Yet I don't see anything breaking down mutt, pine, balsa or even Mozilla's email client.
Pine has had a number of problems with maliciously coded attachments. These were real-world exploits, not theoretical ones.
Linux isn't immune from viruses - email or otherwise - even though in practise it suffers less. The troll before you was telling a half-truth when he claimed that Linux is safer because (a) everybody loves Linux even though (b) nobody uses it. Those two factors are real and they do contribute; it's silly to deny it. However there are dozens of other factors, eg:
Less integration between desktop apps means fewer unexpected side-effects. Expect this to change for the worse as KDE and GNOME add more features.
Better designed server apps: I believe that in general Linux (and UNIX) have server apps that were designed with security in mind. Though there are always exceptions.
Greater diversity in hardware and software platforms; makes it much harder to write a UNIX virus and it's much harder for a poorly written virus to spread.
...
Protecting Linux against viruses is one of those "eternal vigilance" things. Don't get smug because Linux is relatively free from problems today while Windows is copping a flogging. Yes, I think Microsoft brought most of it on themselves and yes, I think Linux (and UNIX) is more immune by design. However I think it's naive to think that things will stay like this forever. Linux viruses are on their way. Be ready to eat your words in 5 years time when Linux becomes more popular and Linux viruses become commonplace.
No? Who did they steal BOB from? Word? Excel? Visual Studio? Visual Basic?.NET? Windows NT/XP/2000? XBox?
Well, the word "steal" isn't quite correct, but if you say "bought" or "borrowed" then all of your examples fall flat. Let's go through them all:
BOB was a rather poor reimplementation of a software product called Lemon Dog written by the Inner Workings company. Microsoft's character in Bob was Rocky Dog, if you recall. Inner Workings sued Microsoft over that one (and settled out of court I think).
Visual Basic was originally called Ruby. It was written by the Cooper Software Company and bought by Microsoft in 1991.
Windows NT was largely written by Dave Cutler's crew who was "bought" en-masse from Digital. It's little wonder that NT and VMS share a fair number of similar design concepts; there are many in-depth articles discussing the similarities. The user interface is actually CDE-based; lots of people seem to forget that CDE was both a standard co-developed by Sun, IBM and Microsoft as well as an implementation that seems now to be associated mostly with UNIX systems. Many other parts of Windows NT were co-developed with IBM as part of the OS/2 project before Microsoft decided to go their own way with Windows.
I don't think anybody could seriously argue that.NET is anything other than a direct ripoff of J2SE and J2EE. Even the architectural diagrams are the same. When you go to a.NET Developer course the instructors start with "basically it's just like J2EE".
Visual Studio is ill-defined. Visual C is just Lattice C bought from Lattice Technologies. Visual Sourcesafe was bought from OneTree Software. The user interface for Visual Studio (the editors and syntax checkers, etc) are obviously a ripoff of Visual Cafe from Symantec; even the name lacks any imagination.
Xbox is a PC masquerading as a console. It was most certainly a Johnny-come-lately to the console market. It was most certainly a "me too" response from Microsoft. I don't see how you can possibly argue that the Xbox is an example of Microsoft creating something new.
Word, Excel, and all the office suites. Well those things are more an evolution than anything else. You can certainly argue that their first versions were ripoffs of existing products (eg, WordPerfect, 1-2-3, Visicalc) but there is little resemblance to those original products in the modern versions. PowerPoint was bought from ForeThought Technologies; and it shows, because PowerPoint has never properly integrated into Office.
But to claim that they've created nothing new is pure ignorance.
I'm sure they have created something new (they are a huge company with 1000s of projects) but I am honestly struggling to find an example. Nothing you've listed is all that convincing. Even their original flagship products - MS-DOS and Basic - were either bought or "borrowed". Microsoft is a good repackager and reimplementor, but they have never been a good creator of software or ideas.
No, I mean the changes aren't extreme enough. It strikes me that Linux is playing a perpetual game of catch-up to Microsoft. It'd be nice of Linux, for a change, started to define the rules that MS would have to follow. I'm talking about the desktop here, not the servers.
Linux feels like a cheap imitation when migrating from Windows.
How strange. As I come from the UNIX world I've always thought the exact opposite: Linux is a well written UNIX and Windows is the cheap imitation that is *still* playing catchup. I feel dirty when I have to use Windows; especially when I'm forced to use beta-quality Microsoft software like their "Microsoft Cluster" crap (which is broken beyond all imagination).
