Slashdot Mirror
FSF Launches "BadVista" Campaign
FrankNFurter writes to note the launch yesterday of the FSF's BadVista campaign against Microsoft's new operating system. BadVista's aim is to inform users about the alleged harms inflicted by Vista on the user and about free software alternatives. Quoting program administrator John Sullivan: "Vista is an upsell masquerading as an upgrade. It is an overall regression when you look at the most important aspect of owning and using a computer: your control over what it does. Obviously MS Windows is already proprietary and very restrictive, and well worth rejecting. But the new 'features' in Vista are a Trojan Horse to smuggle in even more restrictions. We'll be focusing attention on detailing how they work, how to resist them, and why people should care."
True. I think the campaign shoots itself by hyping it's own cause (although I expected that).
If they see flaws in MS-OSs (as I do), point Joe Shmoe to Apple - it's the best alternative.
My linux desktop is more customised and intelligent than an Apple Desktop will be (as far as I'm concerned) because I've been configuring my bashrc & enlightenment config files for over a year - and always adding/evolving. Everything is automatic and on cron or timeout (from closing a open eterms to switching virtual desktops from the multimedia screen or browser screen to the blank default one automatically at 6am). I don't expect people to spend as much time as I have. Apple's a good gateway into the joys of a configurable / automatable system (it's how Joe's going to discover the console).
"You know you don't act like a scientist, you're more like a game show host." Dana Barret
...plenty of ignorant MSFT-aplogists' bitching about how the "zealots" are going "mad" about "Windows being teh suxx" and all after this campaign has been announced, but, please, care to tell me where the FSF fails to tell the truth with such nifty things as "signed drivers only", "protected audio path" an the like coming after consumers, which are being promised an overall richer and safer experience in casual computing, but are being entirely stripped of their fair use rights by these "added features" instead?
Vista - it's a trap thing, really. Break out as long as you can.
:%s/Open Source/Free Software/g
YTARY!
"Proprietary" does not mean what you seem to think it means...
What's the frequency, Kenneth?
How about the third link on the right side: 25 Shortcomings Of Vista
You are aware that the FSF is behind the Defective By Design campaign, which is specifically targetting Apple at this point, right?
How we know is more important than what we know.
Locking the users into proprietary software and DRM are not improvements for users.
Here is a video of Richard Stallman on the Free Software Movement and the reasons why it is so important that things like GNU/Linux exist.
No, because it's not fear, we're all certain of what Vista will include (many have already seen versions of it, including the version that will be distributed to millions of users), and therefore there's no doubt as to what Microsoft Windows Vista will do to a user's software freedom.
You talk about Microsoft and the FSF as if they're equivalent yet they're not. One has a history of locking-in users to software they can't run, inspect, share, or modify anytime they want for any reason. The other promotes those very freedoms.
What you really don't like is that talk of software freedom reframes the debate away from what Microsoft can compete on. Microsoft, despite having a budget so many orders of magnitude greater than the FSF, chooses not to deliver software freedom to its users. Therefore, advocates for software freedom reject what Microsoft distributes and they warn others of what's in store should they choose to use non-free OSes including Microsoft Windows Vista.
Digital Citizen
How so? I've never had any problems with MacOS and DRM. In fact, the OS doesn't even have any kind of "activation" or serial numbers. I can install a single copy on as many machines as I like, violating the EULA, and Apple would never even know, let alone prevent it. What might you be referring to?
... and then they built the supercollider.
It's proprietary software.
The FSF does not allow themselves to install ANY proprietary software, for ANY purpose, other than to write a free replacement. Unless they joined the ReactOS project and it was retargeted to clone Vista, this doesn't fall into that situation.
Most of the 'shortcomings' listed in the article are either purely speculative or worse, revealing that the author lacks insight. Just to pick a few examples:
Purely speculative.
More guesswork.
Hardly relevant, any hard drive sold within the last few years will allow > 100GB.
No, do not back up the full installation, only your personal data.
That hardly qualifies as a shortcoming... to anyone but MS of course.
These are not issues specific to Vista. A platform switch will always be a costly affair (the cost of retraining your staff is several orders of magnitude greater than anything else).
And so it drags on... It might very well be that some of the issues raised are indeed actual problems, but as the article stands it's mostly FUD.
