Sounds alot like gpg to me.. with more whistles (and potential problems). I can't wait to hear from users who can't open a document... I'll just say "sorry, it can't be permissions on the server. It must be the document."
Microsoft has long wanted to be able to have backward compatibility. They have also wanted to be able to re-write their filesystem.. now with virtual machines, they can have both and make themselves incompatible with any emulators (such as Wine and Mac windows emulator) or non-microsoft "blessed" applications. Of course they would run in the "virtual machine" but it'd be slower... AND NO-WAY WOULD NON-MS Operating Systems RUN on it.
I have my MCSE (and CCNA, and Solaris) Certification. Requiring a certificate doesn't ensure quality in any industry... especially computers. Just like the large number of "bad" mechanics, "certified" professionals in the PC world don't allow us to filter the "wheat from the chaff"... only good judgement does.
No, err..Yes.. I mean NO.But do we have a choice?
on
Windows Media Player 9
·
· Score: 1
NO, I wouldn't want a WMP for Linux.. but well, yes (I feel like Gollum). Afterall, I can't even use the streaming audio from Yahoo.com (BSD based as it is) without windows media player. It dissapoints me when the Unix community supports windows proprietary formats without supporting open/Unix formats as well.
Yeah, they want to "embrace" Linux.. by extending IIS (unstable and insecure) and SQL Server (same) to it. Too bad they won't port the ONLY GOOD software they produce (OFFICE) to it. But then if they did, how would they sell Windows?
HOW can anyone claim that an OS that needs to have security patches applied almost every week and needs to be rebooted when they are applied is cheaper to run? It is literally impossible to have a windows server with more than a couple of weeks uptime (unless you don't patch the thing, and then it's an insecure/unstable mess). In addition, security patches are release when MS want's them to be.. not when the hole is found (as is the case with Linux). Only a MICROSOFT SPONSORED "study" would be so biased.
Well, it seems that the American system may work afterall.. regardless of how much money MS has, they don't seem able to stop the TRUTH from coming out. They appear to have reached their high point and are now on the way down...finally. The real innovators (Linux/Sun/Cisco/IBM/etc..) are going to ultimately win even if not in the courtroom of the DOJ, they will win in the courtroom of public opinion.
How is this innovation? To me it's moving in the opposite direction.. my palm pilot can do most of the things a tablet can.. an IPaq can do ALL of them.. and it's SMALL (I guess that making a palm device a laptop is inovation?) Typical of MS, take the old and call it innovation. Next thing, they will want us to go to dumb terminals running apps (oops, they are already trying to do that with.NET).
Ok, how is it that someone that likes capitalism.. but wants corporate America to trust it's consumers (actually, this is the only way companies REALLY succeed) communist? That's like saying that anyone who wants the breakup of M$ is communist because they want the govt. to prevent big business from succeeding.. quite the opposite, I want big business to be successfull, I just don't want any single business to squash other businesses from having the opportunity to get "big" too... Like Netscape/MP3.com/Real Audio/Macintosh/Word Perfect.. and the million other companies MS has squashed have been. For capitalism to succeed, two things need to happen.. a competitive market and customers. Personally I miss the days of software "innovation" and the time when America was know for it's engineering.. not it's big bodyshop companies like MS.
To heck with Sony and whatever other companies pull this communist "we won't trust you" crap. All that will happen is that customers will record "protected" music from a stereo to a mic on their PC and then create MP3's from that... problem solved/"security" broken. Unfortunately, quality of music may suffer.. but then if we listen to artists who release thier music without the Sony protection scheme then we won't have these problems.
It's about stability, security and the fact that we don't have to reboot our systems everytime we apply a patch. (not to mention the ability to communicate well with others, standards...DNS/Bind etc..). BTW, many of the root servers are 32+ CPU systems.. last I checked, it was impossible to get 32 CPU's in any wintel system without clustering 4 - 8-cpu systems and calling it 32 cpu's.
>And with 2-4 2GHz Xeon processors, a hell of a lot faster too.
Hrmm.. a 32 Bit bus faster than a 64 bit one? The whole concept of multi-processor hasn't yet been fully grasped by ms. (of course the mhz is higher.. but do we include bus speed, downtime,viruses, DOS vulnerability, patch time/etc??)
A whorehouse is much MUCH better than a warehouse full of MS! (hell, a dollhouse is more useful)
Re:Verisign? Does that mean
on
Root Zone Changed
·
· Score: 5, Funny
Not unless at least one of the Root servers changes from being UNIX based... Come now.. can you imagine the size of the windows cluster needed to offer a stable Root server? It would fill a warehouse!
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft thinking they have one set of rules and everyone else has another... and how is this strange? It's not right, but it IS TYPICAL.
Sounds alot like gpg to me.. with more whistles (and potential problems). I can't wait to hear from users who can't open a document... I'll just say "sorry, it can't be permissions on the server. It must be the document."