Shrug. I guess if all you do is play games and use Microsoft Office - you did mention the magic word "desktop" - then Windows might feel like the more polished product.
If Linux has all the win32 apps...is it not more usable for tasks?
If Linux supports all hardware, including those nasty winmodems, is it not more usable?
Huh? What point are you trying to make? Are you trying to defend your silly statement by saying that all benefits are simply alternate forms of usability? I hope you're smarter than that. Or is English your second language?
Is it just me, or is there something scary about a judge, who may or may not use his/her computer for anything other than e-mail and word processing, trying to interpret two snippets of source code to determine if one uses the other in an illegal way?
The judge doesn't try and interpret the code. That's what expert witnesses are for.
If you had a toilet that had to survive 1000 bums per day in a saltwater environment with no spares or repair shops for 5000 miles in all directions (this was a toilet on a SHIP) then you might expect to pay more than the HomeSpot $100 special.
I agree with this too... I really wanted to buy a PS2 when I was console shopping but the old technology (in comparison to GCN and XBOX) was a major turn-off, especially since GCN and XBOX can be aquired for much cheaper than the PS2.
And did you ever consider buying the console that had the games you wanted?
You're talking about price and old technology, but you're not talking about games.
The solution isn't to shove Linux down the throats of those who can't effectively use it. The solution is to make Linux more usable.
So Windows 3.1 beat MacOS 6 because Windows was more usable? Get a clue. Windows beat MacOS because of many factors including price, preloads, applications, and hardware support.
Whatever. Yes I do think you said that, or else I wouldn't have bothered to continue to contribute to this painful thread. I also think its amusing, again or else I wouldn't have bothered.
Then you'd have no trouble highlighting where I previously used the words "mofo", "bitchass", and "we already smart".
You still haven't answered my question: what "group of people" are you talking about.
I'm just saying, when someone says "Free and Open Tech can Help India" don't go fucking replying "India doesn't need yo' bitchass bigot help, mo-fo', we already smart!"
Do you really think I said anything like that? Even with the greatest stretch of the imagination, and reading out of context, and looking for all the negativity imaginable, do you *really* think that I said anything like that?
Especially when you use it to attack a 'group of people' whose views oppose yours.
Now tell me, what "group of people" are you talking about.
No? I say your demand for silence is defence enough. You said:
"American attitude about India" is ignoring the fact, going off-topic, and... in my opinion... demonstrates a significant deficiency in character.
In other words, you are perfectly happy for a bigot to speak their mind and go unopposed. You are not satisfied to merely keep quiet yourself; you insist on attacking anybody who speaks out against the bigot. Do you know what is meant by "tacit support"? You claim that you are not defending the bigots. I think you are fooling yourself.
BTW: It beggars belief that you denied you were attacking my character, then in the same figurative breath you said I had a "deficiency of character". Are you always this confused?
I don't know you, all I was trying to say is that you shouldn't ignore the *FACT* about the India poor people situation when discussing these things - Linux has a *LOT* to give India with regards to this poblem.
No kidding. That's my opinion also. But I didn't state *any* opinion at first. I joked about the bigot and left it at that. You on the other hand, just assumed the worst and launched into a rant. Even now after I gave you my opinion, which should have put this matter to rest, you are still going off like an angry kettle.
I never said you didn't think there were poor people in India...
Fact is, if the world thinks that India is full of poor people, here's a news flash: its because it *IS* full of poor people
If you "never said it" then why are you still lecturing me as if this is news? Fact is, you're not even listening to me. If you were then you'd not be lecturing me about the "benefits of OSS in India" in reply to my post where I'd stated that OSS will benefit India!
Detracting from the issue by turning this debate into an argument about "American attitude about India" is ignoring the fact, going off-topic, and... in my opinion... demonstrates a significant deficiency in character.
I don't consider it a deficiency of character to insult a bigot. Also I never consider it an inappropriate time, and never off-topic. Bigots deserve to be ridiculed at ALL times.
I would say that your defense of the bigots on this thread - just look around, they've all come out of the woodwork to bash India - is by far the greatest deficiency of character I can imagine.
I not once mentioned that there is a license to be paid. I dunno where you got that from.