But, While Ubuntu might not run on the '64 Linux will run on a power PC.
/.er's reason for using Linux)
Besides which, I think you're missing something here. Apple has always restricted you to THEIR hardware, essentially a "hardware key" for their software. In order to use their software, you must first buy their hardware, which comes licensed with their software, so they don't really need activation keys or whatnot. You must have bought their product in order to use their software.
I'm not trying to bash apple here, I think that they are a good company. Sometimes a little misguided, but they appear to have their costumers intrests at heart. However, I know in the past that upgrading the hardware on an apple could be difficult due to their hardware lockdown, which retricts my rights as a consumer. This may have changed, I haven't worked on a Mac lately.
This is the point that I think is being argued here. I can't use my files like I want on M$ products, and I can't listen to my music on whatever player I want if I buy with Apple. These, among the many other restictions on these porducts is my (and many other
Make sure you know what you're talking about before you make a statement about someone else's software. I will validate my statement with my own experiance, you should try linux before you bash it.
The Restriction is in how you can use your music:
- not able to play it in any player of your choice
- not able to take samples from the media
- not able to analyse the music
- no assurance you can access your music in the future to come
I've been running Vista as the primary OS since Beta 1, and have watched it improve significantly. That said, there's nothing at all compelling about it. There are some really nice things, to be sure, but nothing that tells me "YOU MUST RUN THIS EVERYWHERE NOW!" Much-improved Event Viewer, improved firewall, better IPv6 support, integrated WPA2 compatibility, better naming conventions for directories, and a few other things are outweighed by the overbearing security architecture and the apparent need of Microsoft to HTML-ize everything. There are times when this is good, but there are also a lot of times when tabbed dialog boxes are good. I don't want to click a link for every little thing, especially when it's going to open a very XP-looking dialog box anyway.
Size is also a major problem. On my notebook (2GB RAM), there is a pre-allocation of 2GB for the hibernation file and 2.6GB for the swap file, making for a 10.5GB 32-bit Vista installation and a 12.7GB 64-bit installation using Vista Enterprise. That's ridiculously large, as I can build up a complete Linux installation with OpenOffice and KOffice, some games, and an entire suite of security apps and utilities, and remain fairly easily under 6GB without much effort.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
Also, #18:
Funny, some might have said the same thing in WinXP, until they realized there is a classic view. Vista also has this classic view.
And, #25:
Are they serious? Who the hell uses WordPad to open
#8:
I suppose the author of the article missed the article on their own website about key management servers, and also on the Microsoft support website, which states:
Last but not least, #6:
No... just, no. Vista does use more RAM than WinXP, but why do you think that is? That's right, Aero and the Windows Sidebar. Between those two, I'm using a whopping 48 megs of RAM. You can always turn them off if your system is strapped for RAM. Right now my system is sitting at 696MB usage, which might seem like a lot, until you read that 452MB of that is for cache. So, I'm really only using 244MB.
The complete change in how Video works in Vista should be a primary reason for people to upgrade, but you don't see many tech people out here that get it.
Vista's new graphics system is not about eye candy, although that is a good side effect. Here are just a few things that the new Vista graphic system has that you can't do on earlier versions of Windows.
- It can multi-task GPU RAM with system RAM intelligently. Meaning if your Video card only has 128mb or RAM, and you want to run all the extra High Quality Textures in a game that would normally want more GPU RAM, Vista will let the game do this, seamlessly with existing games.
The multi-tasking of GPU RAM also extends to GPU multi-tasking as well, which is a new concept and works even marginally already with current generation boards from ATI and NVidia. So you get GPU RAM and GPU multi-tasking that also extends beyond a single game or application or even the interface itself.
On Vista for example, you can load WoW, SWG, CoH, and pick a good FPS, put them all in a Window and they will run side by side with VERY little FPS drop in any of the applications. Now take into consideration they all want the GPU to themselves, and they all want all the GPU RAM. However, it just freaking works in Vista, and works well. This example I give is one demonstration one of our techs uses. He will set the characters to auto-run in the applications and he will then hit Flip 3D, angling all the applications in perspective on their side with all the Aero effects, and point out to people how the FPS didn't change in any of the applications. And this is with a 256MB NVidia 6800 card that is almost two years old.
