to excessive tax refunds in 2006 (for tax year 2005 returns). The system responsible was also scrapped and the old one was put back into service.

Though not mentioned in the overview that I link below, a GAO report I saw a couple years ago put the total actual losses (internal/external/disaster recovery etc...) at several times the publicly reported loss numbers.

Here is a general overview: http://www.crn.com/it-channel/192502071

The FBI attempted a complete systems overhaul (agents still can only use one search term in many of their databases, and much info is still paper file only). That was finally scrapped in 2005 after $170 million in costs, and over 170,000 lines of code... the project had been in progress for three years. The Washington Post put total upgrade costs since 9/11/2001 at around $600 million.

Here is a general overview: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2006/08/17/AR2006081701485_pf.html

I suppose the successes don't make as much news as the failures, but the real perspective we should be looking for here is who the F*** is going to plan and manage a project that will be responsible for our air safety? The upgrade attempts that I know of all ended with the old systems being put back into place.

NASA probably gets my vote. I have heard that their software design requirements and beyond insane, and that despite the catastrophic structural failures they have endured, the shuttle software systems are beyond rock-solid. They still use multiple levels of 'readers' to proofread every line of code as you would a thesis manuscript in addition to all other testers/unit-tests/sims etc..

Regards.

Actually, Office 2007 sales have been much better than Office 2003 sales generally. There are a lot more big features for users to get excited about (new UI, equation editor, bibliography, bigger worksheets in Excel, new graphics subsystem, etc.)

Here.
And here.
Also, here.

Note that the first one isn't even Microsoft 'stuffing channels' as you so often accuse them of doing - it's a small distributor, commenting that they've sold Vista at an alarmingly high rate since launch.

So much for that sleep, then, eh? I hope you had good dreams about you and RMS spooning on a penguin-shaped bed.

The way to counter FUD is with truth, but another is to cover the problems up. And a common ploy for people in business or politics is to try to do exactly that often, in these discussions, we have both unwarranted attacks and cover-ups. For instance how often do we discuss IBM's position http://www.crn.com/software/198701024 on the GPL 3.0 draft and the special dispensation they got?

But my point is that anything that weakens OSS works to Microsoft's benefit, this discussion topic alone would seem to support the conclusion that Microsoft should like this. That's the point.

Build An Xbox Media Center http://www.crn.com/white-box/60406779/ Examples of what can be done http://www.cboxmediacenter.com/info_screens.htm/ -Aa

239 million PCs sold last year (from Gartner), that's an average 20 million a month, so 40 million is 2 months worth of average PC sales. Presumably the sales figures include the Christmas Vista vouchers.

So Jan Feb, March, and part of April, and the Christmas vouchers.... results in 40 million units. About 50% takeup on new PCs.

Is this correct? Vista's shipped on 50% of new PCs?

That would fit the story from Feb that shrink wrap sales of Vista were about a third less in revenue compared to XP (higher price, lower volume, overall worse):

http://www.crn.com/software/197006491

to most people who have to run legacy Windoze apps. With dual boot, it always seems that the next app you need to open is always on the other OS. Unless one is a serious gamer, running a Windows VM rather than a dual boot is more useful. I also thought that Apple's decision to sell Boot Camp instead of preinstalling VMware Server was moderately stupid. With a desktop virtual machine setup, one cuts and pastes on a share clipboard between apps on different OSs. (one can also run a Windows app and a *nix app on the same file at the same time... VERY carefully)

I don't see any reason why they couldn't offer VMware Server with Windows (preferably, XP, though a VM might even tame Vista) installed in a VM and dual boot with a preinstalled Windows.

Or simply preinstall VMware Server, set up the speed optimizations and a shared SAMBA Linux/Windows filespace (easy if you know how, but a pain to dig up the info) and let customers load Windows onto it (works with everything from DOS to Vista 64-bit) who actually want it.

The CEO of Dell has a laptop with Ubuntu and VMware Workstation on it... I assume that the VM isn't set up to give Michael Dell an advance look at Solaris or OpenBSD. So somebody at Dell Inc. knows how to set up VMware with Windows. I think they should share this with all their Ubuntu customers

I suspect that after word got around, even people with no interest in Ubuntu would buy the VMware combination simply to get a reliable, stable Vista and run Vista full-screen.

I personally run the notoriously insecure and unstable Windows 98SE on VMware Server over Debian (testing)... it is now neither unstable nor insecure... and I've got the speed optimizations and shared filespace I talked about earlier. But I only use it for a handful legacy apps, by and large, the Linux stuff is better.

CRN's got some more info on this story, including a list of compromised companies that are slated to be posted on that blog, but aren't up yet. They've also got a list of "good" companies that haven't (yet) been spotted generating any spam.

