Slashdot Mirror
Lindows Allowed to Use Company Name in Holland
Supp0rtLinux writes "It appears that Lindows/Linspire has finally made some headway against Microsoft in the Netherlands. According this article, the Judge ruled that Linspire's continued, but minimal use of 'Lindows' for legal and trademark purposes doesn't violate Microsoft's trademark. With the US court date on this issue coming up soon, one can only wonder if Microsoft will have effectively cut off its nose to spite its face. And following immediately on the heels of today's Netherlands news, the latest Michael's Minutes from Linspire pegs all the blame for virus problems on Microsoft and basically says that Linux (well, Lindows anyway) is the cure."
even if there are things he does that I don't like, I must concede he is really relentless and aggressive in pushing lindows
There are some differences between USA and Europe that will give some varying and odd court decisions. Big business has a strong hold of the US courts. The only way they can lose is if anyone even stronger is the counterpart, or if a state or country invests heavily in the suit to gain even larger monetary gains from winning in the court. In Europe, this is rarely the case, but on the other hand many European legislators and courts are weak, have little resources and time. In Sweden, for example, the Social Democarat party tends to legislate and vote in the EU parlament often following the US court results and organisation bullying (MPAA, RIAA) Some countries invest time and resources to actually learn what the cases are about, and court cases involving Microsoft etc, can in fact be lost by the larger companies, liek in this case.
Really? So all the holes in Outlook through the years haven't meant anything?
And the fact that all home users were "root" by default prior to XP means nothing?
And the fact that unless set up differently, even in XP the average user is "root" is not an issue?
Suuuuuuuuuuuuuure....
What you have said isn't really true. One of the major strengths of Linux is the lack of a monoculture. Most distributions come with 3 or 4 web browsers, e-mail programs, and media players etc. It would take a very good hacker to find a generic security hole in every program.
The only other option would be to try and exploit a security hole in the Kernel. Given that not everybody runs the same Kernel this would also prove difficult.
The irony of this statement is that Lindows will probably be one of the driving forces in getting Linux viruses popular. By marketing the software to those who are less computer-savvy while making the root user the default user, Lindows is opening up the door for some nasty widespread security exploits. Some of the reasons why viruses have not been a problem under Linux so far has been due to smaller desktop market penetration, heterogeneity, the computer literacy of those who run Linux, and the restricted account privileges of the user. Lindows threatens all of those factors.
An unjust law is no law at all. - St. Augustine
I don't have the latest figures, but I'm pretty sure that MacOSX desktop figures far outweight those of any Linux distribution (right now anyway ;-)
MacOSX is a real OS. What's the virus situation here? I think it will be a good indication of what life will be like when Linux desktop becomes more common.
BTW: this is a question... not a statement, but my hunch is that MacOSX malware is rare (?)
Well say that "X Window System" where first, then Microsoft added a single letter and it became "Windows" with an plural s. After that Lindows release yet another GUI system and changed again 1 letter... (W became L) and then Microsoft is all pissed off about it?! These word games are just aweful, it would be so much better if they could just write code instead! :)
Really, this hoary old chestnut has been done-to-death. No. I don' think for one second that if Linux yada yada yada. For numerous reasons outlined already in this thread. Because Linux has a competent security model. Because Windows is homogenous - many/most users use identical apps (think Outlook Express, IE), on Linux there's too much choice for a worm, etc, to successfully propogate using one target. Because Linux doesn't default to running as root, and provides an easy mechanism for dropping-into root when you need to (disclaimer: maybe Windows has this - I've never found it, and I've been running Windows a lot longer than I've been running Linux).
Please, people, rather than using arguments like "I'll bet...", try just googling for facts. Or give up trolling.
This is where the serious fun begins.
A team of programmers in a commercial company distributes the work in the most cost-effective way, so that each person in the team specializes in a section of the code. There is little cross-checking if any. In open source, OTOH, there are people with different backgrounds verifying the code, independently.
That's the same reason why crackers find weak spots in software, they verify details that the programmers who created the software never thought about checking. In open source there is a balance of forces that's strongly biased to "good", instead of "evil", because the "black hats" are more often immature teens while the "white hats" are university professors. In commercial software, the balance of forces tends more to the "evil" side, because of the larger number of people in the black hats.
What do you mean, 'if'? Linux does have the attention of hackers worldwide. How else do you think it ever got written?
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
You think Lindows' site is bad? Browse a couple pages on THIS site. People are going to copy Apple no matter what. For the most part, all Apple can do is keep innovating and stay ahead of the game