- Accelerated drawing. Everyone should know Vista adds 3D technology to the basic desktop and desktop applications, but another fact missed is that even the old 2D drawing of applications uses the 3D GPU functions to accelerate rendering. And this happens on even old DirectX 7 cards from 1998 that couldn't dream of running Aero/Glass.
How does this affect everyone? Well the display, rendering and movement of bitmaps and vector images is significantly faster than on WindowsXP, or any other OS. Take an application like CorelDraw or AI, they will draw very complex vector images and are are pre-Vista made applications, yet on Vista they will display and redraw their graphics 10x faster or more. I have one layered image that on WindowsXP and OSX takes close to 30 secs to redraw fully, yet on Vista it will redraw in less than 2 secs fully.
So if you work in the graphics world, Vista will impact your life tremendously. So existing and old applications get a tremedous speed boost when they are very graphically heavy applications.
- 3D composer. Vista like OSX sports a full Composer, so images never tear. Again this is a performance improvement over WindowsXP. It also features a full vector based composer, meaning that newer applications using the WPF side of Vista get even more of a performance increase, as it can talk to the composer in pure vector and redraws and changes can be communicated in vector instead of full bitmap redraw changes being shoved to the composer. This again not only adds more performance for applications that haven't even been released yet, but adds interface quality as Vista can properly anti-alias the vector images, etc without any work from the application.
Another nice 'visual' side effect of the graphics composer in Vista, is that is can scale 'old' application on high resolution displays. So if you want to get all the use out of the pixel on your 17" 1920x1200 display and don't have perfect eye sight, you can still run your desktop at 1920x1200 and Vista will scale things up to a level that you can see and look like a printed page.
- User Mode Video Drivers - Video in Vista has been put back in the user mode. This means more stability if a video drivers crashes. However, one clever side effect of how Vista has implemented the WDDM
But I think you already miss an important point of the Open Source community and why it already blows other models away: you can go right now on the ALSA mailing list or join an IRC chat room and be able to correspond directly with developers involved in the project and find answers to your questions. You are focusing too much on the "what" rather than seeing the massive beauty that is already there in the "how".
Not really. That's just FUD.
That's just for their script for building your own customised distro from gNewSense, for the purposes of becoming the next Ubuntu or debian or gNewsense. The final step in those instructions is 'Push your files to a mirror and publicise'.
If you want to run gNewsense, it'll probably be similar to any other debian/Ubuntu based distro.
UAC can elevate programs from normal user permissions to admin permissions. Getting system permissions will require messing around with some ACLs,
This is FLAT OUT WRONG...
Yes UAC will elevate a normal user to Admin if needed, it will also elevate an admin or normal user to 'trusted installer' which is above 'system'.
If an admin couldn't push past the 3rd tier of access as the post suggests, then no one could ever install an application on the system.
An admin CAN push to the top level of access and even have control over System, that is how you kill SYSTEM processes, etc.
An admin can do anything on the system, but certain areas are going to require a security jump to allow them to do it, that is why even running as Administrator on a system, you will get the UAC prompt if you want higher priveledges.
Admins are NOT locked to the third level of security as the article and parent post suggests.
Go look this stuff up, I am so tired of the uninformed me too posts.
The only process I'm aware of that runs as trusted installer is, as you might expect, the Windows installer.
PS Windows Installer is not the only process capable of pushing to trusted installer level of access. A 1991 VB 3.0 setup application can request trusted installer just like a 2006 Windows MSI Install script can.
I believe the Apple Macintosh was in a different market. As a teen I remember looking at an Apple marketing brochure and being impressed by the specs. Then I noticed it came with a monochrome screen (crap for games) and I couldn't change the monitor because it was bolted into the main unit. None of the computer shops I knew would stock Apple machines. Not to mention the price. There were models with color, but they were priced way out of my league.
I ended up buying a Commodore Amiga instead. That was the most viable commodity platform for gaming and multimedia at the time for me, not the Apple Macintosh. The Amiga had The Video Toaster, Lightwave 3D, Deluxe Paint, Bars and Pipes (used by Danny Elfman to make music), Scala (video titling). The Macintosh mostly had a niche in the photography and publishing businesses due to products such as Adobe Photoshop and Quark XPress.
Most people at the time were using Metrowerks Codewarrior. I do not remember Apple bundling a C/C++ compiler at the MacOS Classic times.