I think one of the unsong advantages of Open Source is it responds to user wants, even when those wants conflit with business wants. Cookie management, image and pop-up blocking, and other privacy protections would never have been initiated by M$.
News of the MyDoom virus get murky as reporters grasp at straws to get big headlines. It seems as though a BBC reporter stepped over the ethical line in reported unsubstantiated rumors.
News reports of MyDoom are reaching an apex, and getting a big story is sure to make any reporters day. Some reporters would do anything to get a big storying including disguising rumor as fact.
On Thursday, 5 February, 2004, 00:41 GMT, BBC NEWS World Edition website published a story by reporter Stephen Evans which implicated LINUX users as the source of the MyDoom virus. Stephen claimed LINUX users are upset over SCO's "Patent" dispute with IBM and LINUX and are motivated to exact revenge. Stating "LINUX user are responsible for MyDoom" would be unethical, because there is nothing other than motive which points to them.
There's no proof of unethical behavior on Stephen's part, of course, but it must be one of the theories at the top of any reader's list. My message is a parody of Stephen's article, but I hope it points out major flaws in this article. Stephen should have stated up front this was speculation, just as a reporter would do in any criminal case. I myself find it very likely that LINUX users my have written MyDoom. I read this article to find out more information. I was shocked to find it contained no proof or even a new lead after reading the headline "Linux cyber-battle turns nasty".
When I got to the line (in the middle of the article) which stated "There's no proof", I got angry for wasting my time reading an article which is essentially a back story which I already know. I look to the BBC for balanced and ethical reporting (which American media don't always give). It would be nice to know an article is merely speculation or back story before I get 1/2 way though it.
By the way, SCO vs IBM and UNIX is an Intellectual property dispute, not a patent dispute. ----
BUT, what about legit gray-hacks like the Mandrake Linux XBox project and such? It would seem to me that in the long haul, Microsoft would support such efforts because they could sell more devices
Why would Microsoft want that?
They don't make any money selling the XBox, they make money licensing and selling games. The last thing they would want is to sell a lot of Xboxes that never get used to play any games.
Apple failed at the Cube because it didn't really have an audience--it was powerful but not expandable (like the G4 towers) or cheap (like the iMacs) or portable (like the iBook or PowerBook). It was a great design--but it had no market since Apple covered them all for its area. You're right--Apple discontinued it for that good reason.
I was thinking how much it look like a suped up version of the G4 Cube. The reason that the Cube failed though was not because there wasn't a market. There just wasn't a big enough market for Apple. A small shop making customized cases like that could do well selling them to fashionable home users, but a even bigger market would be for a companies front office or sales office. Something like this guys cube would make a big impression.
-- Jeff
Or mabye just get one and set it up at work to make all my cow-orkers jealous as H*LL.
Microsoft can use the same tactics that it used to beat out the other compeditors, back in the early Windows 3.1 days. I can just see this meaningless error message if you have the gaul to run the wrong distro.
Slashdot Mirror
I saw this article earlier on digg, so I did some fact checking.
The original article was reported in the Mainichi Daily.
I couldn't find any reference to an such arrest at http://mdn.mainichi-msn.co.jp/.
I think one of the unsong advantages of Open Source is it responds to user wants, even when those wants conflit with business wants. Cookie management, image and pop-up blocking, and other privacy protections would never have been initiated by M$.
Just my $.02.
I posted this complaint
----
REPORTER PUSHES ETHICAL EDGE
News of the MyDoom virus get murky as reporters grasp at straws to get big headlines. It seems as though a BBC reporter stepped over the ethical line in reported unsubstantiated rumors.
News reports of MyDoom are reaching an apex, and getting a big story is sure to make any reporters day. Some reporters would do anything to get a big storying including disguising rumor as fact.
On Thursday, 5 February, 2004, 00:41 GMT, BBC NEWS World Edition website published a story by reporter Stephen Evans which implicated LINUX users as the source of the MyDoom virus. Stephen claimed LINUX users are upset over SCO's "Patent" dispute with IBM and LINUX and are motivated to exact revenge. Stating "LINUX user are responsible for MyDoom" would be unethical, because there is nothing other than motive which points to them.
There's no proof of unethical behavior on Stephen's part, of course, but it must be one of the theories at the top of any reader's list. My message is a parody of Stephen's article, but I hope it points out major flaws in this article. Stephen should have stated up front this was speculation, just as a reporter would do in any criminal case. I myself find it very likely that LINUX users my have written MyDoom. I read this article to find out more information. I was shocked to find it contained no proof or even a new lead after reading the headline "Linux cyber-battle turns nasty".
When I got to the line (in the middle of the article) which stated "There's no proof", I got angry for wasting my time reading an article which is essentially a back story which I already know. I look to the BBC for balanced and ethical reporting (which American media don't always give). It would be nice to know an article is merely speculation or back story before I get 1/2 way though it.
By the way, SCO vs IBM and UNIX is an Intellectual property dispute, not a patent dispute.
----
BUT, what about legit gray-hacks like the Mandrake Linux XBox project and such? It would seem to me that in the long haul, Microsoft would support such efforts because they could sell more devices
Why would Microsoft want that?
They don't make any money selling the XBox, they make money licensing and selling games. The last thing they would want is to sell a lot of Xboxes that never get used to play any games.
-- Three thousand quirks and counting...
I forgot to mention that this runs WindowsXP rather than OS X (that's another thing the Gateway machine has going against it.
Look at the website. It doesn't come with WindowsXP, it comes with Windows 98 SE.
Riding the bleeding edge of crap.
Apple failed at the Cube because it didn't really have an audience--it was powerful but not expandable (like the G4 towers) or cheap (like the iMacs) or portable (like the iBook or PowerBook). It was a great design--but it had no market since Apple covered them all for its area. You're right--Apple discontinued it for that good reason.
I was thinking how much it look like a suped up version of the G4 Cube. The reason that the Cube failed though was not because there wasn't a market. There just wasn't a big enough market for Apple. A small shop making customized cases like that could do well selling them to fashionable home users, but a even bigger market would be for a companies front office or sales office. Something like this guys cube would make a big impression.
-- Jeff
Or mabye just get one and set it up at work to make all my cow-orkers jealous as H*LL.
Microsoft can use the same tactics that it used to beat out the other compeditors, back in the early Windows 3.1 days. I can just see this meaningless error message if you have the gaul to run the wrong distro.
You are using an unsupported version of Linux.