Every time I read about what Microsoft really does...It angers me. (As I'm sure it does for some of you).
...But then, I step back and I recall the wise words of another:
"The most important thing the hacker community does is write better code. Our deeds are the best propaganda we have. Most of us, most of the time, shouldn't be distracted by worrying about beating Microsoft's PR or countering their political moves, because writing good code is in the long run a far more potent weapon than flackery."
-Eric S. Raymond
When I used Windows XP Pro (I now use CentOS and Debian), I set the system up such that I didn't need AV...I basically applied what I learned from Linux.
That is...
(1) Set up a Limited User Account (LUA)
(2) Software Restriction Policy (OR if you're using XP Home; use => http://www.beyondlogic.org/solutions/trust-no-exe/trust-no-exe.htm instead)
(3) Install only the apps you need.
(4) Online Armor Free Edition. (Software Firewall with HIPS...ie: It warns you something is trying to execute or "dial out", and gives you the option to stop it.)
(5) Removed or disabled Services, etc you know you'll never use.
Of course, the "Cons" to this approach is that XP isn't forgiving when it comes to using LUA...So you have to use something like SuRUN to allow certain apps to run with Admin privileges. A little testing is required before putting it into "production use".
Complement the above with "security aware" computing habits, and you're largely fine. (I used AutoPatcher to pull down updates).
I set this approach up for my dad's XP box and spent a few hours with him on correcting his poor computing habits. This was in early 2008. Its been a year. No infection or complaints from him. He can still use his PC, but he's now much better off than most people.
I don't trust AV implementations for 3 reasons:
(1) AV companies use FUD because most people are ignorant on computer security matters.
(2) AV apps are cures to a problem, not prevention. As long as people continue with cures, AV companies remain profitable.
(3) They have been proven unreliable in the real world. (You are reacting to threats! You are already at a tactical disadvantage!)
This blog at c/net is just an indication that MS is in a more subtle tone, crapping themselves. They have NO effective response to open source. This has been true since their first public strike at Open Source. (Cancer, anyone?)
The reason? The simple existence of open source is a contradiction to their very own fundamental business model.
They rely on software licenses as their main source of income. They will do ANYTHING to protect that. We know this from their history. They're about control...Because to them, control is profit. (Examples: Protocols, document formats, de-facto standards, anti-piracy schemes like Activation and "Genuine Advantage", etc are all different aspects of control.)
But Open Source turns that model upside down. Software licenses become $0. You don't control and "encourage" people to use your products. You let them do things on their own accord. You let your fellow man/woman choose. It puts more pressure on you to improve the technology.
Companies who are based on this model now focus their resources on tools to give to the community. They let the community innovate while they polish up and improve for their commercially supported variants. (The cycle continues endlessly as they improve and give back).
The result? Microsoft will find it harder and harder as Open Source improves. Granted, the closed source model gets you the money quicker, and its more polished for mainstream PC users, but you don't have genuine user loyalty.
The fundamental weakness here is, if you can create an Open Source equivalent (features that are equal or better), closed source companies will be in serious trouble. Why would people pay if they can get it elsewhere for free? (legally).
This is why they're so scared. They know the day will come. (On that day, be sure to note the share prices and the company's general behaviour).
They can resort to petty distractions and occasional seasons of being nice to open source, but they know they cannot stop this stone wheel. It may grind slowly, but its coming. Consistent improvement, that's what its all about.
Easy => This is the one with the training wheels. Suitable for everyone and anyone. Its clean and direct with minimal number of clicks. Icons, wizards, and error messages in plain english, etc.
Advance => The wheels come off. This is more detailed and flexible. Have the option to view error messages in greater detail. For folks who want to make things exactly the way they want it.
(1) FUD on open source has failed. (Get the Facts...What happened to the bloke who came up with that, didn't he get fired?)
(2) OOXML is in limbo. (Fast tracking process was inconsistent like no tomorrow...Stack the ballot!)
(3) Live Search solution is a flop. (Google is still dominant!)
(4) Xbox 360 has reliability issues. (RROD...What was initially an attempt to save a few million is now costing them a Billion!)
(5) Vista is suffering from poor adoption. (The reality is becoming more obvious when you see that they need to rejuvenate Vista's PR image with deception).