Step 1 - You either have SP2 or you don't. If you don't, install whatever version you have and download the update (that'll also cut down the number of reboots on step 2). If you're worried about viruses, download a freeware AV package before you do the update.

Are you insane? If you don't have SP2 and you are not in a secure network, then you are infected before you have finished a download. 12 minutes in 2005.

Take a look at my how-to article on setting up a Windows VM on VMware Server over a Linux host. Setting up VMware Server over Linux actually is pretty easy... the hard part is optimizing it to get full speed out of it and to make it possible for Windows and Linux to share a chunk of file system. More accurately, the hard part is finding out what you need to know to make everything work. That's what my article does.

I myself have 2 monitors at my workplace, it definitely helps do things faster, even better than having a single huge monitor...

More on this topic can be found here, here and here.

I also get time to do other things at office by the time saved :)
some examples are at my blog
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2006/02/some-pics-fr om-my-cubicle-in-office.html
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2006/02/expressive-p ictures-of-my-ferrari.html
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2007/02/harley-garag e.html
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2007/04/and-best-pic ture-from-my-harley-model.html

"Free software means software that respects users essential freedoms, including the freedom to change the software so it does what you wish, freedom to run it, and freedom to redistribute copies. The denial of these freedoms is what makes proprietary software unethical. To make these freedoms a reality, we set out 23 years ago to develop the GNU operating system, which is the basis of all today's quote Linux unquote distributions, including that of Novell.

In 1983, a few free programs existed, and unscrupulous middleman eagerly took them and made non-free modified versions. It was clear that to deliver freedom to every user we would have to find a way to defend the users' freedom. The method we developed is the GNU General Public License. The purpose of the GNU GPL is to ensure that redistributors of the program respect the freedom of those further downstream. The GPL defends the freedom of all users by blocking the known methods of making free software proprietary.

Novell and Microsoft have tried a new method: using Microsoft's patents to give an advantage to Novell customers only. If they get away with scaring users into paying Novell, they will deny users the most basic freedom, freedom zero: the freedom to run the program.

Microsoft have been threatening free software with software patents for many years, but without a partner in our community, the only thing it could do was threaten to sue users and distributors. This had enough drawbacks that Microsoft has not yet tried it. Attacking in combination with a collaborator in our community was much more attractive.

If nothing resists such deals, they will spread, and make a mockery of the freedom of free software. So we have decided to update the GNU General Public License not to allow such deals, for the future software releases covered by GPL version 3. Anyone making a discriminatory patent pledge in connection with distribution of GPL-covered software will have to extend it to everyone."

In the mean time, let's make it clear to Novell that its conduct is not the conduct of a bona-fide member of the GNU/Linux community.

Maybe this has something to do with the fact that Windows Media Center Edition is now known as Windows Vista Premium (or Ultimate), which is selling very well and the Media Center features don't need their own confusing branding campaign.

It's seizegate, so the warranty is five years.

And yet this article from the same website concludes that Vista is in fact not the only game in town.

Amazing? Why should the lack of Open Source products in a site whose mission is to "drive sales by empowering VARs and technology integrators with the vital news and technology information they need to generate demand and grow revenue" be amazing?

Open Source is "Best of Breed" when it comes to generate advantages for the users, not to "drive sales".

From their Media Kit page:

Mission Statement

CRN drives sales by empowering VARs and technology integrators with the vital news and technology information they need to generate demand and grow revenue. CRN is the newspaper of record for the channel. For 24 years, VARs, Solution Providers, technology integrators and IT consultants have turned to CRN first each week for immediate and actionable information.

This has nothing to do with "best of breed" or anything like that. It's purely about MAXIMIZING REVENUE by doing as little as possible.

That's CRN not CERN.

There is an enormous difference.

Here is a direct link to the article the parent is talking about.

And, yeah, I agree with the parent, that article is rather bad. I mean listing a learning curve as a short-coming? If something is going to change (for better or worse) some time investment from the users will be required.

How about the third link on the right side: 25 Shortcomings Of Vista

Yes, I have both experienced first hand and observed it with many others those problems in MS Office. Odds of a perfect transfer are very high if you have the exact same hardware and same MS Office versions and operating system versions, but not close enough to 100%.

The probability goes way down between different versions of MS Office, or if you have radically different setups or configurations. It's so much so that the ability to properly render the old MS formats is one of the more popular advantages of OpenOffice.org. It does a very good job with the WordPerfect formats, but the real life saver is the ability to recover the files that MS Office corrupts. Having OpenOffice.org somewhere at work generally means that the corrupted document can be recovered.

As for macros, I haven't seen anyone use them in office documents years and years, probably pushing 12 years. However, they're there in OpenOffice.org and you're not limited to using VB, you have a choice including Python which you are probably already using in your work.