Microsoft has long wanted to be able to have backward compatibility. They have also wanted to be able to re-write their filesystem.. now with virtual machines, they can have both and make themselves incompatible with any emulators (such as Wine and Mac windows emulator) or non-microsoft "blessed" applications. Of course they would run in the "virtual machine" but it'd be slower... AND NO-WAY WOULD NON-MS Operating Systems RUN on it.
http://www.digitalcarversguild.com/tutorials/agroc ropcircle/agrocropcircle.htm
Part 5- Have stock that is flat on the market for multiple years.
Part 1- Embrace and extend the PC industry. Gain Monopoly power by suffocating competition. Stifle innovation.
Part 2- Embrace and extend the video game industry. Gain Monopoly power by suffocating competition. Stifle innovation.
Part 3- ?? Takeover of US Govt?
Can't even see the site, completely overwhelmed I guess...
exactly... the MCSE means less than nothing..
I have my MCSE (and CCNA, and Solaris) Certification. Requiring a certificate doesn't ensure quality in any industry... especially computers. Just like the large number of "bad" mechanics, "certified" professionals in the PC world don't allow us to filter the "wheat from the chaff"... only good judgement does.
NO, I wouldn't want a WMP for Linux.. but well, yes (I feel like Gollum). Afterall, I can't even use the streaming audio from Yahoo.com (BSD based as it is) without windows media player. It dissapoints me when the Unix community supports windows proprietary formats without supporting open/Unix formats as well.
Yeah, they want to "embrace" Linux.. by extending IIS (unstable and insecure) and SQL Server (same) to it. Too bad they won't port the ONLY GOOD software they produce (OFFICE) to it. But then if they did, how would they sell Windows?
HOW can anyone claim that an OS that needs to have security patches applied almost every week and needs to be rebooted when they are applied is cheaper to run? It is literally impossible to have a windows server with more than a couple of weeks uptime (unless you don't patch the thing, and then it's an insecure/unstable mess). In addition, security patches are release when MS want's them to be.. not when the hole is found (as is the case with Linux). Only a MICROSOFT SPONSORED "study" would be so biased.
Well, it seems that the American system may work afterall.. regardless of how much money MS has, they don't seem able to stop the TRUTH from coming out. They appear to have reached their high point and are now on the way down...finally. The real innovators (Linux/Sun/Cisco/IBM/etc..) are going to ultimately win even if not in the courtroom of the DOJ, they will win in the courtroom of public opinion.
And no, I won't stop. Oh.. and I'm not bothered either.
How is this innovation? To me it's moving in the opposite direction.. my palm pilot can do most of the things a tablet can.. an IPaq can do ALL of them.. and it's SMALL (I guess that making a palm device a laptop is inovation?) Typical of MS, take the old and call it innovation. Next thing, they will want us to go to dumb terminals running apps (oops, they are already trying to do that with .NET).
Ok, how is it that someone that likes capitalism.. but wants corporate America to trust it's consumers (actually, this is the only way companies REALLY succeed) communist? That's like saying that anyone who wants the breakup of M$ is communist because they want the govt. to prevent big business from succeeding.. quite the opposite, I want big business to be successfull, I just don't want any single business to squash other businesses from having the opportunity to get "big" too... Like Netscape/MP3.com/Real Audio/Macintosh/Word Perfect.. and the million other companies MS has squashed have been. For capitalism to succeed, two things need to happen.. a competitive market and customers. Personally I miss the days of software "innovation" and the time when America was know for it's engineering.. not it's big bodyshop companies like MS.
You can't contract Linux unless you have opensource... but Windows will take away your privacy whenever present.
To heck with Sony and whatever other companies pull this communist "we won't trust you" crap. All that will happen is that customers will record "protected" music from a stereo to a mic on their PC and then create MP3's from that... problem solved/"security" broken. Unfortunately, quality of music may suffer.. but then if we listen to artists who release thier music without the Sony protection scheme then we won't have these problems.
>Really I fail to see why you would say this.
It's about stability, security and the fact that we don't have to reboot our systems everytime we apply a patch. (not to mention the ability to communicate well with others, standards...DNS/Bind etc..). BTW, many of the root servers are 32+ CPU systems.. last I checked, it was impossible to get 32 CPU's in any wintel system without clustering 4 - 8-cpu systems and calling it 32 cpu's.
>And with 2-4 2GHz Xeon processors, a hell of a lot faster too.
Hrmm.. a 32 Bit bus faster than a 64 bit one? The whole concept of multi-processor hasn't yet been fully grasped by ms. (of course the mhz is higher.. but do we include bus speed, downtime,viruses, DOS vulnerability, patch time/etc??)
A whorehouse is much MUCH better than a warehouse full of MS! (hell, a dollhouse is more useful)
Not unless at least one of the Root servers changes from being UNIX based... Come now.. can you imagine the size of the windows cluster needed to offer a stable Root server? It would fill a warehouse!
QUALCOMM (CDMA/wireless/etc) is entirely Unix based.. do/will they use Linux? I have no clue.. will they use windows? NO.
Yup, you are correct.. I should have known by the 404 I keep getting trying to access the site.
OOPS.. GotDotNet is running windows... I thought it was godotnet. DOH... Guess they didn't pull another wehavethewayout.com/hotmail/etc...
See for yourself! Classic.. to promote .net they use a Linux server... on Apache!!! I just love it!!!