Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Virtual PC 2004 Removes Linux Support
Psykechan writes "MSFN has got themselves a beta of the new MS Virtual PC 2004 which should be out at the end of this year. Most notable in their 'fixes' is the removal of Linux, BSD, Netware, and Solaris from the supported OS list. They may still work, they just aren't supported. We all thought that this would happen after MS bought Connectix but this just makes it official."
It costs $300 USD, fuck-o. Why in the living fuck can't the open source hippies come out with a contender to VMWare? Plex86, pshaw.
actually, we feel we're much better off, having never been subjected to the felonious softwar gangster corepirate nazi stock markup execrable hostage scams.
perfect "storm" of 21st century, still brewing?
not so much a 'storm' per say, as a form of recycling/disempowering unprecedented evile, etc....
a lot of the positive activity taking place, is based on the creator's increasingly popular newclear power, & planet/population rescue initiatives (formerly unknown as the oil for babies program), which coincide perfectly (we do not use that word lightly) with the onset of the gnu millennium.
this stuff is unbreakable, & works on several (more than 3) dimensions.
the daze of the phonIE payper liesense corepirate nazi stock markup fraud execrable is WANing into coolapps/the abyss, at the speed of right.
the pateNTdead eyecon0meter kode has been used extensibly, in helping to eXPose many of the ?pr? ?firm? hypenosys fallicIEs surrounding the efforts of the felonious billyonerrors/softwar gangsters to mask their greed/fear/ego based misdeeds, & ongoing frauduleNT behaviours.
still much to be done. see you there.
consult with/trust in yOUR creator regarding decisions of the heart/mind/wallet. that's the spirit, moving you.
for each of the creator's innocents harmed, there is a badtoll that must/will be repaid by you/US, as the aforementioned perpetraitors of the life0cide against the planet/population, will not be available to make reparations.
get ready to see the light. there's no going back, & no where to hide.
Isn't this anticompetitive behaviour? Helloo...justice department!?
"Backups are for wimps. Real men upload their data to an FTP site and have everyone else mirror it." -- Linus Torvalds
Yes, because as a PC user you've never accounted for the thousands of dollars your poured into your piece of shit fly-by-night crap.
Macintoshes are cheaper, and have been for almost a decade now.
Its just that %90 of the populace can't, or doesn't do the math, and so they buy PCs (And new cars, and houses and lots of other stupid financial moves that they think are smart.)
By the way, I'm sure you'll be happy to know Microsoft is counting you as a windows user as it convinces everyone that they have %90+ market share. How does it feel to be a tool of Microsoft?
Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23
I can get a brand new, pretty decent 2ghz Athlon box for around $400. What can I get from Apple for that price? Perhaps a set of speakers for a G5 Tower?
And I'm sure you'll be happy to know that Microsoft has even been known to include Macintoshes in it's 90+% market share estimates. Dunno. You tell us.Max OSX is built on BSD and the software doesn't offically support BSD. Isn't that just a bit weird?
Naah, like banging the high school slut, there are things do but don't wanna admit to.
We went for Virtual PC because it was cheaper than VMWare (By quite some margin, I might add).
However we've already been shafted by the Connectix - Microsoft handover; we bought VPC 5.0, and when we wanted to upgrade to 5.2 they're no longer available. All we can get is a 5.2 trial, or the 5.0 we already have. The Virtual PC page at Microsoft also used to say VPC 2004 would be released in November; now it says "End of 2003". Bah!
You get what you pay for. Meanwhile intelligent people like me have been happily running VMware for many years. Please not that VMware blows away all other similar systems in many respects. Run can run USB devices that only work in Windows even if you're in Linux. It has undo and snapshot mechanisms just like VPC.
it is also thought that windows is also built on bsd, it doesnt mean it is a bsd operating system
YEah, that server, however ,cost more than the Mac when you bought it.
This is the truth... you guys just can't handle the truth.
Its not enough that you have the market share, you have to bash the Mac anyway.
Becuase deep down inside, you know it's superior.
Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23
VMware is not just for consolidating servers, last week I used it for the first time and was able to lose having a Windows machine for legacy apps for the first time. There are still two apps I need to use that Wine can't cope with, this is a really nice and fast solution. $299 for VMware makes sense because it allows everything to live on the one 3GHz laptop here, its a radical simplification.
.EXEs that can run under Wine (or Crossover Office more precisely) I run on Linux. So the VMware VM is a two-app ghetto that will never run anything else.
Another interesting point is that Windows XP running on Linux via VMWare is defanged somewhat security-wise. I only need to use IE inside the VM for Windows Update, for all other browsing and email its on the native Linux OS, which is prettier than XP anyway with KDE. The
If you have legacy apps in Windows, VMware is the answer, the parent could easily be right.
They didn't simply not support the competition the ELIMINATED IT. They purchased a company/product that was a generic component of a cross platform system and eliminated the other platforms leaving THEM and ONLY THEM. It is a big deal.
Where is the frikin' DOJ & anti-trust laws when you need them?
What We Can Learn From BSD
By Chinese Karma Whore, Version 1.0
Everyone knows about BSD's failure and imminent demise. As we pore over the history of BSD, we'll uncover a story of fatal mistakes, poor priorities, and personal rivalry, and we'll learn what mistakes to avoid so as to save Linux from a similarly grisly fate.
Let's not be overly morbid and give BSD credit for its early successes. In the 1970s, Ken Thompson and Bill Joy both made significant contributions to the computing world on the BSD platform. In the 80s, DARPA saw BSD as the premiere open platform, and, after initial successes with the 4.1BSD product, gave the BSD company a 2 year contract.
These early triumphs would soon be forgotten in a series of internal conflicts that would mar BSD's progress. In 1992, AT&T filed suit against Berkeley Software, claiming that proprietary code agreements had been haphazardly violated. In the same year, BSD filed countersuit, reciprocating bad intentions and fueling internal rivalry. While AT&T and Berkeley Software lawyers battled in court, lead developers of various BSD distributions quarreled on Usenet. In 1995, Theo de Raadt, one of the founders of the NetBSD project, formed his own rival distribution, OpenBSD, as the result of a quarrel that he documents on his website. Mr. de Raadt's stubborn arrogance was later seen in his clash with Darren Reed, which resulted in the expulsion of IPF from the OpenBSD distribution.
As personal rivalries took precedence over a quality product, BSD's codebase became worse and worse. As we all know, incompatibilities between each BSD distribution make code sharing an arduous task. Research conducted at MIT found BSD's filesystem implementation to be "very poorly performing." Even BSD's acclaimed TCP/IP stack has lagged behind, according to this study.
Problems with BSD's codebase were compounded by fundamental flaws in the BSD design approach. As argued by Eric Raymond in his watershed essay, The Cathedral and the Bazaar, rapid, decentralized development models are inherently superior to slow, centralized ones in software development. BSD developers never heeded Mr. Raymond's lesson and insisted that centralized models lead to 'cleaner code.' Don't believe their hype - BSD's development model has significantly impaired its progress. Any achievements that BSD managed to make were nullified by the BSD license, which allows corporations and coders alike to reap profits without reciprocating the goodwill of open-source. Fortunately, Linux is not prone to this exploitation, as it is licensed under the GPL.
The failure of BSD culminated in the resignation of Jordan Hubbard and Michael Smith from the FreeBSD core team. They both believed that FreeBSD had long lost its earlier vitality. Like an empire in decline, BSD had become bureaucratic and stagnant. As Linux gains market share and as BSD sinks deeper into the mire of decay, their parting addresses will resound as fitting eulogies to BSD's demise.