So what's a way to kill Linux? (while they're at it)
Simple, take away its applications! Make them work better with Windows!
LAMP => WAMP.
Do anything and everything you can to win the community over! Play nice, wear T-shirts, throw money at them, donate some code (to Windows benefit!), etc.
Notice how in that movie, "Pirates of Silicon Valley", the character playing Bill Gates wore a T-shirt offered by Apple. (Apple basically embraced them into their community)...Guess what happened? Gates screwed them over!
Point being?
Microsoft can be seen in two views: Character and Personality.
The Character is what everyone knows it has done. It will plunder, stab you in the back, etc to get its way. This is how they've always worked. Manipulate the situation to THEIR benefit. Get what you need NOW! Don't worry about the law, ethics, moral, etc...Leave that for later. (Hello anti-trust cases!)
Personality is its PR side. All that marketing spin, that olive branching to open source, playing nice...Nothing but lip service. Its a facade.
Seriously, wouldn't you be suspicious of the neighborhood bully suddenly playing nice?
Deep down, Sam Ramji is just another expendable employee of Microsoft playing "Liason" with open source. You can feel sympathy for him, but you don't have to feel sympathy for Microsoft. Then again, why would you feel sympathy for Sam? He joined MS on his own accord. His choice.
So the question really is (from a FOSS view): We've done well without Microsoft so far, why do we need them now?
As joked many years ago: Microsoft isn't the solution. Microsoft is the question...And the answer is: NO!
This is becoming even more true in the 21st Century.
Slashdot Mirror
Every time I read about what Microsoft really does...It angers me. (As I'm sure it does for some of you).
...But then, I step back and I recall the wise words of another:
"The most important thing the hacker community does is write better code. Our deeds are the best propaganda we have. Most of us, most of the time, shouldn't be distracted by worrying about beating Microsoft's PR or countering their political moves, because writing good code is in the long run a far more potent weapon than flackery."
-Eric S. Raymond
When I used Windows XP Pro (I now use CentOS and Debian), I set the system up such that I didn't need AV...I basically applied what I learned from Linux.
That is...
(1) Set up a Limited User Account (LUA)
(2) Software Restriction Policy (OR if you're using XP Home; use => http://www.beyondlogic.org/solutions/trust-no-exe/trust-no-exe.htm instead)
(3) Install only the apps you need.
(4) Online Armor Free Edition. (Software Firewall with HIPS...ie: It warns you something is trying to execute or "dial out", and gives you the option to stop it.)
(5) Removed or disabled Services, etc you know you'll never use.
Of course, the "Cons" to this approach is that XP isn't forgiving when it comes to using LUA...So you have to use something like SuRUN to allow certain apps to run with Admin privileges. A little testing is required before putting it into "production use".
Complement the above with "security aware" computing habits, and you're largely fine. (I used AutoPatcher to pull down updates).
I set this approach up for my dad's XP box and spent a few hours with him on correcting his poor computing habits. This was in early 2008. Its been a year. No infection or complaints from him. He can still use his PC, but he's now much better off than most people.
I don't trust AV implementations for 3 reasons:
(1) AV companies use FUD because most people are ignorant on computer security matters.
(2) AV apps are cures to a problem, not prevention. As long as people continue with cures, AV companies remain profitable.
(3) They have been proven unreliable in the real world. (You are reacting to threats! You are already at a tactical disadvantage!)
Isn't it more cost effective to make exercise fun, rather than spend money on Wii and its accessories?
=> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iYBmAVuBns
Yes, companies consist of people.
And its also the very people that decide to be complete pricks in order to maintain dominance and control. Control means profit.
Tell me, when does one have a choice when the majority of the easily purchasable systems out there are bundled with Windows?
Why do I have to pay for a Windows license when I'm not going to need or use one?
You talk of choices, but reality says otherwise.
That's just mean.
No. This time, we're jumping ship.
I suspect it will be the same number as last time.
Its more like: Windows 7 => Windows Vista Second Edition.
This blog at c/net is just an indication that MS is in a more subtle tone, crapping themselves. They have NO effective response to open source. This has been true since their first public strike at Open Source. (Cancer, anyone?)