Probably from the same place where you got the idea that I said anything about Linux. Presumably this is the same place where you fabricated the idea that I don't think there are poor people in India, or that I'm trying to stop 300 thousand Indian street kids from getting a job. If you want to start talking about crazy ideas appearing out of thin air, you are not in any position to claim innocence.
If you want clarification of my position: I think the PM is being very sensible by advocating OSS. It means more money stays in India where it belongs instead of paying for programmer salaries in the USA.
Now that you know my position, were your foul attacks on my character justified?
There *are* a lot of starving, hungry people in India, who have no chance whatsoever.
That you chose to ignore the details in the message - which is that the President of India is advocating the Linux/OSS mantra of DIY technology, and this might mean something to one of the 300,000 street kids in Delhi who would just *LOVE* to be able to get a job without having to first wade through hordes of pompous asses like you to get there.
Care to explain how they're going to feed those starving people when they're sending millions of dollars per year to an American company for software licenses?
You really are dumber than a box of hammers. Did you ever think that the PM of India, who has a doctorate in ROCKET SCIENCE, is a bit smarter about Indian economics than you are!?
India's not a poor country, it's just a really, really corrupt one.
...
When you guys get that sorted even reasonably well, we'll be willing to listen to criticism from you.
Yeah, that sounds about right. You (an American) can openly criticise the Indian government but then you won't even listen to criticism about your own country.
What amazes me even more than your unabashed arrogance is that so few yanks will recognise the hypocrisy, even when it's pointed out to them.
I've gotten bitten by this before. Using sarcasm on Slashdot without using appropriate sarcasm markup tags can be dangerous. Slashdot readers range in density from fluffy air to depleted uranium, with the distribution weighted heavily to either extreme.
I think the aftermath of an untagged sarcastic remark is even funnier than the punchline.
You must not be an American or you would realize that not all of us are so stereotypical. As with all countries we are as diversified as the next, as argumentative and debative of our governments role, and have the uneducated along with the educated, so please, do not lump us all into a simplistic catagory.
It really detracts from a joke if you have to explain it, but I'm getting hate mail so I guess I'll have to spell this one out.
For all the really slow people out there, I'm using something called S-A-R-C-A-S-M. When that nitwit "r0xah" claimed that Indians are trying to "break free of poverty" - possibly the stupidest thing I've heard all year - I used S-A-R-C-A-S-M to highlight the ignorant claim. You see, what I did was turn the stereotype around and claim that Americans are all redneck bigots just like r0xah.
Now I realise that you have a gun-toting monkey for a president so perhaps some of you yanks took me too seriously. With somebody like that in power you can be forgiven for getting a tad defensive. I forgive you all! At least a few moderators seemed to get the joke; there might be hope for the rest of you yanks, yet!
I am from India, and have been reading these things on/. in the recent stories on India. India is not a poor country, where everyone is just trying to break free of poverty. Please.
You must remember that you are speaking with an American. In their eyes, if you don't live in the "Good Ol' US of A" then you are living in a gutter and probably a terrorist.
britney spears, gta3, matrix 2, and mtv are examples of this. all of them would not have existed if quality were the standard.
Most of that list I'll agree with but even without the violence, GTA3 is a great game. I bought GTA3 not because of hype (I bought GT3 because of hype) but because it was worth it.
My understanding is a little wobbly, so this might be wrong, but I think Novell owns copyright to and patents on UNIX but SCO owns the licensing rights. So SCO can license UNIX to third parties but can't pursue copyright violations or sell the UNIX codebase (because they don't own it).
So what Microsoft "bought" was licensing rights to UNIX (from SCO). Though you don't actually buy a license; you license it:-)
Hrm, it's similar to you owning a house but hiring an agent to rent it out. The agent picks and chooses tenants, collects the rent, deals with any problems, but passes the majority of cash onto the owner. The owner still owns the house. The agent just deals with collecting the money.
Slashdot Mirror
Pine has had a number of problems with maliciously coded attachments. These were real-world exploits, not theoretical ones.
Linux isn't immune from viruses - email or otherwise - even though in practise it suffers less. The troll before you was telling a half-truth when he claimed that Linux is safer because (a) everybody loves Linux even though (b) nobody uses it. Those two factors are real and they do contribute; it's silly to deny it. However there are dozens of other factors, eg:
Protecting Linux against viruses is one of those "eternal vigilance" things. Don't get smug because Linux is relatively free from problems today while Windows is copping a flogging. Yes, I think Microsoft brought most of it on themselves and yes, I think Linux (and UNIX) is more immune by design. However I think it's naive to think that things will stay like this forever. Linux viruses are on their way. Be ready to eat your words in 5 years time when Linux becomes more popular and Linux viruses become commonplace.