It is because the link is to the "printer friendly" version, if you go to the normal version it looks normal, but they do that annoying one-paragraph-per-page thing so it spans seven pages. Normal version here.

Dell, Novell and Apple have also received delisting notices at some point. Let me know if/when Activision actually gets pulled off the exchange.

Fool. Sun will most probably GPL java.

http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingn ews.jhtml?articleId=193600331&cid=CRNBreakingNews

When John Milan says "the days of purely desktop-based applications are clearly numbered, but so are the days of exclusively web-based apps" - he is absolutely correct, but not for the reasons given.

The writing is on the wall people -- we're already seeing a demand for hybrid applications.

Example from my work area -- online education:

Teachers publish their course materials online, create online tests, grade assignments, lead discussion forums online. So far, so good. Now they want ways work on their materials offline, superior editing tools, vastly improved performance, the ability to save materials off the server, and significantly improved control of the student's test taking environment.

A web-only application cannot provide (all) of this. Conversely, developing a pure client-server application throws away the marvelous (and growing) cross-platform infrastructure (HTML, Javascript, Flash) provided by IE and Firefox, the ability to access the course from any computer with a browser, and an internet connection and default data synchronization with a highly accessible server (i.e. you don't have to "sync" gmail - it does it for you).

One potential answer as well as upcoming buzzphrase is the "offline client", and companies such as IBM and Adobe are taking this seriously.

There of course are questions about who's going to implement the most successful online/offline application suites and development environments. But I it's good bet that -- within the next 15 years -- anyone who builds an application without both significant functionality on the browser side *and* a featureful offline client will be in the same boat of someone trying to build an GUI-less application today.

As Miller says, it would be foolish for Microsoft and Google not to try to capitalize on this trend. Look for Microsoft Studio 2010 to tout its "offline client wizard" capabilities.

Doesn't sound like a messed up link. According to this dozens of users were kicked off the system. How does a messed up link cause them to login as 'presenters'?

Microsoft finally called an online briefing .. Fifteen minutes into the much-anticipated briefing, dozens of the security companies were kicked off line and could not connect again

"There were problems with the audio and video. We could not get back on."

A Microsoft spokesman explained the crash was due to "technical problems" and an extra briefing would be set for Monday

'Alex Eckelberry .. said .. participants signed on as presenters. "Which, if you've ever used Live Meeting, is an invitation to chaos".'

Did the users actually sign on as 'presenters' and how would this crash Live Meeting?

Correct second link: Windows XP Service Pack 2: Install With Care

I don't believe I saw an example of one of "several of their mission critical apps".

And you won't. What those locations do, and what's wrong with them, is between them and their vendors, not for your leader in Redmond to interfere with. If they worked with XP SP1, why change? A security patch, if that's what it really is, shouldn't affect functionality. If it's not a security patch, but a functionality upgrade, then it's fraudulent to call it a security patch. If undesireable changes in configuration and functionality are pushed out by bundling them with security patches deemd essential, then that's illegal and unethical, though you'll have to ask a lawyer what that's actually called.

However, a quick check of any non-MSN search engine will bring up lots of articles about the troubles caused by XP SP2.

• Redmond, We Have a Problem Here: XP SP2
• Users Give XP SP2 Mixed Marks
• Windows XP SP2 and the Risk of a Linux Backlash
• WinXP SP2 = security placebo?
• Microsoft: DRM Trojan hole is not a vulnerability
• Programs "Seem" to Break Under Windows XP SP2, Microsoft Says

Given the problems SP2 has had with third party (and even MS' own) apps as well as falling on its face security-wise, it would appear that SP2 is more about rolling out unpopular configuration and functionality changes under the guise of "security". After most customers, politicians and even courts will simply roll over and close their eyes when the magic word, "security", is mentioned.

Like I said, get over it. And while you're at it, get out of the way. Like one of the reviewers says, "Unfortunately, Windows remains a quite dangerous system to connect to the Internet, and users are still very much on their own in terms of security solutions."

how much did you pay for SP2?

A lot. Twice. MS makes a profit on Windows, somewhere about 70%-80% profit in fact. Then you pay again when you have to re-tool your whole shop for the differences found in XP SP2. That is, if you are still running out-dated architectures like MS Windows. Many of us don't pay a thing.

So, dude, just lay off with the faboi stuff and get over it: XP SP2 breaks a lot of software that worked under XP SP1 -- even today, in October of 2006.

I realize some of the MS fabois just don't know better (or don't want to), but many simply get paid to cruise blogs and websites and put in the good word for their masters and throw out the same canards again and again. However, because there are many more among those that read and don't post that haven't figured that tactic out it's necessary address them again and again:

The places that notice little or no effect between XP SP1 and XP SP2 are few. Even the reviews compared the effort of deploying SP2 to more like an OS upgrade than to anything else, let alone a "patch". Several sites I witnessed, could not deploy SP2 because it broke several of their mission critical apps, even on the desktop. In those cases, none of the vendors were quick about getting their over-priced cruft to work with SP2 for MS' over-priced cruft. One even tried to demand payment for development work.