The reason? The simple existence of open source is a contradiction to their very own fundamental business model.
They rely on software licenses as their main source of income. They will do ANYTHING to protect that. We know this from their history. They're about control...Because to them, control is profit. (Examples: Protocols, document formats, de-facto standards, anti-piracy schemes like Activation and "Genuine Advantage", etc are all different aspects of control.)
But Open Source turns that model upside down. Software licenses become $0. You don't control and "encourage" people to use your products. You let them do things on their own accord. You let your fellow man/woman choose. It puts more pressure on you to improve the technology.
Companies who are based on this model now focus their resources on tools to give to the community. They let the community innovate while they polish up and improve for their commercially supported variants. (The cycle continues endlessly as they improve and give back).
The result? Microsoft will find it harder and harder as Open Source improves. Granted, the closed source model gets you the money quicker, and its more polished for mainstream PC users, but you don't have genuine user loyalty.
The fundamental weakness here is, if you can create an Open Source equivalent (features that are equal or better), closed source companies will be in serious trouble. Why would people pay if they can get it elsewhere for free? (legally).
This is why they're so scared. They know the day will come. (On that day, be sure to note the share prices and the company's general behaviour).
They can resort to petty distractions and occasional seasons of being nice to open source, but they know they cannot stop this stone wheel. It may grind slowly, but its coming. Consistent improvement, that's what its all about.
Maybe have two modes?
Easy => This is the one with the training wheels. Suitable for everyone and anyone. Its clean and direct with minimal number of clicks. Icons, wizards, and error messages in plain english, etc.
Advance => The wheels come off. This is more detailed and flexible. Have the option to view error messages in greater detail. For folks who want to make things exactly the way they want it.
Hackers: We're gonna present security issues with Apple solutions at the Black Hat Conference in Vegas! Its going to be great!
Apple Marketing: *Waves hand*...There are no security issues with Apple products.
Hackers: There are no security issues with Apple products.
Apple Marketing: You will withdraw your presentations.
Hackers: We will withdraw our presentations.
Apple Marketing: You want to be in Apple's "PC and Mac" TV ads.
Hackers: We want to be...No we don't!
Looking at Microsoft's current situation...
(1) FUD on open source has failed. (Get the Facts...What happened to the bloke who came up with that, didn't he get fired?)
(2) OOXML is in limbo. (Fast tracking process was inconsistent like no tomorrow...Stack the ballot!)
(3) Live Search solution is a flop. (Google is still dominant!)
(4) Xbox 360 has reliability issues. (RROD...What was initially an attempt to save a few million is now costing them a Billion!)
(5) Vista is suffering from poor adoption. (The reality is becoming more obvious when you see that they need to rejuvenate Vista's PR image with deception).
So what's a way to kill Linux? (while they're at it)
Simple, take away its applications! Make them work better with Windows!
LAMP => WAMP.
Do anything and everything you can to win the community over! Play nice, wear T-shirts, throw money at them, donate some code (to Windows benefit!), etc.
Notice how in that movie, "Pirates of Silicon Valley", the character playing Bill Gates wore a T-shirt offered by Apple. (Apple basically embraced them into their community)...Guess what happened? Gates screwed them over!
Point being?
Microsoft can be seen in two views: Character and Personality.
The Character is what everyone knows it has done. It will plunder, stab you in the back, etc to get its way. This is how they've always worked. Manipulate the situation to THEIR benefit. Get what you need NOW! Don't worry about the law, ethics, moral, etc...Leave that for later. (Hello anti-trust cases!)
Personality is its PR side. All that marketing spin, that olive branching to open source, playing nice...Nothing but lip service. Its a facade.
Seriously, wouldn't you be suspicious of the neighborhood bully suddenly playing nice?
Deep down, Sam Ramji is just another expendable employee of Microsoft playing "Liason" with open source. You can feel sympathy for him, but you don't have to feel sympathy for Microsoft. Then again, why would you feel sympathy for Sam? He joined MS on his own accord. His choice.
So the question really is (from a FOSS view): We've done well without Microsoft so far, why do we need them now?
As joked many years ago: Microsoft isn't the solution. Microsoft is the question...And the answer is: NO!
This is becoming even more true in the 21st Century.