Well, the word "steal" isn't quite correct, but if you say "bought" or "borrowed" then all of your examples fall flat. Let's go through them all:
BOB was a rather poor reimplementation of a software product called Lemon Dog written by the Inner Workings company. Microsoft's character in Bob was Rocky Dog, if you recall. Inner Workings sued Microsoft over that one (and settled out of court I think).
Visual Basic was originally called Ruby. It was written by the Cooper Software Company and bought by Microsoft in 1991.
Windows NT was largely written by Dave Cutler's crew who was "bought" en-masse from Digital. It's little wonder that NT and VMS share a fair number of similar design concepts; there are many in-depth articles discussing the similarities. The user interface is actually CDE-based; lots of people seem to forget that CDE was both a standard co-developed by Sun, IBM and Microsoft as well as an implementation that seems now to be associated mostly with UNIX systems. Many other parts of Windows NT were co-developed with IBM as part of the OS/2 project before Microsoft decided to go their own way with Windows.
I don't think anybody could seriously argue that .NET is anything other than a direct ripoff of J2SE and J2EE. Even the architectural diagrams are the same. When you go to a .NET Developer course the instructors start with "basically it's just like J2EE".
Visual Studio is ill-defined. Visual C is just Lattice C bought from Lattice Technologies. Visual Sourcesafe was bought from OneTree Software. The user interface for Visual Studio (the editors and syntax checkers, etc) are obviously a ripoff of Visual Cafe from Symantec; even the name lacks any imagination.
Xbox is a PC masquerading as a console. It was most certainly a Johnny-come-lately to the console market. It was most certainly a "me too" response from Microsoft. I don't see how you can possibly argue that the Xbox is an example of Microsoft creating something new.
Word, Excel, and all the office suites. Well those things are more an evolution than anything else. You can certainly argue that their first versions were ripoffs of existing products (eg, WordPerfect, 1-2-3, Visicalc) but there is little resemblance to those original products in the modern versions. PowerPoint was bought from ForeThought Technologies; and it shows, because PowerPoint has never properly integrated into Office.
I'm sure they have created something new (they are a huge company with 1000s of projects) but I am honestly struggling to find an example. Nothing you've listed is all that convincing. Even their original flagship products - MS-DOS and Basic - were either bought or "borrowed". Microsoft is a good repackager and reimplementor, but they have never been a good creator of software or ideas.
How strange. As I come from the UNIX world I've always thought the exact opposite: Linux is a well written UNIX and Windows is the cheap imitation that is *still* playing catchup. I feel dirty when I have to use Windows; especially when I'm forced to use beta-quality Microsoft software like their "Microsoft Cluster" crap (which is broken beyond all imagination).
Shrug. I guess if all you do is play games and use Microsoft Office - you did mention the magic word "desktop" - then Windows might feel like the more polished product.
Huh? What point are you trying to make? Are you trying to defend your silly statement by saying that all benefits are simply alternate forms of usability? I hope you're smarter than that. Or is English your second language?
The judge doesn't try and interpret the code. That's what expert witnesses are for.
If you had a toilet that had to survive 1000 bums per day in a saltwater environment with no spares or repair shops for 5000 miles in all directions (this was a toilet on a SHIP) then you might expect to pay more than the HomeSpot $100 special.
And did you ever consider buying the console that had the games you wanted?
You're talking about price and old technology, but you're not talking about games.
So Windows 3.1 beat MacOS 6 because Windows was more usable? Get a clue. Windows beat MacOS because of many factors including price, preloads, applications, and hardware support.
Usability is only one tiny aspect of the problem.
As if I care.
Then you'd have no trouble highlighting where I previously used the words "mofo", "bitchass", and "we already smart".
You still haven't answered my question: what "group of people" are you talking about.
Do you really think I said anything like that? Even with the greatest stretch of the imagination, and reading out of context, and looking for all the negativity imaginable, do you *really* think that I said anything like that?
Now tell me, what "group of people" are you talking about.