In contrast, look how Debian (and some other systems) still does it. Patches address only specific problems and do not change the functionality of the software. In a production environment, it is essential that nothing changes until you yourself make it change. People pay the money for getting a known item. It will have advantages and disadvantages, but since they are known they can be planned around. Changing the specs means a lot of readjustment, which translates into lower return on investment.

Look at it this way. What if the gear ratio on your car changed occasionally and without advanced warning? Or if, after two years of using it daily, it suddenly turns into a diesel while the tank is full of gasoline? Or if the tires changed from summer, winter, or all-weather while driving? You get the idea. If you buy something to perform in a certain way, you expect it to continue performing that way for the life cycle of the product. It used to be that way even in IT. I guess it still is, with the exeception of MS and its products. I guess that's because so much of the MS business model is based on keeping customers on the treadmill and too busy to look around, let alone hop off.

Businesses like stability and predictability. Debian has those in spades and is attracting more users that way. As a result, the visibility of Debian is increasing and as that happens, an re-awakening of the knowledge that even IT can be reliable and predictable. Reliable and predictable == money.

a trivial response and lazy.

if you do not understand your own procurement system you are not ready to compete with Microsoft Federal Systems

---which does nothing on its own, but partners with the big boys on projects like the Reagan. Microsoft Appoints Federal Business VP"

On the contrary, I see Debian Ubuntu, Suse and Fedora/Red Hat more and more on the desktop. Once it has finally catched up with some of the requisites of the corporate environment (eye-candiness for the lame Windows admins, graphical userfriendlyness, + monitoring tools, clients for obscure protocols/formats), it will be shipped OEM by hardware vendors (look, Lenovo will ship Suse soon if not already). And they will offer support.

GNU/Linux adoption can only grow on the desktop. Just look at the trends for the home desktop (Ubuntu gaining on OSX and Windows). The same will come true (with Ubuntu or not) in the corporate environment too. And Apple will remain a niche market, because their "holier than thou" attitude discards them, and OS X is far from GNU/Linux (yep, you read it well; not only XGL/Compiz @ GNOME/XFCE will own Aqua in no time [even if Aqua has some good stuff, most end-users don't care, they only see eye-candiness], but under the hood, GNU/Linux is far more customisable [including "lock-able", that's what companies want] than OS X). It's not only GNU/Linux that will gain share, but all F/OSS.

This Tom Yager is on the same stuff as John Dvorak; instead of their speculations, they should tell us who their dealer is.

Fair enough, FreeDos not Linux but it is a free OS. WRT OSs other than M$, options are not on their front page or in typical "configure your system" options. That was the essential point I was trying to make.

If you know where to look - being a geek, I can get a Dell with Linux but for your average user it's no where to be found and part of the reason Linux scares/intimidates the average user is that they would need to configure their own system, which requires a not insubstantial familiarity with how computers work. Having all that done at the factory so you can just use it out of the box makes a tremendous difference. Turn it on and start working. The average user doesn't care what OS it used as long as they can get stuff done.

A case in point is the news article on CRN.com about linux being installed on Illinois machines and the students not giving a cr@p whether it was M$ or Linux http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingn ews.jhtml?articleId=192201386

And see how Linux Torvalds blasts those radical views:

http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/dailyarch ives.jhtml?articleId=191600924

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7004367120

RJ

If "your buddy" only needs to read your document, then export to PDF and send him the PDF. Atleast that way, it's less likely your document will get changed and mis-interpreted from how you intended it AND everyone can read it.

But if you must send him/her an editable document, I would trust a 3rd pary plugin for MS Office over one backed by MSFT any day. There's alredy one being deliverd to that State of Massachusetts from the OpenDocument Foundation:
http://www.crn.com/sections/breakingnews/breakingn ews.jhtml?articleId=187201009
But I don't know if it's been released to the public yet or not. And if people really think there'll be anything better in Microsofts plugin over the others, just think about how well Microsoft has supported competing products in the past. And if MSopen XML is really open, there's nothing stopping a 3rd party from doing as good a job, or better, than Microsoft since ODF is completely public.

And not everyone is going to jump on the ODF bandwagon right away. It'll first happen at the State, Local, and Federal levels of government since they are the ones creating public documents without owning or controlling the rights for access to the documents. The rest will follow this lead. And considering MSFT gets over 30% of its profits from MS Office, there's no reason to believe they will go quietly.

LoB

"We're either right or we're not. If we're wrong, we deserve people throwing rocks at us."