No? I say your demand for silence is defence enough. You said:
In other words, you are perfectly happy for a bigot to speak their mind and go unopposed. You are not satisfied to merely keep quiet yourself; you insist on attacking anybody who speaks out against the bigot. Do you know what is meant by "tacit support"? You claim that you are not defending the bigots. I think you are fooling yourself.
BTW: It beggars belief that you denied you were attacking my character, then in the same figurative breath you said I had a "deficiency of character". Are you always this confused?
No kidding. That's my opinion also. But I didn't state *any* opinion at first. I joked about the bigot and left it at that. You on the other hand, just assumed the worst and launched into a rant. Even now after I gave you my opinion, which should have put this matter to rest, you are still going off like an angry kettle.
If you "never said it" then why are you still lecturing me as if this is news? Fact is, you're not even listening to me. If you were then you'd not be lecturing me about the "benefits of OSS in India" in reply to my post where I'd stated that OSS will benefit India!
I don't consider it a deficiency of character to insult a bigot. Also I never consider it an inappropriate time, and never off-topic. Bigots deserve to be ridiculed at ALL times.
I would say that your defense of the bigots on this thread - just look around, they've all come out of the woodwork to bash India - is by far the greatest deficiency of character I can imagine.
Probably from the same place where you got the idea that I said anything about Linux. Presumably this is the same place where you fabricated the idea that I don't think there are poor people in India, or that I'm trying to stop 300 thousand Indian street kids from getting a job. If you want to start talking about crazy ideas appearing out of thin air, you are not in any position to claim innocence.
If you want clarification of my position: I think the PM is being very sensible by advocating OSS. It means more money stays in India where it belongs instead of paying for programmer salaries in the USA.
Now that you know my position, were your foul attacks on my character justified?
Care to explain how they're going to feed those starving people when they're sending millions of dollars per year to an American company for software licenses?
You really are dumber than a box of hammers. Did you ever think that the PM of India, who has a doctorate in ROCKET SCIENCE, is a bit smarter about Indian economics than you are!?
Yeah, that sounds about right. You (an American) can openly criticise the Indian government but then you won't even listen to criticism about your own country.
What amazes me even more than your unabashed arrogance is that so few yanks will recognise the hypocrisy, even when it's pointed out to them.
I think the aftermath of an untagged sarcastic remark is even funnier than the punchline.
You must admit, the anonymous coward made my point far better than I ever could.
If you are an American than "huzzah, that's another point for the home team". Pints all 'round! Drinks are on me!
It really detracts from a joke if you have to explain it, but I'm getting hate mail so I guess I'll have to spell this one out.
For all the really slow people out there, I'm using something called S-A-R-C-A-S-M. When that nitwit "r0xah" claimed that Indians are trying to "break free of poverty" - possibly the stupidest thing I've heard all year - I used S-A-R-C-A-S-M to highlight the ignorant claim. You see, what I did was turn the stereotype around and claim that Americans are all redneck bigots just like r0xah.
Now I realise that you have a gun-toting monkey for a president so perhaps some of you yanks took me too seriously. With somebody like that in power you can be forgiven for getting a tad defensive. I forgive you all! At least a few moderators seemed to get the joke; there might be hope for the rest of you yanks, yet!
India's woes? I was insulting Americans. I guess what they say about Americans is true; you guys really can't detect sarcasm without a laugh track.
Haha, I don't have a second account. I guess there are simply people out there who know what sarcasm is.
You must remember that you are speaking with an American. In their eyes, if you don't live in the "Good Ol' US of A" then you are living in a gutter and probably a terrorist.
Most of that list I'll agree with but even without the violence, GTA3 is a great game. I bought GTA3 not because of hype (I bought GT3 because of hype) but because it was worth it.
My understanding is a little wobbly, so this might be wrong, but I think Novell owns copyright to and patents on UNIX but SCO owns the licensing rights. So SCO can license UNIX to third parties but can't pursue copyright violations or sell the UNIX codebase (because they don't own it).
So what Microsoft "bought" was licensing rights to UNIX (from SCO). Though you don't actually buy a license; you license it :-)
Hrm, it's similar to you owning a house but hiring an agent to rent it out. The agent picks and chooses tenants, collects the rent, deals with any problems, but passes the majority of cash onto the owner. The owner still owns the house. The agent just deals with collecting the money.
How about "All your code base are belong to us. You are on the way to deprecation."
Oh, don't look like that, you knew somebody was going to say it.